American Academic Male Economists and Women’s Suffrage: Another Look at Progressive-Era (Il)Liberalism

References

• Agger, Eugene. 1911. The Antis Answered. Woman Voter, 2(9): 9–12.
   Google Scholar
• Antler, J. 1987. Lucy Sprague Mitchell: The Making of a Modern Woman. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beard, C. A. 1906. ‘Thinks Woman's Rights Would Increase Strength of Nation.’ American Educational Review 27 (10): 467.
   Google Scholar
• Beard, C. A. 1913. An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States. New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Beard, C. A. 1914. ‘Woman Suffrage and Strategy.’ New Republic, 1 (December 12): 22–23.
   Google Scholar
• Beard, C. A. 1916. ‘The Woman’s Party.’ New Republic, 9 (July 29): 329–331.
   Google Scholar
• Borning, B. C. 1962. The Political and Social Thought of Charles A. Beard. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burns, A. F. 1952. ‘Introductory Sketch.’ In Wesley Clair Mitchell: The Economic Scientist, edited by A. F. Burns, 1–54. New York: NBER.
   Google Scholar
• Carver, T. N. 1918. Women Suffrage from a Neutral Point of View. Address Delivered at the Annual Meeting of the Cambridge Branch of the Women’s Anti Suffrage Association of Massachusetts, May 13, 1918. Boston: A.T. Bliss.
   Google Scholar
• Carver, T. N. 1949. Recollections of an Unplanned Life. Los Angeles: The Ward Ritchie Press.
   Google Scholar
• Davenport, H. 1916. ‘The Economics of Feminism.’ Herbert J. Davenport Papers, State Historical Society of Missouri.
   Google Scholar
• Du Bois, W. E. B. 1912a. ‘Votes for Women.’ Crisis 4 (August): 182.
   Google Scholar
• Du Bois, W. E. B. 1912b. ‘Votes for Women.’ Crisis 4 (September): 234.
   Google Scholar
• Ely, R. T. 1908. ‘Economic Theory and Labor Legislation.’ American Economic Association Quarterly 3rd Series 9 (1): 124–153.
   Google Scholar
• Ely, R. T. 1912. ‘Ely Opposes Suffrage in Address Today.’ Wisconsin State Journal, May 25.
   Google Scholar
• Fiorito, L., and C. Orsi. 2017. ‘““Survival Value and a Robust, Practical, Joyless Individualism”: Thomas Nixon Carver, Social Justice, and Eugenics.’ History of Political Economy 49 (3): 469–495.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher, I. 1913. ‘Unfair in Some Points.’ The Woman’s Journal, May 17.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, I. 1914. ‘Would Liberate Women.’ New Haven Union, June 6.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, I. 1916. ‘Ten Reasons Why I Shall Vote for Wilson.’ New York Times, August 27.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, I. 1918. ‘The Suffrage Amendment’ The Evening Post, December 3.
   Google Scholar
• Franklin, M. L. 1913. The Case for Woman Suffrage: A Bibliography. New York: National College Equal Suffrage League.
   Google Scholar
• Giersch, H. 1984. ‘The Age of Schumpeter.’ American Economic Review 74 (2): 103–109.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamilton, W. 1915. Current Economic Problems. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leonard, T. C. 2005. ‘Protecting Family and Race. The Progressive Case for Regulating Women's Work.’ American Journal of Economics and Sociology 64 (3): 757–791.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leonard, T. C. 2016. Illiberal Reformers: Race, Eugenics, and American Economics in the Progressive Era. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lunardini, C. A., and T. J. Knock. 1980. ‘Woodrow Wilson and Woman Suffrage: A New Look.’ Political Science Quarterly 95 (4): 655–671.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason, E. S., and T. S. Lamont. 1982. ‘The Harvard Department of Economics from the Beginning to World War II.’ The Quarterly Journal of Economics 97 (3): 383–433.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McBride, G. G. 1994. On Wisconsin Women: Working for Their Rights from Settlement to Suffrage. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
   Google Scholar
• McMahon, S. H. 1999. Social Control and Public Intellect: The Legacy of Edward A. Ross. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Memorial to Former President Simon N. Patten. 1923. American Economic Review 13(1): 257–293.
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell, W. C. 1912. ‘The Backward Art of Spending Money.’ American Economic Review 2 (2): 269–281.
   Google Scholar
• Mussey, H. R. 1912. ‘College Women and Suffrage.’ The Woman Voter 2 (1): 6–7.
   Google Scholar
• National Anti-Suffrage Association. 1916. The Case Against Woman Suffrage. Boston.
   Google Scholar
• No Suffrage for Women: So Says Professor Jenks in Third Lecture of Blumenthal Lecture. 1907. Columbia Spectator, October 25.
   Google Scholar
• Opinions of Eminent Persons Against Woman Suffrage. 1912. Boston: Massachusetts Association Opposed to the Further Extension of Suffrage to Women.
   Google Scholar
• Parmelee, M. 1914. ‘The Economic Basis of Feminism.’ The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 56: 18–26.
   Google Scholar
• Patten, S. N. 1904. ‘Young Wives in Industry.’ Independent LVII (December): 1244-1249.
   Google Scholar
• Patten, S. N. 1914. ‘The Evolution of a New Woman.’ The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 56: 111–121.
   Google Scholar
• Patten, S. N. 1919. ‘Making National Debts National Blessings.’ The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 82: 39–51.
   Google Scholar
• Pauley, G. E. 2000. ‘W.E.B. Du Bois on Woman Suffrage.’ Journal of Black Studies 30 (3): 383–410.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Popenoe, P. B., and R. H. Johnson. 1918. Applied Eugenics. New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenberg, R. 2004. Changing the Subject: How the Women of Columbia Shaped the Way We Think About Sex and Politics. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chaddock, R. 1911. The Antis Answered. Woman Voter, 2(9): 9–12.
   Google Scholar
• Ross, E. A. 1908. Social Psychology: An Outline and Source Book. New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, J. H. 1914. ‘The Antis Answered.’ The Woman Voter 5 (4): 9–12.
   Google Scholar
• Schumpeter, J. A. 1914. ‘Suffrage Coming, Says Economist, Because of Changing Family Life.’ Washington Post, March 22.
   Google Scholar
• Seager, H. R. 1911. ‘Why the Working Girl Should Vote.’ Woman Voter 2 (9): 7–8.
   Google Scholar
• Seager, H. R. 1914. ‘The Antis Answered.’ The Woman Voter 5 (4): 9–12.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, R. M. 2016. ‘The Progressive Seedbed: Claims of American Political Community in the Twentieth and Twentieth-First Centuries.’ In The Progressive Century: Political Reform, Constitutional Government, and the Modern American State, edited by S. Skowronek, S. M. Engel, and B. Ackerman, 264–268. New Heaven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Watkins, V. 2016. ‘Votes for Women: Race, Gender, and W.E.B. Du Bois’s Advocacy of Woman Suffrage.’ Phylon (1960) 53 (2): 3–19.
   Google Scholar
• Weinberg, J. 1967. ‘E. A. Ross: The Progressive as Nativist.’ Wisconsin Magazine of History 50 (3): 242–253.
   Google Scholar
• Wolfe, A. B. 1913. ‘Manhood Suffrage in the United States.’ In The Woman Citizen's Library, edited by S. Mathews. Vol. 7: Woman Suffrage, 1687–1736. Chicago: The Civics Society.
   Google Scholar
• Yellin, Jean F. 2013. Du Bois’s Crisis and Women’s Suffrage. Massachusetts Review 54 (3): 399–409.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar