No Place for Black Women
Document Text |
Summary |
| At the time of writing we have only seen the first day’s proceedings [of the Worcester Convention]. These are all we could have wished except the introduction of the color question. The convention was not called to discuss the rights of color; and we think it was altogether irrelevant and unwise to introduce the question. We dislike very much the omnibus plan of action, and … we would contend to the last possible moment against any bundle of measures, even though we were in favor of every one taken separately and singly. In a woman’s rights convention the question of color had no right to a hearing. One thing at a time! Always do one thing at a time, and you will get along much faster than by attempting to do a dozen. The question of the rights of colored men is already before the people. Let it work out its own salvation in its own strength. | We are writing this after the first day of the convention. It was good, except someone tried to talk about race. This convention is not supposed to be about race. We don’t think anyone should have brought race up. We are against any attempt to combine the fight for women’s rights with the fight for Black civil rights. We will fight every attempt to combine the two causes, although we support them both separately. A women’s rights convention is no place for discussion of Black civil rights. One thing at a time! It is faster to do one thing at a time than try to do everything at once. The question of Black men’s rights is already being debated. They can find their own solution to their problem. |
| Many a man is in favor of emancipating every Southern slave, and granting the rights of citizenship to every free negro, who is by no means agreed that his wife or mother should stand on a political equality with himself. Many a man believes his wife and mother to be inferior to his bootblack, and many a woman ranks herself in the same scale. Then there are many of both sexes who are, or would be, anxious for the elevation of woman as such, who nevertheless hate “the niggers” most sovereignly. Why mingle the two questions? For our part we would say no resolution should be passed at that convention that would not have been as acceptable to the citizens of Georgia as to those of Massachusetts. | There are a lot of men who support freeing every enslaved person and granting citizenship to all Black men. But they do not support the same rights for women. Many men see women as inferior to the lowliest male laborer. Many women feel the same way. Then there are people who support women’s rights, but hate all Black people. So why would we try to address both problems at once? Whatever we propose at the convention needs please people from Northern and Southern states. |
| We are pretty nearly out of patienced with the dogged perseverance with which so many of our reformers persist in their attempts to do everything at once…. | We are almost out of patience with our colleagues who want to do everything at once. . . . |
| The subject of woman’s admission to the rights of citizenship is of sufficient importance to claim consideration as a separate measure…This convention was called to discuss Woman’s rights, and if it had paid right good attention to its own burden, it would have had work plenty. | The fight for women’s rights is important enough to be an independent cause. This convention was held to discuss women’s rights, and if people stuck to the topic there would have been plenty to do. |
Jane Swisshelm, “Opinion,” The Saturday Visitor, November 2, 1850.
Document Text |
Summary |
| 1854 New York State Council of Colored People
Tuesday Afternoon, Jan. 3d. Council met at half-past 3 o’clock. |
|
| Prayer by the Rev. J. W Loguen. The President in the Chair. Minutes of the morning session read and approved, Communication by letters from Messrs. George Weir of Buffalo, and Uriah Boston of Poughkeepsie, members elect, were read and ordered on file. In the absence of the Business Committee, Rev. Mr. Lougen, made an interesting speech on “Woman’s Rights,” which was earnestly objected to, as being irrelevant to the business of the Council, by Mr. Rich of Troy. Mr. Morrel, the Secretary, warmly approved of the speech of Mr. Loguen, and desired, if possible, to go even farther than Mr. Loguen had advanced, as he felt and believed that Human Rights were not to be defined either by sex or complexion. | Meeting started with a prayer. The President of the Council ran the meeting. Someone read the notes from the morning meeting, and they were approved. Then someone read letters from two members, and they were filed. The Business Committee was not present. Instead, Reverend Lougen gave a speech on women’s rights. Mr. Rich objected to the speech, because women’s rights are irrelevant to the work of the Council of Colored People. Mr. Morrel approved the speech and proposed that human rights should not be defined by sex or skin color. |
New York State Council of Colored People (1854 : Albany, NY), “Proceedings of the New York State Council of Colored People, January 2, 1854.,” Colored Conventions Project Digital Records, accessed November 7, 2022, https://omeka.coloredconventions.org/items/show/236.
Background
Black women activists were among the first women to take their support of abolition public. But when the women’s rights movement evolved in the late 1840s, Black women found themselves in a predicament. Black men did not want the fight for women’s rights to take attention away from the fight of abolition. White women did not want the issues of slavery and race to alienate Southern women from the cause of women’s rights. In both movements, Black women were asked to put aside their specific needs and experiences for the greater cause.
About the Document
The first document is an editorial by Jane Swisshelm, a white abolitionist and the editor of the Pittsburgh Sunday Visitor. The second are the minutes from the 1854 meeting of the New York State Council for Colored People. Together, they demonstrate how leaders of the abolition and women’s rights movement responded negatively when constituents tried to argue that the two causes should work together.
Vocabulary
- abolition: The movement to end the practice of slavery in the United States
Discussion Questions
- What is Jane Swisshelm’s complaint about the National Women’s Rights Convention?
- Why does Mr. Rich dismiss the subject of women’s rights during the 1854 meeting of the New York State Council for Colored People?
- What do these two documents reveal about the experiences of Black women activists in the mid-1800s?
Suggested Activities
- APUSH Connection: 4.11 An Age of Reform
- After reading these two perspectives, ask students to write a rebuttal. Why is it important to consider race and gender together when fighting for social justice? How would working together benefit these two causes?
- Black women did not accept the dismissal of their perspective lightly. To learn more, see “All Bound Up Together” and “Why Sit Ye Here and Die.”
- There were some abolitionists and women’s rights advocates who believed the causes should work together. To learn more, see: Life Story: The Grimke Sisters, and Life Story: Ernestine Rose.
- For a larger lesson about Black women’s activism in the mid-1800s, combine this life story with the following:
Themes
POLITICS AND POWER
