INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type o f computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely afreet reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9” black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road, Aim Arbor MI 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600
A HEMISPHERE OF WOMEN: LATIN AMERICAN AND U.S. FEMINISTS IN THE lACW, 1915-1939
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School
of The Ohio State University
By
Esther Sue Wamsley, B.A., M.A.
*****
The Ohio State University 1998
Dissertation Committee:
Professor Leila J. Rupp, Adviser
Professor Kenneth J. Andrien Adviser
Professor Susan M. Hartmann History Graduate Program UMI Number: 9834091
Copyright 1998 by Wamsley, Esther Sue
All rights reserved.
UMI Microform 9834091 Copyright 1998, by UMI Company. All rights reserved.
This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
UMI 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 Copyright Esther Sue Wamsley 1998 ABSTRACT
The early twentieth century witnessed widespread organizing among women in the transnational arena. Most of the literature, however, concentrates on the transatlantic activities among U.S. and European feminists. Historians of women's international organizing have paid scant attention to Pan American feminism, and to the fact that Latin
American women often took the leadership role. This dissertation explores the nature of women's organizing on the Pan American stage, paying particular attention to the impact of the imperial or neo-colonial relationships of the
U.S. and various Latin American countries. My investigation examines U.S. women's deeply rooted assumptions about the lack of emancipation of their Latin American colleagues and the ways that Latin American women defied those narrow imperialists' views. The lACW thus marks not the U.S.- inspired beginning of Pan American organizing among women.
11 but the culmination of years of effort by women from many countries throughout the Western hemisphere.
To get at these issues, I trace the development of the
Inter-American Commission of Women starting in 1915, the year that the first organized Pan American women's conference took place, to 193 9, when its chair, Doris
Stevens, stepped down. The Commission was the first all female, government-affiliated body to deal specifically with women's civil and political rights in a transnational arena.
It played an important role as a strong advocate of legal equality for women, and the Commission remains today a dominant voice on women's concerns in the Western hemisphere.
Ill Dedicated to my daughters
IV ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am indebted to Professor Leila J. Rupp for her
patience, scholarly guidance, and dedication throughout this
project. Often Professor Rupp went beyond the call of duty
to assist me in this work. Professor Kenneth J. Andrien played a valuable role in my pursuit and completion of this dissertation giving thoughtful analysis, helpful
suggestions, and generous support. And I extend a sincere appreciation to Professor Susan M. Hartmann for her
insightful comments. My daughters, as always, have sustained me throughout this ordeal and have seldom complained about my often diverted attention. A special thanks goes to the newest member of my family, J. R.
Thompson, for his understanding.
Numerous librarians and archivists have also contributed to this work. The staffs at OSU's Inter-Library
Loan, the Library of Congress, the Columbus Memorial
Library, the Inter-American Commission of Women, and the Schlesinger Library on the History of Women provided extensive help in my endeavors to locate often obscure materials. I would like to thank The Ohio State
University's Department of History for the Ruth Higgins
Award, the Department of Women Studies for the Elizabeth D.
Gee Research Grant, the Graduate School for the Graduate
Student Research Award, and the Latin American Studies
Program for the Foreign Language and Area Studies Fellowship for the funding to help to complete this project.
Lastly, I owe a tremendous debt to my father who has always supported me in the circuitous path I have taken to arrive here. Throughout my life he told me: "you could do anything that you want." And even though he never quite understood why his daughter was in college for so long, he was always there with praise.
VI VITA
1990 ...... M.A., The Ohio State University
1978...... B.A., The Ohio State University
Fields of Study
Major Field: History
Vll TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page Abstract______ii
Dedication------iv
Acknowledgments______v
Vita------vii
Chapters ;
1. Introduction______1
2. Origins of Pan American Feminism------17
3 . The Founding of the lACW------73
4. Negotiating Goals And Strategies------134
5. The lACW in the International Arena______187
6. A Coup d'Etat in the lACW?______233
7. Conclusion------257
Bibliography______2 66
Vlll CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
In January 1928, women from the United States and a
number of Latin American countries convened in Havana, Cuba,
to secure an official voice in the Pan American Union (PAU),
a government-affiliated organization established in 1889 to
promote peaceful and commercial relations through diplomatic
channels among the nations of the Americas/ As early as
1915 the Honorable John Barrett, Director General of the Pan
American Union and Secretary of the Second Pan American
Scientific Conference, had proposed the formation of a women's group. In a letter inviting women to attend the
First Pan American Women's Auxiliary, Barrett intoned "that the holding of this Women's Conference may be the first step toward calling together a few years hence a great Pan
American Women's Conference that will become a powerful
^ The World Book. 1927 ed., s.v. "Pan-American Union." factor in the development of fraternity and solidarity among the American nations."^
Eight years later, in 1923, at the Fifth International
Conference of American States in Santiago, Chile, the issue of a woman-centered Pan American group got onto the Union's official agenda. Maximo De Soto Hall, Guatemalan delegate at the conference, initiated a "series of résolutions...to accord to women, through the intervention of the Conference of the American Republics, equal rights with the men in all the American Republics."^ The resolution called for the promotion of women's education, a systematic examination of laws pertaining to women among the various countries, the establishment of a body in the Union to analyze women's civil and legal status, and the appointment of women as official delegates to PAU conferences. “ To discuss and
^ Report on the Women's Auxiliary Conference held in the City of Washington. U.S.A. in Connection with the Second Pan American Scientific Congress. December 28. 1915-January 7. 1916■ (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1916): 15 .
^ The American Journal of International Law. "Inter-American Commission of Women," 24 (1930): 758.
“ James Brown Scott, ed.. The International Conferences of American States. 1889-1928. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1931): 244-245. investigate these concerns, Union members promised women seats at the upcoming Sixth Pan American Conference to be held in Havana in 1928. They neglected to nominate women as delegates, however, even though women's issues constituted part of the official agenda.
Determined not to succumb to defeat, women from the
United States and Latin American countries gathered in
Havana to protest their exclusion from and to obtain official recognition in the Pan American Union. Through a variety of campaign and lobbying efforts, the women succeeded in securing a hearing before the conference, resulting in the founding of the Inter-American Commission of Women (lACW), the first all-female, government-affiliated body to deal specifically with women's civil and political rights in a transnational arena. The lACW played an important role internationally as a strong advocate of legal equality for women, and the Commission remains today a dominant voice on women's concerns in the Western hemisphere.
How did this come to pass? Given the often-difficult relationship of the United States and various Latin American nations, some of which suffered military invasion from and all of which sat under the economic thumb of the United
States, how did Latin American and U.S. women work together in a transnational organization? What difference did the lACW make? These are the questions addressed in this dissertation.
In this study the term 'feminist' refers to anyone who recognized that women held a subordinate societal role and sought to elevate women's status.^ I concentrate here on the interactions between Latin American and U.S. feminists in the development of the Inter-American Commission of Women from its inception in 1928 in Havana, Cuba, to 193 9, the year that the first chairman stepped down. These years
® For a discussion of the varied understandings of womanhood, of feminism, and of the central issues around which women organized, the following provide a solid starting point. Nancy F . Cott, "What's in a Name: The Limits of 'Social Feminism': or. Expanding the Vocabulary of Women's History," Journal of American History 16 (December 1989): 809-829; Ellen C. DuBois & Nancy F. Cott, "Comment on Karen Offen's 'Defining Feminism: A Comparative Historical Approach'," Signs 15 (Autumn 1989): 195-209; Nancy Hewitt, "Beyond the Search for Sisterhood: American Women's History in the 1980s," Social History 10 (1985) : 299-321; Asuncion Lavrin, "The Ideology of Feminism in the Southern Cone, 1900-1940," (Washington, D.C.: Wilson Center, 1986), "Female, Feminine, and Feminist: Key Concepts in Understanding Women's History in Twentieth-Century Latin America," paper presented as part of the University of Bristol "Occasional Lecture Series" 4 (1988); Karen Offen, "Defining Feminism: A Comparative Historical Approach," Signs 14 (Autumn 1988) : 119-157. 4 represent a period in which Pan American feminists defined, shaped, and negotiated the methods and goals of the
Commission. These were tumultuous years for the entire globe.
The Great Depression of the late 1920s had reverberating effects around the world. The economic devastation contributed to the homelessness, poverty, and starvation of millions of people. It both reflected and heightened an already existing political crisis cumulating in the establishment of violent, totalitarian governments.
Authoritarian-style rule became almost common place in war- ravaged European countries and eventually spread to many parts of the globe, including Latin America. There economic stagnation had a catastrophic effect on the export-based economies of the various nations.
The demand for Latin American products such as sugar, coffee, metals, and meat dramatically decreased, creating severe social and political tensions. Many, especially those at the bottom who had suffered severely from the economic decline, lost trust in traditional ruling elites, weakening the credibility of regimes and making them vulnerable to takeovers. And to create even more internal instability, infighting over how best to resolve the devastation went on among the various political factions, including liberals, conservatives, radicals, communists, anarchists, socialists, and labor unionists, among the most prominent.
Mirroring trends going on in Europe, especially in
Spain and Portugal, opposition grew against anti-democratic and anti-liberal groups, opening the way for more authoritarian rule and leading to numerous military coups.
Within a year of the 1929 stock market crash, Argentina,
Brazil, Chile, Peru, Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras all experienced military takeovers. And the United States struggled, often using force covertly and overtly, to continue to exert control over Latin America.
One route was "import-substitution industrialization
(ISI)." By beginning to manufacture those products that used to be imported, the larger and more prosperous nations developed an internal industrial center and market.
Ironically, the Depression pushed such nations to industrialize and to become less dependent on the
"developed" world. Initially, import-substitution industrialization had relative success, especially in
Argentina, Mexico, and Brazil. But industrialization also had complex social and political consequences. On the one hand, the growth of industry gave rise to new social groups.
Whether autonomous or state-supported, labor unions grew in strength. Sometimes unionists allied with the bourgeois elite to form political alliances based on anti-democratic ideals. Lazaro Cardenas was arguably the most successful in forming such broad-based populist alliances. However, the inherent instability of the infrastructure of import-- substitution policies contributed to their long term ineffectiveness in handling the economic problems of Latin
America. In other words, the ISI bottlenecked.
As tensions built around the world in the 1930s, the
U.S. policy-makers worried about the fate of Latin America.
Because of its geopolitical location and political instability, Latin America represented a potential threat to
U.S. security. Backing off from a historical reliance on direct military intervention to protect U.S. interests,
Franklin Roosevelt initiated what he called the "Good
Neighbor Policy" in 1933. He promoted positive relations and, by the time the U.S. joined the war effort in 1941, he had recruited military and political allies in Latin
America. He managed to establish military bases, gain access to vital raw materials such as rubber, and to form political agreements.
It was in this political and economic climate that Pan
American feminists came together in the lACW to work for women's rights. The economic disparities between the U.S. and Latin American nations, as well as among Latin American nations, the historical dominance of the United States in
Latin America, and the political conflicts among Latin
American nations all posed potential problems for cooperation. Yet women did manage to define some common interests.
This study builds on the work of other scholars who have examined the problematic nature of women's international organizing.® The late nineteenth and early
® The scholarship on women's international organizing focuses largely on the role of U.S. and European women. See, for example, Candice Lewis Bredbenner, A Nationality of Her Own: Women. Marriage, and the Law of Citizenship (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998) ; Edith F. Hurwitz, "The International Sisterhood," in Becoming Visible: Women in European History, eds. Renate Bridenthal and Claudia Koonz (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1977), 325-346; Carol Ann Miller, "Lobbying the League : Women's International Organizations and the League of Nations" (Ph.D. diss., University of Oxford, 1992); Paula F . 8 centuries brought about the emergence of an international women's movement. With the founding of the International
Council for Women, the International Alliance for Women's
Suffrage, and the Women's International League for Peace and
Freedom, Euroamerican feminists had begun a worldwide campaign to improve women's lives. These groups, however, differed over their main objectives. And by the late 1920s numerous other international organizations emerged to challenge the ideological dominance of the pioneers, with the issue of equal rights being a divisive point for feminists.
Existing works have pointed out that the complexities of women's lives created conflict, alongside cooperation.
Pfeffer, "'A Whisper in the Assembly of Nations: 'United States' Participation in the International Movement for Women's Rights from the League of Nations to the United Nations," Women Studies International Forum 8 (1985): 459- 471; Leila J. Rupp, "Challenging Imperialism in International Women's Organizations, 1888-1945," National Women's Studies Association Journal. 8 (Spring 1996): 8-27, "Constructing Internationalism: The Case of Transnational Women's Organizations, 1888-1945, The American Historical Review 99 (December 1994): 1571-1600, "Sexuality and Politics in the Early Twentieth Century: The Case of the International Women's Movement," Feminist Studies 23 (Fall 1997) : 577-605, Worlds of Women:__ The Making of an International Women's Movement (Princeton, N J : Princeton University Press, 1997); Rebecca L. Sherrick, "Toward Universal Sisterhood," Women's Studies International Forum 5 (1982): 655-661. 9 among women in organizing efforts beginning in the late
nineteenth century. But despite recognition that women's
diverse cultural experiences based on race, ethnicity,
class, religion, and nationality led to varied understandings of womanhood, of feminism, and of the central
issues around which women organized, the literature
concentrates on transatlantic activities among European and
U.S. feminists. Scant scholarship exists on Latin American women's organizing efforts, and most of it focuses on women's movements on a national level.’ Francesca Miller
’ See, Marifran Carlson, Feminiso!: The Women's Movement in Argentina from its Beginnings to Eva Peron (Chicago: Academy Chicago Publishers, 1988) ; June Hahner, Emancipating the Female Sex: The Struggle for Women's Rights in Brazil, 1850- 1940 (Durham: Duke University Press, 1991); Anna Macias, Against All Odds: The Feminist Movement in Mexico to 1940 (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1982); K. Lynn Stoner, From the House to the Streets: The Cuban Women's Movement for Legal Reform. 1898-1940 (Durham: Duke university Press, 1991); Francesca Miller is the only scholar to investigate in any significant way Latin American women's Pan American activities. See, "The International Relations of Women of the Americas, 1890-1928," Americas 43 (October 1986): 171- 182, "Latin American Feminism and the Transnational Arena," in Women. Culture, and Politics in Latin America, eds. Emilie Bergmann, et al (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990), 10-26, Latin American Women and the Search for Social Justice (Hanover, N.H.: University Press of New England, 1991). And Asuncion Lavrin recently published a work comparing feminist activities in the Southern Cone. Women. Feminism, and Social Change in Argentina. Chile, and 10 is the only scholar to investigate in any significant way
Latin American feminists' international activities or the
lACW. She examines the Commission as an autonomous body within the Pan American Union, the parent body of the lACW, concluding that Latin American and U.S. activists cooperated
in the spirit of Pan Americanism, the idea that nations in
North, South, and Central America worked together as equal partners in the development of the Western hemisphere. My research, in contrast, emphasizes that conflict, evolving largely from imperial relations between the U.S. and various
Latin American countries, sat alongside cooperation and permeated the activities surrounding the founding and development of the lACW. By shifting the focus to the interactions between Latin American and U.S. women, my research provides fresh insights into the process of international organizing among women.
I set my exploration of the lACW within the context of what has been called "imperial feminism." Scholars have explored the attitudes of women from imperialist nations toward women of colonial and dependent countries, pointing
Uruguay. 1890-1940 (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1995) .
11 out that the former tended to assume their right to
leadership of their more "backward sisters."® I pay
attention to the sometimes arrogant thinking of U.S.
feminists who believed that they could help show Latin
American women the best way to win their rights.
My approach has also been influenced by what scholars
working primarily on Indian history have called
® Recently an important body of literature on women's transnational organizing has arisen examining interactions between women from imperial nations and women from colonial or dependent countries. Antoinette Burton, Burdens of History: British Feminists. Indian Women, and Imperial Culture. 1865-1915 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, 1994), "The Feminist Quest for Identity: British Imperial Suffragism and 'Global Sisterhood', 1900-1915," Journal of Women's History 3 (Fall 1991): 46-81, "The White Woman's Burden: British Feminists and the Indian Woman, 1865-1915," Women's Studies International Forum 13 (1990): 295-308; Francesca Miller, "The International Relations of Women of the Americas, 1890-1928," Americas 43 (October 1986): 171-182, "Latin American Feminism and the Transnational Arena," in Women. Culture, and Politics in Latin America, eds. Emilie Bergmann, et al (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990) , 10-26, Latin American Women and the Search for Social Justice (Hanover, N.H.: University Press of New England, 1991); Barbara N. Ramusack, "Cultural Missionaries, Maternal Imperialists, Feminist Allies: British Women Activists in India, 1865- 1945," Women's Studies International Forum 13 (1990): 309- 321; Joyce Zonona, "The Sultan and the Slave: Feminist Orientalism and the Structure of Jane Eyre," Signs (Spring 1993): 592-617.
12 "subalternity. Subaltern studies focuses largely on the
voices of those who traditionally have had limited access to
the dominant discourse in society, taking into consideration
that one's status or "subalternity" shifts from situation to
situation. In the case of the lACW, middle- and upper-class
women from countries having an imperial relationship
cooperated to form an association giving them an official
and legitimate voice in the political affairs of the
Americas, an area dominated and controlled by men. An
exploration of the interactions of Pan American feminists in
the origins and development of the Commission contributes
significantly to providing answers to the central question about women's international organizing; how women with culturally bound differences cooperated to achieve gains for women on an international scale.
Subaltern studies emphasizes the possibility of understanding those groups, traditionally considered
® Partha Chatterjee, Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World: A Derivative Discourse (Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press, 1993); Ranajit Guha, Elementary Aspects of Peasant Insurgency in Colonial India (Delhi : Oxford University Press, 1992); Ranajit Guha & Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Selected Subaltern Studies (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988); Florence E. Mallon, "The Promise and Dilemma of Subaltern Studies: Perspectives from Latin
13 unrecorded, by analyzing the discourse of dominant groups.
I have had to make use of such an approach in trying to uncover the participation of Latin American women in the papers of the lACW. For the years before its founding, I rely on the records of the Pan American Association for the
Advancement of Women at the Library of Congress. The Doris
Stevens manuscript collection at the Schlesinger Library proved essential to an analysis of the Commission, since
Stevens, as chair from 1928 through 1939, took possession of vast quantities of lACW records. The history is dominated by U.S. women, but they do not represent the whole story, as
I argue here. Latin American women played a vital role in the founding and early years of the Commission, and its history cannot be understood without considering the complex dynamics of interactions between Latin American and U.S. women.
What little we do know about the lACW in its international context tends to focus on the controlling hand of the U.S. National Woman's Party. Why the NWP has dominated the story is quite simple. The records of the first decade of the lACW remained in the hands of the
American History," American Historical Review 99 (December 14 National Woman's Party because Doris Stevens, a leading
Party member, served as its first chair. And eventually
large quantities of the Commission's documents ended up in
Stevens' manuscript collection at the Schlesinger Library.
Consequently, NWP voices tend to narrate the origins and
early years of the lACW's history. This does not mean,
however, that Latin American feminists' participation in the
development of the Commission has to remain shrouded in
mystery. Piecing together material written by Latin
American feminists and a "reading against the grain" of U.S.
voices can stitch together a more complete history.
Analysis of U.S. women's versions of the actions and
reactions of Latin American feminists, along with Latin
American sources such as newspapers, personal
correspondence, and organization records, prove valuable in
uncovering the interactions of women from the United States
and Latin America in the early twentieth century. In this
way we can see that Latin American feminists actively participated in and largely engineered the campaign leading
to the founding of the lACW.
1994): 1491-1515. 15 Chapter 2 uncovers Pan American feminist activities
before the establishment of the lACW, starting in 1915 with
the first all-female Pan American feminist conference. I
show how active Latin American women had been in the years
before the establishment of the lACW in 1928. Chapter 3
examines the founding of the Commission and underscores the
important role that Latin American feminists played in its
formation. Chapter 4 explores the Commission's initial
organization and the beginning of its international
activities. Chapter 5 sets the lACW in its larger
international context by exploring its successes in
agitating for legal equality for women on the global stage.
The final chapter considers the events leading to the dismissal of the first chair, Doris Stevens, in 1939. In
the conclusion, I discuss the significance of the history of
the lACW's early years for understanding women's
international organizing and the participation of women in
Pan American affairs.
16 CHAPTER 2
THE ORIGINS OF PAN AMERICAN FEMINISM: TRANSNATIONAL ORGANIZING AMONG LATIN AMERICAN AND U.S. WOMEN, 1915-1928
By the early twentieth century. Pan Americanism, the idea that nations in North, Central, and South America should work together in the development of the Western hemisphere, had gained a firm foothold in social, economic, and political thought in Latin America and the United
States. Women, like their male counterparts, shared in this enthusiasm and formed many organizations focusing on "mutual knowledge, understanding and true friendship among the women of the American Republics."^ These women, educated and from the upper- and middle-classes, represented a variety of interests ranging from traditional/conservative to
^ "The Pan American Round Table," Pan American International Women's Committee (PAIWC) papers, box 4, Library of Congress.
17 feminist/liberal.^ Some women participants perceived of their activities as extensions of their husbands and purely
"auxiliary," while others took political and social stands independent of the male players, at times even advocating controversial issues such as women's suffrage. Regardless of political orientation, these women viewed themselves as female diplomats devoted to issues of special concern to women in the relations of the Americas. In 1928 women in the Western hemisphere succeeded in securing an official voice in the Pan American Union with the founding of the
Inter-American Commission of Women. But the lACW did not appear out of nowhere. An examination of women's activity in the Pan American arena before 1928 will illuminate our understanding of the founding of the lACW, as well as shed light on transnational organizing among women in the early twentieth century generally.
This chapter traces the development of Latin American and U.S. women's participation in Pan American activities from 1915, the year that the first organized Pan American women's conference took place, to 1928 and the creation of
^ Most of the women in my study are of European origin; however, I have seen a few Latin American women referred to as "from a good Indian family" and having formal education. 18 the lACW. I examine five major Pan American women's
conferences held throughout the Hemisphere under the auspices of many different women's and men's organizations.
In contrast to the assumptions that permeate both the contemporaneous U.S. accounts and present-day scholarship on
U.S. involvement in Pan-American activities, I argue that
Latin American women had a well-organized women's movement by 1928; that many of the Latin American feminists who participated in Pan American activities viewed women's suffrage as central to the promotion of women's concerns, in contrast to U.S. assumptions about the "backwardness" of
Latin American feminism; and that Latin American women acted in ways that challenged U.S. characterizations of them as timid, shy, and conservative. All of these developments set the stage for the founding, the agenda, and the controversy surrounding the lACW.
Stirring of Pan American Women's Organizing
From December 28, 1915, to January 7, 1916, under the auspices of the Second Pan American Scientific Congress, the
19 first organized Pan American women's meeting took place.^
Since the original Latin American Scientific Congress held
in 1898 in Buenos Aires, Latin American women had
participated in scientific conferences, meetings devoted to
"intellectual study of the scientific, economic, social and
political life" of the Latin American states.'* Women had
presented papers, held official membership, and in 1905 at
the Third Latin American Scientific Congress in Rio de
Janeiro, Constanca Barbosa Rodrigues, wife and collaborator
of the director of the Botanical Gardens of Rio de Janeiro,
had served as honorary president.^ In 1908, when the Fourth
Latin American Scientific Congress became the First Pan
American Scientific Congress, women, mostly school teachers,
comprised six percent of the total membership. W.R.
Shephard, professor at Columbia University and an official
^ Even in this congress, a few women participated in subsections of the men's Scientific Congress, focusing mainly on education, anthropology, public health, and medical science. Report on the Women's Auxiliary Conference held in the Citv__Qf_Washinaton. U.S.A. in Connection with the..Second Pan American Scientific Congress. December 2 8 . 1915-January 7. 1916. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1916), 8-12.
" Ibid., 7-15.
' Ibid., 8.
20 U.S. delegate at the conference, remarked that Latin
American female delegates,
expressed their opinions, as well as their differences in opinion from those held by educators of the other sex, with a degree of freedom and frankness quite surprising to anyone who might fancy that no phase of the feminist movement had yet reached Latin America!*
By the time of the 1915 Washington meeting, however,
U.S. women with the authorization of the United States
Department of State and the Executive Committee of the Pan
American Union had formed a separate women's auxiliary group.^ Organizers proposed the group "in the hope that an opportunity to become acquainted and to exchange views, not only on subjects of special interest to women, but on all matters pertaining to Pan-Americanism might create even greater desire on the part of the women of the Americas for friendly and harmonious cooperation."* Now women took part in scientific congresses outside the main events, but
* W.R. Shephard, "The Scientific Congress at Santiago," Columbia Quarterly (1909): 334.
’ The idea for the Women's Auxiliary came from Mrs. Charles R. Crane, wife of a U.S. government diplomat, who endowed the group with a yearly income of $1000 for five years. Executive Committee Minutes, November 25, 1918, PAIWC papers, box 6, LC.
* "Pan-American Conference," PAIWC papers, box 3, LC.
21 instead of this separation providing autonomy, the women's
auxiliary group had to rely on the approval of male Union members for its program and agenda. In 1917, John Barrett wrote to Emma Swiggett, Executive Secretary of the Women's
Auxiliary, concerning future women's auxiliary meetings:
I want it distinctly understood that I think that anything which is done should have the unofficial approval of the Department of State, so that, there would be nothing done which the Department did not approve of.*
Ties between the Women's Auxiliary and Latin American and U.S. governments were so tight that virtually the entire group consisted of the wives and daughters of high-ranking government administrators. For instance, Eleanor Lansing, wife of the U.S. Secretary of State, chaired and later served as President of the Women's Auxiliary, and Emma
Swiggett, wife of the Assistant Secretary General of the Pan
American Union, held the post of Organizing Secretary and later the Executive Secretary of the Auxiliary.
* John Barrett to Mrs. Glen Levin Swiggett, February 25, 1917, PAIWC papers, box 3, LC.
The wife of the U.S. Secretary of State always served as the President of the Women's Auxiliary.
22 What happened to the female members of the Latin
American Scientific Congresses remains unclear.“ A few of
them participated both in the Second Pan American Scientific
Congress in 1915 as well as the First Women's Auxiliary.
Evidence suggests, though, that women lost their official
voice within the larger Pan American Scientific Congress and
that U.S. and Latin American diplomats and ministers
controlled the membership in and activities of the newly
formed women's group. Pan American officials invited mostly
their wives and daughters to the Congresses, potentially
excluding the professional Latin American women who had participated in the earlier meetings. In some cases Union members recruited women from colleges and universities as well as from other prominent, though conservative and
traditional, women's organizations. Nevertheless, the women
in the Auxiliary took their "quasi-government [al] " role seriously, with over a hundred women attending the
Washington conference and with women, both from the U.S. and
Latin America, presenting over thirty papers on such topics
Some of the same women--in particular Paulina Luisi from Uruguay and Professor Adela Palacio from Mexico--who had participated in the Latin American Scientific Congresses also took part in the Women's Auxiliary in 1915.
23 as the welfare of women, children's rights, women's education, sanitation, and domestic science.’’^
Participants responded to the Women's Auxiliary quite favorably, viewing it as a success. A Latin American woman exclaimed, "We would not have missed it for anything," while another Latin American member declared of the sessions, "We are crazy about them."^^ In a similar vein, a U.S. woman commented with evident surprise that "to the great delight of their hostesses the Latin-American guests, not only seemed interested in the addresses, but they themselves most generously took part, making fluent and capable comments and speeches."^* In addition to attendance and presentations at the meetings, women from all the Americas shared a general enthusiasm for the spirit of Pan Americanism and "showed a widespread desire for an opportunity to unite in closer bonds the women of the American Republics.A
The Women's Auxiliary estimated that 300-400 women attended the women's sessions daily. "Report on the Women's Auxiliary."
Alice Thacher Post, "Women of Pan-America in Conference," The Public. 19 (1916): 87, PAIWC papers, box 5, LC.
"An International Report," [1918], PAIWC papers, box 4, LC.
15 'Pan-American Conference," PAIWC papers, box 3, LC. 24 contemporary observer, Alice Thacher Post, member of the
Women's Peace Party and the Women's Auxiliary Committee,
reported in The Public:
A demand for the organization of a permanent Pan- American Union of Women sprang spontaneously from the deeply moved audience of Latin American and United States women sitting side by side...It was under the inspiration of this unlooked for and capable response that on the first morning, after the charming and illuminating addresses from Blanche Z. de Baralt of Cuba, and Helen Holmberg de Ambrosetti of Argentina, Mrs. Albion Fellows Bacon offered a resolution asking that steps should be taken toward creating a permanent union between the women of all the Americas. A committee was immediately appointed, to report before the close of the conference.^®
Indicating a commitment to cooperation and equality among women of the Americas, at the closing of the
Conference, on recommendation of the Committee, the women passed several resolutions. The most important included the publication of present and future Auxiliary proceedings in
Spanish, Portuguese, French, and English; formation of
International Committees composed of women from the twenty- one Republics to distribute the published proceedings, to keep alive communication among Latin American and U.S. women, and to organize future Auxiliary meetings in
"Women of Pan-America in Conference," 87, PAIWC papers, box 5, LC. 25 conjunction with the Pan American Scientific Congresses;
and the appointment of a secretary to orchestrate these
activities. According to women members, the Women's
Auxiliary no longer existed; instead in each country
members organized an International Committee consisting of
three to five members to handle future programs and to
promote "a truer and deeper development of the solidarity of
Pan American womanhood."^' Not surprisingly, the Auxiliary
appointed the U.S. women's International Committee as the
Executive Committee, and as such it took charge of the
group ' s agenda.
Thus, even though a congenial spirit of Pan Americanism permeated the activities at this Congress, U.S. women and men attempted to control the direction of the meeting. In
spite of the fact that they recognized Latin American women's active participation in the early Scientific
Congresses, supported their professional accomplishments, and praised their abilities, they also revealed deeply rooted assumptions about the lack of emancipation of Latin
Official letter of invitation to join the Women's International Committee, PAIWC papers, box 4, LC.
26 American women. A journalist in the Washington Times best summed up this imperialist attitude:
It was a meeting between the progressive, modern women of the United States, and the conservative women of Latin America. The women of the north, fair-skinned, alert and mindful of the power they wield in the affairs of this country, were calling upon the timid women of the southern countries to take up with them the task of bettering the social conditions of the western hemisphere. And from the women present from Latin-America came ideas which showed that they too, were beginning to awake to the part they should play.^®
Broadening the Scope of Women's Pan Americanism
By the 192 0s, many prominent U.S. and international women's organizations promoted the ideal of Pan Americanism.
The American Association of University Women, the General
Federation of Women's Clubs, the Women's International
League for Peace and Freedom, the National League of Women's
Voters, the International Woman Suffrage Alliance, and the
Daughters of the American Revolution all had committees devoted to promoting women's role in the Pan American arena." In general, these groups encouraged women to
" Newspaper clipping, Washington Times. December 28, 1915, PAIWC papers, box 5, LC.
" Pan Americanism was so widespread that even small independent groups of women sprang up. For example, in 1918 in Tarrytown. New York, women organized the Inter-American 27 cooperate and form Pan American unions to discuss issues particular to women such as children's rights, humanitarian
causes, women's education, married women's property rights, and the arts, with an emphasis on cultural heritage. In
April 1922, in Baltimore, Maryland, following the example of the Women's Auxiliary, the National League of Women Voters, the successor to the mainstream suffrage group, organized a women's Pan American conference.^®
Although Francesca Miller, the only scholar to examine in any depth women's Pan American organizing, has recognized the importance of the Baltimore meeting in promoting Pan
Americanism among U.S. and Latin American women, she has failed to distinguish this conference from the Women's
Auxiliary.The Auxiliary and the LWV comprised two distinct and separate women's groups with differing, at
Roundtable and in that same year in San Antonio, Texas, women founded the Pan American Round Table. "Memorandum for Mrs. Lansing," "The Pan American Round Table," PAIWC papers, box 4, LC.
"History of the Pan American Conferences of Women [,] Pan American Association for the Advancement of Women[,] Inter- American Union of Women[,] April 1922-April 1926," PAIWC papers, box 4, LC.
Miller, "International Relations," "Latin American Feminism and Transnational Organizing," and Latin American Women and the Search for Social Justice. 28 times even opposing, agendas.The organizations disagreed
over the issue of suffrage, particularly as it pertained to
Latin American women. And they struggled over their
relationship to the male-dominated Pan American Union, both
wanting to be recognized as the official U.S. women
representatives. U.S women fought over who was most suited
to work with and organize Latin American women, providing
them with an ideology, an agenda, and strategies with which
to achieve women's goals. U.S. women, despite their
acknowledgment and praise of Latin American women's feminist
activities, tended to view Latin American women as backward,
uneducated, and unenlightened in the women's rights cause.
In contrast, U.S. feminists saw themselves as the
sophisticated and experienced women's rights activists, well
qualified to spearhead a transnational women's movement.
Moreover, because of the special Pan American sisterhood between U.S. and Latin American women, U.S. women maintained an eager desire to help to guide their Latin American sisters out of the dark ages. By 1922, with many U.S.
Even though some Auxiliary participants had membership in The League of Women Voters, they viewed the issue of Latin American women's suffrage as inappropriate for their group.
29 women's groups organizing around the cause of Pan
Americanism and with the LWV's prominent role in women's rights activities in the United States, as well as its membership in the prominent International Woman's Suffrage
Alliance, the LWV posed a threat to the Women's Auxiliary by asserting a claim to women's Pan American organizing efforts.
In conjunction with their Third Annual Convention, the
LWV called for:
Women from All the Americas to meet...on subjects of special concern to women,--Education, Child Welfare, Women in Industry, Prevention of Traffic in Women, Civil and Political Status of Women and International Friendliness.
