diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 4 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/63948-0.txt | 9863 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/63948-0.zip | bin | 215168 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/63948-h.zip | bin | 227286 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/63948-h/63948-h.htm | 12750 |
7 files changed, 17 insertions, 22613 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d7b82bc --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ +*.txt text eol=lf +*.htm text eol=lf +*.html text eol=lf +*.md text eol=lf diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..e2f4c02 --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #63948 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/63948) diff --git a/old/63948-0.txt b/old/63948-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 4d78716..0000000 --- a/old/63948-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,9863 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg EBook of Common Sense about Women, by Thomas -Wentworth Higginson - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you -will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before -using this ebook. - -Title: Common Sense about Women - -Author: Thomas Wentworth Higginson - -Release Date: December 05, 2020 [EBook #63948] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -Produced by: Richard Tonsing and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team - at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images - generously made available by The Internet Archive) - -*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK COMMON SENSE ABOUT WOMEN *** - - - - - ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ - │ T. W. HIGGINSON’S BOOKS. │ - │ │ - │ │ - │COMMON SENSE ABOUT WOMEN $1│ - │ 50│ - │ │ - │ARMY LIFE IN A BLACK REGIMENT 1 50│ - │ │ - │ATLANTIC ESSAYS 1 50│ - │ │ - │OLDPORT DAYS. With 10 Heliotype Illustrations 2 00│ - │ │ - │OUT-DOOR PAPERS 1 50│ - │ │ - │MALBONE. An Oldport Romance 1 50│ - │ │ - │YOUNG FOLKS’ HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES. Illustrated. 16mo 1 50│ - │ │ - │YOUNG FOLKS’ BOOK OF AMERICAN EXPLORERS. Illustrated. 16mo 1 50│ - │ │ - │SHORT STUDIES OF AMERICAN AUTHORS. Little classic size 75│ - │ │ - │ │ - │ LEE AND SHEPARD, PUBLISHERS, BOSTON. │ - └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ - - - - - COMMON SENSE ABOUT WOMEN - - - BY - - THOMAS WENTWORTH HIGGINSON - - - BOSTON - - LEE AND SHEPARD PUBLISHERS - - NEW YORK - - CHARLES T. DILLINGHAM - - 1882 - - - - - COPYRIGHT, 1881, - - BY THOMAS WENTWORTH HIGGINSON. - - _All rights reserved._ - - - - - =To= - - =My Little Daughter Margaret.= - - - - - TABLE OF CONTENTS. - - - PAGE - =Physiology= 5 - - I. TOO MUCH NATURAL HISTORY 7 - - II. DARWIN, HUXLEY, AND BUCKLE 11 - - III. WHICH IS THE STRONGER? 16 - - IV. THE SPIRIT OF SMALL TYRANNY 18 - - V. “THE NOBLE SEX” 21 - - VI. PHYSIOLOGICAL CROAKING 24 - - VII. THE TRUTH ABOUT OUR GRANDMOTHERS 28 - - VIII. THE PHYSIQUE OF AMERICAN WOMEN 33 - - IX. “VERY MUCH FATIGUED” 37 - - X. THE LIMITATIONS OF SEX 40 - - - =Temperament= 43 - - XI. THE INVISIBLE LADY 45 - - XII. SACRED OBSCURITY 49 - - XIII. “OUR TRIALS” 52 - - XIV. VIRTUES IN COMMON 55 - - XV. INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES 60 - - XVI. ANGELIC SUPERIORITY 63 - - XVII. VICARIOUS HONORS 66 - - XVIII. THE GOSPEL OF HUMILIATION 69 - - XIX. “CELERY AND CHERUBS” 73 - - XX. THE NEED OF CAVALRY 77 - - XXI. “THE REASON FIRM, THE TEMPERATE WILL” 80 - - XXII. “ALLURES TO BRIGHTER WORLDS, AND LEADS THE WAY” 83 - - =The Home= 87 - - XXIII. WANTED—HOMES 89 - - XXIV. THE ORIGIN OF CIVILIZATION 93 - - XXV. THE LOW-WATER MARK 96 - - XXVI. “OBEY” 99 - - XXVII. WOMAN IN THE CHRYSALIS 103 - - XXVIII. TWO AND TWO 106 - - XXIX. A MODEL HOUSEHOLD 109 - - XXX. A SAFEGUARD FOR THE FAMILY 112 - - XXXI. WOMEN AS ECONOMISTS 116 - - XXXII. GREATER INCLUDES LESS 120 - - XXXIII. A CO-PARTNERSHIP 123 - - XXXIV. “ONE RESPONSIBLE HEAD” 127 - - XXXV. ASKING FOR MONEY 131 - - XXXVI. WOMANHOOD AND MOTHERHOOD 135 - - XXXVII. A GERMAN POINT OF VIEW 139 - - XXXVIII. CHILDLESS WOMEN 142 - - XXXIX. THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO MOTHERS 145 - - - =Society= 149 - - XL. FOAM AND CURRENT 151 - - XLI. “IN SOCIETY” 155 - - XLII. THE BATTLE OF THE CARDS 159 - - XLIII. SOME WORKING-WOMEN 163 - - XLIV. THE EMPIRE OF MANNERS 167 - - XLV. “GIRLSTEROUSNESS” 171 - - XLVI. ARE WOMEN NATURAL ARISTOCRATS? 175 - - XLVII. MRS. BLANK’S DAUGHTERS 178 - - XLVIII. THE EUROPEAN PLAN 181 - - XLIX. “FEATHERSES” 185 - - L. SOME MAN-MILLINERY 189 - - LI. SUBLIME PRINCES IN DISTRESS 192 - - - =Education= 197 - - LII. “EXPERIMENTS” 199 - - LIII. INTELLECTUAL CINDERELLAS 203 - - LIV. FOREIGN EDUCATION 207 - - LV. TEACHING THE TEACHERS 210 - - LVI. “CUPID-AND-PSYCHOLOGY” 213 - - LVII. MEDICAL SCIENCE FOR WOMEN 216 - - LVIII. SEWING IN SCHOOLS 219 - - LIX. CASH PREMIUMS FOR STUDY 223 - - LX. MENTAL HORTICULTURE 226 - - - =Employment= 231 - - LXI. “SEXUAL DIFFERENCE OF EMPLOYMENT” 233 - - LXII. THE USE OF ONE’S FEET 237 - - LXIII. MISS INGELOW’S PROBLEM 240 - - LXIV. SELF-SUPPORT 245 - - LXV. SELF-SUPPORTING WIVES 248 - - LXVI. THE PROBLEM OF WAGES 251 - - LXVII. THOROUGH 255 - - LXVIII. LITERARY ASPIRANTS 259 - - LXIX. “THE CAREER OF LETTERS” 263 - - LXX. TALKING AND TAKING 266 - - LXXI. HOW TO SPEAK IN PUBLIC 269 - - - =Principles of Government= 273 - - LXXII. WE THE PEOPLE 275 - - LXXIII. THE USE OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE 278 - - LXXIV. THE TRADITIONS OF THE FATHERS 281 - - LXXV. SOME OLD-FASHIONED PRINCIPLES 285 - - LXXVI. FOUNDED ON A ROCK 288 - - LXXVII. “THE GOOD OF THE GOVERNED” 292 - - LXXVIII. RULING AT SECOND-HAND 296 - - LXXIX. “TOO MANY VOTERS ALREADY” 299 - - =Suffrage= 303 - - LXXX. DRAWING THE LINE 305 - - LXXXI. FOR SELF-PROTECTION 309 - - LXXXII. WOMANLY STATESMANSHIP 312 - - LXXXIII. TOO MUCH PREDICTION 316 - - LXXXIV. FIRST-CLASS CARRIAGES 320 - - LXXXV. EDUCATION VIA SUFFRAGE 324 - - LXXXVI. “OFF WITH HER HEAD!” 328 - - LXXXVII. FOLLOW YOUR LEADERS 331 - - LXXXVIII. HOW TO MAKE WOMEN UNDERSTAND POLITICS. 335 - - LXXXIX. “INFERIOR TO MAN, AND NEAR TO ANGELS” 339 - - - =Objections to Suffrage= 343 - - XC. THE FACT OF SEX 345 - - XCI. HOW WILL IT RESULT? 349 - - XCII. “I HAVE ALL THE RIGHTS I WANT” 352 - - XCIII. “SENSE ENOUGH TO VOTE” 356 - - XCIV. AN INFELICITOUS EPITHET 359 - - XCV. THE ROB ROY THEORY 363 - - XCVI. THE VOTES OF NON-COMBATANTS 368 - - XCVII. “MANNERS REPEAL LAWS” 372 - - XCVIII. KILKENNY ARGUMENTS 375 - - XCIX. WOMEN AND PRIESTS 379 - - C. THE ROMAN CATHOLIC BUGBEAR 382 - - CI. DANGEROUS VOTERS 386 - - CII. HOW WOMEN WILL LEGISLATE 389 - - CIII. WARNED IN TIME 393 - - CIV. INDIVIDUALS VS. CLASSES 396 - - CV. DEFEATS BEFORE VICTORIES 400 - - - - - PHYSIOLOGY. - - -“Allein, bevor und nachdem man Mutter ist, ist Man ein Mensch; die -mütterliche Bestimmung aber, oder gar die eheliche, kann nicht die -menschliche überwiegen oder ersetzen, sondern sie muss das Mittel, nicht -der Zweck derselben sein.”— J.P.F. RICHTER: _Levana_, § 89. - -“But, before and after being a mother, one is a human being; and neither -the motherly nor the wifely destination can overbalance or replace the -human, but must become its means, not its end.” - - - - - COMMON SENSE ABOUT WOMEN. - - - - - I. - TOO MUCH NATURAL HISTORY. - - -Lord Melbourne, speaking of the fine ladies in London who were fond of -talking about their ailments, used to complain that they gave him too -much of their natural history. There are a good many writers—usually -men—who, with the best intentions, discuss woman as if she had merely a -physical organization, and as if she existed only for one object, the -production and rearing of children. Against this some protest may well -be made. - -Doubtless there are few things more important to a community than the -health of its women. The Sandwich-Island proverb says:— - - “If strong is the frame of the mother, - The son will give laws to the people.” - -And, in nations where all men give laws, all men need mothers of strong -frames. - -Moreover, there is no harm in admitting that all the rules of -organization are imperative; that soul and body, whether of man or -woman, are made in harmony, so that each part of our nature must accept -the limitations of the other. A man’s soul may yearn to the stars; but -so long as the body cannot jump so high, he must accept the body’s veto. -It is the same with any veto interposed in advance by the physical -structure of woman. Nobody objects to this general principle. It is only -when clerical gentlemen or physiological gentlemen undertake to go a -step farther, and put in that veto on their own responsibility, that it -is necessary to say, “Hands off, gentlemen! Precisely because women are -women, they, not you, are to settle that question.” - -One or two points are clear. Every specialist is liable to overrate his -own specialty; and the man who thinks of woman only as a wife and mother -is apt to forget, that, before she was either of these, she was a human -being. “Women, as such,” says an able writer, “are constituted for -purposes of maternity and the continuation of mankind.” Undoubtedly, and -so were men, as such, constituted for paternity. But very much depends -on what relative importance we assign to the phrase, “as such.” Even an -essay so careful, so moderate, and so free from coarseness, as that here -quoted, suggests, after all, a slight one-sidedness,—perhaps a natural -re-action from the one-sidedness of those injudicious reformers who -allow themselves to speak slightingly of “the merely animal function of -child-bearing.” Higher than either—wiser than both put together—is that -noble statement with which Jean Paul begins his fine essay on the -education of girls in “Levana.” “Before being a wife or mother, one is a -human being; and neither motherly nor wifely destination can overbalance -or replace the human, but must become its means, not end. As above the -poet, the painter, or the hero, so above the mother, does the human -being rise pre-eminent.” - -Here is sure anchorage. We can hold to this. And, fortunately, all the -analogies of nature sustain this position. Throughout nature the laws of -sex rule everywhere; but they rule a kingdom of their own, always -subordinate to the greater kingdom of the vital functions. Every -creature, male or female, finds in its sexual relations only a -subordinate part of its existence. The need of food, the need of -exercise, the joy of living, these come first, and absorb the bulk of -its life, whether the individual be male or female. This _Antiope_ -butterfly, that flits at this moment past my window,—the first of the -season,—spends almost all its existence in a form where the distinction -of sex lies dormant: a few days, I might almost say a few hours, -comprise its whole sexual consciousness, and the majority of its race -die before reaching that epoch. The law of sex is written absolutely -through the whole insect world. Yet everywhere it is written as a -secondary and subordinate law. The life which is common to the sexes is -the principal life; the life which each sex leads, “as such,” is a minor -and subordinate thing. - -The same rule pervades nature. Two riders pass down the street before my -window. One rides a horse, the other a mare. The animals were perhaps -foaled in the same stable, of the same progenitors. They have been -reared alike, fed alike, trained alike, ridden alike; they need the same -exercise, the same grooming; nine tenths of their existence are the -same, and only the other tenth is different. Their whole organization is -marked by the distinction of sex: but, though the marking is -ineffaceable, the distinction is not the first or most important fact. - -If this be true of the lower animals, it is far more true of the higher. -The mental and moral laws of the universe touch us first and chiefly as -human beings. We eat our breakfasts as human beings, not as men and -women; and it is the same with nine tenths of our interests and duties -in life. In legislating or philosophizing for woman, we must neither -forget that she has an organization distinct from that of man, nor must -we exaggerate the fact. Not “first the womanly and then the human,” but -first the human and then the womanly, is to be the order of her -training. - - - - - II. - DARWIN, HUXLEY, AND BUCKLE. - - -When any woman, old or young, asks the question, Which among all modern -books ought I to read first? the answer is plain. She should read -Buckle’s lecture before the Royal Institution upon “The Influence of -Woman on the Progress of Knowledge.” It is one of two papers contained -in a thin volume called “Essays by Henry Thomas Buckle.” As a means -whereby a woman may become convinced that her sex has a place in the -intellectual universe, this little essay is almost indispensable. -Nothing else takes its place. - -Darwin and Huxley seem to make woman simply a lesser man, weaker in body -and mind,—an affectionate and docile animal, of inferior grade. That -there is any aim in the distinction of the sexes, beyond the -perpetuation of the race, is nowhere recognized by them, so far as I -know. That there is any thing in the intellectual sphere to correspond -to the physical difference; that here also the sexes are equal yet -diverse, and the natural completion and complement of the other,—this -neither Huxley nor Darwin explicitly recognizes. And with the utmost -admiration for their great teachings in other ways, I must think that -here they are open to the suspicion of narrowness. - -Huxley wrote in “The Reader,” in 1864, a short paper called -“Emancipation—Black and White,” in which, while taking generous ground -in behalf of the legal and political position of woman, he yet does it -pityingly, _de haut en bas_, as for a creature hopelessly inferior, and -so heavily weighted already by her sex, that she should be spared all -further trials. Speaking through an imaginary critic, who seems to -represent himself, he denies “even the natural equality of the sexes,” -and declares “that in every excellent character, whether mental or -physical, the average woman is inferior to the average man, in the sense -of having that character less in quantity and lower in quality.” Finally -he goes so far as “to defend the startling paradox that even in physical -beauty, man is the superior.” He admits that for a brief period of early -youth the case may be doubtful, but claims that after thirty the -superior beauty of man is unquestionable. Thus reasons Huxley; the whole -essay being included in his volume of “Lay Sermons, Addresses, and -Reviews.”[1] - -Footnote 1: - - Pp. 22, 23, Am. ed. - -Darwin’s best statements on the subject may be found in his “Descent of -Man.”[2] He is, as usual, more moderate and guarded than Huxley. He -says, for instance: “It is generally admitted that with women the powers -of intuition, of rapid perception, and perhaps of imitation, are more -strongly marked than in man; but some, at least, of these faculties are -characteristic of the lower races, and therefore of a past and lower -state of civilization.” Then he passes to the usual assertion that man -has thus far attained to a higher eminence than woman. “If two lists -were made of the most eminent men and women in poetry, painting, -sculpture, music,—comprising composition and performance,—history, -science, and philosophy, with half a dozen names under each subject, the -two lists would not bear comparison.” But the obvious answer, that -nearly every name on his list, upon the masculine side, would probably -be taken from periods when woman was excluded from any fair -competition,—this he does not seem to recognize at all. Darwin, of all -men, must admit that superior merit generally arrives later, not -earlier, on the scene; and the question for him to answer is, not -whether woman equalled man in the first stages of the intellectual -“struggle for life,” but whether she is not gaining on him now.@ - -Footnote 2: - - II., 311, Am. Ed. - -If, in spite of man’s enormous advantage in the start, woman has already -overtaken his very best performances in several of the highest -intellectual departments,—as, for instance, prose fiction and dramatic -representation,—then it is mere dogmatism in Mr. Darwin to deny that she -may yet do the same in other departments. We in this generation have -actually seen this success achieved by Rachel and Ristori in the one -art, by “George Sand” and “George Eliot” in the other. Woman is, then, -visibly gaining on man, in the sphere of intellect; and, if so, Mr. -Darwin, at least, must accept the inevitable inference. - -But this is arguing the question on the superficial facts merely. Buckle -goes deeper, and looks to principles. That superior quickness of women, -which Darwin dismisses so lightly as something belonging to savage -epochs, is to Buckle the sign of a quality which he holds essential, not -only to literature and art, but to science itself. Go among ignorant -women, he says, and you will find them more quick and intelligent than -equally ignorant men. A woman will usually tell you the way in the -street more readily than a man can; a woman can always understand a -foreigner more easily; and Dr. Currie says in his letters, that when a -laborer and his wife came to consult him, he always got all the -information from the wife. Buckle illustrates this at some length, and -points out that a woman’s mind is by its nature deductive and quick; a -man’s mind, inductive and slow; that each has its value, and that -science profoundly needs both. - -“I will endeavor,” he says, “to establish two propositions. First, that -women naturally prefer the deductive method to the inductive. Secondly, -that women, by encouraging in men deductive habits of thought, have -rendered an immense though unconscious service to the progress of -science, by preventing scientific investigators from being as -exclusively inductive as they would otherwise be.” - -Then he shows that the most important scientific discoveries of modern -times—as of the law of gravitation by Newton, the law of the forms of -crystals by Haüy, and the metamorphosis of plants by Goethe—were all -essentially the results of that _a priori_ or deductive method, “which, -during the last two centuries, Englishmen have unwisely despised.” They -were all the work, in a manner, of the imagination,—of the intuitive or -womanly quality of mind. And nothing can be finer or truer than the -words in which Buckle predicts the benefits that are to come from the -intellectual union of the sexes for the work of the future. “In that -field which we and our posterity have yet to traverse, I firmly believe -that the imagination will effect quite as much as the understanding. Our -poetry will have to re-enforce our logic, and we must feel quite as much -as we must argue. Let us, then, hope that the imaginative and emotional -minds of one sex will continue to accelerate the great progress by -acting upon and improving the colder and harder minds of the other sex. -By this coalition, by this union of different faculties, different -tastes, and different methods, we shall go on our way with the greater -ease.” - - - - - III. - WHICH IS THE STRONGER? - - -What is strength,—the brute hardness of iron, or the more delicate -strength of steel? Which is the stronger,—the physical frame that can -strike the harder blow, or that which can endure the greater strain and -yet last longer? “Man can lift a heavier weight,” says a writer on -physiology, “but woman can watch more enduringly at the bedside of her -sick child.” The strain upon the system of all women who have borne and -reared children is as great in its way as that upon the system of the -carpenter or the woodchopper; and the power to endure it is as properly -to be called strength. - -Again, which is the stronger in the domain of will,—the man who carries -his points by energy and command, or the woman who carries hers by -patience and persuasion? the man in the household who leads and decides, -or the woman who foresees, guards, manages? the mother of the family, -who puts the commas and semicolons in her children’s lives, as Jean Paul -Richter says, or the father who puts in the colons and periods? It may -be hard to say which type of strength is the more to be admired, but it -is clear that they are both genuine types. - -One grows tired of hearing young men who can do nothing but row, or -swing dumb-bells, and are thrown wholly “off their training” by the loss -of a night’s sleep, speak contemptuously of the physical weakness of a -woman who can watch with a sick person half a dozen nights together. It -is absurd to hear a man who is prostrated by a single reverse in -business speak of being “encumbered” with a wife who can perhaps alter -the habits of a lifetime more easily than he can abandon his half-dollar -cigars. It is amusing to read the criticisms of languid and graceful -masculine essayists on the want of vigorous intellect in the sex that -wrote “Aurora Leigh” and “Middlemarch” and “Consuelo.” - -It may be that a man’s strength is not a woman’s, or a woman’s strength -that of a man. I am arguing for equivalence, not identity. The greater -part played in the phenomena of woman’s strength by sensibility and -impulse and variations and tears—this does not affect the matter. What I -have never been able to see is, that woman as such is, in the long-run -and tried by all the tests, a weaker being than man. And it would seem -that any man, in proportion as he lives longer and sees more of life, -must have the conceit taken out of him by actual contact with some -woman—be she mother, sister, wife, daughter, or friend—who is not only -as strong as himself in all substantial regards, but it may be, on the -whole, a little stronger. - - - - - IV. - THE SPIRIT OF SMALL TYRANNY. - - -When Mr. John Smauker and the Bath footmen invited Sam Weller to their -“swarry,” consisting of a boiled leg of mutton, each guest had some -expression of contempt and wrath for the humble little greengrocer who -served them,—“in the true spirit,” Dickens says, “of the very smallest -tyranny.” The very fact that they were subject to being ordered about in -their own persons gave them a peculiar delight in issuing tyrannical -orders to others: just as sophomores in college torment freshmen because -other sophomores once teased the present tormentors themselves; and -Irishmen denounce the Chinese for underbidding them in the labor-market, -precisely as they were themselves denounced by native-born Americans -thirty years ago. So it has sometimes seemed to me that the men whose -own positions and claims are really least commanding are those who hold -most resolutely that women should be kept in their proper place of -subordination. - -A friend of mine maintains the theory that men large and strong in -person are constitutionally inclined to do justice to women, as fearing -no competition from them in the way of bodily strength; but that small -and weak men are apt to be vehemently opposed to any thing like equality -in the sexes. He quotes in defence of his theory the big soldier in -London who justified himself for allowing his little wife to chastise -him, on the ground that it pleased her and did not hurt him; and on the -other hand cites the extreme domestic tyranny of the dwarf Quilp. He -declares that in any difficult excursion among woods and mountains, the -guides and the able-bodied men are often willing to have women join the -party, while it is sure to be opposed by those who doubt their own -strength or are reluctant to display their weakness. It is not necessary -to go so far as my friend goes; but many will remember some fact of this -kind, making such theories appear not quite so absurd as at first. - -Thus it seems from the “Life and Letters” of Sydney Dobell, the English -poet, that he was opposed both to woman suffrage and woman authorship, -believing the movement for the former to be a “blundering on to the -perdition of womanhood.” It appears that against all authorship by women -his convictions yearly grew stronger, he regarding it as “an error and -an anomaly.” It seems quite in accordance with my friend’s theory to -hear, after this, that Sydney Dobell was slight in person and a -life-long invalid; nor is it surprising, on the same theory, that his -poetry took no deep root, and that it will not be likely to survive -long, except perhaps in his weird ballad of “Ravelston.” But he -represents a large class of masculine intellects, of secondary and -mediocre quality, whose opinions on this subject are not so much -opinions as instinctive prejudices against a competitor who may turn out -their superior. Whether they know it, or not, their aversion to the -authorship of women is very much like the conviction of a weak -pedestrian, that women are not naturally fitted to take long walks; or -the opinion of a man whose own accounts are in a muddle, that his wife -is constitutionally unfitted to understand business. - -It is a pity to praise either sex at the expense of the other. The -social inequality of the sexes was not produced so much by the voluntary -tyranny of man, as by his great practical advantage at the outset; human -history necessarily beginning with a period when physical strength was -sole ruler. It is unnecessary, too, to consider in how many cases women -may have justified this distrust; and may have made themselves as -obnoxious as Horace Walpole’s maids of honor, whose coachman left his -savings to his son on condition that he should never marry a maid of -honor. But it is safe to say that on the whole the feeling of contempt -for women, and the love to exercise arbitrary power over them, is the -survival of a crude impulse which the world is outgrowing, and which is -in general least obvious in the manliest men. That clear and able -English writer, Walter Bagehot, well describes “the contempt for -physical weakness and for women which marks early society. The -non-combatant population is sure to fare ill during the ages of combat. -But these defects, too, are cured or lessened; women have now marvellous -means of winning their way in the world; and mind without muscle has far -greater force than muscle without mind.”[3] - -Footnote 3: - - Physics and Politics, p. 79. - - - - - V. - “THE NOBLE SEX.” - - -A highly educated American woman of my acquaintance once employed a -French tutor in Paris, to assist her in teaching Latin to her little -grandson. The Frenchman brought with him a Latin grammar, written in his -own language, with which my friend was quite pleased, until she came to -a passage relating to the masculine gender in nouns, and claiming -grammatical precedence for it on the ground that the male sex is the -noble sex,—”_le sexe noble_.” “Upon that,” she said, “I burst forth in -indignation, and the poor teacher soon retired. But I do not believe,” -she added, “that the Frenchman has the slightest conception, up to this -moment, of what I could find in that phrase to displease me.” - -I do not suppose he could. From the time when the Salic Law set French -women aside from the royal succession, on the ground that the kingdom of -France was “too noble to be ruled by a woman,” the claim of nobility has -been all on one side. The State has strengthened the Church in this -theory, the Church has strengthened the State; and the result of all is, -that French grammarians follow both these high authorities. When even -the good Père Hyacinthe teaches, through the New York Independent, that -the husband is to direct the conscience of his wife, precisely as the -father directs that of his child, what higher philosophy can you expect -of any Frenchman than to maintain the claims of “_le sexe noble_”? - -We see the consequence, even among the most heterodox Frenchmen. -Rejecting all other precedents and authorities, the poor Communists -still held to this. Consider, for instance, this translation of a -marriage-contract under the Commune, which lately came to light in a -trial reported in the “Gazette des Tribunaux:”— - - - FRENCH REPUBLIC. - - The citizen Anet, son of Jean Louis Anet, and the _citoyenne_ Maria - Saint; she engaged to follow the said citizen everywhere and to love - him always.—ANET. MARIA SAINT. - - Witnessed by the under-mentioned citizen and _citoyenne_.—FOURIER. - LAROCHE. - - PARIS, April 22, 1871. - -What a comfortable arrangement is this! Poor _citoyenne_ Maria Saint, -even when all human laws have suspended their action, still holds by her -grammar, still must annex herself to _le sexe noble_. She still must -follow citizen Anet as the feminine pronoun follows the masculine, or as -a verb agrees with its nominative case in number and in person. But with -what a lordly freedom from all obligation does citizen Anet, -representative of this nobility of sex, accept the allegiance! The -citizeness may “follow him,” certainly,—so long as she is not in the -way,—and she must “love him always;” but he is not bound. Why should he -be? It would be quite ungrammatical. - -Yet, after all is said and done, there is a brutal honesty in this frank -subordination of the woman according to the grammar. It has the same -merit with the old Russian marriage-consecration: “Here, wolf, take thy -lamb,” which at least put the thing clearly, and made no nonsense about -it. I do not know that anywhere in France the wedding ritual is now so -severely simple as that, but I know that in some rural villages of that -country the bride is still married in a mourning-gown. I should think -she would be. - - - - - VI. - PHYSIOLOGICAL CROAKING. - - -A very old man once came to King Agis of Sparta, to lament over the -degeneracy of the times. The king replied, “What you say must be true; -for I remember that when I was a boy, I heard my father say that when he -was a boy, he heard my grandfather say the same thing.” - -It is a sufficient answer to most of the croakers, that doubtless the -same things have been said in every generation since the beginning of -recorded time. Till within twenty years, for instance, it has been the -accepted theory, that civilized society lost in vigor what it gained in -refinement. This is now generally admitted to be a delusion growing out -of the fact that civilization keeps alive many who would have died under -barbarism. These feebler persons enter into the average, and keep down -the apparent health of the community; but it is the triumph of -civilization that they exist at all. I am inclined to think, that when -we come to compare the nineteenth century with the seventeenth, as -regards the health of women and the size of families, we shall find much -the same result. - -We look around us, and see many invalid or childless women. We say the -Pilgrim mothers were not like these. We cheat ourselves by this -perpetual worship of the pioneer grandmother. How the young bachelors, -who write dashing articles in the newspapers, denounce their “nervous” -sisters, for instance, and belabor them with cruel memories of their -ancestors! “The great-grandmother of this helpless creature, very -likely, was a pioneer in the woods; reared a family of twelve or -thirteen children; spun, scrubbed, wove, and cooked; lived to -eighty-five, with iron muscles, a broad chest and keen, clear eyes.” But -no one can study the genealogies of our older New England families -without noticing how many of the aunts and sisters and daughters of this -imaginary Amazon died young. I think there may be the same difference -between the households of to-day and the Puritan households that there -is confessedly between the American families and the Irish: fewer -children are born, but more survive. - -And is it so sure that the families are diminishing, even as respects -the number of children born? This is a simple question of arithmetic, -for which the materials are being rapidly accumulated by the students of -family history. Let each person take the lines of descent which are -nearest to himself, to begin with, and compare the number of children -born in successive generations. I have, for instance, two such tables at -hand, representing two of the oldest New England families, which meet in -the same family of children in this generation. - - FIRST TABLE. - - CHILDREN - First generation (emigrated 1629) 9 - Second generation 7 - Third generation 7 - Fourth generation 8 - Fifth generation 7 - Sixth generation 10 - —— - Average 8 - - SECOND TABLE. - - CHILDREN - First generation (emigrated 1636) 10 - Second generation 7 - Third generation 14 - Fourth generation 7 - Fifth generation 6 - Sixth generation 4 - Seventh generation 10 - —— - Average 8.29 - -It will be seen that the last generation exhibits the largest family in -the first line, and almost the largest—much beyond the average—in the -other. - -Now, when we consider the great change in all the habits of living, -since the Puritan days, and all the vicissitudes to which a single line -is exposed,—a whole household being sometimes destroyed by a single -hereditary disease,—this is certainly a fair exhibit. These two -genealogies were taken at random, because they happened to be nearest at -hand. But I suspect any extended examination of genealogies, either of -the Puritan families of New England, or the Dutch families of New York, -would show much the same result. Some of the descendants of the old -Stuyvesant race, for instance, exhibit in this generation a physical -vigor which it is impossible that the doughty governor himself could -have surpassed. - -There are undoubtedly many moral and physiological sins committed, -tending to shorten and weaken life; but the progress of knowledge more -than counterbalances them. No man of middle age can look at a class of -students from our older colleges without seeing them to be physically -superior to the same number of college boys taken twenty-five years ago. -The organization of girls being far more delicate and complicated, the -same reform reaches them more promptly, but it reaches them at last. The -little girls of the present day eat better food, wear more healthful -clothing, and breathe more fresh air, than their mothers did. The -introduction of india-rubber boots and waterproof cloaks alone has given -a fresh lease of life to multitudes of women, who otherwise would have -been kept housed whenever there was so much as a sprinkling of rain. - -It is desirable, certainly, to venerate our grandmothers; but I am -inclined to think, on the whole, that their great-granddaughters will be -the best. - - - - - VII. - THE TRUTH ABOUT OUR GRANDMOTHERS. - - -Every young woman of the present generation, so soon as she ventures to -have a headache or a set of nerves, is immediately confronted by -indignant critics with her grandmother. If the grandmother is living, -the fact of her existence is appealed to: if there is only a departed -grandmother to remember, the maiden is confronted with a ghost. That -ghost is endowed with as many excellences as those with which Miss -Betsey Trotwood endowed the niece that never had been born; and, as -David Copperfield was reproached with the virtues of his unborn sister -who “would never have run away,” so that granddaughter with the headache -is reproached with the ghostly perfections of her grandmother, who never -had a headache—or, if she had, it is luckily forgotten. It is necessary -to ask, sometimes, what was really the truth about our grandmothers? -Were they such models of bodily perfection as is usually claimed? - -If we look at the early colonial days, we are at once met by the fact, -that although families were then often larger than is now common, yet -this phenomenon was by no means universal, and was balanced by a good -many childless homes. Of this any one can satisfy himself by looking -over any family history; and he can also satisfy himself of the -fact,—first pointed out, I believe, by Mrs. Dall,—that third and fourth -marriages were then obviously and unquestionably more common than now. -The inference would seem to be, that there is a little illusion about -the health of those days, as there is about the health of savage races. -In both cases, it is not so much that the average health is greater -under less highly civilized conditions, but that these conditions kill -off the weak, and leave only the strong. Modern civilized society, on -the other hand, preserves the health of many men and women—and permits -them to marry, and become parents—who under, the severities of savage -life or of pioneer life would have died, and given way to others. - -On this I will not dwell; because these good ladies were not strictly -our grandmothers, being farther removed. But of those who were our -grandmothers,—the women of the Revolutionary and post-Revolutionary -epochs,—we happen to have very definite physiological observations -recorded; not very flattering, it is true, but frank and searching. What -these good women are in the imagination of their descendants, we know. -Mrs. Stowe describes them as “the race of strong, hardy, cheerful girls -that used to grow up in country places, and made the bright, neat New -England kitchens of olden times;” and adds, “This race of women, pride -of olden time, is daily lessening; and in their stead come the fragile, -easily-fatigued, languid girls of a modern age, drilled in -book-learning, ignorant of common things.” - -What, now, was the testimony of those who saw our grandmothers in the -flesh? As it happens, there were a good many foreigners, generally -Frenchmen, who came to visit the new Republic during the presidency of -Washington. Let us take, for instance, the testimony of the two -following. - -The Abbé Robin was a chaplain in Rochambeau’s army during the -Revolution, and wrote thus in regard to the American ladies in his -“Nouveau Voyage dans l’Amérique Septentrionale,” published in 1782:— - - “They are tall and well-proportioned; their features are generally - regular; their complexions are generally fair and without color.... - At twenty years of age the women have no longer the freshness of - youth. At thirty-five or forty they are wrinkled and decrepit. The - men are almost as premature.” - -Again: The Chevalier Louis Félix de Beaujour lived in the United States -from 1804 to 1814, as consul-general and _chargé d’affaires_; and wrote -a book, immediately after, which was translated into English under the -title, “A Sketch of the United States at the Commencement of the Present -Century.” In this he thus describes American women:— - - “The women have more of that delicate beauty which belongs to their - sex, and in general have finer features and more expression in their - physiognomy. Their stature is usually tall, and nearly all are - possessed of a light and airy shape,—the breast high, a fine head, - and their color of a dazzling whiteness. Let us imagine, under this - brilliant form, the most modest demeanor, a chaste and virginal air, - accompanied by those single and unaffected graces which flow from - artless nature, and we may have an idea of their beauty; but this - beauty fades and passes in a moment. At the age of twenty-five their - form changes, and at thirty the whole of their charms have - disappeared.” - -These statements bring out a class of facts, which, as it seems to me, -are singularly ignored by some of our physiologists. They indicate that -the modification of the American type began early, and was, as a rule, -due to causes antedating the fashions or studies of the present day. -Here are our grandmothers and great-grandmothers as they were actually -seen by the eyes of impartial or even flattering critics. These critics -were not Englishmen, accustomed to a robust and ruddy type of women, but -Frenchmen, used to a type more like the American. They were not mere -hasty travellers; for the one lived here ten years, and the other was -stationed for some time at Newport, R.I., in a healthy locality, noted -in those days for the beauty of its women. Yet we find it their verdict -upon these grandmothers of nearly a hundred years ago, that they showed -the same delicate beauty, the same slenderness, the same pallor, the -same fragility, the same early decline, with which their granddaughters -are now reproached. - -In some respects, probably, the physical habits of the grandmothers were -better: but an examination of their portraits will satisfy any one that -they laced more tightly than their descendants, and wore their dresses -lower in the neck; and as for their diet, we have the testimony of -another French traveller, Volney, who was in America from 1795 to 1798, -that “if a premium were offered for a regimen most destructive to the -teeth, the stomach, and the health in general, none could be devised -more efficacious for these ends than that in use among this people.” And -he goes on to give particulars, showing a far worse condition in respect -to cookery and diet than now prevails in any decent American society. - -We have therefore strong evidence that the essential change in the -American type was effected in the last century, not in this. Dr. E. H. -Clarke says, “A century does not afford a period long enough for the -production of great changes. That length of time could not transform the -sturdy German _fräulein_ and robust English damsel into the fragile -American miss.” And yet it is pretty clear that the first century and a -half of our colonial life had done just this for our grandmothers. And, -if so, our physiologists ought to conform their theories to the facts. - - - - - VIII. - THE PHYSIQUE OF AMERICAN WOMEN. - - -I was talking the other day with a New York physician, long retired from -practice, who after an absence of a dozen years in Europe has returned -within a year to this country. He volunteered the remark, that nothing -had so impressed him since his return as the improved health of -Americans. He said that his wife had been equally struck with it; and -that they had noticed it especially among the inhabitants of cities, -among the more cultivated classes, and in particular among women. - -It so happened, that within twenty-four hours almost precisely the same -remark was made to me by another gentleman of unusually cosmopolitan -experience, and past middle age. He further fortified himself by a -similar assertion made him by Charles Dickens, in comparing his second -visit to this country with his first. In answer to an inquiry as to what -points of difference had most impressed him, Dickens said, “Your people, -especially the women, look better fed than formerly.” - -It is possible that in all these cases the witnesses may have been led -to exaggerate the original evil, while absent from the country, and so -may have felt some undue re-action on their arrival. One of my -informants went so far as to say that he was confident that among his -circle of friends in Boston and in London a dinnerparty of half a dozen -Americans would outweigh an English party of the same number. Granting -this to be too bold a statement, and granting the unscientific nature of -all these assertions, they still indicate a probability of their own -truth until refuted by facts or balanced by similar impressions on the -other side. They are further corroborated by the surprise expressed by -Huxley and some other recent Englishmen at finding us a race more -substantial than they had supposed. - -The truth seems to be, that Nature is endeavoring to take a new -departure in the American, and to produce a race more finely organized, -more sensitive, more pliable, and of more nervous energy, than the races -of Northern Europe; that this change of type involves some risk to -health in the process, but promises greater results whenever the new -type shall be established. I am confident that there has been within the -last twenty years a great improvement in the physical habits of the more -cultivated classes, at least, in this country,—better food, better air, -better habits as to bathing and exercise. The great increase of athletic -games; the greatly increased proportion of seaside and mountain life in -summer; the thicker shoes and boots of women and little girls, -permitting them to go out more freely in all weathers—these are among -the permanent gains. The increased habit of dining late, and of taking -only a lunch at noon, is of itself an enormous gain to the professional -and mercantile classes, because it secures time for eating and for -digestion. Even the furnaces in houses, which seemed at first so -destructive to the very breath of life, turn out to have given a new -lease to it; and open fires are being rapidly re-introduced as a -provision for enjoyment and health, when the main body of the house has -been tempered by the furnace. There has been, furthermore, a decided -improvement in the bread of the community, and a very general -introduction of other farinaceous food. All this has happened within my -own memory, and gives _a priori_ probability to the alleged improvement -in physical condition within twenty years. - -And, if these reasonings are still insufficient on the one side, it must -be remembered that the facts of the census are almost equally inadequate -when quoted on the other. If, for instance, all the young people of a -New Hampshire village take a fancy to remove to Wisconsin, it does not -show that the race is dying out because their children swell the -birth-rate of Wisconsin instead of New Hampshire. If in a given city the -births among the foreign-born population are twice as many in proportion -as among the American, we have not the whole story until we learn -whether the deaths are not twice as many also. If so, the inference is, -that the same recklessness brought the children into the world, and sent -them out of it; and no physiological inference whatever can be drawn. It -was clearly established by the medical commission of the Boston Board of -Health, a few years ago, that “the general mortality of the foreign -element is much greater than that of the native element of our -population.” “This is found to be the case,” they add, “throughout the -United States as well as in Boston.” - -So far as I can judge, all our physiological tendencies are favorable -rather than otherwise: and the transplantation of the English race seems -now likely to end in no deterioration, but in a type more finely -organized, and more comprehensive and cosmopolitan; and this without -loss of health, of longevity, or of physical size and weight. And, if -this is to hold true, it must be true not only of men, but of women. - - - - - IX. - “VERY MUCH FATIGUED.” - - -The newspapers say that the Wyoming ladies, after their first trial of -jury-duty, looked very much fatigued. Well, why not? - -Is it not the privilege of their sex to be fatigued? Is it not commonly -said to be one of their most becoming traits? “The strength of womanhood -lies in its weakness,” and so on; and, if emancipation does not destroy -this lovely debility, it is not so bad, after all. If a graceful languor -is desirable, then the more of it the better. Instead of the women’s -coming out of the jury-box like Amazons, they simply came out so many -tired women. They were not spoiled into strength, but “very much -fatigued.” - -In London or New York, now, this fatigue might have come from six hours -of piano-practice, from a day’s shopping, from a night’s “German.” Then -the fatigue would be held to be charming and womanly. But to aid in -deciding on the guilt or innocence of a fellow-creature, perhaps a -fellow-woman,—is that the only pursuit in which fatigue becomes -disreputable? - -Consider at any rate that in Wyoming Territory these more genteel and -feminine forms of fatigue are as yet rare. Pianos are doubtless scarce; -in the shops whiskey is the only thing not scarce; “Germans” are -uncommon, except in the shape of wandering miners who are looking for -other shafts than those of Cupid. Thus cut off from city frivolities, -may not the Wyoming ladies be allowed for a while to tire themselves -with something useful? Let them have their court duties until good -society and “feminine” amusements arrive. Let them at least be -serviceable till they can be ornamental—as the English member of -Parliament declared that until a man knew which way his interest went, -he was justified in temporarily voting according to his conscience. - -“Very much fatigued?” How does jury-duty affect men? Is there any thing -against which they so fight and struggle? It is recognized by the -universal masculine heart as the greatest bore known under civilization. -There is nothing which a man will not do in preference. He will go to -church twice on a Sunday, he will abjure tobacco for a week, he will -over-state his property to the assessor, he will speak respectfully of -Congress, he will go without a daily newspaper, he will do any -self-devoted and unmasculine thing—if you will only contrive in some way -to leave him off the jury-list. If these things are done in the dry -tree, what shall be done in the green? That which experienced men hate -with this consummation of all hatred, shall inexperienced women endure -without fatigue? It is wrong to claim for them such unspeakable -superiority. - -Look at a jury of men when they re-appear in court after a long -detention on a difficult case. What a set of woe-begone wretches they -are! What weary eyes, what unkempt hair, what drooping and dilapidated -paper collars! Not all the tin wash-basins and soap, not all the -crackers and cheese, provided by the gentlemanly sheriff, enable them to -look any thing but “very much fatigued.” Shall women look more forlorn -than these men? No: so long as women are women, they will contrive -during the most arduous jury duties to “do up” their hair, they will -come provided with unseen relays of fresh cuffs and collars, and out of -the most unpromising court-room arrangements they will concoct their cup -of tea. Who has not noticed how much better a railway detention or a -prolonged trip on a steamboat is borne, in appearance at least, by the -women than the men? Fatigued! How did the jury-men look? Probably the -jury-women, when they bade his Honor the Judge good-morning, looked -incomparably fresher than their companions. - -At any rate, when we think what things women endured that they might -nurse our sick soldiers, how they had to spend day and night where they -might possibly inhale tobacco, probably would hear swearing, and -certainly must brave dirt; when we think that they did these things, and -were only “very much fatigued,”—why should we fear to risk them in a -court-room? Where there is wrong to be righted, innocence to be -vindicated, and guilt to be wisely dealt with,—there make room for -woman, and she will not shrink from the fatigue. “For thee, fair -justice! welcome all,” as Sir William Blackstone remarked, when he -stopped being a poet and began to be a lawyer. - - - - - X. - THE LIMITATIONS OF SEX - - -Are there any inevitable limitations of sex? - -Some reformers, apparently, think that there are not, and that the best -way to help woman is to deny the fact of limitations. But I think the -great majority of reformers would take a different ground, and would say -that the two sexes are mutually limited by nature. They would doubtless -add that this very fact is an argument for the enfranchisement of woman: -for, if woman is a mere duplicate of man, man can represent her; but if -she has traits of her own, absolutely distinct from his, then he cannot -represent her, and she must have a voice and a vote of her own. - -To this last body of believers I belong. I think that all legal or -conventional obstacles should be removed, which debar woman from -determining for herself, as freely as man determines, what the real -limitations of sex are, and what the merely conventional restriction. -But, when all is said and done, there is no doubt that plenty of -limitations will remain on both sides. - -That man has his limitations, is clear. No matter how finely organized a -man may be, how sympathetic, how tender, how loving, there is yet a -barrier, never to be passed, that separates the most precious part of -the woman’s kingdom from him. All the wondrous world of motherhood, with -its unspeakable delights, its holy of holies, remains forever unknown by -him; he may gaze, but never enter. That halo of pure devotion, which -makes a Madonna out of so many a poor and ignorant woman, can never -touch his brow. Many a man loves children more than many a woman: but, -after all, it is not he who has borne them; to that peculiar sacredness -of experience he can never arrive. But never mind whether the loss be a -great one or a small one: it is distinctly a limitation; and to every -loving mother it is a limitation so important that she would be unable -to weigh all the privileges and powers of manhood against this peculiar -possession of her child. - -Now, if this be true, and if man be thus distinctly limited by the mere -fact of sex, can the woman complain that she also should have some -natural limitations? Grant that she should have no unnecessary -restrictions; and that the course of human progress is constantly -setting aside, as needless, point after point that was once held -essential. Still, if she finds—as she undoubtedly will find—that natural -barriers and hindrances remain at last, and that she can no more do -man’s whole work in the world than he can do hers, why should she -complain? If he can accept his limitations, she must be prepared also to -accept hers. - -Some of our physiological reformers declare that a girl will be -perfectly healthy if she can only be sensibly dressed, and can “have -just as much out-door exercise as the boys, and of the same sort, if she -choose it.” But I have observed that matter a good deal, and have -watched the effect of boyish exercise on a good many girls; and I am -satisfied that so far from being safely turned loose, as boys can be, -they need, for physical health, the constant supervision of wise -mothers. Otherwise the very exposure that only hardens the boy may make -the girl an invalid for life. The danger comes from a greater -sensitiveness of structure,—not weakness, properly so called, since it -gives, in certain ways, more power of endurance,—a greater sensitiveness -which runs through all a woman’s career, and is the expensive price she -pays for the divine destiny of motherhood. It is another natural -limitation. - -No wise person believes in any “reform against Nature,” or that we can -get beyond the laws of Nature. If I believed the limitations of sex to -be inconsistent with woman suffrage for instance, I should oppose this; -but I do not see why a woman cannot form political opinions by her -baby’s cradle, as well as her husband in his workshop, while her very -love for the child commits her to an interest in good government. Our -duty is to remove all the artificial restrictions we can. That done, it -will not be hard for man or woman to acquiesce in the natural -limitations. - - - - - TEMPERAMENT. - - -Ἀνδρὸς καὶ γυναικὸς ἡ αὐτὴ ἀρετή.