years?

been now fourteen years before the bar, in an almost continu tice, and my experience has been large, often serious, and many" any amusing. I have never lacked plenty of good paying work; but, while I have supported my family well, I have not grown rich. In business I have been patient, painstaking, and indefatigable. There is no class of case that comes before the court that I have not ventured to try, either civil, equitable, or criminal; and my clients have been as largely men as women. There is a good opening at the bar for the class of women who have taste and tact for it.

But neither my ambitions nor my troubles ceased with my admission to the District bar. On or about the 1st of April, 1874, having an important case to file in the Court of Claims, I asked one A. A. Hosmer, a reputable member of the bar of that court, to move my admission thereto, having previously filed with the clerk my power of attorney in the case, and a certificate from the clerk of the District Court of my good standing therein, as required by the rule of that court.

At precisely twelve o'clock the five justices of that dignified court marched in, made their solemn bows, and sat down. Without ceremony, after the formal opening of the court by the clerk, and the reading of the minutes of the last session, my gracious attorney moved my admission. There was a painful pause. Every eye in the court-room was fixed first upon me, and then upon the court; when Justice Drake, in measured words, announced, " Mistress Lockwood, you are a woman." For the first time in my life I began to realize that it was a crime to be a woman; but it was too late to put in a denial, and I at once pleaded guilty to the charge of the court. Then the chief justice announced, "This cause will be continued for one week." I retired in good order, but my counsel, who had only been employed for that occasion, deserted me, and seemed never afterwards to have backbone enough to keep up the fight.

On the following week, duly as the hand of the clock approached the hour of twelve, I again marched into the court-room, but this time almost with as much solemnity as the judges, and accompanied by my husband and several friends. When the case of Lockwood was reached, and I again stood up before that august body, the solemn tones of the chief justice announced, "Mistress Lockwood, you are a married woman!" Here was a new and quite unexpected arraignment, that almost took my breath away for the moment; but I collected myself, and responded, with a wave of my hand towards my husband, "Yes, may it please the court, but I am here with the consent of my husband," Dr. Lockwood at the same time bowing to the court. My pleading and distressed look was of no avail. The solemn chief justice responded, "This cause will be continued for another week."

Seeing that a fierce contest was imminent, I forthwith employed a member of this bar, one Charles W. Horner, to appear and plead my cause. He was a man who loved justice, and who feared neither the court nor conservatism. He prepared an able argument, presented it to the court on the following Monday, and, after patient attention, was allowed to file the same with the clerk, while the cause of "Lockwood" was continued for one more week. Next Monday, Judge Peck, who

Wo

course of sitting in the cause, had died; and of course there was an adcall Wment for another week. Upon the convening of the court at this me the cause was given to Judge Nott to deliver the opinion of the court; and three weeks were devoted to this work. I had time to reflect, to study up on my law, to ponder upon the vast disparity between the sexes, and, if I had possessed any nice discrimination, to see the utter folly of my course. But I would not be convinced.

Three weeks later, I was again present on the solemn assembling of that court. It took Judge Nott one hour and a half to deliver his opinion, which closed as follows:

"The position which this court assumes is that under the laws and Constitution of the United States a court is without power to grant such an application, and that a woman is without legal capacity to take the office of attorney."

Of course this was a squelcher, and with the ordinary female mind would have ended the matter; for it was concurred in without a dissenting voice by the four other judges on that august bench. But I was at this time not only thoroughly interested in the law, but devoted to my clients, anxious that their business should not suffer, and determined to support my family by the profession I had chosen. My cases and my powers of attorney were filed in the court, and there was nothing to prevent me from taking the testimony, which I did, and preparing the notices and motions which my clients filed. Nevertheless I found that I was working continuously at a disadvantage, and that my clients lacked the confidence in me that I would have commanded had I stood fairly with the court.

