Search All Items
- Filters:
- Language
- English 1667
- Spanish 215
- ENGLISH 2
- English 1
- census_013 1
- Type
- Image 1473
- Still Image 304
- Text 81
- Text 22
- Textual 1
Search Results 1731 to 1740 of 1895
-
Press Release from U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farm Security Administration regarding the creation of the Wartime Farm Adjustment Program
Date: March 18, 1942
-
No Caption: A front page Seattle Daily Times article and photographs reporting on the April 18, 1906 San Francisco earthquake, with the headline: "City Wiped Out! Fire Still Raging!" April 20, 1906.
Date: 1906
-
A Brief of Appellant is filed in the appellate court by the party who lost in the previous trial and argues in favor of appealing a lower court’s decision. Ellen Van Valkenburg began an important legal battle for women’s enfranchisement in California on July 21, 1871, when she requested that Santa Cruz County Clerk Albert Brown enter her name in the Great Register of voters. After Brown (a willing accomplice in helping her bring the case to court) refused to register her, Van Valkenburg and her lawyer, Santa Cruz Judge Albert Hagan, began legal proceedings by requesting a writ of mandamus, a judicial remedy used to compel agencies to perform ministerial acts, such as registering voters. Van Valkenburg and Hagan argued her case by citing the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The new amendment, ratified 3 years earlier in 1868, defined all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. as citizens protected by civil rights. Van Valkenburg and Hagan asserted that American women were considered citizens under this amendment, and that citizenship automatically granted absolute rights, including the right to vote. The case first went to California’s Third District Court. Many of America’s most prominent suffragists, including Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, were with Van Valkenburg in Santa Cruz when the lower court ruled against her on August 16, 1871. Van Valkenburg and Hagan swiftly appealed this decision through the Supreme Court of California. In the end, the Supreme Court of California upheld the lower court’s verdict under the reasoning that as a white American woman, Van Valkenburg already had citizenship and civil rights prior to the passage of the 14th amendment, and that the 14th amendment did not provide her with any additional political rights, such as the right to vote. While Van Valkenburg lost her case, and subsequent lawsuits failed to secure women's suffrage nationwide, the case stands as a critical early example of legal advocacy for women's political rights in California.
Date: September 29, 1871
