women lawyers in the united states - the green bag · 2012-08-10 · women lawyers in the united...

68

Women Lawyers in the United StatesLelia J. Robinson, LL.B.

his is an era of experimentalphilosophy. New departures of everykind have been taken in all directions,

physical, mental, and moral, many of whichmust lead their followers entirely away fromthe broad paths, smooth-trodden by themyriad feet of custom through the ages, intoÕelds unknown, perhaps to gracious heightsbeyond, and possibly into pitfalls and quag-mires; and of all nineteenth-century novelties,there is probably no one that would haveamazed our good ancestors of a century agomore than the woman lawyer as she existsto-day.

Not that she is, strictly speaking, a new in-vention. The oft-quoted proverb, “There isnothing new under the sun,” has been wellveriÕed in this respect by the valuable bro-chure entitled “La Femme Avocat,” which wasrecently published in Brussels by Dr. LouisFrank, an advocate at the bar of that city, inview of the application of Mlle. Marie Popelin,in September, 1888, for admission to the Or-der of Advocates. An able translation of thispamphlet by Miss Mary A. Greene of the Suf-folk Bar, Massachusetts, has been running forthe past year in serial form in the “Chicago

Law Times,” and has made us all familiar withthe litigious Calphurnia, upon whose ancientshoulders seems to have been thrown all theburden of woman’s legal inferiority since theold Roman days, when she made herselfobnoxious. “The forwardness of Calphurniaappeared to all the ancient jurists a peremp-tory reason for excluding women from the fo-rum,” says Dr. Frank; and his citations fromlegal authorities in many countries prove himquite correct. Eve plucked the apple andshared it with Adam; Calphurnia argued loudand long, and occasionally won cases whichpresumably some man lost. The race ofwomen ever since has borne the yoke of thesewickednesses. Sisters in the law, one and all,let us take heed that we walk not in Calphur-nia’s footsteps, thereby becoming a hindranceand a stumbling-block to those that shallfollow us!

In various countries and at diÖerent timessince the ill-fated Calphurnian epoch, a veryfew women have been noted students of law,and one or two Italian ladies lectured andtaught in some legal branches; but it remainedfor the United States to inaugurate the era ofthe woman lawyer of to-day. And this was so

T

Autumn 98.book : Babcock.fm Page 68 Tuesday, November 3, 1998 10:14 PM

Women Lawyers in the United States

G r e e n B a g

• Autumn 1998 69

Marilla M. Ricker.

short a time ago,– for the woman lawyer in theabstract has not yet attained her majority,–that the novelty of her very existence hasscarcely begun to wear oÖ, and the newspaperspublish and republish little Ôoating itemsabout women lawyers along with those of thelatest sea-serpent, the popular idea seeming tobe that the one is about as real as the other.

I have often been asked how many womenthere are in the law, and until the returns camein from a somewhat extended system of corre-spondence which Istarted a few weeksago for the purposeof gathering materialfor this article, I hadto give very vaguereplies; for though Ihave preserved everyscrap of informationwhich I could gatheron the subject for adozen years past, thisgave me only a massof unreliable data.Another diÓculty inthe way of a directreply to this questionis the fact that manywomen who havestudied law, who havetaken degrees in law,or who have beenadmitted to the bar,are not at the present time in active practice,owing to a variety of reasons; yet as we do notcease to regard as a lawyer the politician whospends his days at Washington in his country’sservice, so neither should the woman who hastemporarily or even permanently abandonedthe oÓce and the court-room for the platformor the nursery, thereby lose recognition as alawyer. One of the things to be said in defenceof the woman lawyer, indeed, is that she existsto quite as numerical a degree in the married

state as in that of single-blessedness; so that itcannot be charged against her, any more thanit can against the college girl of the period, thatshe does not marry. Perhaps a majority of themarried women lawyers, however, were wivesbefore they began the study of law, many ofthem studying in their husbands’ oÓces; whilein several instances a young couple has enteredlaw-school and taken the entire course to-gether, as will be shown later on in this paper.

Webster’s Õrst deÕnition of a lawyer is:“One versed in thelaws, or a practitionerof law.” And inas-much as lawyers ofboth sexes who havestudied but have notfollowed the profes-sion in practice areliable to resume it atany time, and as itseems of interest toknow how manywomen have studiedlaw to the point of adegree or of admis-sion to the bar, as wellas the number of ac-tual practitioners, Ihave opened up a lineof inquiries intendedto secure the namesat least of all suchwomen in the coun-

try. But as many addresses have been lost,especially by means of the somewhat inconve-nient custom of changing a woman’s name atmarriage, and as it is a very diÓcult matter toget trace of women who have lately studied inoÓces and been quietly admitted to the bar inStates where such an occurrence is no longerso rare as to create any sensation, the list mustnecessarily be more or less incomplete. Manyof the most interesting letters which I havereceived have come to me from ladies whose


Lelia J. Robinson, LL.B.

70

2

G r e e n B a g 2 d 6 8

names I only secured by accident and at thelast moment of my investigations.

My Õrst move was to send a circular letterto the Deans of the principal law-schools, ask-ing whether any women had ever beenenrolled as students in these schools, or wouldbe so enrolled on application, and for namesand addresses of women graduates. To allthese letters, save two, prompt and courteousresponses were received, containing thedesired information; and as the questionwhere women may study law is pertinent tothat of women in law, I will refer from time totime to the facts contained in these letters.

From the Southern schools to which Iwrote, only one responded in favor of co-education in law. The Cumberland UniversityLaw School of Lebanon, Tenn., the LawDepartment of the Washington and LeeUniversity in Lexington, Va., and the LawDepartment of the University of Virginia, donot admit women as students. It is possiblethat the time may not be far distant, however,when women will not be refused admission tothe law schools of Virginia, for even now awoman is knocking at the bar of that State foradmission. Mrs. Annie Smith, wife of P.A.L.Smith, Esq., an attorney in Danville, Va., hasstudied law the past two years and a half in herhusband’s oÓce. Last July she applied to theCorporation Judge of Danville for the neces-sary certiÕcate to enable her to be examinedfor admission to the bar, but her applicationwas refused on the ground that a special stat-ute would have to be enacted before a womancould be admitted to practise law in that State.Mr. and Mrs. Smith propose to lay the matterbefore the Legislature this December, andpossibly before this article gets to press newsmay arrive that the desired legislation has beenenacted.

Widely diÖerent from the decision of theVirginia judge just referred to was that of theSupreme Court of the neighboring State ofNorth Carolina, in 1878, when Miss Tabitha

A. Holton, of Dobson in that State, appearedbefore them for examination and admission tothe bar. Miss Holton (as a letter from herbrother, with whom she was afterwards associ-ated in practice, informs me), having lost hermother in early childhood, was thrown muchinto the company of her brothers (three ofwhom are now practising attorneys in NorthCarolina), and with them she read law underthe instruction of their father, the Rev.Quinton Holton. Her taste for the study grewwith what it fed on; and no obstacle was put inher way, for the court examined her, and onthe 8th of January, 1878, duly granted her alicense. She practised in association with herbrother, Samuel L. Holton, devoting herselfchieÔy to oÓce work, until a short time beforeher death, which occurred in June, 1886.

There can be no better place than thepresent, perhaps, in which to speak of theother State in which is now pending an appli-cation by a woman for admission to the bar.The North and the South march together inthis, for the State that is keeping step withVirginia is New Hampshire,– or perhaps Ishould rather say that the two States are run-ning a race, which shall Õrst admit the womanwho has applied for a license to practise law.

Mrs. Marilla M. Ricker, of Dover, N. H.,has for a number of years been a resident ofthe District of Columbia, where she wasadmitted to the bar in May, 1882, after fouryears’ study in a law oÓce. She was in practicethere until some three years since, appearing ascounsel in some important cases,– amongthem the famous Star Route trial, where sherepresented Dorsey, one of the defendants,and the test case whether a barber could keepopen shop on Sunday. She was appointedcommissioner and examiner in Chancery bythe Supreme Court of the District, and severalcases were heard before her. Her special inter-est, however, is in the defence of criminals, andshe has been known as “the prisoners’ friend.”On Mrs. Ricker’s return to her home in New



G r e e n B a g

• Autumn 1998 71

Myra Bradwell.

Hampshire recently, she made application foradmission to the bar there. Her petition cameup for a hearing before the Supreme Court ofthat State, a few days previous to the presentwriting, and she made an argument in supportof her brief, followed by myself on a point ofconstruction which she had not fully covered.The court reserved the question for consider-ation, but a decision may be looked for at anytime. Her argument for admission restschieÔy on the decision upon the similar appli-cation of Miss Hall ofConnecticut in 1882,which will be referredto later on; and theprincipal obstacle inher way is theunfavorable Massa-chusetts decision inmy own case in 1881.

