Unfortunately, the suffragists did not know, when they advanced this argument, that it would be overthrown by the endorsement of Bok's point of view by such men and women of years and ripe judgment as Doctor Eliot, then president of Harvard University, former President Cleveland, Lyman Abbott, Margaret Deland, and others.When articles by these opponents to suffrage appeared, the argument of youth hardly held good;and the attacks of the suffragists were quickly shifted to the ground of "narrow-mindedness and old-fashioned fogyism."The article by former President Cleveland particularly stirred the ire of the attacking suffragists, and Miss Anthony hurled a broadside at the former President in a newspaper interview.Unfortunately for her best judgment, and the strength of her argument, the attack became intensely personal; and of course, nullified its force.But it irritated Mr.
Cleveland, who called Bok to his Princeton home and read him a draft of a proposed answer for publication in Bok's magazine.
Those who knew Mr.Cleveland were well aware of the force that he could put into his pen when he chose, and in this proposed article he certainly chose! It would have made very unpleasant reading for Miss Anthony in particular, as well as for her friends.Bok argued strongly against the article.He reminded Mr.Cleveland that it would be undignified to make such an answer; that it was always an unpopular thing to attack a woman in public, especially a woman who was old and ill; that she would again strive for the last word; that there would be no point to the controversy and nothing gained by it.He pleaded with Mr.Cleveland to meet Miss Anthony's attack by a dignified silence.
These arguments happily prevailed.In reality, Mr.Cleveland was not keen to attack Miss Anthony or any other woman; such a thought was foreign to his nature.He summed up his feeling to Bok when he tore up the draft of his article and smilingly said: "Well, I've got if off my chest, that is the main thing.I wanted to get it out of my system, and talking it over has driven it out.It is better in the fire," and he threw the torn paper into the open grate.
As events turned out, it was indeed fortunate that the matter had been so decided; for the article would have appeared in the number of Bok's magazine published on the day that Miss Anthony passed away.It would have been a most unfortunate moment, to say the least, for the appearance of an attack such as Mr.Cleveland had in mind.
This incident, like so many instances that might be adduced, points with singular force to the value of that editorial discrimination which the editor often makes between what is wise or unwise for him to publish.
Bok realized that had he encouraged Mr.Cleveland to publish the article, he could have exhausted any edition he might have chosen to print.Times without number, editors make such decisions directly against what would be of temporary advantage to their publications.The public never hears of these incidents.
More often than not the editor hears "stories" that, if printed, would be a "scoop" which would cause his publication to be talked about from one end of the country to the other.The public does not give credit to the editor, particularly of the modern newspaper, for the high code of honor which constantly actuates him in his work.The prevailing notion is that an editor prints all that he knows, and much that he does not know.Outside of those in the inner government circles, no group of men, during the Great War, had more information of a confidential nature constantly given or brought to them, and more zealously guarded it, than the editors of the newspapers of America.Among no other set of professional men is the code of honor so high; and woe betide the journalist who, in the eyes of his fellow-workers, violates, even in the slightest degree, that code of editorial ethics.Public men know how true is this statement; the public at large, however, has not the first conception of it.If it had, it would have a much higher opinion of its periodicals and newspapers.
At this juncture, Rudyard Kipling unconsciously came into the very centre of the suffragists' maelstrom of attack when he sent Bok his famous poem: "The Female of the Species." The suffragists at once took the argument in the poem as personal to themselves, and now Kipling got the full benefit of their vitriolic abuse.Bok sent a handful of these criticisms to Kipling, who was very gleeful about them."I owe you a good laugh over the clippings," he wrote."They were delightful.But what a quantity of spare time some people in this world have to burn!"It was a merry time; and the longer it continued the more heated were the attacks.The suffragists now had a number of targets, and they took each in turn and proceeded to riddle it.That Bok was publishing articles explaining both sides of the question, presenting arguments by the leading suffragists as well as known anti-suffragists, did not matter in the least.These were either conveniently overlooked, or, when referred to at all, were considered in the light of "sops" to the offended women.
At last Bok reached the stage where he had exhausted all the arguments worth printing, on both sides of the question, and soon the storm calmed down.
It was always a matter of gratification to him that the woman who had most bitterly assailed him during the suffrage controversy, Anna Howard Shaw, became in later years one of his stanchest friends, and was an editor on his pay-roll.When the United States entered the Great War, Bok saw that Doctor Shaw had undertaken a gigantic task in promising, as chairman, to direct the activities of the National Council for Women.He went to see her in Washington, and offered his help and that of the magazine.Doctor Shaw, kindliest of women in her nature, at once accepted the offer; Bok placed the entire resources of the magazine and of its Washington editorial force at her disposal; and all through America's participation in the war, she successfully conducted a monthly department in The Ladies' Home Journal.
"Such help," she wrote at the close, "as you and your associates have extended me and my co-workers; such unstinted co-operation and such practical guidance I never should have dreamed possible.You made your magazine a living force in our work; we do not see now how we would have done without it.You came into our activities at the psychological moment, when we most needed what you could give us, and none could have given with more open hands and fuller hearts."So the contending forces in a bitter word-war came together and worked together, and a mutual regard sprang up between the woman and the man who had once so radically differed.
