• DOI:10.1353/ohh.0.0018
• Corpus ID: 144676061

Voting for the Devil: Unequal Partnerships in the Ohio Women's Suffrage Campaign of 1914

@article{Pliley2008VotingFT,
  title={Voting for the Devil: Unequal Partnerships in the Ohio Women's Suffrage Campaign of 1914},
  author={Jessica R. Pliley},
  journal={Ohio History},
  year={2008},
  volume={115},
  pages={27 - 4}
}

• Jessica R. Pliley
• Published 7 June 2008
• History
• Ohio History

In 94 John Reilly of Columbus, Ohio, wrote to Progressive Party candidate for the United States Senate Arthur Garford voicing his concern about the party’s endorsement of women’s suffrage. Although Reilly admitted to signing one of the suffragist’s petitions to get the issue of women’s suffrage on the November ballot, he declared that he had no intention of voting for the women’s suffrage amendment. He wrote that he would “vote for the devil on the Progressive ticket” but that he did “not like the women’s suffrage end of it at all.” Reilly’s rejection of women’s suffrage reflects the difficulty Columbus suffragists faced in their 94 campaign for an amendment to the Ohio constitution. The state and national Progressive Party endorsed women’s suffrage, even prominently including it on their 94 platform, but clearly not all Progressive voters supported the idea. As Reilly demonstrates, not all purported allies were actually supporters of women’s suffrage. This was the case in Franklin County, Ohio, where, despite vigorous campaigning, suffragists faced defeat in 94.1 Social capital is an analytic metaphor that describes the important value of social networks and alliances to politics. It refers to “features of social organization such as networks, norms, and social trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit.” It points to the fact that groups can expand their political influence by using their social connections. Gain-