,
went immediately to Washington and undertook to obtain an injunction
on this action but it was refused by the court.

Although the ratification by the Tennessee Legislature was due to the
votes of both Democrats and Republicans the former claimed the credit.
The general election was close at hand in which all women could take
part and Republican leaders felt that some action was necessary.
Governor Marcus H. Holcomb of Connecticut called a special session of
the Legislature for September 14 and its first act was to ratify the
Federal Amendment by unanimous vote of the Senate and 216 to 11 in the
House. Owing to a technical question the ratification was repeated
September 21.[141]

The stories of these 37 ratifications are interesting--in some States
occasions of much pleasure accompanied by music and feasting; in
others strenuous contests which left some unpleasant memories. They
are described in each State chapter and the failures as well. Especial
reference should be made to those of States mentioned here and of
Delaware, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia,
Mississippi and Louisiana.

When the opponents could not prevent ratification they had recourse to
the law. The attempt to have a referendum to the voters has been
referred to. Efforts were made in many States to have the Attorney
Generals declare that the ratification was unconstitutional or that
further legislation by the States would be necessary, but they were
unavailing. In May, 1920, the official board of the National Woman
Suffrage Association retained former U. S. Supreme Court Justice
Charles Evans Hughes as counsel and his advice and his opinions widely
published proved to be of the greatest benefit. Although one of the
most eminent of lawyers his interest in woman suffrage was so great
that he never refused any appeal for assistance.

On July 7, 1920, before the 36th State had ratified, Charles S.
Fairchild, president of the American Constitutional League, formerly
the Men's Anti-Suffrage Association of New York, instituted injunction
proceedings in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia against
Secretary of State Bainbridge Colby and Attorney General A. Mitchell
Palmer. They sought to restrain the Secretary from proclaiming the
Federal Suffrage Amendment when it should receive the final
ratification and the Attorney General from doing anything to enforce
it. On July 13 the case for the Government was argued by Solicitor
Gene