—ANTISTHENES _in Diogenes Laertius_, -vi. 1, 5. - - “Virtue in man and woman is the same.” - - - - - XI. - THE INVISIBLE LADY. - - -The Invisible Lady, as advertised in all our cities a good many years -ago, was a mysterious individual who remained unseen, and had apparently -no human organs except a brain and a tongue. You asked questions of her, -and she made intelligent answers; but where she was, you could no more -discover than you could find the man inside the Automaton Chess-Player. -Was she intended as a satire on womankind, or as a sincere -representation of what womankind should be? To many men, doubtless, she -would have seemed the ideal of her sex, could only her brain and tongue -have disappeared like the rest of her faculties. Such men would have -liked her almost as well as that other mysterious personage on the -London sign-board, labelled “The Good Woman,” and represented by a -female figure without a head. - -It is not that any considerable portion of mankind actually wishes to -abolish woman from the universe. But the opinion dies hard that she is -best off when least visible. These appeals which still meet us for “the -sacred privacy of woman” are only the Invisible Lady on a larger scale. -In ancient Bœotia, brides were carried home in vehicles whose wheels -were burned at the door in token that they would never again be needed. -In ancient Rome, it was a queen’s epitaph, “She staid at home, and -spun,”—_Domum servavit, lanum fecit_. In Turkey, not even the officers -of justice can enter the apartments of a woman without her lord’s -consent. In Spain and Spanish America, the veil replaces the four walls -of the house, and is a portable seclusion. To be visible is at best a -sign of peasant blood and occupations; to be high-bred is to be -invisible. - -In the Azores I found that each peasant family endeavored to secure for -one or more of its daughters the pride and glory of living unseen. The -other sisters, secure in innocence, tended cattle on lonely -mountain-sides, or toiled bare-legged up the steep ascents, their heads -crowned with orange-baskets. The chosen sister was taught to read, to -embroider, and to dwell indoors; if she went out it was only under -escort, and with her face buried in a hood of almost incredible size, -affording only a glimpse of the poor pale cheeks, so unlike the rosy -vigor of the damsels on the mountain-side. The girls, I was told, did -not covet this privilege of seclusion; but let us be genteel, or die. - -Now all that is left of the Invisible Lady among ourselves is only the -remnant of this absurd tradition. In the seaside town where I write, -ladies usually go veiled in the streets, and so general is the practice -that little girls often veil their dolls. They all suppose it to be done -for complexion or for ornament; just as people still hang straps on the -backs of their carriages, not knowing that it is a relic of the days -when footmen stood there and held on. But the veil represents a -tradition of seclusion, whether we know it or not; and the dread of -hearing a woman speak in public, or of seeing a woman vote, represents -precisely the same tradition. It is entitled to no less respect, and no -more. - -Like all traditions, it finds something in human nature to which to -attach itself. Early girlhood, like early boyhood, needs to be guarded -and sheltered, that it may mature unharmed. It is monstrous to make this -an excuse for keeping a woman, any more than a man, in a condition of -perpetual subordination and seclusion. The young lover wishes to lock up -his angel in a little world of her own, where none may intrude. The -harem and the seraglio are simply the embodiment of this desire. But the -maturer man, and the maturer race, have found that the beloved being -should be something more. - -After this discovery is made, the theory of the Invisible Lady -disappears. It is less of a shock to an American to hear a woman speak -in public than it is to an Oriental to see her show her face in public -at all. Once open the door of the harem, and she has the freedom of the -house: the house includes the front door, and the street is but a -prolonged doorstep. With the freedom of the street comes inevitably a -free access to the platform, the tribunal, and the pulpit. You might as -well try to stop the air in its escape from a punctured balloon, as to -try, when woman is once out of the harem, to put her back there. Ceasing -to be an Invisible Lady, she must become a visible force: there is no -middle ground. There is no danger that she will not be anchored to the -cradle, when cradle there is; but it will be by an elastic cable, that -will leave her as free to think and vote as to pray. No woman is less a -mother because she cares for all the concerns of the world into which -her child is born. It was John Quincy Adams who said, defending the -political petitions of the women of Plymouth, that “women are not only -justified, but exhibit the most exalted virtue, when they do depart from -the domestic circle, and enter on the concerns of their country, of -humanity, and of their God.” - - - - - XII. - SACRED OBSCURITY. - - -In the preface to that ill-named but delightful book, the “Remains of -the late Mrs. Richard Trench,” there is a singular remark by the editor, -her son. He says that “the adage is certainly true in regard to the -British matron, _Bene vixit quæ bene latuit_,” the meaning of this adage -being, “She has lived well who has kept herself well out of sight.” -Applying this to his beloved mother, he further expresses a regret at -disturbing her “sacred obscurity.” Then he goes on to disturb it pretty -effectually by printing a thick octavo volume of her most private -letters. - -It is a great source of strength and advantage to reformers, that there -are always men preserved to be living examples of this good old Oriental -doctrine of “sacred obscurity.” Just as Mr. Darwin needs for the -demonstration of his theory that the lower orders of creation should -still be present in visible form for purposes of comparison, so every -reformer needs to fortify his position by showing examples of the -original attitude from which society has been gradually emerging. If -there had been no Oriental seclusion, many things in the present -position of woman would be inexplicable. But when we point to that; when -we show that even in the more enlightened Eastern countries it is still -held indecorous to allude to the feminine members of a man’s family; -when we see among the Christian nations of Southern Europe many -lingering traits of this same habit of seclusion; and when we find an -archdeacon of the English Church still clinging to the theory, even -while exhibiting his mother’s family letters to the whole world,—we more -easily understand the course of development. - -These re-assertions of the Oriental theory are simply reversions, as a -naturalist would say, to the original type. They are instances of -“atavism,” like the occasional appearance of six fingers on one hand in -a family where the great-great-grandfather happened to possess that -ornament. Such instances can always be found, when one takes the pains -to look for them. Thus a critic, discussing in the Atlantic Monthly Mr. -Mahaffy’s book on “Social Life in Greece,” is surprised that this writer -should quote, in proof of the degradation of woman in Athens, the remark -attributed to Pericles, “That woman is best who is least spoken of among -men, whether for good or for evil.” “In our opinion,” adds the reviewer, -“that remark was wise then, and is wise now.” The Oriental theory is not -then, it seems, extinct; and we are spared the pains of proving that it -ever existed. - -If this theory be true, how falsely has the admiration of mankind been -given! If the most obscure woman is best, the most conspicuous must -undoubtedly be worst. Tried by this standard, how unworthy must have -been Elizabeth Barrett Browning, how reprehensible must be Dorothea Dix, -what a model of all that is discreditable is Rosa Bonheur, what a -crowning instance of human depravity is Florence Nightingale! Yet how -consoling the thought, that, while these disreputable persons were thus -wasting their substance in the riotous performance of what the world -weakly styled good deeds, there were always women who saw the folly of -such efforts, women who by steady devotion to eating, drinking, and -sleeping continued to keep themselves in sacred obscurity, and to prove -themselves the ornaments of their sex, inasmuch as no human being ever -had occasion to mention their names! - -But alas for human inconsistency! As for this inverse-ratio theory,—this -theory of virtue so exalted that it has never been known or felt or -mentioned among men,—it is to be observed that those who hold it are the -first to desert it when stirred by an immediate occasion. Just as a -slaveholder, in the old times, after demonstrating to you that freedom -was a curse to the negro, would instantly turn round, and inflict this -greatest of all curses on some slave who had saved his life; so, I fear, -would one of these philosophers, if he were profoundly impressed with -any great action done by a woman, give the lie to all his theories, and -celebrate her fame. In spite of all his fine principles, if he happened -to be rescued from drowning by Grace Darling, he would put her name in -the newspaper; if he were tended in hospital by Clara Barton, he would -sound her praise; and, if his mother wrote as good letters as did Mrs. -Trench, he would probably print them to the extent of five hundred -pages, as the archdeacon did, and all his gospel of silence would exhale -itself in a single sigh of regret in the preface. - - - - - XIII. - “OUR TRIALS.” - - -A Providence (R.I.) newspaper remarked some time since that Mrs. -Livermore had just delivered in Newport her celebrated lecture, “What -shall we do with our Trials?” It was, I suppose, one of those felicitous -misprints, by which compositors build better than they know. The real -title of the lecture was, “What shall we do with our Girls?” Perhaps it -was the unconscious witticism of some poetic young typesetter, to whom -damsels were as yet only pleasing pains; or of some premature cynic of -the printing-office, who was in the habit of regarding himself as a -Blighted Being. - -Yet to how many is this morose phrase “humanly adaptive,” as Mrs. -Browning abstrusely says! Anxious mothers, for instance, will accept it, -the mothers of the thousands of surplus maidens—or whatever the -statistics say—in Massachusetts. Frederica Bremer inserts in one of her -novels an “Extra Leaf on Daughter-full Houses;” an extra that should -have a large circulation in many towns of New England. The most heroic -and unflinching remedy for this class of trials, so far as my knowledge -goes, was that announced by a small relative of my own, aged three, who -sitting on the floor thus soliloquized to her doll: “If I had too many -daughters, I’d take ’em into the woods and lose ’em—I’d take ’em to the -sea and push ’em in: I wouldn’t have too many daughters!” She is now a -happy wife and mother; but Fate, warned in time by such exceeding -plainness of speech, has judiciously endowed her chiefly with sons. - -Most of the serious assertion that women are trials comes from masculine -wisdom. One hears a good deal of it in summer, at the seaside, from the -marriageable youth of some of our chief cities. After a languid hour’s -chat upon tailors or boots or the proper appointments of a harness,—or -of the groom, so perfectly costumed that he seems but a part of the -harness,—how often they fall to lamenting the extravagance, the -exactions, the general unmarriageableness, of the young women of the -present day! Some wit once said that the Pilgrim Mothers had much more -to bear than the Pilgrim Fathers, since the Mothers had not only to -endure the cold and the hunger, but to endure the Fathers beside. In -hearing these remarks I have sometimes thought that these young ladies -must be extravagant indeed, if, in addition to their own expenses, they -take to themselves so very costly a luxury as a fashionable husband. - -And I think that wiser critics than these youths are sometimes tempted -into treating these lovely and lovable “trials” in too severely hopeless -a way. There is folly enough on the surface, no doubt, and something of -it below the surface: yet who does not remember how, in time of need, -all these follies proved themselves, during our civil war, but -superficial things? The very maidens over whom we had shaken our anxious -heads were suddenly those who with pale cheeks bade their lovers leave -them, or who changed their gorgeous array for the plain garments of the -hospital. So far as I can judge, there is not a young girl within the -range of my knowledge who can confidently be insured against marrying a -poor artist or a poorer army officer to-morrow, should she once fall -thoroughly in love. And, once married, she will very probably develop a -power of self-denial, of economy, and of dressing herself and baby -gracefully out of the cast-off clothes of her genteel relations,—in a -way to put her critics to shame. I think we ought all patiently to -endure “trials” that turn to such blessings in the end. - -For one, I can truly say, with charming Mrs. Trench in her letters -written in 1816, “I do believe the girls of the present day have not -lost the power of blushing; and, though I have no grown-up daughters, I -enjoy the friendship of some who might be my daughters, in whom the -greatest delicacy and modesty are united with perfect ease of manner, -and habitual intercourse with the world.” And if this is the case,—and I -think we shall all own it to be so,—we may as well have the -typographical error corrected, after all, and hereafter say—for “trials” -read “girls.” - - - - - XIV. - VIRTUES IN COMMON. - - -A young friend of mine, who was educated at one of the very best schools -for girls in New York City, told me that one day her teacher requested -the older girls to write out a list of virtues suitable to manly -character, which they did. A month or more later, when this occurrence -was well forgotten, the same teacher bade them write out a list of -womanly virtues, she making no reference to the other list. Then she -made each girl compare her lists; and they all found with surprise that -there was no substantial difference between them. The only variation, in -most cases, was, that they had put in a rather vague special virtue of -“manliness” in the one case, and “womanliness” in the other; a sort of -miscellaneous department or “odd drawer,” apparently, in which to group -all traits not easily analyzed. - -The moral is, that, as tested by the common-sense of these young people, -duty is duty, and the difference between ethics for men and ethics for -women lies simply in practical applications, not in principles. - -Who can deny that the philosopher Antisthenes was right when he said, -“The virtues of the man and the woman are the same”? Not the Christian, -certainly; for he accepts as his highest standard the being who in all -history best united the highest qualities of both sexes. Not the -metaphysician; for his analysis deals with the human mind as such, not -with the mind of either sex. Not the evolutionist; for he is accustomed -to trace back qualities to their source, and cannot deny that there is -in each sex at least a “survival” of every good and every bad trait. We -may say that these qualities are, or may be, or ought to be, distributed -unequally between the sexes; but we cannot reasonably deny that each sex -possesses a share of every quality, and that what is good in one sex is -also good in the other. Man may be the braver, and yet courage in a -woman may be nobler than cowardice. Woman may be the purer, and yet -purity may be noble in a man. - -So clear is this, that some of the very coarsest writers in all -literature, and those who have been severest upon women, have yet been -obliged to acknowledge it. Take, for instance, Dean Swift, who writes:— - - “I am ignorant of any one quality that is amiable in a woman, which - is not equally so in a man. I do not except even modesty and - gentleness of nature; nor do I know one vice or folly which is not - equally detestable in both.” - -Mrs. Jameson, in her delightful “Commonplace Book,” illustrates this -admirably by one or two test cases. She takes, for instance, from one of -Humboldt’s letters a much-admired passage on manly character:— - - “Masculine independence of mind I hold to be in reality the first - requisite for the formation of a character of real manly worth. The - man who allows himself to be deceived and carried away by his own - weakness, may be a very amiable person in other respects, but cannot - be called a good man: such beings should not find favor in the eyes - of a woman, for a truly beautiful and purely feminine nature should - be attracted only by what is highest and noblest in the character of - man.” - -“Take now this same bit of moral philosophy,” she says, “and apply it to -the feminine character, and it reads quite as well:— - - “‘Feminine independence of mind I hold to be in reality the first - requisite for the formation of a character of real feminine worth. - The woman who allows herself to be deceived and carried away by her - own weakness, may be a very amiable person in other respects, but - cannot be called a good woman; such beings should not find favor in - the eyes of a man, for a truly beautiful and purely manly nature - should be attracted only by what is highest and noblest in the - character of woman.’” - -I have never been able to perceive that there was a quality or grace of -character which really belonged exclusively to either sex, or which -failed to win honor when wisely exercised by either. It is not thought -necessary to have separate editions of books on ethical science, the one -for man, the other for woman, like almanacs calculated for different -latitudes. The books that vary are not the scientific works, but little -manuals of practical application,—“Duties of Men,” “Duties of Women.” -These vary with times and places: where women do not know how to read, -no advice on reading will be found in the women’s manuals; where it is -held wrong for women to uncover the face, it will be laid down in these -manuals as a sin. But ethics are ethics: the great principles of morals, -as proclaimed either by science or by religion, do not fluctuate for -sex; their basis is in the very foundations of right itself. - -This grows clearer when we remember that it is equally true in mental -science. There is not one logic for men, and another for women; a -separate syllogism, a separate induction: the moment we begin to state -intellectual principles, that moment we go beyond sex. We deal then with -absolute truth. If an observation is wrong, if a process of reasoning is -bad, it makes no difference who brings it forward. Any list of mental -processes, any inventory of the contents of the mind, would be -identical, so far as sex goes, whether compiled by a woman or a man. -These things, like the circulation of the blood or the digestion of -food, belong clearly to the ground held in common. The London Spectator -well said lately,— - - “After all, knowledge is knowledge; and there is no more a - specifically feminine way of describing correctly the origin of the - Lollard movement, or the character of Spenser’s poetry, than there - is a specifically feminine way of solving a quadratic equation, or - of proving the forty-seventh problem of Euclid’s first book.” - -All we can say in modification of this is, that there is, after all, a -foundation for the rather vague item of “manliness” and “womanliness” in -these schoolgirl lists of duties. There is a difference, after all is -said and done; but it is something that eludes analysis, like the -differing perfume of two flowers of the same genus and even of the same -species. The method of thought must be essentially the same in both -sexes; and yet an average woman will put more flavor of something we -call instinct into her mental action, and the average man something more -of what we call logic into his. Whipple tells us that not a man guessed -the plot of Dickens’s “Great Expectations,” while many women did; and -this certainly indicates some average difference of quality or method. -So the average opinions of a hundred women, on some question of ethics, -might very probably differ from the average of a hundred men, while yet -it remains true that “the virtues of the man and the woman are the -same.” - - - - - XV. - INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES. - - -Blackburn, in his entertaining book, “Artists and Arabs,” draws a -contrast between Frith’s painting of the “Derby Day” and Rosa Bonheur’s -“Horse Fair,”—“the former pleasing the eye by its cleverness and -prettiness, the latter impressing the spectator by its power and its -truthful rendering of animal life. The difference between the two -painters is probably more one of education than of natural gifts. But, -whilst the style of the former is grafted on a fashion, the latter is -founded on a rock,—the result of a close study of nature, chastened by -classic feeling and a remembrance, it may be, of the friezes of the -Parthenon.” - -Now, it is to be observed that this description runs precisely counter -to the popular impression as to the work of the two sexes. Novelists -like Charles Reade, for instance, who have apparently seen precisely one -woman in their lives, and hardly more than one man, and who keep on -sketching these two figures most felicitously and brilliantly -thenceforward, would be apt to assign these qualities of the artist very -differently. Their typical man would do the truthful and powerful work, -and everybody would say, “How manly!” Their woman would please by -cleverness and prettiness, and everybody would say, “How womanly!” Yet -Blackburn shows us that these qualities are individual, not sexual; that -they result from temperament, or, he thinks, still more from training. -If Rosa Bonheur does better work than Frith, it is not because she is a -woman, nor is it in spite of that; but because, setting sex aside, she -is a better artist. - -This is not denying the distinctions of sex, but only asserting that -they are not so exclusive and all-absorbing as is supposed. It is easy -to name other grounds of difference which entirely ignore those of sex, -striking directly across them, and rendering a different classification -necessary. It is thus with distinctions of race or color, for instance. -An Indian man and woman are at many points more like to one another than -is either to a white person of the same sex. A black-haired man and -woman, or a fair-haired man and woman, are to be classified together in -these physiological aspects. So of differences of genius: a man and -woman of musical temperament and training have more in common than has -either with a person who is of the same sex, but who cannot tell one -note from another. So two persons of ardent or imaginative temperament -are thus far alike, though the gulf of sex divides them; and so are two -persons of cold or prosaic temperament. In a mixed school the teacher -cannot class together intellectually the boys as such, and the girls as -such: bright boys take hold of a lesson very much as bright girls do, -and slow girls like slow boys. Nature is too rich, too full, too varied, -to be content with a single basis of classification: she has a hundred -systems of grouping, according to sex, age, race, temperament, training, -and so on; and we get but a narrow view of life when we limit our -theories to one set of distinctions. - -As a matter of social philosophy, this train of thought logically leads -to co-education, impartial suffrage, and free co-operation in all the -affairs of life. As a matter of individual duty, it teaches the old -moral to “act well your part.” No wise person will ever trouble himself -or herself much about the limitations of sex in intellectual labor. Rosa -Bonheur was not trying to work like a woman, or like a man, or unlike -either, but to do her work thoroughly and well. He or she who works in -this spirit works nobly, and gives an example which will pass beyond the -bounds of sex, and help all. The Abbé Liszt, the most gifted of living -pianists, told a friend of mine, his pupil, that he had learned more of -music from hearing Madame Malibran sing, than from any thing else -whatever. - - - - - XVI. - ANGELIC SUPERIORITY. - - -It is better not to base any plea for woman on the ground of her angelic -superiority. The argument proves too much. If she is already so perfect, -there is every inducement to let well alone. It suggests the expediency -of conforming man’s condition to hers, instead of conforming hers to -man’s. If she is a winged creature, and man can only crawl, it is his -condition that needs mending. - -Besides, one may well be a little incredulous of these vast claims. -Granting some average advantage to woman, it is not of such completeness -as to base much argument upon it. The minister looking on his -congregation, rarely sees an unmixed angel, either at the head or at the -foot of any pew. The domestic servant rarely has the felicity of waiting -on an absolute saint at either end of the dinner-table. The lady’s-maid -has to compare her little observations of human infirmity with those of -the valet-de-chambre. The lover worships the beloved, whether man or -woman; but marriage bears rather hard on the ideal in either case. And -those who pray out of the same book, “Have mercy upon us, miserable -sinners,” are not supposed to be offering up petitions for each other -only. - -We all know many women whose lives are made wretched by the sins and -follies of their husbands. There are also many men whose lives are -turned to long wretchedness by the selfishness, the worldliness, or the -bad temper of their wives. Domestic tyranny belongs to neither sex by -monopoly. If man tortures or depresses woman, she also has a fearful -power to corrupt and deprave man. On the other hand, to quote old -Antisthenes once more, “the virtues of the man and woman are the same.” -A refined man is more refined than a coarse woman. A child-loving man is -infinitely tenderer and sweeter toward children than a hard and -unsympathetic woman. The very qualities that are claimed as -distinctively feminine are possessed more abundantly by many men than by -many of what is called the softer sex. - -Why is it necessary to say all this? Because there is always danger that -we who believe in the equality of the sexes should be led into -over-statements, which will re-act against ourselves. It is not safe to -say that the ballot-box would be reformed if intrusted to feminine votes -alone. Had the voters of the South been all women, it would have plunged -earlier into the gulf of secession, dived deeper, and come up even more -reluctantly. Were the women of Spain to rule its destinies unchecked, -the Pope would be its master, and the Inquisition might be -re-established. For all that we can see, the rule of women alone would -be as bad as the rule of men alone. It would be as unsafe to give woman -the absolute control of man as to make man the master of woman. - -Let us be a shade more cautious in our reasonings. Woman needs equal -rights, not because she is man’s better half, but because she is his -other half. She needs them, not as an angel, but as a fraction of -humanity. Her political education will not merely help man, but it will -help herself. She will sometimes be right in her opinions, and sometimes -be altogether wrong; but she will learn, as man learns, by her own -blunders. The demand in her behalf is, that she shall have the -opportunity to make mistakes, since it is by that means she must become -wise. - -In all our towns, there is a tendency toward “mixed schools.” We rarely -hear of the sexes being separated in a school after being once united; -but we constantly hear of their being brought together after separation. -This is commonly, but mistakenly, recommended as an advantage to the -boys alone. I once heard an accomplished teacher remonstrate against -this change, when thus urged. “Why should my girls be sacrificed,” she -said, “to improve your boys?” Six months after, she had learned by -experience. “Why,” she asked, “did you rest the argument on so narrow a -ground? Since my school consisted half of boys, I find with surprise -that the change has improved both sexes. My girls are more ambitious, -more obedient, and more ladylike. I shall never distrust the policy of -mixed schools again.” - -What is true of the school is true of the family and of the state. It is -not good for man, or for woman, to be alone. Granting the woman to be, -on the whole, the more spiritually minded, it is still true that each -sex needs the other. When the rivet falls from a pair of scissors, we do -not have them mended because either half can claim angelic superiority -over the other half, but because it takes two halves to make a whole. - - - - - XVII. - VICARIOUS HONORS. - - -There is a story in circulation—possibly without authority—to the effect -that a certain young lady has ascended so many Alps that she would have -been chosen a member of the English Alpine Club, but for her misfortune -in respect to sex. As a matter of personal recognition, however, and, as -it were, of approximate courtesy, her dog, who has accompanied her in -all her trips, and is not debased by sex, has been elected into the -club. She has therefore an opportunity for exercising in behalf of her -dog that beautiful self-abnegation which is said to be a part of woman’s -nature, impelling her always to prefer that her laurels should be worn -by somebody else. - -The dog probably made no objection to these vicarious honors; nor is any -objection made by the young gentlemen who reply eloquently to the toast, -“The Ladies” at public dinners, or who kindly consent to be educated at -masculine colleges on “scholarships” founded by women. At Harvard -University alone there are ten such scholarships,—their income amounting -annually to $2,340 in all. Those who receive the emoluments of these -funds must reflect within themselves, occasionally, how grand a thing is -this power of substitution given to women, and how pleasant are its -occasional results to the substitute. It is doubtless more blessed to -give than to receive, but to receive without giving has also its -pleasures. Very likely the holder of the scholarship, and the orator who -rises with his hand on his heart to “reply in behalf of the ladies,” may -do their appointed work well; and so did the Alpine dog. Yet, after all, -but for the work done by his mistress, he would have won no more honor -from the Alpine Club than if he had been a chamois. - -Nothing since Artemus Ward and his wife’s relations has been finer than -the generous way in which fathers and brothers disclaim all desire for -profits or honors on the part of their feminine relatives. In a certain -system of schools once known to me, the boys had prizes of money on -certain occasions, but the successful girls at those times received -simply a testimonial of honor for each; “the committee being convinced,” -it was said, “that this was more consonant with the true delicacy and -generosity of woman’s nature.” So in the new arrangements for opening -the University of Copenhagen to young women, Karl Blind writes to the -New York Evening Post, that it is expressly provided that they shall not -“share in the academic benefices and stipends which have been set apart -for male students.” Half of these charities may, for aught that appears, -have been established originally by women, like the ten Harvard -scholarships already named. Women, however, can avail themselves of them -only by deputy, as the Alp-climbing young lady is represented by her -dog. - -It is all a beautiful tribute to the disinterestedness of woman. The -only pity is that this virtue, so much admired, should not be -reciprocated by showing the like disinterestedness toward her. It does -not appear that the butchers and bakers of Copenhagen propose to reduce -in the case of women students “the benefices and stipends” which are to -be paid for daily food. Young ladies at the university are only -prohibited from receiving money, not from needing it. Nor will any of -the necessary fatigues of Alpine climbing be relaxed for any young lady -because she is a woman. The fatigues will remain in full force, though -the laurels be denied. The mountain-passes will make small account of -the “tenderness and delicacy of her sex.” When the toil is over she will -be regarded as too delicate to be thanked for it; but, by way of -compensation, the Alpine Club will allow her to be represented by her -dog. - - - - - XVIII. - THE GOSPEL OF HUMILIATION. - - -“The silliest man who ever lived,” wrote Fanny Fern once, “has always -known enough, when he says his prayers, to thank God he was not born a -woman.” President —— of —— College is not a silly man at all, and he is -devoting his life to the education of women; yet he seems to feel as -vividly conscious of his superior position as even Fanny Fern could -wish. If he had been born a Jew, he would have thanked God, in the -appointed ritual, for not having made him a woman. If he had been a -Mohammedan, he would have accepted the rule which forbids “a fool, a -madman, or a woman” to summon the faithful to prayer. Being a Christian -clergyman, with several hundred immortal souls, clothed in female -bodies, under his charge, he thinks it his duty, at proper intervals, to -notify his young ladies, that, though they may share with men the glory -of being sophomores, they still are in a position, as regards the other -sex, of hopeless subordination. This is the climax of his discourse, -which in its earlier portions contains many good and truthful things:— - - “And, as the woman is different from the man, so is she relative to - him. This is true on the other side also. They are bound together by - mutual relationship so intimate and vital that the existence of - neither is absolutely complete except with reference to the other. - But there is this difference, that the relation of woman is, - characteristically, that of subordination and dependence. This does - not imply inferiority of character, of capacity, of value, in the - sight of God or man; and it has been the glory of woman to have - accepted the position of formal inferiority assigned her by the - Creator, with all its responsibilities, its trials, its possible - outward humiliations and sufferings, in the proud consciousness that - it is not incompatible with an essential superiority; that it does - not prevent her from occupying, if she will, an inward elevation of - character, from which she may look down with pitying and helpful - love on him she calls her lord. Jesus said, ‘Ye know that the - princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that - are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among - you; but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your - minister; and whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your - servant, even as the Son of man came, not to be ministered unto, but - to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.’ Surely woman - need not hesitate to estimate her status by a criterion of dignity - sustained by such authority. She need not shrink from a position - which was sought by the Son of God, and in whose trials and griefs - she will have his sympathy and companionship.” - -There is a comforting aspect to this discourse, after all. It holds out -the hope, that a particularly noble woman may not be personally inferior -to a remarkably bad husband, but “may look down with pitying and helpful -love on him she calls her lord.” The drawback is not merely that it -insults woman by a reassertion of a merely historical inferiority, which -is steadily diminishing, but that it fortifies this by precisely the -same talk about the dignity of subordination which has been used to -buttress every oppression since the world began. Never yet was there a -pious slaveholder who did not quote to his slaves, on Sunday, precisely -the same texts with which President —— favors his meek young pupils. -Never yet was there a slaveholder who would not shoot through the head, -if he had courage enough, anybody who should attempt to place him in -that beautiful position of subjection whose spiritual merits he had been -proclaiming. When it came to that, he was like Thoreau, who believed -resignation to be a virtue, but preferred “not to practise it unless it -was quite necessary.” - -Thus, when the Rev. Charles C. Jones of Savannah used to address the -slaves on their condition, he proclaimed the beauty of obedience in a -way to bring tears to their eyes. And this, he frankly assures the -masters, is the way to check insurrection and advance their own -“pecuniary interests.” He says of the slave, that under proper religious -instruction “his conscience is enlightened and his soul is awed; ... to -God he commits the ordering of his lot, and in his station renders to -all their dues, obedience to whom obedience, and honor to whom honor. -_He dares not wrest from God his own care and protection._ While he sees -a preference in the various conditions of men, he remembers the words of -the apostle: ‘Art thou called being a servant? Care not for it; but, if -thou mayst be free, use it rather. For he that is called in the Lord, -being a servant, is the Lord’s freeman; likewise, also, he that is -called being free, is Christ’s servant.’”[4] - -Footnote 4: - - Religious Instruction of the Negroes. Savannah, 1842, pp. 208–211. - -I must say that the Rev. Mr. Jones’s preaching seems to me precisely as -good as Dr. ——’s, and that a sensible woman ought to be as much -influenced by the one as was Frederick Douglass by the other—that is, -not at all. Let the preacher try “subordination” himself, and see how he -likes it. The beauty of service, such as Jesus praised, lay in the -willingness of the service: a service that is serfdom loses all beauty, -whether rendered by man or by woman. My objection to separate schools -and colleges for women is, that they are too apt to end in such -instructions as this. - - - - - XIX. - “CELERY AND CHERUBS.” - - -There was once a real or imaginary old lady who had got the metaphor of -Scylla and Charybdis a little confused. Wishing to describe a perplexing -situation, this lady said,— - -“You see, my dear, she was between Celery on one side and Cherubs on the -other! You know about Celery and Cherubs, don’t you? They was two rocks -somewhere; and if you didn’t hit one, you was pretty sure to run smack -on the other.” - -This describes, as a clever writer in the New York Tribune declares, the -present condition of women who “agitate.” Their Celery and Cherubs are -tears and temper. - -It is a good hit, and we may well make a note of it. It is the danger of -all reformers, that they will vibrate between discouragement and anger. -When things go wrong, what is it one’s impulse to do? To be cast down, -or to be stirred up; to wring one’s hands, or clench one’s fists,—in -short, tears or temper. - -“Mother,” said a resolute little girl of my acquaintance, “if the dinner -was all spoiled, I wouldn’t sit down, and cry! I’d say, ‘Hang it!’” This -cherub preferred the alternative of temper, on days when the celery -turned out badly. Probably her mother was addicted to the other -practice, and exhibited the tears. - -But as this alternative is found to exist for both sexes, and on all -occasions, why charge it especially on the woman-suffrage movement? Men -are certainly as much given to ill temper as women; and, if they are -less inclined to tears, they make it up in sulks, which are just as bad. -Nicholas Nickleby, when the pump was frozen, was advised by Mr. Squeers -to “content himself with a dry polish;” and so there is a kind of dry -despair into which men fall, which is quite as forlorn as any tears of -women. How many a man has doubtless wished at such times that the pump -of his lachrymal glands could only thaw out, and he could give his -emotions something more than a “dry polish”! The unspeakable comfort -some women feel in sitting for ten minutes with a handkerchief over -their eyes! The freshness, the heartiness, the new life visible in them, -when the crying is done, and the handkerchief comes down again! - -And, indeed, this simple statement brings us to the real truth, which -should have been more clearly seen by the writer who tells this story. -She is wrong in saying, “It is urged that men and women stand on an -equality, are exactly alike.” Many of us urge the “equality:” very few -of us urge the “exactly alike.” An apple and an orange, a potato and a -tomato, a rose and a lily, the Episcopal and the Presbyterian churches, -Oxford and Cambridge, Yale and Harvard,—we may surely grant equality in -each case, without being so exceedingly foolish as to go on and say that -they are exactly alike. - -And precisely here is the weak point of the whole case, as presented by -this writer. Women give way to tears more readily than men? Granted. Is -their sex any the weaker for it? Not a bit. It is simply a difference of -temperament: that is all. It involves no inferiority. If you think that -this habit necessarily means weakness, wait and see! Who has not seen -women break down in tears during some domestic calamity, while the -“stronger sex” were calm; and who has not seen those same women, that -temporary excitement being over, rise up and dry their eyes, and be -thenceforth the support and stay of their households, and perhaps bear -up the “stronger sex” as a stream bears up a ship? I said once to an -experienced physician, watching such a woman, “That woman is really -great.”—“Of course she is,” he answered: “did you ever see a woman who -was not great, when the emergency required?” - -Now, will women carry this same quality of temperament into their public -career? Doubtless: otherwise they would cease to be women. Will it be -betraying confidence if I own that I have seen two of the very bravest -women of my acquaintance—women who have swayed great audiences—burst -into tears, during a committee-meeting, at a moment of unexpected -adversity for “the cause”? How pitiable! our critical observers would -have thought. In five minutes that April shower had passed, and those -women were as resolute and unconquerable as Queen Elizabeth: they were -again the natural leaders of those around them; and the cool and -tearless men who sat beside them were nothing—men were “a lost art,” as -some one says—compared with the inexhaustible moral vitality of those -two women. - -No: the dangers of “Celery and Cherubs” are exaggerated. For temper, -women are as good as men, and no better. As for tears, long may they -flow! They are symbols of that mighty distinction of sex which is as -ineffaceable and as essential as the difference between land and sea. - - - - - XX. - THE NEED OF CAVALRY. - - -In the interesting Buddhist book, “The Wheel of the Law,” translated by -Henry Alabaster, there is an account of a certain priest who used to -bless a great king, saying, “May your majesty have the firmness of a -crow, the audacity of a woman, the endurance of a vulture, and the -strength of an ant.” The priest then told anecdotes illustrating all of -these qualities. Who has not known occasions wherein some daring woman -has been the Joan of Arc of a perfectly hopeless cause, taken it up -where men shrank, carried it through where they had failed, and -conquered by weapons which men would never have thought of using, and -would have lacked faith to employ even if put into their hands? The wit, -the resources, the audacity of women, have been the key to history and -the staple of novels, ever since that larger novel called history began -to be written. - -How is it done? Who knows the secret of their success? All that any man -can say is, that the heart enters largely into the magic. Rogers asserts -in his “Table-Talk,” that often, when doubting how to act in matters of -importance, he had received more useful advice from women than from men. -“Women have the understanding of the heart,” he said, “which is better -than that of the head.” Then this instinct, that begins from the heart, -reaches the heart also, and through that controls the will. “Win -hearts,” said Lord Burleigh to Queen Elizabeth, “and you have hands and -purses;” and the greatest of English sovereigns, in spite of ugliness -and rouge, in spite of coarseness and cruelty and bad passions, was -adored by the nation that she first made great. - -It seems to me that women are a sort of cavalry force in the army of -mankind. They are not always to be relied upon for that steady -“hammering away,” which was Grant’s one method; but there is a certain -Sheridan quality about them, light-armed, audacious, quick, -irresistible. They go before the main army; their swift wits go scouting -far in advance; they are the first to scent danger, or to spy out -chances of success. Their charge is like that of a Tartar horde, or the -wild sweep of the Apaches. They are upon you from some wholly unexpected -quarter; and this respectable, systematic, well-drilled masculine force -is caught and rolled over and over in the dust, before the man knows -what has hit him. But, even if repelled and beaten off, this formidable -cavalry is unconquered: routed and in confusion to-day, it comes back -upon you to-morrow—fresh, alert, with new devices, bringing new dangers. -In dealing with it, as the French complained of the Arabs in Algiers, -“Peace is not to be purchased by victory.” And, even if all seems lost, -with what a brilliant final charge it will cover a retreat! - -Decidedly, we need cavalry. In older countries, where it has been a -merely undisciplined and irregular force, it has often done mischief; -and public men, from Demosthenes down, have been lamenting that measures -which the statesman has meditated a whole year, may be overturned in a -day by a woman. Under our American government we have foolishly -attempted to leave out this arm of the service altogether; and much of -the alleged dulness of our American history has come from this attempt. -Those who have been trained in the various reforms where woman has taken -an equal part—the anti-slavery reform especially—know well how much of -the energy, the dash, the daring, of those movements, have come from -her. A revolution with a woman in it is stronger than the established -order that omits her. It is not that she is superior to man, but she is -different from man; and we can no more spare her than we could spare the -cavalry from an army. - - - - - XXI. - “THE REASON FIRM, THE TEMPERATE WILL.” - - -It is a part of the necessary theory of republican government, that -every class and race shall be judged by its highest types, not its -lowest. The proposition of the French revolutionary statesman, to begin -the work of purifying the world by arresting all the cowards and knaves, -is liable to the objection that it would find victims in every circle. -Republican government begins at the other end, and assumes that the -community generally has good intentions at least, and some common sense, -however it may be with individuals. Take the very quality which the -newspapers so often deny to women,—the quality of steadiness. “In fact, -men’s great objection to the entrance of the female mind into politics -is drawn from a suspicion of its unsteadiness on matters in which the -feelings could by any possibility be enlisted.” Thus says the New York -Nation. Let us consider this implied charge against women, and consider -it not by generalizing from a single instance,—“just like a woman,” as -the editors would doubtless say, if a woman had done it,—but by -observing whole classes of that sex, taken together. - -These classes need some care in selection, for the plain reason that -there are comparatively few circles in which women have yet been allowed -enough freedom of scope, or have acted sufficiently on the same plane -with men, to furnish a fair estimate of their probable action, were they -enfranchised. Still there occur to me three such classes,—the -anti-slavery women, the Quaker women, and the women who conduct -philanthropic operations in our large cities. If the alleged -unsteadiness of women is to be felt in public affairs, it would have -been felt in these organizations. Has it been so felt? - -Of the anti-slavery movement I can personally testify,—and I have heard -the same point fully recognized among my elders, such as Garrison, -Phillips, and Quincy,—that the women contributed their full share, if -not more than their share, to the steadiness of that movement, even in -times when the feelings were most excited, as, for instance, in -fugitive-slave cases. Who that has seen mobs practically put down, and -mayors cowed into decency, by the silent dignity of those rows of women -who sat, with their knitting, more imperturbable than the men, can read -without a smile these doubts of the “steadiness” of that sex? Again, -among Quaker women, I have asked the opinion of prominent Friends, as of -John G. Whittier, whether it has been the experience of that body that -women were more flighty and unsteady than men in their official action; -and have been uniformly answered in the negative. And finally, as to -benevolent organizations, a good test is given in the fact,—first -pointed out, I believe, by that eminently practical philanthropist, Rev. -Augustus Woodbury of Providence,—that the whole tendency has been, -during the last twenty years, to put the management, even the financial -control, of our benevolent societies, more and more into the hands of -women, and that there has never been the slightest reason to reverse -this policy. Ask the secretaries of the various boards of State -Charities, or the officers of the Social Science Associations, if they -have found reason to complain of the want of steadfast qualities in the -“weaker sex.” Why is it that the legislation of Massachusetts has -assigned the class requiring the steadiest of all supervision—the -imprisoned convicts—to “five commissioners of prisons, two of whom shall -be women”? These are the points which it would be worthy of our journals -to consider, instead of hastily generalizing from single instances. Let -us appeal from the typical woman of the editorial picture,—fickle, -unsteady, foolish,—to the nobler conception of womanhood which the poet -Wordsworth found fulfilled in his own household:— - - “A being breathing thoughtful breath, - A traveller betwixt life and death; - _The reason firm, the temperate will; - Endurance, foresight, strength and skill_; - A perfect woman, nobly planned - To warn, to comfort, to command, - And yet a spirit still, and bright - With something of an angel light.” - - - - - XXII. - “ALLURES TO BRIGHTER WORLDS, AND LEADS THE WAY.” - - -When the Massachusetts House of Representatives had “School Suffrage” -under consideration, the other day, the suggestion was made by one of -the pithiest and quaintest of the speakers, that men were always better -for the society of women, and therefore ought to vote in their company. -“If all of us,” he said, “would stay away from all places where we -cannot take our wives and daughters with us, we should keep better -company than we now do.” This expresses a feeling which grows more and -more common among the better class of men, and which is the key to much -progress in the condition of women. There can be no doubt that the -increased association of the sexes in society, in school, in literature, -tends to purify these several spheres of action. Yet, when we come to -philosophize on this, there occur some perplexities on the way. - -For instance, the exclusion of woman from all these spheres was in -ancient Greece almost complete; yet the leading Greek poets, as Homer -and the tragedians, are exceedingly chaste in tone, and in this respect -beyond most of the great poets of modern nations. Again no European -nation has quite so far sequestered and subordinated women as has Spain; -and yet the whole tone of Spanish literature is conspicuously grave and -decorous. This plainly indicates that race has much to do with the -matter, and that the mere admission or exclusion of women is but one -among several factors. In short, it is easy to make out a case by a -rhetorical use of the facts on one side; but, if we look at all the -facts, the matter presents greater difficulties. - -Again, it is to be noted that in several countries the first women who -have taken prominent part in literature have been as bad as the men; as, -for instance, Marguerite of Navarre and Mrs. Aphra Behn. This might -indeed be explained by supposing that they had to gain entrance into -literature by accepting the dissolute standards which they found -prevailing. But it would probably be more correct to say that these -standards themselves were variable, and that their variation affected, -at certain periods, women as well as men. Marguerite of Navarre wrote -religious books as well as merry stories; and we know from Lockhart’s -Life of Scott, that ladies of high character in Edinburgh used to read -Mrs. Behn’s tales and plays aloud, at one time, with delight,—although -one of the same ladies found, in her old age, that she could not read -them to herself without blushing. Shakspeare puts coarse repartees into -the mouths of women of stainless virtue. George Sand is not considered -an unexceptionable writer; but she tells us in her autobiography that -she found among her grandmother’s papers poems and satires so indecent -that she could not read them through, and yet they bore the names of -_abbés_ and gentlemen whom she remembered in her childhood as models of -dignity and honor. Voltaire inscribes to ladies of high rank, who -doubtless regarded it as a great compliment, verses such as not even a -poet of the English “fleshly school” would now print at all. In “Poems -by Eminent Ladies,”—published in 1755 and reprinted in 1774,—there are -one or two poems as gross and disgusting as any thing in Swift; yet -their authors were thought reputable women. Allan Ramsay’s “Tea-Table -Miscellany”—a collection of English and Scottish songs—was first -published in 1724; and in his preface to the sixteenth edition the -editor attributes its great success, especially among the ladies, to the -fact that he has carefully excluded all grossness, “that the modest -voice and ear of the fair singer might meet with no affront;” and adds, -“the chief bent of all my studies being to attain their good graces.” -There is no doubt of the great popularity enjoyed by the book in all -circles; yet it contains a few songs which the most licentious newspaper -would not now publish. The inference is irresistible, from this and many -other similar facts, that the whole tone of manners and decency has very -greatly improved among the European races within a century and a half. - -I suspect the truth to be, that, besides the visible influence of race -and religion, there has been an insensible and almost unconscious -improvement in each sex, with respect to these matters, as time has -passed on; and that the mutual desire to please has enabled each sex to -help the other,—the sex which is naturally the more refined taking the -lead. But I should lay more stress on this mutual influence, and less on -mere feminine superiority, than would be laid by many. It is often -claimed by teachers that co-education helps not only boys, but also -girls, to develop greater propriety of manners. When the sexes are -wholly separate, or associate on terms of entire inequality, no such -good influence occurs: the more equal the association, the better for -both parties. After all, the Divine model is to be found in the family; -and the best ingenuity cannot improve much upon it. - - - - - THE HOME. - - -“In respect to the powers and rights of married women, the law is by no -means abreast of the spirit of the age. Here are seen the old fossil -footprints of feudalism. The law relating to woman tends to make every -family a barony or a monarchy or a despotism, of which the husband is -the baron, king, or despot, and the wife the dependent, serf, or slave. -That this is not always the fact, is not due to the law, but to the -enlarged humanity which spurns the narrow limits of its rules. The -progress of civilization has changed the family from a barony to a -republic; but the law has not kept pace with the advance of ideas, -manners, and customs.”—W. W. STORY’s _Treatise on Contracts not under -Seal_, § 84,—third edition, p. 89. - - - - - XXIII. - WANTED—HOMES. - - -We see advertisements, occasionally, of “Homes for Aged Women,” and more -rarely “Homes for Aged Men.” The question sometimes suggests itself, -whether it would not be better to begin the provision earlier, and see -that homes are also provided, in some form, for the middle-aged and even -the young. The trouble is, I suppose, that as it takes two to make a -bargain, so it takes at least two to make a home; and unluckily it takes -only one to spoil it. - -Madame Roland once defined marriage as an institution where one person -undertakes to provide happiness for two; and many failures are accounted -for, no doubt, by this false basis. Sometimes it is the man, more often -the woman, of whom this extravagant demand is made. There are marriages -which have proved a wreck almost wholly through the fault of the wife. -Nor is this confined to wedded homes alone. I have known a son who lived -alone, patiently and uncomplainingly, with that saddest of all -conceivable companions, a drunken mother. I have known another young man -who supported in his own home a mother and sister, both habitual -drunkards. All these were American-born, and all of respectable social -position. A home shadowed by such misery is not a home, though it might -have been a home but for the sins of women. Such instances are, however, -rare and occasional compared with the cases where the same offence in -the husband makes ruin of the home. - -Then there are the cases where indolence, or selfishness, or vanity, or -the love of social excitement, in the woman, unfits her for home life. -Here we come upon ground where perhaps woman is the greater sinner. It -must be remembered, however, that against this must be balanced the -neglect produced by club-life, or by the life of society-membership, in -a man. A brilliant young married belle in London once told me that she -was glad her husband was so fond of his club, for it amused him every -night while she went to balls. “Married men do not go much into society -here,” she said, “unless they are regular flirts,—which I do not think -my husband would ever be, for he is very fond of me,—so he goes every -night to his club, and gets home about the same time that I do. It is a -very nice arrangement.” It was apparently spoken in all the fearlessness -of innocence, but I believe that it has since ended in a “separation.” - -It is common to denounce club-life in our large cities as destructive of -the home. The modern club is simply a more refined substitute for the -old-fashioned tavern, and is on the whole an advance in morals as well -as manners. In our large cities a man in a certain social coterie -belongs to a club, if he can afford it, as a means of contact with his -fellows, and to have various conveniences which he cannot so -economically obtain at home. A few haunt them constantly: the many use -them occasionally. More absorbing than clubs, perhaps, are the secret -societies which have so revived among us since the war, and which -consume time so fearfully. There was a case mentioned in the newspapers -lately of a man who belonged to some twenty of these associations; and -when he died, and each wished to conduct his funeral, great was the -strife! In the small city where I write, there are seventeen secret -societies down in the directory, and I suppose as many more not so -conspicuous. I meet men who assure me that they habitually attend a -societymeeting every evening of the week except Sunday, and a church -meeting then. These are rarely men of leisure: they are usually -mechanics or business men of some kind, who are hard at work all day, -and never see their families except at meal-times. Their case is far -worse, so far as absence from home is concerned, than that of the -“club-men” of large cities; for these are often men of leisure, who, if -married, at least make home one of their lounging-places, which the -secret-society men do not. - -I honestly believe that this melancholy desertion of the home is largely -due to the traditional separation between the alleged spheres of the -sexes. The theory still prevails largely, that home is the peculiar -province of the woman, that she has almost no duties out of it; and -hence, naturally enough, that the husband has almost no duties in it. If -he is amused there, let him stay there; but, as it is not his recognized -sphere of duty, he is not actually violating any duty by absenting -himself. This theory even pervades our manuals of morals, of -metaphysics, and of popular science; and it is not every public teacher -who has the manliness, having once stated it, to modify his statement, -as did the venerable President Hopkins of Williams College, when -lecturing the other day to the young ladies of Vassar. - -“I would,” he said, “at this point correct my teaching in ‘The Law of -Love’ to the effect that home is peculiarly the sphere of woman, and -civil government that of man. _I now regard the home as the joint sphere -of man and woman, and the sphere of civil government more of an open -question as between the two._ It is, however, to be lamented that the -present agitation concerning the rights of woman is so much a matter of -‘rights’ rather than of ‘duties,’ as the reform of the latter would -involve the former.” - -If our instructors in moral philosophy will only base their theory of -ethics as broadly as this, we shall no longer need to advertise “Homes -Wanted;” for the joint efforts of men and women will soon provide them. - - - - - XXIV. - THE ORIGIN OF CIVILIZATION. - - -Nothing throws more light on the whole history of woman than the first -illustration in Sir John Lubbock’s “Origin of Civilization.” A young -girl, almost naked, is being dragged furiously along the ground by a -party of naked savages, armed literally to the teeth, while those of -another band grasp her by the arm, and almost tear her asunder in the -effort to hold her back. These last are her brothers and her friends; -the others are—her enemies? As you please to call them. They are her -future husband and his kinsmen, who have come to aid him in his wooing. - -This was the primitive rite of marriage. Vestiges of it still remain -among savage nations. And all the romance and grace of the most refined -modern marriage—the orange-blossoms, the bridal veil, the church -service, the wedding-feast—these are only the “bright consummate flower” -reared by civilization from that rough seed. All the brutal encounter is -softened into this. Nothing remains of the barbarism except the one word -“obey,” and even that is going. - -Now, to say that a thing is going, is to say that it will presently be -gone. To say that any thing is changed, is to say that it is to change -further. If it never has been altered, perhaps it will not be; but a -proved alteration of an inch in a year opens the way to an indefinite -modification. The study of the glaciers, for instance, began with the -discovery that they had moved; and from that moment no one doubted that -they were moving all the time. It is the same with the position of -woman. Once open your eyes to the fact that it has changed, and who is -to predict where the matter shall end? It is sheer folly to say, “Her -relative position will always be what it has been,” when one glance at -Sir John Lubbock’s picture shows that there is no fixed “has been,” but -that her original position was long since altered and revised. Those who -still use this argument are like those who laughed at the lines of -stakes which Agassiz planted across the Aar glacier in 1840. But the -stakes settled the question, and proved the motion. _Pero si muove_: -“But it moves.” - -The motion once proved, the whole range of possible progress is before -us. The amazement of that formerly “heathen Chinee” in Boston, the other -day, when he saw a woman addressing a missionary meeting; the -astonishment of all English visitors when young ladies hear classes in -geometry and Latin, in our high schools; the surprise of foreigners at -seeing the rough throng in the Cooper Institute reading-room submit to -the sway of one young woman with a crochet-needle—all these simply -testify to the fact that the stakes have moved. That they have yet been -carried half way to the end, who knows? What a step from the horrible -nuptials of those savage days to the poetic marriage of Robert Browning -and Elizabeth Barrett—the “Sonnets from the Portuguese” on one side, the -“One Word More” on the other! But who can say that the whole relation -between man and woman reached its climax there, and that where the past -has brought changes so vast the future is to add nothing? Who knows -that, when “the world’s great bridals come,” people may not look back -with pity, even on this era of the Brownings? Probably even Elizabeth -Barrett promised to obey! - -At any rate, it is safe to say that each step concedes the probability -of another. Even from the naked barbarian to the veiled Oriental, from -the savage hut to the carefully enshrined harem, is a step forward. It -is another step in the spiral line of progress to the unveiled face and -comparatively free movements of the modern English or American woman. -From the kitchen to the public lecture-room, from that to the -lecture-platform, and from that again to the ballot-box,—these are far -slighter steps than those which have already lifted the savage girl of -Sir John Lubbock’s picture into the possession of the alphabet and the -dignity of a home. So easy are these future changes beside those of the -past, that to doubt their possibility is as if Agassiz, after tracing -year by year the motion of his Alpine glacier, should deny its power to -move one inch farther into the sunny valley, and there to melt -harmlessly away. - - - - - XXV. - THE LOW-WATER MARK. - - -We constantly see it assumed, in arguments against any step in the -elevation of woman, that her position is a thing fixed permanently by -nature, so that there can be in it no great or essential change. Every -successive modification is resisted as “a reform against nature;” and -this argument from permanence is always that appealing most strongly to -conservative minds. Let us see how the facts confirm it. - -A story is going the rounds of the newspapers in regard to a Russian -peasant and his wife. For some act of disobedience the peasant took the -law into his own hands; and his mode of discipline was to tie the poor -creature naked to a post in the street, and to call on every passer-by -to strike her a blow. Not satisfied with this, he placed her on the -ground, and tied heavy weights on her limbs until one arm was broken. -When finally released, she made a complaint against him in court. The -court discharged him on the ground that he had not exceeded the legal -authority of a husband. Encouraged by this, he caused her to be arrested -in return; and the same court sentenced her to another public whipping -for disobedience. - -No authority was given for this story in the newspaper where I saw it; -but it certainly did not first appear in a woman-suffrage newspaper, and -cannot therefore be a manufactured “outrage.” I use it simply to -illustrate the low-water mark at which the position of woman may rest, -in the largest Christian nation of the world. All the refinements, all -the education, all the comparative justice, of modern society, have been -gradually upheaved from some such depth as this. When the gypsies -described by Leland treat even the ground trodden upon by a woman as -impure, they simply illustrate the low plane from which all the -elevation of woman has begun. All these things show that the position of -that sex in society, so far from being a thing in itself permanent, has -been in reality the most variable of all factors in the social problem. -And this inevitably suggests the question, Are we any more sure that her -present position is finally and absolutely fixed than were those who -observed it at any previous time in the world’s history? Granting that -her condition was once at low-water mark, who is authorized to say that -it has yet reached high-tide? - -It is very possible that this Russian wife, once scourged back to -submission, ended her days in the conviction, and taught to her -daughters, that such was a woman’s rightful place. When an American -woman of to-day says, “I have all the rights I want,” is she on any -surer ground? Grant that the difference is vast between the two. How do -we know that even the later condition is final, or that any thing is -final but entire equality before the laws? It is not many years since -William Story—in a legal work inspired and revised by his father, the -greatest of American jurists—wrote this indignant protest against the -injustice of the old common law:— - - “In respect to the powers and rights of married women, the law is by - no means abreast of the spirit of the age. Here are seen the old - fossil footprints of feudalism. The law relating to woman tends to - make every family a barony or a monarchy, or a despotism, of which - the husband is the baron, king, or despot, and the wife the - dependent, serf, or slave. That this is not always the fact, is not - due to the law, but to the enlarged humanity which spurns the narrow - limits of its rules. The progress of civilization has changed the - family from a barony to a republic; but the law has not kept pace - with the advance of ideas, manners, and customs. And, although - public opinion is a check to legal rules on the subject, the rules - are feudal and stern. Yet the position of woman throughout history - serves as the criterion of the freedom of the people or an age. When - man shall despise that right which is founded only on might, woman - will be free and stand on an equal level with him,—a friend and not - a dependent.”