Although the LWV had more autonomy and was less restricted by government influence than the Women's Auxiliary, the initiators of the Baltimore meeting, Maud Wood Park,
President of the LWV, and Carrie Chapman Catt, President of the International Woman Suffrage Alliance and Honorary
President of the LWV, sought local, state, and national support. The LWV, like the Women's Auxiliary, had long standing friendships and kin relations with members of the
"Call to the Third Annual Convention of the National League of Women Voters and to the Pan-American Conference of Women," PAIWC papers, box 5, LC. 30 Pan American Union. The organizers "received constant
advice and help" from the mayor of Baltimore, the governor
of Maryland, officials at the Departments of State,
Treasury, and Commerce as well as from members of the Pan
American Union.They used the facilities of the Union and
relied on government contacts, including the Women's
Auxiliary, to recruit Latin American women participants,
even though at least one League member, Catt, knew Latin
American women from her transnational organizing activities.
Such a situation might suggest that by relying on government
help, guidance, and financial support, both the LWV and the
Women's Auxiliary attempted to situate themselves as the
legitimate and official women's voice on the Pan American
stage.
Strife over turf involved more than just sisterly rivalry but stemmed from the Women's Auxiliary and the LWV's deep-rooted differences over the meaning of women's role in society in general and especially over U.S. women's place and mission in the Pan American arena. On the one hand, the leaders of the U.S. Women's Auxiliary viewed themselves as
"History of the Pan American Conference of Women," PAIWC papers, box 4, LC. 31 extensions of the Pan American Union focusing on such traditional issues as child welfare, women's education, and women's role in the home. The LWV, on the other, in addition to promoting traditional women's causes, advocated suffrage as essential to women's struggle.
Nevertheless, the LWV invited members of the Women's
Auxiliary to help them organize and participate in the
Baltimore meeting, but because of these rivalries and ideological differences the Women's Auxiliary did not formally or officially take part in conference proceedings.
It would have been particularly difficult, though, for the
Auxiliary to disassociate completely from the Pan American women's meeting in Baltimore because of the social ties among the women, not to mention the propriety of maintaining a sense of sisterhood in the presence of Latin American women. After much discussion among Executive Committee members, the Women's Auxiliary decided to act in an advisory capacity. They provided names of Latin American women, appointed a liaison to help with organizing the conference, put on a reception for the Latin American women delegates
(especially targeted at family members of the Latin American
32 delegates of the Pan American Union) , and participated in a
mass meeting in Washington, D.C., commemorating Washington
Day. “
But members of the U.S. women's International Committee
of the Auxiliary did not want to associate officially with
what they perceived as a liberal or radical stand. Emma
Swiggett wrote to Eva Moore, vice-president of the
International Committee:
Judging by the official delegates and their connection in so many cases with the suffrage alliances in the South American countries, I feel sure that any organization that comes out of this Conference will be largely a suffrage one whatever its name may be or however much child welfare and women and industry may be included.
She continued:
We are working, with few exceptions, with the conservative groups and have taken great care not to alienate their sympathy nor that of the Latin American men. I am inclined to think there is a great deal of peace work yet to be done in Latin America before a real successful Pan American organization could be launched.
Such antagonism existed between the two groups of women
that they even argued over the LWV's use of the name "Pan
Executive Secretary to Mrs. Crane, March 27, 1922, PAIWC papers, box 4, LC.
Executive Secretary to Mrs. Moore, April 19, 1922, PAIWC papers, box 4, LC. 33 American Women's Conference." Eventually, the League changed the name of their group to the All America
Association for the Advancement of Women, supposedly to avoid confusion and resentment from the Women's Auxiliary.
The LWV and the Women's Auxiliary were so embroiled in the struggle for leadership in the Western hemisphere that Latin
American female participants took a back seat in Pan
American organizing efforts.
Paulina Luisi, for example. President of the Alianza
Urugaya para el Sufragio Fememino (Uruguayan Alliance for
Women's Suffrage), eminent physician, and delegate at the
1908 Latin American Scientific Congress, had to initiate contact with Catt about the Baltimore meeting.^’ Luisi and
Catt had met through activities in the International Woman
Suffrage Alliance. Despite their acquaintance, the LWV enlisted the help of an Uruguayan diplomat in Washington to suggest a female representative from his country. Even though Luisi actively engaged in women's activities around the world, the ambassador did not choose her as Uruguay's
Paulina Luisi to Mrs. Chapman Catt, January 16, 1922, Carrie Chapman Catt papers. Microfilm Collection, reel 4
34 representative. After consulting his government, he named
the wife of the Uruguayan minister in Washington.^®
Luisi and sister members of the Uruguayan Suffrage
Alliance did not hear about the Baltimore conference until
this appointment appeared in a Uruguayan newspaper.^® After
much correspondence between Catt and Luisi, the Uruguayan
suffragist persuaded Catt to appoint Celia Paladino de
Vitale, member of the Uruguayan suffrage group, in addition
to the minister's wife, as a representative to the Baltimore meeting.^® Luisi herself could not attend the Conference because she had to "go to Paris to represent the Government and the Medical Faculty at the International Congress of
Social Hygiene. She further wrote to Catt,
As it concerns a scientific congress related to the medical profession, I believe that I will serve the feminine cause better by accepting that appointment. You know that there are not yet many women in the world
^® Evidence suggests that even in this more autonomous group of women, as in the Women's Auxiliary, government approval for many of the Latin American women representatives was required and standard practice.
Paulina Luisi to Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt, January 16, 1922, Catt papers, reel 4.
30 Ibid.
Paulina Luisi to Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt, May 3, 1922, Catt papers, reel 4.
35 who have been called by name to represent a Government and a scientific institution such as the Medical Faculty in an International Congress.
Clearly, Luisi considered herself a worldwide leader in the women's movement and did not hesitate to remind Catt of her status. Nor did she refrain from asking Catt if the
Suffrage Alliance would help fund Vitale's trip to
Baltimore.
Luisi, even though she could not attend the Baltimore meeting, viewed Latin American women's participation as vital. She contacted a feminist group in Paraguay, one in
Chile, and two "exclusively" suffrage groups in Argentina—
'Liga por los Derechos de la Mujer, ' and the 'Partido
Feminista Nacional about the conference. At least one of these groups, the 'Liga por los Derechos de la Mujer,' established in 1919 in Buenos Aires, sent a delegate to the conference." Other notable Latin American women such as
Bertha Lutz, leading feminist in Brazil, and Ester N. de
" Ibid.
" Paulina Luisi to Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt, January 16, 1922, Catt papers, reel 4.
36 Calvo, an eminent women's rights activist in Panama, also took part in conference proceedings.
In the end, in spite of ideological differences and struggles over leadership, U.S. and Latin American women worked side-by-side to carry out the goals put forth at the
Conference, making recommendations for future programs, and presenting papers on a variety of topics. According to participants, one of the most important sessions focused on a round table discussion of women's suffrage in which Latin
American women played a significant role. The success of the Conference resulted in the founding of a permanent organization, the Pan American Association for the
Advancement of Women (later renamed the All America
Association for the Advancement of Women), and Carrie
Chapman Catt decided to tour South America to further the women's Pan American cause.
Lutz had an international reputation and in 1926 Calvo organized a Pan American women's conference in Panama and for at least five years served as Executive Secretary of the Inter-American Commission of Women.
"History of the Pan American Conferences of Women," PAIWC papers, box 4, LC. On her 1924 trip, Catt toured South America as a representative for the International Woman Suffrage Alliance.
37 One can see that the issue of women's suffrage divided,
as well as united, women in these early Pan American
organizing efforts. In spite of the fact that women in the
U.S. had already received the vote in 1920, members of the
Women's Auxiliary distanced themselves from this issue,
proclaiming that their 'kind' of Latin American woman had
little interest in suffrage, although Latin American women
with such interests had taken part in the Auxiliary since
its inception. U.S. members of the Auxiliary, while taking
a conservative stand on women's issues, remained active in
Pan American women's organizing efforts and continued to
work with liberal and even some radical Latin American women
activists. Moreover, neither group considered seriously
that Latin American women had their own ideas about feminism
and had developed an agenda worthy of U.S. consideration.
As more and more women became involved in Pan American women's organizing, the opportunities for disagreement about
issues increased.
Uniting the Republics: Columbus Day Celebrations
In October 1923, in celebration of Columbus Day, or as most Latin American countries called it "El Dia de Raza,"
38 the next major Pan American women's conference occurred.
The Women's Auxiliary contacted members of the International
Committees in each country to organize these meetings which were to take place simultaneously on October 12 to show solidarity among the countries in the Pan American Union.
The Executive Committee of the Women's Auxiliary, in conjunction with Pan American Union members, planned and coordinated the Columbus Day conferences as "preparatory step[s] toward the organization of a woman's Conference in connection with the Third Pan American Scientific Congress in Peru."^® Because this Pan American women's group operated with the support and guidance of the Pan American
Union, conferences were only held under the auspices of the
Union. The Peruvian congress would mark the Second Women's
Auxiliary Conference, and women's participation in future
Pan American Scientific Congresses and in the "organization of a permanent Pan American Conference of Women" depended on the success of this meeting.^'
Executive Secretary to L. S. Rowe, June 23, 1922, PAIWC papers, box 7, LC.
Executive Committee Minutes, November 23, 1921, PAIWC papers, box 6, LC.
39 Auxiliary members intended for the Columbus Day
Conferences to "enable all sections of the International
Committee to make plans, uniform in respect of time and character, for the celebration of the Second Pan American
Conference of Women.According to the guidelines set
forth in 1915 at the first meeting, women participants had decided that the women's International Committee in the country where the upcoming Pan American Scientific Congress would take place should coordinate and direct the activities
for the Women's Auxiliary Conference. Many U.S. women and
Pan American Union members believed that Latin American women did not possess the capabilities to plan and organize the Second Pan American Women's Auxiliary Conference. The
U.S. women and men thus collaborated and decided that
Columbus Day Celebrations in all the member nations would help pave the way for a successful conference in Peru.
Because the host government determined whether the women could have an Auxiliary meeting, the U.S. had to handle these preliminary plans discreetly or the Peruvians might
Proceedings And Report Of _The__Columbus Day Conferences Held In Twelve American Countries,On October .12,._J323 . (New York: Inter-America Press, 1926) : 6, PAIWC papers, box 3, LC.
40 consider such behavior intrusive and insulting. In a letter written to L. S. Rowe, Director General of the Pan American
Union, Emma Swiggett, Executive Secretary of the U.S.
International Committee, stated:
Since the primary object of holding these simultaneous Conferences in all the countries is to express the hope, through resolutions, that Peru will organize a Women's Conference...we are most anxious to remove any seeming discrimination...The Committee is always anxious to be advised.^*
The U.S. women's International Committee, as the
Executive Committee of the Women's Auxiliary, outlined the
agenda for the Columbus Day Conferences, stipulating the
time and number of sessions, the topics to be presented,
length of speeches, and the program for evening
receptionsThey recommended that Pan American Union members speak at the conferences in the respective countries, and they included a speech written by Mrs.
Charles Evans Hughes, Chairman of the Women's Auxiliary
Committee of the United States, to open the meetings.
Swiggett, in a letter concerning the proposed topics to
Executive Secretary to L. S. Rowe, June 2, 1922, PAIWC papers, box 7, LC.
"Proceedings and Report of the Columbus Day Conferences," PAIWC papers, box 3, LC.
41 sister member Valeria H. Parker, Executive Secretary of the
United States Interdepartmental Social Hygiene Board, declared: "we have chosen fields in which the Latin American women can most easily arrange a program. Such a statement can be viewed as a way to find common ground on which the women from the various nations could unite; at the same time, it also reveals U.S. women hoping to manipulate the program.
The importance of women from many nations of the
Americas holding simultaneous conferences went beyond the symbolic purpose of "uniting the mind and heart of the women of America...and sustaining the high ideal of feminine unity on the American continent. It was also a subtle way for the U.S. Auxiliary members to attempt to exercise control over the women's' activities in the Pan American arena. The
LWV had challenged the position of the Auxiliary as the dominant women's group in Pan American activities during the events surrounding the Baltimore meeting. Consequently, the
“ Mrs. Glenn Levin Swiggett to Valeria H. Parker, September 7, 1923, PAIWC papers, box 7, LC.
Julia M. de Moreno to Mrs. Charles Evans Hughes, October 22, 1923, PAIWC papers, box 7, LC.
42 Women's Auxiliary sought to reassert their role as the pre eminent women's group in the Hemisphere.
Concerning the Columbus Day Conferences and the controversial nature of the LWV's Baltimore meeting, the
Executive Committee of the Women's Auxiliary concluded that these celebrations "would come at an opportune time to clear up any confusion caused by the Pan American Conference of
Women held in Baltimore in April. Moreover, to display solidarity among U.S. women and to maintain the leadership position in Pan American women's organizing, Eleanor Lansing considered inviting Carrie Chapman Catt to "lead the discussion" in the afternoon session of the U.S. Columbus
Day Conference, while Maud Wood Park, President of the LWV, presented an essay on the common interests of women.^
In general, the various Latin American sections followed the suggestions of the U.S. Executive Committee.
But at least three of the twelve participating countries broadened the proposed agenda and included the controversial
Executive Committee Minutes, November 23, 1921, PAIWC papers, box 6, LC.
Eleanor Lansing to Executive Secretary, September 1, 1923, PAIWC papers, box 7, LC; "Proceedings and Report of the Columbus Day Conferences," PAIWC papers, box 3, LC.
43 issues of suffrage and feminism."® Although the Executive
Committee had not directly excluded these topics from the
Columbus Day Conferences, during a planning meeting members had "agreed that humanitarian service would be added to religion and that politics be omitted.""® They had carefully outlined acceptable topics and had advised all national sections to send their programs and speeches to them for approval. In the end, both religion and politics appeared in Columbus Day programs, with both Latin American women and men presenting essays on women's suffrage as well as on the benefits of feminism in general.
Brazilian women members, led by the renowned feminist activist Bertha Lutz, included a discussion of women's suffrage, Julia Lopes de Almeida, President of the Brazilian section of the Auxiliary's International Women's Committee, presented a report on the progressive nature of the feminist movement in her country, and Ana Rosa Chacon of the Costa
Rican section spoke on the necessity of the feminist movement for perfect health of the body and mind.
"® "Proceedings and Report of the Columbus Day Conferences," PAIWC papers, box 3, LC.
"® Minutes of the United States Section of the International Committee, June 3, 1922, PAIWC papers, box 6, LC. 44 Interestingly, two Panamanian men proclaimed their support
for women's rights. Narciso Garay, Secretary of Foreign
Relations of Panama, presented a brief history of the Pan
American feminist movement and espoused at length the
importance of "feminism," while Belisario Porras, President
of Panama, vigorously asserted, "Some writers maintain that
Suffrage is Saxon, but there is no proof of it."“'' In
contrast, only two U.S. participants, Maud Wood Park and
Julia C. Lathrop, former Chief of the Children's Bureau of
the United States Department of Labor, touched on feminist
issues, addressing the growing interest of suffrage among
women of the world.'*® Mary E. Woolley, President of Mount
Holyoke College, mentioned noted suffragist Susan B.
Anthony's "illustrious [role] in the history of equal
suffrage" and emphasized her prominence in promoting women's
education, but she virtually ignored the importance that
Anthony herself attached to women's suffrage.*®
"Proceedings and Report of the Columbus Day Conferences," PAIWC papers, box 3, Lc.
"Proceedings and Report of the Columbus Day Conferences," PAIWC papers, box 3, LC.
49 "Proceedings and Report of the Columbus Day Conferences."
45 From the beginning Latin American women had displayed
enthusiasm for the October meetings. In a circular letter
to members of the U.S. Women's Auxiliary Committee, Emma
Swiggett as the Executive Secretary commented: "Prospects
for success of the Conference in Latin countries are good.
An unexpectedly large number have responded.Similarly, all participating Latin American countries published a pamphlet outlining their activities. Excitement and support
for women's Pan American activism were also evident in the careful and meticulous conference that the Mexican
Auxiliary's International Committee organized. In fact, because the Mexican group had put together and coordinated such a sophisticated Columbus Day program, Emma Swiggett questioned the authenticity of the program. Adelia
Palacios, Chairman of the Mexican section of the
International Committee, nationally recognized teacher, and an official delegate at the 1908 Latin American Scientific
Congress, responded to Swiggett concerning the Columbus Day
Conference, "It surprises me your question 'if all the material I sent was prepared by our association.' Yes,
Emma Swiggett to members of the Women's Auxiliary Committee, September 1, 1923, PAIWC papers, box 7, LC.
46 didn't you see the progratn!...all I sent was done by our
circle.Clearly, Swiggett insulted Palacios, an
experienced women's rights and educational leader in Mexico, with her insinuations.
The Executive Committee's proposal emphasized that:
All National Sections are urged to select a topic that will show best the most solid contribution of the women of their country to a movement of vital concern to their nation. Conforming to the purpose of the Conferences, however, this topic should have a special significance due to the opportunity it affords for the development of a better Pan-American understanding."^
The committee continued with its suggested emphasis on:
The call of the future to Pan American women. How can they best organize so as to make their efforts most effective, their accomplishments most appropriate; contributing in their way to the consummation of the praiseworthy purpose of the Pan American ideal.
Despite the call to Pan Americanism, some U.S. women focused their Columbus Day speeches on issues so specific to the
“ Adelia Palacios to Mrs. Glen Levin Swiggett, May 23, 1924, PAIWC papers, box 7, LC.
"The Proposal of the Women's Auxiliary Committee to Celebrate on Columbus Day, October 12, 1922, By the National Sections of the International Committee Pan American Conferences of Women in the Capitals of Their Respective Countries," PAIWC papers, box 4, LC.
" Ibid.
47 United States that they seemed inappropriate for a
transnational women's conference. Mrs. Smith, for example,
member of the Auxiliary, addressed problems of trash and the
unsightliness of alleys in Washington D.C.®“ What this
topic had to do with Pan Americanism or women remains unclear. The planning Committee had stated explicitly that presentations should highlight women's social and familial role, women's education, and women's accomplishments in the past, present, and future, tying these themes with women's special role and mission in the Pan American arena.^
Martha Strayer, a reporter for the Washington News, editorialized concerning the U.S. women's conference and this contradiction:
It was almost a strictly woman's affair, the Columbus Day meeting. There may have been more, but I saw only three men in the afternoon audience. One looked like a South American Spaniard, and he listened carefully and earnestly, but didn't hear a lot about Pan- Americanism...That was what struck me most--that the tone of the speakers at this Pan-American meeting was American, not Pan-American.^®
"Proceedings and Report of the Columbus Day Conferences," PAIWC papers, box 3, LC.
” "Proposal of the Women's Auxiliary Committee to Celebrate Columbus Day," PAIWC papers, box 4, LC.
Newspaper clipping, Martha Strayer, "At Pan-American Meet Yesterday," Washington (D.C.) News. October 13, 1923, PAIWC papers, box 5, LC. 48 This critical view caught the attention of the U.S. women, who demanded a formal retraction. The following week in a short article entitled, "Correction," Strayer responded,
Mrs. Glenn Levin Swiggett, executive secretary of the committee, has asked for correction of any impression this may have given our readers that the speakers should have talked Pan Americanism. In all American capitals where similar Columbus Day meetings were held, she says, speakers outlined the work of women in a few fields in their respective countries.
By 1923, women with a variety of interests and political stands had come together and had organized in the
Pan American arena to celebrate the "discovery of the New
World."®® Women in thirteen countries held Columbus Day celebrations. Perhaps appropriately, given the occasion, no indigenous women took part in the Conference, and in only three countries, Mexico, Nicaragua, and Peru, did the indigenous female heroine of the past make it into the speeches.®* Latin American female and male participants.
57 Ibid., "A Correction," October 22, 1923.
®® "Proceedings and Report of the Columbus Day Conferences," 1, PAIWC papers, box 3, LC.
®* Cuba and Peru had planned and organized meetings but had to cancel at the last minute, while the Mexican section of 49 more than their U.S. counterparts, broadened the scope of the Executive Committee and included the controversial issue of women's suffrage and feminism in general. Latin American women undoubtedly had their own ideas about feminism which they inserted in their Pan American activities.
Continuation of Traditional Organizing?
The following year the long-awaited Peruvian conference took place, and from December 28, 1924, to January 7, 1925, the Second Women's Pan American Auxiliairy Committee met under the auspices of the Third Pan American Scientific
Congress. Similar to other Pan American women's conferences, the Second Auxiliary was a success, and in contrast to U.S. concern, the Peruvian women competently organized the Congress.
In 1916, immediately following the First Women's
Auxiliary, Latin American and U.S. women had started planning for the second women's meeting. They exchanged numerous letters expressing their support for the First
Auxiliary, their excitement about the future of women's role the Women's Auxiliary held its conference a week after the others.
50 in the Pan American arena, their enthusiasm for a Pan
American sisterhood, and their desire for a permanent organization. Honduran Lucila Gamero de Medina wrote an article entitled 'Conditions of Women in Honduras,' for the
Women's Auxiliary Bulletin, sent names of Honduran women
interested in women's Pan American activities, and was in contact with the Honduran press to promote women's rights.
Medina also proudly announced that the recently revised
Central American Constitution included women's suffrage.
Luisa de Anderson, member of the Costa Rican Women's
Auxiliary, exclaimed her "deep interest in and enthusiastic devotion to things which the Congress represents," Maria
Cristina Zapata, Director of the Voice of the People in
Nicaragua, offered her cooperation in promoting the
Auxiliary, and Julia G. de Batres of El Salvador supplied the Auxiliary with the names of qualified women to serve on the International Committee and sent her support for the prosperous future of women's Pan American organizing.®^
®° Lucila Gamero de Medina to Mrs. Glenn Levin Swiggett, [1917], PAIWC papers, box 4, LC.
Luisa de Anderson to Mrs. Robert Lansing, July 2, 1921, PAIWC papers, box 1, LC; Maria Cristina Zapata to Mrs. Glen Levis Swiggett, October 13, 1918, PAIWC papers, box 4, 51 Similarly, an Ecuadorian member referred to the Auxiliary as
a "noble cause" and "believed that she would be able to be
of help to her North American sisters.""
The participants maintained that because of women's
special qualities and interests, they could have a positive
impact on the lives of children, women, and society
generally. As can be expected, their correspondence
concentrated on issues of the poor, including milk programs
for children, problems of orphans, child labor, as well as
poor women's working conditions and their ability to care
adequately for their children and homes. Most striking,
though, were the political interests of the Latin American
women. Not only did many of them advocate women's suffrage
as indicated by the numerous Latin American suffrage groups, but they also discussed and took political stands on subjects considered traditionally male. A member of the
Women's Auxiliary, Mrs. Post, had received a letter from a woman in Mexico asking the U.S. to join with Venezuela in requesting the freedom of political prisoners. The
LC; Julia G. de Batres to Mrs. Robert Lansing, February 25, 1919, PAIWC papers, box 8, LC.
" Unsigned to Mrs. Robert Lansing, May 19, 1919, PAIWC papers, box 4, LC. 52 committee members brought up the issue during an Auxiliary meeting and they decided to "not take any action.""
All over Latin America women, often with differing agendas, wanted to participate in the Auxiliary, viewing it as a way to promote peaceful relations and mutual understanding among women of the Americas as well as an avenue to advance their own agenda." Unlike the first conference, which U.S. women organized spontaneously, the
1924-25 meeting was carefully planned, allowing for a more diverse group of women to attend, to participate in the proceedings, and to shape the program. These women saw this transnational conference as a means of putting forth and advocating their concerns. For instance, women from the radical Cuban women's group. Club Femenino de Cuba, the
Paraguayan Las Mujeres de Sufragistas, the Panamanian
Sociedad Nacional para el Progreso de al Mujer as well as the Partido Nacional Feminista, and in various Latin
" Minutes of the Women's Auxiliary Committee, November 23, 1922, PAIWC papers, box 6, LC.
" Women from Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Guatemala, Mexico, and Peru all actively participated in and displayed much enthusiasm for women's Pan American activities.
53 American countries the National Councils of Women gave
papers and organized sessions at the conference.®^ Women
with more conservative and traditional agendas were
represented at the congress as well. The Red Cross had
members from the United States, Cuba, and Panama, various
countries had associations of nurses in attendance,
Uruguay's Liga Nacional contra el Alcoholismo came, and a
member of the U.S. Daughters of the American Revolution was
there.
From the beginning the U.S. women attempted to assert a
leadership role in organizing the Second Pan American
Women's Auxiliary. By using their connections to U.S. (Pan
American Union) officials and espousing that Peruvian and
Latin American women in general lacked the skills to
organize a transnational conference, the U.S. International
Committee tried to manipulate the Peruvian meeting. Swiggett
lamented to Rowe :
you will remember that we discussed over the telephone the advisability of sending such a memorandum [to the Peruvian women's auxiliary organizing committee] and decided that it could be sent with propriety only after
"Second Pan-American Conference of Women, Lima, Peru, 1924" Columbus Memorial Library (CML), Organization of American States, Washington, D.C.
54 the Women's Committee in Peru had communicated with the Women's Auxiliary Committee here.®®
Such a comment suggests that U.S. women viewed themselves as integral to the organization and success of the women's Pan
American meetings. Swiggett further stated insinuating that they were trying not to appear too controlling,
As no communication has been received and it is now so late, I am enclosing the prepared suggestions leaving the transmittal of them to your judgment, as I say in my letter they have been prepared on your suggestion.®^
Earlier Rowe had responded to Swiggett in a letter marked "CONFIDENTIAL" concerning arrangements for the
Peruvian conference, "As I said to you before, the more complete and specific your suggestions, the more likely we are to secure definite results."®® Thus, in collaboration with U.S. Pan American Union members, the U.S. women sought to insert their agendas into the meetings with little or no regard for the views and interests of the Latin American women's Auxiliary groups.
®® Executive Secretary to L. S. Rowe, August 28, 1924, PAICW papers, box 8, LC.
67 Ibid.
®® L. S. Rowe to Mrs. Swiggett, May 31, 1924, PAIWC papers, box 8, L C .
55 U.S. women maintained that Latin American women did not
have the personal qualities or experiences needed to take on
such a huge undertaking as the Second Auxiliary. They
claimed that Latin American women did not initiate contact
with U.S. women, ignoring the fact that Latin American
activists might have corresponded more with each other than
with their North American neighbors. Moreover, such a
statement was untrue. As we have seen, immediately after
the First Women's Auxiliary until the 1924 congress, women
from a variety of Latin American countries corresponded
extensively with U.S. women members about women's future in
the Pan American arena. With the exception of the Dominican
Republic, women from every country in Latin America were
involved in the Women's Auxiliary and had formed
International Committees.®® Latin American women's
commitment to a Pan American sisterhood was reflected in the attitude and concerns of Amanda Labarca Hubertson. Director of Liceo de Ninas (high school for girls) in Santiago,
Chile, and member of the Chilean Auxiliary Committee.
®® Mrs. Glen Levin Swiggett to Cristobal de Losada y Puga, July 10, 1924, PAIWC papers, box 8, L C .
56 Hxibertson wrote on a variety of issues including the
need for regular communication between Latin American and
U.S. women, women's labor, women's status in Latin America,
and ways to popularize women's cause. Concerning the
relationship among women of the Americas she observed.
North American women do not know us. We South American women do not even know each other... [Nevertheless] [t]he Social Problems which the Latin American women are trying to resolve at this time are very different from those confronting you, because among us conditions of life, the economic situation, education and customs are very different. Hence, we have greater encouragement in the example of women from Latin American countries than from the United States, as it is difficult for us to imitate the women of the latter country
Instead of viewing this situation as hopeless, she suggested a way for the different groups of women to become better acquainted. Hubertson proposed that the U.S. and
Chile develop an exchange program for female teachers to work in the schools, thereby gaining knowledge of the pedagogical systems and, perhaps even more importantly, of each other's culture and people. Such a situation, according to Hubertson, would deepen the relations of the
Americas, helping to overcome their ignorance of one another and leading to better understanding.
Amanda Labarca Hubertson to Glen Levin Swiggett, April 9, 1918, PAIWC papers, box 1, LC. 57 U.S. International Committee members did not try to contact Latin American women directly concerning the Second
Auxiliary; instead, they relied on Peruvian Pan American
Union members. As early as 1919, the U.S. International
Committee solicited Manuel Vicente Villaran, member of the
Executive Committee of the Third Pan American Scientific
Congress, to provide names for the Peruvian women's group.
However, Peruvian officials, like U.S. Pan American Union members, did not find the woman's cause of importance and were slow to respond, and in the end they were careful to stipulate that they would "suggest" not "select" the women's
Peruvian International Committee.’^
In the spring of 1924, the Peruvian men called together a meeting of the Peruvian section of the Women's Auxiliary resulting in a large gathering of women "representatives of the true social and intellectual activities of Peru. At this meeting those attending elected the Organization
Committee of the Pan American Conference and invited "all
F. A. Pezet to Mrs. Glen Levin Swiggett, June 24, 1922, PAIWC papers, box 8, LC.
Jose J. Bravo to The President of the Cooperating Committee in the United States, May 13, 1924, PAIWC papers, box 8, LC. 58 the women of the Continent who may desire to join in this work of noble and comprehensive feminism...to take part in the
Conference.
Mercedes Gallagher de Parks, member of the Auxiliary and President of the Peruvian section of the ICW, chaired the Peruvian International Committee. Swiggett repeatedly offered Parks the help of the U.S. women to organize the
Second Auxiliary; Parks, however, preferred to keep the affair in Peruvian hands. Parks and the Peruvian committee only consulted the U.S. women on minor details concerning the structure of the First Auxiliary, while freely implementing the Second Auxiliary in the manner they chose.
The Peruvian women's International Committee, like its
Northern sister, sought Pan American Union members' help to organize the Second Women's Auxiliary Conference. Parks exclaimed, "We are extremely lucky in having Don Jose J.
Bravo, the General Secretary of the Congress...without whose help and direction we could never have got anything done at all." In many respects, this situation could not be
73 Ibid.
Mercedes Gallagher de Parks to Mrs. Glen Levin Swiggett, October 22, 1924, PAIWC papers, box 8, LC. 59 avoided because of the connection of the women's group with the Pan American Union. Both groups of women, though, rather than solely relying on the men's guidance, used the men as a way to advance their own causes. The U.S. women tried to manipulate the women's Congress by gaining the support and interference of the U.S. Pan American Union members, while the Peruvian women used the male members to control the composition of the women's organizing committee.
Parks relayed to Swiggett:
There are a few women here who have [emphasis Park's] got some experience of public speaking and public meetings, but they are mostly women whose opinion of themselves is not shared by the sensible people in the community...So if, when you reach Lima, you hear of some ill-used female genius who has been left out of the Conference committees through base envy, you will know what to think !
Interestingly, it turned out to be the U.S. women who showed a lack of involvement in the Second Auxiliary. About the upcoming meeting Blanche Z. de Baralt, member of the
Cuban International Women's Auxiliary Committee, complained to Swiggett,
our congress in December is going to be a great success-- that is if the element from the United States responds, and we don't know yet--at this eleventh hour-
Ibid.
60 -if it is going to or Qgt. As for the Spanish American countries they have responded most enthusiastically and are going to make a fine showing.’®
At the end of the Conference Parks similarly questioned the
integrity of the U.S. women's commitment to Pan American
women's activism, commenting,
though the members of the American Delegation were all very charming and cultured women, it seems to me that, outside of the Washington Committee, the really important women in the States do not seem to have taken great interest in the Conference, if any at all.”
Parks thus implied that not only did U.S. women display disinterest in the Pan American Conference and Pan American women's organizing, but also that the Women's Auxiliary represented only a small sector of U.S. women and not necessarily the most eminent one.
In spite of the lack of help from U.S. women, the
Peruvian women showed that they could put together a well- tbought out and planned meeting. Thirteen countries, including Peru and the United States, sent female representatives to the Second Women's Auxiliary Congress, with participants presenting papers and holding sessions on
Blanche de Baralt to Mrs. Swiggett, October 27, 1924, PAIWC papers, box 8, LC.
” Mercedes Gallagher de Parks to Mrs. Swiggett, January 13, 1925, PAIWC papers, box 8, LC. 61 a variety of topics. Program themes included social assistance and the well being of the child, women's and children's education, Pan Americanism, equal pay for equal work, protection and support of the woman worker, as well as women's right to suffrage, feminism and love, the work of the Peruvian Pro-Culture Feminist League, and feminism.
The Peruvian women were proud of their Inca heritage and shared this enthusiasm with the other women through field trips to cultural sites, lectures on Peruvian history, and plays."'® In addition, the Peruvian newspaper, El Comercio. daily covered the women's activities, recording their
Tercer Conareso Cientifico Pan-Americano. Seaunda Conferencia Pan-American _de._Muieres.. Constitucion v Programas (Lima, Peru: Carlos Fabbri, 1924). The participants took their role seriously and resolved to set up programs to help with child welfare, working conditions of children and women, establishment of day nurseries and single working girls inexpensive and protected living quarters, improvements in women's education, domestic science instruction for poor mothers, and women's rights. Women's Second Auxiliary.Conference of the Third Pan American Scientific Conference. 1924-25-Resolutions. (CML).
Mercedes Gallagher de Parks, chair of the women's Peruvian organizing committee, insisted that L. S. Lowe have the official program of the women's congress include a translation of these "excursions and festivities" for the American delegates.
62 schedule of events and printing many of their speeches.®®
The women's Peruvian meeting thus brought together in one
place women with diverse agendas in a semi-official Pan
American context, setting the tone for a permanent women's
group in the Pan American Union.
Conflict smd Cooperation: Diversity Among Pam. American Women
In many ways the conference held in Panama June 18-25,
1926, epitomized the diversity of Pan Americanism for women
in the early twentieth century. This meeting celebrated
what Latin Americans considered the one hundredth
anniversary of the first Pan American meeting held in Panama
in 1826. Simon Bolivar, the eminent independence leader,
had initiated and organized the 1826 conference. Ester N.
de Calvo, a Panamanian women's rights activist who had participated in women's Pan American conferences since the early 1920s, organized this women's transnational meeting.
®® The Columbus Memorial Library houses many newspaper clippings from Latin American countries in the early twentieth century.
In 1925 the All America Association for the Advancement of Women, the organization formed at the 1922 meeting in Baltimore, had a women's conference which Calvo, among other Latin American women, attended.