Among other prom-inent law schoolswhich do not admitwomen as studentsare those of Harvard,Columbia, and Yale.One woman, how-ever, does wear thehonors of the degreeof Bachelor of Laws asconferred by Yale.This is Miss Alice R.Jordan, now Mrs.Blake, who, after ayear of study in the law school of MichiganUniversity and admission to the bar of Michi-gan in June, 1885, entered the law school at Yalein the fall of the same year, and graduated at theclose of the course with the degree as alreadystated. Since that time; she has married, andhas not practised as yet because she has beentravelling most of the time but to my questionwhether she intends to practise, she replies,“Yes; my husband is a lawyer, and the profes-sion is to be our future life.” Their home is in

the beautiful city of Seattle, in Washington.Dean Wayland, of Yale Law School, sends me acatalogue of the University, and writes that “themarked paragraph on page 25 is intended toprevent a repetition of the Jordan incident.”The paragraph referred to appears on the pagedevoted to departments of instruction, andreads as follows:–

“It is to be understood that the courses ofinstruction above described are open to per-sons of the male sex only, except where both

sexes are speciÕcallyincluded.”

The Southern lawschool to which Ihave referred, as anexception to the ruleagainst the admis-sion of women as stu-dents, is located asmuch West as South,and it is undoubtedlyowing to the Westernspirit of liberalitythat women have everbeen recognized atthe bar in thiscountry at all. TheLaw Department ofWashington Univer-sity in St. Louis, Mo.,was always open toboth sexes withoutdistinction. The Õrst

woman to enter as a student was Miss LemmaBarkaloo, of Brooklyn, N.Y., who had been re-fused admission to the Law School of Colum-bia. She entered the St. Louis School in thefall of 1869, but probably did not take a fullcourse, as her name is not found on the rolls asa graduate. She was admitted to the bar of theSupreme Court of Missouri in March, 1870;and I learn from an article on “Admission ofWomen to the Bar,” by Miss Ellen A. Martin,published in the initial number of the “Chi-



72

2

G r e e n B a g 2 d 6 8

cago Law Times,” that Miss Barkaloo was theÕrst woman in this country to try a case incourt. She died of typhoid fever in September,1870. In 1869, also, Miss Phebe W. Couzins, ofSt. Louis, entered this law school, graduatedin May, 1871, and was immediately admitted tothe bar, but I understand that she has neverpractised. For some time, however, she actedas deputy under her father, who was UnitedStates Marshal, and at his death she wasappointed to Õll the unexpired term asmarshal. She has also been well known as apublic speaker and lecturer. Another woman,Miss A.E.P McAlister of St. Louis, attendedthe school in 1886-1887.

But though Miss Couzins graduated in1871, there were two women ahead of her,– oneby a year, the other by a couple of months. Thepalm of seniority in this new departure of con-ferring a degree for a regular course of legalstudy upon a woman must be awarded to theUnion Law College of Chicago, and Chicagois altogether the banner city in the number ofits women lawyers as well. Dean Henry Boothof this college sends me the names of womengraduates as ten in number, and adds thatsome Õve or six others have been in the schoolat diÖerent times. The Õrst woman to gradu-ate was Mrs. Ada H. Kepley, of EÓngham,Ill., who took her degree in June, 1870, havingpreviously studied in her husband’s ofÕce. Shewas not admitted to the bar at that time, theadverse decision in Mrs. Bradwell’s case(which will be referred to later on) barring theway against her; but in 1881 she was given herlicense, and has practised to some extent, hav-ing good success with all that she hasattempted. Her most active eÖorts have beengiven to temperance work. Miss Alice D.Merrill, of Chicago, was the next woman tograduate, in 1878, but of her I can learn noth-ing. Neither do I hear from Miss Phebe M.

Bartlett, also of Chicago, who graduated in1880.

Miss Bessie Bradwell, of the same city,graduated in 1882, being chosen orator of herclass for the commencement exercises, andwas admitted to the bar. This young lady isone of a legal family. To quote from an articlein a Western paper:– “Through ex-JudgeJames B. Bradwell, the family of which he ishead achieved legal distinction. ThroughMyra, his wife, it attained legal celebrity.”Mrs. Bradwell studied law under her hus-band’s instruction, and in August, 1869, shepassed the examination for the Chicago Bar,but admission was refused her on the groundof sex.1 On a writ of error, the case was takenup to the U.S. Supreme Court, where, how-ever, she was again unsuccessful,2 thoughChief-Justice Chase dissented from the opin-ion against her. Later on, in March, 1882, theLegislature of Illinois passed a law forbiddingthe exclusion of any person “from any occupa-tion, profession, or employment (except mili-tary), on account of sex.” But meanwhile Mrs.Bradwell had established on a solid founda-tion the well-known paper, “The ChicagoLegal News,” and had no time for law practice,and she has never been admitted to the bar,except by courtesy as an honorary member.The two children of Judge and Mrs. Bradwell,a son and a daughter, are both lawyers; and thedaughter has also married a lawyer, Frank A.Helmer, Esq. Mrs. Helmer is not in activepractice, but aids her husband in his business,and has also compiled, unassisted, the last tenvolumes of Bradwell’s Appellate CourtReports.

Another legal editor, Mrs. Catharine V.Waite, comes next in the list of graduates fromthe Union College of Law, in 1886. Mrs. Waitewrites me that she read law at diÖerent timeswith her husband, ex-Judge C.B. Waite. In

1 Bradwell v. The State, 55 Ill. 535.2 Bradwell v. The State, 16 Wall. 130.



G r e e n B a g

• Autumn 1998 73

Catharine V. Waite.

1885 she entered the law school, graduated,and was admitted to the bar in 1886. She haspractised little, but immediately upon gradua-tion she established the “Chicago Law Times,”a quarterly magazine of great interest andmerit, which she has edited and publishedever since. She has Õve children, one of herdaughters being a physician of unusual ability;and as is the case with Mrs. Bradwell, her fam-ily relations are of the closest and pleasantest.

But the women attorneys of Illinois are byno means all middle-aged nor all married.In the same class withMrs. Waite, therewas another woman,Miss Catharine G.Waugh, of Rockford,Ill., who was at thattime about twenty-two or twenty-threeyears of age. She isone of the brightestand ablest of theyoung women of theprofession in theWest, though shemodestly disclaimsany such merit. Shestudied a year in a lawoÓce, and the follow-ing year in the LawSchool, was admit-ted to the bar in 1886,and has been steadily in practice at Rockfordsince. She does all varieties of work, foreclos-ing mortgages, obtaining divorces, draftingwills, collecting claims, settling estates, and oc-casionally appearing in probate and justicecourts, but seldom doing anything in criminallaw. She was for a year or two professor ofcommercial law in the business college of hercity. She is entitled to write the title A.M. aswell as LL.B. after her name.

From Miss Annie M. McCoy, who gradu-

ated from the Union College of Law in 1888, Ihear nothing; but the three ladies who gradu-ated last June have all replied to my letter ofinquiry. Mrs. Mary A. Abrens, of Chicago,was admitted to the bar upon graduation, andhas been in practice since, her special objectbeing to settle without litigation all caseswhich with justice to clients can be kept out ofcourt. She is of middle age, well-known as anactive worker in philanthropical and charitablelines, and is spoken of as a bright, ambitious,

energetic, and intel-lectual woman. MissBertha E. Curtis, an-other of last sum-mer’s graduates, and abright young girl, wasadmitted to the barand began practice inChicago at once. Herpractice thus far hasbeen miscellaneousin its nature. MissMinerva A. Doyle,the last of the womengraduates from theUnion College ofLaw, is a very fortu-nate young womanindeed. Upon hergraduation last Juneat the age of twenty-three, she was admit-ted to the bar and

went immediately into her father’s ofÕce inWatseka, Ill., as a member of the Õrm, whichreads at present Doyle, Morris & Doyle, andhas been very actively at work since that timein preparing pleadings, briefs, and writtenarguments. Her father’s health requiring hisabsence this winter, much extra work hasfallen upon her young shoulders in preparingfor the November term of court, and taking oncases of his in the Supreme and AppellateCourts. Many women lawyers, old and young,



74

2

G r e e n B a g 2 d 6 8

will envy Miss Doyle her exceptional opportu-nities.

There are at present four women studentsin the Union College of Law. Miss L.M. Starrand Miss K.E. Wallace do not intend to prac-tise the profession. Miss Alice M. Albright, ofChicago, has been engaged for some years incourt reporting, and is studying with theintention of practising. Miss L. BlancheFearing, of Chicago, who will graduate nextJune, is a student of whose abilities I hearunusual praise, and who intends to devoteherself to practice, though it is hoped that shewill not altogether abandon literary work, inwhich she has gained a reputation above theordinary as a poet.