[5] - -Footnote 5: - - Story’s Treatise on the Law of Contracts not under Seal, p. 89, § 84. - -We know that the law is greatly changed and ameliorated in many places -since Story wrote this statement; but we also know how almost every one -of these changes was resisted: and who is authorized to say that the -final and equitable fulfilment is yet reached? - - - - - XXVI. - “OBEY.” - - -After witnessing the marriage ceremony of the Episcopal Church, the -other day, I walked down the aisle with the young rector who had -officiated. It was natural to speak of the beauty of the Church service -on an occasion like that; but, after doing this, I felt compelled to -protest against the unrighteous pledge to obey. “I hope,” I said, “to -live to see that word expunged from the Episcopal service, as it has -been from that of the Methodists.” - -“Why?” he asked. “Is it because you know that they will not obey, -whatever their promise?” - -“Because they ought not,” I said. - -“Well,” said he, after a few moments’ reflection, and looking up -frankly, “I do not think they ought!” - -Here was a young clergyman of great earnestness and self-devotion, who -included it among the sacred duties of his life to impose upon ignorant -young girls a solemn obligation, which he yet thought they ought not to -incur, and did not believe that they would keep. There could hardly be a -better illustration of the confusion in the public mind, or the manner -in which “the subjection of woman” is being outgrown, or the subtile way -in which this subjection has been interwoven with sacred ties, and -baptized “duty.” - -The advocates of woman suffrage are constantly reproved for using the -terms “subjection,” “oppression,” and “slavery,” as applied to woman. -They simply commit the same sin as that committed by the original -abolitionists. They are “as harsh as truth, as uncompromising as -justice.” Of course they talk about oppression and emancipation. It is -the word _obey_ that constitutes the one, and shows the need of the -other. Whoever is pledged to obey is technically and literally a slave, -no matter how many roses surround the chains. All the more so if the -slavery is self-imposed, and surrounded by all the prescriptions of -religion. Make the marriage-tie as close as Church or State can make it; -but let it be equal, impartial. That it may be so, the word _obey_ must -be abandoned or made reciprocal. Where invariable obedience is promised, -equality is gone. - -That there may be no doubt about the meaning of this word in the -marriage-covenant, the usages of nations often add symbolic -explanations. These are generally simple and brutal enough to be -understood. The Hebrew ceremony, when the bridegroom took off his -slipper and struck the bride on the neck as she crossed his threshold, -was unmistakable. As my black sergeant said, when a white prisoner -questioned his authority, and he pointed to the _chevrons_ on his -sleeve, “Dat mean guv’ment.” All these forms mean simply government -also. The ceremony of the slipper has now no recognition, except when -people fling an old shoe after the bride, which is held by antiquarians -to be the same observance. But it is all preserved and concentrated into -a single word, when the bride promises to obey. - -The deepest wretchedness that has ever been put into human language, or -that has exceeded it, has grown out of that pledge. There is no misery -on earth like that of a pure and refined woman who finds herself owned, -body and soul, by a drunken, licentious, brutal man. The very fact that -she is held to obedience by a spiritual tie makes it worse. -Chattel-slavery was not so bad; for, though the master might pervert -religion for his own satisfaction, he could not impose upon the slave. -Never yet did I see a negro slave who thought it a duty to obey his -master; and therefore there was always some dream of release. But who -has not heard of some delicate and refined woman, one day of whose -torture was equivalent to years of that possible to an obtuser -frame,—who had the door of escape ready at hand for years, and yet died -a lingering death rather than pass through it; and this because she had -promised to obey! - -It is said of one of the most gifted women who ever trod American -soil,—she being of English birth,—that, before she obtained the divorce -which separated her from her profligate husband, she once went for -counsel to the wife of her pastor. She unrolled before her the long -catalogue of merciless outrages to which she had been subject, -endangering finally her health, her life, and that of her children born -and to be born. When she turned at last for advice to her confessor, -with the agonized inquiry, “What is it my duty to do?”—“Do?” said the -stern adviser: “Lie down on the floor, and let your husband trample on -you if he will. That is a woman’s duty.” - -The woman who gave this advice was not naturally inhuman nor heartless: -she had simply been trained in the school of obedience. The Jesuit -doctrine, that a priest should be as a corpse, _perinde ac cadaver_, in -the hands of a superior priest, is not worse. Woman has no right to -delegate, nor man to assume, a responsibility so awful. Just in -proportion as it is consistently carried out, it trains men from boyhood -into self-indulgent tyrants; and, while some women are transformed by it -to saints, others are crushed into deceitful slaves. That this was the -result of chattel-slavery, this nation has at length learned. We learn -more slowly the profounder and more subtile moral evil that follows from -the unrighteous promise to obey. - - - - - XXVII. - WOMAN IN THE CHRYSALIS. - - -When the bride receives the ring upon her finger, and utters—if she -utters it—the unnatural promise to obey, she fancies a poetic beauty in -the rite. Turning of her own free will from her maiden liberty, she -voluntarily takes the yoke of service upon her. This is her view; but is -this the historic fact in regard to marriage? Not at all. The pledge of -obedience—the whole theory of inequality in marriage—is simply what is -left to us of a former state of society, in which every woman, old or -young, must obey somebody. The state of tutelage, implied in such a -marriage, is merely what is left of the old theory of the “Perpetual -Tutelage of Women,” under the Roman law. - -Roman law, from which our civil law is derived, has its foundation -evidently in patriarchal tradition. It recognized at first the family -only, and that family was held together by parental power (_patria -potestas_). If the father died, his powers passed to the son or -grandson, as the possible head of a new family; but these powers never -could pass to a woman, and every woman, of whatever age, must be under -somebody’s legal control. Her father dying, she was still subject -through life to her nearest male relations, or to her father’s nominees, -as her guardians. She was under perpetual guardianship, both as to -person or property. No years, no experience, could make her any thing -but a child before the law. - -In Oriental countries the system was still more complete. “A man,” says -the Gentoo Code of Laws, “must keep his wife so much in subjection that -she by no means be mistress of her own action. If the wife have her own -free will, notwithstanding she be of a superior caste, she will behave -amiss.” But this authority, which still exists in India, is not merely -conjugal. The husband exerts it simply as being the wife’s legal -guardian. If the woman be unmarried or a widow, she must be as -rigorously held under some other guardianship. It is no uncommon thing -for a woman in India to be the ward of her own son. Lucretia Mott or -Florence Nightingale would there be in personal subjection to somebody. -Any man of legal age would be recognized as a fit custodian for them, -but there must be a man. - -With some variation of details at different periods, the same system -prevailed essentially at Rome, down to the time when Rome became -Christian. Those who wish for particulars will find them in an admirable -chapter (the fifth) of Maine’s “Ancient Law.” At one time the husband -was held to possess the _patria potestas_, or parental power, in its -full force. By law “the woman passed _in manum viri_, that is, she -became the daughter of her husband.” All she had became his, and after -his death she was retained in the same strict tutelage by any guardians -his will might appoint. Afterwards, to soften this rigid bond, the woman -was regarded in law as being temporarily deposited by her family with -her husband; the family appointed guardians over her: and thus, between -the two tyrannies, she won a sort of independence. Then came -Christianity, and swept away the parental authority for married women, -concentrating all upon the husband. Hence our legislation bears the mark -of a double origin, and woman is half recognized as an equal and half as -a slave. - -It is necessary to remember, therefore, that all the relation of -subjection in marriage is merely the residue of an unnatural system, of -which all else is long since outgrown. It would have seemed to an -ancient Roman a matter of course that a woman should, all her life long, -obey the guardians set over her person. It still seems to many people a -matter of course that she should obey her husband. To others among us, -on the contrary, both these theories of obedience seem barbarous, and -the one is merely a relic of the other. - -We cannot disregard the history of the Theory of Tutelage. If we could -believe that a chrysalis is always a chrysalis, and a butterfly always a -butterfly, we could easily leave each to its appropriate sphere; but -when we see the chrysalis open, and the butterfly come half out of it, -we know that sooner or later it must spread wings, and fly. The theory -of tutelage is the chrysalis. Woman is the butterfly. Sooner or later -she will be wholly out. - - - - - XXVIII. - TWO AND TWO. - - -A young man of very good brains was telling me, the other day, his -dreams of his future wife. Rattling on, more in joke than in earnest, he -said, “She must be perfectly ignorant, and a bigot: she must know -nothing, and believe every thing. I should wish to have her call to me -from the adjoining room, ‘My dear, what do two and two make?’” - -It did not seem to me that his demand would be so very hard to fill, -since bigotry and ignorance are to be had almost anywhere for the -asking; and, as for two and two, I should say that it had always been -the habit of women to ask that question of some man, and to rest easily -satisfied with the answer. They have generally called, as my friend -wished, from some other room, saying, “My dear, what do two and two -make?” and the husband or father or brother has answered and said, “My -dear, they make four for a man, and three for a woman.” - -At any given period in the history of woman, she has adopted man’s whim -as the measure of her rights; has claimed nothing; has sweetly accepted -any thing: the law of two-and-two itself should be at his discretion. At -any given moment, so well was his interpretation received, that it stood -for absolute right. In Rome a woman, married or single, could not -testify in court; in the middle ages, and down to quite modern times, -she could not hold real estate; ten years ago she could not, in New -England, obtain a collegiate education; even now she cannot vote. - -The first principles of republican government are so rehearsed and -re-rehearsed, that one would think they must become “as plain as that -two and two make four.” But we find throughout, that, as Emerson said of -another class of reasoners, “Their two is not the real two; their four -is not the real four.” We find different numerals and diverse -arithmetical rules for the two sexes; as, in some Oriental countries, -men and women speak different dialects of the same language. - -In novels the hero often begins by dreaming, like my friend, of an ideal -wife, who shall be ignorant of every thing, and have only brains enough -to be bigoted. Instead of sighing, like Falstaff, “Oh for a fine young -thief, of the age of two and twenty or thereabouts!” the hero sighs for -a fine young idiot of similar age. When the hero is successful in his -search and wooing, the novelist sometimes mercifully removes the young -woman early, like David Copperfield’s Dora, she bequeathing the bereaved -husband, on her death-bed, to a woman of sense. In real life these -convenient interruptions do not commonly occur, and the foolish youth -regrets through many years that he did not select an Agnes instead. - -The acute observer Stendhal says,— - - “In Paris, the highest praise for a marriageable girl is to say, - ‘She has great sweetness of character and the disposition of a - lamb.’ Nothing produces more impression on fools who are looking out - for wives. I think I see the interesting couple, two years after, - breakfasting together on a dull day, with three tall lackeys waiting - upon them!” - -And he adds, still speaking in the interest of men,— - - “Most men have a period in their career when they might do something - great, a period when nothing seems impossible. The ignorance of - women spoils for the human race this magnificent opportunity; and - love, at the utmost, in these days, only inspires a young man to - learn to ride well, or to make a judicious selection of a - tailor.”[6] - -Footnote 6: - - De L’Amour, par de Stendhal (Henri Beyle). Paris, 1868 [written in - 1822], pp. 182, 198. - -Society, however, discovers by degrees that there are conveniences in -every woman’s knowing the four rules of arithmetic for herself. Two and -two come to the same amount on a butcher’s bill, whether the order be -given by a man or a woman; and it is the same in all affairs or -investments, financial or moral. We shall one day learn that with laws, -customs, and public affairs it is even so. Once get it rooted in a -woman’s mind, that, for her, two and two make three only, and sooner or -later the accounts of the whole human race fail to balance. - - - - - XXIX. - A MODEL HOUSEHOLD. - - -There is an African bird called the hornbill, whose habits are in some -respects a model. The female builds her nest in a hollow tree, lays her -eggs, and broods on them. So far, so good. Then the male feels that he -must also contribute some service; so he walls up the hole closely, -giving only room for the point of the female’s bill to protrude. Until -the eggs are hatched, she is thenceforth confined to her nest, and is in -the mean time fed assiduously by her mate, who devotes himself entirely -to this object. Dr. Livingstone has seen these nests in Africa, Layard -and others in Asia, and Wallace in Sumatra. - -Personally I have never seen a hornbill’s nest. The nearest approach I -ever made to it was when in Fayal I used to pass near a gloomy mansion, -of which the front windows were walled up, and only one high window was -visible in the rear, beyond the reach of eyes from any neighboring -house. In this cheerful abode, I was assured, a Portuguese lady had been -for many years confined by her jealous husband. It was long since any -neighbor had caught a glimpse of her, but it was supposed that she was -alive. There is no reason to doubt that her husband fed her well. It was -simply a case of human hornbill, with the imprisonment made perpetual. - -I have more than once asked lawyers whether, in communities where the -old common law prevailed, there was any thing to prevent such an -imprisonment of a married woman; and they have always answered, “Nothing -but public opinion.” Where the husband has the legal custody of the -wife’s person, no _habeas corpus_ can avail against him. The hornbill -household is based on a strict application of the old common law. A -Hindoo household was a hornbill household: “a woman, of whatsoever age, -should never be mistress of her own actions,” said the code of Menu. An -Athenian household was a hornbill’s nest, and great was the outcry when -some Aspasia broke out of it. When Mrs. Sherman petitions Congress -against the emancipation of woman, we seem to hear the twittering of the -hornbill mother, imploring to be left inside. - -Under some forms, the hornbill theory becomes respectable. There are -many peaceful families, innocent though torpid, where the only dream of -existence is to have plenty of quiet, plenty of food, and plenty of -well-fed children. For them this African household is a sufficient -model. The wife is “a home body.” The husband is “a good provider.” -These are honest people, and have a right to speak. The hornbill theory -is only dishonest when it comes—as it often comes—from women who lead -the life, not of good stay-at-home fowls, but of paroquets and -humming-birds,—who sorrowfully bemoan the active habits of enlightened -women, while they themselves - - “Bear about the mockery of woe - To midnight dances and the public show.” - -It is from these women, in Washington, New York, and elsewhere, that the -loudest appeal for the hornbill standard of domesticity proceeds. Put -them to the test, and give them their chicken-salad and champagne -through a hole in the wall only, and see how they like it. - -But even the most honest and peaceful conservatives will one day admit -that the hornbill is not the highest model. Plato thought that “the soul -of our grandame might haply inhabit the body of a bird;” but Nature has -kindly provided various types of bird-households to suit all varieties -of taste. The bright orioles, filling the summer boughs with color and -with song, are as truly domestic in the freedom of their airy nest as -the poor hornbills who ignorantly make home into a dungeon. And -certainly each new generation of orioles, spreading their free wings -from that pendent cradle, are a happier illustration of judicious -nurture than are the uncouth little offspring of the hornbills, whom -Wallace describes as “so flabby and semi-transparent as to resemble a -bladder of jelly, furnished with head, legs, and rudimentary wings, but -with not a sign of a feather, except a few lines of points indicating -where they would come.” - - - - - XXX. - A SAFEGUARD FOR THE FAMILY. - - -Many German-Americans are warm friends of woman suffrage; but the -editors of “Puck,” it seems, are not. In a late number of that comic -journal, it had an unfavorable cartoon on this reform; and in a -following number,—the number, by the way, which contains that amusing -illustration of the vast seaside hotels of the future, with the cheering -announcement, “Only one mile to the barber’s shop,” and “Take the cars -to the dining-room,”—a lady comes to the rescue, and bravely defends -woman suffrage. It seems that the original cartoon depicted in the -corner a pretty family scene, representing father, mother, and children -seated happily together, with the melancholy motto, “Nevermore, -nevermore!” And when the correspondent, Mrs. Blake, very naturally asks -what this touching picture has to do with woman suffrage, Puck says, “If -the husband in our ‘pretty family scene’ should propose to vote for the -candidate who was obnoxious to his wife, would this ‘pretty family -scene’ continue to be a domestic paradise, or would it remind the -spectator of the region in which Dante spent his ‘fortnight off’?” - -It is beautiful to see how much anxiety there is to preserve the family. -Every step in the modification of the old common law, whereby the wife -was, in Baron Alderson’s phrase, “the servant of her husband,” was -resisted as tending to endanger the family. That the wife should control -her own earnings, so that her husband should not have the right to -collect them in order to pay his gambling-debts, was declared by English -advocates, in the celebrated case of the Hon. Mrs. Norton, the poetess, -to imperil all the future peace of British households. Even the -liberal-minded “Punch,” about the time Girton College was founded in -England, expressed grave doubts whether the harmony of wedded unions -would not receive a blow, from the time when wives should be liable to -know more Greek than their husbands. Yet the marriage relation has -withstood these innovations. It has not been impaired, either by -separate rights, private earnings, or independent Greek: can it be -possible that a little voting will overthrow it? - -The very ground on which woman suffrage is opposed by its enemies might -assuage these fears. If, as we are told, women will not take the pains -to vote except upon the strongest inducements, who has so good an -opportunity as the husband to bring those inducements to bear? and, if -so, what is the separation? Or if, as we are told, women will merely -reflect their husbands’ political opinions, why should they dispute -about them? The mere suggestion of a difference deep enough to quarrel -for, implies a real difference of convictions or interests, and -indicates that there ought to be an independent representation of each; -unless we fall back, once for all, on the common-law tradition that man -and wife are one, and that one is the husband. Either the antagonisms -which occur in politics are comparatively superficial, in which case -they would do no harm; or else they touch matters of real interest and -principle, in which case every human being has a right to independent -expression, even at a good deal of risk. In either case, the objection -falls to the ground. - -We have fortunately a means of testing, with some fairness of estimate, -the probable amount of this peril. It is generally admitted,—and -certainly no German-American will deny,—that the most fruitful sources -of hostility and war in all times have been religious, not political. -All merely political antagonism, certainly all which is possible in a -republic, fades into insignificance before this more powerful dividing -influence. Yet we leave all this great explosive force in unimpeded -operation,—at any moment it may be set in action, in any one of those -“pretty family scenes” which “Puck” depicts,—while we are solemnly -warned against admitting the comparatively mild peril of a political -difference! It is like cautioning a manufacturer of dynamite against the -danger of meddling with mere edge-tools. Even with all the intensity of -feeling on religious matters, few families are seriously divided by -them; and the influence of political differences would be still more -insignificant. - -The simple fact is, that there is no better basis for union than mutual -respect for each other’s opinions; and this can never be obtained -without an intelligent independence. “I would rather have a thorn in my -side than an echo,” said Emerson of friendship; and the same is true of -married life. It is the echoes, the nonentities, of whom men grow tired; -it is the women with some flavor of individuality who keep the hearts of -their husbands. This is only applying in a higher sense what -Shakspeare’s Cleopatra saw. When her handmaidens are questioning how to -hold a lover, and one says,— - - “Give way to him in all: cross him in nothing,”— - -Cleopatra, from the depth of an unequalled experience, retorts,— - - “Thou speakest like a fool: the way to lose him!” - -And what “the serpent of old Nile” said, the wives of the future, who -are to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves, may well ponder. It -takes two things different to make a union; and part of that difference -may as well lie in matters political as anywhere else. - - - - - XXXI. - WOMEN AS ECONOMISTS. - - -An able lawyer of Boston, arguing the other day before a legislative -committee in favor of giving to the city council a check upon the -expenditures of the school committee, gave as one reason that this body -would probably include more women henceforward, and that women were -ordinarily more lavish than men in their use of money. The truth of this -assumption was questioned at the time: and, the more I think of it, the -more contrary it is to my whole experience. I should say that women, -from the very habit of their lives, are led to be more particular about -details, and more careful as to small economies. The very fact that they -handle less money tends to this. When they are told to spend money, as -they often are by loving or ambitious husbands, they no doubt do it -freely: they have naturally more taste than men, and quite as much love -of luxury. In some instances in this country they spend money recklessly -and wickedly, like the heroines of French novels; but as, even in -brilliant Paris, the women of the middle classes are notoriously better -managers than the men, so we often see, in our scheming America, the -same relative superiority. Often have I heard young men say, “I never -knew how to economize until after my marriage;” and who has not seen -multitudes of instances where women accustomed to luxury have accepted -poverty without a murmur for the sake of those whom they loved? - -I remember a young girl, accustomed to the gayest society of New York, -who engaged herself to a young naval officer, against the advice of the -friends of both. One of her near relatives said to me, “Of all the young -girls I have ever known, she is the least fitted for a poor man’s wife.” -Yet from the very moment of her marriage she brought their joint -expenses within his scanty pay, and even saved a little money from it. -Everybody knows such instances. We hear men denounce the extravagance of -women, while those very men spend on wine and cigars, on clubs and -horses, twice what their wives spend on their toilet. If the wives are -economical, the husbands perhaps urge them on to greater lavishness. -“Why do you not dress like Mrs. So-and-so?”—“I can’t afford it.”—“But -_I_ can afford it;” and then, when the bills come in, the talk of -extravagance recommences. At one time in Newport that lady among the -summer visitors who was reported to be Worth’s best customer was also -well known to be quite indifferent to society, and to go into it mainly -to please her husband, whose social ambition was notorious. - -It has often happened to me to serve in organizations where both sexes -were represented, and where expenditures were to be made for business or -pleasure. In these I have found, as a rule, that the women were more -careful, or perhaps I should say more timid, than the men, less willing -to risk any thing: the bolder financial experiments came from the men, -as one might expect. In talking the other day with the secretary of an -important educational enterprise, conducted by women, I was surprised to -find that it was cramped for money, though large subscriptions were said -to have been made to it. On inquiry it appeared that these ladies, -having pledged themselves for four years, had divided the amount -received into four parts, and were resolutely limiting themselves, for -the first year, to one quarter part of what had been subscribed. No -board of men would have done so. Any board of men would have allowed far -more than a quarter of the sum for the first year’s expenditures, justly -reasoning that if the enterprise began well it would command public -confidence, and bring in additional subscriptions as time went on. I -would appeal to any one whose experience has been in joint associations -of men and women, whether this is not a fair statement of the difference -between their ways of working. It does not prove that women are more -honest than men, but that their education or their nature makes them -more cautious in expenditure. - -The habits of society make the dress of a fashionable woman far more -expensive than that of a man of fashion. Formerly it was not so; and, so -long as it was not so, the extravagance of men in this respect quite -equalled that of women. It now takes other forms, but the habit is the -same. There is not a club-house in Boston furnished with such absence of -luxury as the Women’s Club rooms on Park Street: the contrast was at -first so great as to seem almost absurd. The waiters at any fashionable -restaurant will tell you that what is a cheap dinner for a man would be -a dear dinner for a woman. Yet after all, the test is not in any -particular class of expenditures, but in the business-like habit. Men -are of course more business-like in large combinations, for they are -more used to them; but for the small details of daily economy women are -more watchful. The cases where women ruin their husbands by extravagance -are exceptional. As a rule, the men are the bread-winners; but the -careful saving and managing and contriving come from the women. - - - - - XXXII. - GREATER INCLUDES LESS. - - -I was once at a little musical party in New York, where several -accomplished amateur singers were present, and with them the eminent -professional, Miss Adelaide Phillips. The amateurs were first called on. -Each chose some difficult operatic passage, and sang her best. When it -came to the great opera-singer’s turn, instead of exhibiting her ability -to eclipse those rivals on her own ground, she simply seated herself at -the piano, and sang “Kathleen Mavourneen” with such thrilling sweetness, -that the young Irish girl who was setting the supper-table in the next -room forgot all her plates and teaspoons, threw herself into a chair, -put her apron over her face, and sobbed as if her heart would break. All -the training of Adelaide Phillips—her magnificent voice, her stage -experience, her skill in effects, her power of expression—went into the -performance of that simple song. The greater included the less. And thus -all the intellectual and practical training that any woman can have, all -her public action and her active career, will make her, if she be a true -woman, more admirable as a wife, a mother, and a friend. The greater -includes the less for her also. - -Of course this is a statement of general facts and tendencies. There -must be among women, as among men, an endless variety of individual -temperaments. There will always be plenty whose career will illustrate -the infirmities of genius, and whom no training can convince that two -and two make four. But the general fact is sure. As no sensible man -would seriously prefer for a wife a Hindoo or Tahitian woman rather than -one bred in England or America, so every further advantage of education -or opportunity will only improve, not impair, the true womanly type. - -Lucy Stone once said, “Woman’s nature was stamped and sealed by the -Almighty, and there is no danger of her unsexing herself while his eye -watches her.” Margaret Fuller said, “One hour of love will teach a woman -more of her true relations than all your philosophizing.” These were the -testimony of women who had studied Greek, and were only the more womanly -for the study. They are worth the opinions of a million half-developed -beings like the Duchess de Fontanges, who was described as being “as -beautiful as an angel and as silly as a goose.” The greater includes the -less. Your view from the mountain-side may be very pretty, but she who -has taken one step higher commands your view and her own also. It was no -dreamy recluse, but the accomplished and experienced Stendhal, who -wrote, “The joys of the gay world do not count for much with happy -women.”[7] - -Footnote 7: - - De l’Amour, par de Stendhal (Henri Beyle): “Les plaisirs du grand - monde n’en sont pas pour les femmes heureuses,” p. 189. - -If a highly educated man is incapable and unpractical, we do not say -that he is educated too well, but not well enough. He ought to know what -he knows, and other things also. Never yet did I see a woman too well -educated to be a wife and a mother; but I know multitudes who deplore, -or have reason to deplore, every day of their lives, the untrained and -unfurnished minds that are so ill-prepared for these sacred duties. -Every step towards equalizing the opportunities of men and women meets -with resistance, of course; but every step, as it is accomplished, -leaves men still men, and women still women. And as we who heard -Adelaide Phillips felt that she had never had a better tribute to her -musical genius than that young Irish girl’s tears; so the true woman -will feel that all her college training for instance, if she has it, may -have been well invested, even for the sake of the baby on her knee. And -it is to be remembered, after all, that each human being lives to unfold -his or her own powers, and do his or her own duties first, and that -neither woman nor man has the right to accept a merely secondary and -subordinate life. A noble woman must be a noble human being; and the -most sacred special duties, as of wife or mother, are all included in -this, as the greater includes the less. - - - - - XXXIII. - A CO-PARTNERSHIP. - - -Marriage, considered merely in its financial and business relations, may -be regarded as a permanent co-partnership. - -Now, in an ordinary co-partnership, there is very often a complete -division of labor among the partners. If they manufacture -locomotive-engines, for instance, one partner perhaps superintends the -works, another attends to mechanical inventions and improvements, -another travels for orders, another conducts the correspondence, another -receives and pays out the money. The latter is not necessarily the head -of the firm. Perhaps his place could be more easily filled than some of -the other posts. Nevertheless, more money passes through his hands than -through those of all the others put together. Now, should he, at the -year’s end, call together the inventor and the superintendent and the -traveller and the correspondent, and say to them, “I have earned all -this money this year, but I will generously give you some of it,”—he -would be considered simply impertinent, and would hardly have a chance -to repeat the offence, the year after. - -Yet precisely what would be called folly in this business partnership is -constantly done by men in the co-partnership of marriage, and is there -called “common-sense” and “social science” and “political economy.” - -For instance, a farmer works himself half to death in the hay-field, and -his wife meanwhile is working herself wholly to death in the dairy. The -neighbors come in to sympathize after her demise; and, during the few -months’ interval before his second marriage, they say approvingly, “He -was always a generous man to his folks! He was a good provider!” But -where was the room for generosity, any more than the member of any other -firm is to be called generous, when he keeps the books, receipts the -bills, and divides the money? - -In case of the farming business, the share of the wife is so direct and -unmistakable that it can hardly be evaded. If any thing is earned by the -farm, she does her distinct and important share of the earning. But it -is not necessary that she should do even that, to make her, by all the -rules of justice, an equal partner, entitled to her full share of the -financial proceeds. - -Let us suppose an ordinary case. Two young people are married, and begin -life together. Let us suppose them equally poor, equally capable, -equally conscientious, equally healthy. They have children. Those -children must be supported by the earning of money abroad, by attendance -and care at home. If it requires patience and labor to do the outside -work, no less is required inside. The duties of the household are as -hard as the duties of the shop or office. If the wife took her husband’s -work for a day, she would probably be glad to return to her own. So -would the husband if he undertook hers. Their duties are ordinarily as -distinct and as equal as those of two partners in any other -co-partnership. It so happens, that the out-door partner has the -handling of the money; but does that give him a right to claim it as his -exclusive earnings? No more than in any other business operation. - -He earned the money for the children and the household. She disbursed it -for the children and the household. The very laws of nature, by giving -her the children to bear and rear, absolve her from the duty of their -support, so long as he is alive who was left free by nature for that -purpose. Her task on the average is as hard as his: nay, a portion of it -is so especially hard that it is distinguished from all others by the -name “labor.” If it does not earn money, it is because it is not to be -measured in money, while it exists—nor to be replaced by money, if lost. -If a business man loses his partner, he can obtain another: and a man, -no doubt, may take a second wife; but he cannot procure for his children -a second mother. Indeed, it is a palpable insult to the whole relation -of husband and wife when one compares it, even in a financial light, to -that of business partners. It is only because a constant effort is made -to degrade the practical position of woman below even this standard of -comparison, that it becomes her duty to claim for herself at least as -much as this. - -There was a tradition in a town where I once lived, that a certain -Quaker, who had married a fortune, was once heard to repel his wife, who -had asked him for money in a public place, with the response, “Rachel, -where is that ninepence I gave thee yesterday?” When I read in -Scribner’s Monthly an article deriding the right to representation of -the Massachusetts women who pay two millions of tax on one hundred and -thirty-two million dollars of property,—asserting that they produced -nothing of it; that it was only “men who produced this wealth, and -bestowed it upon these women;” that it was “all drawn from land and sea -by the hands of men whose largess testifies alike of their love and -their munificence,”—I must say that I am reminded of Rachel’s ninepence. - - - - - XXXIV. - “ONE RESPONSIBLE HEAD.” - - -When we look through any business directory, there seem to be almost as -many co-partnerships as single dealers; and three-quarters of these -co-partnerships appear to consist of precisely two persons, no more, no -less. These partners are, in the eye of the law, equal. It is not found -necessary under the law, to make a general provision that in each case -one partner should be supreme and the other subordinate. In many cases, -by the terms of the co-partnership there are limitations on one side and -special privileges on the other,—marriage settlements, as it were; but -the general law of co-partnership is based on the presumption of -equality. It would be considered infinitely absurd to require, that, as -the general rule, one party or the other should be in a state of -_coverture_, during which the very being and existence of the one should -be suspended, or entirely merged and incorporated into that of the -other. - -And yet this requirement, which would be an admitted absurdity in the -case of two business partners, is precisely that which the English -common law still lays down in case of husband and wife. The words which -I employed to describe it, in the preceding sentence, are the very -phrases in which Blackstone describes the legal position of women. And -though the English common law has been, in this respect, greatly -modified and superseded by statute law; yet, when it comes to an -argument on woman suffrage, it is constantly this same tradition to -which men and even women habitually appeal,—the necessity of a single -head to the domestic partnership, and the necessity that the husband -should be that head. This is especially true of English men and women; -but it is true of Americans as well. Nobody has stated it more tersely -than Fitzjames Stephen, in his “Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity” (p. -216), when arguing against Mr. Mill’s view of the equality of the sexes. - - “Marriage is a contract, one of the principal objects in which is - the government of a family. - - “This government must be vested, either by law or by contract, in - the hands of one of the two married persons.” - -[Then follow some collateral points, not bearing on the present -question.] - - “Therefore if marriage is to be permanent, the government of the - family must be put by law and by morals into the hands of the - husband, for no one proposes to give it to the wife.” - -This argument he calls “as clear as that of a proposition in Euclid.” He -thinks that the business of life can be carried on by no other method. -How is it, then, that when we come to what is called technically and -especially the “business” of every day, this whole finespun theory is -disregarded, and men come together in partnership on the basis of -equality? - -Nobody is farther than I from regarding marriage as a mere business -partnership. But it is to be observed that the points wherein it differs -from a merely mercantile connection are points that should make equality -more easy, not more difficult. The tie between two ordinary business -partners is merely one of interest: it is based on no sentiments, sealed -by no solemn pledge, enriched by no home associations, cemented by no -new generation of young life. If a relation like this is found to work -well on terms of equality,—so well that a large part of the business of -the world is done by it,—is it not absurd to suppose that the same equal -relation cannot exist in the married partnership of husband and wife? -And if law, custom, society, all recognize this fact of equality in the -one case, why, in the name of common-sense, should they not equally -recognize it in the other? - -And, again, it must be far easier to assign a sphere to each partner in -marriage than in business; and therefore the double headship of a family -will involve less need of collision. In nine cases out of ten, the -external support of the family can devolve upon the husband, -unquestioned by the wife; and its internal economy upon the wife, -unquestioned by the husband. No voluntary distribution of powers and -duties between business partners can work so naturally, on the whole, as -this simple and easy demarcation, with which the claim of suffrage makes -no necessary interference. It may require angry discussion to decide -which of two business partners shall buy, and which shall sell; which -shall keep the books, and which do the active work, and so on; but all -this is usually settled in married life by the natural order of things. -Even in regard to the management of children, where collision is likely -to come, if anywhere, it can commonly be settled by that happy formula -of Jean Paul’s, that the mother usually supplies the commas and the -semicolons in the child’s book of life, and the father the colons and -periods. And as to matters in general, the simple and practical rule, -that each question that arises should be decided by that partner who has -personally most at stake in it, will, in ninety-nine times out of a -hundred, carry the domestic partnership through without shipwreck. Those -who cannot meet the hundredth case by mutual forbearance are in a -condition of shipwreck already. - - - - - XXXV. - ASKING FOR MONEY. - - -One of the very best wives and mothers I have ever known once said to -me, that, whenever her daughters should be married, she should stipulate -in their behalf with their husbands for a regular sum of money to be -paid them, at certain intervals, for their personal expenditures. -Whether this sum was to be larger or smaller, was a matter of secondary -importance,—that must depend on the income, and the style of living; but -the essential thing was, that it should come to the wife regularly, so -that she should no more have to make a special request for it than her -husband would have to ask her for a dinner. This lady’s own husband was, -as I happened to know, of a most generous disposition, was devotedly -attached to her, and denied her nothing. She herself was a most accurate -and careful manager. There was every thing in the household to make the -financial arrangements flow smoothly. Yet she said to me, “I suppose no -man can possibly understand how a sensitive woman shrinks from _asking_ -for money. If I can prevent it, my daughters shall never have to ask for -it. If they do their duty as wives and mothers they have a right to -their share of the joint income, within reasonable limits; for certainly -no money could buy the services they render. Moreover, they have a right -to a share in determining what those reasonable limits are.” - -Now, it so happened that I had myself gone through an experience which -enabled me perfectly to comprehend this feeling. In early life I was for -a time in the employ of one of my relatives, who paid me a fair salary -but at no definite periods: I was at liberty to ask him for money up to -a certain amount whenever I needed it. This seemed to me, in advance, a -most agreeable arrangement; but I found it quite otherwise. It proved to -be very disagreeable to ask for money: it made every dollar seem a -special favor; it brought up all kinds of misgivings, as to whether he -could spare it without inconvenience, whether he really thought my -services worth it, and so on. My employer was a thoroughly upright and -noble man, and I was much attached to him. I do not know that he ever -refused or demurred when I asked for money. The annoyance was simply in -the process of asking; and this became so great, that I often underwent -serious inconvenience rather than ask. Finally, at the year’s end, I -surprised my relative very much by saying that I would accept, if -necessary, a lower salary, on condition that it should be paid on -regular days, and as a matter of business. The wish was at once granted, -without the reduction; and he probably never knew what a relief it was -to me. - -Now, if a young man is liable to feel this pride and reluctance toward -an employer, even if a kinsman, it is easy to understand how many women -may feel the same, even in regard to a husband. And I fancy that those -who feel it most are often the most conscientious and high-minded women. -It is unreasonable to say of such persons, “Too sensitive! Too -fastidious!” For it is just this quality of finer sensitiveness which -men affect to prize in a woman, and wish to protect at all hazards. The -very fact that a husband is generous; the very fact that his income is -limited,—these may bring in conscience and gratitude to increase the -restraining influence of pride, and make the wife less willing to ask -money of such a husband than if he were a rich man or a mean one. The -only dignified position in which a man can place his wife is to treat -her at least as well as he would treat a housekeeper, and give her the -comfort of a perfectly clear and definite arrangement as to money -matters. She will not then be under the necessity of nerving herself to -solicit from him as a favor what she really needs and has a right to -spend. Nor will she be torturing herself, on the other side, with the -secret fear lest she has asked too much and more than they can really -spare. She will, in short, be in the position of a woman and a wife, not -of a child or a toy. - -I have carefully avoided using the word “allowance” in what has been -said, because that word seems to imply the untrue and mean assumption -that the money is all the husband’s to give or withhold as he will. Yet -I have heard this sort of phrase from men who were living on a wife’s -property or a wife’s earnings; from men who nominally kept -boarding-houses, working a little, while their wives worked hard,—or -from farmers, who worked hard, and made their wives work harder. Even in -cases where the wife has no direct part in the money-making, the -indirect part she performs, if she takes faithful charge of her -household, is so essential, so beyond all compensation in money, that it -is an utter shame and impertinence in the husband when he speaks of -“giving” money to his wife as if it were an act of favor. It is no more -an act of favor than when the business manager of a firm pays out money -to the unseen partner who directs the indoor business or runs the -machinery. Be the joint income more or less, the wife has a claim to her -honorable share, and that as a matter of right, without the daily -ignominy of sending in a petition for it. - - - - - XXXVI. - WOMANHOOD AND MOTHERHOOD. - - -I always groan in spirit when any advocate of woman suffrage, carried -away by zeal, says any thing disrespectful about the nursery. It is -contrary to the general tone of feeling among us, I am sure, to speak of -this priceless institution as a trivial or degrading sphere, unworthy -the emancipated woman. It is rarely that anybody speaks in this way; but -a single such utterance hurts us more than any arguments of the enemy. -For every thoughtful person sees that the cares of motherhood, though -not the whole duty of woman, are an essential part of that duty, -wherever they occur; and that no theory of womanly life is good for any -thing which undertakes to leave out the cradle. Even her -school-education is based on this fact, were it only on Stendhal’s -theory that the sons of a woman who reads Gibbon and Schiller will be -more likely to show talent than those of one who only tells her beads -and reads Mme. de Genlis. And so clearly is this understood among us, -that, when we ask for suffrage for woman, it is almost always claimed -that she needs it for the sake of her children. To secure her in her -right to them; to give her a voice in their education; to give her a -vote in the government beneath which they are to live,—these points are -seldom omitted in our statement of her claims. Any thing else would be -an error. - -But there is an error at the other extreme, which is still greater. A -woman should no more merge herself in her child than in her husband. Yet -we often hear that she should do just this. What is all the public -sphere of woman, it is said,—what good can she do by all her speaking, -and writing, and action,—compared with that she does by properly -training the soul of one child? It is not easy to see the logic of this -claim. - -For of what service is that child to be in the universe, except that he, -too, may write and speak and act for that which is good and true? And if -the mother foregoes all this that the child, in growing up, may simply -do what the mother has left undone, the world gains nothing. In -sacrificing her own work to her child’s, moreover, she exchanges a -present good for a prospective and merely possible one. If she does this -through overwhelming love, we can hardly blame her; but she cannot -justify it before reason and truth. Her child may die, and the service -to mankind be done by neither. Her child may grow up with talents unlike -hers, or with none at all; as the son of Howard was selfish, the son of -Chesterfield a boor, and the son of Wordsworth in the last degree -prosaic. - -Or the special occasion when she might have done great good may have -passed before her boy or girl grows up to do it. If Mrs. Child had -refused to write “An Appeal for that Class of Americans called -Africans,” or Mrs. Stowe had laid aside “Uncle Tom’s Cabin,” or Florence -Nightingale had declined to go to the Crimea, on the ground that a -woman’s true work was through the nursery, and they must all wait for -that, the consequence would be that these things would have remained -undone. The brave acts of the world must be done when occasion offers, -by the first brave soul who feels moved to do them, man or woman. If all -the children in all the nurseries are thereby helped to do other brave -deeds when their turn comes, so much the better. But when a great -opportunity offers for direct aid to the world, we have no right to -transfer that work to other hands—not even to the hands of our own -children. We must do the work, and train the children besides. - -I am willing to admit, therefore, that the work of education, in any -form, is as great as any other work; but I fail to see why it should be -greater. Usefulness is usefulness: there is no reason why it should be -postponed from generation to generation, or why it is better to rear a -serviceable human being than to be one in person. Carry the theory -consistently out: each mother must simply rear her daughter that she in -turn may rear somebody else; from each generation the work will devolve -upon a succeeding generation, so that it will be only the last woman who -will personally do any service, except that of motherhood; and when her -time comes it will be too late for any service at all. - -If it be said, “But some of these children will be men, who are -necessarily of more use than women,” I deny the necessity. If it be -said, “The children may be many, and the mother, who is but one, may -well be sacrificed,” it might be replied, that as one great act may be -worth many smaller ones, so all the numerous children and grandchildren -of a woman like Lucretia Mott may not collectively equal the usefulness -of herself alone. If she, like many women, had held it her duty to -renounce all other duties and interests from the time her motherhood -began, I think that the world, and even her children, would have lost -more than ever could have been gained by her more complete absorption in -the nursery. - -The true theory seems a very simple one. The very fact that during -one-half the years of a woman’s average life she is made incapable of -child-bearing, shows that there are, even for the most prolific and -devoted mothers, duties other than the maternal. Even during the most -absorbing years of motherhood, the wisest women still try to keep up -their interest in society, in literature, in the world’s affairs—were it -only for their children’s sake. Multitudes of women will never be -mothers; and those more fortunate may find even the usefulness of their -motherhood surpassed by what they do in other ways. If maternal duties -interfere in some degree with all other functions, the same is true, -though in a far less degree, of those of a father. But there are those -who combine both spheres. The German poet Wieland claimed to be the -parent of fourteen children and forty books; and who knows by which -parentage he served the world the best? - - - - - XXXVII. - A GERMAN POINT OF VIEW. - - -Many Americans will remember the favorable impression made by Professor -Christlieb of Germany, when he attended the meeting of the Evangelical -Alliance in New York some four or five years ago. His writings, like his -presence, show a most liberal spirit; and perhaps no man has ever -presented the more advanced evangelical theology of Germany in so -attractive a light. Yet I heard a story of him the other day, which -either showed him in an aspect quite undesirable, or else gave a -disagreeable view of the social position of women in Germany. - -The story was to the effect, that a young American student recently -called on Professor Christlieb with a letter of introduction. The -professor received him cordially, and soon entered into conversation -about the United States. He praised the natural features of the country, -and the enterprising spirit of our citizens, but expressed much -solicitude about the future of the nation. On being asked his reasons, -he frankly expressed his opinion that “the Spirit of Christ” was not -here. Being still further pressed to illustrate his meaning, he gave, as -instances of this deficiency, not the Crédit Mobilier or the Tweed -scandal, but such alarming facts as the following. He seriously -declared, that, on more than one occasion, he had heard an American -married woman say to her husband, “Dear, will you bring me my shawl?” -and the husband had brought it. He further had seen a husband return -home at evening, and enter the parlor where his wife was -sitting,—perhaps in the very best chair in the room,—and the wife not -only did not go and get his dressing-gown and slippers, but she even -remained seated, and left him to find a chair as he could. These things, -as Professor Christlieb pointed out, suggested a serious deficiency of -the Spirit of Christ in the community. - -With our American habits and interpretations, it is hard to see this -matter just as the professor sees it. One would suppose, that, if there -is any meaning in the command, “Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so -fulfil the law of Christ,” a little of such fulfilling might sometimes -be good for the husband, as for the wife. And though it would -undoubtedly be more pleasing to see every wife so eager to receive her -husband that she would naturally spring from her chair and run to kiss -him in the doorway, yet, where such devotion was wanting, it would be -but fair to inquire which of the two had had the more fatiguing day’s -work, and to whom the easy-chair justly belonged. The truth is, I -suppose, that the good professor’s remark indicated simply a “survival” -in his mind, or in his social circle, of a barbarous tradition, under -which the wife of a Mexican herdsman cannot eat at the table with her -“lord and master,” and the wife of a German professor must vacate the -best arm-chair at his approach. - -If so, it is not to be regretted that we in this country have outgrown a -relation so unequal. Nor am I at all afraid that the great Teacher, who, -pointing to the multitude for whom he was soon to die, said of them, -“This is my brother and my sister and my mother,” would have objected to -any mutual and equal service between man and woman. If we assume that -two human beings have immortal souls, there can be no want of dignity to -either in serving the other. The greater equality of woman in America -seems to be, on this reasoning, a proof of the presence, not the -absence, of the spirit of Christ; nor does Dr. Christlieb seem to me -quite worthy of the beautiful name he bears, if he feels otherwise. - -But, if it is really true that a German professor has to cross the -Atlantic to witness a phenomenon so very simple as that of a lover-like -husband bringing a shawl for his wife, I should say, Let the immigration -from Germany be encouraged as much as possible, in order that even the -most learned immigrants may discover something new. - - - - - XXXVIII. - CHILDLESS WOMEN. - - -It has not always been regarded as a thing creditable to woman, that she -was the mother of the human race. On the contrary, the fact was often -mentioned, in the Middle Ages, as a distinct proof of inferiority. The -question was discussed in the mediæval Council of Maçon, and the -position taken that woman was no more entitled to rank as human, because -she brought forth men, than the garden-earth could take rank with the -fruit and flowers it bore. The same view was revived by a Latin writer -of 1595, on the thesis “_Mulieres non homines esse_,” a French -translation of which essay was printed under the title of “_Paradoxe sur -les femmes_,” in 1766. Napoleon Bonaparte used the same image, carrying -it almost as far:— - -“Woman is given to man that she may bear children. Woman is our -property; we are not hers: because she produces children for us; we do -not yield any to her: she is therefore our possession, as the fruit-tree -is that of the gardener.” - -Even the fact of parentage, therefore, has been adroitly converted into -a ground of inferiority for women; and this is ostensibly the reason why -lineage has been reckoned, almost everywhere, through the male line -only, ignoring the female; just as, in tracing the seed of some rare -fruit, the gardener takes no genealogical account of the garden where it -grew. The view is now seldom expressed in full force: the remnant of it -is to be found in the lingering impression, that, at any rate, a woman -who is not a mother is of no account; as worthless as a fruitless garden -or a barren fruit-tree. Created only for a certain object, she is of -course valueless unless that object be fulfilled. - -But the race must have fathers as well as mothers; and, if we look for -evidence of public service in great men, it certainly does not always -lie in leaving children to the republic. On the contrary, the rule has -rather seemed to be, that the most eminent men have left their bequest -of service in any form rather than in that of a great family. Recent -inquiries into the matter have brought out some remarkable facts in this -regard. - -As a rule, there exist no living descendants in the male line from the -great authors, artists, statesmen, soldiers, of England. It is stated -that there is not one such descendant of Chaucer, Shakespeare, Spenser, -Butler, Dryden, Pope, Cowper, Goldsmith, Scott, Byron, or Moore; not one -of Drake, Cromwell, Monk, Marlborough, Peterborough, or Nelson; not one -of Strafford, Ormond, or Clarendon; not one of Addison, Swift, or -Johnson; not one of Walpole, Bolingbroke, Chatham, Pitt, Fox, Burke, -Grattan, or Canning; not one of Bacon, Locke, Newton, or Davy; not one -of Hume, Gibbon, or Macaulay; not one of Hogarth or Reynolds; not one of -Garrick, John Kemble, or Edmund Kean. It would be easy to make a similar -American list, beginning with Washington, of whom it was said that -“Providence made him childless that his country might call him Father.” - -Now, however we may regret that these great men have left little or no -posterity, it does not occur to any one as affording any serious -drawback upon their service to their nation. Certainly it does not occur -to us that they would have been more useful had they left children to -the world, but rendered it no other service. Lord Bacon says that “he -that hath wife and children hath given hostages to fortune; for they are -impediments to great enterprises, either of virtue or mischief. -Certainly the best works, and of greatest merit to the public, have -proceeded from unmarried or childless men; which, both in affection and -means, have married and endowed the public.” And this is the view -generally accepted,—that the public is in such cases rather the gainer -than the loser, and has no right to complain. - -Since, therefore, every child must have a father and a mother both, and -neither will alone suffice, why should we thus heap gratitude on men who -from preference or from necessity have remained childless, and yet -habitually treat women as if they could render no service to their -country except by giving it children? If it be folly and shame, as I -think, to belittle and decry the dignity and worth of motherhood, as -some are said to do, it is no less folly, and shame quite as great, to -deny the grand and patriotic service of many women who have died and -left no children among their mourners. Plato puts into the mouth of a -woman,—the eloquent Diotima, in the “Banquet,”—that, after all, we are -more grateful to Homer and Hesiod for the children of their brain than -if they had left human offspring. - - - - - XXXIX. - THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO MOTHERS. - - -From the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals we have now -advanced to a similar society for the benefit of children. When shall we -have a movement for the prevention of cruelty to mothers? - -A Rhode Island lady, who had never taken any interest in the woman -suffrage movement, came to me in great indignation the other day, asking -if it was true that under Rhode Island laws a husband might, by his last -will, bequeath his child away from its mother, so that she might, if the -guardian chose, never see it again. I said that it was undoubtedly true, -and that such were still the laws in many States of the Union. - -“But,” she said, “it is an outrage. The husband may have been one of the -weakest or worst men in the world; he may have persecuted his wife and -children; he may have made the will in a moment of anger, and have -neglected to alter it. At any rate, he is dead, and the mother is -living. The guardian whom he appoints may turn out a very malicious man, -and may take pleasure in torturing the mother; or he may bring up the -children in a way their mother thinks ruinous for them. Why do not all -the mothers cry out against such a law?” - -“I wish they would,” I said. “I have been trying a good many years to -make them even understand what the law is; but they do not. People who -do not vote pay no attention to the laws, until they suffer from them.” - -She went away protesting that she, at least, would not hold her tongue -on the subject, and I hope she will not. The actual text of the law is -as follows:— - - “Every person authorized by law to make a will, except married - women, shall have a right to appoint by his will a guardian or - guardians for his children during their minority.”