Miss Louise H. Coburn,
\nSkowhegan, Me.,<\/p>\n
Dear Miss Coburn, –
\nAt the same meeting
\nof the trustees when the petition
\nrequesting the exclusion of women
\nstudents from Colby is to come
\nbefore them, there are also to be
\npresented to them several petitions
\nand expressions of opinion
\nfrom those who favor the oppo-
\nsite side of the question. The
\nresolutions unanimously passed
\nby the New York Alumni Association,
\nexpressions of opinion from
\nprominent friends and supporters
\nof Colby, also from the trustees
\nof the various fitting schools,
\nas well as a petition from the
\nalumni who favor the continu-
\nation of the present method, are
\nall expected to come before the
\ntrustees at that time.<\/p>\n
When all friends are thus exerting
\nthemselves in our behalf, it seems
\nfitting that the body of the alumnae
\nshould show their interest in the
\nquestion at issue by presenting the
\nenclosed petition. Friends of the
\ncollege have advised and indeed
\nrequested that we should take such
\naction. It is believed that several
\npetitions from different sources
\nwill be more effective than one,
\nwhich all should sign.<\/p>\n
I trust this move will have
\nyour hearty support.<\/p>\n
In order to cover the expense
\nof printing and circulating our petition,
\nall interested are asked to contribute.
\nIf each one so interested will enclose
\na dime when returning the petition
\nthe bills can be met.<\/p>\n
As the time is now short, you are
\nrequested to return the petition, with or
\nwithout your signature, as promptly
\nas possible to my address.<\/p>\n
Yours in loyalty to Colby,
\nBertha L. Brown,
\n53 Court St., Bangor, Me.<\/p>\n
53 Court St.
\nBangor, Me. May 18, 1901,<\/p>\n
My dear Miss Coburn,<\/p>\n
Yours of the 17th received
\nthis morning and I hasten to
\nreply.<\/p>\n
It was my impulse to write you
\na letter more fully explaining
\nthis move of the petition when I
\nsent it to you, but I thought per-
\nhaps you might have heard
\nfrom your brother-in-law about
\nwhat the general plan was, and
\nso understand. As we had so much
\nwriting to do, accordingly, I sent
\nonly a copy of the letter which we
\nare sending to all.<\/p>\n
Miss Bertha Soule \u201985 and I are
\nthe ones who have undertaken to
\ncirculate the petition, and I will
\nexplain how it came about.<\/p>\n
At the time of the Boston
\nAlumni meeting and the issuing<\/p>\n
of that petition asking for the ex-
\nclusion of women from the college,
\nMiss Soule (who is teaching in
\nBangor this year) and I, naturally,
\nhad many talks on the subject,
\nand also met with several of the
\nyounger alumnae who are in or
\nnear Bangor. We came to the con-
\nclusion which seems to have been
\nvery general that the best course
\nwas for the alumnae to preserve
\n\u201ca dignified silence\u201d, and let the
\nmatter work itself out.<\/p>\n
Just at that time it happened
\nthat Mr. Owen, the financial
\nagent of Colby, was in the city
\nand we talked with him several
\ntimes. He was very encouraging,
\nand very warm in his espousal
\nof co-education. It seems that he
\nwith Mr. Cornish (who seems to
\nbe really at the back of other petition)
\nwith one other are the special<\/p>\n
2
\ncommittee of the trustees who
\nare in charge of the question of the
\nwoman\u2019s college. Mr. Owen also
\nadvised that the women make
\nno direct move, as he assured us
\nthat it would be unnecessary,
\nsince he said that the trustees
\nwould never vote to exclude either
\nthe women or the men students
\nfrom the college.<\/p>\n
As he was going about among
\nthe churches of the state he had
\nan especially good opportunity
\nof hearing opinions from many
\nsources, and he promised to
\nlet us know if at any time he
\nshould change his idea about
\nthe best methods of procedure.<\/p>\n
Accordingly a few weeks later
\nwhen he happened to be again in
\nthe vicinity of Bangor he sent word
\nto Miss Soule and me that he<\/p>\n
would like to have a meeting of all
\nalumni and alumnae near here,
\nwho would be likely to be interested
\nin the question. With Mr. Owen came
\nalso Rev. Mr. Dunn of Waterville.
\nAs they had talked matters over
\ntogether and with some of the friends
\nin Waterville, among others Dr. Butler,
\nthey had come to the conclusion
\nthat it would be better for a counter-
\npetition to be sent in, as it would
\nsimplify matters for the trustees
\nwho would surely decide to pay no
\nheed to the petition against women.