There is also in Chicago another legal insti-tution, the Evening College of Law, in whichthree women are studying,– Miss EmmaBauman and Miss Cora B. Hirtzel, both ofChicago, who expect to practise the professioneventually; and Miss Husten, from whom Ihave not heard.

There are well-known women practisinglaw in Chicago who graduated from otherschools, but I will refer to them here. First,however, must be named the lamented AltaM. Hulett, a young and beautiful girl ofremarkable ability and brilliant prospects, wholived only long enough to demonstrate what awoman could accomplish in a very brief timein her chosen profession of the law; and thisproof, given when the new departure was stillin its earliest infancy, has been invaluable tothe women who have come to the bar sincethat time. She studied about two years in law-oÓces, was at Õrst refused admission to thebar, but secured the passage of the new lawunder which she was admitted in 1873. Fromthis date till that of her death in the spring of1877 she had a lucrative business, followinggeneral lines of work without limiting herselfto any specialty, and succeeded marvellouslywell both in handling her cases and disarmingprejudice.

Miss Ellen A. Martin, who has been inuninterrupted practice in Chicago for thirteenyears, studied two years in a law oÓce, and twoyears more in the Law School of MichiganUniversity, where she graduated in 1875,together with Miss M. Fredrika Perry, whohad also pursued the study of law for fouryears. These two ladies were admitted to thebar of Illinois shortly after graduation, andformed a legal partnership, doing a generalpractice until the death of Miss Perry, whichoccurred in June, 1883, since which time MissMartin has continued the business alone.

Miss Kate Kane, also of Chicago, is one ofthe active women lawyers, whose business islargely in court. She was admitted to the bar inJanesville, Wis., in 1878, after a course of studyin a law oÓce and in the Law School at AnnArbor, where she duly graduated. She beganpractice at once in Milwaukee, continued thereÕve years, and then went to Chicago, whereshe has remained since. Her business is gen-eral, and she writes me that in criminal law shehas either prosecuted or defended in everycrime known to modern times except treasonand piracy; that she has represented clientsfrom every quarter of the globe, of every hueand every religion except the followers ofZoroaster and Mahomet.

Miss Alice C. Nute studied in law oÓces inChicago for several years while engaged in herbusiness of court reporting, and was admittedto the bar of Illinois in 1885. Miss Jessie E.Hutchinson, who is now engaged as law clerkin Miss Martin’s oÓce in Chicago, has studiedlaw during the past Õve years, during part ofwhich time she held an appointment as dep-uty clerk of the Circuit and District courts inFayette County, Md. This was followed byactive experience in a law oÓce, and a regularcourse in the Law Department of the Univer-sity of Wisconsin, where she graduated lastJune, and was admitted to the bar. She intendsto practise for herself later on.

Another woman who is a member of the

Autumn 98.book : Babcock.fm 4 Tuesday, November 3, 1998 10:14 PM


G r e e n B a g

• Autumn 1998 75

Catharine G. Waugh.

bar in Illinois, but is not in practice, is MissCora A. Benneson, of Quincy, who graduatedfrom the Law School at Ann Arbor in 1880,and was admitted to the bar. She has used theprofession chieÔy in connection with literaryand historical work. In 1886 she was law editorfor the West Publishing Company of St. Paul,Minn.

The Bloomington Law School, a depart-ment of the Illinois Wesleyan University,makes no distinction on account of sex, buthas graduated only one woman, Mrs. MariettaB. R. Shay, of Streator, Ill., of whom the Deanwrites me in thehighest terms. She isthe author of a workon law entitled“Students’ Guide toCommon-Law Plead-ing,” of which I haveseen favorable criti-cisms from manyauthorities.

The only remain-ing woman lawyer ofIllinois of whom Ihave learned (except-ing Miss EmmaStrawn, of Lacon,with whom by anoversight I have failedto correspond) isMiss Lettie L. Burlingame, of Joliet. She is oneof our able and successful wom-en practitio-ners, whose years are yet so few as to give greatopportunities for the future. She began studyin 1883 in a lawyer’s oÓce, where she continuedtill she entered the Law School at Ann Arbor,where she graduated in 1886, and was admittedto the bar of Michigan and afterwards to thatof Illinois. She speaks of the kindness and en-couraging attitude of the professors in theschool, but says one of them used to “arousemy indignation by picking out easy questionsto ask us women.” After a few months’ delay

Miss Burlingame opened her oÓce for prac-tice in Joliet, her home, in January, 1888, sincewhich time she has had a remarkable degree ofsuccess, business coming in much more rap-idly than a newly Ôedged lawyer can ever rea-sonably expect. Her practice has been variedin nature, including considerable civil work inthe Circuit Court and a little criminal work.She has had clients from several diÖerentcounties, and has been consulted on legal mat-ters by parties in distant States. Some of thecases which she has successfully handled be-fore court or jury have been important ones,

and she now has,among others, a con-test pending on theconstruction of atrust deed, involvingseveral legal pointswhich have neverbeen decided in Illi-nois. It may be of in-terest to those whoquestion whether awoman’s strength,physical and mental,is equal to the strainof a legal practice, tomention that MissBurlingame’s friendswere very anxiouswhen she opened her

oÓce, because she had always had, as shewrites me, “the weakest constitution ever givento mortal; but legal practice agreed with me, Icontinually grew stronger, gained Õfteenpounds in weight in six months, and now en-joy the best health I ever had.”

The Law School of the Michigan Univer-sity, located at Ann Arbor, has graduated morewomen than any other in the country; but myfacts concerning some of these ladies are mea-gre, owing to my inability to get the list oftheir names in season to correspond with all ofthem. The greater part of the information



76

2

G r e e n B a g 2 d 6 8

which I have concerning them was very kindlyfurnished me by Miss Martha K. Pearce, atpresent resident in Chicago, who is herself agraduate of the school of the class of 1883, anda member of the Michigan Bar, but who hasdevoted herself to literary rather than profes-sional work. As Secretary of the Equity Club,Miss Pearce is well informed concerning thegraduates of her school and women lawyersgenerally; and before proceeding further, aword right here concerning the Equity Clubmay be in place.

This society originated at Ann Arbor in thefall of 1886, when it chanced that seven womenwere attending lectures at the law school there,and two women who had graduated were stillresident in the place. From a local club for per-sonal meeting, it became a correspondenceclub, which women lawyers and law studentseverywhere have been invited to join. Someforty in all have been members of the club; andthe “Equity Club Annual,” consisting of let-ters from members and restricted to privatecirculation among members only, is a mostinteresting and valuable yearly visitant, makingus better known to each other, and extendingto each the sympathy and fellowship of otherwomen of similar tastes and experiences.

The Õrst woman to enter the Law Depart-ment of Michigan University was Miss SaraKilgore, who had previously studied one yearin the Chicago Law School and then enteredthe school at Ann Arbor, where she graduatedin March, 1871, thus being the second womanin the country to receive the degree of LL.B.Miss Kilgore was admitted to the SupremeCourt of Michigan in 1871, and was, so far as Ican learn, the third woman to become a mem-ber of the bar in this country, the Õrst beingMrs. MansÕeld of Iowa, who will be referredto later on, and the second Miss Barkaloo ofMissouri, already mentioned. Not long afterher graduation Miss Kilgore married J.S.Wertman, Esq., of Indianapolis, where theypractised law together for a few years, until

domestic duties caused her to withdraw fromthe active profession of the law. For severalyears past, however, Mrs. Wertman hasresumed business in Ashland, Ohio, wherethe family now make their home, devotingherself especially to real-estate matters and theabstracting of titles. It is their intention soonto remove to Port Townsend, Washington,where Mr. and Mrs. Wertman will engagetogether in law and real-estate business, thusmaking the second couple of husband andwife, both lawyers, who will practise the pro-fession in partnership on the shores of PugetSound.

The second woman to graduate in law atAnn Arbor was Harriet A. Patton, of that city,of the class of 1872. She was admitted to thebar, but has never practised. Miss Emma L.Hubbard and Miss Susannah Roper gradu-ated in 1873; but the former has been lost sightof, and the latter has embarked in a businessenterprise in Auburn, N.Y. In 1874 Jane M.Slocum, now of Canandaigua, N.Y., and MaryStockbridge, now of Fort Wayne, Ind., tooktheir degrees in law. Of these ladies, theformer is one of the proprietors of the GrangerPlace School in Canandaigua, and the latter isengrossed in domestic duties. Mrs. Mary E.Foster, of Ann Arbor, graduated in 1876, wasadmitted to the bar and practised for severalyears. Miss Hattie Mason graduated in 1877,and married a classmate, named Willard,shortly after; their present address I have beenunable to learn.