[8] - -Footnote 8: - - Gen. Statutes R. I., chap. 154, sect. 1. - -There is not associated with this, in the statute, the slightest clause -in favor of the mother; nor any thing which could limit the power of the -guardian by requiring deference to her wishes, although he could, in -case of gross neglect or abuse, be removed by the court, and another -guardian appointed. There is not a line of positive law to protect the -mother. Now, in a case of absolute wrong, a single sentence of law is -worth all the chivalrous courtesy this side of the Middle Ages. - -It is idle to say that such laws are not executed. They are executed. I -have had letters, too agonizing to print, expressing the sufferings of -mothers under laws like these. There lies before me a letter,—not from -Rhode Island,—written by a widowed mother who suffers daily tortures, -even while in possession of her child, at the knowledge that it is not -legally hers, but held only by the temporary permission of the guardian -appointed under her husband’s will. “I beg you,” she says, “to take this -will to the hill-top, and urge law-makers in our next Legislature to -free the State record from the shameful story that no mother can control -her child unless it is born out of wedlock.” - -“From the moment,” she says, “when the will was read to me, I have made -no effort to set it aside. I wait till God reveals his plans, so far as -my own condition is concerned. But out of my keen comprehension of this -great wrong, notwithstanding my submission for myself, my whole soul is -stirred,—for my child, who is a little woman; for all women, that the -laws may be changed which subject a true woman, a devoted wife, a -faithful mother, to such mental agonies as I have endured, and shall -endure till I die.” - -In a later letter she says, “I now have his [the guardian’s] solemn -promise that he will not remove her from my control. To some extent my -sufferings are allayed; and yet never, till she arrives at the age of -twenty-one, shall I fully trust.” I wish that mothers who dwell in -sheltered and happy homes would try to bring to their minds the -condition of a mother whose possession of her only child rests upon the -“promise” of a comparative stranger. We should get beyond the -meaningless cry, “I have all the rights I want,” if mothers could only -remember that among these rights, in most States of the Union, the right -of a widowed mother to her child is not included. - -By strenuous effort, the law on this point has in Massachusetts been -gradually amended, till it now stands thus: The father is authorized to -appoint a guardian by will; but the powers of this guardian do not -entitle him to take the child from the mother. - - “The guardian of a minor ... shall have the custody and tuition of - his ward; and the care and management of all his estate, except that - the father of the minor, if living, and in case of his death the - mother, they being respectively competent to transact their own - business, shall be entitled to the custody of the person of the - minor and the care of his education.”[9] - -Footnote 9: - - Public Statutes, chap. 139, sect. 4. - -Down to 1870 the cruel words “while she remains unmarried” followed the -word “mother” in the above law. Until that time, the mother if remarried -had no claim to the custody of her child, in case the guardian wished -otherwise; and a very painful scene once took place in a Boston -court-room, where children were forced away from their mother by the -officers, under this statute; in spite of her tears and theirs; and this -when no sort of personal charge had been made against her. This could -not now happen in Massachusetts, but it might still happen in some other -States. It is true that men are almost always better than their laws; -but, while a bad law remains on the statute-book, it gives to any -unscrupulous man the power to be as bad as the law. - - - - - SOCIETY. - - -“Place the sexes in right relations of mutual respect, and a severe -morality gives that essential charm to woman which educates all that is -delicate, poetic, and self-sacrificing, breeds courtesy and learning, -conversation and wit, in her rough mate; so that I have thought a -sufficient measure of civilization is the influence of good -women.”—EMERSON: _Society and Solitude_, p. 21. - - - - - XL. - FOAM AND CURRENT. - - -Sometimes, on the beach at Newport, I look at the gayly dressed ladies -in their phaëtons, and then at the foam which trembles on the breaking -wave, or lies palpitating in creamy masses on the beach. It is as pretty -as they, as light, as fresh, as delicate, as changing; and no doubt the -graceful foam, if it thinks at all, fancies that it is the chief -consummate product of the ocean, and that the main end of the vast -currents of the mighty deep is to yield a few glittering bubbles like -those. At least, this seems to me what many of the fair ladies think. - -Here is a nation in which the most momentous social and political -experiment ever tried by man is being worked out, day by day. There is -something oceanlike in the way in which the great currents of life, -race, religion, temperament, are here chafing with each other, safe from -the storms through which all monarchical countries may yet have to pass. -As these great currents heave, there are tossed up in every -watering-place and every city in America, as on an ocean-beach, certain -pretty bubbles of foam; and each spot, we may suppose, counts its own -bubbles brighter than those of its neighbors, and christens them -“society.” - -It is an unceasing wonder to a thoughtful person, at any such resort, to -see the unconscious way in which fashionable society accepts the foam, -and ignores the currents. You hear people talk of “a position in -society,” “the influential circles in society,” as if the position they -mean were not liable to be shifted in a day; as if the essential -influences in America were not mainly to be sought outside the world of -fashion. In other countries it is very different. The circle of social -caste, whose centre you touch in London, radiates to the shores of the -island; the upper class controls, not merely fashion, but government; it -rules in country as well as city; genius and wealth are but its -tributaries. Wherever it is not so, it is because England is so far -Americanized. But in America the social prestige of the cities is -nothing in the country; it is a matter of the pavement, of a three-mile -radius. - -Go to the farthest borders of England: there are still the “county -families,” and you meet servants in livery. On the other hand, in a -little village in Northern New Hampshire, my friend was visited in the -evening by the landlady, who said that several of their “most -fashionable ladies” had happened in, and she would like to exhibit to -them her guest’s bonnet. Then the different cities ignore each other: -the rulers of select circles in New York find themselves nobodies in -Washington, while a Washington social passport counts for as little in -New York. Boston and Philadelphia affect to ignore both; and St. Louis -and San Francisco have their own standards. The utmost social prestige -in America is local, provincial, a matter of the square inch: it is as -if the foam of each particular beach along the seacoast were to call -itself “society.” - -There is something pathetic, therefore, in the unwearied pains taken by -ambitious women to establish a place in some little, local, transitory -domain, to “bring out” their daughters for exhibition on a given -evening, to form a circle for them, to marry them well. A dozen years -hence the millionnaires whose notice they seek may be paupers, or these -ladies may be dwelling in some other city, where the visiting cards will -bear wholly different names. How idle to attempt to transport into -American life the social traditions and delusions which require monarchy -and primogeniture, and a standing army, to keep them up—and which cannot -hold their own in England, even with the aid of these! - -Every woman, like every man, has a natural desire for influence; and if -this instinct yearns, as it often should yearn, to take in more than her -own family, she must seek it somewhere outside. I know women who bring -to bear on the building-up of a frivolous social circle—frivolous, -because it is not really brilliant, but only showy; not really gay, but -only bored—talent and energy enough to influence the mind and thought of -the nation, if only employed in some effective way. Who are the women of -real influence in America? They are the school-teachers, through whose -hands each successive American generation has to pass; they are those -wives of public men who share their husbands’ labor, and help mould -their work; they are those women, who, through their personal eloquence -or through the press, are distinctly influencing the American people in -its growth. The influence of such women is felt for good or for evil in -every page they print, every newspaper-column they fill: the individual -women may be unworthy their posts, but it is they who have got hold of -the lever, and gone the right way to work. As American society is -constituted, the largest “social success” that can be attained here is -trivial and local; and you have to “make believe very hard,” like that -other imaginary Marchioness, to find in it any career worth mentioning. -That is the foam, but these other women are dealing with the main -currents. - - - - - XLI. - “IN SOCIETY.” - - -One sometimes hears from some lady the remark that very few people “in -society” believe in any movement to enlarge the rights or duties of -women. In a community of more marked social gradations than our own, -this assertion, if true, might be very important; and even here it is -worth considering, because it leads the way to a little social -philosophy. Let us, for the sake of argument, begin by accepting the -assumption that there is an inner circle, at least in our large cities, -which claims to be “society,” _par excellence_. What relation has this -favored circle, if favored it be, to any movement relating to women? - -It has, to begin with, the same relation that “society” has to every -movement of reform. The proportion of smiles and frowns offered from -this quarter to the woman-suffrage movement, for instance, is about that -offered to the anti-slavery agitation: I see no great difference. In -Boston, for example, the names contributed by “society” to the -woman-suffrage festivals are about as numerous as those formerly -contributed to the anti-slavery bazaars; no more, no less. Indeed, they -are very often the same names; and it has been curious to see, for -nearly fifty years, how radical tendencies have predominated in some of -the wellknown Boston families, and conservative tendencies in others. -The traits of blood seem to outlast successive series of special -reforms. Be this as it may, it is safe to assume, that, as the -anti-slavery movement prevailed with only a moderate amount of sanction -from “our best society,” the woman-suffrage movement, which has at least -an equal amount, has no reason to be discouraged. - -But on looking farther, we find that not reforms alone, but often most -important and established institutions, exist and flourish with only -incidental aid from those “in society.” Take, for instance, the whole -public-school system of our larger cities. Grant that out of twenty -ladies “in society,” taken at random, not more than one would personally -approve of women’s voting: it is doubtful whether even that proportion -of them would personally favor the public-school system so far as to -submit their children, or at least their girls, to it. Yet the public -schools flourish, and give a better training than most private schools, -in spite of this inert practical resistance from those “in society.” The -natural inference would seem to be, that if an institution so well -established as the public schools, and so generally recognized, can -afford to be ignored by “society,” then certainly a wholly new reform -must expect no better fate. - -As a matter of fact, I apprehend that what is called “society,” in the -sense of the more fastidious or exclusive social circle in any -community, exists for one sole object,—the preservation of good manners -and social refinements. For this purpose it is put very largely under -the sway of women, who have, all the world over, a better instinct for -these important things. It is true that “society” is apt to do even this -duty very imperfectly, and often tolerates, and sometimes even -cultivates, just the rudeness and discourtesy that it is set to cure. -Nevertheless, this is its mission; but so soon as it steps beyond this, -and attempts to claim any special weight outside the sphere of good -manners, it shows its weakness, and must yield to stronger forces. - -One of these stronger forces is religion, which should train men and -women to a far higher standard than “society” alone can teach. This -standard should be embodied, theoretically, in the Christian Church; but -unhappily “society” is too often stronger than this embodiment, and -turns the church itself into a mere temple of fashion. Other opposing -forces are known as science and common-sense, which is only science -written in short-hand. On some of these various forces all reforms are -based, the woman-suffrage reform among them. If it could really be shown -that some limited social circle was opposed to this, then the moral -would seem to be, “So much the worse for the social circle.” It used to -be thought in anti-slavery days that one of the most blessed results of -that agitation was the education it gave to young men and women who -would otherwise have merely grown up “in society,” but were happily -taken in hand by a stronger influence. It is Goethe who suggests, when -discussing Hamlet in “Wilhelm Meister,” that, if an oak be planted in a -flower-pot, it will be worse in the end for the flower-pot than for the -tree. And to those who watch, year after year, the young human seedlings -planted “in society,” the main point of interest lies in the discovery -which of these are likely to grow into oaks. - -But the truth is, that the very use of the word “society” in this sense -is narrow and misleading. We Americans are fortunate enough to live in a -larger society, where no conventional position or family traditions -exert an influence that is to be in the least degree compared with the -influence secured by education, energy, and character. No matter how -fastidious the social circle, one is constantly struck with the -limitations of its influence, and with the little power exerted by its -members as compared with that which may easily be wielded by tongue and -pen. No merely fashionable woman in New York, for instance, has a -position sufficiently important to be called influential compared with -that of a woman who can speak in public so as to command hearers, or can -write so as to secure readers. To be at the head of a normal school, or -to be a professor in a college where co-education prevails, is to have a -sway over the destinies of America which reduces all mere “social -position” to a matter of cards and compliments and page’s buttons. - - - - - XLII. - THE BATTLE OF THE CARDS. - - -The great winter’s contest of the visiting-cards recommences at the end -of every autumn. Suspended during the summer, or only renewed at Newport -and such thoroughbred and thoroughly sophisticated haunts, it will set -in with fury in the habitable regions of our cities once more. Now will -the atmosphere around Fifth Avenue in New York be darkened—or -whitened—at the appointed hour by the shower of pasteboard transmitted -from dainty kid-gloved hands to the cotton-gloved hands of “John,” -through him to reach the possibly gloveless hands of some other John, -who stands obsequious in the doorway. Now will every lady, after John -has slammed the door, drive happily on to some other door, re-arranging, -as she goes, her display of cards, laid as if for a game on the opposite -seat of her carriage, and dealt perhaps in four suits,—her own cards, -her daughters’, her husband’s, her “Mr. and Mrs.” cards, and who knows -how many more? With all this ammunition, what a very _mitrailleuse_ of -good society she becomes; what an accumulation of polite attentions she -may discharge at any door! That one well-appointed woman, as she sits in -her carriage, represents the total visiting power of self, husband, -daughters, and possibly a son or two beside. She has all their -counterfeit presentments in her hands. How happy she is! and how happy -will the others be on her return, to think that dear mamma has disposed -of so many dear, beloved, tiresome, social foes that morning! It will be -three months at least, they think, before the A’s and the B’s and the -C’s will have to be “done” again. - -Ah! but who knows how soon these fatiguing letters of the alphabet, -rallying to the defence, will come, pasteboard in hand, to return the -onset? In this contest, fair ladies, “there are blows to take, as well -as blows to give,” in the words of the immortal Webster. Some day, on -returning, you will find a half-dozen cards on your own table that will -undo all this morning’s work, and send you forth on the war-path again. -Is it not like a campaign? It is from this subtle military analogy, -doubtless, that when gentlemen happen to quarrel, in the very best -society, they exchange cards as preliminary to a duel; and that, when -French journalists fight, all other French journalists show their -sympathy for the survivor by sending him their cards. When we see, -therefore, these heroic ladies riding forth in the social battle’s -magnificently stern array, our hearts render them the homage due to the -brave. When we consider how complex their military equipment has grown, -we fancy each of these self-devoted mothers to be an Arnold Winkelried, -receiving in her martyr-breast the points of a dozen different cards, -and shouting, “Make way for liberty!” For is it not securing liberty to -have cleared off a dozen calls from your list, and found nobody at home? - -If this sort of thing goes on, who can tell where the paper warfare -shall end? If ladies may leave cards for their husbands, who are never -seen out of Wall Street, except when they are seen at their clubs; or -for their sons, who never forsake their billiards or their books,—why -can they not also leave them for their ancestors, or for their remotest -posterity? Who knows but people may yet drop cards in the names of the -grandchildren whom they only wish for, or may reconcile hereditary feuds -by interchanging pasteboard in behalf of two hostile grandparents who -died half a century ago? - -And there is another social observance in which the introduction of the -card system may yet be destined to save much labor,—the attendance on -fashionable churches. Already, it is said, a family may sometimes -reconcile devout observance with a late breakfast, by stationing the -family carriage near the church-door—empty. Really, it would not be a -much emptier observance to send the cards alone by the footman; and -doubtless, in the progress of civilization, we shall yet reach that -point. It will have many advantages. The _effete_ of society, as some -cruel satirist has called them, may then send their orisons on -pasteboard to as many different shrines as they approve; thus insuring -their souls, as it were, at several different offices. Church -architecture may be simplified, for it will require nothing but a -card-basket. The clergyman will celebrate his solemn ritual, and will -then look in that convenient receptacle for the names of his fellow -worshippers, as a fine lady, after her “reception,” looks over the cards -her footman hands her, to know which of her dear friends she has been -welcoming. Religion as well as social proprieties will glide smoothly -over a surface of glazed pasteboard; and it will be only very humble -Christians indeed who will do their worshipping in person, and will hold -to the worn-out and obsolete practice of “No Cards.” - - - - - XLIII. - SOME WORKING-WOMEN. - - -It is almost a stereotyped remark, that the women of the more -fashionable and worldly class, in America, are indolent, idle, -incapable, and live feeble and lazy lives. It has always seemed to me -that, on the contrary, they are compelled, by the very circumstances of -their situation, to lead very laborious lives, requiring great strength -and energy. Whether many of their pursuits are frivolous, is a different -question; but that they are arduous, I do not see how any one can doubt. -I think it can be easily shown that the common charges against American -fashionable women do not hold against the class I describe. - -There is, for instance, the charge of evading the cares of housekeeping, -and of preferring a boarding-house or hotel. But no woman with high aims -in the world of fashion can afford to relieve herself from household -cares in this way, except as an exceptional or occasional thing. She -must keep house in order to have entertainments, to form a circle, to -secure a position. The law of give and take is as absolute in society as -in business; and the very first essential to social position in our -larger cities is a household and a hospitality of one’s own. It is far -more practicable for a family of high rank in England to live -temporarily in lodgings in London, than for any family with social -aspirations to do the same in New York. The married woman who seeks a -position in the world of society, must, therefore, keep house. - -And, with housekeeping, there comes at once to the American woman a -world of care far beyond that of her European sisters. Abroad, every -thing in domestic life is systematized; and services of any grade, up to -that of housekeeper or steward, can be secured for money, and for a -moderate amount of that. The mere amount of money might not trouble the -American woman; but where to get the service? Such a thing as a trained -housekeeper, who can undertake, at any salary, to take the work off the -shoulders of the lady of the house,—such a thing America hardly affords. -Without this, the multiplication of servants only increaseth sorrow; the -servants themselves are commonly an undisciplined mob, and the lady of -the house is like a general attempting to drill his whole command -personally, without the aid of a staff-officer or so much as a sergeant. -For an occasional grand entertainment, she can, perhaps, import a -special force; some fashionable sexton can arrange her invitations, and -some genteel caterer her supper. But for the daily routine of the -household—guests, children, door-bell, equipage—there is one vast, -constant toil every day; and the woman who would have these things done -well must give her own orders, and discipline her own retinue. The -husband may have no “business,” his wealth may supersede the necessity -of all toil beyond daily billiards; but for the wife wealth means -business, and, the more complete the social triumph, the more -overwhelming the daily toil. - -For instance, I know a fair woman in an Atlantic city who is at the head -of a household including six children and nine servants. The whole -domestic management is placed absolutely in her hands: she engages or -dismisses every person employed, incurs every expense, makes every -purchase, and keeps all the accounts; her husband only ordering the -fuel, directing the affairs of the stable, and drawing checks for the -bills. Every hour of her morning is systematically appropriated to these -things. Among other things, she has to provide for nine meals a day; in -dining-room, kitchen, and nursery, three each. Then she has to plan her -social duties, and to drive out, exquisitely dressed, to make her calls. -Then there are constantly dinner-parties and evening entertainments; she -reads a little, and takes lessons in one or two languages. Meanwhile her -husband has for daily occupation his books, his club, and the -above-mentioned light and easy share in the cares of the household. Many -men in his position do not even keep an account of personal -expenditures. - -There is nothing exceptional in this lady’s case, except that the work -may be better done than usual: the husband could not well contribute -more than his present share without hurting domestic discipline; nor -does the wife do all this from pleasure, but in a manner from necessity. -It is the condition of her social position: to change it, she must -withdraw herself from her social world. A few improvements, such as -“family hotels,” are doing something to relieve this class to whom -luxury means labor. The great under-current which is sweeping us all -toward some form of associated life is as obvious in this new -improvement in housekeeping, as in co-operative stores or trades-unions; -but it will nevertheless be long before the “women of society” in -America can be any thing but a hard-working class. - -The question is not whether such a life as I have described is the ideal -life. My point is that it is, at any rate, a life demanding far more of -energy and toil, at least in America, than the men of the same class are -called upon to exhibit. There is growing up a class of men of leisure in -America; but there are no women of leisure in the same circle. They hold -their social position on condition of “an establishment,” and an -establishment makes them working-women. One result is the constant -exodus of this class to Europe, where domestic life is just now easier. -Another consequence is, that you hear woman suffrage denounced by women -of this class, not on the ground that it involves any harder work than -they already do, but on the ground that they have work enough already, -and will not bear the suggestion of any more. - - - - - XLIV. - THE EMPIRE OF MANNERS. - - -I was present at a lively discourse, administered by a young lady just -from Europe to a veteran politician. “It is of very little consequence,” -she said, “what kind of men you send out as foreign ministers. The thing -of real importance is that they should have the right kind of wives. Any -man can sign a treaty, I suppose, if you tell him what kind of treaty it -must be. But all his social relations with the nations to which you send -him will depend on his wife.” There was some truth, certainly, in this -audacious conclusion. It reminded me of the saying of a modern thinker, -“The only empire freely conceded to women is that of manners—but it is -worth all the rest put together.” - -Every one instinctively feels that the graces and amenities of life must -be largely under the direction of women. The fact that this feeling has -been carried too far, and has led to the dwarfing of women’s intellect, -must not lead to a rejection of this important social sphere. It is too -strong a power to be ignored. George Eliot says well that “the commonest -man, who has his ounce of sense and feeling, is conscious of the -difference between a lovely, delicate woman, and a coarse one. Even a -dog feels a difference in their presence.” At a summer resort, for -instance, one sees women who may be intellectually very ignorant and -narrow, yet whose mere manners give them a social power which the -highest intellects might envy. To lend joy and grace to all one’s little -world of friendship; to make one’s house a place which every guest -enters with eagerness, and leaves with reluctance; to lend encouragement -to the timid, and ease to the awkward; to repress violence, restrain -egotism, and make even controversy courteous,—these belong to the empire -of woman. It is a sphere so important and so beautiful, that even -courage and self-devotion seem not quite enough, without the addition of -this supremest charm. - -This courtesy is so far from implying falsehood, that its very best -basis is perfect simplicity. Given a naturally sensitive organization, a -loving spirit, and the early influence of a refined home, and the -foundation of fine manners is secured. A person so favored may be reared -in a log-hut, and may pass easily into a palace; the few needful -conventionalities are so readily acquired. But I think it is a mistake -to tell children, as we sometimes do, that simplicity and a kind heart -are absolutely all that are needful in the way of manners. There are -persons in whom simplicity and kindness are inborn, and who yet never -attain to good manners for want of refined perceptions. And it is -astonishing how much refinement alone can do, even if it is not very -genuine or very full of heart, to smooth the paths and make social life -attractive. - -All the acute observers have recognized the difference between the -highest standard, which is nature’s, and that next to the highest, which -is art’s. George Eliot speaks of that fine polish which is “the -expensive substitute for simplicity,” and Tennyson says of manners,— - - “Kind nature’s are the best: those next to best - That fit us like a nature second-hand; - Which are indeed the manners of the great.” - -In our own national history, we have learned to recognize that the -personal demeanor of women may be a social and political force. The -slave-power owed much of its prolonged control at Washington, and the -larger part of its favor in Europe, to the fact that the manners of -Southern women had been more sedulously trained than those of Northern -women. Even at this moment, one may see at any watering-place that the -relative social influence of different cities does not depend upon the -intellectual training of their women, so much as on the manners. And, -even if this is very unreasonable, the remedy would seem to be, not to -go about lecturing on the intrinsic superiority of the Muses to the -Graces, but to pay due homage at all the shrines. - -It is a great deal to ask of reformers, especially, that they should be -ornamental as well as useful; and I would by no means indorse the views -of a lady who once told me that she was ready to adopt the most radical -views of the women-reformers if she could see one well-dressed woman who -accepted them. The place where we should draw the line between -independence and deference, between essentials and non-essentials, -between great ideas and little courtesies, will probably never be -determined—except by actual examples. Yet it is safe to fall back on -Miss Edgeworth’s maxim in “Helen,” that “Every one who makes goodness -disagreeable commits high treason against virtue.” And it is not a -pleasant result of our good deeds, that others should be immediately -driven into bad deeds by the burning desire to be unlike us. - - - - - XLV. - “GIRLSTEROUSNESS.” - - -They tell the story of a little boy, a young scion of the house of -Beecher, that, on being rebuked for some noisy proceeding, in which his -little sister had also shared, he claimed that she also should be -included in the indictment. “If a boy makes too much noise,” he said, -“you tell him he mustn’t be boisterous. Well, then, when a girl makes -just as much noise, you ought to tell her not to be _girlsterous_.” - -I think that we should accept, with a sense of gratitude, this addition -to the language. It supplies a name for a special phase of feminine -demeanor, inevitably brought out of modern womanhood. Any transitional -state of society develops some evil with the good. Good results are -unquestionably proceeding from the greater freedom now allowed to women. -The drawback is, that we are developing, here and now, more of -“girlsterousness” than is apt to be seen in less-enlightened countries. - -The more complete the subjection of woman, the more “subdued” in every -sense she is. The typical woman of savage life is, at least in youth, -gentle, shy, retiring, timid. A Bedouin woman is modest and humble; an -Indian girl has a voice “gentle and low.” The utmost stretch of the -imagination cannot picture either of them as “girlsterous.” That -perilous quality can only come as woman is educated, self-respecting, -emancipated. “Girlsterousness” is the excess attendant on that virtue, -the shadow which accompanies that light. It is more visible in England -than in France, in America than in England. - -It is to be observed, that, if a girl wishes to be noisy, she can be as -noisy as anybody. Her noise, if less clamorous, is more shrill and -penetrating. The shrieks of schoolgirls, playing in the yard at -recess-time, seem to drown the voices of the boys. As you enter an -evening party, it is the women’s tones you hear most conspicuously. -There is no defect in the organ, but at least an adequate vigor. In -travelling by rail, when sitting near some rather under-bred party of -youths and damsels, I have commonly noticed that the girls were the -noisiest. The young men appeared more regardful of public opinion, and -looked round with solicitude, lest they should attract too much -attention. It is “girlsterousness” that dashes straight on, regardless -of all observers. - -Of course reformers exhibit their full share of this undesirable -quality. Where the emancipation of women is much discussed in any -circle, some young girls will put it in practice gracefully and with -dignity, others rudely. Yet even the rudeness may be but a temporary -phase, and at last end well. When women were being first trained as -physicians, years ago, I remember a young girl who came from a Southern -State to a Northern city, and attended the medical lectures. Having -secured her lecture-tickets, she also bought season-tickets to the -theatre and to the pistol-gallery, laid in a box of cigars, and began -her professional training. If she meant it as a satire on the pursuits -of the young gentlemen around her, it was not without point. But it was, -I suppose, a clear case of “girlsterousness;” and I dare say that she -sowed her wild oats much more innocently than many of her male -contemporaries, and that she has long since become a sedate matron. But -I certainly cannot commend her as a model. - -Yet I must resolutely deny that any sort of hoydenishness or indecorum -is an especial characteristic of radicals, or even “provincials,” as a -class. Some of the fine ladies who would be most horrified at the -“girlsterousness” of this young maiden would themselves smoke their -cigarettes in much worse company, morally speaking, than she ever -tolerated. And, so far as manners are concerned, I am bound to say that -the worst cases of rudeness and ill-breeding that have ever come to my -knowledge have not occurred in the “rural districts,” or among the lower -ten thousand, but in those circles of America where the whole aim in -life might seem to be the cultivation of its elegances. - -And what confirms me in the fear that the most profound and serious -types of this disease are not to be found in the wildcat regions is the -fact that so much of is transplanted to Europe, among those who have the -money to travel. It is there described broadly as “Americanism;” and, so -surely as any peculiarly shrill group is heard coming through a European -picture-gallery, it is straightway classed by all observers as belonging -to the great Republic. If the observers are enamoured at sight with the -beauty of the young ladies of the party, they excuse the voices; - - “Strange or wild, or madly gay, - They call it only pretty Fanny’s way.” - -But other observers are more apt to call it only Columbia’s way; and if -they had ever heard the word “girlsterousness,” they would use that too. - -Emerson says, “A gentleman makes no noise; a lady is serene.” If we -Americans often violate this perfect maxim of good manners, it is -something that America has, at least, furnished the maxim. And, between -Emerson and “girlsterousness,” our courteous philosopher will yet carry -the day. - - - - - XLVI. - ARE WOMEN NATURAL ARISTOCRATS? - - -A clergyman’s wife in England has lately set on foot a reform movement -in respect to dress; and, like many English reformers, she aims chiefly -to elevate the morals and manners of the lower classes, without much -reference to her own social equals. She proposes that “no servant, under -pain of dismissal, shall wear flowers, feathers, brooches, buckles or -clasps, ear-rings, lockets, neck-ribbons, velvets, kid gloves, parasols, -sashes, jackets, or trimming of any kind on dresses, and, above all, no -crinoline; no pads to be worn, or frisettes, or _chignons_, or -hair-ribbons. The dress is to be gored and made just to touch the -ground, and the hair to be drawn closely to the head, under a round -white cap, without trimming of any kind. The same system of dress is -recommended for Sunday-school girls, school-mistresses, church-singers, -and the lower orders generally.” - -The remark is obvious, that in this country such a course of discipline -would involve the mistress, not the maid, in the “pain of dismissal.” -The American clergyman and clergyman’s wife who should even “recommend” -such a costume to a school-mistress, church-singer, or Sunday-school -girl,—to say nothing of the rest of the “lower orders,”—would soon find -themselves without teachers, without pupils, without a choir, and -probably without a parish. It is a comfort to think that even in older -countries there is less and less of this impertinent interference: the -costume of different ranks is being more and more assimilated; and the -incidental episode of a few liveries in our cities is not enough to -interfere with the general current. Never yet, to my knowledge, have I -seen even a livery worn by a white native American; and to restrain the -Sunday bonnets of her handmaidens, what lady has attempted? - -This is as it should be. The Sunday bonnet of the Irish damsel is only -the symbol of a very proper effort to obtain her share of all social -advantages. Long may those ribbons wave! Meanwhile I think the fact that -it is easier for the gentleman of the house to control the dress of his -groom than for the lady to dictate that of her waiting-maid,—this must -count against the theory that it is women who are the natural -aristocrats. - -Women are no doubt more sensitive than men upon matters of taste and -breeding. This is partly from a greater average fineness of natural -perception, and partly because their more secluded lives give them less -of miscellaneous contact with the world. If Maud Müller and her husband -had gone to board at the same boarding-house with the Judge and his -wife, that lady might have held aloof from the rustic bride, simply from -inexperience in life, and not knowing just how to approach her. But the -Judge, who might have been talking politics or real estate with the -young farmer on the doorsteps that morning, would certainly find it -easier to deal with him as a man and a brother at the dinner-table. From -these different causes women get the credit or discredit of being more -aristocratic than men are; so that in England the Tory supporters of -female suffrage base it on the ground that these new voters at least -will be conservative. - -But, on the other hand, it is women, even more than men, who are -attracted by those strong qualities of personal character which are -always the antidote to aristocracy. No bold revolutionist ever defied -the established conventionalisms of his times without drawing his -strongest support from women. Poet and novelist love to depict the -princess as won by the outlaw, the gypsy, the peasant. Women have a way -of turning from the insipidities and proprieties of life to the wooer -who has the stronger hand; from the silken Darnley to the rude Bothwell. -This impulse is the natural corrective to the aristocratic instincts of -womanhood; and though men feel it less, it is still, even among them, -one of the supports of republican institutions. We need to keep always -balanced between the two influences of refined culture and of native -force. The patrician class, wherever there is one, is pretty sure to be -the more refined; the plebeian class, the more energetic. That woman is -able to appreciate both elements, is proof that she is quite capable of -doing her share in social and political life. This English clergyman’s -wife, who devotes her soul to the trimmings and gored skirts of the -lower orders, is no more entitled to represent her sex than are those -ladies who give their whole attention to the “novel and intricate -bonnets” advertised this season on Broadway. - - - - - XLVII. - MRS. BLANK’S DAUGHTERS. - - -Mrs. Blank, of Far West—let us not draw her from the “sacred privacy of -woman” by giving the name or place too precisely—has an insurmountable -objection to woman’s voting. So the newspapers say; and this objection -is, that she does not wish her daughters to encounter disreputable -characters at the polls. - -It is a laudable desire, to keep one’s daughters from the slightest -contact with such persons. But how does Mrs. Blank precisely mean to -accomplish this? Will she shut up the maidens in a harem? When they go -out, will she send messengers through the streets to bid people hide -their faces, as when an Oriental queen is passing? Will she send them -travelling on camels, veiled by _yashmaks_? Will she prohibit them from -being so much as seen by a man, except when a physician must be called -for their ailments, and Miss Blank puts her arm through a curtain, in -order that he may feel her pulse and know no more? - -Who is Mrs. Blank, and how does she bring up her daughters? Does she -send them to the post-office? If so, they may wait a half-hour at a time -for the mail to open, and be elbowed by the most disreputable -characters, waiting at their side. If it does the young ladies no harm -to encounter this for the sake of getting their letters out, will it -harm them to do it in order to get their ballots in? If they go to hear -Gough lecture, they may be kept half an hour at the door, elbowed by -saint and sinner indiscriminately. If it is worth going through this to -hear about temperance, why not to vote about it? If they go to -Washington to the President’s inauguration, they may stand two hours -with Mary Magdalen on one side of them and Judas Iscariot on the other. -If this contact is rendered harmless by the fact that they are receiving -political information, will it hurt them to stay five minutes longer in -order to act upon the knowledge they have received? - -This is on the supposition that the household of Blank are plain, -practical women, unversed in the vanities of the world. If they belong -to fashionable circles, how much harder to keep them wholly clear of -disreputable contact! Should they, for instance, visit Newport, they may -possibly be seen at the Casino, looking very happy as they revolve -rapidly in the arms of some very disreputable characters; they will be -seen in the surf, attired in the most scanty and clinging drapery, and -kindly aided to preserve their balance by the devoted attentions of the -same companions. Mrs. Blank, meanwhile, will look complacently on, with -the other matrons: they are not supposed to know the current reputation -of those whom their daughters meet “in society;” and, so long as there -is no actual harm done, why should they care? Very well; but why, then, -should they care if they encounter those same disreputable characters -when they go to drop a ballot in the ballot-box? It will be a more -guarded and distant meeting. It is not usual to dance round-dances at -the ward-room, so far as I know, or to bathe in clinging drapery at that -rather dry and dusty resort. If such very close intimacies are all right -under the gas-light or at the beach, why should there be poison in -merely passing a disreputable character at the City Hall? - -On the whole, the prospects of Mrs. Blank are not encouraging. Should -she consult a physician for her daughters, he may be secretly or openly -disreputable; should she call in a clergyman, he may, though a bishop, -have carnal rather than spiritual eyes. If Miss Blank be caught in a -shower, she may take refuge under the umbrella of an undesirable -acquaintance; should she fall on the ice, the woman who helps to raise -her may have sinned. There is not a spot in any known land where a woman -can live in absolute seclusion from all contact with evil. Should the -Misses Blank even turn Roman Catholics, and take to a convent, their -very confessor may be secretly a scoundrel; and they may be glad to flee -for refuge to the busy, buying, selling, dancing, voting world outside. - -No: Mrs. Blank’s prayers for absolute protection will never be answered, -in respect to her daughters. Why not, then, find a better model for -prayer in that made by Jesus for his disciples: “I pray Thee, not that -Thou shouldst take them out of the world, but that Thou shouldst keep -them from the evil.” A woman was made for something nobler in the world, -Mrs. Blank, than to be a fragile toy, to be put behind a glass case, and -protected from contact. It is not her mission to be hidden away from all -life’s evil, but bravely to work that the world may be reformed. - - - - - XLVIII. - THE EUROPEAN PLAN. - - -Every mishap among American women brings out renewed suggestions of what -maybe called the “European plan” in the training of young girls,—the -plan, that is, of extreme seclusion and helplessness. It is usually -forgotten, in these suggestions, that not much protection is really -given anywhere to this particular class as a whole. Everywhere in -Europe, the restrictions are of caste, not of sex. Even in Turkey, -travellers tell us, women of the humbler vocations are not much -secluded. It is not the object of the “European plan,” in any form, to -protect the virtue of young women, as such, but only of young ladies; -and the protection is pretty effectually limited to that order. Among -the Portuguese, in the island of Fayal, I found it to be the ambition of -each humble family to bring up one daughter in a sort of ladylike -seclusion: she never went into the street alone, or without a hood which -was equivalent to a veil; she was taught indoor industries only; she was -constantly under the eye of her mother. But, in order that one daughter -might be thus protected, all the other daughters were allowed to go -alone, day or evening, bare-headed or bare-footed, by the loneliest -mountain-paths, to bring oranges or firewood or whatever their work may -be—heedless of protection. The safeguard was for a class: the average -exposure of young womanhood was far greater than with us. So in London, -while you rarely see a young lady alone in the streets, the housemaid is -sent on errands at any hour of the evening with a freedom at which our -city domestics would quite rebel; and one has to stay but a short time -in Paris to see how entirely limited to a class is the alleged restraint -under which young French girls are said to be kept. - -Again, it is to be remembered that the whole “European plan,” so far as -it is applied on the Continent of Europe, is a plan based upon utter -distrust and suspicion, not only as to chastity, but as to all other -virtues. It is applied among the higher classes almost as consistently -to boys as to girls. In every school under church auspices, it is the -French theory that boys are never to be left unwatched for a moment; and -it is as steadily assumed that girls will be untruthful if left to -themselves, as that they will do every other wrong. This to the -Anglo-Saxon race seems very demoralizing. “Suspicion,” said Sir Philip -Sidney, “is the way to lose that which we fear to lose.” Readers of the -Brontë novels will remember the disgust of the English pupils and -teachers in French schools at the constant espionage around them; and I -have more than once heard young girls who had been trained at such -institutions say that it was a wonder if they had any truthfulness left, -so invariable was the assumption that it was the nature of young girls -to lie. I cannot imagine any thing less likely to create upright and -noble character, in man or woman, than the systematic application of the -“European plan.” - -And that it produces just the results that might be feared, the whole -tone of European literature proves. Foreigners, no doubt, do habitual -injustice to the morality of French households; but it is impossible -that fiction can utterly misrepresent the community which produces and -reads it. When one thinks of the utter lightness of tone with which -breaches, both of truth and chastity, are treated even, in the better -class of French novels and plays, it seems absurd to deny the -correctness of the picture. Besides, it is not merely a question of -plays and novels. Consider, for instance, the contempt with which Taine -treats Thackeray for representing the mother of Pendennis as suffering -agonies when she thinks that her son has seduced a young girl, his -social inferior. Thackeray is not really considered a model of elevated -tone, as to such matters, among English writers; but the Frenchman is -simply amazed that the Englishman should describe even the saintliest of -mothers as attaching so much weight to such a small affair. - -An able newspaper writer, quoted with apparent approval by the Boston -Daily Advertiser, praises the supposed foreign method for the “habit of -dependence and deference” that it produces; and because it gives to a -young man a wife whose “habit of deference is established.” But it must -be remembered, that, where this theory is established, the habit of -deference is logically carried much farther than mere conjugal -convenience would take it. Its natural outcome is the authority of the -priest, not of the husband. That domination of the women of France by -the priesthood which forms to-day the chief peril of the republic,—which -is the strength of legitimism and imperialism and all other conspiracies -against the liberty of the French people,—is only the visible and -inevitable result of this dangerous docility. - -One thing is certain, that the best preparation for freedom is freedom; -and that no young girls are so poorly prepared for American life as -those whose early years are passed in Europe. The worst imprudences, the -most unmaidenly and offensive actions, that I have ever heard of in -decent society, have been on the part of young women educated in Europe, -who have been launched into American life without its early -training,—have been treated as children until they suddenly awakened to -the freedom of women. On the other hand, I remember with pleasure, that -a cultivated French mother, whose daughter’s fine qualities were the -best seal of her motherhood, once told me that the models she had chosen -in her daughter’s training were certain families of American young -ladies, of whom she had, through peculiar circumstances, seen much in -Paris. - - - - - XLIX. - “FEATHERSES.” - - -One of the most amusing letters ever quoted in any book is that given in -Curzon’s “Monasteries of the Levant,” as the production of a Turkish -sultana who had just learned English. It is as follows:— - - - NOTE FROM ADILE SULTANA, THE BETROTHED OF ABBAS PASHA, TO HER - ARMENIAN COMMISSIONER. - - CONSTANTINOPLE, 1844. - - _My Noble Friend_:—Here are the featherses sent my soul, my noble - friend, are there no other featherses leaved in the shop beside - these featherses? and these featherses remains, and these featherses - are ukly. They are very dear, who buyses dheses? And my noble - friend, we want a noat from yorself; those you brought last tim, - those you sees were very beautiful; we had searched; my soul, I want - featherses again, of those featherses. In Kalada there is plenty of - feather. Whatever bees, I only want beautiful featherses; I want - featherses of every desolation to-morrow. - - (Signed) - - YOU KNOW WHO. - -The first steps in culture do not, then, it seems, remove from the -feminine soul the love of finery. Nor do the later steps wholly -extinguish it; for did not Grace Greenwood hear the learned Mary -Somerville conferring with the wise Harriet Martineau as to whether a -certain dress should be dyed to match a certain shawl? Well! why not? -Because women learn the use of the quill, are they to ignore -“featherses”? Because they learn science, must they unlearn the arts, -and above all the art of being beautiful? If men have lost it, they have -reason to regret the loss. Let women hold to it, while yet within their -reach. - -Mrs. Rachel Howland of New Bedford, much prized and trusted as a public -speaker among Friends, and a model of taste and quiet beauty in costume, -delighted the young girls at a Newport Yearly Meeting, a few years -since, by boldly declaring that she thought God meant women to make the -world beautiful, as much as flowers and butterflies, and that there was -no sin in tasteful dress, but only in devoting to it too much money or -too much time. It is a blessed doctrine. The utmost extremes of dress, -the love of colors, of fabrics, of jewels, of “featherses,” are, after -all, but an effort after the beautiful. The reason why the beautiful is -not always the result is because so many women are ignorant or merely -imitative. They have no sense of fitness: the short wear what belongs to -the tall, and brunettes sacrifice their natural beauty to look like -blondes. Or they have no adaptation; and even an emancipated woman may -show a disregard for appropriateness, as where a fine lady sweeps the -streets, or a fair orator the platform, with a silken or velvet train -which accords only with a carpet as luxurious as itself. What is -inappropriate is never beautiful. What is merely in the fashion is never -beautiful. But who does not know some woman whose taste and training are -so perfect that fashion becomes to her a means of grace instead of a -despot, and the worst excrescence that can be prescribed—a _chignon_, a -hoop, a panier—is softened into something so becoming that even the -Parisian bondage seems but a chain of roses? - -In such hands, even “featherses” become a fine art, not a matter of -vanity. Are women so much more vain than men? No doubt they talk more -about their dress, for there is much more to talk about; yet did you -never hear the men of fashion discuss boots and hats and the liveries of -grooms? A good friend of mine, a shoemaker, who supplies very high heels -for a great many pretty feet on Fifth Avenue in New York, declares that -women are not so vain of their feet as men. “A man who thinks he has a -handsome foot,” quoth our fashionable Crispin, “is apt to give us more -trouble than any lady among our customers. I have noticed this for -twenty years.” The testimony is consoling—to women. - -And this naturally suggests the question, What is to be the future of -masculine costume? Is the present formlessness and gracelessness and -monotony of hue to last forever, as suited to the rough needs of a -work-a-day world? It is to be remembered that the difference in this -respect between the dress of the sexes is a very recent thing. Till -within a century or so men dressed as picturesquely as women, and paid -as minute attention to their costume. Even the fashions in armor varied -as extensively as the fashions in gowns. One of Henry III.’s courtiers, -Sir J. Arundel, had fifty-two complete suits of cloth of gold. No satin, -no velvet, was too elegant for those who sat to Copley for their -pictures. In Puritan days the laws could hardly be made severe enough to -prevent men from wearing silver-lace and “broad bone-lace,” and -shoulder-bands of undue width, and double ruffs and “immoderate great -breeches.” What seemed to the Cavaliers the extreme of stupid sobriety -in dress, would pass now for the most fantastic array. Fancy Samuel -Pepys going to a wedding of to-day in his “new colored silk suit and -coat trimmed with gold buttons, and gold broad lace round his hands, -very rich and fine.” It would give to the ceremony the aspect of a fancy -ball; yet how much prettier a sight is a fancy ball than the ordinary -entertainment of the period! - -Within the last few years the rigor of masculine costume is a little -relaxed; velvets are resuming their picturesque sway: and, instead of -the customary suit of solemn black, gentlemen are appearing in blue and -gold editions at evening parties. Let us hope that good sense and taste -may yet meet each other, for both sexes; that men may borrow for their -dress some womanly taste, women some masculine sense; and society may -again witness a graceful and appropriate costume, without being too much -absorbed in “featherses.” - - - - - L. - SOME MAN-MILLINERY. - - -We may breathe more freely. The religious prospects of America brighten. -Our dealers have received the “Catalogue of Clerical Vestments and -Improved Church Ornaments manufactured by Simon Jeune, 34 Rue de Cléry, -Paris.” - -Why are we not a nation of saints? Plainly, because the church-apparatus -has hitherto been so very deficient. Religion has been, so to speak, -naked. The dry-goods stores, supplying only the laity, have left the -clergy unclothed. In what ready-made-clothing store can you find any -thing like a proper alb? Ask your tailor, if you dare, for a chasuble. -At Stewart’s shop New Yorkers boast that you can buy any thing; but -fancy a respectable citizen entering those marble portals, and demanding -a cope or a dalmatic! As for an ombrellino, or an antependium, you might -as well attempt to go buffalo-hunting in Broadway. In that case you -would at least find the dried skin of the animal; but we doubt if there -is to be found on sale any thing nearer an ombrellino than a lady’s -parasol. They order this thing otherwise in France. - -Mr. Simon Jeune provides every one of these simple luxuries. Not a -device by which a rich man may enter the kingdom of heaven, but he has -it at his fingers’ ends. None of your cheap salvations mar the dignity -of 34 Rue de Cléry. “We do not manufacture these articles at a low -price,” he calmly announces. There is no limit in the other direction. -You can lead souls to heaven in a robe worth twenty-five guineas; but, -if you insist on parsimony in your piety, you must patronize some other -establishment. - -Yet who that reads this catalogue, and revels for a half-hour amid its -gold and jewels, would care to be parsimonious? What is money worth, -except as a means of putting one’s favorite minister into a chasuble “in -gold cloth with glazed friz ground, double superior quality”? Since the -Christian must at any rate bear his cross, is it not a satisfaction to -have it “on a gold ground, richly worked in gold and silver”? If there -is no true religion without a cope, is it not well that its “hood and -orfraies” should be “surrounded with glazed gold-columned galloon”? And, -as death must come at any rate, is it not something that your pall may -bear “a handsome design of silver tears in emboss in the centre of the -cross,” price only six guineas? - -Time would fail to tell of the banners and the dais, the altar-cloths -and frontals, the pastoral stoles and benediction-scarfs, the pyxes and -chalices, and, in short, all dear delights of consecrated souls. This -saintly upholsterer makes as many “fresh sacrifices,” it would appear, -as any other retailer; but, as this does not prevent him from pricing a -dais as high as four hundred pounds sterling, there is no danger of the -purchasers finding any thing cheap enough to be really discreditable. -And the goods are all warranted to be as indestructible as the lowly -virtues they symbolize. - -M. Jeune positively announces that he “supplies every article connected -with the Roman Catholic Church.” Perhaps he reserves the faith, hope, -and charity for the next catalogue, as they do not appear largely in -this. In other respects, reading this catalogue is as good as a seat in -the most fashionable church, and leaves much the same impression. It is -especially useful for summer-time, when one may wander in the country, -to the peril of one’s soul, and may consider the lilies a great deal too -much, and may come to thinking religion a thing obtainable on cheap -terms, after all. This would not do for M. Jeune’s business: let us -return to the realities of time and eternity, and consider this -“embroidered glory of spangles and prul,”—whatever prul may be. - -But can it, after all, be possible that these gorgeous garments are to -be worn by men only, and that those same men will sometimes treat it as -a reproach to women that they are fond of dress? - - - - - LI. - SUBLIME PRINCES IN DISTRESS. - - -In looking over some miscellaneous papers which came, the other day, -into my hands, I found among them a newspaper scrap, expressing certain -criticisms familiar to the inquiring mind. It stated the predominant -attribute of women to be frivolity; an inordinate love of show, display, -rank, title, dress; a habit of absorption in the petty details of these -follies, to the exclusion of all serious thought and purpose. In reading -this lucubration, one was led to suppose that the whole aim of all women -was to meet in little circles where they could wear costly attire, call -themselves by fine names, and, in the concise Italian phrase, “peacock -themselves” generally. - -But there happened to be among the same papers another class of -documents which tended to unsettle the mind a little on these topics. -These documents were in print, and were not marked as private, or -addressed to any particular name, so that there can be no harm in -reprinting one of them, suppressing, however, all reference to -particular persons or places, lest I should be innocently betraying some -awful secret. The paper affording most information was as follows, the -dashes of omission (——) being mine, but all the rest being given -_verbatim_:— - - “Lux e tenebris.” - - —— CONSISTORY. - - {Non nobis } - {Domine non} - S. P. R. S. {nobis, sed} 32° - {nomini tuo} - {da gloriam} - - Sublime Prince: - - A stated rendezvous of —— Consistory, A. A. S. Rite, will be held on - the 15th day of the month Adar, A. H. 5640, in —— Hall, under the c. - c. of the 3, near the B. B. at Five o’clock P.M. - - Per order of - ____ ____ - Ill. Com. in Chief. - - —— —— - Ill. Grand Secretary. - -The object of this meeting is thus stated: “Work: the grade of Knight -Kadosh, the 30th, will be worked in full at this Rendezvous.” And it -appears that this work must have something of a military character; for -it seems from another circular, which I will not quote in full, that the -purpose of the rendezvous can be much better carried out if the members -will provide themselves with a costly uniform, including a sword and -other equipments. Yet it would also appear that the expenses of this -organization, apart from the uniform, are so great as to call forth the -following notice:— - - “DELINQUENTS.