63 Calvo named the conference the Congreso Inter-Americano de
Mujeres, or the Inter-American Congress of Women. Although
Panamanian government officials, in addition to organizing
their own celebration, attended and took part in the women's
proceedings, the Panamanian women organized, planned, and
designed the program independent of government control with
the issue of women's suffrage making up a large portion of
the program." Calvo, it should be remembered, at the 1923
Columbus Day Conference in Panama had helped to organize and
had taken part in a session on feminism.
Like the other Pan American women's conferences, this
one was a success, with many women from all the Americas
attending and representing many professions, among them
business, medicine, law, education, social work, and women's
rights. Curiously, Carrie Chapman Catt, Pan American
feminist and international suffragist, did not attend the
conference, much to Calvo's disappointment. In fact,
Calvo, like Baralt and Parks, had anticipated much more
" "Congreso Inter-Americano de Mujeres, Junio 18 a 25- 1926," PAIWC papers, box 4, LC.
64 interest in the Conference from U.S. women. Calvo wrote
to Catt,
According to the program adopted last April in our Conference in favour of our ideals of fraternity and friendship between the women of the Americas, I have worked very hard, but I have to feel quite disappointed with the results of my work in the United States.^
Despite her disillusionment about U.S. women and Catt's
absence, Calvo appointed Catt honorary president of the
Conference, wanting her prestige and portraying a unity of
sisterhood among women of the Americas.
This Pan American women's meeting had a deep meaning
for Calvo. Even though she was pregnant, she often worked
until "two and four o'clock in the morning" organizing the
conference, and she took great care to accommodate the
visiting women with the assurance that all the female
" Latin American women had actively participated in women's Pan American conferences in the U.S., even those not affiliated with the men's Pan American conferences. For example, they enthusiastically joined with the LWV in the 1922 Baltimore meeting, and again in 1925 at the second LWV Pan American women's congress, the All America Women's Conference, held in Washington, B.C. Some Latin American feminists came to question U.S. women's commitment to the Pan American women's movement because of their lack of attendance at conferences held outside the U.S.
®“Ester N. de Calvo to Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt, May 11, 1926, PAIWC papers, box 4, LC. Calvo's reference is to the 1925 All America Women's Conference.
65 delegates would be guests of the government and with a
guarantee of a 24% discount from steamship companies.
Latin American women, like U.S. women, viewed these conferences as a way to promote their cause on both an
international and national level, unified as 'woman' in the
Americas.
Calvo organized the congress independent of outside control and carefully planned it, making sure to invite women with a variety of interests and perspectives,
initially not including members of the Women's Auxiliary.
Emma Swiggett had inquired as to why Calvo had not contacted the Women's Auxiliary about the Bolivar conference.
Following the usual pattern, Swiggett asked L. S. Rowe to investigate this matter for her, and he responded:
"invitations were extended to institutions of a scientific or educational character, not merely those having international interests."®® After much haggling, Calvo, as president of the Panamanian organizing committee, extended an invitation to the Women's Auxiliary. By this time
Ibid.
L. S. Rowe to Mrs. Swiggett, March 18, 1926, PAIWC papers, box 4, LC.
66 Swiggett had finagled, with the assistance of Rowe, to
attend the Conference as the official representative of the
American Association of University Women. Mrs. James Brown
Scott, member of the Auxiliary's Executive Committee and wife of a Pan American Union official, went to Panama as the
Women's Auxiliary representative.®’ Swiggett appeared to go out of her way to participate in this conference, even
though she had previously criticized those Pan American meetings that promoted controversial women's issues. As one of the few U.S. women attending the conference, perhaps she saw this meeting as an opportunity for the Auxiliary to take the lead in women's Pan American organizing.
Swiggett was aware of the LWV-driven All America
Women's Conference and believed that some Latin Americans felt betrayed because of its emphasis on the vote, referring to it as a congress for "Pan American Suffrage."®® A traveling companion of Catt's on her trip in 1924 to South
America to observe the women's movement there as well as
Latin American women's status generally, exclaimed to
®’ Executive Secretary to Madame Esther Fsicl J. de Calvo, May 7, 1926, PAIWC papers, box 4, LC.
®® Anita Van Lewin to Mrs. Swiggett, March 6, 1924, PAIWC papers, box 3, LC. 67 Swiggett: "I cared nothingabout having the South American
women take up suffrage, and most of my many friends there
cared nothing about it..J4any of them rebelled at having to
endorse the suffrage problem in order to be in Mrs. Catt's
organization."®® In fact by 1924 Catt herself had given up
hope for the future of women's Pan American organizing. She
lamented: "I have, personally, become convinced that a Pan
American Association of Women upon an independent, self-
supporting and self-respecting basis will not be possible because of the great distances and tremendous expense of
traveling."®® She found it "impossible" to attend the 1924
Peruvian women's meeting further stating: "A congress of women which is sponsored by governments...wi 11 never build up an effectual women's movement... [which] is desperately needed in South and Central America." Catt, nevertheless, was compelled to have a follow-up meeting to the one held in
Baltimore in 1922 to complete the work begun, which took place in 1925 in Washington, D.C. Catt insisted that she wanted to have this congress in a Latin American country but
®® Ibid.
®° Carrie Chapman Catt to Mrs. Glen Levin Swiggett, October 30, 1924, PAIWC papers, box 3, LC. 68 that the interested countries were unable to obtain the
necessary funds. Ironically, she criticized Latin American
women for relying on the financial support of their
governments, while the LWV, the sponsor of both the 1922 and
1925 meetings, utilized government resources and used the
Pan American Union building's facilities.
The Inter-American Congress of Women opened in the
Assembly Hall of the National Institute in Panama with the
Panamanian National Anthem. Latin American government
officials attended, with Mendez Pereira, President of the
Bolivian Congress, giving a welcoming speech to the female
delegates. He exclaimed "his faith in what women of today
are accomplishing as well as his belief that men and women working together will bring about much for the development of Latin America. In some ways this meeting was a Latin
American affair because of the focus on Simon Bolivar, who
for many Latin Americans symbolized freedom and liberation.
The women, however, while praising Bolivar, took this occasion to show their commitment to Pan American feminism,
Draft of a report that the Women's Auxiliary prepared about the 1926 Conference. PAIWC papers, box 4, LC.
69 even canceling a social gathering to hold an extra business meeting.
The papers and presentations focused mostly on the
subjects of child welfare, education, women in the law and
legislation, and inter-American relations. The congress passed resolutions to form a permanent Pan American women's committee, to found a library especially for women patrons, and to endorse women's rights, including "full political rights" for women.Clearly, by 1926 Latin American women had the skills and intellectual and political sensibilities to organize on their own and displayed a commitment to the future of women's Pan American activities.
Conclusion
Latin American women, like U.S. women, displayed an air of confidence and accomplishment concerning women's Pan
American organizing efforts. Since the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Latin American women had participated in transnational as well as national women's activities. They had taken part in the sexually integrated
” "Inter-American Congress of Women," PAIWC papers, box 4, LC.
70 Latin America Scientific Congresses and by the third decade of the century had formed numerous all-female groups devoted to women's issues, including the divisive issue of suffrage.
Even though U.S. women espoused a rhetoric of Pan American sisterhood and recognized Latin American women's accomplishments, they viewed Latin American as their "little sisters," took an interest only when the U.S. was in charge, and believed that they should always have control because of the established women's movement in the U.S. Latin American women, in contrast, considered Pan American women's activities as an avenue to continue and broaden their feminist base, eagerly engaging in Pan American women's meetings, even those congresses held outside of the Southern continent.
Although such traditional women's topics as child welfare, women workers, and women's education occupied an important place on conference agendas, the issue of women's political rights, especially suffrage, appeared in the programs of Latin American feminist groups as well. In 1920 in Buenos Aires the Argentine National Council of Women held a conference devoted to women's suffrage; in 1923 in Havana the National Federation of Cuban Women's Associations
71 organized a National Women's Conference with women's
suffrage and other women's rights issues occupying a large
portion of the program; and in 1924 in Santiago, Chile,
supporters founded an association to work for women's civil,
administrative, and political rights.” Thus, by 1928 Latin
American women had a well—organized women's movement with
women from many parts of the Americas organizing within and
outside of the Pan American arena. Instead of remaining
content as an "auxiliary" to the Pan American Union, many of
these women strove for and won an official place in the
Western hemisphere with the founding of the Inter-American
Commission of Women in 1928 in Cuba.
” Bulletin of the Pan American Union 56 (1923) : 580-590, 58 (1924) : 743-744.
72 CHAPTER 3
THE FOUNDING OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION OF WOMEN
As we have seen, by the late 1920s Pan American feminist organizing was widespread, with women from all the
Americas participating. Under the auspices of various Pan
American female groups, women had come together to examine their subordinate status, holding conferences as early as
1915. Even though participants displayed enthusiasm about such activism, travel to meetings was costly, competing factions weakened and splintered collaborative efforts, and no one association had the power, clout, or resources to serve as an umbrella agency to coordinate an agenda and cement women's activities. The founding of the government- sponsored Inter-American Commission of Women thus marked a new phase for Pan American feminists. Now those interested in women's concerns had a central, legitimate, and official base from which to operate. But contrary to the lACW's own publicity, which has dominated existing scholarship, Cuban
73 feminists rather than members of the U.S.-based National
Woman's Party took the leadership role, initiating most of
the campaign efforts in Havana.^
In her scholarly work on the early Cuban women's movement, K. Lynn Stoner has shown that Cuban women had built a strong women's movement by 1928.^ Cuban women, as well as Latin American women generally, had participated in their country's independence movements in the nineteenth century, and once they achieved their goals, they used every avenue available to work on women's issues. They put on congresses, petitioned legislatures, protested in the streets, circulated propaganda through newspapers and radio, promoted women's education, sponsored women's and children's health clinics, and formed alliances in the international arena.
But in contrast to U.S. feminism, according to Stoner, most Cuban feminists based their activism on their differences from men and on their traditional roles as
^ Other U.S. women's groups such as the national chapter of the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom sent delegates to the 1928 meeting in Havana, but the NWP played the dominant U.S. role.
^ Stoner, From the House to the Streets.
74 mothers.^ They took a variety of perspectives on the struggle for women's liberation. Socialist women fought for egalitarian labor restructuring, radical feminists argued for suffrage, and conservative activists focused on maternity issues. Virtually all of these women, however, distinguished themselves and their efforts from their "North
American" sisters, viewing "Yankee" feminism as a threat to country and family.“ Still, some Latin American women recognized the influence of the U.S. in the Pan American
Union and believed that cooperation might help advance their cause. Cuban feminist, socialist, and lawyer Flora Diaz de
Parrado was such a woman. In fact, even though National
Woman's Party members, the dominant U.S. players in Havana, had had contact with other Central American feminists, it
^ Asuncion Lavrin makes similar arguments in her work on Latin American women's activism in the first half of the twentieth century. Asuncion Lavrin, "Female, Feminine, and Feminist: Key Concepts in Understanding Women's History in Twentieth-Century Latin America." Paper presented as part of the University of Bristol "Occasional Lecture Series" (1988), Bristol, England and "The Ideology of Feminism in the Southern Cone, 1900-1940," (Washington, D.C.: Wilson Center, 1986) .
Latin American feminists frequently referred to U.S. feminists as North Americans and Yankees, often calling their brand of feminism "Yankee."
75 was Parrado who first alerted the NWP to the upcoming conference.®
Following an often-used path to harness support for women's rights such as suffrage, Parrado sought help from abroad.® Aware of the potential importance of the 1923 proposal promising women an official role in the Pan
American Union to study their status in the Western hemisphere, and of the power that the U.S. wielded in Pan
American affairs, she solicited the NWP's assistance:
"While the resolutions adopted by the Pan-American Congress have no legal force in the countries of the Americas, they are very important in influencing the course of legislation.
® Pilar Houston to [National Woman's Party], February 27, 1928, National Woman's Party (NWP) papers, microfilm, reel 38. In May 1926 Cuban feminist and member of the important Club Femenino de Cuba, Pilar Houston, was on a trip to Washington, D.C. as a Cuban Red Cross representative and they "all went to the N.W.P. headquarters." At that time Houston paid membership dues for Club Femenino; Ricarda L. de Ramos Casellas to Margaret Lambie, January 26, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38. Mississippi-born wife of the first president of Puerto Rico, Muna Lee de Munoz, and others in the Puerto Rican women's suffrage Liga Social Sufragista formed a chapter of the NWP in 1927. These feminists had forged an alliance with the Party then to help them with their struggle for women's suffrage there. Lee ends up working with the NWP as the Liga's representative in Havana in 1928.
® Leila J. Rupp, Worlds of Women.
76 particularly in South and Central America."’ During a two- week visit to the United States, Parrado worked diligently to gain the U.S. feminists' support. She appealed to Party members on social occasions such as teas, lunches, and dinners, gave an extensive lecture at their New York headquarters, and even offered to provide them personal contacts with feminists in Cuba.®
The exact circumstances surrounding Parrado's initial encounter with the NWP remain unclear. She was a socialist activist in Cuba with women's suffrage one of her main concerns, and because of her radical political involvement she was alienated both from her government and mainstream women's groups.® She had come to the United States on Pan
’ ER, December 17, 1927, NWP papers, reel 154. Stoner also makes this argument.
® Flora Diaz de Parrado speech at NWP headquarters, January 1, 1928, Doris Stevens papers, carton 10, Schlesinger Library, Catnbridege, MA. Parrado made this speech at the headquarters of the NWP in Washington, D.C. in celebration of the 135^' anniversary of Lucretia Mott, prominent nineteenth century U.S. feminist; Isabel Keith MacDermott to [Margaret] Lambie, December 29, 1927; Katharine Ward Fisher to [Jane Norman] Smith, December 31, 1927, NWP papers, reel 38.
® For more on Parrado's and other Cuban feminists' views, see Mariblanca Sabas Aloma, Feminismo: Cuestiones Sociales- Critica Literaria (La Habana: Editorial "Hermes," 1930).
77 American business, and Isabel Keith MacDermott, editor of
the Pan American Bulletin, introduced her to NWP members.
Parrado had expressed to MacDermott concern about the lack
of female presence at the upcoming sixth conference.
Whether she had asked to speak to NWP members specifically
or whether MacDermott had decided that they best suited her
needs is a mystery. MacDermott knew about other women's
groups such as the League of Women Voters and the Women's
Auxiliary, both of which had organized all-female Pan
American women's associations. The NWP was not new to such
requests from Latin American feminists, however. And perhaps Parrado or MacDermott had heard about the Party's
recent participation in the Puerto Rican women's suffrage campaign.
In 1927 Puerto Rican proponents of women's suffrage had
sought assistance from the NWP. Although the Party had not actively courted Central and South American women as had their nemesis, the League of Women Voters, Puerto Rican suffragists had formed a political alliance with the Party to help with their propaganda efforts to gain suffrage.^
Yamila Azize-Vargas, "The Emergence of Feminism in Puerto Rico, 1870-1930," in Unequal Sisters: A Multi-Cultural 78 The forging of associations with women from enfranchised
countries by those from nations where women lacked the vote
followed an avenue many women took in their struggle for
equality.
Of course, the relationship between Puerto Rican and
U.S. suffrage struggles was complex because of the
countries' imperialist connection. In 1898 the United
States had invaded and "annexed" Puerto Rico, taking it from
its colonial overlord Spain. Although in 1917 the U.S. had
granted the people of the territory citizenship, the small
country and the United States maintained an uneasy, imperial
bond. In spite of this, supporters of women's suffrage had
expected Puerto Rican women to receive the vote with the passing of the nineteenth amendment in the United States in
1920. Much to the feminists' chagrin, however, the dominant nation had not directly extended the vote to women there, creating confusion in the Puerto Rican Legislature. Scholar of Puerto Rican women's history, Yamila Azize-Vargas, maintains that the controversy revolved around the Socialist
Party's support of universal suffrage versus the Liberal
Reader in U.S. Women's History. 2"*^ ed. , eds., Vicki L. Ruiz and Ellen Carol DuBois, (New York: Routledge, 1994).
79 Party's support of restricted enfranchisement.^^ The
Liberal Party currently controlled the government and
universal suffrage would have given voting privileges to
thousands of poor, working-class women, most of whom had an
allegiance to the Socialists. The Liberals thus feared that
they might be ousted from their electoral position of power.
Consequently, a conflict ensued between the two factions,
putting the women in the middle. Feminists from both
political camps, however, did not take defeat easily,
immediately rallying support for their cause.
As early as 1920 the Socialist Party put together the
Asociacion Feminista Popular, later reorganized into the
Liga Social Sufragista, which advocated universal suffrage.
And within months the more moderate restrictive suffrage
proponents founded the Asociacion Puertorriqueha de Mujeres
and the Liga Panamericana de Mujeres Votantes. After years
of struggle and essentially making very little headway, the
Liga Social Sufragista decided to go directly to Washington,
D.C., and put together a lobbying campaign at the U.S.
Congress. To work in the United States they needed an
11 Rupp, Worlds of Women: Miller, "Lobbying the League";
80 experienced ally there, so they formed a political partnership with the NWP. Although the Puerto Rican
suffragists were in contact with the League of Women Voters,
the National Woman's Party was more to their liking because of their militant and aggressive stance in the U.S. suffrage movement. After years of untiring efforts and pressure on the U.S. Congress, the feminists eventually succeeded, and in 1932 the first Puerto Rican women participated in general elections.“
Whether aware of the Puerto Rican situation or not,
Parrado understood the influence of the United States in
Latin American, especially Cuban, affairs, and hoped that an alliance with the Yankee feminists might bring about some positive results. During her initial visits to NWP headquarters, she explained the Cuban women's situation.
She asserted that even though women differed over other issues, female enfranchisement represented a priority to many Cuban feminists who believed that without it, women would retain their subordinate status. Recent events in
Azize-Vargas, "Feminism in Puerto Rico."
13 Ibid.
Parrado speech at NWP headquarters. 81 her government had again proved disappointing. Gerardo
Machado, president of Cuba, as part of his campaign strategy
and propaganda, had promised women that, if elected, he
would actively seek to enfranchise them. The most he had
done, however, was to include female suffrage as part of his
larger political agenda without giving it any special
attention or support. The Cuban government, instead of
adopting a women's suffrage act as Machado had pledged,
passed only an "enabling act" merely allowing for a future
suffrage bill. According to Parrado, the Club Femenino, the
leading Cuban feminist organization in 1928, "accepted this palliative smilingly," continuing to support their status as
second class citizens. She further contended:
the club, if it really meant to achieve suffrage, should protest against what they considered an attempt to deceive women into thinking they would soon be enfranchised..As yet, however, these resigning members have not organized a militant organization to bring about the suffrage amendment they want.
Despite Parrado's turn to U.S. feminists, the relationship between women from Cuba and the United States was fraught with difficulty, given the neo-colonial bondage of Cuba to U.S. economic and political interests. U.S.
ER, December 17, 1927, NWP papers, reel 154. 82 entrepreneurs, with the backing of the U.S. government,
owned large amounts of land and extensive sugar plantations,
controlled the banking system, and manipulated other
commercial endeavors. Moreover, the United States on
numerous occasions had deployed troops to Cuba, as well as
other Latin American nations, to suppress protests against
the United States and its puppet regimes. Many Cubans viewed the intrusions, both economic and military, as violations and fought for the elimination of the United
States from their affairs. This neo-colonial relationship undoubtedly affected the interactions between the NWP and
Cuban women, with both groups forming their own biased ideas about one another. Parrado, recognizing the tensions between U.S. and Latin American feminists and possessing a sense of potential solidarity, bluntly told the NWP: "I am sure North American women do not know much about women in
Central and South America, just as they do not know very much about you. This ignorance is very inconvenient for our common aims."^’ She further advised, "When women understand
Louis A. Pérez, Jr., Cuba: Between Reform and Revolution (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988).
Parrado speech at NWP headquarters. 83 that 'in union is strength' and when we leave behind little
suspicions in our struggles, we will get all our ideals and
we may help directly to develop society with more peace and
freedom.
Before Parrado's visit, women in the United States had
displayed no interest in the Santiago proposal nor in the
1928 conference. As early as 1924 Brazilian international
feminist Bertha Lutz had corresponded with U.S.
international suffrage leader Carrie Chapman Catt about the
1928 meeting and had urged her to send delegates. Catt,
however, thought that the trip to Havana would be too costly
and the expense not worth the potential outcome, discounting
the significance of Pan American feminism and viewing it as
secondary in the promotion of women's rights on the
international scene.Indicating the NWP's lack of awareness, member Jane Norman Smith wrote to sister ally
Margaret Lambie, "It is such a pity that we did not know about it sooner for it is very important. In a letter to
18 Ibid.
Circular to Board of Officers of the LWV, April 23, 1924, LWV papers, reel 15.
84 NWP colleague Mabel Vernon, Smith further lamented, "While you were away Margaret Lambie wrote to me about Dr. Parrado
and the Pan American Conference...!t is too bad that we didn't know about it long ago."^^ In another letter she continued:
"I cannot understand why we knew nothing of this before. If we had had more time, I am sure we could have secured your appointment [as delegate to the conference]."^' The Women's
Auxiliary, the early U.S feminist Pan American group largely responsible for organizing the first women's Pan American conference in 1915, similarly showed no concern for the congress until the NWP announced its intention to attend and promote their Equal Rights Treaty/" This prompted
Jane Norman Smith to Margaret Lambie, December 18, 1927, NWP papers, reel 38.
Jane Norman Smith to Mabel Vernon, December 1927, NWP papers, reel 38. In fact only a few NWP members, Jane Norman Smith, Margaret Lambie, and Katherine Ward Fisher, initially wanted to attend the Havana conference.
Jane Norman Smith to Margaret Lambie, December 26, 1927, NWP papers, reel 38.
Alice Paul, co-founder of the NWP, wrote the Equal Rights Amendment, a proposal granting women in the U.S. the same legal rights as that of men. The Equal Rights Treaty was a slightly reworded version of the amendment to include laws around the world. Carol Miller argues that the Party promoted the treaty as a way to pressure the U.S. congress into passing the amendment at home. These became the main focus of the NWP's agenda for at least the next decade. 85 Auxiliary officer Emma Swiggett to go to Havana. These U.S. feminists' behavior mirrored the lack of enthusiasm they had consistently shown toward Pan American meetings held outside the United States.
Scholars of women's history have posited that feminists in imperial countries view feminists from dependent nations as politically, socially, economically, and culturally
"backward" and "unsophisticated."^ Consequently, the
"modern" woman from the core industrial nations feels an obligation to offer maternal advice, leadership, and her well-honed skills to less-fortunate sisters or "daughters" from the colonial or dependent countries.^ Antoinette
Burton, among others, argues that Euroamerican feminists used "orientalist" conceptions of the "other," or women from the periphery, to advance their own cause.By evoking an image of progressive feminism juxtaposed to "oriental"
Burton, "Burdens of History," "Feminist Quest for Identity," "The White Woman's Burden"; Miller, "International Relations of Women of the Americas," Latin American Women and the Search for Social Justice. Ramusack, "Cultural Missionaries, Maternal Imperialists, Feminist Allies"; Zonana, "Sultan and the Slave."
25 Ramusack, "Cultural Missionaries."
Zonana, "The Sultan and the Slave." 86 oppression of women, the Euroamerican feminists garnered support from their male and female peers for their work.
Employing such an "imperialist" feminist view, the NWP considered their Latin American sisters the "other," having little to offer the modern and progressive U.S. activists.
As might be expected, then, NWP members hesitated to act on the plea from Parrado, displaying ambivalent attitudes about the conference. Reflecting an imperial
Euroamerican view, the NWP did not consider the Pan American arena nor Pan American feminism important. What could these women have to offer such progressive and modern feminists?
A notable exception, however, was Jane Norman Smith, long interested in international feminism. With the encouragement of young and energetic NWP members Margaret
Lambie and Katherine Ward Fisher, Smith would not let the issue of the Pan American conference die. Perhaps Lambie and Fisher represented the younger generation of international-minded feminists who advocated a broader, more inclusive brand of activism.The threesome persistently nudged their colleagues into supporting the cause, resulting in a small delegation attending the meeting.
87 In the end Party members attended, at least partly, to
galvanize support for the Equal Rights Treaty, modeled after
the Equal Rights Amendment, and to fortify a leadership role
on the international stage. In a letter to an officer in
the NWP, Fisher wrote: "Miss Paul feels that no efforts made will be valueless, and that if you represent women
there, desirable publicity and important contacts will result at least, and a basis [will] be laid for future
international effort."^® Smith, quoting Paul, exclaimed:
"It seems to me that since the subject is on the agenda of the Conference, it is a very great opportunity for us... [and] we could ask them to adopt a treaty on Equal Rights and even if we do not succeed this time, it would start the ball rolling. It is a wonderful opportunity for us to start serious international work."^ Another NWP member enthusiastically asserted that "this is a forward looking move which the Woman's Party should identify itself with. I
27 Rupp, Worlds Qf Women.
28 Katherine Ward Fisher, December 1927, NWP papers, reel 38 .
Jane Norman Smith to Mabel Vernon, December 26, 1927, NWP papers, reel 38. 88 do hope you will consider this."^“ Benefactor of the NWP
Alva Belmont, writing to Doris Stevens, sister member and representative in Havana, concurred: "I am sure we shall have some good results from it if is nothingmore Fsicl than the publicity."^ NWP members were so concerned about presenting an appearance of leadership and success that
Smith thought it "unwise to press for any kind of an appointment [to the PAC] just now. Please don't repeat this to anyone...Couldn't you suggest to Miss Lambie that it would be better for individuals to ask for it rather than have the
Party turned down?"^
By stepping into the international arena, the NWP was joining other feminists, including Latin American women, who had been working for years to elevate women's status.^^ And
NWP leaders were also jockeying for position in an
Unsigned to Jane Norman Smith, December 16, 1927, NWP papers, reel 38.
" Alva E. Belmont to Doris Stevens, February 2, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 9, SL.
Jane Norman Smith to Mabel Vernon, January 5, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38.
" Two of the most prominent and visible Latin American international feminists were Paulina Luisi from Uruguay and Bertha Lutz from Brazil. 89 ideological struggle focused on the League of Nations.^
International feminists shared a belief that women held a
subordinate socioeconomic position, and they sought avenues
to bring about a more egalitarian relationship between the
sexes. In contrast to League of Nations delegates who
argued that women's issues were domestic concerns to be left
up to individual nations, international feminists maintained
that the League had established an obligation at least to
investigate, if not to secure, women's rights when it vowed
to protect individual rights throughout the world. But
there the agreement ended.
Transnational activists were unable to agree either on
their role in the League of Nations or on how best to
convince League delegates that they should have an official
position. Essentially two ideological camps struggled over
control in Geneva, the League's home base. On the one hand,
equalitarian or equal rights feminists demanded a
comprehensive program forbidding any special legislation for women. Social feminists, on the other, desired protective
legislation or treaties to correct specific problems faced by women. The National Woman's Party sought the support of
90 the equal rights faction for their Equal Rights Treaty. In
this struggle, an official government-based alliance with
Latin American feminists was particularly important, for it provided a potential road for the NWP to march forward with
the Equal Rights Treaty. Because the United States did not belong to the League of Nations, U.S. women had to find a route into League deliberations through international organizations. The possibility of using Latin American contacts as an entering wedge into the international arena had particular appeal to the NWP because it had already failed in its bid to enter the International Woman's
Suffrage Alliance (IWSA), one of the preeminent international suffrage groups.In 1926, the IWSA, at its
Paris congress, rejected the NWP's application, arguing that the Party opposed special legislation for women. Personal rivalry, some argued, also influenced the decision.
As we have seen, president of the IWSA and officer in the League of Women Voters Carrie Chapman Catt had long had an antagonistic and competitive relationship with NWP
Rupp, Worlds of Women; Miller, "Lobbying the League."
For a thorough account of this dispute see Rupp's Worlds of Women. She argues that officials at the League of Nations
91 members. The feminists vied for prominence as the supreme
U.S. women's rights leaders, both at home and abroad.
During the past few years, however, Catt had lost interest
in the Latin American women's movement, now putting her
energy into the Euroamerican international arena. And as
past president of the IWSA, she was as determined as ever to
keep the Party alienated from the Alliance, as well as from
playing a major role in transnational organizing generally.
NWP members proclaimed that Catt used her power to keep them
out of the IWSA by prompting the LWV as the U.S. chapter of
the IWSA to threaten to withdraw its membership and cut off
financial support if the Party were admitted. Asserting
that it had been treated unfairly, forthright and militant
international feminist and NWP leader Doris Stevens demanded
that the Party be allowed a hearing before the conference in
Paris. In a tumultuous atmosphere, the Alliance turned down
the request, creating havoc among the women present. In
support of the NWP, the Six Point Group, the leading British
equal rights organization, resigned. Many other feminists,
however, viewed the NWP women's behavior as too aggressive
and out of line.
Nations labeled those feminists "extremists" who subscribed 92 Conscious of their unpopular reputation as overbearing
know-it-alls and hoping to get the Latin Americans behind
them, participants cautioned each other to use discretion in
Cuba. An active NWP member warned, "I do not think it the occasion for aggressive publicity on the part of the
Party...and if. we actually accomplish anything down there, then is the time for publicity."^ One of their own even espoused: "we gave the impression that we were 'the whole thing' and were trying to 'run the [1926 IWSA] Congress.
Trying to foil conflict in Havana, this time Smith suggested a different strategy: "it would be very nervy of us to tell these women what to do...I should rather wait until we get down there and then get in touch by cable with key women, as the occasion arises."^® Fisher, still not fully convinced of NWP intentions, responded, "I am certain from the way you have written that you are not intending to put over a
to identical rights for women and men.
Unknown to Jane Norman Smith, December 29, 1927, NWP papers, reel 38.
” Jane Norman Smith to Katherine Ward Fisher, December 31, 1927, NWP papers, reel 38.
Ibid. 93 campaign for the Woman's Party, as the Paris situation
seemed to require."”
By the time Stevens and Smith reached Cuba, they had
virtually forgotten who had informed them of the conference
and how they had come to find out about the meeting.
Although Smith acknowledged using Parrado's 'introductions,'
both women emphasized the role of the NWP in organizing the
women's plenary session. NWP advocate Mary Gertrude Fendall
wrote to Party officer Vernon, "We are greatly interested in
all Mrs. Smith and Doris are doing in Cuba. It was a
splendid idea."“° Smith commented, revealing a hierarchical
ranking of English language over Spanish language publicity:
"Doris Stevens really deserves the credit for all that we
have accomplished here, for she has had entire charge of the
English press, while Muna Lee has taken charge of the
Spanish press. That means all the South American papers too.""
” Katherine Ward Fisher to Jane Norman Smith, January 6, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38.
Mary Gertrude [Fendall] to Mabel Vernon, February 14, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38.
Jane Norman Smith to Mabel Vernon, January 31, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38. 94 Taking an "imperial" feminist position, NWP members
assumed that they would run the women's activities in
Havana, even though Latin American women had organized,
participated in, and coordinated numerous women's rights
activities both inside and outside the Pan American arena.
U.S. participants perceived Cuban and other Latin American
feminists as inexperienced in the promotion of women's
rights and no match for the U.S. leadership. And they never
questioned whether the NWP would be best suited to organize
and direct the campaign in Cuba, despite the fact that most
Party members could not speak Spanish. U.S. feminists,
sometimes recognizing their accomplishments, still persisted
in viewing Latin American women as backward,
unsophisticated, and uninterested in women's rights.
Once in Havana such imperial attitudes became well-
ingrained. Fisher urged Smith to "cooperate with Latin
American women, and get their point of view. MacDermott
suggested that "since the women of the Latin American
countries are a long way from the discussion of meticulous details," publicity should "Stress, concretely, one after
Katherine Ward Fisher to Jane Norman Smith, January 6, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38. 95 another of the great objectives sought by your party, socially, economically, and politically."^^ Smith cautioned
Lambie, "It seemed to me that we might offend these South
American women if we should take the leadership—whereas after we are upon the scene in Havana, we might then urge them to do something as the occasion arises."** She further elaborated,
women there are in about the same state of mind that we were in the early days of suffrage, when we thought any woman who spoke on the street was a bold hussy !...Wh i l e upholding our principles, we must try to keep that in mind...and not offend them.*®
In a similar vein Stevens referred to Cuba as a
"demoralizing place," to Latin Americans as "sluggards," and to the Peruvian delegate Victor Maurtua as the "little
Inca."*® And Smith retorted: "We cannot hurry these Latin
Americans about giving us a hearing," thus suggesting Latin
*® Isabel Keith MacDermott to Margaret Lambie, December 29, 1927, NWP papers, reel 38.
** Jane Norman Smith to Margaret Lambie, January 2, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38.
*® Jane Norman Smith, December 31, 1927, and Jane Norman Smith to Margaret Lambie, January 6, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38 .
*® Doris Stevens to [Jonathan Mitchell], January 25, 1928, Stevens papers, box 3, SL. 96 men held sexist, macho attitudes/^ Such condescension is particularly interesting considering that it was the
Guatemalan Maximo de Soto Hall who first proposed women's participation at the 1923 PAC, and that it was the Latin
Americans who supported, in the face of U.S. opposition and resistance, the women's call for a plenary session in
Havana. U.S. feminists clearly lacked confidence in their
Latin American counterparts because they accepted pervasive stereotypes of their neighbors. Ironically, however, if it had not been for the women and men of Central and South
America, the lACW might not have reached fruition.
Not surprisingly, then, U.S. feminists emphasized their leadership role in the activities surrounding the founding of the lACW. They asserted that Latin American women constantly sought them out for advice, visited their headquarters, stopped them on the streets and in restaurants, and in general made a nuisance of themselves to find out about the Equal Rights Treaty and the campaign activities at the conference. Such an attitude implied that
Latin American women had not thought about the conference
Jane Norman Smith to Mabel Vernon, January 26, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38. 97 prior to the arrival of the NWP and that Latin American
women did not have plans of their own. Doris Stevens, self-
proclaimed "youngest international feminist" and NWP leader,
for example, complained that even her "sitting room is
constantly filled with visiting Cubans who come to look at
US...I have to stand behind a hat rack if I have to change my dress in the middle of the day.""*® Another U.S. woman
similarly claimed that "we have spent hours and hours
conversing with them. They talk on forever and use up our prescious Fsicl time."** In a report on the activities of
the 1928 meeting, Muna Lee lamented that "There was no escape—not at the Yacht Club nor the Jockey Club, not on the
Golf Course nor at a dinner dance...Wherever there were women."*® She described her NWP colleagues as "valient
Fsicl emissaries of equal rights," while Smith proclaimed
"we have revived their [Latin American women's] interest in
*® Doris Stevens to Jonathan Mitchell, January 16 and January 22, 192 8, Stevens papers, box 3, SL.
