a regular correspondence was also difficult when various women were ill or absent from their posts for long periods of time. Adelia Palacios endured a long illness during the winter of 1921. Elena Landázuri was away from Mexico City for three months in 1922 during the final illness and death of her mother. Addams and Balch also struggled with ill health. Travel abroad, which was common especially among WILPF and YWCA members, only made regular communication more difficult, since letters often had to be forwarded multiple times before they reached their intended recipients.55
Given these difficulties, many women recognized that the ideal way to share information in the pursuit of common ground was in person. Of the four organizations considered here, the YWCA and the Women’s International League sent representatives to Mexico; the Pan American International Women’s Committee and the Women’s Peace Society did not. Their different organizational structures offer some explanation. The YWCA and WILPF were constituted by sections and branches established in countries around the world. The PAIWC, by contrast, was based in Washington and operated primarily through correspondence during the periods between its major gatherings in conjunction with the scientific congresses. The WPS dedicated itself to lobbying in New York and Washington, and never intended to establish national sections in other countries.
The women who traveled to Mexico on behalf of the YWCA and WILPF had varying experiences. WILPF representative Rose Standish Nichols visited Mexico City twice over the course of 1920 to try to start a section there. She spoke with “twenty-five or thirty women” who “seemed interested and eager to form a group.”56 Nichols did not encounter Elena Torres or Elena Landázuri, but another U.S. member, Zonia Baber, met with them both during the same period. Baber, a professor of geography and a close friend of Jane Addams, traveled extensively in Mexico during the early 1920s. She did not know Torres well, but she was well liked both by Landázuri and by Adelia Palacios, with whom she interacted frequently. Two YWCA representatives, Harriet Taylor and Caroline Smith, traveled to Mexico in May 1921 to examine the feasibility of establishing a branch of the association there. They reported that their meetings with various groups of Mexican women and men had been “warm” and “charming,” and by the end Smith was convinced that the Mexican people as a whole were “the personification of devotion and love.”57
The best method for practicing human internationalism was also the most expensive and time-consuming. Organizing conferences, where large groups of women could meet each other in person, exchange information about issues of concern to them, and socialize informally was the most straightforward way to further cooperation. WILPF organized international meetings in 1915, 1919, and 1921, but as they were all held in Europe, it was difficult for Latin American women to attend. The Women’s Peace Society was much too small, and had no real reason to be interested in a large-scale conference of its own. But U.S. women who were drawn to Pan Americanism during this period could take advantage of a preexisting network of organizations and conferences. The Pan American Union participated in the International Conferences of American States, which were held roughly every five years except during World War I, though women did not participate significantly in those conferences until 1928. But women had participated in several previous scientific congresses, dating back to 1898. Women comprised 6 percent of the delegates to the First Pan American Scientific Congress in 1909. Most of them were teachers who gave papers and participated in discussions on education in various fields. By the time of the second congress in December 1915, a group of U.S. women—all wives of congress members or diplomats—desired more time devoted to women’s education and other issues than the scientific congress could provide. A month before the scientific congress opened, a hastily convened committee sent invitations to the wives and daughters of the men traveling to Washington to attend the Women’s Auxiliary Conference of the Second Pan American Scientific Congress. Planning for the conference rested largely in the hands of Emma Bain Swiggett, whose husband was the general secretary of the Scientific Congress.58
The idea of human internationalism, conducted through personal exchanges and information sharing rather than treaties and formal agreements, was exactly what the organizers of the auxiliary conference had in mind. Swiggett hoped that in the process of becoming better acquainted and of exchanging views “on subjects of special interest to women as well as on those dealing with Pan Americanism” that a desire would arise “on the part of the women of the Americas for further and harmonious cooperation in the future.” The official report of the conference went further in explaining its origins: “It was the belief that such cooperation among women would furnish a powerful factor in developing the means ‘to increase the knowledge of things American,’ and ‘to disseminate and make the culture of each American country the heritage of all American Republics.’ There was a vision of all that a united American womanhood might do in creating and cherishing feelings of mutual helpfulness and friendship, and of all it might contribute to a strong spiritual union of the Americas.”59 Such a mandate echoed Jane Addams’s visions of a “spiritual internationalism” to promote cooperation and peace, and of the special role of women within it.
The program of the conference faithfully executed this mandate, directing the attendees’ attention to “things American” that promoted traditional conceptions of “American womanhood.” Included in the program, for example, were talks on “Education for Home-Making” and “Advancing Ideals for the Home.” In a speech on “The Changing Emphasis in the Education of Women in the Southern United States,” conference attendee Elizabeth Colton praised the increasing presence of “domestic science” in southern colleges. Instead of being taught “ornamental” subjects such as music, art, and elocution, women were now being taught “practical” skills such as cooking and sewing. “Home economics,” she contended, “are better adapted for the majority of women than curricula such as at Bryn Mawr and Wellesley Colleges.” Blanche Z. de Baralt, a French painter married to a Cuban diplomat, recognized the “superior intelligence” of “the Latin American woman,” but maintained “it is our conviction that the most immediate need for the women of Latin America is training in the domestic sciences; in order to destroy the barrier between man and woman she must be prepared for usefulness as a skilled home maker as well as an intellectual worker.”60 This emphasis on women’s domestic capacities reflected the elite makeup of the conference attendees and their distance from the more activist feminism emerging in the United States during the 1910s.
But the traditionalist slant of the conference should not obscure its significance within the context of the new internationalism. Swiggett and her colleagues believed strongly in the unique power of women to shape inter-American relations. As wives of prominent diplomatic officials, the organizers were fully aware of the myriad issues facing U.S.-Latin American relations, not least of which were the Wilson administration’s interventions in Mexico. The purpose of the conference was to facilitate diplomacy among men, first by fostering friendship among women, and second by trying to create a sense of common purpose. This was not a novel effort on the part of Swiggett and her colleagues; women had long used their positions as wives, sisters, mothers, and daughters to further their own and their male relatives’ political agendas. In a context such as this, “Washington women—both well-known and not—appear as political actors in their own right, using social events and the ‘private sphere’ to establish the national capital and to build … extraofficial structures.”61 Swiggett used her position as the wife of a prominent Pan American official to advance not only women’s interests but international interests as well.
Indeed, a closer look at the conference agenda reveals the presence of many progressive ideas about women and their potential contributions to international amity. One representative from Texas spoke on “The Solidarity of the World’s Womanhood as an International Asset.” Fannie Fern Andrews, founder of the American School Peace League and member of the Woman’s Peace Party, proposed a “Pan American Bureau of Education” that would stress topics such as “Public Education in a Democracy” and “International Education.” Another speech on “Constructive Woman, an Aid to Modern Progress” highlighted the achievements of woman educators, political reformers, and social workers, including Maria Montessori, Susan B. Anthony, and Jane Addams.62 Addams herself