—The Finance Committee recommend the discharge from - Membership of the following Sublime Princes, for non-payment of - dues, they having failed to make any satisfactory reply to repealed - notices of their indebtedness.” [Then follows a list of names and - amounts varying from $17 to $23.] - -One of the most brilliant of recent French novels, Daudet’s “Les Rois en -Exil,” lays its whole plot among the forlorn class of dethroned -sovereigns in Paris; but really their sorrows do not touch an American -heart so deeply as this black-list. Here are nearly twenty Princes on -our own soil who are publicly exposed in a single circular as refusing, -after “repeated notices of their indebtedness,” even to reply -satisfactorily. What pleasure can there be in the most attractive -“rendezvous,” what joy in the most absorbing “work,” when one thinks of -all these fallen Sublime Princes wandering, like Milton’s angels, into -outer darkness? I almost blush to own that I recognize among the names -of these outcasts one or two acquaintances of my own, who certainly -passed for honest men before they became princes. - -But the most interesting question for women to consider is this: Who -conducts this picturesque consistory, with its rites, its titles, and -its uniforms? Which sex is it that makes up this society, and twenty -other societies so absorbing in their “work” that some worthy persons -have a “society” for almost every evening in the week? Is it the sex -which is alleged to be frivolous, dressy, and eager for rank and title? -Or is it the grave sex, the serious and hard-working sex, the “noble -sex,” _le sexe noble_, as some of the French grammars call it? No doubt -there is under all this display and formality, in this “consistory,” as -in most similar organizations, a great deal of mutual help and -friendliness. But so there is under even the seeming frivolities of -women: the majority of fashionable women have good hearts, and do good. -If substantial and practical men like to cover even their benevolent -organizations with something of show and display, and to “peacock -themselves” a little, why should not women be permitted the same -privilege? Surely Sublime Princes should stand by their order, and not -look with disdain on those who would like to be Sublime Princesses if -they only could. - - - - - EDUCATION. - - - “Movet me ingens scientiarum admiratio, seu legis communis æquitas, - ut in nostro sexu, rarum non esse feram, id quod omnium votis - dignissimum est. Nam cum sapientia tantum generis humani ornamentum - sit, ut ad omnes et singulos (quoad quidem per sortem cujusque - liceat) extendi jure debeat, non vidi, cur virgini, in qua excolendi - sese ornandique sedulitatem admittimus, non conveniat mundus hic - omnium longè pulcherrimus.”—ANNÆ MARIÆ À SCHURMAN EPISTOLÆ. (1638.) - -“A great reverence for knowledge and the natural sense of justice urge -me to encourage in my own sex that which is most worthy the aspirations -of all. For, since wisdom is so great an ornament of the human race that -it should of right be extended (so far as practicable) to each and every -one, I did not see why this fairest of ornaments should not be -appropriate for the maiden, to whom we permit all diligence in the -decoration and adornment of herself.” - - - - - LII. - “EXPERIMENTS.” - - -Why is it, that, whenever any thing is done for women in the way of -education, it is called “an experiment,”—something that is to be long -considered, stoutly opposed, grudgingly yielded, and dubiously -watched,—while, if the same thing is done for men, its desirableness is -assumed as a matter of course, and the thing is done? Thus, when Harvard -College was founded, it was not regarded as an experiment, but as an -institution. The “General Court,” in 1636, “agreed to give 400_l._ -towards a schoale or colledge,” and the affair was settled. Every -subsequent step in the expanding of educational opportunities for young -men has gone in the same way. But when there seems a chance of -extending, however irregularly, some of the same collegiate advantages -to women, I observe that the Boston Daily Advertiser and the Atlantic -Monthly, in all good faith, speak of the measure as an “experiment.” - -It seems to me no more of an “experiment” than when a boy who has -hitherto eaten up his whole apple becomes a little touched with a sense -of justice, and finally decides to offer his sister the smaller half. If -he has ever regarded that offer as an experiment, the first actual trial -will put the result into the list of certainties; and it will become an -axiom in his mind that girls like apples. Whatever may be said about the -position of women in law and society, it is clear that their educational -disadvantages have been a prolonged disgrace to the other sex, and one -for which women themselves are in no way accountable. When Françoise de -Saintonges, in the sixteenth century, wished to establish girls’ schools -in France, she was hooted in the streets, and her father called together -four doctors of law to decide whether she was possessed of a devil in -planning to teach women,—”_pour s’assurer qu’instruire des femmes -n’était pas un œuvre du démon_.” From that day to this, we have seen -women almost always more ready to be taught than was any one else to -teach them. Talk as you please about their wishing or not wishing to -vote: they have certainly wished for instruction, and have had it doled -out to them almost as grudgingly as if it were the ballot itself. - -Consider the educational history of Massachusetts, for instance. The -wife of President John Adams was born in 1744; and she says of her youth -that “female education, in the best families, went no farther than -writing and arithmetic.” Barry tells us in his History of Massachusetts, -that the public education was first provided for boys only; “but light -soon broke in, and girls were allowed to attend the public schools two -hours a day.”[10] It appears from President Quincy’s “Municipal History -of Boston,”[11] that from 1790 girls were there admitted to such -schools, but during the summer months only, when there were not boys -enough to fill them,—from April 20 to Oct. 20 of each year. This lasted -until 1822, when Boston became a city. Four years after, an attempt was -made to establish a high school for girls, which was not, however, to -teach Latin and Greek. It had, in the words of the school committee of -1854, “an alarming success;” and the school was abolished after eighteen -months’ trial, because the girls crowded into it; and as Mr. Quincy, -with exquisite simplicity, records, “not one voluntarily quitted it, and -there was no reason to suppose that any one admitted to the school would -voluntarily quit for the whole three years, except in case of marriage!” - -Footnote 10: - - III., 323. - -Footnote 11: - - p. 21. - -How amusing seems it now to read of such an “experiment” as this, -abandoned only because of its overwhelming success! How absurd now seem -the discussions of a few years ago!—the doubts whether young women -really desired higher education, whether they were capable of it, -whether their health would bear it, whether their parents would permit -it. The address I gave before the Social Science Association on this -subject, at Boston, May 14, 1873, now seems to me such a collection of -platitudes that I hardly see how I dared come before an intelligent -audience with such needless reasonings. It is as if I had soberly -labored to prove that two and two make four, or that ginger is “hot i’ -the mouth.” Yet the subsequent discussion in that meeting showed that -around even these harmless and commonplace propositions the battle of -debate could rage hot; and it really seemed as if even to teach women -the alphabet ought still to be mentioned as “a promising experiment.” -Now, with the successes before us of Vassar and Wellesley and Smith -Colleges, of Michigan and Cornell and Boston Universities; with the -spectacle at Cambridge of young women actually reading Plato “at sight” -with Professor Goodwin,—it surely seems as if the higher education of -women might be considered quite beyond the stage of experiment, and -might henceforth be provided for in the same common-sense and -matter-of-course way which we provide for the education of young men. - -And, if this point is already reached in education, how long before it -will also be reached in political life, and women’s voting be viewed as -a matter of course, and a thing no longer experimental? - - - - - LIII. - INTELLECTUAL CINDERELLAS. - - -When, some thirty years ago, the extraordinary young mathematician, -Truman Henry Safford, first attracted the attention of New England by -his rare powers, I well remember the pains that were taken to place him -under instruction by the ablest Harvard professors: the greater his -abilities, the more needful that he should have careful and symmetrical -training. The men of science did not say, “Stand off! let him alone! let -him strive patiently until he has achieved something positively -valuable, and he may be sure of prompt and generous recognition—when he -is fifty years old.” If such a course would have been mistaken and -ungenerous if applied to Professor Safford, why is it not something to -be regretted that it was applied to Mrs. Somerville? In her case, the -mischief was done: she was, happily, strong enough to bear it; but, as -the English critics say, we never shall know what science has lost by -it. We can do nothing for her now; but we could do something for future -women like her, by pointing this obvious moral for their benefit, -instead of being content with a mere tardy recognition of success, after -a woman has expended half a century in struggle. - -It is commonly considered to be a step forward in civilization, that -whereas ancient and barbarous nations exposed children to special -hardships, in order to kill off the weak and toughen the strong, modern -nations aim to rear all alike carefully, without either sacrificing or -enfeebling. If we apply this to muscle, why not to mind? and, if to -men’s minds, why not to women’s? Why use for men’s intellects, which are -claimed to be stronger, the forcing process,—offering, for instance, -many thousand dollars a year in gratuities at Harvard College, that -young men may be induced to come and learn,—and only withhold assistance -from the weaker minds of women? A little schoolgirl once told me that -she did not object to her teacher’s showing partiality, but thought she -“ought to show partiality to all alike.” If all our university systems -are wrong, and the proper diet for mathematical genius consists of fifty -years’ snubbing, let us employ it, by all means; but let it be applied -to both sexes. - -That it is the duty of women, even under disadvantageous circumstances, -to prove their purpose by labor, to “verify their credentials,” is true -enough; but this moral is only part of the moral of Mrs. Somerville’s -book, and is cruelly incomplete without the other half. What a garden of -roses was Mrs. Somerville’s life, according to some comfortable critics! -“All that for which too many women nowadays are content to sit and -whine, or fitfully and carelessly struggle, came naturally and quietly -to Mrs. Somerville. And the reason was, that she never asked for any -thing until she had earned it; or, rather, she never asked at all, but -was content to earn.” Naturally and quietly! You might as well say that -Garrison fought slavery “quietly,” or that Frederick Douglass’s escape -came to him “naturally.” Turn to the book itself, and see with what -strong, though never bitter, feeling, the author looks back upon her -hard struggle. - - “I was intensely ambitious to excel in something; for I felt in my - own breast that women were capable of taking a higher place in - creation than that assigned them in my early days, which was very - low” (p. 60). “Nor ... should I have had courage to ask any of them - a question, for I should have been laughed at. I was often very sad - and forlorn; not a hand held out to help me” (p. 47). “My father - came home for a short time, and, somehow or other finding out what I - was about, said to my mother, ‘Peg, we must put a stop to this, or - we shall have Mary in a strait-jacket one of these days’” (p. 54). - “I continued my mathematical and other pursuits, but under great - disadvantages; for, although my husband did not prevent me from - studying, I met with no sympathy whatever from him, as he had a very - low opinion of the capacity of my sex, and had neither knowledge of - nor interest in science of any kind” (p. 57). “I was considered - eccentric and foolish; and my conduct was highly disapproved of by - many, especially by some members of my own family” (p. 80). “A man - can always command his time under the plea of business: a woman is - not allowed any such excuse” (p. 164). And so on. - -At last in 1831—Mrs. Somerville being then fifty-one—her work on “The -Mechanism of the Heavens” appeared. Then came universal recognition, -generous if not prompt, a tardy acknowledgment. “Our relations,” she -says, “and others who had so severely criticised and ridiculed me, -astonished at my success, were now loud in my praise.”[12] No doubt. So -were, probably, Cinderella’s sisters loud in her praise, when the prince -at last took her from the chimney-corner, and married her. They had kept -for themselves, to be sure, as long as they could, the delights and -opportunities of life; while she had taken the place assigned her in her -early days,—“which was very low,” as Mrs. Somerville says. But, for all -that, they were very kind to her in the days of her prosperity; and no -doubt packed their little trunks, and came to visit their dear sister at -the palace, as often as she could wish. And, doubtless, the Fairyland -Monthly of that day, when it came to review Cinderella’s “Personal -Recollections,” pointed out, that, as soon as that distinguished lady -had “achieved something positively valuable,” she received “prompt and -generous recognition.” - -Footnote 12: - - p. 176. - - - - - LIV. - FOREIGN EDUCATION. - - -There is a fashionable phrase which always awakens my inward -protest,—“the advantages of foreign education.” Every summer brings -within my view a large class of people who have perhaps spent their -youth in Europe, and then have taken Europe for their wedding-tour; and -then, after a year or two at home, have found it an excellent reason for -going abroad again “to give the children the advantage of foreign -education, you know.” And, as it is in regard to girls that this -advantage is especially claimed, it is in respect to them that I wish to -speak. - -In some ways, undoubtedly, the early foreign training offers an -advantage. It is a thing of very great convenience to have the easy -colloquial command of one or two languages beside one’s own; and this -can no doubt be obtained far more readily by a few years of early life -abroad than by any method employed in later years at home. There are -also some unquestionable advantages in respect to music, art, and -European geography and history. The trouble is, that, when we have -enumerated these advantages, we have mentioned all. - -And, as a further trouble, it comes about that these things, being all -that are better learned in Europe, are easily assumed, by what may be -called our Europeanized classes, to be all that are worth learning, -especially for girls. When, in such circles, you hear of a young lady as -“splendidly educated,” it commonly turns out that she speaks several -languages admirably, and plays well on the piano, or sketches well. It -is not needful for such an indorsement that she should have the -slightest knowledge of mathematics, of logic, of rhetoric, of -metaphysics, of political economy, of physiology, of any branch of -natural science, or of any language, or literature, or history, except -those of modern Europe. All these missing branches she would have been -far more likely to study, if she had never been abroad: all these, or a -sufficient number of them, she would have been pretty sure to study at a -first-class American “academy” or high school. But all these she is -almost sure to have missed in Europe,—missed them so thoroughly, indeed, -that she is likely to regard with suspicion any one who knows any thing -about them, as being “awfully learned.” - -Yet it needs no argument to show that the studies thus omitted by girls -taught in Europe are the studies which train the intellect. That a girl -should know her own powers of body and mind, should know how to observe, -how to combine, how to think; that she should know the history and -literature of the world at large, and in particular of the country in -which she is to live,—this is certainly more important than that she -should be able to speak two or three languages as well as a European -courier, and should have nothing to say in any of them. - -A very few persons I have known who contrived, while living abroad, to -keep a home atmosphere round their children, and who, by great personal -effort, succeeded in giving to their girls that solid early training -which is to be had in every high school in this country, but is only to -be obtained by personal effort, and under great disadvantages, in -Europe. Wiser still, in my judgment, were those who trusted America for -the main training, but contrived early to secure for their children the -needful year or two of foreign life, for the learning of languages -alone. Perhaps we exaggerate, too, the absolute necessity of foreign -study, even for modern languages. The Russians, who are the best -linguists in Europe, are not in the habit of expatriating themselves for -that purpose; and perhaps we have something to learn from them in this -direction, as well as in the line of Professor Runkle’s machine-shops. - - - - - LV. - TEACHING THE TEACHERS. - - -Cotton Mather says of his father, Increase Mather, that, when he became -president of Harvard College, it was from the desire to teach those who -were to teach others, or, as he expresses it, not to shape the building -but the builders,—_non lapides dolare sed architectos_. It is curious to -see that women are admitted more readily to this higher work than to the -lower. Thus I know a lady who teaches elocution professionally, and has -clerical pupils among others. One of these assures me that he finds his -power and influence in the pulpit much increased through her -instruction. Yet there is scarcely a denomination which would admit her -into the pulpit: she can direct the builders, but can take no share in -the building. - -It sometimes occurred to me, when a member of the legislature of -Massachusetts, that the little I knew of political economy was mainly -due to the assiduous reading, in childhood, of Miss Martineau’s stories -founded on that science. Yet it would have been thought something very -astounding, were some such woman to have a seat in that legislature. So -I have seen classes of young men and maidens, in a high school, reciting -political economy out of Mrs. Fawcett’s excellent textbook,—and -sometimes reciting it to a woman; and yet, should any one of these boys -ever become a member of “the Great and General Court,” as the -legislature is called in Massachusetts, he could not even invite this -teacher, or Mrs. Fawcett herself, to sit beside him and aid him with her -advice. Can any one help seeing that this distinction is a merely -traditional thing, and one that cannot last? - -At the last teachers’ convention which I attended, I heard a lady, Mrs. -Knox, give an address on the best way of teaching English composition. -There was assembled a great body of teachers, some five or six hundred; -the church was crowded; and yet this lady faced the audience for some -three-quarters of an hour,—she being armed only with a piece of chalk -and a blackboard,—and held it in close attention. Without perceptible -effort, and without a word or an attitude that was otherwise than -womanly and graceful, she taught the teachers, men and women alike. I do -not see how it is possible that the alleged supremacy of man can long -withstand such influences. - -It seems very appropriate to read from town after town, in reference to -the late school elections, “The first lady to deposit her ballot was -Miss ——, a teacher in the high school.” Who else should be first? I do -not think that men generally comprehend how absurd it is to an -experienced teacher, who has for years been putting into the brains of -dull boys all the activity they possess, to see those boys grow up to be -men and voters, and decide what to do with the money she pays in taxes, -while she is set aside as “only a woman.” Her pupils cannot make a -speech in town-meeting, they cannot present a report on any subject, -they cannot show any capacity of leadership, without exhibiting the -influence she has had over them. Yet they are now as entirely beyond her -direct reach as if she were a hen who had hatched ducklings, and had -lived to see them swimming away. But the teachers are worse off than the -hens; because they have actually taught their ducklings to swim, and -could swim themselves if permitted. After all, Horace Mann builded -better than he knew. Every step in the training of women as teachers -implies a farther step. - - - - - LVI. - “CUPID-AND-PSYCHOLOGY.” - - -The learned Master of Trinity College, Cambridge, England, is frequently -facetious; and his jokes are quoted with the deference due to the chief -officer of the chief college of that great university. Now, it is known -that the Cambridge colleges, and Trinity College in particular, are -doing a great deal for the instruction of women. The young women of -Girton College and Newnham College,—both of these being institutions for -women, in or near Cambridge,—not only enjoy the instruction of the -university, but they share it under a guaranty that it shall be of the -best quality; because they attend, in many cases, the very same lectures -with the young men. Where this is not done, they sometimes use the -vacant lecture-rooms of the college; and it was in connection with an -application for this privilege that the Master of Trinity College made -his last joke,—the last, at any rate, that has crossed the Atlantic. -When told that the lecture-room was needed for a class of young women in -psychology, he said, “Psychology? What kind of psychology? -Cupid-and-Psychology, I suppose.” - -Cupid-and-Psychology is, after all, not so bad a department of -instruction. It may be taken as a good enough symbol of that mingling of -head and heart which is the best result of all training. One of the -worst evils of the separate education of the sexes has been the easy -assumption that men were to be made all head, and women all heart. It -was to correct the evils of this, that Ben Jonson proposed for his ideal -woman - - “a learned and a manly soul.” - -It was an implied recognition of it from the other side when the great -masculine intellect, Goethe, held up as a guiding force in his Faust -“the eternal womanly” (_das ewige weibliche_). After all, each sex must -teach the other, and impart to the other. It will never do to have all -the brains poured into one human being, and christened “man;” and all -the affections decanted into another, and labelled “woman.” Nature -herself rejects this theory. Darwin himself, the interpreter of nature, -shows that there is a perpetual effort going on, by unseen forces, to -equalize the sexes, since sons often inherit from the mother, and -daughters from the father. And we all take pleasure in discovering in -the noblest of each sex something of the qualities of the other,—the -tender affections in great men, the imperial intellect in great women. - -On the whole, there is no harm, but rather good, in the new science of -Cupid-and-Psychology. There are combinations for which no single word -can suffice. The phrase belongs to the same class with Lowell’s witty -denunciation of a certain tiresome letter-writer, as being, not his -incubus, but his “pen-and-inkubus.” It is as well to admit it first as -last: Cupid-and-Psychology will be taught wherever young men and women -study together. Not in the direct and simple form of mutual love-making, -perhaps; for they tell the visitor, at universities which admit both -sexes, that the young men and maidens do not fall in love with each -other, but are apt to seek their mates elsewhere. The new science has a -wider bearing, and suggests that the brain is incomplete, after all, -without the affections; and so are the affections without the brain. The -very professorship at Harvard University which Rev. Dr. Peabody is just -leaving, and which Rev. Phillips Brooks has been invited to fill, was -founded by a woman, Miss Plummer; and the name proposed by her for it -was “a professorship of the heart,” though they after all called it only -a professorship of “Christian morals.” We need the heart in our -colleges, it seems, even if we only get it under the ingenious title of -Cupid-and-Psychology. - - - - - LVII. - MEDICAL SCIENCE FOR WOMEN. - - -In reading, the other day, a speech on the Medical Education of Women, -it struck me that the most important reason for this education was one -which the speaker had not mentioned,—the fact that the medical -profession stands for science; and that women peculiarly need science, -since their natural bent is supposed to be a little the other way. The -other professions represent tradition very generally: the lawyer must be -bound by precedents; the clergyman generally admits that he must go back -to his texts. But the physician claims, at least, to be a man of -science, and stands for that before the world. Hence the sacredness with -which his position has always been surrounded. The Florida Indians, -according to the early voyagers, not only took the physician’s medicine, -but they took the physician himself internally, after his death. All -other men were buried; but the body of the physician was burned, and his -ashes mixed with water, by way of a permanent prescription. - -At any rate, the physician himself popularly stands for science; and, in -this point of view, his position is very noble. I have known physicians -whose professed materialism was more elevated than most of what the -world calls religion. To trace that wondrous power called life, which -takes these particles of matter, and makes them think with thought, or -glow with passion, or put forth an activity so intense as to be the -parent of new life from generation to generation,—this study is -something sublime. He who reverently ponders on this may call himself -theist or atheist, he is yet worthy to be revered: if he can teach us, -he blesses us. “I touch heaven,” said Novalis, “when I lay my hand on a -human body;” and the popularity among physicians of that fine engraving -of Vesalius standing ready for his first dissection, shows that they -take a higher view of their vocation than the world sometimes admits. - -It seems to me peculiarly important that women should have a share in -these studies. They often have time enough. It takes more time for a -woman to make herself charming than to make herself learned, Sydney -Smith says; and he thinks it a pity that she should often hang up her -brains on the wall in poor pictures, or waft them into the air in poor -music, when they might be better employed. Yet a great physician, Dr. -Currie, says in his letters that he always preferred to have an ignorant -patient bring his wife with him, because he could always get more -careful observation and quicker suggestions from the woman. This point -lies directly in the line of medical education. - -The study lies also directly in their path as prospective wives and -mothers, and this alone would furnish a sufficient reason for it. A -woman of superior gifts, who had studied medicine, but never adopted it -as a profession, told me that the mere domestic use of her knowledge had -more than repaid her for all the trouble it had cost. For a man who -should thus abandon the pursuit, it would be of comparatively little -service, apart from the general training; but for a woman, if she -fulfills the commoner duties of a woman’s life, this early knowledge -will always be a source of direct strength. This applies in a degree to -surgery also; and I have always wondered, in view of the old proverb -that a surgeon should have “a lion’s heart and a lady’s hand,” why our -professors do not oftener aim at developing this heart, if need be, in -those who have the hand without training. - - - - - LVIII. - SEWING IN SCHOOLS. - - -Mr. N. T. Allen, of West Newton, Mass., who has had much experience and -success as a teacher of both sexes, has been visiting the German public -schools. He has lately given an interesting report of his observations -to the Middlesex County Teachers’ Association. The reporter says (the -Italics being my own),— - - “Mr. Allen paid particular attention to the Dorf Schule of the - cities, and the Bürger Schule of the country, both being of the - lower grades; and contended that the educational system of Germany - was far from being perfect, and was inferior in certain respects to - that adopted in some of our own States, and carried into successful - operation in several towns and communities. It was compulsory and - autocratic, in that parents were not allowed any choice in the - education of their children; _it was unjust toward girls, in - establishing and perpetuating the idea of their great mental - inferiority to the boys_; it was undemocratic, in having different - schools for different castes and classes of society; and it was - extremely sectarian and bigoted in the religious dogmatic - instruction prescribed and forced upon all.” - -It is well known that in the German schools a certain number of hours -are given by the girls to sewing, and that their course of study, as -compared with that of the boys, is narrowed to make room for this. It is -for this reason that I, for one, dread to see sewing brought into our -public schools. So strong is still the disposition in many minds to put -off girls with less schooling than boys, that it seems unsafe to provide -so good an excuse for this inequality. - -The whole theory of industrial schools is liable to a similar -danger,—that of introducing class distinctions into our education. It -tends toward that other evil of the German system, described by Mr. -Allen, “having different schools for different castes in society.” I -hold to the old theory of providing all boys and girls, whatever their -parentage or probable pursuit, with a good basis of common-school -education, and then trusting the intellectual faculties, thus sharpened, -to help them in the struggle for life. Just as it was found in the army -that a well-educated young man who had never handled a musket soon -overtook and passed a comrade of inferior brains who had been in the -militia from boyhood, so is it found to be with those whose minds have -been well taught in our public schools. But whether this criticism -holds, or not, against industrial schools, as such, it certainly holds -when we further make an industrial discrimination against all girls. -This we do, if we take an hour of their time for sewing, when the boys -give that hour to study. - -But it will be said, Ought not girls to be taught to sew? Undoubtedly. -All boys ought to be taught the use of hammer and plane and -screw-driver, and, for that matter, plain sewing also. Girls need sewing -no doubt; and they should be taught it at home, or at school, or -wherever they can find a teacher. But, for all this, to assign to sewing -any thing like the same relative importance that belonged to it a -hundred years ago, or even twenty years ago, is to overlook the changed -conditions of modern society. Let us consider this a moment. - -The Old-World theory was that all imaginable hard work was to be done by -human hands. But the New-World theory is—for it is a New World wherever -the theory is recognized—that all this work should be done, as far as -possible, by human brains. Napoleon defined it as his ultimate intention -for the French people, “to convert all trades into arts,” the head doing -the work of the hands. This applies to woman’s work as much as any -other. The epoch of private spinning and weaving was an epoch of -barbarism; the vast mills of Lowell and Fall River now do that toil. The -sewing-machine does a day’s work in an hour. But all this machinery came -out of somebody’s brain, and is adapted to a race of women with brains. -The treasurer of half a dozen manufacturing corporations told me last -week, that, though the mills were filled with French and Irish, the -superiority of American “help” was just as manifest as ever, and the -manufacturers would gladly keep them if they could: they could almost -always tend more looms, for instance. Those who have tried to teach the -use of the sewing-machine to the Southern negroes or poor whites know -how hard it is. A sewing-machine is a step in civilization: its presence -in a house, like that of a piano, proves a certain stage of advancement. -Its course runs parallel with that of the common-school; and an agent -for this machine, like those who sell improved agricultural implements, -would instinctively avoid those regions where there are no schoolhouses. - -I do not undervalue the use of the hands, or the need of physical -training for both boys and girls. But, after all, the hands must be kept -subordinate to the head. If industrial training is to be the first -thing, then every Irish parent who takes his ten-year-old girl from -school, and sends her to the factory, is in the path of virtue. If, on -the other hand, it be found that some time can be advantageously taken -from books, and given to some handiwork, without loss of intellectual -progress, that is a different thing. That is only an intellectual -eight-hour bill or five-hour bill; and, for one, I should gladly favor -that. But let it be done as securing the best education for all; not as -a class-education, or as merely utilitarian: and let it be done as -rigidly for boys as for girls. Let us not set out with the theory that a -boy may avail himself of all the divisions of labor in modern society, -but that every girl must still spin her own cloth, and sew her own seam. - - - - - LIX. - CASH PREMIUMS FOR STUDY. - - -On looking over the Harvard College catalogue, I am struck with the -great pecuniary inducements which are held out to tempt young gentlemen -to study. There are, to begin with, one hundred and seventeen -“scholarships;” yielding incomes ranging from $40 to $350 annually, but -averaging $225. The total income of these is $19,635. Then there are -“loan” and “beneficiary” funds, amounting to $4,700 annually, and given -or lent in sums from $25 to $75. Then there are “monitorships,” yielding -$700 per annum; and various money prizes, amounting to some $1,200. The -whole amount that is or may be paid in cash to undergraduates every year -is more than $25,000, which may perhaps reach a hundred and fifty young -men. No wonder that the catalogue asserts that “The experience of the -past warrants the statement that good scholars of high character, but -slender means, are seldom or never obliged to leave college for want of -money.” - -Probably one-sixth of the eight hundred undergraduates of Harvard -College receive direct pecuniary aid in studying there; and, as -scholarship is an essential in securing most of this pecuniary aid, it -is probable that half the high scholars in every class are thus directly -helped. Observe that this is in addition to the general value of the -college endowments to all students, over and above what they pay for -tuition,—an amount lately estimated by the academical authorities at one -thousand dollars, at least, for every graduate. Apart from all this, I -was told many years ago, by that very acute observer, the late President -James Walker of Harvard University, that in his opinion one-quarter of -the undergraduates were maintained in college through the personal -self-denial and sacrifices of mothers and sisters. - -But what a tremendous protective tariff, what an irresistible -“discriminating duty,” is this! While boys are thus bribed largely, year -by year, to come to Cambridge, and study,—so that the influence of all -this promise of pecuniary aid is felt through every academy and high -school in the land,—we find, on the other hand, that every girl who -wishes to pursue similar studies is expected to pay at the full market -rates for all she gets, and even then cannot enter Harvard College. In -some of our normal schools her board may be paid, I believe, on -condition that she becomes a teacher; but I know of no place where she -herself is paid, as young men are paid, merely to come and study. -Ex-Gov. Bullock founded one scholarship at Amherst, of which the income -is to be given by preference to a woman—when a woman is admitted! But -unfortunately that time has not come. And yet those who sit by the banks -of this golden stream, and monopolize all its benefits, have a tone of -sublime contempt for those who are not permitted to approach it, and -never can quite forgive the impecunious condition of these outcasts! -“Your scholarship is not to be compared to ours,” they say to women. -“Certainly not,” the women may fairly reply: “we were never paid -salaries that we might become scholars.” - -The thing that perpetually neutralizes all claims of chivalry, all -professions of justice, all talk of fairness, as between the sexes, is -this class of facts. Woman is systematically excluded from training, and -then told she must not compete; if admitted to compete, she is so -weighted by artificial disadvantages, that it is hard for her to win. If -her brain is inferior, she should be helped; if her natural obstacles -are greater, all other hinderances should be the more generously swept -away. Give girls a chance at a high school, they use it, and they there -equal boys in scholarship; in our academies, in our normal schools, -there is no deficiency on their part. Even in our colleges they ask, as -yet, only admittance, not cash premiums. Only admit them, and see if -they do not hold their own unpaid, with the young men to whom you pay, -collectively, twenty-five thousand dollars a year to stay there. Only a -seat in a recitation-room, to be paid for at the full price,—is this so -very much for a young girl to ask? Do be at least as generous as that -school committee in a Massachusetts town which shall be nameless, who -said seriously in their report, speaking of a certain appointment, “As -this place offers neither honor nor profit, we do not see why it should -not be filled by a woman”! - - - - - LX. - MENTAL HORTICULTURE. - - -There was once a public meeting held, at the request of some excellent -ladies, to consider the question whether it might be possible for roses -and lilies to grow together in the same garden. Many of the ladies were -quite used to gardening, and had opinions of their own; but, as it was -not proper for them to open their lips before people, they of course -could not testify. So several respectable gentlemen—clergymen and -professors—were invited to tell them all about it. Some of these -gentlemen had seen a rose, and some had seen a lily, but it turned out -that very few of them had ever happened to see a garden. Still, as they -were learned men, they could give very valuable suggestions. One of them -explained, that, as roses and lilies assimilated very different juices -from the soil, they could not possibly grow in the same soil. Another -pointed out, that, as they needed different proportions of sun and of -air, they should have very different exposures, and therefore must be -kept apart. Another, more daring, suggested, that, as God had put the -two species into the same world, it was quite possible that they might -grow in the same enclosure for a time, perhaps for about fourteen years, -but that, if they were left longer together, they would certainly blight -and destroy each other. All this seemed very conclusive; and the meeting -was about to vote that roses and lilies should never be allowed to exist -in the same garden, unless with a brick wall twenty feet high between. - -But it so happened that a sensible gardener from a distant State was -present, and got up to say a word before the debate closed. “Bless your -souls, my good people, what are you talking about?” said he. “Roses and -lilies are already growing together by the thousand, all over the -country, and you may as well close your discussion.” Upon which the -meeting broke up in some confusion: the brick wall was never built; but -the clergyman went back to his study, the professor to his lecture-room, -the physician to his patients, and all remained in the conviction that -the gardener was a good sort of man, but strangely ignorant of -scientific horticulture. - -“Which things are an allegory.” The writer has been reading the report, -in the Boston Daily Advertiser, of a recent debate on female education. - -I suppose that those born and bred in New England can never quite -abandon the feeling that this region should still lead the nation, as it -once led, in all educational matters. For one, I cannot help a slight -sense of mortification, when, in an assemblage of Boston professors, -undertaking to discuss a simple practical matter, everybody begins in -the clouds, ignoring the facts before everybody’s eyes, and discussing -as a question of theory only, what has long since become a matter of -common practice. The mortification is not diminished when the -common-sense has to be at last imported from beyond the borders of New -England, in the shape of a college president from Central New York. To -him alone it seems to have occurred to remind these dwellers in the -clouds that what they persisted in treating as theory had been a matter -of daily experience in half the large towns in New England for the last -quarter of a century. - -What is the question at issue? Simply this: New England is full of -normal schools, high schools, and endowed academies. In the majority of -these, pupils of both sexes, from fourteen to twenty-five or -thereabouts, study together and recite together, living either at home -or in boarding-houses, or in academic dormitories, as the case may be. -This has gone on for many years, without cavil or scandal. As a general -rule, teachers have testified that they prefer to teach these mixed -schools; at any rate, the fact is certain, that the sexes, once united -in schools of this grade, are very seldom separated again; while we -often hear of the separate schools as being abandoned, and the sexes -brought together. Certainly the experiment of joint education has been -very extensively tried in all parts of New England; indeed, for schools -of this kind, in most regions, the association of the sexes is the rule, -their separation the exception. Now, the only remaining question is: -This being the case, will it make any essential difference if you widen -the course of instruction a little, and call the institution a college? - -This is really the only problem left to be solved; and yet on this -question, thus limited, not a speaker at the above—except President -White of Cornell University—had apparently a word to say. Every other -speaker appeared to approach the general theme in as profound and -blissful an ignorance as if he had lived all his life in Turkey or in -France, or in some other country where no young man had ever recited -algebra in the same room with a young woman since the world began. - - - - - EMPLOYMENT. - - -“The non-combatant population is sure to fare ill during the ages of -combat. But these defects, too, are cured or lessened; women have now -marvellous ways of winning their way in the world; and mind without -muscle has far greater force than muscle without mind.”—BAGEHOT’S -_Physics and Politics_, c. ii., § 3. - - - - - LXI. - “SEXUAL DIFFERENCE OF EMPLOYMENT.” - - -I am at a loss to understand an assertion made by Rev. Dr. Hedge, at an -educational meeting in Boston, that “the course of civilization hitherto -has tended to develop and confirm sexual difference of employment.” He -adds, according to the report in the Daily Advertiser, that, “the more -civilized the country, the more the vocations of men and women divide: -the more savage the nation, the more they blend and coincide.” - -With due respect for Dr. Hedge on many grounds, and especially as having -been the first man to demand publicly in presence of the Harvard alumni -the admission of women to the university, I must yet express great -surprise at his taking what seems to me so utterly untenable a position. -To me it seems, on the contrary, that it is the savage period which is -remarkable for the industrial separation of the sexes; and that every -epoch of advancing civilization—as the present—blends them more and -more. The fact would have seemed to me so plain as hardly to need more -than simply to state it, but for the authority of Dr. Hedge upon the -other side. - -As we trace society back to savage life, what are the prevailing -employments of the male sex? More and more exclusively, war and the -chase. From these two vocations, monopolizing literally the whole active -life of the savage man, the savage woman is almost absolutely excluded. -Precisely at the point where the man’s sphere leaves off, in each of -these pursuits, the woman’s sphere begins. Among American Indians, the -man takes the captive, the woman tortures him. The man kills the deer, -carries it till within sight of his own village, and then throws it -down, that the squaw may go out and drag it in. Much that seems cruel -and selfish in Indian life is the result, as Mrs. Jameson long since -pointed out, of this complete separation of functions. The reason why -the Indian woman carries the lodgepoles and the provisions on the march -is that the man’s limbs may be left free and agile for the far severer -labors of war and of the chase, from which she is excluded. The reason -why she finally brings the deer to the camp is because he has had the -more exhausting labor of hunting and killing it. - -Contrast now this absolute “sexual difference of employment” with the -greater and greater blending of civilized society,—a blending, observe, -which proceeds from both sides, and not from woman only. It is hard to -say which is more remarkable, within the last half-century,—the way in -which women have encroached on men’s work, or the way in which men have -encroached on women’s. - -In many mechanical and commercial pursuits,—as printing and -bookkeeping,—once almost monopolized by men, you now find a very large -number of women. In some pursuits, as in education, the women have come -to outnumber the men enormously, at least in America; in others, as -telegraphy, they seem likely to do the same. We constantly hear of new -channels opening. A friend of mine, the other day, just before -addressing an audience on woman suffrage, stepped into a barber’s shop, -and to his great amazement was shaved by a woman. On inquiry, he learned -for the first time, that a good many of that sex, mostly Germans, -pursued this occupation in New York and elsewhere. Thus do the vocations -of men and women now “blend and coincide.” On the other hand, the -leading dressmaker of the world is a man; our bonnetshops are largely -conducted by men; the eminent hotel cooks, whose salaries exceed any -paid by Harvard University, are men; and the lady who goes to rest in a -sleeping-car on our railroads has her pillow smoothed and her curtains -drawn, not by a chambermaid, but by a chamberman. - -These are the facts which seem to me, I must say, quite fatal to Dr. -Hedge’s theory. And there is one thing worth noticing in the very -different criticisms passed on men and on women as to these invasions of -each other’s province. If you call attention to the way in which men are -everywhere taking part in women’s work, people say approvingly, “To be -sure! greater energy, greater skill! they do even women’s work better -than women themselves can.” But if you point out, that, on the other -hand, women are also doing men’s work, and in some cases—as in -literature and lecturing—are actually obtaining higher prices than most -men can obtain, the same people shake their heads disapprovingly, and -say, “Unsexed; out of their sphere!” Now, if we lived in an age of -chivalrous protection of women, it would be a different thing; but, as -we live in an age of political economy, there is no reason why men alone -should have the benefit of its laws. If practical life is to be regarded -as a game of puss-in-the-corner, I should recommend to each ejected puss -to make for the best corner she finds open, without much deference to -the theories of the sages. - - - - - LXII. - THE USE OF ONE’S FEET. - - -Is it better to stand on one’s own feet, or to depend on those of other -people? We need clear views on that matter, certainly; and there is not -much doubt which theory will ultimately prevail. - -For one, I believe the whole theory of a leisure-class, whether for man -or woman, to be a snare and a delusion. It seems to me that there is one -great drawback that a young American may encounter,—namely, the -possession of an independent property; and that there is one great piece -of good fortune,—to be thrown on one’s self for support. Of all -influences for development or usefulness, I know of none so great as -“the wholesome stimulus of pecuniary necessity.” Of all forms of social -organization, that seems to me the most favorable which opens to all -most freely the opportunity of early education, and then calls upon each -to exert himself for his own support. - -To be sure, it is hardly possible to overrate the value of cultivated -companionship and refined association. In other countries it may be -worth while, for the sake of these, to be born to wealth: it is so hard -to get them without wealth. But the happiest and best American -households are apt to be found among such as Miss Alcott, for instance, -habitually describes, where there is plenty of refinement and very -little money; where perhaps there has been wealth in times past, but it -has been lost just in time for the good of the children. All that money -can bring—all books, all travel, all art—are not worth so much as the -power to stand on one’s own feet. It is an essential to the character, -and it is certainly the greatest of delights. To have earned, for a -single year, one’s own support, gives one, in a manner, the freedom of -the universe. Till that is done, we are children: after that we are -mature human beings. - -In England, where the whole social atmosphere is so different, there are -many instances of much service done to art and philanthropy by persons -born to leisure. And yet, even in England, if the admissions of English -people may be trusted, these instances are bought by a frightful -disproportion of wasted lives; and the best work is, after all, done by -those who have learned to stand on their own feet. This last fact is -certainly true of France, Germany, and America. So far as my own -observation goes, for one American born to leisure who makes a good use -of it, there are a dozen who lead empty or vicious lives. And even that -exceptional one, with all his advantages, is often distanced in the race -by the men who have early had to stand on their own feet. The man of -leisure is usually so limited, either by the absence of stimulus or by -the tiresome narrowness of a petty circle, or by missing the wholesome -attrition of other minds, that he dwindles and grows feeble. If such a -man attains by the aid of wealth what the man of the next inferior grade -attains without it, we are all glad, and say it is “an honorable -instance.” Not that the rich are worse than other men. It is no calamity -to earn wealth, or even to inherit it after we have learned the lesson -of self-reliance. It is the children of wealth who are to be pitied. - -Now, all women who are born outside of actual poverty in America are as -badly off as if they had been born to wealth. They are systematically -discouraged from the delightful tonic of self-support. But when it is -said that they never even feel the desire to support themselves, I must -dissent. For twenty years I have been encountering young women who so -longed for the sense of an independent position that even the happiest -paternal home could not satisfy them unless it gave them so much to do -that they might honestly feel that they earned their living. Otherwise -the most luxurious arm-chairs in their own houses would not satisfy -them, they so longed to learn the use of their own feet. I have known -girls to rejoice in their father’s loss of property, because it would -release them to enjoy the happiness of self-reliance; and, for one, had -I the good fortune to have a dozen daughters, I should wish them all to -be of this way of thinking. Any other theory would give us a world of -mere amateurs and dilettantes, and very little work would be done. We -are getting over the theory that it is undignified for a man to stand -upon his own feet; and we shall one day get over it in regard to women. - - - - - LXIII. - MISS INGELOW’S PROBLEM. - - -In a certain New England town I lived opposite the house of a thriving -mechanic. His wife, a young and pretty woman, soon attracted the -attention of my household by the grace and vivacity of her bearing, and -the peculiar tastefulness of her own and her little boy’s costume. On -further acquaintance, we found that she did every atom of her housework, -washing and all; that she cut and made every garment for herself and her -child; and that, finding her energies still unsatisfied, she took in -sewing-work from a tailor’s shop, and thus earned most of the money for -their wardrobe. It may be well to add, to complete this story of New -England social life, that her husband was one of the very earliest -volunteers for the war of the Rebellion; that he went in captain, came -out brigadier-general, and now holds an important government office. - -There is nothing isolated or unexampled about this instance. My pretty -and ladylike neighbor was only energetic, ready, capable, and ambitious, -or, to sum it all up in the New England vernacular, “smart.” Whatever -she saw in society or life that was desirable for herself or her husband -or her child, that she aimed at, and generally obtained. - -She “hadn’t a lazy bone in her body;” and she never will have, though -she may wear that body out prematurely by nervous tension. Wherever she -goes, she will carry the same restless, tireless energy; and, should her -husband ever go to Congress or to the Court of St. James, she will carry -herself with perfect fearlessness and ease. And in all this she -represents one great type of New England women. - -When you ask of such a woman if she shrinks from work, it is as if you -asked, Does a deer shrink from running, or a swallow from flying? She -loves the work: indeed she loves it, in my opinion, far too much, and -sets a dangerous example. All theories of the natural indolence of -man—or woman—fall defeated before the New England temperament, -traditions, training, climate; before that “whip of the sky,” as a poet -has sung, that urges us on. If, therefore, “household work is thought -degrading,”—and Miss Ingelow asserts too hastily that “nowhere is this -so much the case as in America,”—it certainly is not merely because it -is work. - -For myself, I doubt the fact, and demand the evidence. So far as the -free States of the Union are concerned, it seems to me that household -labor is thought less degrading than in England, and that the proportion -of well-taught and ladylike women who contentedly do their own work is -far greater in America, and keeps pace with the greater spread of -average education. There is not a city in the land, I suppose,—certainly -not a village,—where the housework in a large majority of the -American-born families is not done by Americans; for the large majority -are always mechanics and laborers, among whom, as a rule, the work is -done by the wives and sisters and daughters. The wages of domestics are -so much higher in America than in England,—being almost double,—that it -is here a more serious expenditure to employ such aid. - -I think, therefore, that we must be very cautious before we say that -housework, as such, is held degrading in the free States. No doubt, -American women feel, as their husbands and brothers feel, that all work -should be done by machinery, as far as possible, and that the -washing-machine and the carpet-sweeper are as legitimate as the patent -reaper or mower. They would be foolish if they did not. They also feel, -as American men feel, that, in this great assemblage of all nations, the -place for the American is rather in posts of command than in the ranks. -In our ships you find men of all nations in the forecastle, but -Americans in the cabin. In the regular army it is the officers, -commissioned or non-commissioned, who are Americans. Go as far west as -you please, you are surprised to find that the railway officials, -superintendents, conductors, baggage-masters, are not merely -American-born but often New-England-born. The better average education -tells. It is in the fitness of things that the under-work of household -life also should be done by the under-class of foreign elements, and -that it should be Americans who do the direction and guidance. Some such -instinct as this is the explanation of much that Miss Ingelow takes for -a contempt of household labor. An American woman does not despise such -labor, properly speaking, any more than an American man despises -mechanical labor. Both aim, if they can, to rise to occupations more -lucrative and more intellectual. - -It is not the labor, it is not even the household labor, to which -objection is made. When you come to household labor for other people, -done in a capacity recognized as menial,—ay, there’s the rub! There is a -widespread feeling that domestic service in other people’s families is -menial. - -For one I have publicly remonstrated against the excess of this feeling, -and think it is carried too far. Women will never compete equally with -men, until they are willing, like men, to do any honest work without -sense of degradation. This is one point where enfranchisement will help -them. So long as a man bears in his hand the ballot, that symbol of -substantial equality, his self-respect is not easily impaired by the -humblest position. “A man’s a man for a’ that,” he knows, before the -law. But a woman, not having this, has only the usages of society to -guide her; and, so long as society talks about “master” and “servant,” I -do not blame the American girl for refusing to accept such a -position,—just as I do not blame, but applaud, the American man for -refusing to wear livery. I only condemn them, in either case, when the -alternative is starvation or sin. Then pride should yield. - -But this is the conclusive proof that it is not the housework which is -held degrading: the fact that there is no difficulty in securing any -number of American girls in our large country hotels, where they -associate with their employers as equals, and call no man master. The -fact that the proprietors of such hotels invariably prefer American -“help” to Irish, shows that the philosophy of the whole question lies in -a different direction from that indicated by our good friend Miss -Ingelow. The evil of which she speaks does not properly exist: the real -difficulty lies in a different direction, and cannot be settled till we -see farther into the social organization that is to come. - - - - - LXIV. - SELF-SUPPORT. - - -It is the English theory, that society needs a leisure class, not -self-supporting, from whom public services and works of science and art -may proceed. Even Darwin recognizes this theory. But how little is -England doing for science and art, compared to Germany! and the German -work of that kind is not done by a leisure class, but by poor men. I -believe that the necessity of self-support, at least in the earlier -years of life, is the best training for manhood; and it does not seem -desirable that women should be wholly set free from it. - -A clever writer, on the other hand, maintains in the New York -Independent that women should never support themselves if it be possible -honorably to avoid it. “Pecuniary dependence, degrading to men, is not -only not undignified, but is the only thoroughly dignified condition, -for women. In a renovated and millennial society all women will be -supported by men,—will have no more to do with bringing in money than -the lilies of the field.” This statement is delightfully uncompromising, -and it is a great thing to hear an extreme position so clearly and -unequivocally put. Especially on a question so difficult as the labor -and wages of women, it is particularly desirable to have each extreme -worked out to its logical results. - -It is certainly the normal condition of woman to be a wife and a mother. -It is equally certain that this condition withdraws woman from the -labor-market, during the prime of her life. The very years during which -a man attains his highest skill, and earns his highest wages,—say, from -twenty-five to forty,—are lost to woman, in this normal condition, so -far as earning money is concerned. This is the main fact, as I judge, -which keeps down the standard of both work and pay among women, as a -class. If men, as a class, were thus heavily weighted, the result would -be as clearly seen. Where one sex brings into the market the full vigor -of its life, and the other has only crude labor, or occasional labor, or -broken labor, to offer, the result cannot be doubtful. Yet this is -precisely the state of the competition between man and woman. - -I believe, therefore, with this writer, that woman was not intended to -be the equal competitor of man in business pursuits—or, indeed, to be -self-supporting at all—during her career of motherhood. It is generally -recognized as a calamity, when she is obliged to support herself at that -time. Most people believe with Miss Mitford that “women were not meant -to earn the bread of a family,” and that men are. But to earn the bread -of a family is not self-support: it is much more than self-support. And -when this writer takes a step beyond, and says, “I think the necessity -of earning her own living is always a woman’s misfortune,” then she -seems to theorize beyond good sense, and to confuse things very -different. Self-support is one thing: supporting seven small children is -quite another thing. - -That which should never be left out of sight is the essential dignity of -labor. Woman during the period of maternity is rightly excused from -earning money; but it is because she is better occupied. She is not -exempted in the character of lily of the field, but in the capacity of -mother of a family. It is an important distinction. For labor in the -lower sense, she substitutes what, in a higher and more sacred sense, we -still call “labor.” She is not supported because she is a woman, but -because, in her capacity as woman, she happens to have home-duties. If -she had no such duties, there seems no reason why she should be -supported any more than if she were a man. To be a wife and mother is a -vocation, and one which usually for a time precludes all others. Merely -to be a woman is not a vocation; and, so long as one can make no better -claim on the world than that, the world has a right to demand something -more. The Irishwoman who locks her little children into her one room, -that she may go out to earn their bread, seems to me in a position no -falser than that of the over-worked father who breaks himself down with -toil that his daughters may live like the lilies of the field. - - - - - LXV. - SELF-SUPPORTING WIVES. - - -For one, I have never been fascinated by the style of domestic paradise -that English novels depict,—half a dozen unmarried daughters round the -family hearth, all assiduously doing worsted-work and petting their -papa. I believe a sufficiency of employment to be the only normal and -healthy condition for a human being; and where there is not work enough -to employ the full energies of all, at home, it seems as proper for -young women as for young birds to leave the parental nest. If this -additional work is done for money, very well. It is the conscious -dignity of self-support that removes the traditional curse from labor, -and woman has a right to claim her share in that dignified position. - -Yet I cannot agree, on the other hand, with Celia Burleigh when she says -that her “True Woman” should be self-supporting, even in marriage. -Women’s part of the family task—the care of home and children—is just as -essential to building up the family fortunes as the very different toil -of the out-door partner. For young married women to undertake any more -direct aid to the family income is in most cases utterly undesirable, -and is asking of themselves a great deal too much. And this is not -because they are to be encouraged in indolence, but because they -already, in a normal condition of things, have their hands full. As, on -this point, I may differ from some of my readers, let me explain -precisely what I mean. - -As I write, there are at work, in another part of the house, two -paper-hangers, a man and his wife, each forty-five or fifty years of -age. Their children are grown up, and some of them married: they have a -daughter at home, who is old enough to do the housework, and leave the -mother free. There is no way of organizing the labors of this household -better than this: the married pair toil together during the day, and go -home together to their evening rest. A happier couple I never saw; it is -a delight to see them cheerily at work together, cutting, pasting, -hanging: their life seems like a prolonged industrial picnic; and, if I -had the ill-luck to own as many palaces as an English duke, I should -keep them permanently occupied in putting fresh papers on the walls. - -But the merit of this employment for the woman is, that it interferes -with no other duty. Were she a young mother with little children, and -obliged by her paper-hanging to neglect them, or to leave them at a -“day-nursery,” or to overwork herself by combining too many cares, then -the sight of her would be very sad. So sacred a thing does motherhood -seem to me, so paramount and absorbing the duty of a mother to her -child, that in a true state of society I think she should be utterly -free from all other duties,—even, if possible, from the ordinary cares -of housekeeping. If she has spare health and strength to do these other -things as pleasures, very well; but she should be relieved from them as -duties. And, as to the need of self-support, I can hardly conceive of an -instance where it can be to the mother of young children any thing but a -disaster. As we all know, this calamity often occurs; I have seen it -among the factory-operatives at the North, and among the negro-women in -the cotton-fields at the South: in both cases it is a tragedy, and the -bodies and brains of mother and children alike suffer. That the mother -should bear and tend and nurture, while the father supports and -protects,—this is the true division. - -Does this bear in any way upon suffrage? Not at all. The mother can -inform herself upon public questions in the intervals of her cares, as -the father among his; and the baby in the cradle is a perpetual appeal -to her, as to him, that the institutions under which that baby dwells -may be kept pure. One of the most devoted young mothers I ever knew—the -younger sister of Margaret Fuller Ossoli—made it a rule, no matter how -much her children absorbed her, to read books or newspapers for an hour -every day; in order, she said, that their mother should be more than a -mere source of physical nurture, and that her mind should be kept fresh -and alive for them. But to demand in addition that such a mother should -earn money for them, is to ask too much; and there is many a tombstone -in New England, which, if it told the truth, would tell what comes of -such an effort. - - - - - LXVI. - THE PROBLEM OF WAGES. - - -Talking, the other day, with one of the leading dressmakers of a New -England town, I asked her why it was, that, when women suffered so much -from scanty employments and low pay, there should yet be so few good -dressmakers. “You are all overrun and worn out with work,” I said, “all -the year round; every lady in town complains that there are so few of -you; and it is the same in every town where I ever lived.” She answered, -as such witnesses always answer, “Women do not engage in occupations, as -men do, for a lifetime. They expect only to continue in them for a year -or two, until they shall be married. I employ twelve girls, and not one -of them expects to be a dressmaker for life. They work their ten hours a -day, under my direction, and that is all.” - -Here lies the point of difference between the work of women and that of -men, as a class: I mean, in their industrial pursuits, the work that -earns money. Until we reach this point, or get a social philosophy that -explains this, we are yet upon the surface only. The enfranchisement of -woman will help us towards this, but will not, of itself, solve the -problem of wages; because that depends on other than political -considerations. - -Why do the mass of men work? Not from taste, or for love of the work, -but from conscious need. If they do not work, they and their families -will starve. It is a necessity, and a permanent necessity. It will last -all their lives, except in the case of a few who will “come into their -property” by and by, like Mr. Toots—and their work is usually worth -about as much as his. We see this every day in the sons of rich men. -Their fathers may bring them up to work, yet the mere fact that they are -to be relieved from this compulsion within a dozen years is apt to -paralyze their active faculties. They study law or medicine, or dabble -in “business;” but they only play at the practice of their pursuits, -because there is no conscious necessity behind them. There are -exceptions, but the exceptions are remarkable men. - -Now, theorize as we may, the fact at present is, that what thus -paralyzes the energies of a few young men brings the same paralysis to -many young women. Those whose parents are wealthy do not learn any -regular occupation at all. Those whose parents are poor are obliged by -necessity to learn one: yet they do not learn it as men in general learn -theirs, but only as rich young men do, as if it were something to be -followed for a time only,—till they “come into their property.” To the -rich young man the property is a landed estate or some bank-stock. To -the poor girl the prospective property is a husband. She expects to be -married; and after that her money-making occupation is gone, and a new -avocation—that of housekeeping and maternity—begins. It is no less -arduous, no less honorable; but it is different. In it her previous -special training goes for nothing; and the thought of this must diminish -her interest in the previous special training. It is only a temporary -thing, like the few years’ labor of a rich young man. There are -exceptions, but they are extraordinary. - -One reason why women’s work is not at present so well paid as that of -men is because it is not ordinarily so well done, especially in the more -difficult parts. All employers, male and female, tell you this; and one -great reason why it is not so well done is because women have not, as -men have, a spring of permanent necessity to urge them on. How shall we -supply the spring? This is the question we need to answer. As yet I do -not think we have reached it. It does not seem to me to be, like the -suffrage question, one easily settled. The reader will find very -important facts and testimonies bearing upon it in Virginia Penny’s -“Cyclopædia of Female Employments.”[13] - -Footnote 13: - - Especially on pp. 110, 146, 235, 238, 243, 245, 247, 300, 318, 322, - 367, 380. - -I confess myself unable, even after a good many years of study, to solve -it fully; but a few propositions, I think, are sure, and may be taken as -axioms to begin with. The general wages of women will always depend -greatly on the amount of skill acquired by the mass of them. The mass of -women will always look forward to being married, and, when married, to -being necessarily withdrawn from the labor-market. Those who look -forward to this withdrawal will not, as a rule, concentrate themselves -upon learning their vocation as if it were for life; and, at any rate, -when they leave it, they will take their skill with them, and so lower -the average skill of the whole. - -The problem, therefore, is, how to equalize wages between a sex which -works continually throughout life, driven by conscious necessity, and a -sex which habitually works with temporary expectations, looking forward -to a withdrawal from the labor-market in a few years, and which, when so -withdrawn, carries its acquired skill with it, leaving only inexperience -in its place. We all wish to solve the problem: every man would like to -have his daughters as well paid for their labor as his sons. The ballot -will help to elucidate it, no doubt, by putting woman’s political -protection, at least, into her own hands: but wholly to solve the -problem will take the wisdom of several generations; nor will it be -done, perhaps, until the greater problem of association _vs._ -competition is also understood. It certainly never will be solved by -slighting the marriage-relation, or by advocating either “free love” or -celibacy for women or for men. - - - - - LXVII. - THOROUGH. - - -“The hopeless defect of women in all practical matters,” said a shrewd -merchant the other day, “is, that it is impossible to make them -thorough.” It was a shallow remark, and so I told him. Women are -thorough in the things which they have accepted as their sphere,—in -their housekeeping and their dress and their social observances. There -is nothing more thorough on earth than the way housework is done in a -genuine New England household. There is an exquisite thoroughness in the -way a milliner’s or a dressmaker’s work is done,—a work such as clumsy -man cannot rival, and can hardly estimate. No general plans his -campaigns or marshals his armies better than some women of society -manage the circles of which they are the centre. Day and night, winter -and summer, at city or watering-place, year in and year out, such a -woman keeps open house for her gay world. She has a perpetual series of -guests who must be fed luxuriously, and amused profusely; she talks to -them in four or five languages; at her entertainments, she notes who is -present and who absent, as carefully as Napoleon watched his soldiers; -her interchange of cards, alone, is a thing as complex as the army -muster-rolls: thus she plans, organizes, conquers, and governs. People -speak of her existence as that of a doll or a toy, when she is the most -untiring of campaigners. Grant that her aim is, after all, unworthy, and -that you pity the worn face which has to force so many smiles. No -matter: the smiles are there, and so is the success. I often wish that -the reformers would do their work as thoroughly as the women of society -do theirs. - -No, there is no constitutional want of thoroughness in women. The -trouble is, that into the new work upon which they are just entering, -they have not yet brought their thoroughness to bear. They suffer and -are defrauded and are reproached, simply because they have not yet -nerved themselves to do well the things which they have asserted their -right to do. A distinguished woman, who earns perhaps the largest income -ever honestly earned by any woman off the stage, told me the other day -that she left all her business affairs to the management of others, and -did not even know how to draw a check on a bank. What a melancholy -self-exhibition was that of a clever American woman, the author of half -a dozen successful books, refusing to look her own accounts in the face -until they had got into such a tangle that not even her own referees -could disentangle them to suit her! These things show, not that women -are constitutionally wanting in thoroughness, but that it is hard to -make them carry this quality into new fields. - -I wish I could possibly convey to the young women who write for advice -on literary projects something of the meaning of this word “thorough” as -applied to literary work. Scarcely any of them seem to have a conception -of it. Dash, cleverness, recklessness, impatience of revision or of -patient investigation, these are the common traits. To a person of -experience, no stupidity is so discouraging as a brilliancy that has no -roots. It brings nothing to pass; whereas a slow stupidity, if it takes -time enough, may conquer the world. Consider that for more than twenty -years the path of literature has been quite as fully open for women as -for men, in America,—the payment the same, the honor the same, the -obstacles no greater. Collegiate education has until very lately been -denied them, but how many men succeed as writers without that advantage! -Yet how little, how very little, of really good literary work has yet -been done by American women! Young girls appear one after another: each -writes a single clever story or a single sweet poem, and then disappears -forever. Look at Griswold’s “Female Poets of America,” and you are -disposed to turn back to the title-page, and see if these utterly -forgotten names do not really represent the “female poets” of some other -nation. They are forgotten, as most of the more numerous “female prose -writers” are forgotten, because they had no root. Nobody doubts that -women have cleverness enough, and enough of power of expression. If you -could open the mails, and take out the women’s letters, as somebody -says, they would prove far more graphic and entertaining than those of -the men. They would be written, too, in what Macaulay calls—speaking of -Madame d’Arblay’s early style—“true woman’s English, clear, natural, and -lively.” What they need, in order to convert this epistolary brilliancy -into literature, is to be thorough. - -You cannot separate woman’s rights and her responsibilities. In all ages -of the world she has had a certain limited work to do, and has done that -well. All that is needed, when new spheres are open, is that she should -carry the same fidelity into those. If she will work as hard to shape -the children of her brain as to rear her bodily offspring, will do -intellectual work as well as she does housework, and will meet her moral -responsibilities as she meets her social engagements, then opposition -will soon disappear. The habit of thoroughness is the key to all high -success. Whatever is worth doing is worth doing well. Only those who are -faithful in a few things will rightfully be made rulers over many. - - - - - LXVIII. - LITERARY ASPIRANTS. - - -The brilliant Lady Ashburton used to say of herself that she had never -written a book, and knew nobody whose book she would like to have -written. This does not seem to be the ordinary state of mind among those -who write letters of inquiry to authors. If I may judge from these -letters, the yearning for a literary career is just now greater among -women than among men. Perhaps it is because of some literary successes -lately achieved by women. Perhaps it is because they have fewer outlets -for their energies. Perhaps they find more obstacles in literature than -young men find, and have, therefore, more need to write letters of -inquiry about it. It is certain that they write such letters quite -often; and ask questions that test severely the supposed omniscience of -the author’s brain,—questions bearing on logic, rhetoric, grammar, and -orthography; how to find a publisher, and how to obtain a -well-disciplined mind. - -These letters may sometimes be too long or come too often for -convenience, nor is the consoling postage-stamp always remembered. But -they are of great value as giving real glimpses of American social life, -and of the present tendencies of American women. They sometimes reveal -such intellectual ardor and imagination, such modesty, and such patience -under difficulties, as to do good to the reader, whatever they may do to -the writer. They certainly suggest a few thoughts, which may as well be -expressed, once for all, in print. - -Behind almost all these letters there lies a laudable desire to achieve -success. “Would you have the goodness to tell us how success can be -obtained?” How can this be answered, my dear young lady, when you leave -it to the reader to guess what your definition of success may be? For -instance, here is Mr. Mansfield Tracy Walworth, who was murdered the -other day in New York. He was at once mentioned in the newspapers as a -“celebrated author.” Never in my life having heard of him, I looked in -Hart’s “Manual of American Literature,” and there found that Mr. -Walworth’s novel of “Warwick” had a sale of seventy-five thousand -copies, and his “Delaplaine” of forty-five thousand. Is it a success to -have secured a sale like that for your books, and then to die, and have -your brother penmen ask, “Who was he?” Yet, certainly, a sale of -seventy-five thousand copies is not to be despised; and I fear I know -many youths and maidens who would willingly write novels much poorer -than “Warwick” for the sake of a circulation like that. I do not think -that Hawthorne, however, would have accepted these conditions; and he -certainly did not have this style of success. - -Nor do I think he had any right to expect it. He had made his choice, -and had reason to be satisfied. The very first essential for literary -success is to decide what success means. If a young girl pines after the -success of Marion Harland and Mrs. Southworth, let her seek it. It is -possible that she may obtain it, or surpass it; and, though she might do -better, she might do far worse. It is, at any rate, a laudable aim to be -popular: popularity may be a very creditable thing, unless you pay too -high a price for it. It is a pleasant thing, and has many contingent -advantages,—balanced by this great danger, that one is apt to mistake it -for success. - -“Learning hath made the most,” said old Fuller, “by those books on which -the booksellers have lost.” If this be true of learning, it is quite as -true of genius and originality. A book may be immediately popular and -also immortal, but the chances are the other way. It is more often the -case, that a great writer gradually creates the taste by which he is -enjoyed. Wordsworth in the last generation and Emerson in the present -have been striking instances of this; and authors of far less fame have -yet the same choice which they had. You can take the standard which the -book-market offers, and train yourself for that. This will, in the -present age, be sure to educate certain qualities in you,—directness, -vividness, animation, dash,—even if it leaves other qualities untrained. -Or you can make a standard of your own, and aim at that, taking your -chance of seeing the public agree with you. Very likely you may fail; -perhaps you may be wrong in your fancy, after all, and the public may be -right: if you fail, you may find it hard to bear; but, on the other -hand, you may have the inward “glory and joy” which nothing but fidelity -to an ideal standard can give. All this applies to all forms of work, -but it applies conspicuously to literature. - -Instead, therefore, of offering to young writers the usual comforting -assurance, that, if they produce any thing of real merit, it will be -sure to succeed, I should caution them first to make their own -definition of success, and then act accordingly. Hawthorne succeeded in -his way, and Mr. M. T. Walworth in his way; and each of these would have -been very unreasonable if he had expected to succeed in both ways. There -is always an opening for careful and conscientious literary work; and, -by such work, many persons obtain a modest support. There are also some -great prizes to be won; but these are commonly, though not always, won -by work of a more temporary and sensational kind. Make your choice; and, -when you have got precisely what you asked for, do not complain because -you have missed what you would not take. - - - - - LXIX. - “THE CAREER OF LETTERS.” - - -A young girl of some talent once told me that she had devoted herself to -“the career of letters.” I found, on inquiry, that she had obtained a -situation as writer of “society” gossip for a New York newspaper. I can -hardly imagine any life that leads more directly away from any really -literary career, or any life about which it is harder to give counsel. -The work of a newspaper-correspondent, especially in the “society” -direction, is so full of trials and temptations, for one of either sex, -in our dear, inquisitive, gossiping America, that one cannot help -watching with especial solicitude all women who enter it. Their special -gifts as women are a source of danger: they are keener of observation -from the very fact of their sex, more active in curiosity, more skilful -in achieving their ends; in a world of gossip they are the queens, and -men but their subjects, hence their greater danger. - -In Newport, New York, Washington, it is the same thing. The unbounded -appetite for private information about public or semi-public people -creates its own purveyors; and these, again, learn to believe with -unflinching heartiness in the work they do. I have rarely encountered a -successful correspondent of this description who had not become -thoroughly convinced that the highest desire of every human being is to -see his name in print, no matter how. Unhappily there is a great deal to -encourage this belief: I have known men to express great indignation at -an unexpected newspaper-puff, and then to send ten dollars privately to -the author. This is just the calamity of the profession, that it brings -one in contact with this class of social hypocrites; and the “personal” -correspondent gradually loses faith that there is any other class to be -found. Then there is the perilous temptation to pay off grudges in this -way, to revenge slights, by the use of a power with which few people are -safely to be trusted. In many cases, such a correspondent is simply a -child playing with poisoned arrows: he poisons others; and it is no -satisfaction to know that in time he will also poison himself, and -paralyze his own power for mischief. - -There lies before me a letter written some years ago to a young lady -anxious to enter on this particular “career of letters,”—a letter from -an experienced New York journalist. He has employed, he says, hundreds -of lady correspondents, for little or no compensation; and one of his -few successful writers he thus describes: “She succeeds by pushing her -way into society, and extracting information from fashionable people and -officials and their wives.... She flatters the vain, and overawes the -weak, and gets by sheer impudence what other writers cannot.... I would -not wish you to be like her, or reduced to the necessity of doing what -she does, for any success journalism can possibly give.” And who can -help echoing this opinion? If this is one of the successful laborers, -where shall we place the unsuccessful; or, rather, is success, or -failure, the greater honor? - -Personal journalism has a prominence in this country with which nothing -in any other country can be compared. What is called publicity in -England or France means the most peaceful seclusion, compared with the -glare of notoriety which an enterprising correspondent can flash out at -any time—as if by opening the bull’s-eye of a dark lantern—upon the -quietest of his contemporaries. It is essentially an American -institution, and not one of those in which we have reason to feel most -pride. It is to be observed, however, that foreigners, if in office, -take to it very readily; and it is said that no people cultivate the -reporters at Washington more assiduously than the diplomatic corps, who -like to send home the personal notices of themselves, in order to prove -to their governments that they are highly esteemed in the land to which -they are appointed. But, however it may be with them, it is certain that -many people still like to keep their public and private lives apart, and -shrink from even the inevitable eminence of fame. One of the very most -popular of American authors has said that he never, to this day, has -overcome a slight feeling of repugnance on seeing his own name in print. - - - - - LXX. - TALKING AND TAKING. - - -Every time a woman does any thing original or remarkable,—inventing a -rat-trap, let us say, or carving thirty-six heads on a walnut-shell,—all -observers shout applause. “There’s a woman for you, indeed! Instead of -talking about her rights, she takes them. That’s the way to do it. What -a lesson to these declaimers upon the platform!” - -It does not seem to occur to these wise people that the right to talk is -itself one of the chief rights in America, and the way to reach all the -others. To talk, is to make a beginning, at any rate. To catch people -with your ideas, is more than to contrive a rat-trap; and Isotta -Nogarola, carving thirty-six empty heads, was not working in so -practical a fashion as Mary Livermore when she instructs thirty-six -hundred full ones. - -It shows the good sense of the woman suffrage agitators, that they have -decided to begin with talk. In the first place, talking is the most -lucrative of all professions in America; and therefore it is the duty of -American women to secure their share of it. Mrs. Frances Anne Kemble -used to say that she read Shakspeare in public “for her bread;” and -when, after melting all hearts by a course of farewell readings, she -decided to begin reading again, she said she was doing it “for her -butter.” So long as women are often obliged to support themselves and -their children, and perhaps their husbands, by their own labor, they -have no right to work cheaply, unless driven to it. Anna Dickinson has -no right to make fifteen dollars a week by sewing, if, by stepping out -of the ranks of needle-women into the ranks of the talkers, she can make -a hundred dollars a day. Theorize as we may, the fact is, that there is -no kind of work in America which brings such sure profits as public -speaking. If women are unfitted for it, or if they “know the value of -peace and quietness,” as the hand-organ-man says, and can afford to hold -their tongues, let them do so. But if they have tongues, and like to use -them, they certainly ought to make some money by the performance. - -This is the utilitarian view. And when we bring in higher objects, it is -plain that the way to get any thing in America is to talk about it. -Silence is golden, no doubt, and like other gold remains in the -bank-vaults, and does not just now circulate very freely as currency. -Even literature in America is utterly second to oratory as a means of -immediate influence. Of all sway, that of the orator is the most potent -and most perishable; and the student and the artist are apt to hold -themselves aloof from it, for this reason. But it is the one means in -America to accomplish immediate results, and women who would take their -rights must take them through talking. It is the appointed way. - -Under a good old-fashioned monarchy, if a woman wished to secure any -thing for her sex, she must cajole a court, or become the mistress of a -monarch. That epoch ended with the French Revolution. When Bonaparte -wished to silence Madame de Staël, he said, “What does that woman want? -Does she want the money the government owes to her father?” When Madame -de Staël heard of it, she said, “The question is not what I want, but -what I think.” Henceforth women, like men, are to say what they think. -For all that flattery and seduction and sin, we have substituted the -simple weapon of talk. If women wish education, they must talk; if -better laws, they must talk. The one chief argument against woman -suffrage, with men, is that so few women even talk about it. - -As long as talk can effect any thing, it is the duty of women to talk; -and in America, where it effects every thing, they should talk all the -time. When they have obtained, as a class, absolute equality of rights -with men, their talk on this subject may be silent, and they may accept, -if they please, that naughty masculine definition of a happy -marriage,—the union of a deaf man with a dumb woman. - - - - - LXXI. - HOW TO SPEAK IN PUBLIC. - - -There are other things that women wish to do, it seems, beside studying -and voting. There are a good many—if I may judge from letters that -occasionally come to me—who are taking, or wish to take, their first -lessons in public speaking. Not necessarily very much in public, or -before mixed audiences, but perhaps merely to say to a room-full of -ladies, or before the committee of a Christian Union, what they desire -to say. “How shall I make myself heard? How shall I learn to express -myself? How shall I keep my head clear? Is there any school for debate?” -And so on. My dear young lady, it does not take much wisdom, but only a -little experience, to answer some of these questions. So I am not afraid -to try. - -The best school for debate is debating. So far as mere confidence and -comfort are concerned, the great thing is to gain the habit of speech, -even if one speaks badly. And the practice of an ordinary debating -society has also this advantage, that it teaches you to talk sense (lest -you be laughed at), to speak with some animation (lest your hearers go -to sleep), to think out some good arguments (because you are trying to -convince somebody), and to guard against weak reasoning or unfounded -assertion (lest your opponent trip you up). Speaking in a debating -society thus gives you the same advantage that a lawyer derives from the -presence of an opposing counsel: you learn to guard yourself at all -points. It is the absence of this check which is the great intellectual -disadvantage of the pulpit. When a lawyer says a foolish thing in an -argument, he is pretty sure to find it out; but a clergyman may go on -repeating his foolish thing for fifty years without finding it out, for -want of an opponent. - -For the art of making your voice heard, I must refer you to an -elocutionist. Yet one thing at least you might acquire for yourself,—a -thing that lies at the foundation of all good speaking,—the complete and -thorough enunciation of every syllable. So great is the delight, to my -ear at least, of a perfectly distinct and clear-cut utterance, that I -fear I should rather listen for an hour to the merest nonsense, so -uttered, than to the very wisdom of angels if given in a confused or -nasal or slovenly way. If you wish to know what I mean by a clear and -satisfactory utterance, go to the next woman suffrage convention, and -hear Miss Eastman. - -As to your employment of language, the great aim is to be simple, and, -in a measure, conversational, and then let eloquence come of itself. If -most people talked as well in public as in private, public meetings -would be more interesting. To acquire a conversational tone, there is -good sense in Edward Hale’s suggestion, that every person who is called -on to speak,—let us say, at a public dinner,—instead of standing up and -talking about his surprise at being called on, should simply make his -last remark to his neighbor at the table the starting-point for what he -says to the whole company. He will thus make sure of a perfectly natural -key, to begin with; and can go on from this quiet “As I was just saying -to Mr. Smith,” to discuss the gravest question of Church or State. It -breaks the ice for him, like the remark upon the weather by which we -open our interview with the person whom we have longed for years to -meet. Beginning in this way at the level of the earth’s surface, we can -join hands and rise to the clouds. Begin in the clouds,—as some of my -most esteemed friends are wont to do,—and you have to sit down before -reaching the earth. - -And, to come last to what is first in importance, I am taking it for -granted that you have something to say, and a strong desire to say it. -Perhaps you can say it better for writing it out in full beforehand. -But, whether you do this or not, remember that the more simple and -consecutive your thought, the easier it will be both to keep it in mind -and to utter it. The more orderly your plan, the less likely you will be -to “get bewildered,” or to “lose the thread.” Think it out so clearly -that the successive parts lead to one another, and then there will be -little strain upon your memory. For each point you make, provide at -least one good argument and one good illustration, and you can, after a -little practice, safely leave the rest to the suggestion of the moment. -But so much as this you must have, to be secure. Methods of preparation -of course vary extremely; yet I suppose the secret of the composure of -an experienced speaker to lie usually in this, that he has made sure -beforehand of a sufficient number of good points to carry him through, -even if nothing good should occur to him on the spot. Thus wise people, -in going on a fishing-excursion, take with them not merely their -fishing-tackle, but a few fish; and then, if they are not sure of their -luck, they will be sure of their chowder. - -These are some of the simple hints that might be given, in answer to -inquiring friends. I can remember when they would have saved me some -anguish of spirit; and they may be of some use to others now. I write, -then, not to induce any one to talk for the sake of talking,—Heaven -forbid!—but that those who are longing to say something should not fancy -the obstacles insurmountable, when they are really slight. - - - - - PRINCIPLES OF GOVERNMENT. - - -“That liberty, or freedom, consists in having an actual share in the -appointment of those who frame the laws, and who are to be the guardians -of every man’s life, property, and peace; for the all of one man is as -dear to him as the all of another, and the poor man has an equal right, -but more need, to have representatives in the legislature than the rich -one. That they who have no voice nor vote in the electing of -representatives do not enjoy liberty, but are absolutely enslaved to -those who have votes, and to their representatives; for to be enslaved -is to have governors whom other men have set over us, and be subject to -laws made by the representatives of others, without having had -representatives of our own to give consent in our behalf.”—BENJAMIN -FRANKLIN, _in Sparks’s Franklin_, ii. 372. - - - - - LXXII. - WE THE PEOPLE. - - -I remember, that, when I went to school, I used to look with wonder on -the title of a newspaper of those days which was often in the hands of -one of the older scholars. I remember nothing else about the newspaper, -or about the boy, except that the title of the sheet he used to unfold -was “We the People;” and that he derived from it his school nickname, by -a characteristic boyish parody, and was usually mentioned as “Us the -Folks.” - -Probably all that was taught in that school, in regard to American -history, was not of so much value as the permanent fixing of this phrase -in our memories. It seemed very natural, in later years, to come upon my -old friend “Us the Folks,” reproduced in almost every charter of our -national government, as thus:— - - “WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, in order to form a more - perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, - provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and - secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do - ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of - America.”—_United States Constitution, Preamble._ - - “WE THE PEOPLE of Maine do agree,” etc.—_Constitution of Maine._ - - “All government of right originates from THE PEOPLE, is founded in - their consent, and instituted for the general good.”—_Constitution - of New Hampshire._ - - “The body politic is formed by a voluntary association of - individuals; it is a social compact, by which THE WHOLE PEOPLE - covenants with each citizen, and each citizen with the whole people, - that all shall be governed by certain laws for the common - good.”—_Constitution of Massachusetts._ - - “WE THE PEOPLE of the State of Rhode Island and Providence - Plantations ... do ordain and establish this constitution of - government.”—_Constitution of Rhode Island._ - - “THE PEOPLE of Connecticut do, in order more effectually to - define, secure, and perpetuate the liberties, rights, and - privileges which they have derived from their ancestors, hereby - ordain and establish the following constitution and form of civil - government.”—_Constitution of Connecticut._ - -And so on through the constitutions of almost every State in the Union. -Our government is, as Lincoln said, “a government of the people, by the -people, and for the people.” There is no escaping it. To question this -is to deny the foundations of the American government. Granted that -those who framed these provisions may not have understood the full -extent of the principles they announced. No matter: they gave us those -principles; and, having them, we must apply them. - -Now, women may be voters or not, citizens or not; but that they are a -part of the people, no one has denied in Christendom—however it may be -in Japan, where, as Mrs. Leonowens tells us, the census of population -takes in only men, and the women and children are left to be inferred. -“WE THE PEOPLE,” then, includes women. Be the superstructure what it -may, the foundation of the government clearly provides a place for them: -it is impossible to state the national theory in such a way that it -shall not include them. It is impossible to deny the natural right of -women to vote, except on grounds which exclude all natural right. Dr. -Bushnell, in annihilating, as he thinks, the claims of women to the -ballot, annihilates the rights of the community as a whole, male or -female. He may not be consistent enough to allow this, but Mr. Wasson -is. That keen destructive strikes at the foundation of the building, and -aims to demolish “We the people” altogether. - -The fundamental charters are on our side. There are certain statute -limitations which may prove greater or less. But these are temporary and -trivial things, always to be interpreted, often to be modified, by -reference to the principles of the Constitution. For instance, when a -constitutional convention is to be held, or new conditions of suffrage -to be created, the whole people should vote upon the matter, including -those not hitherto enfranchised. This is the view insisted on, a few -years since, by that eminent jurist, William Beach Lawrence. He -maintained, in a letter to Charles Sumner and in opposition to his own -party, that if the question of “negro suffrage” in the Southern States -of the Union were put to vote, the colored people themselves had a -natural right to vote on the question. The same is true of women. It -should never be forgotten by advocates of woman suffrage, that, the -deeper their reasonings go, the stronger foundation they find; and that -we have always a solid fulcrum for our lever in that phrase of our -charters, “We the people.” - - - - - LXXIII. - THE USE OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE. - - -When young people begin to study geometry, they expect to begin with -hard reasoning on the very first page. To their surprise, they find that -the first few pages are not occupied by reasoning, but by a few simple, -easy, and rather commonplace sentences, called “axioms,” which are -really a set of pegs on which all the reasoning is hung. Pupils are not -expected to go back in every demonstration, and prove the axioms. If -Almira Jones happens to be doing a problem at the blackboard on -examination-day, at the high school, and remarks in the course of her -demonstration that “things which are equal to the same thing are equal -to one another,” and if a sharp questioner jumps up, and says, “How do -you know it?” she simply lays down her bit of chalk, and says -fearlessly, “That is an axiom,” and the teacher sustains her. Some -things must be taken for granted. - -The same service rendered by axioms in the geometry is supplied, in -regard to government, by the simple principles of the Declaration of -Independence. Right or wrong, they are taken for granted. Inasmuch as -all the legislation of the country is supposed to be based in them,—they -stating the theory of our government, while the Constitution itself only -puts into organic shape the application,—we must all begin with them. It -is a great convenience, and saves great trouble in all reforms. To the -Abolitionists, for instance, what an inestimable labor-saving machine -was the Declaration of Independence! Let them have that, and they asked -no more. Even the brilliant lawyer Rufus Choate, when confronted with -its plain provisions, could only sneer at them as “glittering -generalities,” which was equivalent to throwing down his brief, and -throwing up his case. It was an admission, that, if you were so foolish -as to insist on applying the first principles of the government, it was -all over with him. - -Now, the whole doctrine of woman suffrage follows so directly from these -same political axioms, that they are especially convenient for women to -have in the house. When the Declaration of Independence enumerates as -among “self-evident” truths the fact of governments “deriving their just -powers from the consent of the governed,” then that point may be -considered as settled. In this school-examination of maturer life, in -this grown-up geometry-class, the student is not to be called upon by -the committee to prove that. She may rightfully lay down her -demonstrating chalk, and say, “That is an axiom. You admit that -yourselves.” - -It is a great convenience. We cannot always be going back, like a Hindoo -history, to the foundations of the world. Some things may be taken for -granted. How this simple axiom sweeps away, for instance, the cobweb -speculations as to whether voting is a natural right, or a privilege -delegated by society! No matter which. Take it which way you please. -That is an abstract question; but the practical question is a very -simple one. “Governments owe their just powers to the consent of the -governed.” Either that axiom is false, or, whenever women as a class -refuse their consent to the present exclusively masculine government, it -can no longer claim just powers. The remedy then may be rightly -demanded, which the Declaration of Independence goes on to state: -“Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it -is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a -new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing -its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect -their safety and happiness.” - -This is the use of the Declaration of Independence. Women, as a class, -may not be quite ready to use it. It is the business of this book to -help make them ready. But, so far as they are ready, these plain -provisions are the axioms of their political faith. If the axioms mean -any thing for men, they mean something for women. If men deride the -axioms, it is a concession, like that of Rufus Choate, that these -fundamental principles are very much in their way. But, so long as the -sentences stand in that document, they can be made useful. If men try to -get away from the arguments of women by saying, “But suppose we have -nothing in our theory of government which requires us to grant your -demand?” then women can answer, as the straightforward Traddles answered -Uriah Heep, “But you have, you know: therefore, if you please, we won’t -suppose any such thing.” - - - - - LXXIV. - THE TRADITIONS OF THE FATHERS. - - -It is fortunate for reformers that our fathers were clear-headed men. If -they did not foresee all the applications of their own principles,—and -who does?—they at least stated those principles very distinctly. This is -a great convenience to us who preach, in season and out of season, on -the texts they gave. Thus we are constantly told, “You are mistaken in -thinking that the fathers of the Republic, when they proclaimed -‘taxation without representation,’ referred to individual rights. They -were speaking only of national rights. They fought for national -independence, not for personal rights at all.” - -It is in order to refute this sort of reasoning that women very often -need to read American history afresh. They will soon be satisfied that -such reasoning may be met with a plain, distinct denial. It is contrary -to the facts. The plain truth is, that our fathers not only did not make -national independence their exclusive aim, but they did not make it an -aim at all until the war had actually begun. “I verily believe,” wrote -the brave Dr. Warren, “that the night preceding the barbarous outrages -committed by the soldiery at Lexington, Concord, etc., there were not -fifty people in the whole colony that ever expected any blood would be -shed in the contest between us and Great Britain.” - -What was it, then, that had kept the colonists in a turmoil for years? -Let us see. - -On Monday, the 6th of March, 1775, the “freeholders and other -inhabitants of Boston” met in town-meeting at Faneuil Hall, Samuel Adams -being moderator. The committee appointed, the year before, to appoint an -orator “to perpetuate the memory of the horrid massacre perpetrated on -the evening of the 5th of March, 1770, by a party of soldiers,” reported -that they had selected Joseph Warren, Esq. The meeting confirmed this, -and adjourned to meet at the Old South at half-past eleven, Faneuil Hall -being too small. At the appointed hour, the church was crowded. The -pulpit was draped in black. Forty British officers, in uniform, sat in -the front pews or on the gallery-stairs. So great was the crowd, that -Warren, in his orator’s robe, entered the pulpit by a ladder through the -window. He stood there before the representatives of royalty, and in -defiance of the “Regulating Act,” one of whose objects was to suppress -meetings for any such purpose. What doctrines did he stand there to -proclaim? - -Richard Frothingham in his admirable “Life of Warren”[14] states the -following as the fundamental proposition of this celebrated address:— - -Footnote 14: - - p. 430. - - “That personal freedom is the right of every man, and that property, - or an exclusive right to dispose of what he has honestly acquired by - his own labor, necessarily arises therefrom, are truths which - common-sense has placed beyond the reach of contradiction; and no - man or body of men can, without being guilty of flagrant injustice, - claim a right to dispose of the persons or acquisitions of any other - man, or body of men, unless it can be proved that such a right had - arisen from some compact between the parties in which it has been - explicitly and freely granted.” - -“The orator then traced,” says Frothingham, “the rise and progress of -the aggressions on the natural right of the colonists to enjoy personal -freedom and representative government.” Not a word in behalf of national -independence: on the contrary, he said, “An independence on Great -Britain is not our aim. No: our wish is that Britain and the colonies -may, like the oak and ivy, grow and increase together.” What he -protested against was the taking of individual property without granting -the owner a voice in it, personally or through some authorized -representative. And—observe!—this authorization must not be a merely -negative or vaguely understood thing: it must be attested by “some -compact between the parties in which it has been explicitly and freely -granted.” Any thing short of this was “a wicked policy,” under whose -influence the American had begun to behold the Briton as a ruffian, -ready “first to take his property, and next, what is dearer to every -virtuous man, the liberty of his country.” The loss of the country’s -liberty was thus staked as a result, a deduction, a corollary; the -original offence lay in the violation of the natural right of each to -control his own personal freedom and personal property, or else, if -these must be subordinated to the public good, to have at least a voice -in the matter. This, and nothing else than this, was the principle of -those who fought the Revolution, according to the statement of their -first eminent martyr. - -And it was for announcing these great doctrines, and for sealing them, -three months later, with his blood, that it was said of him, on the -fifth of March following, “We will erect a monument to thee in each of -our grateful hearts, and to the latest ages will teach our tender -infants to lisp the name of Warren with veneration and applause.” That -the opinions he expressed were the opinions current among the people, is -proved by the general use of the cry “ Liberty and Property” among all -classes, at the time of the Stamp Act; a cry which puzzles the young -student, until he sees that the Revolution really began with personal -rights, and only slowly reached the demand for national independence. -“Liberty and Property” was just as distinctly the claim of Joseph Warren -as it is the claim of those women who now refuse to pay taxes because -they believe in the principles of the American Revolution. - - - - - LXXV. - SOME OLD-FASHIONED PRINCIPLES. - - -There has been an effort, lately, to show that when our fathers said, -“Taxation without representation is tyranny,” they referred not to -personal liberties, but to the freedom of a state from foreign power. It -is fortunate that this criticism has been made, for it has led to a more -careful examination of passages; and this has made it clear, beyond -dispute, that the Revolutionary patriots carried their statements more -into detail than is generally supposed, and affirmed their principles -for individuals, not merely for the state as a whole. - -In that celebrated pamphlet by James Otis, for instance, published as -early as 1764, “The Rights of the Colonies Vindicated,” he thus clearly -lays down the rights of the individual as to taxation:— - - “The very act of taxing, exercised over those who are not - represented, appears to me to be depriving them of one of their most - essential rights as freemen; and, if continued, seems to be, in - effect, an entire disfranchisement of every civil right. For what - one civil right is worth a rush, after a man’s property is subject - to be taken from him at pleasure, without his consent? If a man is - not his own assessor, in person or by deputy, his liberty is gone, - or he is entirely at the mercy of others.”[15] - -Footnote 15: - - Otis: Rights of the Colonies, p. 58. - -This fine statement has already done duty for liberty, in another -contest; for it was quoted by Mr. Sumner in his speech of March 7, 1866, -with this commentary:— - - “Stronger words for universal suffrage could not be employed. His - argument is, that, if men are taxed without being represented, they - are deprived of essential rights; and the continuance of this - deprivation despoils them of every civil right, thus making the - latter depend upon the right of suffrage, which by a neologism of - our day is known as a political right instead of a civil right. - Then, to give point to this argument, the patriot insists that in - determining taxation, ‘every man must be his own assessor, in person - or by deputy,’ without which his liberty is entirely at the mercy of - others. Here, again, in a different form, is the original - thunderbolt, ‘Taxation without representation is tyranny;’ and the - claim is made not merely for communities, but for ‘every man.’” - -In a similar way wrote Benjamin Franklin, some six years after, in that -remarkable sheet found among his papers, and called “Declaration of -those Rights of the Commonalty of Great Britain, without which they -cannot be free.” The leading propositions were these three:— - - “That every man of the commonalty (excepting infants, insane - persons, and criminals) is of common right and by the laws of God a - freeman, and entitled to the free enjoyment of liberty. That - liberty, or freedom, consists in having an actual share in the - appointment of those who frame the laws, and who are to be the - guardians of every man’s life, property, and peace; for the all of - one man is as dear to him as the all of another; and the poor man - has an equal right, but more need, to have representatives in the - legislature than the rich one. That they who have no voice nor vote - in the electing of representatives do not enjoy liberty, but are - absolutely enslaved to those who have votes, and to their - representatives; for to be enslaved is to have governors whom other - men have set over us, and be subject to laws made by the - representatives of others, without having had representatives of our - own to give consent in our behalf.”