** Jane Norman Smith, January 18, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38.
*° Muna Lee, "Report of Work Done by Committee on International Action of the National Woman's Party, U.S.A., at Pan-American Conference on behalf of Rights of Women," February 21, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38. 98 feminism."SI In a similar vein, at the conference well after the female activists had gained the backing of the
Mexican delegation. Smith discounted and demeaned the Latin
American women's efforts: "We're going to see the Mexican delegation this morning since all previous negotiations have been carried on by the Cuban women, and they do not always understand."" An ironic comment given the fact that none of the women in the NWP delegation, except for Lee, spoke
Spanish.
These comments suggest that in the minds of U.S. women,
Latin American females had little to offer as far as ideology or strategy, and that U.S. feminists had led the campaign in Havana with Latin American women merely following and serving as assistants, at best, or annoyances, at worst. But the Latin American women's interest in discussing women's issues with their North American sisters can be understood as a commitment to Pan American feminism.
Indeed, as we shall see, U.S. participants played more of a supportive than leadership role in Havana.
Muna Lee report; Jane Norman Smith to Mabel Vernon, January 18, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38.
99 In spite of their differences, Latin American and U.S.
women joined forces to secure a hearing before the Sixth
PAC. Representing the host country and having a well-
defined, though diverse, women's movement, Cuban feminists,
along with their Central and South American sisters,
spearheaded the activities in Havana. They initiated meetings to discuss strategies, put on marches, led lobbying efforts, coordinated media propaganda, and presented six of
the eight speeches at the women's plenary session.
Moreover, they made personal appeals to friends and acquaintances, sponsoring teas, lunches, and dinners inviting Latin American dignitaries and their wives to muster support for the feminists' agenda. Personal relationships were very important avenues to harness backing from both men and women in the national and international political arena." And it was largely through contacts initiated by their Latin American sisters and with their help that U.S. feminists participated in the women's campaign in Cuba.
" Jane Norman Smith to Mabel Vernon, January 27, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38.
S3 Rupp, Worlds of Women; Miller, "Lobbying the League." 100 On January 10, 1928, a week before the conference began, Stevens and Smith arrived in Havana. The next day
they opened their headquarters at the prestigious Hotel
Sevilla-Biltmore, and within a week they had formed, albeit at times an uneasy, alliance with their Latin American counterparts. But unlike what NWP members had expected, the
Latin American women had an agenda of their own and did not necessarily need or automatically solicit assistance from the NWP. Believing that Latin American feminists would go out of their way to welcome them, the U.S. women were much surprised when they had to seek out Cuban activists. Smith and Stevens, for example, had stopped by Club Femenino headquarters but no one was there to greet them, even though
Club president Emma Lopez Sena had been notified of their coming. Rather than welcoming the NWP, "no one seemed to have any interest in the U.S. Mrs. Houston [Cuban feminist and member of the Club Femenino] had telephoned them about our arrival, but they preferred to wait until we arrived and told them what we wanted."^ Pilar Houston later wrote NWP member Edith B. Newman : "I could not get any note of
Jane Norman Smith to Margaret Lambie, January 18, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38. 101 interest from this club."^ The Party also ended up spending money entertaining the Cuban women whom they took to "luncheon or tea."^® These overtures suggest that U.S. feminists had to make a concerted effort to win the trust of their Latin American colleagues and that they had to collaborate with their Cuban sisters to gain access to the leading feminist groups there.
Largely due to the assistance of Cuban NWP member Pilar
Houston, the Party quickly made important connections with significant feminists and women's groups in Havana.
Although Parrado had supplied them with letters of introduction, many of these activists operated on the fringe of respectable Cuban society, often having affiliations with leftist and radical political organizations, while others had an ambivalent relationship with Parrado herself.
Houston, in contrast, had friendships with the mainstream and leading feminists, as well as membership in the prominent feminist organization the Club Femenino. On
January 14, for example, she took the NWP delegation to a
55 ER, February 18, 1928, NWP papers, reel 154.
102 meeting of the leading feminist proponents of Cuban
president Gerardo Machado, the Partido Democrata Sufragista;
a few days later, with the prompting of Houston, the most
important Cuban feminist group Club Femenino de Cuba held a
dinner inviting the U.S. women ; the NWP attended a luncheon
to honor the wives of the delegates present at the
conference; and they participated in various other meetings
devoted to organizing and promoting the women's cause.
Moreover, on January 15, the day before the conference
opened, numerous Cuban suffrage women's groups, among them
the Partido Democrata Sufragista, Partido National
Sufragista, Liga Patriotica Sufragista, and Mujeres
Populares, sponsored a mass meeting to coordinate propaganda
at the conference, at which time they formed an alliance
with the NWP to help with campaign efforts.^® The Cuban
feminists Maria Collado, Julia Martinez, Blanche Z. de
Baralt, Margot Lopez, Frances Guerra, and Amalia de Malien
Memorandum attached to statement of Jane Norman Smith in Receipts and Expenditures for Pan American Conference, NWP papers, reel 38.
Log of Havana Conference, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
El Mundo. February 5, 1928, CML. 103 de Ostoloza all agreed to work with the U.S. women.®® And
Senora Thomas de Mederos volunteered to help staff the
Party's table at the Sevilla-Biltmore, which Cuban
ambassador to the U.S. Orestes Ferrara had installed for
them.®° Displaying a sense of solidarity, Collado espoused:
"They [NWP members] demand our co-operation in their task,
which we must be ready to give them, not only for the women
of Pan-America, but also for ourselves.
Under the leadership of the prominent feminist
organization Federacion National de Asociaciones Femeninas
de Cuba, a bouquet of Cuban feminists' groups--the Partido
Democrata Sufragista, the Club Femenino, the Partido
National Sufragista--largely directed the campaign in
Havana." These associations represented different
59 ER, February 4, 1928, NWP papers, reel 154.
" El Mundo February 5, 1928/ ER, February, 4, 1928, NWP papers, reel 154. The U.S. women had had difficulty securing their table for when unattended it would disappear. Stevens approached Ferrara and he officially designated the Party a space in the lobby of the Sevilla-Biltmore.
ER, February 28, 1928, NWP papers, reel 154.
" See Stoner, From the House to the Streets, for a detailed account of women's groups in Cuba. The Federacion served as an umbrella association for a variety of Cuban women's organizations with diverse positions. 104 factions of Cuban feminism, but all of them focused on the
issue of suffrage as pivotal to the promotion of women's
rights. At the same time, however, many simultaneously
supported a comprehensive equalitarian-type program to
advance women's status in the Western hemisphere. The
Partido Democrata Sufragista, for example, drew up a
resolution "to negotiate a treaty to which all the republics
of the Americas shall be invited to adhere, declaring that
men and women shall be equal before the law," while also
advocating specific issues such as enfranchisement." The
Liga Patriotica Sufragista sent a declaration to each
country's delegation outlining its agenda, including women's
suffrage, married women's nationality, and the rights of
illegitimate children." President Luisa Margarita de la
Cotera of the Sociedad National Sufragista, in a letter to
Doris Stevens, quoted the Cuban "apostle" José Marti in support of women's equality: "WOMEN SHOULD HAVE THE SAME
RIGHTS THAT MEN HAVE."" The Cuban "Jane Addams" Julia
" ER, January 28, 1928, NWP papers, reel 154; Partido Democrata Sufragista Comision Gestora National, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
" Circular communication, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
105 Martinez, asserted: "We women of Cuba appeal to the delegates of the Pan-American Conference to put women on an equal plane with men before the law."“ And Blanche Z. de
Baralt, active in Pan American women's groups since 1915 and the first female Ph.D. from the University of Havana, proclaimed: "I am intensely interested in the progress of the conference concerning the question of improving the status of women in the Latin countries...and feel that the outcome will be another great point gained toward placing men and women on an equal footing before the law."®’
Perhaps the single most important women's event at the conference was the Magna Asamblea of women's groups held on
January 24 at the Club of Reporter's Associations.®® There feminists from a wide range of perspectives developed a strategic plan of action. The eminent Federacion Nacional de Asociaciones Femeninas de Cuba, with over eight thousand
®® Margarita de la Cotera to [Doris] Stevens, January 30, 1928. Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
®® Statement by Julia Martinez. Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
®’ Statement by Blanche Z. de Baralt. Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
106 members, sponsored the gathering, and its president Montalvo de Soto Navarro chaired the "mass-meeting of foreign and
Cuban Feminists."**
Representing a variety of women's views, members from the conservative Partido Democrata Sufragista, the more radical, yet highly-respected. Club Femenino, various
Catholic women's groups, a Salvation Army feminist group, a
Cuban chapter of the Temperance Union, mother's organizations, suffrage representatives of the Partido
Nacional Sufragista and the Liga Patriotica Sufragista, revolutionary compartriots in the Asociacion de Damas
Emigradas y Revolucionarias, as well as the U.S. National
Woman's Party, all attended and put together and signed a declaration demanding to be heard at the conference.^*
Feminist and co-founder of the Club Femenino, as well as the more radical splinter group the Alianza Nacional Feminista,
Pilar Jorge de Telia, appealed to her sisters to adopt
Various official documents, including group and individual statements, pertaining to the Magna Asamblea, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
” ER, March 31, 1928, NWP papers, reel 154.
Federacion Nacional de Asociaciones Femeninas de Cuba to Victor Maurtua, January 25, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. 107 resolutions that insisted on a hearing before the Committee on Private International Law, arguing that women were deserving of "undeniable rights, our rights, because we are human beings."’’’ Important member of the Club Femenino
Serafina R. de Rosado asserted that a woman was "lacking the rights she deserves."^ Rosado compared the strength and fierceness of the contemporary women's struggle with that of the Cuban independence movement, proclaiming "we are fighting for the emancipation of all American women.A key Cuban feminist active in the Club Femenino and the
Alianza, wealthy aristocrat Hortensia Lamar, welcomed the
NWP, praised the women's event as an "historic moment," and advocated "equal rights for all American women," for without the "privileges that men are given in the law" women have
"formidable obstacles to progress, personally and collectively."^ President of the Partido Nacional
” Pilar Jorge de Telia speech at the Magna Asamblea, January 24, 1928,Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
Serafina R. de Rosado speech at the Magna Asamblea, January 24, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
Ibid.
Hortensia Lamar speech at the Magna Asamblea, January 24, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. 108 Sufragista and one of the first Cuban women to organize for women's suffrage, Amalia E. Malien de Ostoloza, presented her group's comprehensive feminist agenda, including married women's nationality rights, comparable punishment for adultery of both men and women, and equal pay for equal work.
In the end the feminists passed two resolutions pronouncing that "women in all the American states should be given the same civil and political rights that men enjoy today" and that the congress should sponsor a plenary session for the feminists to "explain to the delegates the urgent necessity of the proposed plan."^® The participants sent the written manifesto to Victor Maurtua, president of the Committee on Private International Law, asking him to give the stated issues "his personal consideration" and to
Amalia E. Malien de Ostoloza speech at the Magna Asamblea, January 24, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
Document approved by all members of the Federacion Nacional de Asociaciones Femeninas de Cuba, as well as the NWP, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. The National Woman's Party was the only U.S. affiliate to sign the resolutions and by all accounts to have attended the meeting. 109 make sure that they "form part of the agenda of this
commission.
Yet another significant occasion was the feminists'
elaborate demonstration at the outdoor celebration in honor of José Marti, the leader of Cuba Libre. The women's ceremony painted a spectacular picture and drew much attention to their campaign. Sponsored by the Asociacion
Nacional de los Emigrades Revolucionaries Cubanos, this emotional event began with a procession of men and women, some of whom had fought in the Cuban independence movement of the last century, marching down the main street of
Havana. The comrades walked in unison and displayed flags and banners with some of Marti's revolutionary slogans to commemorate his work and to show support for a Cuban democratic government.
In Cuba in the late 1920s the ruling Liberal party under the presidency of Gerardo Machado had increased its use of repression with arrests, imprisonment, and general tyrannical acts directed against the opposition. Anger toward Machado had intensified in 1927 when he decided to rewrite the Cuban constitution to extend his term in office
1 1 0 and to ban all political parties except for the
Conservative, National, and Liberal.^ His presidency had
so far proved disappointing to many who had hoped and believed that his "Platform of Regeneration," as his
campaign had propagandized, would bring relief to the Cuban people from Alfredo Zayas' previous regime of political
corruption and corroboration with U.S. imperialism. This
annual event of honoring the memory of the "national
apostle" took on even more significance in this context, for
it occurred during a transnational conference and served as a mode of protest against the present government.^® At
least partly because of Marti's positive stance on women's
issues, the feminists at the sixth conference saw this as an opportunity to promote and bring attention to their cause.
Women, known as mambisas, had participated in the Cuban revolutionary movement and many, along with their male compatriots, had regularly taken part in this celebration.®®
Ibid.
Perez, Cuba.
Invitation from the president of the Asociacion Nacional de los Emigrades Revolucionaries Cubanos, Juan R. O'Farril, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
®° Stoner, From the House to the Streets. Ill This year, however, women not only made up part of the general program, singing and reading poetry, but they also put together a woman's section.®^ Under the leadership of the popular Federacion Nacional de Asociacones Femeninas de
Cuba, the feminists organized a demonstration utilizing
Marti's slogans to publicize their agenda. Secretary of the
Federacion and lawyer Margarita Lopez romantically presented the scene : "More than two hundred women marched with flags and banners... [carrying among others] two thoughts taken from
José Marti: 'Justice admits of no delay, and he who delays its fulfillment turns it against himself.' [and] 'Woman should have the same right to vote as man has. ' " Lopez further elaborated: "Two beautiful flags—the Cuban and the
American—headed the procession..After these came 21 women wearing sky-blue bands on which were inscribed the names of the 21 American nations."" At the end of the demonstration the feminists laid flowers at the statue of the "Father of
Cuban Liberty" in Havana's Central Park. And to top off the
" Programa, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
" Margarita Lopez, 'A Significant Note in the Tribute to Marti,' Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
” Ibid. 112 women's demonstration Pilar Houston reported that "twenty- one women dressed in pure white will free some two thousand carrier doves with messages to all the Republics."^ She went on to say, "I sent two carrying the following: 'Equal
Rights for women are axiomatic rights,' and 'I ask the fact of suffrage for woman, since it is her right'"®' This occasion was so important to the Cuban people that many businesses closed their doors for the day and well over fifty thousand people lined the streets to watch the parade.
Perhaps the feminists' most successful efforts involved their well-organized and extensive lobbying campaign.
Except for the women's meetings with U.S. officials, Latin
American women initiated the contacts with and often interviewed the Latin American representatives, who responded much more favorably than the U.S. male delegates to the women's concerns.®® For example, Maria Collado arranged Stevens' meeting with the President of Cuba,
Machado, and she took Stevens and Smith to the home of
Cresta Ferrara, wife of the Cuban Ambassador to Washington,
®“ ER, February 18, 1928, NWP papers, reel 154
®® Ibid.
113 who promised to "speak" to her husband, as well as to the
Ambassadors from Colombia, Ecuador, and Panama. Collado herself approached the delegate from Paraguay, and Rosario
Guillaume gained the support of Victor Maurtua of Peru. A group of Cuban activists interviewed Gustavo Guerrer, head of the delegation from El Salvador, Pilar Jorge de Telle and
Hortensia Lamar spoke to a representative from Mexico, and
Margot Lopez and Frances Guerra called on Leonel Aguirre of
Uruguay.
Even NWP members credited Cuban women with their lobbying and interviewing efforts, asserting time and again that without their help the women's activities in Havana could not have been achieved.®’ The NWP reported in its journal. Equal Rights. "neither the women of the National
Woman's Party nor the Cuban and Latin American women were idle...and before the conference was opened they were ready with the proposals they wished to submit to the conference for consideration."®® On more than one occasion, NWP members remarked "The Cuban women are cooperating
®® Lobby Reports, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
®’ ER, February 11, 1928, NWP papers, reel 154.
®® ER, January 28, 1928, NWP papers, reel 154. 114 wonderfully."®® On the cover of Equal Rights, a caption
described Dominican feminist Plintha Wos y Gil as "one of
the most successful lobbyists" at the Pan American
conference.*® Perhaps Muna Lee best summarized the Latin
women's feminist verve : "The enthusiasm and energy of the
Cuban women was an unequivocal answer to all who had ever
said...that the Latin woman does not want her rights; that
the Latin woman will not speak in public; that the Latin
women is bound by customs which she cannot break.
Further praising the Latin American feminists Lee
proclaimed: "Organization after organization heard and
eagerly responded to the plan for a treaty granting equal
rights to the women of the Americas. And the campaign was
waged through every available agency.
Over time it had become clear that Latin American
feminists had definite ideas about women's rights and the way that the women's campaign should be run. They were different than what U.S. women had expected. "We haven't
®* ER, January 28, 1928; Lee report.
®° ER, March 3, 1928, NWP papers, reel 154
Lee report.
115 found any of the ‘shrinking, conservative, timid— ‘kind.
They are far more aggressive than we are, only they are new
to political and press work, Jane Norman Smith reported."”
Later, when the Cubans' agenda interfered with the U.S.
plan, rather than acknowledging their expertise Smith
directly belittled and stereotyped their behavior. “Ye
Gads!--They told us about the 'conservative, sheltered Cuban
woman, ' who must be handled with gloves! I've never meet
their equals for aggressiveness."” Cuban feminist Pilar
Houston appealed to her U.S. friend Edith Newman : "how I
wish you might be here for this Pan-American Conference, for
you would be a factor of special force as you understand us
and also your own people."
Not surprisingly, a conflict brewed between the NWP and
the leading conservative Cuban suffrage organization led by
wealthy poet Maria Collado, the Partido Demôcrata
Sufragista. Even though this group had cooperated with,
” Ibid.
” Jane Norman Smith to Mabel Vernon, January 26, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38.
” Jane Norman Smith to Mabel Vernon, February 5, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38,
ER, February 18, 1928, NWP papers, reel 154. 116 welcomed, and often included the U.S. women in their
campaign efforts, the two groups had an uneasy alliance,
sometimes disagreeing over turf, leadership, and issues.
Not only did the Partido have definite ideas about how the
conference should be run, but its members also had connections with important Cuban dignitaries Gerardo
Machado, president of Cuba, and Antonio Bustamente, president of the conference. One particularly nasty incident involved the format of the women's plenary session.
Concerning this dispute Smith wrote :
Our hearing comes off tomorrow—we have only one prescious rsici hour, which we have to divide with Cubans, who are more concerned about votes for women in Cuba than an Equal Rights Treaty. Ks have had a ghastly time to keep them from taking control of the program, hearing, and everything else.**
She continued, "We have finally come to an agreement with all the clubs except Maria Collado's... [and] We fully expect any of them may rise and demand to be heard. As the U.S. women had feared, Bustamante had ended up rearranging the order of female speakers, allowing Julia Martinez, Head of
** Jane Norman Smith to Mabel Vernon, February 5, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38.
*" Ibid. 117 the Department of Mathematics in the Habana Normal School for Women, to give the first speech. The reordering challenged the authority and power that the U.S. feminists perceived themselves as having over their Latin American
"little sisters," who had out maneuvered the Yankee women.
The feminists nevertheless managed to work together to achieve significant gains for women, resulting in the founding of the Inter-American Commission of Women. But it was the Latin Americans who played the dominant role in organizing the campaign in Havana. And even though not all of the Latin American men stood behind the women's program, overall they were the ones responsible for launching the women's plenary session and supporting the women's cause.
U.S. delegates, in fact, hesitated or even downright refused to grant women an open meeting. At least one U.S. member,
Charles Evans Hughes, chided the women and their efforts.
Hughes, head of the U.S. team, "cackled" at the women and treated them "more or less like little children who did not quite understand the problems before the Conference."®®
U.S. member of the Committee on Private International Law
Lobby Report, January 19, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. 118 James Brown Scott, like many other international
dignitaries, insisted that the Pan American Union was not
organized to legislate women's rights. Leo S. Rowe,
Director of the PAU, although more receptive, questioned the
NWP's motives, proclaiming that they went to Havana to promote their Equal Rights Treaty and had little interest in
their Latin American sisters' civil and political rights.
Rowe warned NWP members to keep away from the patronizing
imperial attitude of "come to us and be saved."” By all
indications Rowe's assessment of the NWP was accurate, for
its representatives promoted the adoption of the Equal
Rights Treaty as the official stance of the PAU, attempting to subsume the Latin American women's agendas.
Latin American officials, by contrast, provided the support both for a women's plenary session and a commission to address women's civil and political rights in the
Americas. As we have seen, at the 1923 meeting, it was a
Guatemalan delegate who first initiated the proposal, and at the 1928 conference the Latin American men overwhelmingly supported the women. As one feminist observed:
First were these individual adherents; then entire
99 Lobby Report, [January 1928] , Stevens papers, carton 10 119 delegations fell into line, declaring themselves for an open hearing and the idea of equal rights ; Mexico Guatemala, Cuba, [El] Salvador, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Paraguay—the list lengthened amazingly. Then came the day when Dr. Varela Acvedo, president of the Uruguayan delegation and ex-minister of Uruguay in Washington, proposed in the Committee on Inciatoves Fsicl that the open hearing be granted. Dr. Pueyrredon[, ] Ambassador from the Argentine [delegation], heartily seconded the motion.
Why Latin American men actively fought for the women is uncertain. One possible explanation might involve the hegemonic relationship between the U.S. and Latin America.
Latin American men and women saw Pan Americanism and the
Sixth PAC as an opportunity to interact in an equal way with their more powerful U.S. neighbors. U.S. men and women, in contrast, wanted to assert U.S. leadership, but in very different manners, with the men having mainly political and diplomatic goals, while the women had a social-feminist agenda.
Moreover, Latin American countries had already confronted the U.S. and their imperial policies at the 1928
PAU meeting. On February 4, during a session of the Public
International Law Committee, Pueyrredon questioned U.S. intervention in Nicaragua, which had most recently occurred
Lee report. 120 the previous year.^°^ Except for Cuba and Uruguay, the same
nations that had supported Pueyrredon also promoted the women's plea. In the end the U.S. out-maneuvered the
Argentine faction, and Pueyrredon resigned his position as president of Argentina's delegation. Nevertheless, such an action indicated that opposition toward U.S. imperial policies had surfaced in Havana and that support for the women might have originated from a show of unity among Latin
American nations.
After weeks of campaigning, lobbying, and organizing, and in an atmosphere of conflict, on February 7, 1928, U.S. and Latin American women obtained a hearing to present their concerns before an extraordinary plenary session. The women's meeting lasted for two hours, with eight female activists speaking to a packed hall at the University of
Havana, where onlookers packed the balcony. The feminists
David Sheinin, "Argentina and the United States at the Sixth Pan American Conference (Havana, 1928) ." Research Paper at the University of London Institute of Latin American Studies. (London: University of London, 1991).
The NWP's journal Equal Rights and Latin American newspapers both provide detailed coverage of the hearing. Also see the official government-printed document of the VI International Conference of American States. Some estimate that almost a thousand came to hear the women speak. 121 generally focused on the necessity and importance of an all female Pan American body to examine women's status in the
Americas and on a treaty to ensure women's equal civil and political rights with men. And on this spectacular occasion the activists managed to put their differences behind them in a unified display of female solidarity and sisterhood.
Eight women spoke at the hearing. Four were from Cuba, including a leading educator for over fifty years, Julia
Martinez; Club Femenino president Maria Montalvo de Soto
Navarro; lawyer Angela M. Zaldivar; and founding member of the Club Femenino Pilar Jorge de Telia. NWP members Jane
Norman Smith and Doris Stevens represented the U.S., professor Muna Lee de Munoz spoke for Puerto Rico, and
Plintha Mas y Gil came as a Dominican. Although the feminists concurred on the basic issues, they took different approaches to convince the delegates of their cause.
Martinez attempted to cajole the delegates: "We would be happy if you would listen to us, not as indulgent and gallant gentlemen, but as enthusiastic and devoted defenders of our rights effacing a shameful past and bringing to pass one of the most glorious victories of humanity." Navarro used a patriotic argument: "The women of America,
122 gentlemen, have breathed during four centuries the same atmosphere of liberty that you have breathed, we have felt your same aspirations, suffered your same sorrows, shared your thirst for justice, and your ambition to realize the rights of all as a guarantee of absolute peace." Gil, who had the shortest speech, simply stated that as a "Dominican and as a woman, I ask you to give equal rights in the law to all American women." U.S. feminist Jane Norman Smith promoted the NWP's Equal Rights Treaty as the best route to advance women's legal status in the Western hemisphere. And sister NWP member Doris Stevens similarly explained that the treaty method "is the most dignified. It is the easiest. It is the most permanent. It will not only abolish existing national and international inequalities. It will prevent new ones from being written."
All of the women supported a law that would advance women's legal status in the Americas, but the U.S. team concentrated on the adoption of their Equal Rights Treaty as the exclusive agenda for the proposed all-female government body. Latin American feminists, in contrast, also attempted
Diario de la Sexta Conferencia Internacional Americana. 353-360. 123 to galvanize backing for specific domestic issues such as suffrage. Martinez argued that the Cuban constitution called for women's suffrage, and Pilar Jorge de Telia insisted that women's suffrage was the "most immediate and best way to improve women's position." In a lengthy exposé leading Cuban feminist and government prosecutor in Camaguey
Angela M. Zaldivar, employing a human rights argument to promote equality, embraced a variety of issues, among them married women's nationality and an extensive discussion of the vital importance of suffrage as the apex of women's struggles.^* Thus, at least some Latin American, unlike the
U.S., feminists were able to forge alliances along both national and international lines.
Concluding the session, Latin American delegates Carlos
Salazar, representative from Guatemala, Julio Garcia, member from Mexico, and Antonio Sanchez de Bustamante, Cuban delegate and president of the conference, briefly spoke, lending their support to the women's cause. And interestingly Antonia Arredondo de Lamy, president of the
Asociacion de Damas Emigradas y Revolucionarias Cubanas,
Ibid. 124 sponsor of the Marti celebration, also gave a short speech
in favor of women's emancipation.^®®
In the end, the PAU Governing Board approved the establishment of a semi-permanent all-female body, the
Inter-American Commission of Women, to "study and prepare material for the Seventh Conference on the civil and political rights of women. At first the Commission would represent only seven countries, but it was designed eventually to include female delegates from the twenty-one
American Republics. Except for the United States which automatically had a position on the Commission because of
Stevens's appointment as chairman, by lot the Governing
Board chose the initial nations with their respective governments nominating "worthy" women to serve.Through
Ibid.
Minutes of the Governing Board, March 7, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 12, SL. Originally, the Board perceived this organization as a temporary unit to research women's civil and political rights in the participant countries to be reported on at the upcoming Seventh PAC in 1933.
Minutes of the Governing Board, April 4, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 12, SL. The countries drawn included Argentina, Colombia, Haiti, Panama, El Salvador, and Venezuela. Why the U.S. was automatically one of the first countries on the Commission and why the Board selected Stevens as chair are unclear. 125 the untiring efforts of Doris Stevens and other NWP members,
Victor Maurtua, delegate from Peru and Chairman of the
Committee on International Private Law, the official body in
charge of the lACW, persuaded the PAU to select Stevens to
head the women's group. "Dr. Maurtua is a very powerful
man...and has told her [Stevens] that he will see that she is
put on the commission as its Chairman," Jane Norman Smith
reported. "He may be able to do it regardless of the U.S.
group. "'■°® Stevens herself proclaimed: "Dr. Maurtua is
either wholly insincere or wholly naive enough to still believe that I will be named chairman of this committee..He
says he will see that it is done."^°®
Why Maurtua supported Stevens is unclear. In the beginning he adamantly opposed the women's request, arguing,
as Scott had, that women's rights were national business.
Even then it appears that Latin American feminists were the ones who swayed Maurtua to back the women. Perhaps he
Jane Norman Smith to Mrs. Matthews, February 22, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38.
Doris Stevens to Mrs. Smith, February 17, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
El Mundo. January 26, 1928 and Lobby Reports, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. 126 hoped to rid himself of the demeaning label of
"subordinate." Or perhaps, as Bertha Lutz charged, Stevens and Maurtua had a sexual liaison.Nevertheless, with the
Peruvian's help, the Board appointed Stevens chair.
Stevens's appointment did not, however, pass without criticism. Opponents such as Carlos Alberto Alcorta and
Manuel Bianchi, delegates from Argentina and Chile respectively, objected to her chairmanship. They perceived her as a representative of the NWP and maintained that she would use her office as a platform to promote the NWP's agenda rather than serve as an unbiased advocate of women's status in all the Americas.U.S. male delegates shared
Alcorta's and Bianchi's view, so the U.S. women had to rely on the ambassador from Peru.
Publicly Stevens denied that she used manipulation to obtain her appointment, but an examination of the private correspondence of leading party members confirms her opponents' suspicions. Even before the legal authorization
In Worlds of Women Rupp quotes Lutz's accusations, and Stevens wrote much about him, suggesting at the least flirtation.
Lobby Report, February 16, 1928. Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. 127 of a woman's commission, NWP members discussed the chair position as if it was theirs for the taking. Smith, for example, demurred: "I don't want this appoint ment...and Doris
Stevens does...She...is interested in developing Pan American work for equal rights...! am trusting you not to repeat a word of this to Miss Paul or anyone else."“^ Stevens lamented,
"I don't want the Woman's Party to lose out," and on another occasion she wrote, "It is very sad to think that so much work has been done and that we have given this idea of the committee of women, only to see the likelihood of its slipping from our control.""* Another NWP supporter proclaimed that the League Of Women Voters, pro-special legislation and anti-ERA U.S. feminists, "might easily ruin things if they knew that it is contemplated that the committee of women to be appointed by the Pan-American
Conference shall work under the leadership of the Woman's
Party.Exhibiting a imperial feminist view, Stevens
Jane Norman Smith to Mrs. Matthews, February 22, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38.
"* Doris Stevens to Mrs. Smith, February 17, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
Unsigned,[March 1928], NWP papers, reel 38. 128 later recounted the way she garnered support for her position as chair.
Miss Paul...cabled me as follows: 'Get yourself appointed Chairman of the Commission' . Fsicl This was probably the most embarrassing and the most difficult command one ever received in the field. However, I swallowed my pride, went forth, leading an amiable woman from Santo Domingo by the hand; she, poor woman, not knowing what it was all about; myself the silent exhibit of a Chairman, delicately explaining to the Dominican what she was to say in order to bring this about. I would walk three paces behind her, and then after she had advanced this idea to some unsuspecting plenipotentiary, I would appear as if by accident, as I say, as a living exhibit of what this choice, if made, would be like.^^®
Stevens, as well as other NWP members, clearly viewed themselves as the "natural" leaders of the lACW, even though they followed, rather than led, the feminists' initiatives in Havana.
In the end, the "woman problem" as presented at the
1923 conference in Santiago never materialized as part of the official agenda at the 1928 meeting in Cuba, even though women's issues remained on the program. In spite of this defeat, the proposal provided women a legitimate opportunity to demand an official voice in the Pan American Union. In
129 contrast to what is generally understood, however, Latin
American, especially Cuban, feminists played an instrumental
role in the activities that led to the founding of the
Inter-American Commission of Women. They organized,
demonstrated publicly, circulated petitions, and lobbied
male delegates to achieve their goals. Even in the midst of
cooperation, though, conflict permeated the women's
activities, with U.S. and Latin American feminists
struggling over leadership, turf, and issues. Latin
American women, as we have seen, had participated in women's
rights activities long before their collaboration with U.S.
feminists. Consequently, they had developed their own ideas
about feminism and feminist issues independent of formal connections with the Yankee activists.
U.S. women nevertheless assumed that they would dominate the leadership in Havana. As Barbara Ramusack argues concerning British and Indian feminists in the early twentieth century, U.S. feminists considered themselves
"cultural missionaries," providing backward Latin American women with sophistication and awareness, and "maternal imperialists," giving guidance to their Latin American
[Doris Stevens] to [Alva] Belmont, March 2, 1931, Stevens 130 "daughters. The NWP's imperial behavior can especially be seen in the contrast between their public and private views of their Latin American colleagues. Openly the Party complimented the Latin American feminists' zealous behavior, praising their efforts in Havana. Among themselves, however, they sometimes criticized the Latin Americans, calling them demeaning names, belittling their assertiveness, and generally finding them a nuisance. By acknowledging that conflict emerged, the U.S. women would have had to admit that they were not the "natural" leaders and prime engineers behind the women's activities in the founding of the lACW. Latin American and U.S. feminists, in actuality, had a contested relationship, for all of them had ideas about how the campaign should be run and about the best way to improve women's status.
Moreover, both groups of women saw their activities at the conference as a way to assert a leadership role in the
Western hemisphere. By emphasizing the backwardness of
Latin American women, while asserting their own progressive attributes, U.S. feminists hoped to elevate their status and papers, carton 9, SL.
Ramusack, "Cultural Missionaries." 131 to use the lACW as a platform for the Leagne of Nation work, raising themselves to a position of prominence in the international feminist arena. At the same time, Latin
American feminists had expected their North American sisters to treat them as equals in their mutual quest for women's rights. A problem arose, however, when Latin American women refused to defer to the U.S. feminists, at times questioning their actions and motives. And in the face of Yankee imperialism, Latin American women and men found it mutually beneficial to work as partners and cooperate to achieve gains for women. Even though they had different agendas, they could collaborate under the conceptual framework of Pan
Americanism as a show of unity against the powerful United
States. U.S. women, in contrast, had a very different agenda than U.S. men and the two could not find common ground. In the end U.S. feminists had to organize under the framework of womanhood only, while Latin American feminists united as both women and Latin Americans.