In the same year Elizabeth EaglesÕeld grad-uated from this school; but I learn from MissMartin’s article, before referred to, that shehad previously been admitted to the bar ofIndiana, at her home, Terre Haute, in thesummer of 1875, under a statute which pro-vided for the admission of “every person ofgood moral character, being a voter.” Mrs.EaglesÕeld practised for a time in TerreHaute, after which she abandoned practicetemporarily, resuming it, however, in India-



G r e e n B a g

• Autumn 1998 77

napolis; and she has now been established forsome three years in Grand Rapids, Mich.,where I understand she is doing well. In 1880Miss Maud A. Kelsey graduated and wasmarried the same day. I have not learned herhusband’s name, nor whether she has everpractised. In 1881 Miss Leona Taylor took herdegree in law, was admitted to the bar ofMichigan, and soon after married a classmate,J.R. Lounsbury, Esq., with whom she removedto Omaha, Neb., where they have resided untilthe death of Mr.Lounsbury, whichoccurred last May.Mrs. Lounsburywrites me that it wasalways their intentionthat she should unitewith him in his prac-tice, but the fulÕl-ment of this purposewas postponed untilit was too late. In 1882Miss Laura A. Woo-din took her degree atAnn Arbor. Havingstudied previouslywith her father, shewas admitted to thebar of Michigan a fewmonths before hergraduation. In De-cember of the sameyear she married alawyer, D.W. Le Valley, Esq., and they imme-diately entered together upon the practice ofthe profession in East Saginaw, Mich., wherethey are still located. Mrs. Le Valley’s share ofthe work has been principally in the oÓce.Mrs. Martha Strickland graduated at the AnnArbor school in 1883, was admitted to the barand began practice in Detroit of that State,where she has continued to the present time.Miss Mary C. Geigus graduated in 1885, wasmarried soon after, and removed to Los Ange-

les, Cal. Her plans for practice have been post-poned, owing to continued illness. Miss MaryMerrill took her degree in law in 1886, was ad-mitted to the bar, and began practice shortlyafter in Wichita, Kan., where I understand sheis doing a Ôourishing business, though forsome reason my letter of inquiry addressed toher has not been answered.

In 1887 four ladies graduated from the LawDepartment of Michigan. Mrs. Margaret L.Wilcox and her husband entered the school

and pursued thecourse of study to-gether, and gradu-ated in the same class.He began practice atonce in Chicago, andshe assists him mate-rially in his work; butthey are waiting untilhe shall have an oÓcealone, for her toformally enter theprofession as hispartner. Anothercouple, husband andwife, belonged to thisclass of ’87,– Hamil-ton Douglass, Esq.,of Atlanta, Ga., andCorinne WilliamsDouglass. Mr. Dou-glass replies to myletter that his wife

was admitted to the bar in Michigan aftergraduation, though not with the view to prac-tising. He writes that “she Õnds her hands fullin the ‘Domestic Relations,’ so to speak, intaking care of her boy and other duties. Shestudied law for the purpose of helping me andnot for the practice generally. In fact, womenare not admitted to the bar in the State ofGeorgia.” Miss Rebecca May was the thirdwoman of ’87’s quartette; and after graduationshe was admitted to the bar and began practice

Lettie L. Burlingame.



78

2

G r e e n B a g 2 d 6 8

at once in Topeka, Kan., where she remained ayear, doing remarkably well during this time,but was called home by illness in her family;and I understand that she has not yet resumedher active legal work. Mrs. Mary C. Whitingalso graduated in 1887, was admitted to the barin Michigan immediately after graduation,and entered at once on the active practice ofher profession in Ann Arbor, where she is stilllocated.

In 1888 there graduated from the LawSchool at Ann Arbor a young lady for whomopportunities are not lacking, and she is hap-pily just the one to make the best use of them.This is Miss Almeda E. Hitchcock, of Hilo,Hawaii Islands, whose father is one of the cir-cuit judges of that far-away land. The timewithin which this article had to be prepareddid not permit me to write and receive a replyfrom Miss Hitchcock, but Miss Pearce agreeswith me in thinking she would allow me totake a few ideas from her letters to the EquityClub. About 1882, after she had Õnished theusual education of a young lady and triedteaching, which proved uncongenial, she be-gan to be with her father in his law oÓce andon his circuits; and her highest ambition wasto know enough to help him. Soon, however,she met Miss Cora A. Benneson (of the classof ’80, already referred to), who was then mak-ing a journey around the world; and the ideaÔashed upon this little island girl that shemight be a lawyer herself. Her father encour-aged her, and she entered the next class atMichigan University Law School. She wasadmitted to the bar in Ann Arbor in Decem-ber, 1887, and graduated with her degree thefollowing June. Her letter to this year’s “EquityAnnual” (not yet issued) is intensely interest-ing. Almost immediately on her landing atHonolulu she was, with her father’s help,admitted to the Hawaiian bar, on presentationof her license from the Michigan Court. Thesame day she was appointed notary public.Her father made her his law partner at once;

and instead of going directly home to Hilo,they went to Waimea, Hawaii, where theThird Judicial Circuit was sitting. There shemade and won her Õrst motion. She writesthat the natives were all astonished to see a“Wahine Loio” (woman lawyer), and the re-marks which she heard in passing were oftenamusing, they not realizing that she under-stood their language. She speaks of a journeyof two hundred miles which she made onhorseback last March, to attend a sitting of theCircuit Court in one of the out-districts wherethe Õrm had some cases which it was decidedshe should try. Before she got far towards herdestination, a telephone message from herfather overtook her, telling her to return assoon as the most urgent cases could be dis-posed of. She did so, and found herselfdeputed to act for the sheriÖ of Hilo for sev-eral weeks, during which he was obliged to beabsent. When it is realized that the sheriÖ is toone of these islands practically what the Gov-ernor is to one of our States, the responsibilitydevolving upon this young girl can be imag-ined. To be sure, this little kingdom is a well-regulated and law-abiding place in general; butduring the Õve weeks in which Miss Hitch-cock acted as sheriÖ of Hilo, a bold burglarywas committed on the island. Happily, byprompt action the man was caught, and nearlyall the money recovered within four days.

I hear that three ladies are now studying atthe Law School of Michigan, but have notlearned their names.

The last of Michigan’s women lawyers withwhom I am acquainted, and one of the bestand brightest, is Miss Ada Lee, of Port Huron,Mich. She began to study in June, 1882, in theoÓce of one of the Circuit Judges, and wasadmitted to the bar of St. Clair County inMarch, 1883, and has practised the professionconstantly since the day of admission. In June,1888, she was admitted to the bar of theDistrict Court of the United States for theEastern District of Michigan. In the fall of



G r e e n B a g

• Autumn 1998 79

J. Ellen Foster.

1884 Miss Lee was nominated for the oÓce ofCircuit Court Commissioner by the Republi-can, Democratic, and Greenback parties, withno solicitation for the nomination; and shewas duly elected, receiving the entire vote castin the county. She performed the duties of thisoÓce, and held it until the expiration of herterm, despite the fact that thirteen suits werebegun to oust her, during which time twohundred and seventeen cases were tried beforeher. This brave little woman, who has not yetseen a quarter of acentury, has earnedher own living andeducation, beingwithout either homeor money.

The Õrst womanwho was ever admit-ted to the bar in thiscountry or in themodern world has yetto be referred to. Hername I have seen inevery article I everread on this subject,but until I received aletter from her re-cently, I had notknown whether shewas yet living, andher letter was exceed-ingly welcome. Notthat it was so longago, however, for it was only in June, 1869, thatMrs. Belle A. MansÕeld was admitted to thebar of Iowa at Mt. Pleasant in that State, afterhaving studied in a law oÓce and at home.The statute under which she was admittedprovided only for the admission of “any whitemale person,” but there was also the sectioncommon to most compilations of statutes,that “words importing the masculine genderonly may be extended to females.” And Mrs.MansÕeld writes me that the presiding judge

said very signiÕcantly that when any of thoserestrictive words did a manifest injustice to in-dividuals, the court was justiÕed in construingstatutes as extending to others not expresslyincluded in them. Mrs. MansÕeld studied lawbecause of her love of it, and when admitted tothe bar fully intended to begin practice soon,but delayed till she should return from a Euro-pean trip which had been planned. During herstay in Paris she spent some months in theÉcole de Droit, pursuing her legal studies un-

der most favorableauspices. On her re-turn to America cir-cumstances led herinto teaching ratherthan professionalwork, and she nowÕlls the chair of his-tory in the De PauwUniversity of Green-castle, Ind.; but herinterest in law andwomen lawyers hasnever been lost, andshe is glad that herpioneering along thisline has helped openup the way in whichothers are nowachieving success.