[16] - -Footnote 16: - - Sparks’s Franklin, ii. 372. - -In quoting these words of Dr. Franklin, his latest biographer feels -moved to add, “These principles, so familiar to us now and so obviously -just, were startling and incredible novelties in 1770, abhorrent to -nearly all Englishmen, and to great numbers of Americans.” Their fair -application is still abhorrent to a great many; or else, not willing -quite to deny the theory, they limit the application by some such device -as “virtual representation.” Here, again, James Otis is ready for them; -and Charles Sumner is ready to quote Otis, as thus:— - - “No such phrase as virtual representation was ever known in law or - constitution. It is altogether a subtlety and illusion, wholly - unfounded and absurd. We must not be cheated by any such phantom, or - any other fiction of law or politics, or any monkish trick of deceit - or blasphemy.” - -These are the sharp words used by the patriot Otis, speaking of those -who were trying to convince American citizens that they were virtually -represented in Parliament. Sumner applied the same principle to the -freedmen: it is now applied to women. “Taxation without representation -is tyranny.” “Virtual representation is altogether a subtlety and -illusion, wholly unfounded and absurd.” No ingenuity, no evasion, can -give any escape from these plain principles. Either you must revoke the -maxims of the American Revolution, or you must enfranchise woman. Stuart -Mill well says in his autobiography, “The interest of woman is included -in that of man exactly as much (and no more) as that of subjects in that -of kings.” - - - - - LXXVI. - FOUNDED ON A ROCK. - - -Gov. Long’s letter on woman suffrage is of peculiar value, as recalling -us to the simple principles of “right,” on which alone the agitation can -be solidly founded. The ground once taken by many, that women as women -would be sure to act on a far higher political plane than men as men, is -now urged less than formerly: the very mistakes and excesses of the -agitation itself have partially disproved it. No cause can safely -sustain itself on the hypothesis that all its advocates are saints and -sages; but a cause that is based on a principle rests on a rock. - -If there is any one who is recognized as a fair exponent of our national -principles, it is our martyr-president Abraham Lincoln; whom Lowell -calls, in his noble Commemoration Ode at Cambridge,— - - “New birth of our new soil, the first American.” - -What President Lincoln’s political principle was, we know. On his -journey to Washington for his first inauguration, he said, “I have never -had a feeling that did not spring from the sentiments embodied in the -Declaration of Independence.” To find out what was his view of those -sentiments, we must go back several years earlier, and consider that -remarkable letter of his to the Boston Republicans who had invited him -to join them in celebrating Jefferson’s birthday, in April, 1859. It was -well called by Charles Sumner “a gem in political literature;” and it -seems to me almost as admirable, in its way, as the Gettysburg address. - - “The principles of Jefferson are the definitions and axioms of free - society. And yet they are denied and evaded with no small show of - success. One dashingly calls them ‘glittering generalities.’ Another - bluntly styles them ‘self-evident lies.’ And others insidiously - argue that they apply only to ‘superior races.’” - - “These expressions, differing in form, are identical in object and - effect,—the subverting the principles of free government, and - restoring those of classification, caste, and legitimacy. They would - delight a convocation of crowned heads plotting against the people. - They are the vanguard, the sappers and miners of returning - despotism. We must repulse them, or they will subjugate us.” - - “All honor to Jefferson!—the man who, in the concrete pressure of a - struggle for national independence by a single people, had the - coolness, forecast, and capacity to introduce into a merely - revolutionary document _an abstract truth applicable to all men and - all times_, and so to embalm it there that to-day and in all coming - days it shall be a rebuke and a stumbling-block to the harbingers of - re-appearing tyranny and oppression.” - -The special “abstract truth” to which President Lincoln thus attaches a -value so great, and which he pronounces “applicable to all men and all -times,” is evidently the assertion of the Declaration that governments -derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, following the -assertion that all men are born free and equal; that is, as some one has -interpreted it, equally men. I do not see how any person but a dreamy -recluse can deny that the strength of our republic rests on these -principles; which are so thoroughly embedded in the average American -mind that they take in it, to some extent, the place occupied in the -average English mind by the emotion of personal loyalty to a certain -reigning family. But it is impossible to defend these principles -logically, as Senator Hoar has well pointed out, without recognizing -that they are as applicable to women as to men. If this is the case, the -claim of women rests on a right,—indeed, upon the same right which is -the foundation of all our institutions. - -The encouraging fact in the present condition of the whole matter is, -not that we get more votes here or there for this or that form of woman -suffrage—for experience has shown that there are great ups and downs in -that respect; and States that at one time seemed nearest to woman -suffrage, as Maine and Kansas, now seem quite apathetic. But the real -encouragement is, that the logical ground is more and more conceded; and -the point now usually made is, not that the Jeffersonian maxim excludes -women, but that “the consent of the governed” is substantially given by -the general consent of women. That this argument has a certain -plausibility, may be conceded; but it is equally clear that the minority -of women, those who do wish to vote, includes on the whole the natural -leaders,—those who are foremost in activity of mind, in literature, in -art, in good works of charity. It is, therefore, pretty sure that they -only predict the opinions of the rest, who will follow them in time. -And, even while waiting, it is a fair question whether the “governed” -have not the right to give their votes when they wish, even if the -majority of them prefer to stay away from the polls. We do not repeal -our naturalization laws, although only the minority of our foreign-born -inhabitants as yet take the pains to become naturalized. - - - - - LXXVII. - “THE GOOD OF THE GOVERNED.” - - -In Paris, some years ago, I was for a time a resident in a cultivated -French family, where the father was non-committal in politics, the -mother and son were republicans, and the daughter was a Bonapartist. -Asking the mother why the young lady thus held to a different creed from -the rest, I was told that she had made up her mind that the streets of -Paris were kept cleaner under the empire than since its disappearance: -hence her imperialism. - -I have heard American men advocate the French empire at home and abroad, -without offering reasons so good as those of the lively French maiden. -But I always think of her remark when the question is seriously asked, -as Mr. Parkman, for instance, gravely puts it in his late rejoinder in -“The North American Review,”—“The real issue is this: Is the object of -government the good of the governed, or is it not?” Taken in a general -sense, there is probably no disposition to discuss this conundrum, for -the simple reason that nobody dissents from it. But the important point -is: What does “the good of the governed” mean? Does it merely mean -better street-cleaning, or something more essential? - -There is nothing new in the distinction. Ever since De Tocqueville wrote -his “Democracy in America,” forty years ago, this precise point has been -under active discussion. That acute writer himself recurs to it again -and again. Every government, he points out, nominally seeks the good of -the people, and rests on their will at last. But there is this -difference: A monarchy organizes better, does its work better, cleans -the streets better. Nevertheless De Tocqueville, a monarchist, sees this -advantage in a republic, that when all this is done by the people for -themselves, although the work done may be less perfect, yet the people -themselves are more enlightened, better satisfied, and, in the end, -their good is better served. Thus in one place he quotes a “a writer of -talent” who complains of the want of administrative perfection in the -United States, and says, “We are indebted to centralization, that -admirable invention of a great man, for the uniform order and method -which prevails alike in all the municipal budgets (of France) from the -largest town to the humblest commune.” But, says De Tocqueville,— - - “Whatever may be my admiration of this result, when I see the - communes (municipalities) of France, with their excellent system of - accounts, plunged in the grossest ignorance of their true interests, - and abandoned to so incorrigible an apathy that they seem to - vegetate rather than to live; when, on the other hand, I observe the - activity, the information, and the spirit of enterprise which keeps - society in perpetual labor, in these American townships, whose - budgets are drawn up with small method and with still less - uniformity,—I am struck by the spectacle; _for, to my mind, the end - of a good government is to insure the welfare of a people_, and not - to establish order and regularity in the midst of its misery and its - distress.”[17] - -Footnote 17: - - Reeves’s translation, London, 1838, vol. i. p. 97, note. - -The Italics are my own; but it will be seen that he uses a phrase almost -identical with Mr. Parkman’s, and that he uses it to show that there is -something to be looked at beyond good laws,—namely, the beneficial -effect of self-government. In another place he comes back to the subject -again:— - - “It is incontestable that the people frequently conducts public - business very ill; but it is impossible that the lower order should - take a part in public business without extending the circle of their - ideas, and without quitting the ordinary routine of their mental - acquirements; the humblest individual who is called upon to - co-operate in the government of society acquires a certain degree of - self-respect; and, as he possesses authority, he can command the - services of minds much more enlightened than his own. He is - canvassed by a multitude of applicants, who seek to deceive him in a - thousand different ways, but who instruct him by their deceit.... - Democracy does not confer the most skilful kind of government upon - the people; but it produces that which the most skilful governments - are frequently unable to awaken, namely, an all-pervading and - restless activity, a superabundant force, and an energy which is - inseparable from it, and which may, under favorable circumstances, - beget the most amazing benefits. These are the true advantages of - democracy.”[18] - -Footnote 18: - - Ibid., vol. ii. pp. 74, 75. - -These passages and others like them are worth careful study. They -clearly point out the two different standards by which we may criticise -all political systems. One class of thinkers, of whom Froude is the most -conspicuous, holds that the “good of the people” means good laws and -good administration, and that, if these are only provided, it makes no -sort of difference whether they themselves make the laws, or whether -some Cæsar or Louis Napoleon provides them. All the traditions of the -early and later Federalists point this way. But it has always seemed to -me a theory of government essentially incompatible with American -institutions. If we could once get our people saturated with it, they -would soon be at the mercy of some Louis Napoleon of their own. - -When President Lincoln claimed, following Theodore Parker, that ours was -not merely a government for the people, but of the people and by the -people as well, he recognized the other side of the matter,—that it is -not only important what laws we have, but who makes the laws; and that -“the end of a good government is to insure the welfare of a people,” in -this far wider sense. That advantage which the French writer admits in -democracy, that it develops force, energy, and self-respect, is as -essentially a part of “the good of the governed,” as is any perfection -in the details of government. And it is precisely these advantages which -we expect that women, sooner or later, are to share. For them, as for -men, “the good of the governed” is not genuine unless it is that kind of -good which belongs to the self-governed. - - - - - LXXVIII. - RULING AT SECOND-HAND. - - - “Women ruled all; and ministers of state - Were at the doors of women forced to wait,— - Women, who’ve oft as sovereigns graced the land, - But never governed well at second-hand.” - -So wrote in the last century the bitter satirist Charles Churchill, and -this verse will do something to keep alive his name. He touches the very -kernel of the matter, and all history is on his side. The Salic Law -excluded women from the throne of France,—“the kingdom of France being -too noble to be governed by a woman,” as it said. Accordingly the -history of France shows one long line of royal mistresses ruling in -secret for mischief; while more liberal England points to the reigns of -Elizabeth and Anne and Victoria, to show how usefully a woman may sit -upon a throne. - -It was one of the merits of Margaret Fuller Ossoli, that she always -pointed out this distinction. “Any woman can have influence,” she said, -“in some way. She need only to be a good cook or a good scold, to secure -that. Woman should not merely have a share in the power of man,—for of -that omnipotent Nature will not suffer her to be defrauded,—but it -should be a _chartered_ power, too fully recognized to be abused.” We -have got to meet, at any rate, this fact of feminine influence in the -world. Demosthenes said that the measures which a statesman had -meditated for a year might be overturned in a day by a woman. How -infinitely more sensible, then, to train the woman herself in -statesmanship, and give her open responsibility as well as concealed -power! - -The same principle of demoralizing subordination runs through the whole -position of women. Many a husband makes of his wife a doll, dresses her -in fine clothes, gives or withholds money according to his whims, and -laughs or frowns if she asks any questions about his business. If only a -petted slave, she naturally develops the vices of a slave; and when she -wants more money for more fine clothes, and finds her husband out of -humor, she coaxes, cheats, and lies. Many a woman half ruins her husband -by her extravagance, simply because he has never told her frankly what -his income is, or treated her, in money matters, like a rational being. -Bankruptcy, perhaps, brings both to their senses; and thenceforward the -husband discovers that his wife is a woman, not a child. But, for want -of this, whole families and generations of women are trained to -deception. I knew an instance where a fashionable dressmaker in New York -urged an economical young girl, about to be married, to buy of her a -costly _trousseau_ or wedding outfit. “But I have not the money,” said -the maiden. “No matter,” said the complaisant tempter: “I will wait four -years, and send in the bill to your husband by degrees. Many ladies do -it.” Fancy the position of a pure young girl, wishing innocently to make -herself beautiful in the eyes of her husband, and persuaded to go into -his house with a trick like this upon her conscience! Yet it grows -directly out of the whole theory of life which is preached to many -women,—that all they seek must be won by indirect manœuvres, and not by -straightforward living. - -It is a mistaken system. Once recognize woman as born to be the equal, -not inferior, of man, and she accepts as a right her share of the family -income, of political power, and of all else that is capable of -distribution. As it is, we are in danger of forgetting that woman, in -mind as in body, was born to be upright. The women of Charles -Reade—never by any possibility moving in a straight line where it is -possible to find a crooked one—are distorted women; and Nature is no -more responsible for them than for the figures produced by tight lacing -and by high-heeled boots. These physical deformities acquire a charm, -when the taste adjusts itself to them; and so do those pretty tricks and -those interminable lies. But after all, to make a noble woman, you must -give a noble training. - - - - - LXXIX. - “TOO MANY VOTERS ALREADY.” - - -Curiously enough, the commonest argument against woman suffrage does not -now take the form of an attack on women, but on men. Formerly we were -told that women, as women, were incapable of voting; that they had not, -as old Theophilus Parsons wrote in 1780, “a sufficient acquired -discretion;” or that they had not physical strength enough; or that they -were too delicate and angelic to vote. Now these remarks are waived, and -the argument is: Women are certainly unfit for suffrage, since even men -are unfit. It is something to have women at last recognized as -politically equal to men, even if it be only in the fact of unfitness. - -A spasm of re-action is just now passing over the minds of many men, -especially among educated Americans, against universal suffrage. -Possibly it is a re-action from that too great confidence in mere -numbers which at one time prevailed. All human governments are as yet -very imperfect; and, unless we view them reasonably, they are all -worthless. We try them by unjust or whimsical tests. I do not see that -anybody who objects to universal suffrage has any working theory to -suggest as a substitute: the only plan he even implies is usually that -he himself and his friends, and those whom he thinks worthy, should make -the laws, or decide who should make them. From this I should utterly -dissent: I should far rather be governed by the community, as a whole, -than by my ablest friend and his ablest friends; for, if the whole -community governs, I know it will not govern very much, and that the -tendency will be towards personal freedom by common consent. But if my -particular friend once begins to govern me, or I him, the love of power -would be in danger of growing very much. It may be that he could be -safely trusted with such authority, but I am very sure that I could not. - -We shall never get much beyond that pithy question of Jefferson’s, “It -is said that man cannot govern himself: how, then, can he govern -another?” There is absolutely no test by which we can determine, on any -large scale, who are fit to exercise suffrage, and who are not. John -Brown would exclude John Smith; and John Smith would wish to keep out -John Brown, especially if he had inconvenient views, like him of -Harper’s Ferry. The safeguard of scientific legislation may be in the -heads of a cultivated few, but the safeguard of personal freedom is -commonly in the hands of the uncultivated many. The most moderate -republican thinker might find himself under the supervision of -Bismarck’s police at any moment, should he visit Berlin; and how easily -he might himself fall into the Bismarck way of thinking, is apparent -when we consider that the excellent Dr. Joseph P. Thompson, writing from -Germany, is understood gravely to recommend the exclusion of German -communists from the ports of the United States. When we consider how -easily the first principles of liberty might thus be sacrificed by the -wise few, let us be grateful that we are protected by the presence of -the multitude. - -Whenever the vote goes against us, we are apt to think that there must -be something wrong in the moral nature of the voters. It would be better -to see if their votes cannot teach us something,—if the fact of our -defeat does not show that we left out something, or failed to see some -fact which our opponents saw. There could not be a plainer case of this -than in recent Massachusetts elections. Many good men regarded it as a -hopeless proof of ignorance or depravity in the masses, that more than a -hundred thousand voters sustained General Butler for governor. For one, -I regard that candidate as a demagogue, no doubt; but can anybody in -Massachusetts now help seeing that the instinct which led that large -mass of men to his support was in great measure a true one? Every act of -the Republican legislatures since assembled has been influenced by that -vague protest in behalf of State reform and economy which General Butler -represented. He complicated it with other issues, very likely, and -swelled the number of his supporters by unscrupulous means. It may have -been very fortunate that he did not succeed; but it is fortunate that he -tried, and that he found supporters. In this remarkable instance we see -how the very dangers and excesses of popular suffrage work for good. - -For myself, I do not see how we can have too many voters. I am very -sure, that, in the long-run, voting tends to educate and enlighten men, -to make them more accessible to able leadership, to give them a feeling -of personal self-respect and independence. This is true not merely of -Americans and Protestants, but of the foreign-born and the Roman -Catholic; since experience shows that the political control and -interference of the priesthood are exceedingly over-rated. I believe -that the poor and the ignorant eminently need the ballot, first for -self-respect, and then for self-protection; and, if so, why do not women -need it for precisely the same reasons? - - - - - SUFFRAGE. - - -“No such phrase as virtual representation was ever known in law or -constitution. It is altogether a subtlety and illusion, wholly unfounded -and absurd. We must not be cheated by any such phantom or any other -trick of law and politics.”—JAMES OTIS, _quoted by_ CHARLES SUMNER _in -speech March_ 7, 1866. - - - - - LXXX. - DRAWING THE LINE. - - -When in Dickens’s “Nicholas Nickleby” the coal-heaver calls at the -fashionable barber’s to be shaved, the barber declines that service. The -coal-heaver pleads that he saw a baker being shaved there the day -before. But the barber points out to him that it is necessary to draw -the line somewhere, and he draws it at bakers. - -It is, doubtless, an inconvenience, in respect to woman suffrage, that -so many people have their own theories as to drawing the line, and -deciding who shall vote. Each has his hobby; and as the opportunity for -applying it to men has passed by, each wishes to catch at the last -remaining chance, and apply it to women. One believes in drawing an -educational line; another, in a property qualification; another, in new -restrictions on naturalization; another, in distinctions of race; and -each wishes to keep women, for a time, as the only remaining victims for -his experiment. - -Fortunately the answer to all these objections, on behalf of woman -suffrage, is very brief and simple. It is no more the business of its -advocates to decide upon the best abstract basis for suffrage, than it -is to decide upon the best system of education, or of labor, or of -marriage. Its business is to equalize, in all these directions; nothing -more. When that is done, there will be plenty still left to do, without -doubt; but it will not involve the rights of women, as such. Simply to -strike out the word “male” from the statute,—that is our present work. -“What is sauce for the goose”—but the proverb is somewhat musty. These -educational and property restrictions may be of value; but, wherever -they are already removed from the men, they must be removed from women -also. Enfranchise them equally, and then begin afresh, if you please, to -legislate for the whole human race. What we protest against is that you -should have let down the bars for one sex, and should at once become -conscientiously convinced that they should be put up again for the -other. - -When it was, proposed to apply an educational qualification at the South -after the war, the Southern white loyalists all objected to it. If you -make it universal, they said, it cuts off many of the whites. If you -apply it to the blacks alone, it is manifestly unjust. The case is the -same with women in regard to men. As woman needs the ballot primarily to -protect herself, it is manifestly unjust to restrict the suffrage for -her, when man has it without restriction. If she needs protection, then -she needs it all the more from being poor, or ignorant, or Irish, or -black. If we do not see this, the freedwomen of the South did. There is -nothing like personal wrong to teach people logic. - -We hear a great deal said in dismay, and sometimes even by old -abolitionists, about “increasing the number of ignorant voters.” In -Massachusetts, there is an educational restriction for men, such as it -is; in Rhode Island, a property qualification is required for voting on -certain questions. Personally, I believe with “Warrington,” that, if -ignorant voting be bad, ignorant nonvoting is worse; and that the -enfranchised “masses,” which have a legitimate outlet for their -political opinions, are far less dangerous than disfranchised masses, -which must rely on mobs and strikes. I will go farther, and say that I -believe our Republic is, on the whole, in less danger from its poor men, -who have got to stay in it and bring up their children, than from its -rich men, who have always Paris and Dresden to fall back upon. As to a -property qualification, there is no dispute that Rhode Island—the only -New England State which has one—is the only State where votes are -publicly bought and sold on any large scale. I do not see that even a -poll-tax or registry-tax is of any use as a safeguard; for, if men are -to be bought, the tax merely offers a more indirect and palatable form -in which to pay the price. Many a man consents to have his poll-tax paid -by his party or his candidate, when he would reject the direct offer of -a dollar-bill. - -But this is all private speculation, and has nothing to do with the -woman suffrage movement. All that we can ask, as advocates of this -reform, is, that the inclusion or the exclusion should be the same for -both sexes. We cannot put off the equality of woman till that time, a -few centuries hence, when the Social Science Association shall -have-succeeded in agreeing on the true basis of “scientific -legislation.” It is as if we urged that wives should share their -husbands’ dinners, and were told that the physicians had not decided -whether beefsteak were wholesome. The answer is, “Beefsteak or tripe, -yeast or saleratus, which you please. But, meanwhile, what is good -enough for the wife is good enough for the husband.” - - - - - LXXXI. - FOR SELF-PROTECTION. - - -I remember to have read, many years ago, the life of Sir Samuel Romilly, -the English philanthropist. He was the author of more beneficent legal -reforms than any man of his day, and there was in this book a long list -of the changes he still meant to bring about. It struck me very much, -that, among these proposed reforms, not one of any importance referred -to the laws about women. - -It shows—what all experience has shown—that no class or race or sex can -safely trust its protection in any hands but its own. The laws of -England in regard to woman were then so bad that Lord Brougham -afterwards said they needed total reconstruction, if they were to be -touched at all. And yet it is only since woman suffrage began to be -talked about, that the work of law-reform has really taken firm hold. In -many cases in America the beneficent measures are directly to be traced -to some appeal from feminine advocates. Even in Canada, as stated the -other day by Dr. Cameron, formerly of Toronto, the bill protecting the -property of married women was passed under the immediate pressure of -Lucy Stone’s eloquence. And, even where this direct agency could not be -traced, the general fact that the atmosphere was full of the agitation -had much to do with all the reforms that took place. Legislatures, -unwilling to give woman the ballot, were shamed into giving her -something. The chairman of the judiciary committee in Rhode Island told -me, that, until he heard women address the committee, he had not -reflected upon their legal disabilities, or thought how unjust these -were. While the matter was left to the other sex only, even men like Sir -Samuel Romilly forgot the wrongs of woman. When she began to advocate -her own cause men also waked up. - -But now that they are awake, they ask, is not this sufficient? Not at -all. If an agent who has cheated you surrenders reluctantly one-half -your stolen goods, you do not stop there and say, “It is enough. Your -intention is honorable. Please continue my agent with increased pay.” On -the contrary, you say, “Your admission of wrong is a plea of guilty. -Give me the rest of what is mine.” There is no defence like -self-defence, no protection like self-protection. - -All theories of chivalry and generosity and vicarious representation -fall before the fact that woman has been grossly wronged by man. That -being the case, the only modest and honest thing for man to do is to -say, “Henceforward have a voice in making your own laws.” Till this is -done, she has no sure safeguard, since otherwise the same men who made -the old barbarous laws may at any time restore them. - -It is common to say that woman suffrage will make no great difference; -for that women will think very much as men do, and it will simply double -the vote without varying the result. About many matters this may be -true. To be sure, it is probable that on questions of conscience, like -slavery and temperance, the woman’s vote would by no means coincide with -man’s. But grant that it would. The fact remains,—and all history shows -it,—that on all that concerns her own protection a woman needs her own -vote. Would a woman vote to give her husband the power of bequeathing -her children to the control and guardianship of somebody else? Would a -woman vote to sustain the law by which a Massachusetts chief justice -bade the police take those crying children from their mother’s side in -the Boston court-room a few years ago, and hand them over to a -comparative stranger, because that mother had married again? You might -as well ask whether the colored vote would sustain the Dred Scott -decision. Tariffs or banks may come or go the same, whether the voters -be white or black, male or female. But, when the wrongs of an oppressed -class or sex are to be righted, the ballot is the only guaranty. After -they have gained a potential voice for themselves, the Sir Samuel -Romillys will remember them. - - - - - LXXXII. - WOMANLY STATESMANSHIP. - - -The newspapers periodically express a desire to know whether women have -given evidence, on the whole, of superior statesmanship to men. There -are constant requests that they will define their position as to the -tariff and the fisheries and the civil-service question. If they do not -speak, it is naturally assumed that they will forever after hold their -peace. Let us see how that matter stands. - -It is said that the greatest mechanical skill in America is to be found -among professional burglars who come here from England. Suppose one of -these men were in prison, and we were to stand outside and taunt him -through the window: “Here is a locomotive engine: why do you not mend or -manage it? Here is a steam printing-press: if you know any thing, set it -up for me! You a mechanic, when you have not proved that you understand -any of these things? Nonsense!” - -But Jack Sheppard, if he condescended to answer us at all, would coolly -say, “Wait a while, till I have finished my present job. Being in -prison, my first business is to get out of prison. Wait till I have -picked this lock, and mined this wall; wait till I have made a saw out -of a watch-spring, and a ladder out of a pair of blankets. Let me do my -first task, and get out of limbo, and then see if your little -printing-presses and locomotives are too puzzling for my fingers.” - -Politically speaking, woman is in prison, and her first act of skill -must be in getting through the wall. For her there is no tariff -question, no question of the fisheries. She will come to that by and by, -if you please; but for the present her statesmanship must be employed -nearer home. The “civil-service reform” in which she is most concerned -is a reform which shall bring her in contact with the civil service. Her -political creed, for the present, is limited to that of Sterne’s -starling in the cage,—“I can’t get out.” If she is supposed to have any -common-sense at all, she will best show it by beginning at the point -where she is, instead of at the point where somebody else is. She would -indeed be as foolish as these editors think her if she now spent her -brains upon the tariff question, which she cannot reach, instead of upon -her own enfranchisement which she is fast reaching. - -The woman suffrage movement in America, in all its stages and -subdivisions, has been the work of woman. No doubt men have helped in -it: much of the talking has been done by them, and they have furnished -many of the printed documents. But the energy, the methods, the -unwearied purpose, of the movement, have come from women: they have led -in all councils; they have established the newspapers, got up the -conventions, addressed the legislatures, and raised the money. Thirty -years have shown, with whatever temporary variations, one vast wave of -progress toward success, both in this country and in Europe. Now, -success is statesmanship. - -I remember well the shouts of laughter that used to greet the -anti-slavery orators when they claimed that the real statesmen of the -country were not the Calhouns and Websters, who spent their strength in -trying to sustain slavery, and failed, but the Garrisons, who devoted -their lives to its overthrow, and were succeeding. Yet who now doubts -this? Tried by the same standard, the statesmanship of to-day does not -lie in the men who can find no larger questions before them than those -which concern the fisheries, but in the women whose far-reaching efforts -will one day make every existing voting-list so much waste paper. - -Of course, when the voting-lists with the women’s names are ready to be -printed, it will be interesting to speculate as to how these new -monarchs of our destiny will use their power. For myself, a long course -of observation in the anti-slavery and woman suffrage movements has -satisfied me that women are not idiots, and that, on the whole, when -they give their minds to a question, whether moral or practical, they -understand it quite as readily as men. In the anti-slavery movement it -is certain that a woman, Elizabeth Heyrick, gave the first impulse to -its direct and simple solution in England; and that another woman, Mrs. -Stowe, did more than any man, except perhaps Garrison and John Brown, to -secure its right solution here. There was never a moment, I am -confident, when any great political question growing out of the -anti-slavery struggle might not have been put to vote more safely among -the women of New England than among the clergy, or the lawyers, or the -college-professors. If they have done so well in the last great issue, -it is fair to assume, that, after they have a sufficient inducement to -study out future issues, they at least will not be very much behind the -men. - -But we cannot keep it too clearly in view, that the whole question, -whether women would vote better or worse than men on general questions, -is a minor matter. It was equally a minor matter in case of the negroes. -We gave the negroes the ballot, simply because they needed it for their -own protection; and we shall by and by give it to women for the same -reason. Tried by that test, we shall find that their statesmanship will -be genuine. When they come into power, drunken husbands will no longer -control their wives’ earnings, and a chief justice will no longer order -a child to be removed from its mother, amid its tears and outcries, -merely because that mother has married again. And if, as we are -constantly assured, woman’s first duty is to her home and her children, -she may count it a good beginning in statesmanship to secure to herself -the means of protecting both. That once settled, it will be time enough -to “interview” her in respect to the proper rate of duty on pig-iron. - - - - - LXXXIII. - TOO MUCH PREDICTION. - - -“Seek not to proticipate,” says Mrs. Gamp, the venerable nurse in -“Martin Chuzzlewit”—“but take ’em as they come, and as they go.” I am -persuaded that our woman-suffrage arguments would be improved by this -sage counsel, and that at present we indulge in too many bold -anticipations. - -Is there not altogether too much tendency to predict what women will do -when they vote? Could that good time come to-morrow, we should be -startled to find to how many different opinions and “causes” the new -voters were already pledged. One speaker wishes that women should be -emancipated, because of the fidelity with which they are sure to support -certain desirable measures, as peace, order, freedom, temperance, -righteousness, and judgment to come. Then the next speaker has his or -her schedule of political virtues, and is equally confident that women, -if once enfranchised, will guarantee clear majorities for them all. The -trouble is, that we thus mortgage this new party of the future, past -relief, beyond possibility of payment, and incur the ridicule of the -unsanctified by committing our cause to a great many contradictory -pledges. - -I know an able and high-minded woman of foreign birth, who courageously, -but as I think mistakenly, calls herself an atheist, and who has for -years advocated woman-suffrage as the only antidote to the rule of the -clergy. On the other hand, an able speaker in the late Boston convention -advocated the same thing as the best way of defeating atheism, and -securing the positive assertion of religion by the community. Both -cannot be correct: neither is entitled to speak for woman. That being -the case, would it not be better to keep clear of this dangerous ground -of prediction, and keep to the argument based on rights and needs? If -our theory of government be worth any thing, woman has the same right to -the ballot that man has: she certainly needs it as much for -self-defence. How she will use it, when she gets it, is her own affair. -It may be that she will use it more wisely than her brothers; but I am -satisfied to believe that she will use it as well. Let us not attribute -infallible wisdom and virtue, even to women; for, as dear Mrs. Poyser -says in Adam Bede, “God Almighty made some of ’em foolish, to match the -men.” - -It is common to assume, for instance, that all women by nature favor -peace; and that, even if they do not always seem to promote it in their -social walk and conversation, they certainly will in their political. -When we consider how all the pleasing excitements, achievements, and -glories of war, such as they are, accrue to men only, and how large a -part of the miseries are brought home to women, it might seem that their -vote on this matter, at least, would be a sure thing. Thus far the -theory: the fact being that we have but just emerged from a civil war -which convulsed the nation, and cost half a million lives; and which -was, from the very beginning, fomented, stimulated, and applauded, at -least on one side, by the united voice of the women. It will be -generally admitted by those who know, that, but for the women of the -seceding States, the war of the Rebellion would have been waged more -feebly, been sooner ended, and far more easily forgotten. Nay, I was -told a few days since by an able Southern lawyer, who was long the mayor -of one of the largest Southern cities, that in his opinion the practice -of duelling—which is an epitome of war—owes its continued existence at -the South to a sustaining public sentiment among the women. - -Again, where the sympathy of women is wholly on the side of right, it is -by no means safe to assume that their mode of enforcing that sentiment -will be equally judicious. Take, for instance, the temperance cause. It -is usual to assume that women are a unit on that question. When we look -at the two extremes of society,—the fine lady pressing wine upon her New -Year’s visitors, and the Irishwoman laying in a family supply of whiskey -to last over Sunday,—the assumption seems hasty. But grant it. Is it -equally sure, that when woman takes hold of that most difficult of all -legislation, the license and prohibitory laws, she will handle them more -wisely than men have done? Will her more ardent zeal solve the problem -on which so much zeal has already been lavished in vain? In large -cities, for instance, where there is already more law than can be -enforced, will her additional ballots afford the means to enforce it? It -may be so; but it seems wiser not to predict nor to anticipate, but to -wait and hope. - -It is no reproach on woman to say that she is not infallible on -particular questions. There is much reason to suppose that in politics, -as in every other sphere, the joint action of the sexes will be better -and wiser than that of either singly. It seems obvious that the -experiment of republican government will be more fairly tried when -one-half the race is no longer disfranchised. It is quite certain, at -any rate, that no class can trust its rights to the mercy and chivalry -of any other, but that, the weaker it is, the more it needs all -political aids and securities for self-protection. Thus far, we are on -safe ground; and here, as it seems to me, the claim for suffrage may -securely rest. To go farther in our assertions, seems to me unsafe, -although many of our wisest and most eloquent may differ from me; and, -the nearer we approach success, the more important it is to look to our -weapons. It is a plausible and tempting argument, to claim suffrage for -woman on the ground that she is an angel; but I think it will prove -wiser, in the end, to claim it for her as being human. - - - - - LXXXIV. - FIRST-CLASS CARRIAGES. - - -In a hotly contested municipal election, the other day, an active -political manager was telling me his tactics. “We have to send carriages -for some of the voters,” he said. “First-class carriages! If we -undertake to wait on ’em, we must do it in good shape, and not leave the -best carriages to be hired by the other party.” - -I am not much given to predicting just what will happen when women vote; -but I confidently assert that they will be taken to the polls, if they -wish, in first-class carriages. If the best horses are to be harnessed, -and the best cushions selected, and every panel of the coach rubbed till -you can see your face in it, merely to accommodate some elderly man who -lives two blocks away, and could walk to the polls very easily, then how -much more will these luxuries be placed at the service of every woman, -young or old, whose presence at the polls is made doubtful by mud, or -snow, or the prospect of a shower! - -But the carriage is only the beginning of the polite attentions that -will soon appear. When we see the transformation undergone by every -ferry-boat and every railway-station, so soon as it comes to be -frequented by women, who can doubt that voting-places will experience -the same change? They will soon have—at least in the “ladies’ -department,”—elegance instead of discomfort, beauty for ashes, plenty of -rocking-chairs, and no need of spittoons.[19] Very possibly they may -have all the modern conveniences and inconveniences,—furnace-registers, -tea-kettles, Washington-pies, and a young lady to give checks for -bundles. Who knows what elaborate comforts, what queenly luxuries, may -be offered to women at voting-places, when the time has finally arrived -to sue for their votes? - -Footnote 19: - - Since this was written, the legislature of Massachusetts has passed, - with little opposition, a law prohibiting smoking at voting-places,—an - explicit fulfilment of this prophecy. - -The common impression has always been quite different from this. People -look at the coarseness and dirt now visible at so many voting-places, -and say, “Would you expose women to all that?” But these places are not -dirtier than a railway smoking-car; and there is no more coarseness than -in any ferry-boat which is, for whatever reason, used by men only. You -do not look into those places, and say with indignation, “Never, if I -can help it, shall my wife or my beloved great-grandmother travel by -steamboat or by rail!” You know that with these exemplary relatives will -enter order and quiet, carpets and curtains, brooms and dusters. Why -should it be otherwise with wardrooms and town-halls? - -There is not an atom more of intrinsic difficulty in providing a -decorous ladies’ room for a voting-place, than for a post-office or a -railway-station; and it is as simple a thing to vote a ticket as to buy -one. This being thus easily practicable, all men will desire to provide -it. And the example of the first-class carriages shows that the parties -will vie with each other in these pleasing arrangements. They will be -driven to it, whether they wish it or not. The party which has most -consistently and resolutely kept woman away from the ballot-box will be -the very party compelled, for the sake of self-preservation, to make her -“rights” agreeable to her when once she gets them. A few stupid or noisy -men may indeed try to make the polls unattractive to her, the very first -time; but the result of this little experiment will be so disastrous -that the offenders will be sternly suppressed by their own -party-leaders, before another election-day comes. It will soon become -clear, that, of all possible ways of losing votes, the surest lies in -treating women rudely. - -Lucy Stone tells a story of a good man in Kansas, who, having done all -he could to prevent women from being allowed to vote on school -questions, was finally comforted, when that measure passed, by the -thought that he should at least secure his wife’s vote for a pet -schoolhouse of his own. Election-day came, and the newly enfranchised -matron showed the most culpable indifference to her privileges. She made -breakfast as usual, went about her housework, and did on that perilous -day precisely the things that her anxious husband had always predicted -that women never would do under such circumstances. His hints and advice -found no response; and nothing short of the best pair of horses and the -best wagon finally sufficed to take the farmer’s wife to the polls. I am -not the least afraid that women will find voting a rude or disagreeable -arrangement. There is more danger of their being treated too well, and -being too much attacked and allured by these cheap cajoleries. But women -are pretty shrewd, and can probably be trusted to go to the polls, even -in first-class carriages. - - - - - LXXXV. - EDUCATION _via_ SUFFRAGE. - - -I know a rich bachelor of large property, who fatigues his friends by -perpetual denunciations of every thing American, and especially of -universal suffrage. He rarely votes; and I was much amazed, when the -popular vote was to be taken on building an expensive schoolhouse, to -see him go to the polls, and vote in the affirmative. On being asked his -reason, he explained, that, while we labored under the calamity of -universal (male) suffrage, he thought it best to mitigate its evils by -educating the voters. In short, he wished, as Mr. Lowe said in England -when the last Reform Bill passed, “to prevail upon our future masters to -learn their alphabets.” - -These motives may not be generous; but the schoolhouses, when they are -built, are just as useful. Even girls get the benefit of them, though -the long delay in many places before girls got their share came in part -from the want of this obvious stimulus. It is universal male suffrage -that guarantees schoolhouse and school. The most selfish man understands -that argument: “We must educate the masses, if it is only to keep them -from our throats.” - -But there is a wider way in which suffrage guarantees education. At -every election-time, political information is poured upon the whole -voting community, till it is deluged. Presses run night and day to print -newspaper extras; clerks sit up all night to frank congressional -speeches; the most eloquent men in the community expound the most -difficult matters to the ignorant. Of course each party affords only its -own point of view; but every man has a neighbor who is put under -treatment by some other party, and who is constantly attacking all who -will listen to his provoking and pestilent counter-statements. All the -common-school education of the United States does not equal the -education of election-day; and, as in some States elections are held -very often, this popular university seems to be kept in session almost -the whole year round. The consequence is a remarkable average popular -knowledge of political affairs,—a training which American women now -miss, but which will come to them with the ballot. - -And in still another way, there will be an education coming to woman -from the right of suffrage. It will come from her own sex, proceeding -from highest to lowest. We often hear it said, that, after -enfranchisement, the more educated women will not vote, while the -ignorant will. But Mrs. Howe admirably pointed out, at a Philadelphia -convention, that, the moment women have the ballot, it will become the -pressing duty of the more educated women, even in self-protection, to -train the rest. The very fact of the danger will be a stimulus to duty, -with women, as it already is with men. - -It has always seemed to me rather childish, in a man of superior -education, or talent, or wealth, to complain that when election-day -comes he has no more votes than the man who plants his potatoes or puts -in his coal. The truth is, that under the most thorough system of -universal suffrage the man of wealth or talent or natural leadership has -still a disproportionate influence, still casts a hundred votes where -the poor or ignorant or feeble man throws but one. Even the outrages of -New York elections turned out to be caused by the fact that the leading -rogues had used their brains and energy, while the men of character had -not. When it came to the point, it was found that a few caricatures by -Nast and a few columns of figures in the Times were more than a match -for all the repeaters of the ring. It is always so. Andrew Johnson, with -all the patronage of the nation, had not the influence of “Nasby” with -his one newspaper. The whole Chinese question was perceptibly and -instantly modified when Harte wrote “The Heathen Chinee.” - -These things being so, it indicates feebleness or dyspepsia when an -educated man is heard whining, about election-time, with his fears of -ignorant voting. It is his business to enlighten and control that -ignorance. With a voice and a pen at his command, with a town-hall in -every town for the one, and a newspaper in every village for the other, -he has such advantages over his ignorant neighbors that the only doubt -is whether his privileges are not greater than he deserves. For one, in -writing for the press, I am impressed by the undue greatness, not by the -littleness, of the power I wield. And what is true of men will be true -of women. If the educated women of America have not brains or energy -enough to control, in the long-run, the votes of the ignorant women -around them, they will deserve a severe lesson, and will be sure, like -the men in New York, to receive it. And thenceforward they will educate -and guide that ignorance, instead of evading or cringing before it. - -But I have no fear about the matter. It is a libel on American women to -say that they will not go anywhere or do any thing which is for the good -of their children and their husbands. Travel West on any of our great -lines of railroad, and see what women undergo in transporting their -households to their new homes. See the watching and the feeding, and the -endless answers to the endless questions, and the toil to keep little -Sarah warm, and little Johnny cool, and the baby comfortable. What a -hungry, tired, jaded, forlorn mass of humanity it is, as the sun rises -on it each morning, in the soiled and breathless railway-car! Yet that -household group is America in the making; those are the future kings and -queens, the little princes and princesses, of this land. Now, is the -mother who has undergone for the transportation of these children all -this enormous labor, to shrink at her journey’s end from the slight -additional labor of going to the polls to vote whether those little ones -shall have schools or rumshops? The thought is an absurdity. A few fine -ladies in cities will fear to spoil their silk dresses, as a few foppish -gentlemen now fear for their broadcloth. But the mass of intelligent -American women will vote, as do the mass of men. - - - - - LXXXVI. - “OFF WITH HER HEAD!” - - -In “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland,” the Queen of Hearts settles all -disputes at croquet by ordering somebody’s head to be taken off. It is -the old royal remedy. The Roman Tarquin, when his son sent to ask him -the best way of reducing a discontented city, merely slashed off the -heads of the tallest poppies, as he walked in the garden. The young man -took the hint, and performed a similar process upon the leading -citizens. - -Every year makes it plainer that the community must imitate Tarquinius -Superbus and the Queen of Hearts if it wishes to get rid of the woman -suffrage movement. So long as every woman favors it whenever she gets -her head above a certain point, so long those conspicuous heads must be -recognized. You must either put them on the voting-list, or on the list -ordered for immediate execution: there is no middle ground. - -There are the women who write books, for instance. When authorship first -came up among the women of America, they not only claimed nothing more -than the mere privilege of having brains, but they almost apologized for -that. Their early authors, as Mrs. Child and Mrs. Leslie, had a way of -preparing a cookery-book apiece, as a propitiation to the tyrant man, -before proceeding to what is called “the intellectual feast.” They held, -with Miss Bremer, that you can get any thing you like from a man if you -will only have something nice to pop into his mouth. Mrs. Sarah J. Hale, -in her “Woman’s Record,” published twenty years ago, adopted a different -form of submission. She seemed very anxious to prove that women had -taken a prominent part in the world; but also to show, that, if they -were only forgiven for this, they would never, never, never make -themselves any more prominent. It is but within a few years that -literary women have dared to go beyond literature, and ask for a vote -besides. - -But now, with what a terrible confidence they come to the demand for -suffrage when they acquire voice enough to make themselves heard! Mrs. -Stowe helps to free Uncle Tom in his cabin, and then strikes for the -freedom of women in her own “Hearth and Home.” Mrs. Howe writes the -“Battle Hymn of the Republic,” and keeps on writing more battle-hymns in -behalf of her own sex. Miss Alcott not only delineates “Little Women,” -but wishes to emancipate them. Miss Phelps desires to see the “Gates -Ajar” for her sex, both in heaven and on earth. Mrs. Child, who risked -her literary popularity in early life by her “Appeal for that Class of -Americans called Africans,” was as ready to risk it again for that class -of Americans called women. - -Of course, there are social circles in America where all desire for -leadership on the part of literary women would be repudiated; nay, where -the fact that a woman had written a book would imply a loss of caste. -When Karl von Beethoven signed himself “_Gutsbesitzer_,” or “land -proprietor,” his brother Ludwig signed himself “_Hirnbesitzer_,” or -“proprietor of a brain.” Posterity remembers only the great musical -composer; yet, doubtless, to the society of that period, the stupid -elder brother was by far the greater man. Such perversities cannot be -helped; but I write for reasonable people. Among the women who dance the -German, woman suffrage may be just now unpopular; but the women who -translate German will in the long-run have most influence, and their -verdict seems to tend the other way. It is said that the leading dancer -among the young men of one of our cities was transformed into an equally -prominent lawyer by a single suggestion from an elder sister, that it -was “better to be a man of books than a man of toes.” It is likely that -America will be more influenced at last by the women of heads than by -the women of heels. - - - - - LXXXVII. - FOLLOW YOUR LEADERS. - - -“There go thirty thousand men,” shouted the Portuguese, as Wellington, -with a few staff-officers, rode along the mountain-side. The action of -the leaders’ minds, in any direction, has a value out of all proportion -to their numbers. In a campaign, there is a council of officers,—Grant -and Sherman and Sheridan perhaps. They are but a trifling minority, yet -what they plan the whole army will do; and such is the faith in a real -leader, that, were all the restraints of discipline for the moment -relaxed, the rank and file would still follow his judgment. What a few -general officers see to be the best to-day, the sergeants and corporals -and private soldiers will usually see to be best to-morrow. - -In peace, also, there is a silent leadership; only that in peace, as -there is more time to spare, the leaders are expected to persuade the -rank and file, instead of commanding them. Yet it comes to the same -thing in the end. The movement begins with certain guides, and, if you -wish to know the future, keep your eye on them. If you wish to know what -is already decided, ask the majority; but, if you wish to find out what -is likely to be done next, ask the leaders. - -It is constantly said that the majority of women do not yet desire to -vote, and it is true. But, to find out whether they are likely to wish -for it, we must keep our eyes on the women who lead their sex. The -representative women,—those who naturally stand for the rest, those most -eminent for knowledge and self-devotion,—how do they view the thing? The -rank and file do not yet demand the ballot, you say; but how is it with -the general officers? - -Now, it is a remarkable fact, about which those who have watched this -movement for twenty years can hardly be mistaken, that almost any woman -who reaches a certain point of intellectual or moral development will -presently be found desiring the ballot for her sex. If this be so, it -predicts the future. It is the judgment of Grant and Sherman and -Sheridan as against that of the average private soldier of the Two -Hundredth Infantry. Set aside, if you please, the specialists of this -particular agitation,—those who were first known to the public through -its advocacy. There is no just reason why they should be set aside, yet -concede that for a moment. The fact remains that the ablest women in the -land—those who were recognized as ablest in other spheres, before they -took this particular duty upon them—are extremely apt to assume this -cross when they reach a certain stage of development. - -When Margaret Fuller first came forward into literature, she supposed -that literature was all she wanted. It was not till she came to write -upon woman’s position that she discovered what woman needed. Clara -Barton, driving her ambulance or her supply-wagon at the battle’s edge, -did not foresee, perhaps, that she should make that touching appeal, -when the battle was over, imploring her own enfranchisement from the -soldiers she had befriended. Lydia Maria Child, Julia Ward Howe, Harriet -Beecher Stowe, Louisa Alcott, came to the claim for the ballot earlier -than a million others, because they were the intellectual leaders of -American womanhood. They saw farthest, because they were in the highest -place. They were the recognized representatives of their sex before they -gave in their adhesion to the new demand. Their judgment is as the -judgment of the council of officers; while Flora McFlimsey’s opinion is -as the opinion of John Smith, unassigned recruit. But, if the generals -make arrangements for a battle, the chance is that John Smith will have -to take a hand in it, or else run away. - -It is a rare thing for the petition for suffrage from any town to -comprise the majority of women in that town. It makes no difference: if -there are few women in the town who want to vote, there is as much -propriety in their voting as if there were ten millions, so long as the -majority are equally protected in their right to stay at home. But, when -the names of petitioners come to be weighed as well as counted, the -character, the purity, the intelligence, the social and domestic value, -of the petitioners, is seldom denied. The women who wish to vote are not -the idle, the ignorant, the narrow-minded, or the vicious; they are not -“the dangerous classes:” they represent the best class in the community, -when tried by the highest standard. They are the natural leaders. What -they now see to be right, will also be perceived even by the foolish and -the ignorant by and by. - -In a poultry-yard in spring, when the first brood of ducklings go -toddling to the water-side, no doubt all the younger or feebler broods, -just hatched out of similar eggs, think these innovators dreadfully -mistaken. “You are out of place,” they feebly pipe. “See how happy we -are in our safe nests. Perhaps, by and by, when properly introduced into -society, we may run about a little on land, but to swim!