\nBut if there were petitions on the
\nother side as well, it would free
\nthem from the charge of being
\narbitrary and disregarding the
\nwishes of the alumni, as might
\nhave been said if the wishes of the
\nalumni were represented only
\nby the petition for exclusion of women.<\/p>\n
The plan, then, was for some<\/p>\n
3 Miss Soule and I offered to do About this time Miss Soule After the very satisfactory meeting 4 The time was now down to We had previously consulted Mrs. Donovan wrote about the and that there the general sentiment Now we are striking out the word That is not at all the meaning 5 I think all the older alumnae Hence, if we strike out \u2018present\u2019 I hope my long explanation previously with more of the older We have already received returns I hope you will approve of what We thought that we ought not to Let me hear from you again.<\/p>\n Very sincerely, Bertha L. Brown, \u201988.<\/p>\n\n Miss Louise H. Coburn, Skowhegan, Me., Dear Miss Coburn, – At the same meeting of the trustees when the petition requesting the exclusion of women students from Colby is to come before them, there are also to be presented to them several petitions and expressions of opinion from those who favor the oppo- site side […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7698,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","template":"","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"builder_content":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/773"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/7698"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=773"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/773\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":14700,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/773\/revisions\/14700"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/csc-home\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=773"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nprominent alumnus whose
\nname would carry influence
\nshould<\/del> to circulate the counter-petit-
\nion among all graduates, both
\nalumni and alumnae. For my
\nown part, I liked that plan better
\nthan any other.<\/p>\n
\nsome of the drudgery work in
\nwriting etc which must attend
\nthe circulating of the petition; and
\nthat is the reason, I suppose, that
\nwhen they changed the plan, they
\nhappened to ask us to attend
\nto the petition from the alumnae.<\/p>\n
\nin going home for a vacation was
\nable to stop off in Waterville, where
\nshe talked with Dr. Pepper and
\nwith Prof. Hall, both of wome ap-
\nproved and advised that some of<\/del>
\nform of petition come in on our
\nside.<\/p>\n
\nof the New York Alumni, Mr. Owen
\nwrote us that they had decided to
\nchange the plan a little. They thought
\nit would make a more impressive
\narray on the side of co-education,
\nif several petitions from different
\nsources should come in. It seems
\nthat your brother-in-law, Mr. Smith
\nand Mr. Frank Padelford undertook
\nto circulate a petition among the
\nalumni. We have seen the petition
\nwhich they have issued and it
\ncertainly is a very good and strong
\none. Probably you have seen it too.
\nMr. Owen + Dr. Dunn are to gather
\nexpressions of opinion from
\nprominent friends and parents,
\nand from the trustees of the fitting
\nschools. Mr. Owen wrote us, that
\nof course, it lay with the alumnae
\nto do as they thought best, but<\/p>\n
\nthat they would like to have a
\nstrong petition, as unanimous
\nas possible come from them.<\/p>\n
\nthe present weeks and Miss Soule
\nand I thought some haste was
\nnecessary as many of the returns
\nfrom the petitions are sure to come
\nin slowly. We framed the petition
\nwhich Mr. Owen saw and approved,
\nhad it printed and in the last few
\ndays have been rushing to get
\nthe petitions circulated.<\/p>\n
\nwith a few other of the alumnae
\nwith whom we were corresponding,
\nMiss White & Miss Winslow 86,
\nMiss May Gould & Miss H. Bragg,
\nalso Mrs. Donovan as Pres. of
\nthe Alumnae Association.<\/p>\n
\nmeeting of the Boston Alumnae<\/p>\n
\nwas that it were best for us to
\nmake no move, but she said that
\nshe changed her view in the
\nlight of the present development
\nas we were able to explain to her,
\nand said she agreed that the
\nalumnae should manifest their
\ninterest and loyalty by this petition.<\/p>\n
\n\u2018present\u2019 in the petition where it
\nspeaks of the \u201cpresent policy of
\nadmitting both men and women\u201d
\nas some one has suggested that
\nit might be interpreted to mean
\nthat we were petitioning for the
\ncontinuance of the system of
\nco-ordination now in practice.<\/p>\n
\nthat it was intended to put into
\nthe words but rather, that the
\n\u201cpresent policy,\u2019 i.e. admission of
\nboth men and women. The<\/p>\n
\nquestion before the trustees to decide
\nnow is simply whether or not
\nwomen should be excluded, and
\nso our petition should bear only
\non this point, as the other petitions
\nwill which will come in on our
\nside.<\/p>\n
\nwould be glad to see a return to the
\nold system of co-education, though
\nI think there is little hope that it
\nwill ever be made.<\/p>\n
\nfrom the wording of the petition
\nit will surely remove all sugges-
\ntion such as has been remarked.<\/p>\n
\nhas made clearer to you the position
\nMiss Soule and I are in, and why
\nwe were the ones to undertake this
\nthing. Had the time been longer
\nwe should have consulted<\/p>\n
\nalumnae.<\/p>\n
\nfrom several, Miss Matthews 79,
\nMiss White, Miss Winslow,
\nMiss Gould, Miss Bragg, Miss Farr \u201896,
\nand a few others. We have distrib-
\nuted the petitions, so far, to about half
\nthe number of alumnae and hope
\nto finish the work of distribution
\nvery soon.<\/p>\n
\nwe have done. Of course your name
\nshould be one of those to head the
\npetition. If you think that some
\nof the alumnae around Boston
\nwould need more definite explanation
\nit would help us greatly if you will
\nlend you influence and aid.<\/p>\n
\nbring in the names of any trustees in
\nthe general statement which we circulate
\nas I suppose they are presumed to be impartial.<\/p>\n