1934-04: (The First LFAS Dissolved — The End of Roumain’s and Hudicourt’s Three-Month Incarceration Coinciding with the LFAS Petition for Authorization, Vinc…

1934-04: (The First LFAS Dissolved — The End of Roumain’s and Hudicourt’s Three-Month Incarceration Coinciding with the LFAS Petition for Authorization, Vincent Recognizing the Names and Reflecting on the Founders’ Familial and Social Affiliations — Perhaps Remembering His Visits to the Garoute Home and Its Collection of Books Including Marxist Material, the Petition Flagging More Radical Intentions and Vincent’s Government Rejecting It — the Initial LFAS Dissolving in April 1934, Sylvain Identifying Two Reasons: the Government “Took Offense” to Goals Including Public Secondary Schools for Girls Economic Independence for Married Women Equal Salary Suffrage a Women’s Labor Department and Prohibition on Brothels, and Political Differences Among Members Creating Divisions — “Timid and Conservative” Women Versus “Enthusiastic and Dedicated” Warriors): The end of Roumain’s and Hudicourt’s three-month incarceration coincided with Sylvain, Garoute, and Thérèse Hudicourt’s petition for organizational authorization. Vincent certainly recognized the names on the petition and likely reflected on the founders’ familial and social affiliations. Perhaps he even remembered his visits to the Garoute home and the collection of books and newspapers that included Marxist material. Whatever his musings — perhaps the mention of a women’s labor department or improvements to women’s roles in domestic and family life — the petition flagged the brewing of more radical intentions, and Vincent’s government rejected it. Denied authorization, the initial formulation of the LFAS dissolved in April 1934. In her account of the false start, Sylvain identified two reasons. First, the Vincent government took offense to the aggressive agenda, specifically citing the construction and development of public secondary schools for girls, economic independence for married women, equal salary for equal work, women’s suffrage, freedom to establish a women’s labor department, and a prohibition on brothels. Second, political and experiential differences among members created divisions — a majority of timid and conservative women who did not want to be on the wrong side of the government, and a small group of enthusiastic and dedicated women who were relentless warriors but unable to develop a platform with wide national appeal. The fear was not abstract: women were not exempt from arrest, and the men in their families were not exempt from political or legal action in response to women’s organizing.