The name of Mrs.J. Ellen Foster, thesuccessful speaker on

temperance, is generally known through thecountry both to the profession and the laity.Mrs. Foster’s son, W.H. Foster, Esq., an attor-ney in Geneseo, Ill., sent me the following par-ticulars which his mother, who is fulÕlling aseries of platform engagements, was too busyto write out. Mrs. Foster studied law for twoor three years in Clinton, Iowa, at home in herfamily and in the oÓce of her husband, E.C.Foster. She has frequently said in public thatshe read Blackstone while she was rocking her



80

2

G r e e n B a g 2 d 6 8

babies. She was admitted to the bar of theSupreme Court of Iowa in 1872, and was theÕrst woman to practise before that court. Shepractised alone at Õrst, and then formed apartnership with her husband. She followedthe profession generally up to within a fewyears, with good success; but lately her plat-form work has taken her entire time, thoughthis has been largely along and upon the legalphases of the questions which she has treated.Mr. Foster speaks of a murder case in India-napolis where his mother was engaged in thedefence of a woman who had been convictedand sentenced to be hung, but for whom anew trial had been secured, as probably hermost celebrated cause. She was successful; forthe prisoner was only sentenced to imprison-ment for a term of years, which was the mostthat could be hoped for in the case.

The Dean of the Law Department of theState University of Iowa, located at Iowa City,writes me that women are admitted on thesame terms as men, and gives me the names ofÕve women who have graduated there.

Miss Mary B. Hickey graduated in 1873.She writes me that after her graduation shewas admitted to the bar, but was marriedsoon, and has never practised. She says, how-ever, that her love for the law has neverÔagged, that she keeps up reading to someextent, and will enter the profession yet ifhome aÖairs are shaped so that she can do so.She is now Mrs. Wilkinson, and her home isat Hutchinson, Kan. Mrs. Mary E. Haddock,of Iowa City, a graduate of the class of ’75, is awoman of whom I have often heard, and al-ways in terms of highest respect and deepestaÖection. She seems to be a sort of mother inIsrael to young women lawyers of Iowa. Mrs.Haddock writes me that after graduating in1875, she took an extra year’s course, receiving acertiÕcate of special proÕciency. She wasadmitted to practise in the Iowa State courtsin 1875, and later in the United States Circuitand District Courts. She practised law in her

husband’s oÓce in Iowa City from 1875 tillJune, 1887, devoting herself principally to oÓcework and brieÕng cases. In 1887 it became nec-essary for Mr. Haddock, who is secretary ofthe University, to devote his entire time to themanagement of the business of the University,and since then she has been employed withher husband in this work. She was for severalyears appointed by the Supreme Court toexamine students of the University for gradua-tion and admission to the bar.

Mrs. Anne N. Saveny, of New York City,also graduated in 1875, and was admitted tothe bar in Iowa soon after, but not with theintention of practising, unless to help somepoor woman who should be without money.Miss Mary A. Terrell, now Mrs. Sanders,graduated in 1877. Miss Emma L. Brayton, ofDelhi, Iowa, graduated in 1883, and was admit-ted to the bar of the State and to the FederalCourts, but has not practised.

Two ladies are now studying in this school.Miss Myrtle O’Lloyd, of Charles City, Iowa,writes me that she fully intends to practise;and Miss Edith M. Prouty, of Humboldt,Iowa, writes that after leaving the school, shewill continue study in the oÓce of her father,J.N. Prouty, Esq., with the purpose of activepractice in the profession.

The only remaining woman lawyer of Iowa,of whom I have heard, is Miss Ce DoraLieuellen, of Iowa City. She had studied forÕve years before her admission to the bar threeyears ago, and has continued her studies since.She has been teaching during most of thistime, but has now given it up, and after takinga course of lectures in the law school to perfecther familiarity with the subject, she will beginactive practice.

In TiÓn, Ohio, there are located twowomen who have pursued the steady, straightpractice of law for a longer period of time thanany other woman has ever done. They are sis-ters, and began the study about the same time,in the year 1871, though in diÖerent oÓces.



G r e e n B a g

• Autumn 1998 81

Ada Bittenbender.

Miss Nettie W. Cronise was admitted to prac-tise in the State Courts of Ohio, in April, 1873and Miss Florence Cronise was admitted inSeptember, 1873. A fellow-student in the sameoÓce with Miss Nettie and admitted to thebar at the same time, was N.B. Lutes, Esq.;and little more than a year after their admis-sion as attorneys, they were married, but forsome years afterwards the two sisters contin-ued to practise together as partners. In 1880,however, Mrs. Lutes and her husband formeda partnership, andMiss Florence Cron-ise went on with herwork alone, and hascontinued to do sountil the presenttime. She writes methat her practice cov-ers all classes of busi-ness, and by way ofillustration states thatin the seven weeks’session of courtwhich had justclosed, she had tried,among others, casesinvolving questions ofpartnership, ease-ments, the holding ofa wife’s separateproperty for her hus-band’s debt undervarious circumstan-ces, a civil action for damages for assault andbattery, an action of foreclosure and marshal-ling liens, one on the question whether thepayment of a legacy may be oÖset by indebted-ness to the estate, another on alimony, etc.“The fact is,” Miss Cronise goes on, “if awoman wants to practise law just as men do,she can. But it requires patience and long wait-ing,– so does it likewise for young men,– and Iknow I have the same feeling for young mencoming into the practice as the older lawyers

may have had for me.”My letter to Mrs. Lutes was answered by

her husband, who says:–“Our practice is general in character, and ex-tends to the courts of this State and theUnited States Courts for the Northern Dis-trict of Ohio. The following facts will enableyou to form an estimate as to the nature andextent of her practice and experience at thebar. The bar of this county, as you will see bythe printed list enclosed, has forty-Õve mem-bers. The total number of civil cases on the

trial docket of theterm just closed was226; of that number,our Õrm was retainedin Õfty cases, which isprobably a fair aver-age of our share of thebusiness for thiscounty, and our prac-tice also extends to aconsiderable extentto the adjourningcounties of this dis-trict. Now, when I tellyou that I am totallydeaf and have notheard the sound ofthe human voicesince 1881, you willunderstand that Mrs.Lutes is at least a busylawyer, and has nocause for complaintfor the want of recog-nition or business.”

Mr. Lutes addsthat both his wife

and her sister “have won their standing at thebar solely upon their merits as lawyers, ineveryday practice, and the fact that they arewomen seems to have been almost lost sightof, so far as their practice as lawyers is con-cerned and this, we think, is as it should be. Sofar as they are concerned, the law has been asuccess with them, far beyond the average oftheir brethren of the profession, taken as awhole.” Elsewhere in his letter Mr. Lutesmentions his three daughters, the two eldest



82

2

G r e e n B a g 2 d 6 8

of whom (aged fourteen and twelve, respec-tively) are in attendance at Heidelberg Univer-sity, at TiÓn, taking the full classical course,for which they were prepared under Mrs.Lutes’s instruction, as she never permittedthem to enter the public schools. Thus it isapparent that in attending to her large practicethis able lawyer has not neglected her children.

Another woman, Miss Edith Sams, studiedin Miss Cronise’s oÓce two years, and was ad-mitted to the bar of the Supreme Court ofOhio in 1881, standing third in a class oftwenty-six, and then practised for a while inpartnership with Miss Cronise, until 1883,when she married C.A. Seiders, Esq., an attor-ney, and removed with him to Paulding, Ohio,where she has been since in partnership withhim, though for the past few years, owing todomestic duties, she has not been in activepractice. She writes that she took up law as alife work, and expects to resume it actively inthe future. There was also a Miss Agnes Scottwho read law with Miss Cronise for two yearsand who seemed very determined to gainadmission to the bar, concerning which somequestion was raised, but after securing admis-sion her ambition seemed to be gratiÕed, andshe has disappeared from public life.

Still another woman is practising law inOhio,– Mrs. Spargo Fraser, of Cleveland. Shestudied in an oÓce, and was admitted to thebar in 1885, and has been in steady practicesince.