Women thus came to international organizing with their own agendas. The United States or dominant group had to recognize and deal with the interests of other women, but organizing in an atmosphere of such conflict could bring
132 about positive results. As Leila J. Rupp argues elsewhere
concerning women in Euroamerican international
organizations, working through differences could in fact
forge friendships and political bonds among feminists, as
can be seen in the Pan American women's interactions after
the plenary session."* The Club Femenino, for example, gave
a farewell luncheon for the NWP delegates, Cuban feminists
Blanche Z. de Baralt, Julia Martinez, and Montalvo de Soto
Navarro joined the NWP, and Helen M. Gonzalez subscribed to
its journal Equal Rights."* The next important step for
these feminists would revolve around their abilities to
cooperate and establish policies palatable to the diverse
interests of women in North, Central, and South America.
Such efforts would begin within a few months, even before
the PAU's official sanctioning of the lACW and long before
its first meeting as an official body in 193 0 in Havana.
"* Rupp, Worlds of Women.
ER, March 17, 1928, NWP papers, reel 154; Minutes of the National Council of the NWP, February 25, 1928, NWP papers, reel 154; Helen M. Gonzalez to National Woman's Party, March 1928, NWP papers, reel 38. 133 CHAPTER 4
NEGOTIATING GOALS AND STRATEGIES: EARLY YEARS OF THE lACW
The founding of the lACW marked a new beginning for Pan
American feminism. Until then women from the Americas had
organized with little support and encouragement from the
official channel of the PAU and without a definitive voice
in Pan American affairs. Now they had a legitimate place in
shaping government policy pertaining to women and a
rationale for insisting on an investigation of women's
issues, especially their civil and political rights. It
would be a year, until the spring of 1929, however, before
the PAU officially sanctioned the lACW as a government
agency, and its first official conference would not take
place until February 1930.
But Doris Stevens, acting as chair, did not wait for
the Union to authorize the Commission, nor for an official
conference to organize it. Even though the Governing Board of the PAU intended for U.S. and Latin American women to
134 work equally in developing lACW policy, Stevens directed and
controlled the Commission in its early years largely
independently of input from Latin American feminists.
Taking advantage of her proximity to the PAU and utilizing
her friendships with Union delegates, she, along with her
NWP colleagues, started putting together the lACW
immediately after their return from Cuba in 1928. Together
they formulated the Commission's agenda and established policies on membership, headquarters, and financial support.
And as the lACW's first official initiative, the Woman's
Party feminists decided to investigate the international
issue of women's nationality laws.
Organizing and Funding the lACW
NWP members played an aggressive role in Pan American feminism from their involvement at the 1928 meeting through the chairmanship of Stevens to their current position as the main participant from the United States. Because their national office was in Washington, the Party had a permanent residence in the same city as the headquarters of the PAU, providing an opportunity to oversee, direct, and manipulate lACW policy. On March 22, less than a month after their
135 return from the conference in Havana, for example, they
hosted a dinner to "hear the story of the Equal Rights
Campaign at the Pan-American Conference told by delegates to
the Conference and by the women who directed the campaign."^
The list of speakers included only U.S. feminists affiliated with the NWP--Jane Norman Smith, Doris Stevens, and Mrs.
Valentine Winters--and two Latin American male delegates,
Orestes Ferrara, Ambassador from Cuba to the United States,
and Luis Munoz Marin, Economic Representative from Puerto
Rico to the United States and husband of NWP member Muna
Lee. Thus from the outset NWP members grasped the chance to
tell the story of the lACW.
By naming only U.S. feminists as leaders in the Havana campaign, the wording of the invitation suggested that they had guided the activities there devoid of Latin American feminists' leadership and that the women's crusade there had revolved around the adoption of an NWP-sponsored Equal
Rights Treaty, as opposed to the founding of an official Pan
American body to investigate women's issues. Mostly Latin
American men attended the dinner, with many of the U.S.
^ NWP Invitation to Pan-American Dinner. Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
136 delegates turning down the invitations. Taking an imperial feminist stand, the U.S. female participants emphasized their involvement and importance at the 1928 meeting at the expense of the significant role of Latin American feminists, setting the stage for their dominant role in the
Commission's early years. But of course only U.S. women and
Latin American diplomats would be in D.C. and able to attend! In fact, as we shall see later, it would not be until the first conference in 1930 that Latin American feminists had a forum in which to voice their opinions concerning the purpose of the lACW.
Stevens and her colleagues were not the only ones promoting the NWP as the leaders in Havana. Pan American diplomats also applauded the U.S. feminists' efforts in
Cuba, crediting them as the driving force behind the campaign initiatives there. The history of the lACW's founding as published in the official journal of the Pan
American Union, the Pan American Bulletin, attributed the lACW to the NWP.^ President of the American Society of
International Law, delegate to the sixth conference, and
^ The Inter American Commission of Women:__ Documents Concerning Its Creation and Organization, Washington, B.C.: Pan American Union, [no date]. 137 friend of Stevens, James Brown Scott, reported that Stevens and Smith went to "Havana to see that the matter [women's rights] should not be overlooked."^ And Sylvino Gurgel do
Amaral, delegate from Brazil and Chairman of the Committee on Civil and Political Rights of Women, pointed to Stevens as the "initiator of the movement," while Cuban Ambassador
Orestes Ferrara praised her "successful battle" and "able, energetic, and untiring direction" at the sixth conference.*
To establish the lACW as a legitimate, effective government agency, staffing was necessary. The PAU had decided that the initial seven member nations, excluding the
United States which Stevens already represented, should appoint their own delegates. Then they would choose the remaining members. But the actions of some NWP members, the comments of some Union delegates, and the attitude of at least one Latin American feminist suggested that Stevens also had clout in choosing the lACW's roster.
^ James Brown Scott, "Inter-American Commission of Women," The American Journal of International Law 24 (1930): 759.
* Minutes of the Governing Board of the Pan American Union, April 4, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 12, SL; ER, March 31, 1928, NWP papers, reel 154.
138 Concerning Cuba's member, for example, Stevens collaborated with MacDermott to put forward Julia Martinez, a major player in Havana who had cooperated with the NWP at the 1928 conference and ended up joining the Party.^
Stevens instructed Jane Norman Smith that if Emma Lopez
Sena, president of the feminist Club Femenino de Cuba, requested
[a] place on the Commission for the Club Feminino Fsicl as Cuba's representative you can say you know nothing about matters, which is true enough...We (Miss Macdermott and I) have privately hoped to get Martinez...! need not worry about that until I get back.®
At the same time, Stevens freely volunteered Sena's services as a researcher for the project on nationality.
On another occasion Stevens conferred with Rowe to change the manner in which the remaining appointments should be made. Rather than having lACW delegates put together the
Commission, Stevens found it "preferable" to have the respective governments designate their own commissioners in order to make all the members official. The revision.
® Even though there were some contentious moments between Martinez and the NWP in Havana, she wielded much influence among the more important women's groups in Cuba, as well as having connections with the Cuban government.
® [Doris Stevens] to Mrs. Smith, August 7, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 5, SL. 139 according to the chair, would give the Commission greater prestige, would increase the possibility of having governments pay their representatives' expenses, and would assure "greater support from the various organizations within the respective countries."’ For some unknown reason
Rowe and Gil Borges, Assistant Director of the PAU, went along with the request. Perhaps their behavior simply mirrored the overall disinterest many of the statesmens had toward the women's work.
Even more surprising was that renowned international feminist Paulina Luisi believed that Stevens could control the process of choosing lACW members. Luisi had been involved in Pan American feminism since 1915, and at times she had openly defied the U.S. feminists. In many ways she embodied the ideal qualifications for participation in the lACW, for she was active not only in the feminist movements in Uruguay, Europe, and the Americas, but she also had served as the only female delegate to the First Assembly of
’ "INTER AMERICAN COMMISSION OF WOMEN-May 9, 1929." Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. This document recounts a meeting of Stevens, Rowe, and Gil Borges at which time they agreed on certain issues concerning the "completion" of the lACW.
140 the League of Nations in 1920.® Stevens, however,
displayed, at best, a disinterested attitude toward the
appointment of such a leading Pan American and international
feminist.
Dr. Luisi was very angry with me. Dr. Luisi seemed to think that I should have asked the President of Uruguay for... [her] appointment; and that if I had wanted her, I would have done so...I realize how important a feminist she is, and how ardently she believes in equality in industry. Her hostility quite overwhelmed me in Berlin. Perhaps she is more friendly now. I will let you know what I do.®
Such a statement insinuates that Stevens, was supposed, in
Luisi's mind, to influence the choice of members.
By the end of August 1928, four countries—the United
States, Panama, Venezuela, and Argentina--had named delegates. But the Latin American commissioners, unlike their U.S. counterpart, could only spend short periods of time in Washington, limiting their effectiveness in and influence on the lACW. Panamanian member Clara Gonzalez, for example, spent July, August, and September in Washington
® Francesca Miller, Latin American Women and the Search for Social Justice (Hanover, N.H.: University Press of New England, 1991), 84.
® [Doris Stevens] to Miss Paul, April 22, 1932, Stevens papers (M-54), reel 4, SL.
141 to inaugurate the Commission; the Venezuelan commissioner
Lucila Luciana de Pérez Diaz came to B.C. for two weeks to
"familiarize herself with the work of the Commission and
render it all possible assistance"; and important
Argentinean international feminist and social activist
Ernestina A. Lopez de Nelson was at PAU headquarters for a
"brief" stay, conferring with Stevens about the Commission's
work. Although enthusiastic and showing a great desire to
help with the engineering of the Commission, the Latin
American delegates were left out of the decision-making
process, leaving them to perform clerical chores, do
research on discriminatory laws, translate, and promote the
lACW through public appearances and journal articles.
Indeed, in the spring in 1928, even before the feminists'
appointments, Stevens and her NWP colleagues had already
mapped out how the Commission should be organized and what
issues it should undertake.
Moreover, because of the lack of official personnel,
Stevens also put together a "volunteer staff" of women from
the United States, Latin America, and Europe. Brazilian
feminist Elsie Ross Shields served as the Commission's executive secretary and translated Spanish, Portuguese, and
142 French material; the young Mexican feminist Rosalmira
Colomo performed general clerical work, often assisting the
Director of Information and Publicity Muna Lee; Mexican- born attorney residing in the United States and married to a
U.S. attorney, Adelia Artela de Allen, worked on the nationality committee; and Cuban feminists Pilar Houston,
Julia Martinez, and Emma Sena Lopez, all of whom had played active roles at the 1928 conference in Havana, stirred support for the Commission in their home country.^
Similarly, Alice Paul, NWP member and attorney Emma Wold,
British feminist and international secretary of the equalitarian Six Point Group Helen Archdale and her daughter, young feminist Betty Archdale, all helped to launch the lACW in the summer months of 1928. And in the fall Cuban feminist Blanche Z. de Baralt, now living in
Paris as the wife of the Cuban Ambassador there, allied with
Stevens in the international arena, and French activist
Fanny Bunand-Sévastos lent her labor at the headquarters in
Washington.
"Report of Work Done From April 1928 to February 1930 by the Inter American Commission of Women," Stevens papers (A- 104), box 3, SL; L.E. Elliott, "Women's Progress Towards Equal Rights," Pan American Magazine. Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. 143 A major player on the Commission's volunteer staff was
the Puerto Rican feminist Muna Lee. She was not an official
commissioner, although she was a member of the NWP, had
participated in numerous Puerto Rican women's rights groups,
and now served as the lACW's Director of Information and
Publicity. And, as we have seen, at the 1928 conference she
had provided an integral link to the Latin American
community for the NWP. Lee served on the Party's
international committee, superbly handling its extensive
Latin American press coverage, translating important material, and often acting as interpreter. She occupied a
somewhat awkward and contradictory position, however. Her native country was the United States, but she had adopted
Puerto Rico as her home where she now lived, worked, had married, and raised a family. And like her NWP sisters, she sometimes displayed an imperial feminist view toward Latin
American women, while also recognizing their initiatives and accomplishments. In contrast to her U.S. colleagues, however, Lee at times questioned, albeit indirectly, U.S. intervention into Latin American affairs.
144 Conscious of the neocolonial relationship of Puerto
Rico to the United States, her speech at the women's plenary
session at the sixth conference in Havana equated women's
subordinate societal role with that of Puerto Rico's
dependent status :
Our position as women, among you free citizens of Pan America, is like the position of my Puerto Rico in the community of American states. We have everything done for us and given us but sovereignty. We are treated with every consideration save the one great consideration of being regarded as responsible beings. We, like Puerto Rico, are dependents. We are anomalies before the law.
Still, recognizing the influence of the United States in Pan
American affairs, she found it to her advantage as an advocate of Puerto Rico and women's rights to work with the
NWP as she had done since 1927. Thus, in the spring of
1928, Lee immediately joined the volunteer staff of the
lACW, and Stevens persuaded her to preside over and direct its publicity. She was especially qualified for this post for she had expert linguistic skills, had proven her publicity abilities in Cuba, and had a background in
Diario de la Sexta Conferencia Internacional Americana,
145 diplomatie affairs as the Director of the Bureau of
International Relations at the University of Puerto Rico.^
As the Director of Information and Publicity, Lee over the next several months coordinated the Commission's propaganda campaign. She circulated large quantities of literature in Spanish, English, Portuguese, and French, bestowing on the Commission a "worldwide celebrity through her brilliant and effective broadcasting...Under her direction
15,000 bulletins giving such information were sent to the leading daily papers of the Americas alone.Lee reported receiving positive correspondence from various Latin
American newspapers. Editor and owner of La Voz de
Chihuahua José Reyes Estrada, for example, supported the women's cause: "We have had the pleasure of receiving the copy of...'Equal Rights for Women.' We desire to express our sincerest thanks, and our hope that you will favour us with all other material that you edit along these lines."
Lee had to take a leave of absence from her position as Director of the Bureau of International Relations at the University of Puerto Rico in order to devote enough time to the lACW's propaganda.
"Report of Work Done From April 1928 to February 1930 by the Inter American Commission of Women," Stevens papers (A- 104), box 3, SL.
146 Executive of the Cuban daily La Union Victorino Alvarez
similarly praised the women's work: "We congratulate you on
your splendid enterprise and offer you hereby our most loyal
cooperation." Lee also frequently represented the
Commission at "many important meetings" including her
resounding reception at a round table discussion on 'Our
Latin American Relations' at the Virginia University
Institute of Public Affairs.^ And at least in one instance
she persuaded a critic of the NWP, Puerto Rican feminist and
secretary of the Puerto Rican chapter of the Women's
International League Elena Arizmendi, to back and cooperate with the Party and its efforts in the lACW.^^ Lee clearly proved a valuable asset to the Commission because of her
stellar communication, linguistic, and diplomatic skills.^®
Muna [Lee] to Doris [Stevens] , July 27, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 5, SL; "Report of Work Done From April 1928 to February 1930 by the Inter American Commission of Women."
Elena Arizmendi to Muna Lee de Munoz Marin, July 24, 192 8, Stevens papers, carton 5, SL.
Lee served actively on the Commission through August 192 9, at which time she returned to her position at the University of Puerto Rico and family responsibilities full time. Muna [Lee] to Miss Doris Stevens, August 31, 1929, Stevens papers, carton 5, SL.
147 The volunteer staff played a significant role in the early days of the Commission's existence, for the initial seven-member committee was not completed until December of
1928, eight months after Stevens had started organizing the lACW. And even at the first conference in February 193 0, a few seats still were left unfilled.^’ In December 1929
Rowe, at Stevens's insistence, had sent letters to Latin
American governments urging them to appoint their lACW representatives.^® "[I]n order to conform to the terms established at the sixth conference in connection with the
Inter American Commission of Women, all nations are to be present at its upcoming meeting in Havana... [and] as the time is short it will be necessary to make your selection quickly.
PAU member nations varied as to how they choose their representatives to the newly formed lACW. Although all of
Stevens used her power as chair and designated alternates to the conference.
^® L.S. Rowe to Manuel C. Teller, December 13, 1929, Stevens papers, carton 5, SL. This letter is representative of the correspondence Rowe mailed to all the ambassadors whose countries lacked a representative.
L.S. Rowe to Manuel C. Teller, December 13, 1929, Stevens papers, carton 5, SL.
148 the governments had the final say as to whom they appointed, some were more diligent than others in keeping the positions filled. And, as can be seen above, on occasion they would have to be nudged to make the assignments. Women resigning their posts also influenced turn over on the Commission.
Women stepped down for a wide array of reasons including ill health, too much traveling, family responsibilities, accommodation of a relocating spouse, and disagreements with other members, among the most frequent. Well into the
193 0s, problems maintaining steady, consistent membership continued.
Having lACW headquarters in Washington made it especially difficult for Latin American representatives to serve for continuous periods. They often resigned their posts or had alternates take their places, thus limiting input and undermining their power. PAU delegates proposed a plan to solve this problem by filling vacancies with Latin
American diplomats' wives. Stevens adamantly opposed such a plan for it might take away from the Commission's status as a feminist group and interfere with the women's ability to take stands considered controversial, for they might jeopardize their husbands' positions. Since the first
149 women's conference in 1915, diplomats' wives had actively
participated in all-female Pan American groups; but the
lACW was to represent a more independent and official agency
rather than an auxiliary to the men. Stevens argued: "A
more compelling reason was that I feared the Commission
might lose instead of gain prestige by having mere wives of
diplomats, not known as feminists.In the end individual
governments appointed and financed Commission members,
including ambassadors' wives, while also granting Stevens
the power to designate alternates for those who could not
attend important meetings.
Another early concern of the Commission was the
location of its headquarters, for without a base of operations it would be difficult for the feminists to develop and organize the lACW. Because the PAU's home office was situated in the United States, delegates assumed that lACW headquarters would also be located there. The question of exactly where, however, took up many of the early months of the Commission's time. Materials on the preliminary housing of the lACW are scarce. But Stevens
Stevens to Paul, April 22, 1932, Stevens papers (M-54), reel 4, SL.
150 provided some detail in her report to NWP president Alva
Belmont
Where the lACW should be housed was an issue related to
its official status and affiliation with the PAU. Rowe argued that until the Union officially sanctioned and organized the lACW, anyone who worked for the Commission was acting as an independent agent, not as a representative of an American government. According to Stevens, Rowe insinuated that these early initiatives were part of an aggressive campaign to promote the NWP's agenda:
He maintained that while we were created by the Pan American Conference, we were to be entirely independent; that the Pan American Union could not be committed in advance to any work we might do or offer; that when the time came for us to report it was not at all certain that the Union would accept our work and certainly it could not be committed in advance by having us here in the building. To this I replied that we were well accustomed to having our work rejected by governments and that we certainly had no thought that the Union was committed to anything we do..He then said, with great anxiety and trepidation. 'But you people are (meaning the National Woman's Party) [Stevens's parentheses] committed to one theory (meaning equality).
Rowe further advised that the work Stevens planned and the personnel needed to perform the tasks should be sheltered in
[Doris Stevens] to Mrs. Oliver H.P. Belmont, June 29, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 9, SL.
151 the NWP's Washington office. Stevens, aware of the politically vulnerable situation of the lACW and the political isolation of the NWP, objected to such an arrangement, for it implied that the lACW was "simply an off-shoot" of the Party and would "discourage other groups of women from joining in the work." The relationship between the Party and the Commission remained unclear into the early 193 0s. Leading benefactor of the NWP Alva
Belmont, for example, maintained that the lACW was a "part of the National Woman's Party; just a branch of it."^^
Stevens, taking a different view, explained that "although it had been initiated by the National Woman's Party, we hoped the Commission would expand to include great numbers of women outside our organization."^^
Rowe, at least partly as a diplomatic tactic, hesitated to have the lACW located in the Pan American Union Building because of the NWP's "well-known militant stand on equality," since he feared, according to Stevens, "that we
Notes on the History of the lACW, Stevens papers, carton 5, SL.
Stevens to Belmont, June 29, 1928.
152 may do something embarrassing to countries not committed to this idea." Stevens complained.
The whole thing has given us [lACW] a great deal of anxiety...we are so accustomed to working with our colleagues in the National Woman's Party who always expect us to show all the creative ability and all the resourcefulness possible, we find it hard to have to conform to other people's rules
Rowe recognized that the PAU had not yet authorized the completion of the lACW and that the NWP had schemed to assert its own agenda as the official policy. In other words, even though the status of the Commission would not be determined for a year and even though most of the Latin
American delegates would not be appointed for at least several months, Stevens had charged ahead with her plans.
In the summer Rowe finally gave the lACW staff a small
"space" consisting of only a chair and table in the Columbus
Room of the Union. But until the lACW became official, with all member countries participating, only preliminary work should be done, he insisted. To emphasize his point he prohibited Stevens from having letterhead printed with the
PAU designated as the lACW's official headquarters. To sidestep Rowe and to compensate for this absence, Stevens
Ibid.
153 typed at the top of her correspondence, whether personal,
NWP, or lACW business, the name, address, and affiliation of
the Commission-- "Inter American Commission of Women, Pan
American Union, Washington, D.C., and in parentheses
"Letterhead not yet printed," giving her letters an official
quality.^
Taking matters into her own hands, Stevens used every
avenue available to persuade Rowe to provide a legitimate
office for the Commission. She explained to Alva Belmont,
"We are trying to find some way to bring pressure upon Dr.
Rowe to convince him that it is desirable to have us here.
We can not tell how successful we shall be, but we feel that we can not concede the point.She assumed that she could gain the backing of at least some of the Latin American delegates: "Unfortunately, many of the ambassadors are absent from Washington now, especially the most friendly ones who know about our Havana work. We are planning, however [,] ...to visit them all and get from them expressions
In the summer of 1928, Stevens frequently mentioned the lack of official letterhead often printing the business information at the top. See Stevens papers, cartons 5,9, SL.
Stevens to Belmont, June 29, 1928.
154 of approval at our being here to conduct our work. "
Hoping to elicit even more support from her Latin American colleagues, Stevens made use of the visit of Clara
Gonzalez.^® On a trip to the states, Gonzalez, as Panama's commissioner, stopped by the PAU to obtain information about the lACW, at which time Rowe officially welcomed her.
Stevens took this opportunity to have Gonzalez photographed with herself, Lee, and MacDermott, and she then sent the photograph to the press along with an article outlining the visit and the greeting from Rowe. NWP supporters similarly publicized a sojourn to the women's "space" from the
Venezuelan statesmen and his son, emphasizing that the two men "beamed" when signing the visitor's book. For the next eighteen months the lACW continued to have temporary office quarters, relying on the "space" at the PAU and on
27 Ibid.
"Report of Work Done From April 1928 to February 1930 by the Inter American Commission of Women," Stevens papers (A- 104), box 3, SL. Stevens often referred to Gonzalez as playing an instrumental role in the organizing of the lACW and helping with the research on nationality laws. In fact, Gonzalez only sporadically spent time in the United States, although she was quite dedicated while here.
Betty Archdale to Miss Stevens, July 28, [1928], Stevens papers, carton 4, SL.
155 the generosity of the Carnegie Institute for use of its library and office facilities.
Not surprisingly, the NWP also held tight reign over the finances of the lACW. Before the Commission became officially connected to the PAU, it lacked financial support. Occasionally governments would fund a member's trip to Washington as the Venezuelans had for Lucila Luciana de Pérez Diaz. But even more problematic was that the lACW did not have a budget for basic operating costs such as office supplies and typing, making it difficult not only to publicize the Commission, but also to do anything at all.
Out of necessity, then. Party leaders solicited donations from NWP members and managed the accounts. The NWP's journal Equal Rights later explained that because the
Committee on International Action of the National Woman's
Party, U.S.A., was responsible for the "creation of the
Commission, [it] felt that financial support should be given the Inter-American Commission of Women until such time as it was organized and could finance itself.Such good intentions, however, also served the interests of the NWP.
30 ER, March 22, 1930, NWP papers, reel 155
156 Certainly Party members found it worthwhile to garner
political and financial support for the lACW, for they
hoped that an affiliation with the Commission would benefit
them, especially in the international arena, as will be discussed more thoroughly in the following chapter. But at
least one of them, foremost benefactor Alva Belmont, took advantage of the organizations' financial relationship, using the Commission as an avenue to funnel money to the
Party. At times it was difficult to determine to whose treasury—the NWP's or the lACW's—expenses should be debited.
Many of the National Council members of the NWP served on the Commission, making it easy to confuse the two groups' expenditures. For example, other than those costs specifically accrued for Commission activities such as translations, typing, and mailings to Latin American countries, should lACW or NWP money cover monthly pictures of Stevens, Equal Rights subscriptions to Latin American delegates, or the feminists' activities at the Hague in 1928 and 1929?^ Or should the associations share the costs?
Copy of the Financial Report of the Inter American Commission of Women from its Creation in April 1928 up to and Including January 31, 193 0, Stevens papers, carton 8, SL; The Inter American Commission of Women Statement of 157 Undoubtedly some of these expenses benefited and helped to promote both the NWP and the lACW.
But donations to the Commission's account also had an economic advantage. Unlike the NWP, the Commission had tax- exempt status, making it particularly tempting for donors to use it as a tax shelter for large contributions to the
Party. Most proponents of the NWP made small donations to the lACW and probably were not aware of its tax status.
Alva Belmont, wealthy widow and president of the Party from
1921 to her death in 1933, in contrast, made significant contributions to the Commission. And as her private correspondence reveals, she intended the money for NWP purposes.^ Belmont explained:
My gifts to the Party are to be under the head of the Inter American Commission of Women. If the Inter
Receipts and Disbursements, November 1, 1931 - to June 30, 1933, Stevens papers, carton 8, SL.
Copy of the Financial Report of the Inter American Commission of Women from its Creation in April 1928 up to and Including January 31, 193 0, Stevens papers, carton 8, SL; The Inter American Commission of Women Statement of Receipts and Disbursements, November 1, 1931 - to June 30, 1933, Stevens papers, carton 8, SL. For example, Mrs. Isaac H. Dixon, Mrs. Ruth Vandeer Litt, Mrs. John Winter Brannon, and Mrs. Grace Hoffman White, all NWP members, contributed to the lACW. Also, in 193 0 alone Belmont contributed $22,504. Mrs. O.H.P. Belmont Charities, 193 0, Stevens papers, carton 9, SL.
158 American Commission of women Fsicl chooses to dispose of this money, giving parts of it to the National Woman's Party, it is no one's business, but their own...I think it best that my gifts should be listed as far as the tax people are concerned under that heading. “
This arrangement was kept so private that even some top
NWP officials were not aware of it. Anna Kelton Wiley,
national chairman from 1929 to 1932, was perplexed to
discover that Belmont donated large amounts of money to the
lACW, assuming that she had shifted her support. As
representative of the Council she wrote Stevens,
We think it an unwise thing to do to credit this money all to the Inter American Commission, but I hardly like to tell Mrs. Belmont this...In her mind it is all devoted to the cause of women's freedom, and so of course it is.
Belmont had long been one of the most ardent champions of
the NWP, and the Council was worried that her generosity was drifting in another direction. Wiley probably contacted
Stevens because of her close and intimate relationship with
Belmont, hoping that she could gently guide her interest back to the Party. A note written at the side of this letter states that Wiley was not a part of the inner circle
“ Alva Belmont to Doris [Stevens] , February 11, 1931, Stevens papers, carton 9, SL.
[Anna Kelton] Wiley to Miss Stevens, February 24, 1931, Stevens papers, carton 9, SL. 159 and did not understand that even though Belmont ' s money technically went into the lACW's account, she intended it to be used for Party purposes.
The NWP was thus successfully situating itself in a dominant position in the Commission, hoping to gain a foothold in women's international organizing. As representatives of the Pan American group, Stevens and other
NWP members now had a legitimate base from which to operate on an international level, avoiding out-and-out exclusion from international feminist activities as had occurred in
Paris in 1926. Furthermore, because Latin America nations belonged to the League of Nations, U.S. feminists could work within it as legitimate participants. In December 1929, for example, shortly before the Commission's organizing conference, Orestes Ferrara spoke at an NWP-sponsored international dinner where he encouraged the members of the lACW to participate in the League Of Nations' "consultative organization composed of women to contribute to the codification of international law.He advised the women to "contribute with their counsels to the highly meritorious
ER, December 21, 1929, NWP papers, reel 155.
160 labor of endowing all the countries of the world with
juridical rules. The Commission was on its way to becoming a major player in the international women's rights movement.
Setting the Agenda
In May 1928 the chair, anxiously wanting to begin lACW work, insisted on putting together the Commission's agenda with only one member—herself—appointed. Even though the roster of nations with lACW membership was incomplete and its legal status ambiguous, the U.S. feminists did not concern themselves about gaining the approval of Latin
American feminists, nor did they seek Latin American male input on this matter. Stevens and her NWP colleagues wrote an extensive proposal outlining lACW policy.Without attempting to assess the position of Latin American activists, the U.S. feminists approached only U.S. officials
"on the advisability of undertaking as the Commission's first subject of research the question of nationality as it
36 ER, December 21, 1929, NWP papers, reel 155
” Memo[randum] to discuss with Dr. Rowe for his approval. May 1928. Stevens papers, carton 5, SL.
161 relates especially to women.NWP representatives alone
decided that an investigation of nationality laws to discern
the legal status of married women should be the first
feminist undertaking of the Commission.
Largely because of a growing foreign population in the
United States, an interest in nationality laws grew in the
first decades of the twentieth century. After the passage of women's suffrage in 1920, the U.S. congress more
seriously responded to women's pleas, not wanting to alienate or upset the new electorate. After the 1922 passage of the Cable Act, guaranteeing women the right of naturalized citizenry without condition of sex or marital status, many feminists believed that the government had scotched the policy of derivative citizenship. The fine print of the act, however, belied such hope. Over the next several years, women's groups fought to revise discriminatory sections of the Cable Act. But no substantial changes occurred, with each proposal being more controversial than the last. And by the late 1920s U.S.
"Report of Work Done From April 1928 to February 1930 by the Inter American Commission Of Women," Stevens papers (A- 104), box 3, SL.
162 feminists had become embroiled in the international struggle
over how to achieve equality in nationality.
Moreover, the issue of nationality was on the agenda of
the League of Nations and one of the many topics for
discussion at the 193 0 Hague Conference on the Codification
of International Law. Since the early 1920s international
women's organizations such as the Women's International
League for Peace and Freedom and the International Woman
Suffrage Alliance championed improving women's position in
nationality laws, providing women and men the same rights
upon marriage. Because of differences among countries, a married woman's legal status varied from nation to nation.
While some nations gave women a choice in nationality, others retained marital naturalization and expatriation,
forcing a woman to abandon her land of birth citizenship and take that of her husband. Dependence of a woman on her spouse for legal affiliation could be most acute when she lost her own citizenship but was not entitled to take her husband's citizenship or when she remained in her own nation without legal status.^® Although some individual nations had taken steps to remedy the inequity, many international
” Miller, "Lobbying the League." 163 feminists sought passage of an international treaty to resolve this issue.
More and more, however, feminists differed over the meaning of equal rights and over how to achieve equality.
Some argued that women should have certain legal exceptions such as special or protective labor laws; others, including
NWP members, maintained that laws should treat men and women the same. And in 193 0, as international activists became embroiled in the debate over special or protective labor laws, the NWP and one of its closest political allies in the international arena, the British equal rights Six Point
Group, formed a new organization. Equal Rights International
(ERI), in response to their dissatisfaction with existing equalitarian associations The sole agenda of the ERI was the promotion of the Equal Rights Treaty.
The Treaty was controversial, having numerous opponents worldwide because of its likely impact on special or protective labor legislation. Proponents of the Treaty
Rupp, Worlds of Women.
“ Miller, "Lobbying the League"; Rupp, Worlds of Women
164 sought to remove all gender-based legal restrictions." The
NWP saw the lACW as a way to fight internationally for what
they wanted; through their connections with Latin
Americans, they could have the Treaty put on the League of
Nation's agenda. The idea was that if the League ratified
the Equal Rights Treaty, then the United States would be
obligated to make its laws match those in other modern
nations, doing away with special legislation." The Party,
however, needed an avenue to launch its treaty into the
limelight, and the lACW fit the bill perfectly.
The NWP thus had a vested interest in studying the
nationality laws of Pan American countries, with such an
investigation serving dual purposes. It would foster
support for the Equal Rights Treaty from Latin Americans by
providing concrete information about woman's legal status in
the Americas, while also providing the Party leverage to
insert the Equal Rights Treaty on the agenda at the League of Nations. Not surprisingly, then, NWP members decided to
In the European-based international feminist arena, there was an on-going debate over these diverse approaches--the social feminists, or protective legislation supporters, versus the equalitarian feminists--as to which was the best avenue to women's emancipation.
43 Miller, "Lobbying the League"; Rupp, Worlds of Women. 165 research not just the twenty-one American republics, but
included eighty-four countries in their study. Stevens
asserted: "so if Mrs. Corbett-Ashby [president of the
International Alliance of Women] and others would stir
themselves on nationality, we could find a way very soon to
launch the treaty."** Garnering support for a nationality
treaty was easier for it was a narrower, less encompassing
legal act, whereas an equal rights treaty shouldered broad
changes in all laws pertaining to sex.
To compile and analyze the material gathered, Stevens
appointed Paul to chair an lACW-sponsored committee. The
roster of participants included Emma Wold, Helen and Betty
Archdale, Clara Gonzalez, Elsie Ross Shields, Adelia Artela
de Allen, Fanny Bunand-Sévastos, and NWP member and lawyer
Laura Berrien. The Harvard Committee on Nationality
provided them with a comprehensive investigation of women's
nationality laws, and the Carnegie Institute contributed, in
addition to office and library facilities, five thousand
dollars to finance the project. Perhaps the most impressive
assembly of proponents of the project was a round table
** Stevens to Belmont, June 29, 1928
166 conference organized by Stevens and professor of Chemistry
at Oslo University of Norway and president of the
International Association of University Women, Ellen
Gleditsch, held in April 1929 in the Pan American Union.
The meeting focused on a discussion of "plans of cooperation between the women of this hemisphere and the women of Europe at the forthcoming Codification Conference at the Hague.