I had another important case in course of preparation to file in the Court of Claims, and, in order to bridge over the disability under which I stood with the court, I took an assignment of the claim. But in this I hardly succeeded better. The case was that of Webster M. Raines et ux. against the United States, and my assignment covered only onethird of it. I appeared in propria persona, and attempted to argue my own case. The chief justice declared that I was not the assignee, although the original claimant appeared in court and declared that I was, and stated also his desire to have me represent his portion of the case. It was no use. When I arose to explain my position, the court grew white at my audacity and imperturbability, and positively declined to hear me. Then I hired a lawyer to represent me in the case,―a male attorney, who had been a judge on the bench. He occupied the court for three days in saying very badly what I could have said well in one hour. This was some little revenge; but he lost my case, and I at once appealed it to the United States Supreme Court, hoping that before the case would be reached in that court I should have had the three years of good standing in the court below, and thus become entitled to admission thereto under the rule, which reads, "Any attorney in good standing before the highest court of any State or Territory for the space of three years shall be admitted to this court when presented by a member of this bar." I read the rule over carefully and repeatedly, to make sure that it included me, and asked myself, Why not? Was not I a member of the bar of the Supreme Court of the District of

Columbia in good standing? Had I not been such for three years? The law did not say "any man," or "any male citizen," but "any attorney."

Patiently, hopefully, I waited. At last, in October, 1876, full of hope and expectation, and in company with the Hon. A. G. Riddle, whom I had asked to introduce me, I presented myself before the bar of the United States Supreme Court for admission thereto. Again I had reckoned without my host. My attorney made the presentation, holding my credentials in his hand. Those nine gowned judges looked at me in amazement and dismay. The case was taken under advisement, and on the following Monday an opinion rendered, of which the following is the substance: "As this court knows no English precedent for the admission of women to the bar, it declines to admit, unless there shall be a more extended public opinion, or special legislation."* No pen can portray the utter astonishment and surprise with which I listened to this decision. My reverence for the ermine vanished into thin air. I was dazed, and kept repeating to myself, "No English precedent! How about Queens Eleanor and Elizabeth, who sat in the aula regia and dispensed the duties of chief chancellor of the English realm in person? How about Anne, Countess of Pembroke, who was hereditary sheriff of Westmoreland, and who at the assizes at Appleby sat with the judges on the bench ?" "A more extended public opinion,"-how was I to make it? "Special legislation,"-how was I to obtain it, with a family to support, and a sick husband on my hands? I went home, and again took up the thread of my law cases before the District bar, but determined not to let this matter rest.

What next? When Congress assembled in December, I appealed to the Hon. Benjamin F. Butler to draft and introduce in that body a bill for the admission of women to the bar of the United States Supreme Court. This was my first bid for the special legislation. The bill was carefully drawn, introduced, recommended by the House Judiciary for passage, debated, and ingloriously lost on its third reading.

The following year a second bill, drafted, at my suggestion, by Hon. Wm. G. Lawrence, fared even worse than the first, and died almost before it was born.

During all these years of discouragement I was indefatigable in the prosecution of my cases before the bar of the District, and had won some reputation as a lawyer. My husband, after three years of total prostration, died, April 23, 1877. In the autumn of 1877 some of the newspaper men of Washington, who had begun to be interested in the long and unequal contest that I had waged, asked me what I intended to do next. "Get up a fight all along the line," I replied. "I shall ask again to be admitted to the bar of the Supreme Court; I shall myself draft a bill and ask its introduction into both Houses of Congress; and, as I have now a case to be brought in the Federal court in Baltimore, Royuello vs. Attoché, I shall ask admission to the bar of

*Justice Miller dissented from this opinion, and the chief justice himself, but if his decision was ever reduced to writing, he never allowed it to be printed. It was in vain that I sought a copy of it from the clerk.

the Federal court at Baltimore." This latter claim had been sent to me from the city of Mexico, and was for fifty thousand dollars. "Very well," said they: "we are going to help you out this time." And they

did.

I prepared and asked the Hon. John M. Glover to introduce into the House of Representatives, in December, 1877, the following bill: "Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled:

(6 That any woman duly qualified who shall have been a member of the highest court of any State or Territory, or of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, for the space of three years, and shall have maintained a good standing before such Court, and who shall be a person of good moral character, shall, on motion, and the production of such record, be admitted to practise before the Supreme Court of the United States."