The Õrst woman to be admitted to the barin Wisconsin was Miss Lavinia Goodell, ofJanesville, who was admitted to the CircuitCourt of Rock County and began practice, butthe following year she was refused admissionto the Supreme Court of the same State.3 Thedecision in this case did Chief-Justice Ryan lit-tle credit, for he allowed himself to departfrom the legal point at issue to discuss thequestion of “Woman’s Sphere” from a stand-

3 Re Goodell, 39 Wis. 232.

point of domestic economy quite out of hisproper sphere as a judge on the bench. TheLegislature promptly passed a law allowing theadmission of women, and Miss Goodell wasadmitted under it, though Judge Ryan dis-sented even from this decision. She was anable lawyer, and did good work until her deathin 1880 from sciatic rheumatism. At the timeof her death I cut the following clipping fromthe “Independent:”

“The Chicago Journal says the early death ofMiss Lavinia Goodell, the Wisconsin lawyer,suggests the query whether women are able toendure the hard usage and severe mental appli-cation incidental to a legal professional career.Miss Goodell was forty-one years of age.Henry Armitt Brown, the noted young lawyerof Philadelphia, died recently at thirty-two.We would like to suggest the query whethermen are able to endure the hard usage, etc.One swallow does not make a summer.”

In the same Wisconsin city of Janesville,Miss Angie J. King began to study law in 1871,was admitted to the bar of the Circuit Courtin 1879, and was in partnership with MissGoodell until the latter’s death, since whichtime Miss King has continued in steady activegeneral practice alone, succeeding, as shewrites me, far beyond her most sanguine ex-pectations, retaining all her old patrons andgaining new ones every year.

Another woman lawyer, Miss Kate H. Pier,of Milwaukee, is one of a family of lawyers.Her father, Col. C.K. Pier, is an attorney oflong standing, and Mrs. Pier and their daugh-ter Kate graduated from the Law Departmentof the University of Wisconsin in 1887, andwere admitted to the State and FederalCourts. All three practise together, and are do-ing a Õne business. Recently Miss Pier arguedand won a case in the Supreme Court whichsecured her much praise. The balance of thefamily, consisting of two younger sisters (I amtold that Miss Pier herself is only about



G r e e n B a g

• Autumn 1998 83

Laura De Force Gordon.

twenty-two years of age), are at present takingthe legal course in the same school from whichtheir mother and sister graduated.

Two other sisters, named Spaulding, alsostudents in this school, will practise in Janes-ville. Miss King speaks of them in the highestterms. From the same school was graduated aMrs. La Follette in 1885, from whom I havenot heard; and last June Miss Jessie M. Hutch-inson, already referred to.

The name of Mrs. J.M. Kellogg, of Topeka,Kan., has becomefamiliar of late, owingto newspaper itemsannouncing the factof her appointmentas chief clerk – or asthat oÓcer has beenusually called there,assistant attorney-general – to her hus-band, the attorney-general. She studiedin her husband’soÓce at Emporia fortwo years, and wasadmitted to the bar ofthe Supreme Courtin 1881, after whichthey formed a lawpartnership and prac-tised together untilMr. Kellogg’s ap-pointment to oÓce,with the exception of about four years duringwhich she was not in active practice. Anotherlady, Mrs. Ella W. Brown, of Holton, Kan., isstudying in her husband’s oÓce with the pur-pose of practising with him as soon as shegains admission to the bar.

Another well-known name is that of Mrs.Ada M. Bittenbender, who has been for thepast two years active in the Women’s ChristianTemperance Union movement, representingthe association in Washington. Her home is in

Lincoln, Neb., where she read law for twoyears in her husband’s oÓce, was admitted tothe bar in 1882, and in partnership with himshe pursued a general practice until 1888, whenshe went to Washington. At the State conven-tion of the Nebraska Prohibition Party twoyears ago, Mrs. Bittenbender was chosen asthe nominee for the position of Judge of theSecond Judicial District. She is only out ofpractice temporarily, her legal partnership inher husband’s business continuing, as I under-

stand.Another Nebra-

ska couple who arepractising law to-gether is the Õrm ofE.M. & Addie M.Billings, of Geneva,Neb. Mrs. Billingsread law in her hus-band’s oÓce severalyears, was admittedto the bar of Ne-braska in 1887, andhas practised contin-ually, trying cases,civil and criminalalike. She writes methat occasionally aman comes into theoÓce with work whodoes not want “thewoman” to meddle inhis case; but such

clients are exceptional.A little farther west, and the PaciÕc coast is

reached. From the Dean of the Hastings Col-lege of the Law in San Francisco, I learn thatthree women have graduated from that insti-tution. The Õrst was Miss Mary McHenry, ofSan Francisco, a daughter of Judge JohnMcHenry, for many years Judge of the FirstDistrict Court of New Orleans, and a notedman both in Louisiana and California. Shegraduated in 1882, as one of the class speakers,



84

2

G r e e n B a g 2 d 6 8

Belva A. Lockwood.

was immediately admitted to the bar, andpractised for seven or eight months withmarked success, when she married Mr. Will-iam Keith, a well-known artist, removed toBerkeley, Cal., and retired from the law. Shewrites me that she hopes to resume practicebefore long, but that her husband laughinglysays, “Not much you will.”

Miss Emily Buckhout, of Oakland, Cal.,now Mrs. Baker, graduated and was admittedto the bar in 1883, but has never practised,owing, she writesme, to “two reasons,–ill-health and disin-clination. The more Isee of life the strongeris my belief thatpublic life for womenis not desirable, indi-vidually or for society.I began life a woman-suÖragist, but myown experience andobservation haveworked a radicalchange in my opin-ions.” I quote thisfrom Mrs. Baker’s let-ter, which was verypromptly and courte-ously sent in responseto my inquiries, be-cause out of all thehundred and odd let-ters which I have received from women law-yers and law students of the present and of thepast, it is the only one which has beenexpressed in discouraging terms, and I cannothelp but wonder whether the misfortune of ill-health has not had at least some part in form-ing the disinclination.

From Miss Josephine L. Todman, of Stock-ton, Cal., I hear nothing, but understand sheis doing a good oÓce business. Three otherladies have been enrolled as students at this

school,– Mrs. Ida Hatch, of Los Angeles; Mrs.Clara S. Foltz, who was for several years inpractice at San Francisco, and is now, I under-stand, practising in San Diego, but fromwhom I have not heard; and Mrs. Laura DeForce Gordon, of Stockton, Cal. Mrs. Gordonwrites me that in 1877, while attending the ses-sion of the California Legislature to report itsproceedings for her own paper, the “OaklandDaily Democrat,” she assisted in procuringthe passage of an act permitting women to

practise law. At thesame session the Leg-islature accepted orfounded the Hast-ings College of Law;but when open forthe admission of stu-dents, the applica-tions for admissionmade by Mrs. Foltzand herself were re-jected. They broughta writ of mandamus,which was success-ful; and a year laterthese ladies were ad-mitted. In the meantime Mrs. Gordonhad studied dili-gently, and was ad-mitted to the bar in1879. She immedi-ately began practice

in San Francisco, and continued there for Õveyears with very gratifying success. She soughtno specialty, but seemed to drift into criminalpractice, as the result of successfully defendinga Spaniard charged with murder, within twomonths after her admission to the bar. Mrs.Gordon is now located at Stockton, where sheis in steady active practice of a general nature.Among her most noted criminal cases wasthat of The People v. Sproule, which wasindeed in some respects the most remarkable



G r e e n B a g

• Autumn 1998 85

Carrie Burnham Kilgore.

trial in the whole range of criminal jurispru-dence in California. The defendant had shotand killed a young man named Andrews, bymistake for one Espey, the seducer of Sproule’swife. It was a fearful tragedy, and the excite-ment was so great that the jail had to beguarded for a week to prevent the lynching ofthe prisoner. Mrs. Gordon undertook hisdefence, against the advice of the most distin-guished lawyers in the State, and obtained averdict of “Not guilty” amidst the mostdeafening cheers ofmen and hystericalcries of women, half-weeping jurymenjoining in the generalclamor of rejoicing.

Mrs. JosephineYoung was admittedto the bar at Sacra-mento about 1882,and has practisedwith her husband atSan Francisco.

Mrs. MarionTodd, now located atAlbion, Mich., butformerly of San Fran-cisco, writes me thatshe studied two yearsin the Hastings Col-lege, graduated andwas admitted to thebar in 1881. Probablyby some mistake her name was omitted fromthe list furnished me by the Dean. She prac-tised three years in San Francisco with goodsuccess, but she proved to be specially adaptedto platform work, and gradually drifted out oflaw and into politics, as so many lawyers of theother sex do. She was an active advocate andspeaker in the various Greenback campaigns,as delegate to conventions and in regular can-vassing tours. This party in California nomi-nated her in 1882 for attorney-general of the

State, and she ran far ahead of her ticket. Dur-ing the past few years her time has beendevoted to the cause of the Knights of Labor,and she has written a work entitled “ProtectiveTariÖ Delusion,” which has been favorablycriticised.