Except for the Norwegian feminist, only U.S. "experts" James
Brown Scott, Leo S. Rowe, Henry B. Hazard, Thomas H. Healy,
William C. Dennis, Isabel Keith MacDermott, Alice Paul, Emma
Wold, Burnita Shelton Matthews, Margaret Lambie, and, of course, Stevens attended. The organizers had invited statesmen Olaya Herrara of Colombia and Ortes Ferrara, but they were unable to come. And there are no indications that
Latin American feminists made the guest list. Ironically,
U.S. feminists represented "all" women in the hemisphere.
Party members obviously viewed themselves, as they had in
Havana, as the sole leaders of Pan American feminism; Latin
American women were to serve merely as assistants. U.S.
Report of Work Done From April 1928 to February 1930 by the Inter American Commission of Women, Stevens papers, (A- 104), box 3, SL.
167 women's assumptions about the backwardness of Latin American
women thus carried over into the active work of the lACW.
In a similar vein, shortly after the conference in
Havana in 1928, Stevens argued that a conference should take place immediately, although only two official
representatives, herself and Gonzalez, had been appointed/®
Although Rowe as Director General of the PAU had upheld some of the NWP-initiated propositions of the Commission, such as
their research project on nationality, he was careful not to overstep acceptable boundaries and cause controversy among the Pan American nations. In fact, he viewed the study on nationality as an NWP project, not one originating from the
lACW. Rowe thus opposed Stevens's idea, arguing that the
Commission itself was not organized and that most of the designated countries had not yet filled their positions. He suggested that it would be better to wait until after the
PAU had officially authorized the Commission, providing the time for a well-organized, well-planned, and well-thought
"CONCERNING PROPOSED CONFERENCE OF INTER AMERICAN COMMISSION OF WOMEN," Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
168 out meeting with competent and experienced women from all the Americas attending/”'
Rowe's reluctance demonstrated his skills as a diplomat, for the U.S women had wanted to organize the conference without conferring with their Latin American counterparts and only informally contacting United States and Latin American statesmen residing in Washington. And it did not even occur to them that the PAU might find it politically astute to have the first official meeting in a
Latin American nation. A member reported: "It seems to me clear that we have to meet somewhere to organize the work of the Commission. It is simply a question of whether the
United States wishes to act as host to the first conference."'*® The Union, however, determined that Cuba would be most suited to host the first conference.
The 1930 Conference
By invitation of the Cuban government to commemorate the founding of the Commission, the conference was held two
L.S Rowe to Doris Stevens, May9, June 13, July 1, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
'*® "CONCERNING PROPOSED CONFERENCE OF INTER AMERICAN COMMISSION OF WOMEN." 169 years later, from February 17-24, 1930, at the University of
Havana as part of a general celebration of the university's
200'^*' anniversary.'*® The women's program generally followed
the format of other international congresses, with business
sessions, social events, and the adoption of resolutions for
future undertakings. In addition, the women participated in
an evening mass meeting at the Aula Magna, or large assembly
hall, at the University of Havana to share the happenings at
the conference with the public; the Deans and Rectors held
a special plenary session for the women, also at the
University; and the Cuban feminist group Alinaza Nacional
Feminista sponsored a very important luncheon lasting
several hours at the Yacht Club, where numerous women, most
of whom were not affiliated with the lACW or from the United
Numerous sources, both published and unpublished, are available on the lACW's first conference. See, for example, Diario Oficial. Febrero 17 a 24 de 193 0; Primera Conferencia de la Comision Interamericana de Muieres. (Carasa Y Ca.: Habana, 1930); The Inter American Commission of Women; Documents Concerning Its Creation and Organization. For a more detailed account of the congress including the minutes, reports, committee discussions, and copies of speeches, see Stevens papers, cartons 10 and 12, SL.
170 States, gave speeches on a variety of feminist issues.
And, Maria de Montalvo de Soto Navarro, president of the
Alianza, served as press chairman and prepared all the
official news releases for the women's congress.
But Stevens and other U.S. members had orchestrated the
meeting's program with the topic of nationality taking
center stage. The following month the League of Nations was
holding the First Conference for the Codification of
International Law and the feminists hoped to convince Latin
American nations to send lACW members as official
representatives to garner support for their nationality
treaty.
The conference opened in the Law Building at the
University of Havana with an executive session for
commissioners only. From the twenty-one member nations
sixteen delegates and alternates attended.And U.S.
“ Only Latin American feminists gave presentations at the luncheon. For copies of many of the women's speeches see, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
Ernestina A. Lopez de Nelson (Argentina) , Flora de Oliveira Lima (Brazil), Aida Parada (Chile) , Maria Elena de Hinestrosa was represented by Alicia Ricode de Herrera (Colombia) , Lydia Fernandez represented by Serafina Rodriguez de Rosado (Costa Rica), Elena Mederos de Gonzalez (Cuba), Gloria Moya de Jimenez (Dominican Republic), Téligny Mathon represented by Mrs. Fernand Dennis (Haiti), Margarita 171 members of the nationality committee—Laura Berrien, Maud
Bradbury, Fanny Bunand-Sevastos, Charlotte H. Dixon, Mary
Powell, Thelma Wells Snow, Dorothy Trautwein, and Mrs. John
J. White—also participated, with the young Mexican Rosalmiro
Colomo serving as the committee's staff assistant.” The
chair gave a brief welcoming speech, the commissioners presented their credentials to confirm their appointments,
and then members adopted the program and rules of procedure.
Stevens adjourned the meeting with instructions to convene
again at 3:00 p.m. for an official greeting from Cuba.
At this time Fernando Sanchez de Fuentes, on behalf of
the Cuban government, Elena Mederos de Gonzalez, as the
Cuban commissioner, and Rosa Trina Lagomasino, professor of chemistry and official representative of the University of
Robles de Mendoza (Mexico), Juanita Molina de Fromén (Nicaragua), Clara Gonzalez (Panama), Teresa Obregoso de Prévost represented by Maria Mereghi de Rey (Peru), Maria Alvarez de Guillén-Rivas gave her proxy to the Panamanian commissioner Clara Gonzalez (El Salvador), Lucila Luciani de Pérez Diaz represented by Cecilia Herrera de Olavarria (Venezuela) , and Doris Stevens (United States) . Diario Oficial. Febrero 17 a 24 de 193 0; Primera Conferencia de la Comision Interamericana de Muieres. (Carasa Y Ca. : Habana, 193 0). Absent from the conference were representatives from Bolivia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Paraguay, and Uruguay.
List of nationality committee members who attended the first conference, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. 172 Havana, enthusiastically greeted the women." Gonzalez
praised the efforts of the U.S. and Latin American
feminists' campaign in 1928, gave a "hearty" welcome to the
commissioners and visiting delegates, and honored Cuba as
the birthplace of the lACW and the "first country in the
world which invites and receives a commission of women as
official commissioners of their governments... [to] take action
upon matters that will affect women's position in
international law the world over."®“ Lagomasino greeted the
feminists in the "name of the University women of Cuba" and
on behalf of the Rector and Deans at the University of
Havana, while she also congratulated Cuban women as
defenders of "just causes" in which "rests the future of
humanity."" And Fuentes opened his arms to the women.
Stevens because of her position as chair had more powers than the rest of the lACW members. For example, she could appoint alternates to represent countries for missing commissioners, could organize committees and sub-committees and name the members to serve on them, and could use her "parliamentary" powers to overrule or veto members proposals. At the first conference, Stevens exercised all of these powers.
Speech by Elena Mederos de Gonzalez, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
" Speech by Rosa Trina Lagomasino, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. 173 welcoming them for the Cuban government which "greatly
appreciates the noble claims and purposes of your
Commission.
Over the next several days the commissioners outlined the work that they had done on nationality, discussed the
lACW's finances, and organized a subcommittee to "determine the general work between conferences."^^ Delegates also passed resolutions paying "tribute" to Alice Paul for her work on nationality, to the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace for its financial support and for use of its office space and library, and thanked the Cuban government, the University of Havana, and the Cuban feminist group, Alianza Nacional Feminista, for their "hospitality, facilities, and cooperation."®® But most of the women's initiatives centered on the adoption of a nationality treaty and on the official appointment of lACW members to the First
Conference for the Codification of International Law.
56 ER, March 1, 1930, NWP papers, reel 155.
"The Inter American Commission of Women: Documents Concerning Its Creation and Organization."
®® Ibid.
174 While U.S. lawyer and Chairman of the Inter-Relations
Committee of the National [U.S.] Woman's Lawyer Association
Laura Berrien gave the keynote address outlining the work of the nationality committee, several Latin American delegates also presented speeches on nationality, lending their wholehearted support. The Nicaraguan commissioner Juanita
Molina de Fromen introduced the topic and pronounced the importance of the conference at the Hague : "It is apparent that the women of the world making up half of its population are those mostly affected by any decisions in this field., [and] are now coming together for a great
International Conference to agree upon one of the most vital and far reaching matters that has ever been considered by women.Panamanian representative Clara Gonzalez supported a nationality treaty, arguing that the "rights of women as refers to nationality is fuller than any other of the same subject as it takes care of the problem affecting matrimony and also of the children.Aida Parada of Chile elicited grand applause when she proclaimed: "we must reach
lACW Minutes, February 18, 1930, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
lACW minutes, February 20, 1930, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. 175 definite conclusions so that public opinion may be unable to justify the opinion prevalent of women, that we talk much and do little." And Oliveira Lima of Brazil and Elena
Mederos de Gonzalez of Cuba energetically backed the treaty and the appointment of lACW delegates to the Hague. “ The delegates unanimously passed a treaty on nationality to be presented at the Hague, and they also agreed on a resolution calling for governments of the Americas to send Commission representatives to the upcoming conference in Geneva."
While much of the congress focused on nationality, the issue of women's legal status in the Americas was also on the agenda. As established at the inter-American conference in 1928, the main purpose of the Commission was to assess laws on women's civil and political position in the United
States and Latin America. Like feminists in the
Euroamerican international women's movement. Pan American feminists were divided over how to approach and thus remedy
61 Ibid.
The treaty stated: "The contracting parties agree that from the going into affect of this treaty, there shall be no distinction based on sex in their law or practice relating to nationality." And the Cuban government had already appointed Blanche Z. de Baralt as representative to the conference. 176 sex-based legal inequities in the Western hemisphere.
Should they, on the one hand, tackle them one-by-one? Or should they, on the other, take a comprehensive approach and eliminate all disparities at the same time? This issue would not be resolved at the 193 0 conference. But delegates did decide to evaluate laws in their respective nations, to compile the research into a bound volume, and to distribute and discuss the results at their next conference in 1933 in
Montevideo, to be held in conjunction with the seventh conference of American states.
Moreover, despite the fact that issues specific to individual nations were excluded from the program, Latin
American feminists used the conference forum to advance their concerns. On the first day of the congress in her welcoming speech, for example, Elena Mederos de Gonzalez called on the Cuban government to give women the vote because "our civilization demands" it and argued that the lACW should support the proposal because it reflects "all of women's status, which so keenly interests this commission.At the Yacht Club luncheon Cuban feminists
Speech by Elena Mederos de Gonzalez, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. 177 similarly emphasized their interests, focusing largely on women's suffrage. Writer and journalist Herminia Planas de
Mendoza exclaimed: "Women's suffrage in Cuba is our most ardent aspiration...we, the Cuban women ask for their [lACW members] cooperation to obtain our greatest ideal—women's suffrage."** Vice-treasurer of the Alianza Nina Crowley de
Rodriquez Morini called for "full recognition of our civil, political and economic rights"; treasurer Marquesa de
Tiedra nudged the "North American women who enjoy the full scope of political rights...to help us [Cuban women] " obtain the "same opportunities"; member of the National Congress of Mothers Rafaela Mederos de Fernandez proclaimed that the
"right of voting which is claimed by women citizens must be granted for without it there can be no nation with liberty"; and vice-president of the Alianza Celia de Averhoff described feminism as the "attainment of political and civil rights which will grant to women ample and legal defense" ending their subordinate status in the law.** In fact,
** Speech by Herminia Planas de Mendoza, Stevens papers, carton 12, SL.
** Speeches by Nina Crowley de Rodriguez Morini, Marquesa de Tiedra, Rafaela Mederos de Fernandez, and Celia de Averhoff, Stevens papers. Carton 12, SL. 178 Latin American delegates were so concerned about the lack of women's suffrage in their respective nations that they spearheaded the formation of an official sub-committee of the lACW "to investigate the problems of women's political rights especially as they pertained to suffrage," with Clara
Gonzalez as chair.®® Thus, despite the efforts of Stevens to focus the conference on nationality, Latin American feminists found the opportunity to pursue their own agenda.
In general, the women at the congress cooperated to achieve feminist goals. Understandably, however, some of the Latin American feminists held negative attitudes toward the imperialist behavior of the United States, finding it difficult to work with the Yankee women. An incident that occurred in 192 9 reflects the deep-rooted tension between some U.S. and Latin American feminists. An example of such hostility emerged in a public exchange between feminists
Carrie Chapman Catt and Mariblanca Sabas Aloma of Cuba.
Even though Catt was no longer formally involved in Pan
American feminist organizing, she remained active in the
European international arena and retained an interest in the
®® Minutes of the lACW, February 21, 1930, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. 179 Pan American women's movement. In a comprehensive account of Cuban feminism, outspoken activist, feminist, and journalist Aloma responded to one of Catt's articles that appeared in the New York Herald Tribune in 1929.^
Catt accused Latin American women of "lacking the fundamentals of rationality," considering them a "threat to the amicable and peaceful relations between the U.S. and
South America." According to Aloma, Catt did not try to understand the cultural, political, and social differences and problems between Latin America and the United States.
Instead, she narrowly criticized Latin American women because of their political stands on social issues and because many of them were opposed to U.S. imperialist policy. In the first decades of the twentieth century, the
United States had increasingly interfered in Latin American affairs, investing large sums in business ventures, even attempting to manipulate governments, and in some cases even invading countries. Although some Latin Americans supported
" Mariblanca Sabas Aloma, Feminismo: Cuestiones Sociales- Critica Literaria {Havana, Cuba : Hermes, 1930) . This book is an anthology focusing on the state of Cuban feminism in the late 1920s. Herald Tribune. January 19, 1929.
180 the U.S. policies, others strongly opposed such
intervention. As a critic Aloma expounded:
if the amicable and peaceful relations of the US with all the American republics have to continue being based in the hateful economic penetration and the infamous political penetration that are converting us into docile slaves...If 'amicable and peaceful relations' mean the occupation of Nicaragua, the Panama Canal, Brazilian CAUCHERAS, Cuban sugar, Mexican petroleum, Peruvian gold mines, Chilean salt mines, etc. If 'amicable and peaceful relations' means that 2 0 American republics become independent from despotic tutelage of the discovering nation only to fall into humiliating submission to the strength of Yankee imperialism then, Mrs. Chapman Catt, the women of all Indian-Hispanic America WILL TRY BY EVERY MEANS AVAILABLE TO DESTROY THIS RELATIONSHIP..Actually, we women love peace, but we interpret it differently than they interpret it in the CANCILLERIAS. Kellogg and Briand make us feel pity. They are buffoons, and all buffoons are, besides grotesque, tragic.®®
Catt asserted that Latin American women needed an
organization to guide them "toward a modern civilization."
In the exposé Aloma quoted Cuban feminist Betances Jaeger who forcefully informed Catt: "This organization exists. I can cite among others the Alianza Nacional Feminista of
Cuba." Aloma continued.
The women are fighting for intervention and influence in the new currents of thought and politics in their respective countries, understanding that the home and family are decisive factors in obtaining a new life order...The highest ideal is to create a new humanity to
68 Aloma, Feminismo:__ cuestiones Sociales-Critica Literaria.
181 populate the world with free beings, bringing changes of a transcendental nature to the species. This is what I understand as the true desire for peace.
Disagreements also broke out among the female commissioners during the 1930 conference, with U.S. dominance creeping into the proceedings. An examination of the first executive session is representative of the feminists' antagonisms. For example, disputes occurred between Stevens and two commissioners, Juanita Molina de
Fromén and Clara Gonzalez. After the executive committee confirmed the newly appointed delegates, Gonzalez proposed that a resolution committee be organized to handle future ideas. In response to her suggestion, Stevens sharply replied: "This resolution taken to day Fsicl is out, completely and entirely out : I use my parliamentary powers." Fromén snapped back : "We want you to appoint a resolutions committee—which you are going to do." Another disturbance occurred when Gonzalez questioned who had put together, written, and approved the rules of procedure.
Stevens asserted that Flora de Oliveira Lima, member from
Brazil, had consulted with "some of the Universities" and then submitted her findings to Laura Berrien for approval.
Berrien, under orders from the Chair, had conferred with
182 James Brown Scott to check for any legal snafus in the rules
"simply because he was the only one available and he has had a multitude of experience." Gonzalez, not satisfied with
Stevens's rationale, insisted that the "rules of procedure should be drawnup Fsicl by women lawyers," and she went on to recommend noted lawyer, communist, and prominent Cuban feminist Ofelia Dominguez as a likely candidate.®® Further displaying an air of superiority, Stevens instructed her
Latin American colleagues to present an appearance of congeniality and cooperation, acting as if they were
"pleased to be here" and "honored to be appointed." She finally drilled them on their duties at the congress, most of which she had chosen for them.
Perhaps the most vocal critic of Stevens's gang was the
CO-founder of the Alianza Ofelia Dominguez, who attended the
1930 conference. In an editorial in the communist newspaper, El Pais, she denounced the lACW and its activities on nationality:
But this work which through courtesy is presented by Miss Doris Stevens, as one which has been done by the Commission, is not done by it wholly; almost all of it, or all of it if I am not mistaken..±>elongs to the
®® Minutes of the Executive Session, February 17, 1930, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
183 North Americans. To the Latin American women there has been reserved the role of mummers.
Dominguez continued her review, skeptical of Stevens's
integrity and motives :
Doris Stevens bearing herself with tenacity and great energy in the face of the most difficult solution, merits our most sincere applause. But Doris Stevens like all the others of her race, on finding herself collaborating with Latin American women, by the strongly and deeply rooted prejudices in the minds of her people, knows how to make use of smiles of cordial superiority if no idea is brought out which would conflict with her convictions. When this occurs...there follows the imperious gesture and the arbitrary imposition.
In a similar vein, Edetto B. Newman, Cuban feminist, unhappy with the direction of the lACW after the conference in 1930, wrote to Paul: "I am out of the movement...! dreamed of a world made better by women, and I view one made immeasurably worse.And two of the first women named to the Commission, from Haiti and Colombia, refused their appointments to protest the discrimination against the
"coloured" participant from Haiti, who had been prohibited
Copy of "The Latin American Women Enjoy the Role of Mummers in the Recent Women's Conference" translated by Cuban feminist Edetto B. Newman, El Pais. February 28, 1930, Alice Paul papers (MC 399), box 102, Schlesinger Library.
Edetto B. Newman to Miss Paul, March 12, 193 0, Paul papers (MC 399), box 102, SL. 184 from "attending the lunches given for the other delegates"
at the 1928 conference.’^
Conclusion
Thus, from April 1928 to February 1930, the lACW underwent growing pains, with Stevens and her NWP colleagues directing the initiatives. Even before the lACW's official authorization, the U.S. feminists made decisions concerning membership, headquarters, and finances largely independently of input from their Latin American counterparts. Because of their proximity to the PAU's main center of operations, they took charge of the Commission's activities, used their contacts with Union members, and inserted their own agenda, the international issue of nationality, as the official one of the lACW. At the same time, however, such aggressive behavior did not preclude Latin Americans from viewing the lACW as beneficial and from promoting it, both as delegates and as volunteer members.
Latin American feminists performed clerical work, did translations, researched nationality laws, spoke publicly,
Helen Archdale to Doris Stevens, July 28, [1928], Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. 185 and wrote articles, all to muster support for and publicize
the Commission. And, like their U.S. colleagues, when the
opportunity arose they inserted their own agenda into
Commission proceedings. At the 1930 conference, they
emphasized the importance of women's civil and political
rights, especially suffrage, and spearheaded the creation of
a sub-committee to examine women's political position in
Latin American countries. Indeed, U.S. and Latin American
feminists alike used the lACW to promote their individual
and national interests. Such a situation suggests that even
though they came to the organizing table with separate goals, they did not necessarily have exclusive programs.
They could, in fact, work together to achieve a variety of
feminist initiatives. And in spite of opposition from some
Latin American feminists, activists could find common ground on which to unite to elevate women's status in the Pan
American arena.
186 CHAPTER 5
THE lACW IN THE INTERNATIONAL ARENA: PURSUIT OF LEGAL EQUALITY
In the late 1920s and early 1930s, the lACW played a dominant role in the equal rights campaign waged within the international women's movement. The Commission was one of the most active and zealous, and arguably one of the most victorious, proponents of legal equality for women on the intercontinental stage. Latin American women and men, alongside the United States-based NWP, staunchly participated in the feminist crusade, holding conferences, initiating resolutions, and generally promoting equal rights. Two of the most impressive accomplishments of the lACW took place in male-dominated gatherings. At the 1933 inter-American conference in Montevideo, the lACW managed to launch and bolster prospects for its equal rights and equal nationality treaties. There delegates unanimously passed the nationality resolution, and the treaty on equal rights gained partial support. These feats brought worldwide
187 attention to the Commission and invoked its potential importance as an advocate of equality in the law. And because of its successes in the Pan American arena, the lACW, with the help of diplomatic maneuvering by Latin
American member nations in Geneva, wedged its nationality agenda onto the agenda of the Leacfue of Nations Assembly.
Why did the lACW take such a strong position on behalf of legal equality? And how was it able to make such remarkable progress (if short of victory)? This chapter explores the development of the Commission's equality position and its involvement in traditionally male-controlled political environments as a way of answering those questions.
Development of an Equal Rights Agenda
The late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries witnessed widespread organizing among women in national and international arenas. But it would not be until the 1920s, with the establishment of the League of Nations, that intercontinental feminists had a worldwide forum in which to agitate for legal equality. As we have seen, feminists concurred that women held a subordinate societal position, but conflict ensued over the best and most expedient way to
188 bring about equality. The lACW was a vigorous champion of
the identity of law position, arguing that the key to
equality was the elimination of any kind of sex
discrimination, even if assumed to "protect" or help women.
And like other international feminist organizations, the
lACW carried its agenda to the League of Nations.
As an ardent defender of equal rights through
legislation, the Inter-American Commission of Women played
an active role in generating publicity and garnering support
for the identity of law position. As far back as 1923
Guatemalan PAU delegate Maximo De Soto Hall advocated "equal
rights" ; at the lACW's founding proponents argued for
equality under the law; as its first undertaking members
investigated married women's nationality; at the first
conference delegates unanimously passed an equal nationality
treaty; and perhaps the Commission's most recognized equal
rights achievements were the Equal Rights and Equal
Nationality Treaties, introduced at the Seventh Conference of American States in 1933 in Montevideo.^ The Commission
^ The treaty on equal rights stated: "The contracting states agree that upon the ratification of this treaty men and women shall have equal rights throughout the territory subject to their respective jurisdictions." The one on nationality proposed: "The contracting parties agree that 189 clearly had a positive equal rights history. But how did
these initiatives come about?
Part of the answer lies in the strong influence of the
NWP in the early years of the Commission. As an unabashed
champion of equal rights and nationality, the Party, as we
have seen, channeled its agenda into Commission affairs.
The NWP had hoped to gain backing for the U.S. Equal Rights
Amendment through international activities, and the lACW
made a perfect launching pad. Indeed, the motivation for
Party members to attend the conference in 1928 in Cuba
sprang from a desire to marshal transnational support for
their equal rights treaty. Jane Norman Smith, for example,
explained to Margaret Lambie: "Would it not be a good idea
to see Mr. Rowe again...and ask him whether he would be
willing to sponsor an Equal Rights resolution and work for
it, just as Senator Curtis has sponsored the Equal Rights
amendment in Congress?"^ With flattery Isabel MacDermott
attempted to persuade Smith to go to Havana: "It would be
from the going into effect of this Convention there shall be no distinctions based on sex in their law and practice relating to nationality."
^ Jane Norman Smith to Miss Lambie, December 26, 1927, NWP papers, reel 38.
190 wonderful if you could [attend the conference] , for you can
present the idea of Equal Rights so well."^ Young NWP
feminist Katharine Ward Fisher, anxiously looking forward to
the Party's activities in Cuba, exclaimed to Smith: "So I
will hope to see "women" and "equal rights" in the
headlines."* Smith suggested to NWP National Executive
Secretary Mabel Vernon: "It seems to me that we could ask
them [Pan American delegates] to adopt a treaty on Equal
Rights."^ In a press release promoting the women's trip,
Stevens asserted that the "Pan American Conference has a magnificent opportunity to do something beautiful and historical in starting negotiations—which will affirm the principle that men and women shall enjoy equal rights in all the States of the New World."® In a circular letter to obtain money for the Havana trip, the National Executive
Secretary Mabel Vernon informed possible contributors: "It
^ [Isabel Keith MacDermott] to [Jane Norman] Smith, December 16, 1927, NWP papers, reel 38.
* Katharine Ward Fisher to Jane Norman Smith, January 6, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38.
® Jane Norman Smith to Mabel Vernon, December 26, 1927, NWP papers, reel 38.
® Translated by Vera Cold from La Prensa (New York), January 12, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38. 191 [the conference] is the beginning of a tremendous piece of work which we believe will speed the coming of Equal Rights all over the world," while Susan H. B. Gray similarly embraced the congress as "A wonderful opportunity that should be used."^ NWP members even discussed the possibility of a coalition with U.S. delegates. Stevens conferred with her NWP colleagues about harvesting an alliance with Leo Rowe "to link up the possibility of a woman being appointed to the [PAU's] Commission to study the equal rights part of the Conference program," and Smith confided to Fisher: "If we could get Dr. Rowe to say that he would speak at the Equal Rights convention and work for it, then it seems to me that we would have something definitive to say to these women."® Perhaps Paul most directly described the Party's posture concerning the Havana conference: "Previous Pan American conferences similar to this one have adopted treaties and conventions on a number
^ See, for example, [Mabel Vernon] to Margaret Whittemore, January 10, 1928, Susan H. B. Gray to Mabel Vernon, January 9, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38.
® [Doris Stevens] to Mrs. Weed, December 28, 1927, Jane Norman Smith to Katharine W. Fisher, December 28, 1927, NWP papers, reel 38.
192 of subjects, which have since been ratified by the United
States...It seems to me that this is a good opportunity for us to begin a campaign to accomplish a similar thing with regard to Equal Rights."®
Yet the equal rights agenda was not just a creation of the Americans foisted onto the Latin American members. As we have seen, Latin American feminists enthusiastically participated in women's rights movements on the national and international stages. They sponsored congresses, founded organizations, and in general sought to elevate women's civil and political status. And it can be argued that suffrage represented one of their main concerns, with numerous groups formed to work toward this issue. But because of the political diversity among the Caribbean,
Central, and South American nations, Latin American feminists traveled many different paths in pursuit of enfranchisement.
Some governments, including conservative, liberal, and radical ones, promised women the vote in order to broaden
® Alice Paul to Anita [Pollitzer] , December 28, 1927, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
193 their political base and hamstring threats from opponents.
In some countries, women received suffrage first on the local and regional levels, laying the groundwork for national law. And in yet others, women put on persistent and well-orchestrated crusades, seizing opportunities available in reform regimes.^ Francesca Miller argues that the passage of the nineteenth amendment in the U.S. in 1920 served as an impetus to the women's rights struggles in
Latin America. In addition to providing the organized women with a sense of hope in their own fight, U.S. women's suffrage, according to Miller, pointed out that female enfranchisement was not necessarily a revolutionary and disruptive act. And perhaps even more significant, it represented a "safe" way for Latin American nations to show their support for democracy, a growing trend in "modern" nations in the first decades of the twentieth century.
But in order to change existing laws, a revision of a country's Civil Codes had to take place. Embedded in
Miller, Latin American Women and the Search for Social Justice.
Carlson, Feminismo: Macias, Against All Odds; Hahner, Emancipating, the Female Sex; Stoner, From the House to the Streets : Lavrin, Women. Feminism, and Social Change.
194 patriarchy, the Codes legally defined family relationships
with the husband at the head. To make revisions involved an
exhausting task of gaining approval from a legal hierarchy
of a nation's government authorities who, in turn, would
have to approve an actual change in the constitution. And
to complicate the situation for feminists in the Pan
American arena, the Codes of various nations had periodically undergone reorganization since the nineteenth
century, so there was little consistency in the Codes
themselves, and the process to bring about change differed
from country to country. Moreover, the Codes reflected a
seemingly unbreakable bond between the church and state.
Thus, to bring pressure on their home governments, Latin
American feminists favored women's rights on the international stage.^
Lavrin, Women. Feminism, and Social Change. In Worlds of Women Rupp maintains that feminists in the Euroamerican international women's movement also used the intercontinental stage to effect change on the home front, although they criticized other organized women for pursuing national concerns in international crusades. It can be argued that the NWP used the international arena to promote treaties on equal rights and equal nationality, both issues that Party members strongly put forth in aggressive lobbying campaigns in the U.S. congress.
195 During the campaign at the 1928 conference in Cuba,
feminists from the U.S. and Latin America together spread equal rights propaganda. Although by 1928 Latin American
feminists had a well-honed women's movement, few had participated in the European international crusade. Still, like their U.S. counterparts, they viewed a Pan American women's group as a way to precipitate movement on women's issues in their own countries as well as on an intercontinental level. In contrast to the rhetoric of their Yankee colleagues, they did not see a contradiction between advocating specific measures designed to help women while also popularizing blanket equal rights programs.
The 1923 Pan American conference had opened the door for feminists to participate directly in Union affairs pertaining to women by promising them seats, largely to investigate women's civil and political rights, at their next congress in 1928. In their crusade to achieve this goal, feminists from the United States and Latin America put forth an equal rights platform. Thus, although both groups of women had their own agendas and at times struggled over the importance and priority of their concerns, as can be
196 seen in the events surrounding the plenary session, all
backed the equalitarian position at the conference.
The Partido Democrata Sufragista, for example, launched
its own resolution that included an equal rights treaty;
the Sociedad Nacional Sufragista in the name of the Cuban
independence leader José Marti advocated equal rights;
Cuban feminists Julia Martinez, Blanche Z. de Baralt, and
Hortensia Lamar espoused an equalitarian agenda; and in an
address given at the feminists' dinner at the Reporter's
Club, Cuban journalist Carmela Nieto de Herrera called for
"Equal Rights" for Cuban women. Perhaps the most
spectacular event on behalf of equal rights was the open-air
demonstration in honor of José Marti, when feminists publicly displayed equalitarian slogans on banners and
flags, and dispatched equal rights messages attached to
carrier doves. And as a show of widespread support, members of the leading Cuban umbrella feminist organization, the
Federation Nacional de Asociaciones Femeninas de Cuba, embraced an equalitarian position, passing a resolution calling for the granting of legal equality with men in all the American Republics.
ER, February 25, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38 197 Latin American and U.S. feminists also included their message in speeches at the 1928 plenary session. Maria
Montalvo de Soto Navarro argued that "women of America should be made equal to the American man" and that the PAU should sponsor an "inter-American Treaty guarantee[ing] the civil and political rights of American women." Julia
Martinez asked that the "Governments of the 21
Republics...grant [women] by means of a Treaty, the same civil and political rights...enjoyed by men." And, of course, NWP members Jane Norman Smith, Muna Lee, and Stevens promoted equal rights through the treaty method.^" Moreover, the president of the Asociacion de Damas Emigradas y
Revolucionarias Cubanas, Antonia Arredondo de Lamy, passionately called for Cuban women's civil and political rights.And although the delegates did not directly include an equal rights declaration in the lACW's agenda, the main purpose of the Commission was to investigate women's civil and political rights in the Americas, paving the road to an equalitarian stance. Emphasizing the
Diario de la Sexta Conferencia International Americana.
Ibid.
198 popularity of equal rights, Lee proclaimed that organizations throughout the hemisphere "eagerly responded to the plan for a treaty granting equal rights to the women of the Americas."’’® Thus, U.S. and Latin American feminists waged a battle for legal equality in the Pan American arena.
It was not surprising that they carried their campaign to the League of Nations. Since the founding of the League, organized women had sought to promote their issues through this body. The leading international women's organizations—
International Council of Women, Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, and the International Woman Suffrage
Alliance--had persistently lobbied the League, although admittedly with few results. Now with the founding of an official government-affiliated organization, feminists had a strong base from which to operate. The NWP in particular saw the Commission as its ticket into the halls of the
League, from whence women could work for equal rights on the international plane.
As aggressive players in the women's movement, NWP members capitalized on their activities in Havana to set the stage for a global equal rights campaign. While at the
Lee Report. 199 conference Smith elaborated to Lambie : "We are asking...that
the conference recommend the adoption of a treaty to provide
that men and women of the 21 Republics should have equal
rights with men before the law."^’' Alva Belmont took the
"Cuban expedition" as an opportunity to gloat to sister
European international feminists. She reported to Stevens:
"I am taking great pleasure in sending these clippings [of
the Havana conference] to Mrs. Corbett Ashby. I am sending
them also to the principal French suffragists and to Lady
Rhondda."^® Writing from Havana to attorney and new NWP activist Madeline Jacobson, Paul reported that NWP feminists
"are carrying forward in Cuba, in the effort to secure the adoption of an Equal Rights treaty by the republics of the
American continents."^® Vernon informed NWP member Alice
Jaynes Tyler: "Our campaign is constantly growing more extensive and we should be able to interest large numbers of women in it. As you probably know, we have taken our first
Jane Norman Smith to Miss Lambie, January 18, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38.
Alva E. Belmont to Doris [Stevens], February 2, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38.