I was soon called to make an argument before the House Committee on the Judiciary, after which the bill was favorably reported without a dissenting voice, and passed the House early in the session by a twothirds majority.

On reaching the Senate, it was referred to the Senate Judiciary and committed to the Hon. Aaron A. Sargent, of California. Conceiving that the bill as it passed the House was not broad enough, he amended it, but his amendment was lost, and the Judiciary Committee made an adverse report on the bill. I had done a great deal of lobbying and had used a great many arguments to get the bill through, but all to no avail. With consummate tact, Mr. Sargent had the bill recommitted, but it went over to the next session. I worked diligently through the second session of the Forty-fifth Congress for the passage of my bill, but the Judiciary Committee made a second adverse report on the bill, and this time Mr. Sargent had the forethought to have the bill calendared, so that it might come up on its merits.

;

But another misfortune overtook me: Mr. Sargent was taken ill before my bill was reached, and compelled to go to Florida for his health. What was I to do now? Here was my work for years about to be wrecked for want of a foster-mother in the Senate to take charge of it. I knew pretty well the status of every member of that body, for I had conversed with all of them, both at this and at the previous session and in this extremity I went to the Hon. Joseph E. McDonald, of Indiana, and besought him to take charge of the bill. At first he declined, because, as he said, it was Mr. Sargent's bill, and, when I insisted, he bade me go to the Hon. George F. Hoar. I found that gentleman somewhat unwilling to take the entire responsibility of the bill. I was not satisfied to leave anything that I ought to do undone, and so returned to Mr. McDonald, told him that I feared Mr. Sargent's health was such that he would not return in time, and besought him to take upon himself the responsibility of urging and securing the passage of the bill, saying that Senator Hoar would assist him, and Senator Sargent also, when he returned. From the time he assumed this responsibility Senator McDonald was vigilant in the interest of the bill, and, as the Forty-fifth Congress drew to a close, used what in

fluence he could to get the bill up. It was in a precarious position. A single objection would carry it over. When it was about to be reached, I grew anxious, almost desperate,-called out everybody who was opposed to the bill, and begged that it might be permitted to come up on its merits, and that a fair vote might be had on it in the Senate.

I have been interested in many bills in Congress, and have often appeared before committees of Senate and House; but this was by far the strongest lobbying that I ever performed. Nothing was too daring for me to attempt.. I addressed Senators as though they were old familiar friends, and with an earnestness that carried with it conviction. Before the shadows of night had gathered, the victory had been won. The bill admitting women to the bar of the United States Supreme Court passed the Senate on the 7th of February, 1879. It was signed by the President, Rutherford B. Hayes, some days later.

On the 3d of March, 1879, on motion of the Hon. A. G. Riddle, I was admitted to the bar of the United States Supreme Court. The passage of that bill virtually opened the doors of all the Federal courts in the country to the women of the land, whenever qualified for such admission. I was readily admitted to the District Courts of Maryland and Massachusetts after this admission to the Supreme Court.

On the 6th of March, 1879, on motion of the Hon. Thomas J. Durant, I was admitted to the bar of the United States Court of Claims. Thus ended the great struggle for the admission of woman to the bar. Most of the States in the Union have since recognized her right thereto, and notably the State of Pennsylvania, as in the case of Carrie B. Kilgore, who has recently been admitted to the Supreme Court of the State.

Belva A. Lockwood.

I

SERE WISDOM.

HAD remembrance of a summer morn,
When all the glistening field was softly stirred,
And like a child's in happy sleep I heard

The low and healthful breathing of the corn.
Late when the sumach's red was dulled and worn,
And fainter grew the trite and troublous word
Of tristful cricket, that replaced the bird,
I sought the slope, and found a waste forlorn.

Against that cold clear west, whence winter peers,
All spectral stood the bleachéd stalks thin-leaved,
Dry as papyrus kept a thousand years,

And hissing whispered to the wind that grieved,
It was a dream-we bare no goodly ears—

There was no summer-time-deceived! deceived!
Helen Gray Cone.