Since preparing this article, a young ladycalled at my oÓce and introduced herself tome as Miss Alice Parker, of the San FranciscoBar. She studied there in a judge’s oÓce, andwas admitted on examination over a year ago,

since which time shehas devoted herself topractice, having allthe business shecould attend to. Sheis a Massachusettswoman, however, andhas returned to herhome in Lowell, withthe intention of pur-suing her professionin this State, proba-bly in Boston.

In 1884 Mrs.Mary A. Leonardwas admitted to thebar in Seattle, Wash.,and subsequently re-moving to Portland,Ore., was admitted tothe bar there in 1885,after a law had beenpassed providing for

the admission of women. She practised abouta year, and then retired on account of ill-health.

The East was slower than the West to rec-ognize women as lawyers. The struggles ofMrs. Belva A. Lockwood, of Washington, toobtain admission to the bar, are too generallyknown to need repetition here. SuÓce it to saythat she began to study law in 1870, graduatedin 1873 from the Law School of the NationalUniversity in Washington as it existed at that



86

2

G r e e n B a g 2 d 6 8

time, was admitted to the bar of the SupremeCourt of the District in 1873, to the UnitedStates Court of Claims and the United StatesSupreme Court in 1879, after securing the pas-sage of an Act of Congress providing for theadmission of women to this the highest courtin the country. (Since that time Mrs. Bitten-bender and Mrs. De Force Gordon have alsobeen admitted to the bar of the United StatesSupreme Court.) Mrs. Lockwood has been ingeneral practice since her admission, with aspecially large business before the Court ofClaims. She writes me that she has never hadany diÓculty in securing plenty of good pay-ing work, has succeeded fairly well throughouther whole course, and has made a good living.

The Law School of the National Univer-sity, as it now exists, has never admittedwomen, as I am informed by its Dean; nor hasthat of Georgetown College. But the HowardUniversity, also of Washington, makes no dis-tinction of sex, race, or color in its students.Several ladies have graduated from its LawSchool, two of whom were colored; but Iunderstand that the male students are nearly,if not all, colored men. The Õrst woman stu-dent in this school was Mrs. Charlotte E. Ray,colored, who graduated in 1872, and was ad-mitted to the Supreme Court of the District,where she practised for a time, afterwardsgoing to New York, where I have lost trace ofher. I have been told that her admission to thebar was secured by a clever ruse, her namebeing sent in with those of her classmates, asC.E. Ray, and that she was thus admitted,although there was some commotion when itwas discovered that one of the applicants was awoman. In 1880 the names of four womenwere enrolled as students of this school, all ofwhom graduated in due time. One of these,Mrs. Louise V. Bryant, of Washington, I havenot heard from; Mrs. M.A.S. Carey, a widow,colored, graduated in 1883, took her diploma asattorney at law, and has been practising fouryears in Washington. This lady writes me that

she took a course in this same school at anearlier date, being enrolled as a student in Sep-tember, 1869,– the Õrst woman to enter theschool,– but that she was then refused gradua-tion on account of her sex. Mrs. Ruth G.D.Havens, also of Washington, graduated in1883, but did not seek admission to the barowing to illness. She has an appointment inthe Treasury Department, but intends to beadmitted and practise later on. Miss EmmaM. Gillett, of Washington, also graduated thesame year, was admitted to the bar and hasbeen in active practice ever since, with, I amtold, an unusual degree of success. Her workhas been principally in oÓce lines,– the draw-ing of papers, taking testimony in equitycauses, and probate business, together with alarge amount of notarial and some Õnancialwork. Mrs. Eliza A. Chambers entered thesame law school about Õve years ago, com-pleted the full three years course, took bothdiplomas which are earned thereby, and wasthen admitted to the bar. She writes me, how-ever, that the Law School faculty refused tohand in her name to the examiners, for admis-sion to practice, omitting her from the list ofher male classmates whom they recom-mended, simply because she was a woman.She has been in practice since her admission,giving special attention to matters in equity,with patents, pensions, and land claims.

The statements of Mrs. Carey and Mrs.Chambers concerning the discriminationmade against them on account of sex is indirect contradiction to the claim of the schoolthat no such distinction was ever made there;but I feel that the statements should be givento the public just as they were given to me.Mrs. Havens, already referred to, speaks in thehighest terms of the school and its faculty.

Mrs. Carrie B. Kilgore, of Philadelphia, wasone of the Õrst women in the country to ask foradmission to the bar, and one of the last to gainit. Her struggles for recognition as a lawyerbegan in 1870, when she was registered as a stu-



G r e e n B a g

• Autumn 1998 87

Mary Hall.

dent. In 1872 she was ready for admission;being refused, she applied for a writ of manda-mus, but this was also refused. She sued theBoard of Examiners, tried to get the Legisla-ture to pass a law admitting women, sought ad-mission repeatedly in the diÖerent courts, andat last in 1883 was admitted to the Orphans’Court, in 1884 to one of the Courts of Com-mon Pleas, and Õnally in 1886 to the SupremeCourt, which last admission compelled all theother courts of the State to recognize her. AtÕrst, when studying,she was refused ad-mission to the LawSchool of the Univer-sity of Pennsylvania,but ten years later shesecured admissionand graduated withher degree in 1883;and now this lawschool is open towomen, and the Deanin his letter writeswith apparent appre-ciation of Mrs.Kilgore as its onlywoman graduate.Ever since her admis-sion she has been inactive general prac-tice. Nearly two yearsago she lost her hus-band, in whose oÓceshe had studied and worked, and she was ableto take up all his business just where he left itand carry it on, being requested to do so by hisclients in all cases which were at issue exceptone. Mrs. Kilgore has won the respect and theconÕdence of the bar and the courts. She hastwice been appointed Master by the courts,and the character of the business intrusted toher proves that she has gained also the conÕ-dence of the public. Among other valuablebusiness she is retained as the solicitor of a cor-

poration. She regrets that no other women arepractising or studying law in Philadelphia, andsays she would like to have a lady student in heroÓce, and would give such an one a goodchance with her after admission to the bar.

There is, however, another woman studyinglaw in Warren, Penn., who has been for threeyears a registered student in a law oÓce. Thisis Miss Alice G. McGee, and she is ready nowfor examination, but is obliged to wait till Feb-ruary, when she will be twenty-one years old,

before making herapplication.

In New EnglandMrs. Clara H. Nashwas the Õrst womanto secure admissionto the bar. She wasadmitted by the Su-preme Judicial Courtof Maine, at Machias,in the October term,1872. She had stud-ied about three yearsin the oÓce of herhusband, F.C. Nash,Esq., and after ad-mission formed apartnership withhim, and they prac-tised together inWashington County,and afterward inPortland, until re-

cently, when they removed to Boston. HereMrs. Nash has taken a less active part in thebusiness owing to domestic duties, and shehas not yet been formally admitted to our bar.

In July, 1877, Miss Mary Hall, of Hartford,Conn., began to study law in the oÓce of herbrother, Ezra Hall, Esq. His death occurredthe following November, but soon after she re-sumed her legal studies in the oÓce of JohnHooker, Esq., the State reporter, and contin-ued there for three years. She then thought



88

2

G r e e n B a g 2 d 6 8

seriously of going to some State where womenwere admitted to the bar, dreading the noiseand criticism to which a pioneer in such amatter is always subject, but was induced tomake her application for admission in her ownState, which she did in March, 1882. Shepassed the examination successfully, and thequestion of her admission under the statutewent before the Supreme Court on briefs. InJuly of the same year a decision was renderedfavorable to her admission,4 and she wassworn in as an attorney soon after. She hasbeen in constant practice since that time inHartford, supporting herself comfortably. Herwork has been largely for women. She does lit-tle court work, usually turning that over to herbrothers of the profession.

Boston University has strongly favored co-education from its foundation, and all of itsdepartments have been open to women. In1874 Miss Elizabeth G. Daniels, of Hyde Park,this State, was a student in the Law School,but did not graduate. She married and I havenot been able to learn her name or address. In1877 Miss Mary Dinan Sturgess, of MansÕeld,Ohio, was enrolled as a student. She did notgraduate, and has never been admitted to thebar nor practised, but she writes me that herlegal training is of great advantage to her in themanagement of her estate.