Alice Paul to Madeline Jacobson, January 20, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38. 200 step toward an international Equal Rights movement by-
sending a delegation to the Pan-American Conference in
Havana to work for the submission of an Equal Rights Treaty
for all the American Republics."^® And Smith confided to
Burnita Shelton Matthews that Stevens wanted the chair of
the Commission because she "is interested in developing Pan
American work for Equal Rights," while Paul further
explained to sister NWP member Anita Pollitzer: "It is a
much better place to begin international work in a serious
way than at Geneva, because the United States is on an
equality with other countries in this Pan American
federation."^ Thus the equal rights agenda, supported by
women throughout the Americas, had national salience for
women from the different member countries. The NWP may have
had the most to gain, but Latin American feminists also had
their reasons for putting equality in the law at the top of
the agenda.
[Mabel Vernon] to Alice Jaynes Tyler, February 2, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38.
Jane Norman Smith to [Bumita Shelton] Matthews, February 22, 1928, NWP papers, reel 38; Alice Paul to Anita [Pollitzer], December 28, 1927, Stevens papers, carton 10.
201 The Pam. Americam Union's Position
While the main purpose of the women's plenary session at the 1928 conference was to form an official Pan American
commission to study women's civil and political rights in
the Americas, feminists did not wait for the results before they approached their countries' statesmen about equal
rights. Geneva had become the world capital for
international law-making, and during the early years of the
League's existence, international feminists promoted women's
issues there. Politically-minded women, like their male counterparts, relied on personal and professional connections to "political insiders" to achieve their goals.This was especially important for women, like lACW members, who worked within governmental bodies to effect change, for few females had clout or official stature in the inner structures of diplomacy. Through their lobbying of
Union members. Pan American feminists hoped to form personal ties and bolster support for their cause.
They met with some successes in this endeavor, as their lobby reports show. The Secretary of the delegation from El
Miller, "Lobbying the League." 202 Salvador Jacinto Castellanos Rivas, proclaimed himself
"thoroughly in favor...of a treaty granting equal civil and
political rights." The President of the Guatemalan
delegation, Carlos Salazar, who also served on the
commission assigned to handle women's issues,
enthusiastically supported the equal rights treaty, assuring
feminists that the "Guatemalan delegation stands for equal
rights, civil and political, without a dissenting voice."
Technical advisor to the U.S., Puerto Rican Joaquin Servera,
was behind the treaty, although he had no vote. And
Venezuelan J. A. Olavarri-Matos, Argentinean Honorio
Pueyrredon, Bolivian José Antezana, and Peruvian Luis
Erresto Denegri all stressed the importance of a treaty."
During the women's plenary session, Salazar publicly pronounced the importance of equal rights, and Julio Garcia
not only allied himself to the women's cause but also pointed out that the Mexican government had already granted women equal rights.
While some Union members stood staunchly behind the equalitarian agenda, even heartily welcoming a treaty,
Lobby Report, January 23, 1928, [January 1928], Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. 203 others lent more cautious support. Brazilian Raul
Fernandez, for example, was careful to point out that
international agreements were subject to the limitations of
national laws and constitutions. "If we conclude a treaty,
and even if ratified by national parliaments, nothing is
gained, because political rights are generally defined in
the constitutional law."^“ Costa Rican Ricardo Castro
Beeche emphasized that the "only thing [the] Conference can
act upon is civil rights and that [the] Conference should
recommend to the 21 republics that their constitutions
should be amended to give political rights to women.
Chilean ambassador and editor of the important newspaper El
Mercurio. Carlos Silva Vildosola, was "favorably inclined" toward equal rights, but he also stipulated that the treaty might be against his country's constitution. The entire
Cuban delegation believed in equal rights but refused to back the treaty. Ecuadorians Gonzalo Zaldumbide, Victor
Zevallos, and Colon Eloy Alfaro were "friendly and
Lobby Report, [January 1928] , Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
Lobby Report, [January 1928] , Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
204 interested" but could not be counted on to support the
treaty. Nicaraguan Carlos Cuadra Pazos and Panamanian
Ricardo J. Alfaro embraced equal rights but would only back
a treaty after other nations had placed it on the conference
agenda.^ And female lobbyists Jane Norman Smith, Frances
Guerra, and Carmela Nieto de Herrera described Colombian
Enrique Olaya Herrera as a "strong feminist" but noted that
he did not want to be quoted because Roberto Urdaneta
Arbelaez has "charge of all delegation matters relating to
the status of women.
Yet other delegates outright opposed the organized women and their treaty. Dominican minister to Washington
Francisco J. Peynado was against a treaty. Uruguayan Jacobo
Varela Acevedo objected to a treaty but would be for a
"recommendation that no further discrimination against women be written into laws of any country." His countryman Leonel
Aguirre also a member of the Commission on International
Private Law, would "not declare himself on anything," even questioning the validity of the women's proposals
Lobby Reports, [January 1928], February 2, 3, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
Lobby Report, January 20, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. 205 generally.^® Dominican Ricardo Pérez Alfonseca represented
the most extreme negative position, demeaning the women and
declaring that he was going to "introduce a bill
establishing a harem. Clearly, male PAU members took a
variety of positions on equal rights for women, but what is
striking is the strong support the women managed to garner.
Why some Latin American diplomats supported legal
equality for women—eventually even spearheading the effort
for an equal rights treaty at the League of Nations— is not
clear. Others have argued elsewhere that supporting rights
for women was a way for the so-called "undeveloped" nations
to come in line with "modern," democratic governments. And
Latin American feminists, aware that women in "civilized" nations were gradually winning rights, "shamed" men into
supporting equal rights in the international arena. Such backing had a twofold effect. The male delegates could purport that their female counterparts enjoyed the same rights as women in Europe and the U.S., insinuating that
Lobby Reports, [January 1928], January 21, 23, 25, 1928, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
Lobby Report, [January 1928], Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
206 they had made social progress. And in the atmosphere of social change, with many Latin American nations undergoing upheavals in leadership, women's rights legislation held constituency possibilities for the new regimes, thus bolstering the prospects of including women's issues in reform governments.
Background to the Equal Nationality Campaign
Early lACW members generally agreed on an equal rights agenda. International feminists from other organizations, however, could not agree and had made little progress in this direction. The sticking point remained special legislation for women, which some women passionately defended and others abhorred. At best, most organized women could agree that women, not men, should design laws for women. But with the announcement of the Conference on
Codification of International Law scheduled to take place in
1930, the women's struggle in Geneva turned to equal nationality, an issue on which more mutual understanding could be reached. Commission members, like other internationally-minded feminists, set their sights on improving the situation of women married to citizens of
207 other countries, playing an important role in the
intercontinental campaign.
On a global scale concern for married women's
nationality came about with World War I. Traditionally,
upon marriage to a citizen of another country a woman lost
her citizenship and received that of her husband. WWI
exacerbated this situation, causing some women to become
enemy nationals in the land of their birth. And even though
married women's nationality had been an issue among
international feminists since then, by the time of the
Codification Conference little headway had been achieved in
rectifying the discrimination. The Conference thus had a
mobilizing effect, rallying numerous women's groups to the
nationality cause.
As we have seen, from its inception the lACW promoted
an equal nationality agenda. Within a few months of its
founding, members formed a volunteer staff to research
nationality laws around the world. They organized a
committee to instigate equal nationality propaganda on the domestic and intercontinental fronts, and the Chair traveled
to Geneva in August 1928 to "inform herself, for the benefit of the Commission, of the plans of other women regarding
208 work done on Nationality." At the Commission's first
conference, members passed a resolution requesting American
governments to appoint female plenipotentiaries to the
upcoming Codification Conference, and lACW members
"empowered" Stevens to present a nationality treaty there.
Pan American feminists had thus successfully situated
married women's nationality in the Pan American arena, but
their accomplishments did not stop there.
Forging Agendas: Equal Rights and Nationality
With the approach of the Hague Conference, organized
women, including lACW members, put on a fierce campaign to
place equal nationality on the agenda of the League of
Nation's Assembly. The Commission gave feminists a certain
legitimacy not enjoyed by other women's international groups
because of its official status. Even though international
feminists had worked within the League in various advisory
capacities, so far they had had little impact on League policy. The lACW had set a precedent for women's
intercontinental organizing by its affiliation with the Pan
American Union. And because of contacts realized through
30 "Report Of Work Done From April 1928 To February 193 0." 209 the lACW, organized women were able to muster support for their initiatives at the Hague.
The Commission had been represented in feminist efforts in Geneva since its founding, with Alice Paul and Doris
Stevens asserting a leadership role there. Despite the NWP leaders' unpopular reputation among international feminists, they still represented a force to be reckoned with. They long had a close relationship with British feminist and Six
Point Group leader Helen Archdale. With the establishment of Equal Rights International, a joint venture of the Six
Point Group and the NWP, the Party kept equal rights in the fore. Despite the fact that both statesmen and feminists at the Hague complained about the imperious attitude of Paul, who aggressively promoted equal rights by alienating colleagues, using intimidation, and allegedly lying about delegate support, advocates of equal rights, at least partly because of their prominent position in the lACW, managed to keep the identity-in-law position in the limelight at the
League.
Miller, "Lobbying the League"; Rupp, Worlds of Women,
210 Even though it was the U.S. lACW members who received recognition for their activities at the League, Latin
American women and men also participated in the Commission's international activities. Chilean lACW member Marta Vergara in 1930, and Colombian lACW member Maria Pizanoin 1932, resided in Geneva as official government representatives to assist with the nationality cause.In 192 8, friend of the lACW Cuban ambassador Orestes Ferrara proposed and
Venezuelan delegate Diogenes Escalante seconded a resolution at the League of Nations calling for governments to invite women "to form part of the delegations" at the upcoming
Codification Conference. Speaking on behalf of his resolution, Ferrara pointed to the lACW as a model for nations to follow "by recommending to the governments that women be included among the plenipotentiaries."” The
League unanimously adopted the resolution, quoting Article 7 of the Covenant as the precedent establishing "ecjual opportunity between men and women to positions and services
” "Report of Meeting of Inter American Commission of Women, Buenos Aires, December 1936," Paul papers, box 118, SL; "Equality Nationality Campaign in Geneva," CML.
” "Women at the Hague Codification Conference," Stevens papers, carton 9, SL.
211 of the League." And as a further show of support, the
Venezuelan delegation invited Stevens to speak at a banquet
sponsored by the International Union of Societies for the
League of Nations given in honor of the Latin American
ambassadors in Geneva.
Representing the lACW's position, Stevens remarked:
"The dangerous philosophy that one race, one state, one
class, or one sex knows what another[one]^needs is no longer
as popular as it once was. It is against the democratic
trend. Enlightened opinion comes more and more to believe
that one group knows best its own needs." She further explained women's concern with the nationality issue.
"After all, it is our nationality that is at stake. And it would seem peculiarly within our domain to assist in codifying international law on this point. Women have deep convictions on this subject. And the great laws are those born of deep convictions."^'
In spite of the League's resolution encouraging governments to appoint female plenipotentiaries, few did so.
Still, the women's issue remained on the Codification
"Remarks by Doris Stevens (U.S.A.) Chairman of Inter American Commission of Women," Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. 212 Conference's program, and the League sponsored a plenary
session for feminists to present their opinions on
nationality. Chilean delegate Miguel Cruchaga introduced
the lACW's nationality "convention."^® Organized women were
not surprised that it was a Chilean who placed the
resolution on the Conference agenda, for Chile was one of
five countries with equal nationality laws. A proponent
stated: "There could be no better defender of the equality
principle than he, as Chile with four other Latin American
countries, guarantee these rights to women in their laws."^’
The League Council invited equal nationality advocates
and lACW members Doris Stevens and Chilean Marta Vergara to
speak to the Nationality Committee.®® Stevens gave an
For technical reasons the nationality resolution had to be referred to as a convention instead of a treaty.
The lACW's nationality report indicated that only five countries--Argentina, Chile, Paraguay, the Union of Soviet Republics, and Uruguay--handled "equally with men and women at all points in respect to nationality." "The First Conference of the Inter-American Commission of Women."
” Inter American Commission of Women Press Release, April 1, 193 0, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
Six Point Group president Helen Archdale and NWP member Margaret Whittemore were also included in the roster of feminist speakers.
213 elaborate presentation, including a brief overview of the
Commission's history and purpose, emphasizing its connection to the governments of the Western hemisphere. She also reiterated the importance of the nationality issue, repeated its wording, and displayed graphs and charts showing the results of the lACW's research. She ended her speech proclaiming that "International law is not civilized while men and women are treated unequally in the international community." Vergara spoke "on behalf of Chilean women" and as a citizen of a "civilized people who have already granted women equal nationality." She pointed out that equal nationality had not created an immoral, corrupt society.
Chilean society, according to Vergara, was closely intertwined with the morality of the Catholic tradition, and married women's nationality rights had not "affected the religious conscience of the Chilean society."”
In spite of the feminists' vibrant speeches, the League
Council took no action. The League Assembly decided not to vote on the nationality issue while the Hague convention was
” "Inter American Commission of Women Presents a Petition for Equal Nationality Rights at the Meeting at the Codification Conference of International Law at the Hague," April 1, 193 0, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
214 pending. In the meantime, "realizing that during this
interval the States might ratify the Hague Convention," organized women carried out a dynamic propaganda campaign to stop ratification of the entire Hague Convention because of its impact on women's nationality.The organized women's objections stemmed from the fact that the conference kept women's nationality based on that of her husband's.
Yet even in light of what some perceived as defeat, the
Codification Conference was not a total loss. Vergara, perhaps, best summed up the feminists' gains. "This has doubtless been one of the most exciting and important weeks of the Hague Conference, because this week saw the discussion of the problem of equal rights in nationality for men and women...Thus we have disturbed the quiet town of the
Hague, where always peace is being written in one form or another.
In an attempt to influence the League's action on the
Hague convention, during the next year international feminists protested ratification of the nationality act.
Marta Vergara, "Activities at the Hague."
"One Week at the Hague," Marjorie White papers, box 29, Schlesinger Library, Cambridge, MA.
215 lobbying tirelessly for the issue to be included on the agenda of the next Assembly. At the Assembly in 1931, the
Council not only postponed ratification and decided to continue the "study of the nationality of the wife," but also under the feminists' pressure formed the Women's
Consultative Committee on Nationality to advise the
Secretary-General.'*^ The Consultative Committee consisted of two representatives from each of the following international organizations : the International Council of
Women, the Women's International League for Peace and
Freedom, the Inter-American Commission of Women, the Equal
Rights International, the World Women's Union, the All-Asian
Congress of Women, the International Alliance of Women for
Suffrage and Equal Citizenship, the International Federation of University Women, and the Young Women's Christian
Association, which declined the appointment. Not surprisingly, given their positions on the nationality question, Latin American statesmen Guatemalan José Matos and
Venezuelan César Zumeta, and Peruvian Sehor Barreto were behind the resolution. And as an official representative of
Copy of letter from Acting Secretary General J. Avenol to Inter-American Commission of Women, February 13, 1931, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL. 216 the lACW's nationality committee, Vergara reported that the
Women's Consultative Committee "does not completely satisfy women's aspirations, but...the call to women to cooperate and set forth their point of view in the report which the
Secretary General is to make to the next Assembly of the
League of Nations—constitutes a triumph.
The Consultative Committee staged an aggressive campaign to achieve the goal of protecting women's nationality. Taking a bold step in a formal resolution to the League, the women's group opposed ratification of the entire Hague Convention and demanded an end to distinctions based on sex. The organized women orchestrated a worldwide campaign to achieve these goals. International feminists sent numerous cables, letters, and made personal appeals to secure votes against ratification of the nationality resolution. And in the front of the struggle was the lACW, with Latin American feminists wholeheartedly embarking on the crusade.
Report by Marta Vergara on the Activities of Women's Consultative Committee on Nationality, January 28, 1931, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
217 Leading Cuban feminist and social reformer Elena
Mederos de Gonzalez guided the nonratification struggle in
her country, arguing that "I have faith in the work and
believe the facts we can bring to light will serve to direct
national and international feminism." Gonzalez contacted
key Cuban ambassadors, circulated propaganda, sent cables,
and generally stirred an all-out effort on behalf of
feminist awareness.** Mexican activist Margarita Robles de
Mendoza rallied support from several important political
figures, including the ex-president of Mexico Licenciado
Emilio Portes Gil (now president of the important National
Revolutionary Party) and president Pascual Ortiz Rubio, as
well as members of the Comite de Defensa Social y Legal
Femenino. This group was "composed of two women lawyers,
medicine doctors and one educator, all women, and they will
work in cooperation with the Department of the Interior, to make suggestions regarding reforms to the local laws
conserning fsicl women." The association also had planned an informational meeting and had invited twenty of the "most
** Elena Mederos de Gonzalez to [Alice] Paul, April 11, 1930, Elena Mederos de Gonzalez to Doris [Stevens], July 2, 1930, Elena Mederos [de Gonzalez] to Doris [Stevens], July 14, 1930, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
218 outstanding intellectual men of the country."^® Brazilian
Flora de Oliveira Lima described the women's campaign as
"wonderful activity that deserves our greatest admiration," while Costa Rican Ester de Mezerville, Nicaraguan Juanita de
Fromen, and Salvadoran Maria Alvarez de Guillen Rivas
solicited backing on the domestic front/® And Colombian
Maria de Pizano joined Vergara and agitated for independent- nationality at the Hague/’
But the women's campaign, even with the strong support of Latin American diplomats, could only go so far. Equal nationality proponents divided over how best to bring about equality, and members of the Consultative Committee eventually became entangled in a fracas leading to
ineffectiveness in the group itself. Perhaps it did not matter. In 1937, the League of Nations ratified the Hague
Convention, despite the efforts of international feminists.
Yet what is striking is how unified the women of the lACW
Margarita Robles de Mendoza to Doris Stevens, August 25, 193 0, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
[Flora] de Oliveira Lima to Doris Stevens, February 13, 1931, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL; "Report on Ratification of Hague Nationality Convention," Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
"Equality Nationality Campaign at Geneva." 219 were on this issue and how much support they were able to garner from Latin American statesmen.
Montevideo amd Equal Rights
By 1933, when the Seventh Conference of American
States took place in Montevideo, the Commission had become well immersed in the international issues of equal rights and nationality. Delegates from Argentina, Bolivia, Costa
Rico, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Haiti,
Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, the United States, and Uruguay attended. And as had occurred at previous Pan
American meetings, local feminist organizations, such as the important Alianza Uruguaya de Mujeres, founded by the noted activist Paulina Luisi, hosted the lACW. The press provided daily coverage of the women's programs. The Commission itself had established two headquarters: one in the
Legislative Palace, the meeting place of the congress, and the other in the Parque Hotel.Feminists participated in business sessions, social events, and open forums. And they gave a formal thank you to "all the individuals and
"Inter American Commission of Women: Documents Concerning Its Creation and Organization." 220 organizations which had contributed to the work of the
Commission," with U.S. women--the late Alva Belmont, Alice
Paul, NWP member Ella Riegel, and Stevens--heading the list.
As established at the founding of the lACW, members had prepared an exhaustive Report on the Civil and Political
Rights of Women and the Nationality of Women. Moreover, some countries had dispatched women as official representatives.
Social worker and University of Chicago professor
Sophonisba P. Breckinridge (United States), Sofia A. V. de
Demicheli (Uruguay) , Maria F . Gonzalez (Paraguay), and
Margarita Roble de Mendoza (Mexico) were all official delegates serving on the committee investigating women's civil and political rights. And international activist
Bertha Lutz served as a technical advisor to the Brazilian delegation." Thus, the climate at the 1933 conference can be considered somewhat feminist-friendly, perhaps explaining how the women had such success with their equal-nationality and equal rights treaties at the gathering.
■" Minutes and Antecedents of the Seventh International Conference of American States: Third Committee: Civil and Political Rights of Women, CML.
221 As we have seen, the lACW had increasingly gained importance in the Euroamerican international women's movement, winning a place on the WCCN at the League of
Nations. At the Pan American meeting, the lACW hoped to marshal support for its activities in Geneva. Even before the Montevideo gathering, in anticipation of the important events coming up in Uruguay, feminists had begun an equal rights campaign.
Officers of the Peruvian Feminist League Elisa
Rodriguez Larra de Garcia Resell, Jacoba Florian, and Rosa
D. Pérez Liendo sent to Stevens their "exuberant adherence to legislating equal rights for women and men in America."
The Nicaraguan Feminist League expressed its wholehearted support of the Commission in its strength "to secure equal civil and political rights" in Montevideo. And president of the Chilean Women's Union Ignacia de Guzman proclaimed that
"Women of the world eagerly await success of your mission" there.
Elisa Rodriguez Larra de Garcia Resell to Doris Stevens, November 24, 1933, Angelica R. de Argüello to [Doris Stevens], October 30, 1933, and Ignacia de Guzman to Doris Stevens, December 6, 1933, Stevens papers, carton 11, SL.
222 Although lACW members took care of official business at the 1933 congress, their main objective was adoption of their Treaty on Equal Rights for Women and Equality
Convention on Nationality. The feminists then intended to take these official Pan American resolutions to the League, hoping that members there would follow the PAU's lead.
Because of their position on the Women's Consultative
Committee, lACW colleagues would be able to launch the
"recommendations" before the League's Assembly. First, however, they would have to gain the Pan American ambassadors' approbation.
The PAU had set up the Third Committee to handle the women's initiatives, with a sub-committee to preside over and orchestrate meetings. Chairman and representative from
Chile Gustavo Rivera, Brazilian Francisco Luis da Silva
Campos, Peruvian Carlos Neuhaus Ugarteche, and Uruguayan
Sofia A.V. de Demicheli made up the sub-committee's roster.
In addition, illustrious international jurist and U.S. delegate James Brown Scott, a supporter of the Commission since its inception in 1928, took a special interest in the feminists' cause, promoting it on the international stage.
Capitalizing on his reputation as a superb lawyer and on his
223 position as president of the American Institute of
International Law, he enlisted the Institute's assistance in
circulating equal rights propaganda. The Institute's
governing board elected Stevens (and later Paul) as its
first female members, and it endorsed both the Equal Rights
Treaty and the Equal Nationality Convention. Scott,
moreover, as representative of the American Institute as
well as the Carnegie Institute and the PAU, also promoted
the women's cause at the conference in Montevideo. Thus, at
the 1933 conference Pan American feminists were prepared to
launch their equal right treaties.
Even though Latin American feminists had eagerly participated in the international campaign for equal rights,
they had had little opportunity to engage directly in lACW policy since the 1930 organizing meeting. The Montevideo gathering gave lACW members a chance to voice their views.
As a result, Latin American women reformers both as plenipotentiaries and as representatives of the Commission
51 Bredbenner, A Nationality of Her Own
” The Governing Board of the American Institute of International Law Approves Equal Rights and Names Doris Stevens First Woman Member. Washington, D.C.: Pan American Union, [1931] .
224 participated in conference proceedings and spoke at the
meetings of the Third Committee on equal rights.
In addition to analyzing the equality of laws in the
American Republics, members of the Third Committee also made
individual declarations and suggestions. Delegates
Demicheli and Lutz, for example, each laid out proposals calling for a unification of laws focusing on women's rights
in the Americas, and Lutz also expressed a desire, as PAU delegates had done since the 1923 conference, to have "women delegates in all the delegations to the next conference."
The chairman Gustavo Rivera "read a note from the Argentine
Women's Club adhering to all initiatives tending to obtain civil and political rights for women." Gonzalez "spoke in behalf of complete equality for women," sister delegate
Demicheli "made an extended and moving speech for complete emancipation of women and asked that the Sub-Committee's report be modified to grant equality by international action," and Cuban Angel Giraudy "urged women to defend their rights and not entrust them to 'unworthy men.'""
While the lACW did not have official membership on the
Third Committee, it had some access because of the women's
" "Documents Concerning Its Creation," 34, 24, 26. 225 rights focus. Thus, before resolutions went into effect, the Union provided a forum for members to express their views. On December 16, 1933, in a plenary session before the final signing of conference resolutions, the organized women were invited to speak. The Mexican delegation had proposed to hear the "Report of this Commission and the points of view of the women representatives of the various countries concerning the proposals of the Commission."®'*
At this time Dominican Minerva Bernardino, Bolivian Ana Rosa
Tornero, Cuban Dania Padilla, Uruguayan Clara Elisa de
Salterain, famed Mexican suffrage Margarita Robles de
Mendoza, and, of course, the chair Doris Stevens spoke on behalf of the lACW and women's rights.
The first speaker was Bernardino, who came to the conference as a Dominican, a feminist representative of the
Accion Feminista Dominicana, and as a delegate of the lACW.
She cried out to the delegates: "And it is you, the delegates, factors of chief strength who have in your hands the power to give us the right to be citizens, for which we have made such notable efforts." She went on: "The aroused
®‘* "Documents Concerning Its Creation," 23
226 conscience of the world demands with a deeper human interest the participation of women citizens [in] all domains of life." Sister delegate Tornero exclaimed that Bolivian women everywhere desire the "rights to which they, as reasonable human beings, are entitled. We want to win the rights of women in the community and be dignified, not through the lyrics of the poets, but through the laws of the country in every domain of life." Interestingly, Tornero also advocated special legislation to "protect maternity" and "protect orphans," thus raising issues of potential conflict.Padilla, like other Cuban feminists on other occasions, took a patriotic stand, referring to women's gallant participation in the Cuban independence movement, while Salterain proposed that the "American Republics should sign in Montevideo the Treaty on Equal Rights for Women, thus sealing in our dear Republic one of the basic principles of human liberty." Mendoza made a similar appeal. "We women do not think that it is much to ask that the laws be made for individuals and not for the sexes. We
” This is the first time during conference proceedings that mention of protective legislation occurred. And it would not be until the 1938 VIII Conference of American States that the "Commission included labor and maternity aspects among the subjects dealt with in its reports." 227 ask only to be given the same treatment as that given to men as to obligations as well as to privileges. AND ABOVE ALL that we be given the same opportunities as the men to develop our faculties in accordance with our capacity... [and women] will not humbly accept arbitrary impositions and will unceasingly struggle until it is a reality that ALL ENJOY
THE SAME CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS that men enjoy today." And, finally, Stevens, as the chair and the last presenter, applauded the PAU for its approval of the
Nationality treaty, but chastised members for their cautious attitude toward the treaty on equal rights.®*
In the end, nineteen of the twenty countries represented at the gathering signed the Equality Nationality
Convention, and four—Uruguay, Paraguay, Ecuador, and Cuba- approved the Equal Rights Treaty.®"' It is worth noting that both Paraguay and Uruguay had female delegates at the conference, and that Cuba had a long tradition of women's
56 "Document Concerning Its Creation," 34-39.
®’ At the last minute the Venezuelan delegation received instructions from its government to abstain. Costa Rico was not represented at the conference but notified the PAU of its intention to abide by the actions taken at the VII congress.
228 rights activities starting in the nineteenth century with
the revolutionary mambisas, not to mention its most recent
fame as the birthplace of the lACW and the home of its first official meeting. Members of the lACW attended the signing
ceremony and they requested that two special pens be used
for each document, which were then presented to the lACW chairman for historical preservation. It was, indeed, an historic moment, especially in contrast to the lack of progress made at the Codification Conference.
Pan American feminists' achievements at the congress in
Montevideo initially had resounding effects on the international stage. The passage of the equal nationality treaty at the 1933 Pan American conference heartened organized women. Perhaps now, they hoped, with the support of member Latin American nations, feminists could convince the League to adopt or at least reconsider their equal rights proposals once again. The lACW chair even reported that women's organizations and "interested jurists" were inquiring about unofficially signing on to the Convention on the Nationality of Women. After careful consideration the
Supervisory Board of the Pan American Union unanimously
229 approved the proposal.®® And in 1934 the Women's
Consultative Committee on Nationality recommended that the
Nationality Convention be placed on the agenda of the next
League Assembly. Despite the subsequent lack of success at the League, the progress made at Montevideo seemed to promise further gains.
Conclusion
The lACW was a vigorous champion of equality in the law. Latin American and U.S. members alike presented themselves in the international arena as defenders of women's rights. And both groups of women took their interests to the Pan American and international stages to try to maneuver the men of their countries into supporting women's rights at home. In other words, they hoped that progress on women's issues at the Pan American Union and the
League of Nations would bring results on the domestic front by manipulating government officials into legislating
SB "Documents Concerning Its Creation," 46.
230 reforms friendly to women that might otherwise be unacceptable.
Thus, despite the NWP's desire to use the lACW for an equal rights agenda, it did not simply foist this program on
Latin American women. Latin American feminists were vigorous proponents of equality in the law in their own right, believing that women deserved the same opportunities in the law as men. Compared to other national and international women's organizations, the Commission was remarkably unaffected by the identity-versus-difference arguments in legal status. Latin American feminists in particular did not see a contradiction between tackling women's issues one-by-one and instituting blanket women's rights legislation. Even though their goal was to have complete equality between the sexes, they still found it worthwhile to work toward all women's issues, and they found the Pan American arena a useful place to pursue these goals.
Moreover, the lACW had more clout than other women's international organizations because of its status as a government-affiliated organization. Such a position not only provided opportunities for lACW members, but it also boosted the morale of other international women's groups
231 working for equal rights. And perhaps most striking is that
Latin American diplomats played a critical role advocating and supporting equality in the international arena. The sources are silent about why—but surely the lACW's persistent lobbying had some impact.
232 CHAPTER 6
A COUP D'ETAT IN THE lACW?
After a decade of direction under equal rights proponent Doris Stevens, the lACW, in a tumultuous atmosphere, underwent a revolution in leadership in 193 9.
Although little is known about the circumstances surrounding
Stevens's dismissal, existing literature, following
Stevens's lead, emphasizes the opposition from Eleanor
Roosevelt, the U.S. first lady and a strong advocate of special laws for women. Because of Roosevelt's allegiance to the League of Women Voters, which continued to maintain an antagonistic relationship with the NWP, Stevens and
Roosevelt undoubtedly stood on opposite sides of the equal rights debate. But Stevens's role in the lACW had been under scrutiny before Roosevelt's arrival in the White
House. This chapter explores how the Chair's dismissal came about, who the players in the controversy were, and the reorganization of the Commission due to her replacement.
233 With Stevens's dismissal, the first chapter of the lACW came to an end.
As we have seen, Stevens's initial appointment as Chair had evoked some controversy. Carlos Alberto Alcorta and
Manuel Bianchi, delegates from Argentina and Chile respectively, criticized her as head of the Commission.
They argued that she would use the office to force NWP policy on the lACW rather than represent the position of women in all the Americas.’' Interestingly, U.S. male delegates shared Alcorta's and Bianchi's view, and it was the ambassador from Peru and chair of the commission on women's rights, Victor Maurtua, who promoted Stevens.
Maûrtua insisted that Stevens was the logical choice to hold the position since she was the "initiator" of the feminist activities in Havana. And even though the PAU chose the other six lACW member nations by lot, the United States, with Stevens as its representative, automatically had a space on the Commission. Not surprisingly, the League of
Women Voters was suspicious of Stevens's appointment from the beginning, and some Latin American feminists, non-IACW
’ Lobby Report, February 16, 1928. Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
234 members, at the 193 0 coordinating conference in Cuba also
questioned her motives, suggesting that she used the
Commission as a stage to forward the NWP's agenda. But the
first concerted efforts to oust Stevens from her post would
not occur until 1933, at the inter-American conference in
Montevideo, where opponents called for Stevens's resignation
and orchestrated plans to remove her from the chairmanship.
The Uruguayan gathering had, as we have seen, held
great promise for equal rights feminists. But organized
women's success in Montevideo was clouded by controversy.
The uproar largely concerned the usefulness or utility of
the lACW, rotation of its chairmanship, and the validity of
Stevens as the U.S. representative.
U.S. delegates Sophonisba Breckinridge and Alexander
Weddell stood at the center of the conflict. With Weddell's
advice, the committee on women's civil and political rights
took up the "question of the continuance of the work of the
Inter-American Commission of Women.Weddell argued that
the Roosevelt administration had made great strides in obtaining women's rights by including women in the U.S.
^ Seventh International Conference of American States, Third Committee: Minutes and Antecedents, 10-11.
235 political system through changes in legislation and by
appointing women to key government positions. The
Commission had achieved its goal of bringing women's issues
to the fore and had thus lost its usefulness in elevating
women's civil and political status. Now, according to
Weddell, was the time for feminists to direct their energies
inward and to pursue their causes in individual nations.
His proposal, however, lacked the backing necessary to
effect the demise of the lACW.
Another issue that generated much debate focused on the
chairmanship. Proponents argued that the PAU had intended
for the head position to alternate every few years to infuse
new "blood" into the Commission's leadership, allowing for more diverse representation from a variety of American nations. To buttress the case, the Mexican delegate proposed a resolution calling for "the presidency of the
Inter-American Commission of Women, during the interval between one conference and another," to "rotate among representatives of the various countries which make up the
Commission."^ Most committee members opposed the
^ Seventh International Conference of American States, Third Committee: Minutes and Antecedents, 13.
236 declaration, maintaining that such business was an internal affair of the lACW and that the Union should have little say about the Commission's functioning. Accepting defeat in this area and attempting to avoid hostility from Latin
American nations, the U.S. backed down on its proposal and concentrated its attention on ousting Stevens directly. To underscore their unhappiness with the Commission's agenda of equal rights, to continue their campaign against Stevens, and to promote a protectionist stance, the U.S. delegates emphasized special legislation. Breckinridge and Weddell insisted that many feminists in the United States supported laws to protect women in the workplace and that in contrast to what Stevens espoused, the lACW was divided, rather than united, over this issue.
Perhaps because of the dominance of equalitarians on the Commission, the issue of protective legislation had not cropped up in its internal deliberations, or at least had not created barriers among the feminists. In fact, it would not become part of lACW dialogue until the Montevideo conference.“ Protectionists took this opportunity to make
* The lACW from then to the present continues to advocate both positions.
237 their case in the Pan American arena. Indeed, this was the first time since its founding in 1928 that the Commission had met in conjunction with and as part of the larger PAU- sponsored Inter-American conferences. The congress encompassed a broader, more comprehensive forum, allowing for divergent views to emerge. And a few countries had even included women as official members of their delegations, bringing perspectives on women's issues not necessarily endorsed by the equal rights lACW into the previously all-male forum.
Breckinridge, U.S. member of the committee on women's issues and an ardent protective legislative supporter, enthusiastically outlined her position at the conference.
