Republican roll on (NY Times, November 8, 1866)
In 1866 Elizabeth Cady Stanton ran for Congress for New York’s Eighth District as an independent – unaffiliated with either the Democratic or Republican parties. She didn’t win.
From a Seneca County, New York newspaper in 1866:
AWFUL. – Our whilom towns-lady, Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, announced herself a few days before election as a candidate for Member of Congress in the 8th District of New York city, but only received eight votes. This shows what a graceless set those New York “copperheads” are, and that it will take a good deal of civilizing yet to bring them up to the mark of “impartial suffrage.”
A New York City newspaper lauded the eight (male) voters. From The New-York Times, November 8, 1866:
AN EPOCH. – It appears that out of twenty-two, odd, thousand votes cast in the Eighth District for Congressional candidates, Mrs. ELIZABETH CADY STANTON received eight. If the stringent rules of the ballot did not forbid, it would be satisfactory to record and embalm the names of this independent and gallant minority. As marking an epoch in the progress of the race, their names, however, may be held of less significance by posterity than their symbolical number. Thus it has been in times past. Of the Septuagint – the seventy (or seventy-two) learned Jews to whom we all owe so much of our sacred history – not an individual name of popular significance is extant. No one of the Jewish Sanhedrim of two thousand years ago, or of the French Sanhedrim of sixty years ago, presents to-day a name to conjure by. The Venetian Council of Ten [represent an epoch?] in government, and nothing more. Few care to recall the names of OCTAVIUS, ANTHONY and LEPIDUS, in connection with the Roman Triumvirate. And yet, if there were no social and political etiquette in the way, how satisfactory it would be to call the valiant Eight who have led the way in this movement toward universal enfranchisement by their proper names! Their history will, some day, be written by some learned pundit, who may properly call it: “The Reformed Congress; or, The Modern Octatenque.”
Democrat Brooks beats Messrs. Cady Stanton and Cannon (NY Times November 7, 1866)
third column doesn’t fit the template (NY Times November 7, 1866)
According to History of Woman Suffrage, Volume II, edited by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and Matilda Joslyn Gage (1881; pages 180-181), Theodore Tilton (I believe in 1868) had a higher vote count for Mrs. Stanton:
The New York Herald, though, of course, with no sincerity, since that journal is never sincere in anything—warmly advocated Mrs. Stanton’s election. “A lady of fine presence and accomplishments in the House of Representatives,” it said (and said truly), “would wield a wholesome influence over the rough and disorderly elements of that body.” The Anti-Slavery Standard, with genuine commendation, said: “The electors of the Eighth District would honor themselves and do well by the country in giving her a triumphant election.” The other candidates in the same district were Mr. James Brooks, Democrat, and Mr. Le Grand B. Cannon, Republican. The result of the election was as follows: Mr. Brooks received 13,816 votes, Mr. Cannon 8,210, and Mrs. Stanton 24. It will be seen that the number of sensible people in the district was limited! The excellent lady, in looking back upon her successful defeat, regrets only that she did not, before it became too late, procure the photographs of her two dozen unknown friends.
Elizabeth Cady Stanton
still going forward