In the following year, 1878, the writer of thispaper entered the school, took the regularthree years’ course, and graduated with theusual degree in 1881. About the time of gradua-tion she duly applied for examination foradmission to the bar; but her application wasreferred to the Supreme Court, before whomthe question was submitted on briefs. The fol-lowing November the rescript came down,

4 In re Hall, 50 Conn. 131.

holding that under the statute a woman couldnot be admitted to the bar.5 Shortly afterwardthe Legislature passed a unanimous bill per-mitting women to practise law on the sameconditions as men.6 She then took the exami-nation, and was admitted to SuÖolk CountyBar in June, 1882. The next year the Legislatureextended the powers of women attorneys byauthorizing their appointment to a newly cre-ated oÓce termed special commissioner,which enabled them to administer oaths, takedepositions, aÓdavits, and acknowledg-ments.7 This act was made necessary by thedecision of our Supreme Court that a womancould not be appointed a Justice of the Peace.8

This act was further extended last year, thepowers of a special commissioner being morefully deÕned, and the authority to issue sum-monses for witnesses added.9 Since heradmission to the bar she has been in constantpractice in Boston, with the exception of thetime that she practised in Seattle, Wash., dur-ing which she had the remarkable experienceof trying cases before mixed juries of men andwomen, and some time also which was spentin the preparation and publication of a bookintended to give rudimentary information onlegal subjects to the public at large.

The next lady to enter the Boston LawSchool was Miss Anne C. Southworth, ofStoughton, in this State. She entered in 1882and remained two years, ranking very high inher class as I have always understood from thefaculty, but dropped the study at this point.Miss Jessie Wright was enrolled as a studentin 1884, graduated in 1887, married a class-mate, G.H. Whitcomb, Esq., and removed toTopeka, Kan., where she was admitted to thebar in March, 1889, and is now assisting her

5 Robinson’s Case, 131 Mass. 376.6 Acts of 1882, c. 139.7 Acts of 1883, c. 252.8 Opinion of the Justices, 107 Mass. 604.9 Acts of 1889, c. 197.



G r e e n B a g

• Autumn 1998 89

Mary A. Greene.

husband in some of his work.In 1885 Miss Mary A. Greene, of Boston,

but formerly of Providence, R.I., entered ourLaw School as a student, and graduated in1888, ranking number two in a large class ofmen. The following September she wasadmitted to the bar of SuÖolk County, and hasbeen in practice here in Boston since that time.Last winter she made an exceedingly ableargument before the Judiciary Committee ofthe Legislature in support of a petition for thevalidity of contractsbetween husbandand wife in this State;and this argumentshe has embodied ina paper entitled“Privileged Commu-nications in Suits be-tween Husband andWife,” which hasbeen accepted forearly publication bythe “American LawReview.” Miss Greenehas been engaged todeliver a course oflectures the comingseason before the stu-dents of Lasell Semi-nary, on BusinessLaw for Women.Her reputation forscholarly legal learn-ing and her ability as a lawyer rank very high,and promise the best grade of work from herin the future.

There are at present eight women enrolledas students in the Boston University LawSchool. Two are members of the middle class,–Mrs. E.M. Campbell, of Maplewood, thisState; and Miss Lydia Colesworthy, of Boston.The others are juniors. Mrs. Anna Christy Fall,

wife of a young lawyer practising in this city butresident in Malden will practise with her hus-band, though under the existing law in Massa-chusetts they cannot form a legal partnership.Mrs. Leonora M. Martin is the widow of Wil-liam H. Martin, Esq., late of Cambridgeport, awell-known attorney. Miss Ellen A. Stone, Jr.,of Lexington in this State; Miss Lizzie A.Smith of Newburyport, also in this State; MissAlline C. Marcy, of Rockville, Conn., daughterof the late Hon. Dwight Marcy, Esq., an attor-

ney of prominence;and Miss Anna B.Curry, of Ishpening,Mich., complete thelist of women stu-dents. There are twoor three women alsowho are studying inoÓces; and fromthese students, to-gether with MissGreene and myself,are gathered themembers of the Por-tia Club, which meetsperiodically for din-ners and discussions,with women lawyersfrom other States asour guests wheneverany such are knownto be in the city orneighborhood.

New York was the latest State to refuse toadmit a woman to the bar under the statute,and to pass a law remedying the omission.Miss Kate Stoneman, of Albany, studied in anoÓce, passed the examination, and wasrefused admission; but the Legislature, whichwas sitting at the time, rushed a bill through,under which she was admitted in May, 1886.10

Since that time I understand that no woman

10 New York Code of Civil Procedure, § 56.



90

2

G r e e n B a g 2 d 6 8

Lelia Josephine Robinson.

has been admitted to the bar in New YorkState. From the Deans of the Law School ofCornell University and the BuÖalo LawSchool, I learn that these schools will welcomewomen students, though none have as yetbeen enrolled.

Another school has recently been openedfor women in New York City, concerningwhich I regret inability to give very deÕniteinformation. Little more than a year ago,Madame Émile Kempin-Spyri came to thiscountry from Zurich,Switzerland. Shehad pursued the reg-ular course of legalstudy in the School ofJurisprudence in Zu-rich, graduating withthe title of DoctorJuris Utriusque in1887. I understandthat this degree is notconferred as a matterof course on all grad-uates, but denotesspecial proÕciency inthose on whom it isbestowed. The appli-cation of MadameKempin for admis-sion to the order ofadvocates being re-fused, she came tothis country and set-tled in New York. She did not enter any of ourlaw schools as a student, but has, I under-stand, been studying common law and codelaw in an oÓce. Last summer I received fromher a circular concerning a proposed institu-tion for women called “Dr. Emily Kempin’sLaw School.” Courses of lectures for twoyears’ study are laid out, and the circular closeswith the following statement: “Examinationswill be held at the end of each course beforesome of the most prominent jurists, and the

degree of ‘Bachelor at Laws’ [sic] (LL.B.) willbe publicly conferred on those who havepassed the approved examination, both oraland in writing, upon the required studies.”Other printed communications have beensent me more recently concerning the“Women’s Law School Association” con-nected with this school, and giving a list of“Visitors of the Law School for Women,” in-cluding well-known names such as NoahDavis, LL.D., David Dudley Field, LL.D.,

Mrs. Jeanette Gilder,and Dr. Mary Put-nam Jacobi. Desirousof giving full infor-mation concerningthis new venture inmy paper on womenlawyers, I wrote Ma-dame Kempin, askingwhether it was byincorporation or oth-erwise that she adver-tises to confer adegree on graduates,and asking also forthe names of some ofthe lecturers on sub-jects which it couldscarcely be supposedthat one compara-tively unused to ourlanguage, and bred tothe civil rather than

the common law, would herself undertake toteach. I mentioned also the hope that shewould be admitted to the bar of New York assoon as the rules would permit, thus establish-ing beyond question her knowledge of our sys-tem of law, and asked whether the law of NewYork diÖered from ours in Massachusetts,which allows the admission as attorney at lawof an alien who has made his primary declara-tion of intention to become a citizen. I casuallyasked also whether her title of Doctor Juris



G r e e n B a g

• Autumn 1998 91

was commonly abbreviated LL.D., as she usesit. I received a letter, rather hastily written, inwhich she explains at length her use of thetitle, but entirely omits any reply to my moreimportant questions. I wrote again repeatingthem, but have received no answer, and musttherefore leave them for the consideration ofany who may be interested. Probably sheexpects an act of incorporation soon, or shemay have already received one.

The foregoing names by no means includeall the women law students of this country,nor all who have been admitted to the bar.There are unquestionably many of whom Ihave never heard, and there are a very consid-erable number also of whom I have heard orread, but, the limits of this paper having beenreached, I am unable to give even the list oftheir names. Women are coming into the pro-fession so rapidly that in a few years it will beimpossible to attempt in one paper, of what-ever length, to treat of the women lawyers ofthe United States. As it is, I have been obligedto omit much of genuine interest which I hadexpected to use, and to cut down every per-sonal mention to the fewest possible words.

In closing I must not neglect to say thatalthough no question was asked in my circularletter of inquiry concerning the receptionwhich women have met from the men of theprofession, there have been very few replies re-ceived by me in which there has not been someword of acknowledgment of the courtesy,kindness, and cordial helpfulness with whichwe have been welcomed into the legal ranks byour brothers of the bench, the bar, and the lawschool; and one letter expresses what I thinkmany women have felt, when the writer says,speaking of the uniform courtesy and kindnessshown towards her by both faculty and class-mates, that it “was perhaps the better appreci-ated since it was in marked contrast to thetreatment then received by ladies in the medi-cal department of the University.” In someplaces the public is slow to intrust legal busi-ness to women attorneys; in others it readilydoes so, as some of the testimony contained inthis paper abundantly proves. But in time,sooner or later, the lawyer everywhere whodeserves success and can both work and waitto win it, is sure to achieve it,– the woman noless than the man. B


women lawyers in the united states - the green bag · 2012-08-10 · women lawyers in the united...

Documents