Taking advantage of her appointment, she inserted a special laws opinion and relied on a class argument to make her point. She alluded to equal rights lACW members as "women of general professional attainments who feel the irksome restrictions imposed sometimes by law, sometimes by prejudice." Such a woman, she admitted, "needs and desires emancipation from those restrictions... [while] the women at the bottom of the occupational ladder, weak bargainers in comparison with men wage-earners and with their possible
238 employers, find almost the only basis of effective equality
in such protection from undue exploitation as is provided by
legislation."® Until then, an equalitarian agenda had
dominated Pan American feminism in the lACW. As an official
representative of the United States, Breckinridge potentially posed a serious threat to equal rights proponents, as well as to Stevens's role generally. And the
U.S. feminist was not the sole agitator campaigning against
Stevens. Bertha Lutz of Brazil, a close ally of the U.S.
League of Women Voters founder Carrie Chapman Catt, was also attempting to uproot Stevens and her policies.
Obviously fearful of the mounting opposition, Stevens enlisted the help of male Pan American delegates. In a cable to Victor Maurtua, she reported that Lutz was "making openly every effort [to] obtain the chairmanship" of the
Commission.® She accused Lutz of being the culprit behind the crusade to relieve her of her duties as chair. She added that Lutz, in an effort to bolster her case, had spread propaganda claiming that most of the United States
® Seventh International Conference of American States, Third Committee: Minutes and Antecedents, 14-15.
® Cable from [Doris] Stevens to [Victor] Maurtua, December 14, 1933, Stevens papers, carton 5, SL. 239 also wanted Stevens off the Commission. Stevens pleaded
with Maurtua: " [W]ill you as initiator of [the] comision
interamericana cable [Secretary General] Hull...immediately
saying [the] work should be continued under my chairmanship
because [the] comision only got to work in 193 0 and three
years [is] too short to change direction.""' To garner even
more backing, Stevens solicited the aid of another long-time
supporter, James Brown Scott. She moaned to Scott that some
delegates had begun a conspiracy against her and that
Weddell was using his ambassadorship to Argentina to serve
personal needs. His wife, according to Stevens, was a
member of the LWV and had instructed him to use his position
to remove her from the Commission. She further charged that
the antagonists were capitalizing on Cuba's "hatred" of the
U.S. to replace her as chair. And she labeled Lutz and
Breckinridge the prime instigators of the negative propaganda directed at her.®
Certainly Breckinridge was at the heart of the campaign
to remove Stevens. In a memorandum labeled "Strictly
' Ibid.
® Cable from [Doris] Stevens to [James Brown] Scott, December 14, 1933, Stevens papers, carton 5, SL. 240 Confidential," she described Stevens as a "highly nervous, overwrought and fanatical type," and noted that "her determination to carry her program through to the end leads her to an extravagance of conduct and language which have caused astonishment in Conference circles." Breckinridge even accused Stevens and her colleagues of covertly tampering with government documents. A delegate from Chile told U.S. member Benjamin Cohen that he "had prepared for the printer the manuscript of the Treaty on the Nationality of Women, in which appeared a clause relating to the denouncing of this instrument; [and] that having left the room for an hour or so he came back and found that the manuscript had been rewritten with the clause left out;
[and] that the copyist told him he had done this by order of
Miss Doris Stevens." ® Stevens, of course, denied the accusations. Her supporters insisted that Breckinridge, whom they referred to as the "witch," planned to continue the lies and publicize the slander at the next inter-
American conference in 1938 in Lima. Here Breckinridge would marshall a conspiracy to wreck the agenda of the lACW,
® Copy of "Strictly Confidential Memorandum"; "Breckinridge Tries Another Channel," Stevens papers, carton 11, SL. 241 to oust Stevens as chair, and to replace her with a
proponent of special legislation. Unfortunately for
Stevens, her struggle would become increasingly difficult as
more and more opponents displayed overt animosity toward
her.
The 193 3 conference marked the beginning of an all-out
effort to remove the Chair, and Stevens was well aware of
the conflict and its possible outcome for her. Again
Maurtua came to her aid. He promised to garner support for
her at the upcoming 193 8 conference from friends and
colleagues Arias Schreiber, Peruvian minister of Justice,
Colombian delegate Urdaneta Arbelaez, and Cubans Zaydin and
Marquez Sterling.His assurances, however, would not come
to pass. Making matters even worse, in the spring of 1937
the influential ambassador died, perhaps helping to explain
Stevens's decline in popularity with Latin American delegates and contributing to her eventual dismissal.
The pro-special-legislation advocates continued to fight for their cause within Pan American feminist activities. From November 1936 to January 1937, for
V. M. Maurtua to [Doris] Stevens, November 23, 193 6, Stevens papers, carton 11, SL. 242 example, an all-female meeting--the Inter-American
Conference for the Maintenance of Peace--took place in
Buenos Aires. The main objective of this gathering was to
discuss, as the title implies, the importance of peace,
especially in the threatening climate of the late 193 0s. The
conference was also to serve as a platform for exploring and
reporting on lACW activities in Geneva. In general, the
feminists cooperated, focusing on their achievements and developing strategies to uphold a non-violent world. But controversy over equal rights and special legislation emerged in the official signing of the conference's final declarations. U.S. delegate Josephine Schain forthrightly
"opposed the inclusion of the Equal Rights Treaty in the report, and urged the delegates not to endorse this resolution, as it omitted 'protective legislation for women.'" In response, Stevens and Marta Vergara spoke on behalf of equality in law, winning this battle when the congress ended up adopting the report with the equalitarian provision intact.^ Still, the meeting provided an
“ "General Report Inter American Commission of Women, November, 1936 - July, 1937," Stevens papers, carton 11, SL. "Report to Meeting of Inter American Commission of Women, 243 opportunity for those opposed to equal rights at least to
make known their views with the potential of gaining
support. The groundwork had thus been laid for a bitter
dispute in the lACW. At the Lima congress organized women
would become embroiled in the conflict and in Stevens's role
in the Commission. There Stevens would slightly alter her
tactics and charge Eleanor Roosevelt and her "communist
friends" for her troubles.
The report presented at the Lima conference represented
the lACW's largest project so far. Whereas in Montevideo
their research had focused on nationality laws, this report
provided a comprehensive account of women's concerns in the
twenty-one nations of the Americas. The document covered
suffrage, legal rights, education, international affairs,
child welfare, and maternity legislation.^ The compilation resulted from a cooperative effort of diverse women's organizations in all the Americas, various national governments, and from participants at local, national, and
Buenos Aires, Argentina, December 1936," Paul papers, box 118, SL.
Report of the Inter American Commission of Women to the Eighth International_Cpnferen.ce_Qf_Amerioan. States on the Political and Civil Rights of Women. Washington, B.C.: Pan American Union, 1938. 244 international meetings. But attention was diverted from this grand accomplishment to the internal problems of the lACW.
Many Stevens supporters argued that the controversy over Stevens's leadership of the lACW was political, revolving around a struggle for dominance between the identity-in-law and special legislation feminists. "The issue between Miss Stevens and this group has to do with protective legislation for women," insisted a champion of
Stevens's. NWP colleague Edith Houghton Hooker responded to the charge that the lACW represented upper-class women by looking for token support from labor: "If the League of
Women Voters...and other insidious groups, are claiming that we have no labor people with us, it would look very well to have the International Ladies Garment Workers of America cabling and instructing the Conference to endorse the [Equal
Rights] Treaty, she wrote to Stevens. NWP members further attempted to enlist the support of male-dominated labor organizations in the CIO, including the American
13 Untitled report, Stevens papers, carton 3, SL.
Edith Houghton Hooker to Doris [Stevens], November 27, 1937, Stevens papers, carton 4, SL. 245 Communications Association and the Steel Workers' Organizing
Committee. This support, they hoped, would diffuse arguments put forth by Eleanor Roosevelt and the U.S.
Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins who, Stevens argued, were spearheading much of the crusade against her at the 1938 inter-American conference.
In Lima the conflict intensified. Stevens's opponents maintained, as they had done in 1933, that if for no other reason she should step down as chair since the Union had intended for the executive position to be rotated among the various nations' feminist leaders. Adding to their strategy, the antagonists asserted that the U.S. had never even selected Stevens as its delegate in the first place.
Her appointment as chair, as Stevens herself frequently pointed out, was as an impartial representative of all
American nations. When others had criticized her partiality, Stevens had previously argued that she was not a representative from the U.S., for the Chair of the lACW had to take a neutral stance.
The PAU had founded the Commission not only to investigate women's issues but also to bring the diversity
246 of women's concerns from various nations into one inter-
American body. Working as a group the feminists would have more clout and resources to ensure women's rights. As such,
the United States had the right, even obligation, to appoint
its own delegate, and one more in line with the government's posture on women's issues, according to Stevens's opponents.
Stevens took exception to the assertion that she did not reflect the dominant U.S. feminist position, however, and later recounted to Secretary of State Hull ; " [The] Labor
Department was [the one] primarily interested...to take action to change the character of the Commission and to throw out the whole personnel. She declared that Perkins and
Roosevelt were "doing the drafting" of the U.S. proposals pertaining to women, "so no text was shown me until the men of the press showed me the copy after it had been introduced the following day." "It was generally understood that Mrs.
Roosevelt, Miss Perkins and Mr. Hillman were in daily communication with Miss Breckinridge throughout the VIII
Conference and their aim was to strike down Miss Stevens and
Stevens's transcript of interview with Hull, January 28, 193 9, Stevens papers, carton 11, SL.
247 the lACW," according to Stevens. Stevens maintained that
she should be in on all issues pertaining to women, even if
derived from official conference delegates, not lACW
members.
Yet the attack on Stevens was not simply a question of
U.S. politics. At Lima concerns over the direction and
intent of the lACW troubled Latin American feminists as
well. One observer noted that in 1933 delegates "discussed
rotation of the Chairmanship, a provision dear to the Latin
American hearts." Dominican lACW representative Minerva
Bernardino bluntly reminded Stevens that she had "promise [d]
to resign" and had "boldly promised others she would do so."
Stevens denied all such claims, asserting that the
discussions had never taken place and that even though numerous U.S. agitators were out to "get" her, Latin
Americans supported her and recognized the good work that
she had done on the Commission. She further claimed, without evidence, that it was a "Communist plot" to remove her from office and it had originated in a 1937 all-female
Pan American conference on education in Mexico. Stevens
Untitled report, Stevens papers, carton 3, SL.
Ibid. 248 clearly believed that her removal involved a full-fledged
conspiracy, including the unlikely allies of capitalists and communists. She even argued that Marta Vergara had become so wrapped up in promoting the communist cause that she now had
little interest in the lACW. Such allegations resulted from
Stevens's dramatic shift to the right in this period.^®
Peruvian lACW member Mercedes Gallagher de Parks, active since the first women's Pan American meeting in 1915,
also campaigned for a change in the structure of the lACW at
the 1938 conference. Parks initiated a series of debates concerning the reorganization of the Commission. Responding
to Parks, Stevens accused her of trying to abolish the
Commission. Parks insisted, however, that "women have up to now been given the position of a sort of semi-official adjunct to the Pan American Conferences. They should be a
fundamental part of these Conferences." She proposed that
"'abolishing' the Inter-American Commission, and having each government name at least one or two women members of its delegates" would be a more beneficial and expedient way to
Leila J. Rupp, "Feminism and the Sexual Revolution in the Early Twentieth Century: The Case of Doris Stevens," Feminist Studies 15 (1989): 289-309.
249 obtain action on women's issues in the Pan American arena.
Parks also denounced Stevens's claim that a U.S. participant
there, Mrs. Burton Musser, had persuaded her to abandon this
initiative: "The idea of such a dear, ineffectual little
person as Mrs. Musser persuading me of anything is simply
too funny for words. Or of the whole U.S. Delegation with
Secretary Hull at its head persuading me either." Parks
pointed out that many male delegates held a negative view of
the Commission. "I have heard the men delegates speak of
it...and they frankly consider it a sort of uncomfortable
outgrowth, which is neither fish nor flesh nor good red
herring."^® In contrast to what Stevens asserted. Parks maintained that she did not seek the demise of the
Commission, just its reorganization into a more effective
Pan American feminist group.
The Lima conference began a definitive turning point in
the history of the lACW. Stevens was clearly on her way out. Despite the lACW's unified position on equal rights in the early 193 0s, discord crept in as the attack on Stevens accelerated. In 193 9, Stevens stepped down as chair.
Mercedes Gallagher de Parks to [Doris] Stevens, February 8, 193 9, Stevens papers, carton 12, SL.
250 stating that she had presented her resignation months before
the 1938 conference but that lACW members had refused to accept her retirement. To save face from "humiliation," upon her withdrawal she resigned as the U.S. delegate as well.
Stevens supporters James Brown Scott and U.S. Senator
Edward R. Burke launched a campaign to embarrass the U.S. government into reinstating Stevens. On August 2, 193 9,
Burke introduced a bill before the Committee on Foreign
Relations of the U.S. Congress. Senate Joint Resolution 183 provided that only the PAU could "remove or change" lACW members, specifically stating that the delegate "shall not be subject to removal or super-session by officers of the
Government of the United States."^ The purpose of the bill was to allow Stevens to keep her post and to prevent the
U.S. government from nominating Eleanor Roosvelt's friend and colleague, Mary Winslow.
In a similar vein, Scott orchestrated a spectacular effort to recover Stevens's position. He sent a circular letter to foreign ministers in the Americas to repudiate the
76"*' Congress, 1®*^ Session, S. J. RES. 183, August 4, 193 9, copy in Stevens papers, carton 12, SL.
251 U.S. government for "questioning the official status of the
Commission and of Miss Stevens' membership. Cuban
Antonio Bustamante advised Scott that such a campaign "may
aggravate instead of alleviating the situation" and
suggested that the PAU was the only body that could take
action. He generally displayed little concern for Stevens's
removal and responded that contrary to what Scott believed
it had not generated publicity in Cuba. Despite his
reservations, Bustamante signed off on the recommendation
and included his name along with that of Scott's on the
petition.
Fourteen countries replied to the circular letter.
Cuba, Brazil, Colombia, El Salvador, and Costa Rica sided with the two diplomats; Venezuela, Ecuador, Mexico, and
Panama maintained that appointments were not necessarily permanent and that each country had the right to remove its
representative; and the United States, Haiti, Bolivia, the
Dominican Republic, and Chile merely acknowledged receipt of
the letter, waiting until a later time to put forth their
[James Brown Scott] to [Antonio] Bustamante, May 18, 193 9, Stevens papers, carton 12, SL.
Antonio S. de Bustamante to James Brown Scott, May 22, 193 9, Stevens papers, carton 12, SL. 252 opinions/" Interestingly, the Panamanian reply, marked
"Confidential," elaborated on the right of a nation to decide on its representative and stipulated that the appointee's views should reflect those of the government she represents. Narciso Garay emphasized that in his opinion
Doris Stevens "had not been identified with the feminist policies of the government whose representative she was on the Commission." Earlier that year Panama had changed its lACW member from Clara Gonzalez to Ester N. de Calvo for
"similar reasons." Moreover, in anticipation of future events, Panama threw its support to the Dominican Minerva
Bernardino's candidacy for chair, since her feminist beliefs concurred with those of the Panamanian government.
In spite of the aggressive campaign, Stevens did not regain her post. In November 1939, the PAU named the
Argentinean Ana Rosa de Martinez Guerrero chairman,
Bernardino vice-chairman, and the U.S. government chose the protectionist Mary Winslow as its delegate. Even though
Replies from Foreign Offices of American Republics, Stevens papers, carton 12, SL.
Narciso Garay to James Brown Scott, July 3, 193 9, Stevens papers, carton 12, SL.
253 publicly all concerned agreed that the incoming chairman should be from a Latin American country, the executive appointment did not proceed without controversy. Many U.S. feminists were upset over Guerrero's appointment because of
Argentina's open hostility toward the "imperialist behavior of the U.S. in Central America. Winslow backers, according to Stevens, had hoped that the Commission would have an absentee chaiirman, that Winslow would be elected executive secretary, and that consequently she would run the office in Washington during the long intervals of the absent officer. But the PAU went out of its way and elected a vice-chairman to manage the Commission in the chair's absence. And to accommodate the new leader, while complicating matters for others, the Union relocated lACW headquarters to Buenos Aires. Now in order to influence
Commission policy directly, Bernardino and Winslow would have to reside in Argentina or as Stevens imperialistically described the lACW's new home, "the most backward feminist
Convention on Cause and Cure of War, Stevens papers, carton 10, SL.
254 center of the big republics" and "a country which is the
center of anti-U.S. sentiment."^
The Commission operated out of Buenos Aires until 1943,
when the Board elected Benardino as chairman. The lACW from
then to the present has remained in Washington, housed in
the building of the diplomatic inter-American body, the Pan
American Union, later renamed The Organization of American
States. Beginning in 1940 the Commission started holding
annual assemblies as the "supreme organ which formulates its policy and specifies its work program, " avoiding a situation
in which too much power might reside in too few hands.
The Commission remains a leading Pan American international
feminist group continuing its battle against female
inequities.
In conclusion, Stevens's reign ended in controversy.
The conflict focused on equal rights as well as U.S. influence in the lACW and the question of representation, that is whether delegates and officers had to follow the
[Doris Stevens] to Fanny [Bunand-Sévastos] , December 6, 193 9, Stevens papers, carton 4, SL.
News Bulletin of the Inter-American Commission of Women. (July 1953): 7. 255 politics of their governments. All of these issues combined to lead to the campaign against Stevens's leadership. The dismissal of Stevens shows the disadvantage of functioning as part of a government-affiliated body. While the lACW, because of its official status, had a certain degree of clout that other women's organizations did not enjoy, it was at the mercy of decisions or even whims of governments. The removal of Stevens originated outside the Commission. Was it primarily a result of Stevens's strong advocacy of legal equality? The fact that the lACW continued to support equal rights legislation after her dismissal would suggest not.
Was it a personal attack on Stevens? Given her increasingly vehement attacks on the Roosevelt administration as a hotbed of Communism, this seems likely. In any case, the lACW continued after 1939 to take pride in presenting itself as an equality in law proponent and to work on behalf of women throughout the Americas.
256 CHAPTER 7
CONCLUSION
So, what does all of this mean? First and foremost,
Latin American feminists had participated in and had established national and transnational women's movements independently of U.S. feminists before 1928, the year of the founding of the Inter-American Commission of Women. As early as 1898, Latin American women had served as official delegates in the Latin American Scientific Congresses, in
1915 they helped to initiate the first all-female Pan
American conference, and over the next decade they sponsored numerous inter-American feminist groups, as well as launching women's rights campaigns in their individual nations. They set up organizations, held congresses, lobbied officials, petitioned governments, put on public displays such as parades, wrote newspaper and journal editorials, spoke on the radio, and generally spread feminist propaganda.
257 Accordingly, in Havana, as representatives of the host
country, Cuban feminists directed the campaign leading to
the founding of the Inter-American Commission of Women. It
was a Cuban lawyer and feminist. Flora Diaz de Parrado, who
alerted the NWP to the importance of the inter-American
conference. In Havana, under the leadership of the umbrella
organization the Federation National de Asociaciones
Femeninas de Cuba, prominent feminist groups, including the
Partido Democrata Sufragista, the Club Femenino, and the
Partido National Sufragista, put together a vigorous
campaign to publicize women's concerns, to bolster prospects
for a women's plenary session, and to stir support for an
official all-female Pan American group. Thus, Cuban
feminists had a well-organized, forceful women's movement by
1928, and they led, rather than followed, the crusade
resulting in the lACW.
Moreover, contrary to contemporaneous and present-day
scholarship, Latin American feminists fought for political
rights, including suffrage and legal equality, not just the
less controversial issues of education, child welfare, and public health. Indeed, Latin American feminism was more varied than what we think--oriented toward both motherhood
258 and relationships with men as well as having a strong
egalitarian stand. On both the inter-American and
Euroamerican stages, Latin American feminists sought equality under the law. From the beginning of the lACW, many espoused an identity-in-law position. Through resolutions, in speeches, and at public events, Latin
American feminists promoted the equalitarian position in their national organizations, in Pan American congresses, and at the League of Nations. At the 1928 conference participants included an equal rights agenda; as its first feminist project, the lACW researched nationality laws pertaining to women; at the Commission's initial organizing conference, members presented an extensive report on nationality and endorsed independent-nationality; and in
193 3 in Montevideo, organized women managed to launch treaties on equal nationality and equal rights. Perhaps even more stunning, the feminists, with the assistance of
Latin American delegates at the Hague Codification
Conference, placed their equalitarian proposals on the
League of Nation's agenda. In the international arena Latin
American statesmen backed the feminists in their women's
259 rights pursuits more vigorously than the male
representatives of any other nations.
As we have seen, in 1923 a Guatemalan delegate had
proposed that the PAU undertake an investigation of women's
civil and political rights in the Americas and emphasized
the importance of appointing women as official delegates to
oversee and direct the project. Similarly, at the inter-
American conference in Cuba, Latin American delegates overwhelmingly and enthusiastically supported the call for an official organization to focus on women's issues. In
1933 at the Montevideo conference, organized women mustered enough support from the Latin American delegates to pass an equal nationality treaty (at first opposed by the U.S.), and four countries voted for an equal rights treaty. At the
League of Nations, Latin American delegates continued to be in the fore of the women's struggles. They proposed resolutions encouraging nations to appoint female representatives, they launched the Women's Consultative
Committee on Nationality, and they introduced an equal rights agenda on the Assembly floor. Thus, Latin American men, even in the face of opposition from U.S. and other
"modern" nations, carried the issues of equal rights into
260 the male-dominated and male-controlled international
governmental bodies.
Even if male supporters had complex motivations--a
desire to prove themselves by taking a more progressive
stance than countries such as the U.S., the need to build
support for their own governments at home by winning a
female constituency--it is hard to imagine that they would
have argued for women's equality in the absence of pressure
from organized women. So the victory for the principle of
equal nationality at Montevideo--the only real victory that
international feminists could celebrate in the dreary 193 0s
--represented an important achievement of the lACW.
Pan American feminists cooperated at least enough to bring about positive change, but conflict repeatedly emerged over leadership, turf, and principles. In the early 192Os, organized women disagreed over the appropriate agenda at conferences. Latin American feminists complained that U.S. activists only participated in Pan American conferences in the United States, regarding those held outside as insignificant in the promotion of women's rights. They also charged that U.S. feminists, especially the members of the
NWP, were aggressive, manipulating the lACW's agenda to fit
261 their own interests. Thus they called attention to the
"imperial feminism" of U.S. women that we have only recently named. In 1928 in Cuba, feminists argued over lobbying
strategies, publicity, and leadership. And, of course, in
1933 and in 1938, organized women became embroiled in a battle over Stevens's leadership, her legitimacy as the U.S. delegate, and in the usefulness of the Commission itself.
Throughout these struggles, in spite of Latin American women's successes and accomplishments, U.S. feminists persisted in treating and defining them as "backward" and
"unsophisticated" in the promotion of women's rights, viewing themselves as the "natural" leaders. Yet through the strains of an imperial relationship, feminists did manage to work together.
The struggle that emerged in the Commission in 193 8 must be viewed in the context of a larger global tension between what might be described as "feminism" versus
"humanism." At a time when the world sat on the brink of war, many organized women argued that female activists should use their energies in a cirusade for peace, or at least to fight against crimes against humanity. They espoused humanism as a higher form of feminism, a natural
262 evolutionary consequence of it. Opponents, in contrast,
maintained that feminism was a specific crusade for the
improvement of women's status and that humanism was in
actuality archaic, simply social reform. The strongest
advocates of this feminist position were those who took an
identity-in-law position, including the leaders of the lACW.
The lACW until the late 193 0s had been little afflicted with
controversy over "women's rights" versus "human rights," but
the conflict over protective legislation, Stevens's
leadership, and the viability of the Commission as a separate women's organization suggests that these tensions were becoming unavoidable.
Yet even after Stevens's removal, the Commission has managed to pursue legal equality as well as issues specific to women workers, women's education, children's rights, and women's special role as mothers. Perhaps it is because what united the lACW was not commitment to a particular issue or political position, but living in the Western hemisphere.
Unlike other international organizations--the Open Door
International and Equal Rights International, both formed specifically to seek equal rights--the lACW was founded to further a more inclusive program. This did not
263 automatically exclude conflict, for as we know numerous
disputes broke out. But it might have allowed for more exploration of a variety of feminist concerns. This study thus reveals the ways that regionally based international women's organizations contributed to the global women's movement. And the activity of Latin American women in the international arena (in contrast to existing work that emphasis Euroamerican domination) suggests the importance of exploring such regional organizations to get at activities of women from "peripheral" nations.
And what does this tell us about Pan Americanism?
Traditionally scholars view the Pan American arena as a male-dominated platform for bringing about change. Little consideration has been given to the role Pan American feminists might have played in shaping government policy, state-building, foreign relations, or international affairs.
The story of the lACW sheds light on how non-governmental actors participated in Pan American and international affairs, and how the socioeconomic categories of "core" and
"peripheral" nations involved more than just relationships among politicians. Further, by considering the impact of the lACW and its male diplomatic allies on the fight for
264 women's equality at the Hague and in Geneva, we can see the ways that Pan Americanism had impact beyond the Western hemisphere.
265 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Manuscript Collections
League of Women Voters Papers, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.
National Woman's Party Papers, microfilmed and distributed by University Microfilms International.
Pan American International Women's Committee Papers, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.
Jane Norman Smith Papers, The Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe College, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Doris Stevens Papers, The Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe College, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Marjorie White Papers, The Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe College, Cambridege, Massachusetts.
Mary Winslow Papers, The Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe College, Cambridge Massachusetts.
Mary Winsor Papers, The Schlesinger Library, Radcliffe College, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Pan American Conference Proceedings
All America Association for the Advancement of Women, 1925, [no publication information].
266 Call to the Third Annual Convention of the National League of Women Voters and to the Pan-American Conference of Women. Congreso Inter-Americano de Mujeres, Junio 18 a 25—1926 [no publication information].
Diario Oficial. Febrero 17 a 24 de 1930 [no publication information].
Inter-American Conferences
The_International Conferences of American States. 1889-1928. New York: Oxford University Press, 1931.
Pan American Round Table, 1919.
Primera Conferencia de la Comision Interamericana de Mujeres. Carasa Y Ca.: Habana, 1930.
Proceedings And Report Of The Columbus Dav Conferences Held In_Twelve_American Countries On October 12. 1923. New York: Inter-America Press, 1926.
Report of Meeting of Inter American Commission of Women, Buenos Aires, December 1936.
Report of the Inter American Commission of Women to the Eighth International Conference of American States on the Political and Civil Rights of Women. Washington, D.C.: Pan American Union, 1938.
Report on the Women's Auxiliary Conference held in the City of Washington. U.S.A. in Connection with the Second Pan American Scientific Congress. December 28. 1915-January 7. 1916. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1916.
Second Pan-American Conference of Women, Lima, Peru, 1924, [no publication information].
Tercer Congreso Cientifico Pan-Americano. Seaunda Conferencia Pan-American de Muieres. Constitucion y Programas. Lima, Peru: Carlos Fabbri, 1924. 267 Histories/Reports
Bernardino, Minerva. A Summary of the Activities of the Inter-American Commission of Women. 1928-1947. Washington, D.C.: Pan American Union, 1947.
History of the Pan American Conferences of Women, 1922-1926.
Inter-American Commission of Women. 1928-1973. Washington, D.C.: Organization of American States, 1974.
The Inter American Commission of Women: Documents Concerning Its Creation and Organization. Washington, D.C. : Pan American Union, [no date] .
"Twenty-Five Years of Progress, 192 8-1953." News Bulletin of the Inter-American Commission. 1 (1953): 1-22.
Journals
The American Journal of International Law
Columbia Quarterly
£an American Magazine
Ban. American Union Bulletin
The Public
Newspapers
El Comercio
El Mercurio
El.Mundo
Hsrald Tribune
268 New York Times
SI Pais
La Prensa
Washington Times
Washington (D.C.) News
Secondary Sources
Azize-Vargas, Yamila. "The Etnegence of Feminism inPuerto Rico, 1870." In Unequal sisters: A multi-Cultural reader in U.S. Women's History. 2"*^ ed. , eds., Vicki L. Ruiz and Ellen Caril DuBois. New York: Routledge, 1994.
Bredbenner, Candice Lewis. A Nationality of Her Own: Women. Marriage, and the Law of Citizenship Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998.
Burton, Antionette. Burdens of History: British Feminists. Indian Women, and Imperial Culture. 1865-1915. Chape1 Hill: University of North Carolina, 1994.
_____ . "The Feminist Quest for Identity: British Imperial Suffragism and 'Global Sisterhood', 1900-1915." Journal of Women's History 3 (Fall 1991): 46-81.
. "The White Woman's Burden : British Feminists and the Indian Woman, 1865-1915." Women's Studies International Forum 13 (1990): 295-308.
Carlson, Marifran. Feminisol: The Women's Movement in Argentina from its Beginnings to Eva Peron. Chicago : Academy Chicago Publishers, 1988.
Chaney, Elsa. Supermadre: Women in Politics in Latin America. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1979.
Chatterjee, Partha. Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World: A Derivative Discourse. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press, 1993. 269 Cott, Nancy F. "What's in a Name: The Limits of 'Social Feminism': or. Expanding the Vocabulary of Women's History." Journal of American History 16 (December 1989) : 809-829.
DuBois, Ellen C. & Cott, Nancy F . "Comment on Karen Offen's 'Defining Feminism: A Comparative Historical Approach'." Signs 15 (Autumn 1989): 195-209.
Guha, Ranajit. Elementary Aspects of Peasant Insurgency in Colonial India. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1992.
Guha, Ranajit & Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. Selected Subaltern Studies. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988.
Hahner, June. Emancipating the Female Sex: The Struggle for HQmeJl' S Rights in Brazil. 1850-1940 . Durham : Duke University Press, 1991.
Hewitt, Nancy. "Beyond the Search for Sisterhood: American Women's History in the 1980s." Social History 10 (1985): 299-321.
Hurwitz, Edith F . "The International Sisterhood." In Becoming Visible: Women in European History, eds. Renate Bridenthal and Claudia Koonz. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1977, 325-346.
Jaquette, Jane. "Female Political Participation in Latin America." In Sex and Class in Latin America, eds., June Nash and Helen Safa. New York: Praeger, 1976.
Lavrin, Asuncion. "Female, Feminine, and Feminist: Key Concepts in Understanding Women's History in Twentieth- Century Latin America." Paper presented as part of the University of Bristol "Occasional Lecture Series" 4 (1988) . . "The Ideology of Feminism in the Southern Cone, 1900-1940." Washington, D.C.: Wilson Center, 1986.
270 . Women. Feminism, and Social Change in Argentina. Chile, and Uruguay. 1890-1940. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1995.
Macias, Anna. Against All Odds: The Feminist Movement in Mexico to 1940. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1982.
Mallon, Florence E. "The Promise and Dilemma of Subaltern Studies: Perspectives from Latin American History." American Historical Review 99 (December 1994): 1491- 1515 .
Miller, Carol Ann. "Lobbying the League : Women's International Organizations and the League of Nations" Ph.D. diss. University of Oxford, 1992.
Miller, Francesca. "The International Relations of Women of the Americas, 1890-1928." Americas 43 (October 1986): 171-182 .
_ . "Latin American Feminism and the Transnational Arena. In Women. Culture, and Politics in Latin America, eds. Emilie Bergmann, et al. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990, 10-26.
_ . Latin American Women and the Search for Social Justice. Hanover N.H.: University Press of New England, 1991.
Offen, Karen. "Defining Feminism: A Comparative Historical Approach." Signs 14 (Autumn 1988): 119-157.
Pérez, Jr., Louis A. Cuba : Between Reform and Revolution. New York: Oxfprd University Press, 1988.
Pfeffer, Paula F . "'A Whisper in the Assembly of Nations : 'United States' Participation in the International Movement for Women's Rights from the League of Nations to the United Nations." Women Studies International Forum 8 (1985): 459-471.
271 Ramusack, Barbara N. "Cultural Missionaries, Maternal Imperialists, Feminist Allies: British Women Activists in India, 1865-1945." Women's Studies International Eorum 13 (1990): 309-321.
Rupp, Leila J. "Challenging Imperialism in International Women's Organizations, 1888-1945." National Women's Studies Association Journal 8 (Spring 1996) : 8-27.
_____."Constructing Internationalism: The Case of Transnational Women's Organizations, 1888-1945. The American Historical Review 99 (December 1994) : 1571- 1600.
_____."Feminism and the Sexual Revolution in the Early Twentieth Century : The Case of Doris Stevens." Feminist Studies 15 (1989): 289-309.
_____."Sexuality and Politics in the Early Twentieth Century: The Case of the International Women's Movement." Feminist Studies 23 (Fall 1997): 577-605.
_____. Worlds of Women; The Making of an International Women's Movement. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1997.
Sheinin, David. "Argentina and the United States at the Sixth Pan American Conference (Havana, 1928)." Research Paper at the University of London Institute of Latin American Studies. (London : University of London, 1991) .
Sherrick, Rebecca L. "Toward Universal Sisterhood." Women's Studies International Forum 5 (1982): 655-661.
Steven, Evelyn P. "The Prospects for a Women's Liberation Movement in Latin America." Journal of Marriage and the Family 35 (1973): 313-321.
Stoner, K. Lynn. From the House to the Streets : The Cuban Women's Movement for Legal Reform. 1898-1940. Durham : Duke university Press, 1991.
272 Zonona, Joyce. "The Sultan and the Slave: Feminist Orientalism and the Structure of Jane Eyre." Signs (Spring 1993) : 592-617.
273 IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (Q A -3 )
1.0 Kâ m ■ 3.2 2.2
l.l 1.8
1.25 1.4 1.6
150mm
6"
/A P P L IE D A IIVMGE . Inc — 1653 East Main street _■ Roctiester. NY 14609 USA Ptione: 716/482-0300 Fax: 716/288-5989
O 1993. Applied Image. Inc.. All Rights Reserved