—never!” -Meanwhile their elder kindred are splashing and diving in ecstasy; and, -so surely as they are born ducklings, all the rest will swim in their -turn. The instinct of the first duck solves the problem for all the -rest. It is a mere question of time. Sooner or later, all the broods in -the most conservative yard will follow their leaders. - - - - - LXXXVIII. - HOW TO MAKE WOMEN UNDERSTAND POLITICS. - - -An English member of Parliament said in a speech, some years ago, that -the stupidest man had a clearer understanding of political questions -than the brightest woman. He did not find it convenient to say what must -be the condition of a nation which for many years has had a woman for -its sovereign; but he certainly said bluntly what many men feel. It is -not indeed very hard to find the source of this feeling. It is not -merely that women are inexperienced in questions of finance or -administrative practice, for many men are equally ignorant of these. But -it is undoubtedly true of a large class of more fundamental -questions,—as, for instance, of some now pending at Washington,—which -even many clear-headed women find it hard to understand, while men of -far less general training comprehend them entirely. Questions of the -distribution of power, for instance, between the executive, judicial, -and legislative branches of government,—or between the United States -government and those of the separate States,—belong to the class I mean. -Many women of great intelligence show a hazy indistinctness of views -when the question arises whether it is the business of the General -Government to preserve order at the voting-places at a congressional -election, for instance, as the Republicans hold; or whether it should be -left absolutely in the hands of the State officials, as the Democrats -maintain. Most women would probably say that so long as order was -preserved, it made very little difference who did it. Yet, if one goes -into a shoe-shop or a blacksmith’s shop, one may hear just these -questions discussed in all their bearings by uneducated men, and it will -be seen that they involve a principle. Why is this difference? Does it -show some constitutional inferiority in women, as to this particular -faculty? - -The question is best solved by considering a case somewhat parallel. The -South Carolina negroes were considered very stupid, even by many who -knew them; and they certainly were densely ignorant on many subjects. -Put face to face with a difficult point of finance legislation, I think -they would have been found to know even less about it than I do. Yet the -abolition of slavery was held in those days by many great statesmen to -be a subject so difficult that they shrank from discussing it; and -nevertheless I used to find that these ignorant men understood it quite -clearly in all its bearings. Offer a bit of sophistry to them, try to -blind them with false logic on this subject, and they would detect it as -promptly, and answer it as keenly, as Garrison or Phillips would have -done; and, indeed, they would give very much the same answers. What was -the reason? Not that they were half wise and half stupid; but that they -were dull where their own interests had not trained them, and they were -sharp and keen where their own interests were concerned. - -I have no doubt that it will be so with women when they vote. About some -things they will be slow to learn; but, about all that immediately -concerns themselves, they will know more at the very beginning than many -wise men have learned since the world began. How long it took for -English-speaking men to correct, even partially, the iniquities of the -old common law!—but a parliament of women would have set aside at a -single sitting the alleged right of the husband to correct his wife with -a stick no bigger than his thumb. It took the men of a certain State of -this Union a good many years to see that it was an outrage to confiscate -to the State one-half the property of a man who died childless, leaving -his widow only the other half; but a legislature of women would have -annihilated that enormity by a single day’s work. I have never seen -reason to believe that women on general questions would act more wisely -or more conscientiously, as a rule, than men: but self-preservation is a -wonderful quickener of the brain; and, in all questions bearing on their -own rights and opportunities as women, it is they who will prove shrewd -and keen, and men who will prove obtuse, as indeed they have usually -been. - -Another point that adds force to this is the fact that wherever women, -by their special position, have more at stake than usual in public -affairs, even as now organized, they are apt to be equal to the -occasion. When the men of South Carolina were ready to go to war for the -“States-Rights” doctrines of Calhoun, the women of that State had also -those doctrines at their fingers’-ends. At Washington, where politics -make the breath of life, you will often find the wives of members of -Congress following the debates, and noting every point gained or lost, -because these are matters in which they and their families are -personally concerned; and, as for that army of women employed in the -“departments” of the government, they are politicians every one, because -their bread depends upon it. - -The inference is, that, if women as a class are now unfitted for -politics, it is because they have not that pressure of personal interest -and responsibility by which men are unconsciously trained. Give this, -and self-interest will do the rest; aided by that power of conscience -and affection which is certainly not less in them than in men, even if -we claim no more. A young lady of my acquaintance opposed woman suffrage -in conversation on various grounds, one of which was that it would, if -enacted, compel her to read the newspapers, which she greatly disliked. -I pleaded that this was not a fatal objection; since many men voted -“early and often” without reading them, and in fact without knowing how -to read at all. She said, in reply, that this might do for men, but that -women were far more conscientious, and, if they were once compelled to -vote, they would wish to know what they were voting for. This seemed to -me to contain the whole philosophy of the matter; and I respected the -keenness of her suggestion, though it led me to an opposite conclusion. - - - - - LXXXIX. - “INFERIOR TO MAN, AND NEAR TO ANGELS.” - - -If it were anywhere the custom to disfranchise persons of superior -virtue because of their virtue, and to present others with the ballot, -simply because they had been in the State Prison,—then the exclusion of -women from political rights would be a high compliment, no doubt. But I -can find no record in history of any such legislation, unless so far as -it is contained in the doubtful tradition of the Tuscan city of Pistoia, -where men are said to have been ennobled as a punishment for crime. -Among us crime may often be a covert means of political prominence, but -it is not the ostensible ground; nor are people habitually struck from -the voting-lists for performing some rare and eminent service, such as -saving human life, or reading every word of a Presidential message. If a -man has been President of the United States, we do not disfranchise him -thenceforward; if he has been governor, we do not declare him -thenceforth ineligible to the office of United States senator. On the -contrary, the supposed reward of high merit is to give higher civic -privileges. Sometimes these are even forced on unwilling recipients, as -when Plymouth Colony in 1633 imposed a fine of twenty pounds on any one -who should refuse the office of governor. - -It is utterly contrary to all tradition and precedent, therefore, to -suppose that women have been hitherto disfranchised because of any -supposed superiority. Indeed, the theory is self-annihilating, and -involves all supporters in hopeless inconsistency. Thus the Southern -slaveholders were wont to argue that a negro was only blest when a -slave, and there was no such inhumanity as to free him. Then, if a slave -happened to save his master’s life, he was rewarded by emancipation -immediately, amid general applause. The act refuted the theory. And so, -every time we have disfranchised a rebel, or presented some eminent -foreigner with the freedom of a city, we have recognized that -enfranchisement, after all, means honor, and disfranchisement implies -disgrace. - -I do not see how any woman can help a thrill of indignation, when she -first opens her eyes to the fact that it is really contempt, not -reverence, that has so long kept her sex from an equal share of legal, -political, and educational rights. In spite of the duty paid to -individual women as mothers, in spite of the reverence paid by the -Greeks and the Germanic races to certain women as priestesses and -sibyls, the fact remains that this sex has been generally recognized, in -past ages of the human race, as stamped by hopeless inferiority, not by -angelic superiority. This is carried so far, that a certain taint of -actual inferiority is held to attach to women, in barbarous nations. -Among certain Indian tribes, the service of the gods is defiled if a -woman but touches the implements of sacrifice; and a Turk apologizes to -a Christian physician for the mention of the women of his family, in the -phrases used to soften the mention of any degrading creature. Mr. Leland -tells us, that, among the English gypsies, any object that a woman -treads upon, or sweeps with the skirts of her dress, is destroyed or -made away with in some way, as unfit for use. In reading the history of -manners, it is easy to trace the steps from this degradation up to the -point now attained, such as it is. Yet even the habit of physiological -contempt is not gone, as readers of late controversies on “Sex in -Education” know full well; and I do not see how any one can read history -without seeing, all around us, in society, education, and politics, the -tradition of inferiority. Many laws and usages which in themselves might -not strike all women as intrinsically worth striving for—as the -exclusion of women from colleges or from the ballot-box—assume great -importance to a woman’s self-respect, when she sees in these the plain -survival of the same contempt that once took much grosser forms. - -And it must be remembered that in civilized communities the cynics, who -still frankly express this utter contempt, are better friends to women -than the flatterers, who conceal it in the drawing-room, and only utter -it freely in the lecture-room, the club, and the North American Review. -Contempt at least arouses pride and energy. To be sure, in the face of -history, the contemptuous tone in regard to women seems to me untrue, -unfair, and dastardly; but, like any other extreme injustice, it leads -to re-action. It helps to awaken women from that shallow dream of -self-complacency into which flattery lulls them. There is something -tonic in the manly arrogance of Fitzjames Stephen, who derides the -thought that the marriage-contract can be treated as in any sense a -contract between equals; but there is something that debilitates in the -dulcet counsel given by an anonymous gentleman, in an old volume of the -Ladies’ Magazine that lies before me, “She ought to present herself as a -being made to please, to love, and to seek support; _a being inferior to -man, and near to angels._” - - - - - OBJECTIONS TO SUFFRAGE. - - -“When you were weak and I was strong, I toiled for you. Now you are -strong and I am weak. Because of my work for you, I ask your aid. I ask -the ballot for myself and my sex. As I stood by you, I pray you stand by -me and mine.”—CLARA BARTON. - -[Appeal to the returned soldiers of the United States, written from -Geneva, Switzerland, by Clara Barton, invalided by long service in the -hospitals and on the field during the civil war.] - - - - - XC. - THE FACT OF SEX. - - -It is constantly said that the advocates of woman suffrage ignore the -fact of sex. On the contrary, they seem to me to be the only people who -do not ignore it. - -Were there no such thing as sexual difference, the wrong done to woman -by disfranchisement would be far less. It is precisely because her -traits, habits, needs, and probable demands are distinct from those of -man, that she is not, never was, never can, and never will be, justly -represented by him. It is not merely that a vast number of human -individuals are disfranchised; it is not even because in many of our -States the disfranchisement extends to a majority, that the evil is so -great; it is not merely that we disfranchise so many units and tens: but -we exclude a special element, a peculiar power, a distinct interest,—in -a word, a sex. - -Whether this sex is more or less wise, more or less important, than the -other sex, does not affect the argument: it is a sex, and, being such, -is more absolutely distinct from the other than is any mere race from -any other race. The more you emphasize the fact of sex, the more you -strengthen our argument. If the white man cannot justly represent the -negro,—although the two races are now so amalgamated that not even the -microscope can always decide to which race one belongs,—how impossible -that one sex should stand in legislation for the other sex! - -This is so clear, that, so soon as it is stated, there is a shifting of -the ground. “But consider the danger of introducing the sexual influence -into legislation!” ... Then we are sure to be confronted with the case -of Miss Vinnie Ream, the sculptor. See how that beguiling damsel cajoled -all Congress into buying poor statues! they say. If one woman could do -so much, how would it be with one hundred? Precisely the Irishman’s -argument against the use of pillows: he had put one feather on a rock, -and found it a very uncomfortable support. Grant, for the sake of -argument, that Miss Ream gave us poor art; but what gave her so much -power? Plainly, that she was but a single feather. Congress being -composed exclusively of men, the mere fact of her sex gave her an -exceptional and dangerous influence. Fill a dozen of the seats in -Congress with women, and that danger at least will be cancelled. The -taste in art may be no better; but an artist will no more be selected -for being a pretty girl than now for being a pretty boy. So in all such -cases. Here, as everywhere, it is the advocate of woman suffrage who -wishes to recognize the fact of sex, and guard against its perils. - -It is precisely so in education. Believing boys and girls to be unlike, -and yet seeing them to be placed by the Creator on the same planet and -in the same family, we hold it safer to follow his method. As they are -born to interest each other, to stimulate each other, to excite each -other, it seems better to let this impulse work itself off in a natural -way,—to let in upon it the fresh air and the daylight, instead of -attempting to suppress and destroy it. In a mixed school, as in a -family, the fact of sex presents itself as an unconscious, healthy, -mutual stimulus. It is in the separate schools that the healthy relation -vanishes, and the thought of sex becomes a morbid and diseased thing. -This observation first occurred to me when a pupil and a teacher in -boys’ boarding-schools years ago: there was such marked superiority as -to sexual refinement in the day-scholars, who saw their sisters and the -friends of their sisters every day. All later experience of our -public-school system has confirmed this opinion. It is because I believe -the distinction of sex to be momentous, that I dread to see the sexes -educated apart. - -The truth of the whole matter is, that Nature will have her -rights—innocently if she can, guiltily if she must; and it is a little -amusing that the writer of an ingenious paper on the other side, called -“Sex in Politics,” in an able New York journal, puts our case better -than I can put it, before he gets through, only that he is then speaking -of wealth, not women: “Anybody who considers seriously what is meant by -the conflict between labor and capital, of which we are only just -witnessing the beginning, and what is to be done _to give money -legitimately that influence on legislation which it now exercises -illegitimately_, must acknowledge at once that the next generation will -have a thorny path to travel.” The Italics are my own. Precisely what -this writer wishes to secure for money, we claim for the disfranchised -half of the human race,—open instead of secret influence; the English -tradition instead of the French; women as rulers, not as kings’ -mistresses; women as legislators, not merely as lobbyists; women -employing in legitimate form that power which they will otherwise -illegitimately wield. This is all our demand. - - - - - XCI. - HOW WILL IT RESULT? - - -“It would be a great convenience, my hearers,” said old Parson -Withington of Newbury, “if the moral of a fable could only be written at -the beginning of it, instead of the end. But it never is.” Commonly the -only thing to be done is to get hold of a few general principles, hold -to those, and trust that all will turn out well. No matter how -thoroughly a reform may have been discussed,—negro-emancipation or -free-trade, for instance,—it is a step in the dark at last, and the -detailed results never turn out to be precisely according to the -programme. - -An “esteemed correspondent,” who has written some of the best things yet -said in America in behalf of the enfranchisement of woman, writes -privately to express some solicitude, since, as she thinks, we are not -ready for it yet. “I am convinced,” she writes, “of the abstract right -of women to vote; but all I see of the conduct of the existing women, -into whose hands this change would throw the power, inclines me to hope -that this power will not be conceded till education shall have prepared -a class of women fit to take the responsibilities.” - -Gradual emancipation, in short!—for fear of trusting truth and justice -to take care of themselves. Who knew, when the negroes were set free, -whether they would at first use their freedom well, or ill? Would they -work? would they avoid crimes? would they justify their freedom? The -theory of education and preparation seemed very plausible. Against that, -there was only the plain theory which Elizabeth Heyrick first announced -to England,—“Immediate, unconditional emancipation.” “The best -preparation for freedom is freedom.” What was true of the negroes then -is true of women now. - -“The lovelier traits of womanhood,” writes earnestly our correspondent, -“simplicity, faith, guilelessness, unfit them to conduct public affairs, -where one must deal with quacks and charlatans.... We are not all at -once ‘as gods, knowing good and evil;’ and the very innocency of our -lives, and the habits of pure homes, unfit us to manage a certain class -who will flock to this standard.” - -But the basis of all republican government is in the assumption that -good is ultimately stronger than evil. If we once abandon this, our -theory has gone to pieces, at any rate. If we hold to it, good women are -no more helpless and useless than good men. The argument that would here -disfranchise women has been used before now to disfranchise clergymen. I -believe that in some States they are still disfranchised; and, if they -are not, it is partly because good is found to be as strong as evil, -after all, and partly because clergymen are not found to be so -angelically good as to be useless. I am very confident that both these -truths will be found to apply to women also. - -Whatever else happens, we may be pretty sure that one thing will. The -first step towards the enfranchisement of women will blow to the winds -the tradition of the angelic superiority of women. Just as surely as -women vote, we shall have occasionally women politicians, women -corruptionists, and women demagogues. Conceding, for the sake of -courtesy, that none such now exist, they will be born as -instantaneously, after enfranchisement, as the frogs begin to pipe in -the spring. Those who doubt it ignore human nature; and, if they are not -prepared for this fact, they had better consider it in season, and take -sides accordingly. In these pages, at least, they have been warned. - -What then? Suppose women are not “as gods, knowing good and evil:” they -are not to be emancipated as gods, but as fallible human beings. They -are to come out of an ignorant innocence, that may be only weakness, -into a wise innocence that will be strength. It is too late to remand -American women into a Turkish or Jewish tutelage: they have emerged too -far not to come farther. In a certain sense, no doubt, the butterfly is -safest in the chrysalis. When the soft thing begins to emerge, the world -certainly seems a dangerous place; and it is hard to say what will be -the result of the emancipation. But when she is once half out, there is -no safety for the pretty creature but to come the rest of the way, and -use her wings. - - - - - XCII. - “I HAVE ALL THE RIGHTS I WANT.” - - -When Dr. Johnson had published his English Dictionary, and was asked by -a lady how he chanced to make a certain mistake that she pointed out, he -answered, “Ignorance, madam, pure ignorance.” I always feel disposed to -make the same comment on the assertion of any woman that she has all the -rights she wants. For every woman is, or may be, or might have been, a -mother. And when she comes to know that even now, in many parts of the -Union, a married mother has no legal right to her child, I should think -her tongue would cleave to her mouth before she would utter those -foolish words again. - -All the things I ever heard or read against slavery did not fix in my -soul such a hostility to it as a single scene in a Missouri slave-market -some twenty-five years ago. As I sat there, a purchaser came in to buy a -little girl to wait on his wife. Three little sisters were brought in, -from eight to twelve years old: they were mulattoes, with sweet, gentle -manners; they had evidently been taken good care of, and their -pink-calico frocks were clean and whole. The gentleman chose one of -them, and then asked her, good-naturedly enough, if she did not wish to -go with him. She burst into tears, and said, “I would rather stay with -my mother.” But her tears were as powerless, of course, as so many salt -drops from the ocean. - -That was all. But all the horrors of “Uncle Tom’s Cabin,” the stories -told me by fugitive slaves, the scarred backs I afterwards saw by dozens -among colored recruits, did not impress me as did that hour in the jail. -The whole probable career of that poor, wronged, motherless, shrinking -child passed before me in fancy. It seemed to me that a man must be -utterly lost to all manly instincts who would not give his life to -overthrow such a system. It seemed to me that the woman who could -tolerate, much less defend it, could not herself be true, could not be -pure, or must be fearfully and grossly ignorant. - -You acquiesce, fair lady. You say it was horrible indeed, but, thank -God! it is past. Past? Is it so? Past, if you please, as to the law of -slavery, but, as to the legal position of woman, still a fearful -reality. It is not twelve years since a scene took place in a Boston -court-room, before Chief-Justice Chapman, which was worse, in this -respect, than that scene in St. Louis, inasmuch as the mother was -present when the child was taken away, and the wrong was sanctioned by -the highest judicial officer of the State. Two little girls, who had -been taken from their mother by their guardian, their father being dead, -had taken refuge with her against his wishes; and he brought them into -court under a writ of _habeas corpus_, and the court awarded them to him -as against their mother. “The little ones were very much affected,” says -the Boston Herald, “by the result of the decision which separated them -from their mother; and force was required to remove them from the -court-room. The distress of the mother was also very evident.” - -There must have been some special reason, you say, for such a seeming -outrage: she was a bad woman. No: she was “a lady of the highest -respectability.” No charge was made against her: but, being left a -widow, she had married again; and for that, and that only, so far as -appears, the court took from her the guardianship of her own -children,—bone of her bone, and flesh of her flesh, the children for -whom she had borne the deepest physical agony of womanhood,—and awarded -them to somebody else. - -You say, “But her second husband might have misused the children.” -Might? So the guardian might, and that where they had no mother to -protect them. Had the father been left a widower, he might have made a -half-dozen successive marriages, have brought stepmother after -stepmother to control these children, and no court could have -interfered. The father is recognized before the law as the natural -guardian of the children. The mother, even though she be left a widow, -is not. The consequence is a series of outrages of which only a few -scattered instances come before the public; just as in slavery, out of a -hundred little girls sold away from their parents, only one case might -ever be mentioned in any newspaper. - -This case led to an alteration of the law in Massachusetts, but the same -thing might yet happen in some States of the Union. The possibility of a -single such occurrence shows that there is still a fundamental wrong in -the legal position of woman. And the fact that most women do not know -it, only deepens the wrong—as Dr. Channing said of the contentment of -the Southern slaves. The mass of men, even of lawyers, pass by such -things, as they formerly passed by the facts of slavery. - -There is no lasting remedy for these wrongs, except to give woman the -political power to protect herself. There never yet existed a race, nor -a class, nor a sex, which was noble enough to be trusted with political -power over another sex, or class, or race. It is for self-defence that -woman needs the ballot. And, in view of a single such occurrence as I -have given, I charge that woman who professes to have “all the rights -she wants,” either with a want of all feeling of motherhood, or with -“ignorance, madam, pure ignorance.” - - - - - XCIII. - “SENSE ENOUGH TO VOTE.” - - -There is one special point on which men seem to me rather insincere -toward women. When they speak to women, the objection made to their -voting is usually that they are too angelic. But when men talk to each -other, the general assumption is, that women should not vote because -they have not brains enough—or, as old Theophilus Parsons wrote a -century ago, have not “a sufficient acquired discretion.” - -It is an important distinction. Because, if women are too angelic to -vote, they can only be fitted for it by becoming more wicked, which is -not desirable. On the other hand, if there is no objection but the want -of brains, then our public schools are equalizing that matter fast -enough. Still, there are plenty of people who have never got beyond this -objection. Listen to the first discussion that you encounter among men -on this subject, wherever they may congregate. Does it turn upon the -question of saintliness, or of brains? Let us see. - -I travelled the other day upon the Boston and Providence Railroad with a -party of mechanics, mostly English and Scotch. They were discussing this -very question, and, with the true English habit, thought it was all a -matter of property. Without it a woman certainly should not vote, they -said; but they all favored, to my surprise, the enfranchisement of women -of property. “As a general rule,” said the chief speaker, “a woman -that’s got property has got sense enough to vote.” - -There it was! These foreigners, who had found their own manhood by -coming to a land which not only the Pilgrim Fathers but the Pilgrim -Mothers had settled, and subdued, and freed for them, were still ready -to disfranchise most of the daughters of those mothers, on the ground -that they had not “sense enough to vote.” I thanked them for their blunt -truthfulness, so much better than the flattery of most of the -native-born. - -My other instance shall be a conversation overheard in a railway-station -near Boston, between two intelligent citizens, who had lately listened -to Anna Dickinson. “The best of it was,” said one, “to see our minister -introduce her.”—“Wonder what the Orthodox churches would have said to -that ten years ago?” said the other. “Never mind,” was the answer. -“Things have changed. What I think is, it’s all in the bringing up. If -women were brought up just as men are, they’d have just as much brains.” -(Brains again!) “That’s what Beecher says. Boys are brought up to do -business, and take care of themselves: that’s where it is. Girls are -brought up to dress and get married. Start ’em alike! That’s what -Beecher says. Start ’em alike, and see if girls haven’t got just as much -brains.” - -“Still harping on my daughter,” and on the condition of her brains! It -is on this that the whole question turns, in the opinion of many men. -Ask ten men their objections to woman suffrage. One will plead that -women are angels. Another fears discord in families. Another points out -that women cannot fight,—he himself being very likely a non-combatant. -Another quotes St. Paul for this purpose,—not being, perhaps, in the -habit of consulting that authority on any other point. But with the -others, very likely, every thing will turn on the question of brains. -They believe, or think they believe, that women have not sense enough to -vote. They may not say so to women, but they habitually say it to men. -If you wish to meet the common point of view of masculine voters, you -must find it here. - -It is fortunate that it is so. Of all points, this is the easiest to -settle; for every intelligent woman, even if she be opposed to woman -suffrage, helps to settle it. Every good lecture by a woman, every good -book written by one, every successful business enterprise carried on, -helps to decide the question. Every class of girls that graduates from -every good school helps to pile up the argument on this point. And the -vast army of women, constituting nine out of ten of the teachers in our -American schools, may appeal as logically to their pupils, and settle -the argument based on brains. “If we had sense enough to educate you,” -they may say to each graduating class of boys, “we have sense enough to -vote beside you.” - - - - - XCIV. - AN INFELICITOUS EPITHET. - - - “The ladies actively working to secure the co-operation of their sex - in caucuses and citizens’ conventions are not actuated by love of - notoriety, and are not, therefore, to be classed with the absolute - woman suffragists.”—_Boston Daily Transcript_, Sept. 1, 1879. - -When the eloquent colored abolitionist, Charles Remond, once said upon -the platform that George Washington, having been a slaveholder, was a -villain, Wendell Phillips remonstrated by saying, “Charles, the epithet -is not felicitous.” Reformers are apt to be pelted with epithets quite -as ill-chosen. How often has the charge figured in history, that they -were “actuated by love of notoriety”! The early Christians, it was -generally believed, took a positive pleasure in being thrown to the -lions, under the influence of this motive; and at a later period there -was a firm conviction that the Huguenots consented readily to being -broken on the wheel, or sawed in pieces between two boards, feeling -amply rewarded by the pleasure of being talked about. During the whole -anti-slavery movement, while the abolitionists were mobbed, fined, and -imprisoned,—while they were tabooed by good society, depleted of their -money, kept out of employment, checked in their advancement, by the mere -fact of their abolitionism,—there never was a moment when their sole -motive was not considered by many persons to be the love of notoriety. -Why should the advocates of woman suffrage expect any different -treatment now? - -It is not necessary, in order to dispose of this charge, to claim that -all reformers are heroes or saints. Even in the infancy of any reform, -it takes along with it some poor material; and unpleasant traits are -often developed by the incidents of the contest. Doubtless many -reformers attain to a certain enjoyment of a fight, at last: it is one -of the dangerous tendencies which those committed to this vocation must -resist. But, so far as my observation goes, those who engage in reform -for the sake of notoriety generally hurt the reform so much that they -render it their chief service when they leave it; and this happy -desertion usually comes pretty early in their career. The besetting sin -of reformers is not, so far as I can judge, the love of notoriety, but -the love of power and of flattery within their own small circle,—a -temptation quite different from the other, both in its origin and its -results. - -Notoriety comes so soon to a reformer, that its charms, whatever they -may be, soon pall upon the palate, just as they do in case of a popular -poet or orator, who is so used to seeing his name in print that he -hardly notices it. I suppose there is no young person so modest that he -does not, on first seeing his name in a newspaper, cut out the passage -with a certain tender solicitude, and perhaps purchase a few extra -copies of the fortunate journal. But when the same person has been -battered by a score or two of years in successive unpopular reforms, I -suppose that he not only would leave the paper uncut or unpurchased, but -would hardly take the pains even to correct a misstatement, were it -asserted that he had inherited a fortune or murdered his grandmother. -The moral is, that the love of notoriety is soon amply filled, in a -reformer’s experience, and that he will not, as a rule, sacrifice home -and comfort, money and friends, without some stronger inducement. This -is certainly true of most of the men who have interested themselves in -this particular movement, the “weak-minded men,” as the reporters, with -witty antithesis, still describe them; and it must be much the same with -the “strong-minded women” who share their base career. - -And it is to be remembered, above all, that, considered as an engine for -obtaining notoriety, the woman suffrage agitation is a great waste of -energy. The same net result could have been won with far less -expenditure in other ways. There is not a woman connected with it who -could not have achieved far more real publicity as a manager of charity -fairs or as a sensation letter-writer. She could have done this, too, -with far less trouble, without the loss of a single “genteel” friend, -without forfeiting a single social attention, without having a single -ill-natured thing said about her—except perhaps that she bored people, a -charge to which the highest and lowest forms of prominence are equally -open. Nay, she might have done even more than this, if notoriety was her -sole aim: for she might have become a “variety” minstrel or a female -pedestrian; she might have written a scandalous novel; she might have -got somebody to aim at her that harmless pistol, which has helped the -fame of so many a wandering actress, while its bullet somehow never hits -any thing but the wall. All this she might have done, and obtained a -notoriety beyond doubt. Instead of this, she has preferred to prowl -about, picking up a precarious publicity by giving lectures to willing -lyceums, writing books for eager publishers, organizing schools, setting -up hospitals, and achieving for her sex something like equal rights -before the law. Either she has shown herself, as a seeker after -notoriety, to be a most foolish or ill-judging person,—or else, as was -said of Washington’s being a villain, “the epithet is not felicitous.” - - - - - XCV. - THE ROB ROY THEORY. - - -The Saturday Review, in an article which denounces all equality in -marriage-laws and all plans of woman-suffrage, admits frankly the -practical obstacles in the way of the process of voting. “Possibly the -presence of women as voters would tend still further to promote order -than has been done by the ballot.” It plants itself wholly on one -objection, which goes far deeper, thus:— - - “If men choose to say that women are not their equals, women have - nothing to do but to give in. Physical force, the ultimate basis of - all society and all government, must be on the side of the men; and - those who have the key of the position will not consent permanently - to abandon it.” - -It is a great pleasure when an opponent of justice is willing to fall -back thus frankly upon the Rob Roy theory:— - - “The good old rule - Sufficeth him, the simple plan - That they should take who have the power, - And they should keep who can.” - -It is easy, I think, to show that the theory is utterly false, and that -the basis of civilized society is not physical force, but, on the -contrary, brains. - -In the city where the Saturday Review is published, there are three -regiments of “Guards” which are the boast of the English army, and are -believed by their officers to be the finest troops in the world. They -have deteriorated in size since the Crimean war; but I believe that the -men of one regiment still average six feet two inches in height; and I -am sure that nobody ever saw them in line, without noticing the contrast -between these magnificent men and the comparatively puny officers who -command them. These officers are from the highest social rank in -England, the governing classes; and, if it were the whole object of this -military organization to give a visible proof of the utter absurdity of -the Saturday Review’s theory, it could not be better done. There is no -country in Europe, I suppose, where the hereditary aristocracy is -physically equal to that of England, or where the intellectual class has -so good a physique. But set either the House of Lords or the Saturday -Review contributors upon a hand-to-hand fight against an equal number of -“navvies” or “costermongers,” and the patricians would have about as -much chance as a crew of Vassar girls in a boat-race with Yale or -Harvard. Take the men of England alone, and it is hardly too much to say -that physical force, instead of being the basis of political power in -any class, is apt to be found in inverse ratio to it. In case of -revolution, the strength of the governing class in any country is not in -its physical, but in its mental power. Rank and money, and the power to -influence and organize and command, are merely different modifications -of mental training, brought to bear by somebody. - -In our country, without class distinctions, the same truth can be easily -shown. Physical power lies mainly in the hands of the masses: wherever a -class or profession possesses more than its numerical share of power, it -has usually less than its proportion of physical vigor. This is easily -shown from the vast body of evidence collected during our civil war. In -the volume containing the medical statistics of the Provost Marshal -General’s Bureau, we have the tabulated reports of about 600,000 persons -subject to draft, and of about 500,000 recruits, substitutes, and -drafted men; showing the precise physical condition of more than a -million men. - -It appears, that, out of the whole number examined, rather more than 257 -in each 1,000 were found unfit for military service. It is curious to -see how generally the physical power among these men is in inverse ratio -to the social and political prominence of the class they represent. Out -of 1,000 unskilled laborers, for instance, only 348 are physically -disqualified; among tanners, only 216; among iron-workers, 189. On the -other hand, among lawyers, 544 out of 1,000 are disqualified; among -journalists, 740; among clergymen, 954. Grave divines are horrified at -the thought of admitting women to vote, when they cannot fight; though -not one of twenty of their own number is fit for military duty, if he -volunteered. Of the editors who denounce woman suffrage, only about one -in four could himself carry a musket; while, of the lawyers who fill -Congress, the majority could not be defenders of their country, but -could only be defended. If we were to distribute political power with -reference to the “physical basis” which the Saturday Review talks about, -it would be a wholly new distribution, and would put things more -hopelessly upside down than did the worst phase of the French Commune. -If, then, a political theory so utterly breaks down when applied to men, -why should we insist on resuscitating it in order to apply it to women? -The truth is, that, as civilization advances, the world is governed more -and more unequivocally by brains; and whether those brains are deposited -in a strong body or a weak one becomes a matter of less and less -importance. But it is only in the very first stage of barbarism that -mere physical strength makes mastery; and the long head has controlled -the long arm since the beginning of recorded time. - -And it must be remembered that even these statistics very imperfectly -represent the case. They do not apply to the whole male sex, but -actually to the picked portion only, to the men presumed to be of -military age, excluding the very old and the very young. Were these -included, the proportion unfit for military duty would of course be far -greater. Moreover, it takes no account of courage or cowardice, -patriotism or zeal. How much all these considerations tell upon the -actual proportion, may be seen from the fact, that in the town where I -am writing, for instance, out of some twelve thousand inhabitants and -about three thousand voters, there are only some three hundred who -actually served in the civil war,—a number too small to exert a -perceptible influence on any local election. When we see the community -yielding up its voting power into the hands of those who have actually -done military service, it will be time enough to exclude women for not -doing such service. If the alleged physical basis operates as an -exclusion of all non-combatants, it should surely give a monopoly to the -actual combatants. - - - - - XCVI. - THE VOTES OF NON-COMBATANTS. - - -The tendency of modern society is not to concentrate power in the hands -of the few, but to give a greater and greater share to the many. Read -Froissart’s Chronicles, and Scott’s novels of chivalry, and you will see -how thoroughly the difference between patrician and plebeian was then a -difference of physical strength. The knight, being better nourished and -better trained, was apt to be the bodily superior of the peasant, to -begin with; and this strength was re-enforced by armor, weapons, horse, -castle, and all the resources of feudal warfare. With this greater -strength went naturally the assumption of greater political power. To -the heroes of “Ivanhoe,” or “The Fair Maid of Perth,” it would have -seemed as absurd that yeomen and lackeys should have any share in the -government, as it would seem to the members in an American legislature -that women should have any such share. In a contest of mailed knights, -any number of unarmed men were but so many women. As Sir Philip Sidney -said, “The wolf asketh not how many the sheep may be.” - -But time and advancing civilization have tended steadily in one -direction. “He giveth power to the weak, and to them who have no might -He increaseth strength.” Every step in the extension of political rights -has consisted in opening them to a class hitherto humbler. From kings to -nobles, from nobles to burghers, from burghers to yeomen; in short, from -strong to weak, from high to low, from rich to poor. All this is but the -unconscious following-out of one sure principle,—that legislation is -mainly for the protection of the weak against the strong, and that for -this purpose the weak must be directly represented. The strong are -already protected by their strength: it is the weak who need all the -vantage-ground that votes and legislatures can give them. The feudal -chiefs were stronger without laws than with them. “Take care of -yourselves in Sutherland,” was the anxious message of the old -Highlander: “the law has come as far as Tain.” It was the peaceful -citizen who needed the guaranty of law against brute force. - -But can laws be executed without brute force? Not without a certain -amount of it, but that amount under civilization grows less and less. -Just in proportion as the masses are enfranchised, statutes execute -themselves without crossing bayonets. “In a republic,” said De -Tocqueville, “if laws are not always respectable, they are always -respected.” If every step in freedom has brought about a more peaceable -state of society, why should that process stop at this precise point? -Besides, there is no possibility in nature of a political division in -which all the men shall be on one side and all the women on the other. -The mutual influence of the sexes forbids it. The very persons who hint -at such a fear refute themselves at other times, by arguing that “women -will always be sufficiently represented by men,” or that “every woman -will vote as her husband thinks, and it will merely double the numbers.” -As a matter of fact, the law will prevail in all English-speaking -nations: a few men fighting for it will be stronger than many fighting -against it; and, if those few have both the law and the women on their -side, there will be no trouble. - -The truth is, that, in this age, _cedant arma togæ_: it is the civilian -who rules on the throne or behind it, and who makes the fighting-men his -mere agents. Yonder policeman at the corner looks big and formidable: he -protects the women, and overawes the boys. But away in some corner of -the City Hall, there is some quiet man, out of uniform, perhaps a -consumptive or a dyspeptic or a cripple, who can overawe the burliest -policeman by his authority as city marshal or as mayor. So an army is -but a larger police; and its official head is that plain man at the -White House, who makes or unmakes, not merely brevet-brigadiers, but -major-generals in command,—who can by the stroke of the pen convert the -most powerful man of the army into the most powerless. Take away the -occupant of the position, and put in a woman, and will she become -impotent because her name is Elizabeth or Maria Theresa? It is brains -that more and more govern the world; and whether those brains be on the -throne, or at the ballot-box, they will soon make the owner’s sex a -subordinate affair. If woman is also strong in the affections, so much -the better. “Win the hearts of your subjects,” said Lord Burleigh to -Queen Elizabeth, “and you will have their hands and purses.” - -War is the last appeal, and happily in these days the rarest appeal, of -statesmanship. In the multifarious other duties that make up -statesmanship, we cannot spare the brains, the self-devotion, and the -enthusiasm, of woman. One of the most important treaties of modern -history, the peace of Cambray, in 1529, was negotiated, after previous -attempts had failed, by two women,—Margaret, aunt of Charles V., and -Louisa, mother of Francis I. Voltaire said that Christina of Sweden was -the only sovereign of her time who maintained the dignity of the throne -against Mazarin and Richelieu. Frederick the Great said that the Seven -Years’ War was waged against three women,—Elizabeth of Russia, Maria -Theresa, and Mme. Pompadour. There is nothing impotent in the -statesmanship of women when they are admitted to exercise it: they are -only powerless for good when they are obliged to obtain by wheedling and -flattery a sway that should be recognized, responsible, and limited. - - - - - XCVII. - “MANNERS REPEAL LAWS.” - - -There is in Boswell’s Life of Johnson a correspondence which is well -worth reading by both advocates and opponents of woman suffrage. -Boswell, who was of an old Scotch family, had a difference of opinion -with his father about an entailed estate which had descended to them. -Boswell wished the title so adjusted as to cut off all possibility of -female heirship. His father, on the other hand, wished to recognize such -a contingency. Boswell wrote to Johnson in 1776 for advice, urging a -series of objections, physiological and moral, to the inheritance of a -family estate by a woman; though, as he magnanimously admits, “they -should be treated with great affection and tenderness, and always -participate of the prosperity of the family.” - -Dr. Johnson, for a wonder, took the other side, defended female -heirship, and finally summed up thus: “It cannot but occur that women -have natural and equitable claims as well as men, and these claims are -not to be capriciously or lightly superseded or infringed. When fiefs -inspired military service, it is easily discerned why females could not -inherit them; but the reason is at an end. _As manners make laws, so -manners likewise repeal them._” - -This admirable statement should be carefully pondered by those who hold -that suffrage should be only co-extensive with military duty. The -position that woman cannot properly vote because she cannot fight for -her vote efficiently, is precisely like the position of feudalism and of -Boswell, that she could not properly hold real estate because she could -not fight for it. Each position may have had some plausibility in its -day, but the same current of events has made each obsolete. Those who in -1881 believe in giving woman the ballot argue precisely as Dr. Johnson -did in 1776. Times have changed, manners have softened, education has -advanced, public opinion now acts more forcibly; and the reference to -physical force, though still implied, is implied more and more remotely. -The political event of the age, the overthrow of American slavery, would -not have been accomplished without the “secular arm” of Grant and -Sherman, let us agree; but neither would it have been accomplished -without the moral power of Garrison the non-resistant, and Harriet -Beecher Stowe the woman. When the work is done, it is unfair to -disfranchise any of the participants. Dr. Johnson was right: “When fiefs -[or votes] implied military service, it is easily discerned why women -should not inherit [or possess] them; but the reason is at an end. As -manners make laws, so manners likewise repeal them.” - -Under the feudal system it would have been absurd that women should hold -real estate, for the next armed warrior could dispossess her. By Gail -Hamilton’s reasoning, it is equally absurd now: “One man is stronger -than one woman, and ten men are stronger than ten women; and the -nineteen millions of men in this country will subdue, capture, and -execute or expel the nineteen millions of women just as soon as they set -about it.” Very well: why, then, do not all the landless men in a town -unite, and take away the landed property of all the women? Simply -because we now live in civilized society and under a reign of law; -because those men’s respect for law is greater than their appetite for -property; or, if you prefer, because even those landless men know that -their own interest lies, in the long-run, on the side of law. It will be -precisely the same with voting. When any community is civilized up to -the point of enfranchising women, it will be civilized up to the point -of sustaining their vote, as it now sustains their property-rights, by -the whole material force of the community. When the thing is once -established, it will no more occur to anybody that a woman’s vote is -powerless because she cannot fight, than it now occurs to anybody that -her title to real estate is invalidated by the same circumstance. - -Woman is in the world; she cannot be got rid of: she must be a serf or -an equal; there is no middle ground. We have outgrown the theory of -serfdom in a thousand ways, and may as well abandon the whole. Women -have now a place in society: their influence will be exerted, at any -rate, in war and in peace, legally or illegally; and it had better be -exerted in direct, legitimate, and responsible methods, than in ways -that are dark, and by tricks that have not even the merit of being -plain. - - - - - XCVIII. - KILKENNY ARGUMENTS. - - -It always helps a good cause when its opponents are in the position of -the famous Kilkenny cats, and mutually eat each other up. In the -anti-slavery movement, it was justly urged that the slaves might -possibly be (as slaveholders alleged) a race of petted children, whose -hearts could not possibly be alienated from their masters; or they might -be (as was also alleged by slaveholders) a race of fiends, whom a -whisper could madden: but they could not well be both. Every claim that -the negro was happy was stultified by that other claim, that the South -was dwelling on a barrel of gunpowder, and that the mildest anti-slavery -tract meant fire and explosion. The twin arguments saved abolitionists a -great deal of trouble. Either by itself would have required an answer; -but the two answered each other,—devoured each other, in fact, like the -Kilkenny cats. - -So, whenever the advocates of woman suffrage are assailed on the ground -that women are too superstitious, and will, if enfranchised, be governed -by religion and the Church alone, there is always sure to come in some -obliging advocate with his “Besides, the tendency of the movement is to -utter lawlessness, to the destruction of religion, the marriage-vows, -the home”—and all the rest of it. The boy in the story is hardly more -selfcontradictory, when, in answer to his friend’s appeal for his -jack-knife, he replies, “I haven’t any. Besides, I want to use it.” - -Here, for instance, is Mr. Nathan N. Withington of Newbury, Mass., who -in an address on woman suffrage, while waiving many arguments against -it, plants himself strongly on the ground that it must be fatal to the -family. “No one whose opinion is worth reckoning, with whom I have -talked on the matter, ever denied entirely that the logical result of -the movement was what is called free love.” My inference would be, in -passing, that my old neighbor Mr. Withington must confine himself to a -very narrow circle, in the way of conversation; or, that he must find -nobody’s opinion “worth reckoning” if it differs from his own. Certainly -I have talked with hardly an advocate of woman suffrage in New England -who would not deny entirely—and with a good deal of emphasis—any such -assumptions as he here makes. But let that go: the subject has already -been discussed far more than its intrinsic importance required; and -convention after convention has taken unnecessary pains to refute a -charge more baseless than the slaveholders’ fears of insurrection. What -I wish to point out is, that such charges have, in one way, great value: -they precisely neutralize and utterly annihilate the equally baseless -terror of “Too superstitious.” - -If it is true, as is sometimes alleged, that women are constitutionally -under the dominion of religion and the Church, then it is pretty sure, -that, under these auspices, the moral restraints of the community, as -marriage and the home, will be maintained. If it is true on the other -hand, as Mr. Withington honestly thinks, that the tendency of woman -suffrage is to create a deluge that shall sweep away the home, then it -is certain that all vestiges of churchly superstition will be swamped in -the process. The logical outcome of the movement may be, if you please, -to establish the Spanish Inquisition or to bring back the horrors of the -French Revolution, but it seems clear that it cannot simultaneously -bring both. The advocates of both theories are equally sincere, -doubtless, in their predictions of alarm; but one set of alarmists or -the other set of alarmists must be wofully disappointed when the time -comes. And, if either, why not both? - -The simple fact is, that whosoever draws upon his imagination, for -possible disasters from any particular measure, has a great fund at his -disposal, whether he looks right or left. He has always this advantage -over the practical reformer, that whereas the claims of the reformer -are, or should be, definite, coherent, practical, the opponent can, if -he wishes, have the whole cloudy domain of possibility to draw upon: he -can marshal an army in the atmosphere, while the practical reformer must -stay on earth. It is a comfort when two of these nebulous armies of -imaginary obstacles fight in the air, as in the present case, like the -shadowy hosts in Kaulbach’s great cartoon; and so destroy one another, -bringing back clear sky. - -Woman needs the ballot for self-respect and self-protection, and to do -her share for the education and moral safety of the children she bears. -This is enough to begin with. In seeking after this we have firm -foothold. The old Eastern fable describes a certain man as finding a -horse-shoe. His neighbor soon begins to weep and wail, because, as he -justly points out, the man who has found a horse-shoe may some day find -a horse, and may shoe him; and the neighbor’s child may some day go so -near the horse’s heels as to be kicked, and die; and then the two -families may quarrel and fight, and several valuable lives be lost -through that finding of a horse-shoe. The gradual advancement of women -must meet many fancies as far-fetched as this, and must see them -presented as arguments; and we must be very grateful if they prove -Kilkenny arguments, and destroy one another. - - - - - XCIX. - WOMEN AND PRIESTS. - - -The chief reason given by the Italian radicals for not supporting woman -suffrage was the alleged readiness of women to accept the control of the -priests. The same objection has, before now, been heard in other -countries,—in France, England, and America. John Bright, especially, -made it the ground of his opposition to a movement in which several -members of his family have been much engaged. The same point of view was -presented, in this country, several years ago, by Mr. Abbot of the -Index. But to how much, after all, does this objection amount? - -No one doubts that the religious sentiment seems stronger in women than -in men; but it must be remembered that this sentiment has been -laboriously encouraged by men, while the field of action allowed to -women has been sedulously circumscribed, and her intellectual education -every way restricted. It is no wonder if, under these circumstances, she -has gone where she has been welcomed, and not where she has been -snubbed. Priests were glad to hail her as a saint, while legislators and -professors joined in repelling her as a student or a reformer. What -wonder that she turned from the study or the law-making of the world to -its religion? But in all this, whose was the fault,—hers, or those who -took charge of her? If she did not trust the clergy, who alone -befriended her, whom should she trust? - -But observe that the clergy of all ages, in concentrating the strength -of woman on her religious nature, have summoned up a power that they -could not control. When they had once lost the confidence of those ruled -by this mighty religious sentiment, it was turned against them. In the -Greek and Roman worship, women were the most faithful to the altars of -the gods; yet, when Christianity arose, the foremost martyrs were women. -In the Middle Ages women were the best Catholics, but they were -afterwards the best Huguenots. It was a woman, not a man, who threw her -stool at the offending minister’s head in a Scotch kirk; it was a woman -who made the best Quaker martyr on Boston Common. And, from vixenish -Jenny Geddes to high-minded Mary Dyer, the whole range of womanly -temperament responds as well to the appeal of religious freedom as of -religious slavery. It is religion that woman needs, men say; but they -omit to see that the strength of her religious sentiment is seen when -she resists her clerical advisers as well as when she adores them or -pets them. Frances Wright and Lucretia Mott are facts to be considered, -quite as much as the matrons and maids who work ecclesiastical slippers, -and hold fancy fairs to send their favorite clergymen to Europe. - -At any rate, if the clergy still retain too much of their control, the -evil is not to be corrected by leaving the whole matter in their hands. -The argument itself must be turned the other way. Women need the mental -training of science to balance the over-sympathy of religion; they need -to participate in statesmanship to develop the practical side of their -lives. We are outgrowing the sarcasm of the Frenchman who said that in -America there were but two amusements,—politics for the men, and -religion for the women. When both women and men learn to mingle the two -more equally, both politics and religion will become something more than -an amusement. - - - - - C. - THE ROMAN CATHOLIC BUGBEAR. - - - “Those who wish the Roman Catholic Church to subvert our school - system, control legislation, and become a mighty political force, - cannot do better than labor day and night for woman suffrage. This, - it is true, is opposed to every principle and tradition of that - great church, which nevertheless would reap from it immense - benefits. The priests have little influence over a considerable part - of their male flock; but their power is great over the women, who - would repair to the polls at the word of command, with edifying - docility and zeal.”—FRANCIS PARKMAN _on “The Woman Question” in - North American Review_, September, 1879. - -I am surprised that a man like Mr. Parkman, who has done so much to -vindicate the share of Roman Catholic priests and laymen in the early -settlement of this continent, should have introduced this paragraph into -a serious discussion of what he himself recognizes as an important -question. Here is the case. One-half the citizens of every State are -unrepresented in the government: the ordinary means of republican -influence are withheld from them, as they are from idiots and criminals. -It is the rights and claims of these women, as women, that statesmanship -has to consider. Whether their enfranchisement will help the nation or -the race, as a whole, is legitimate matter for argument. Whether their -votes will temporarily tell for this or that party or sect, is a wholly -subordinate matter, that ought not to be obtruded into a serious debate. -If republican government is not strong enough to stand on its own -principles, if its fundamental theory must be interpreted and modified -so that it shall work for or against a particular church or class of -citizens, then it is a worse failure than even Mr. Parkman represents -it. The “woman question,” whenever it is settled, must be settled on its -own merits, with no more reference to Roman Catholics, as such, than to -Mormons or Chinese. Having said this before, when advocates of woman -suffrage were presenting the movement as an anti-Catholic movement, I -can consistently repeat it now, when the movement is charged with being -unconsciously pro-Catholic in its tendencies. It is not its business to -be for or against any religion: its business is with principles. - -The paragraph throws needless odium on a large and an inseparable -portion of the community,—the Roman Catholics. “Aliens to our blood and -race!” cried indignantly the orator Shiel, in the House of Commons, when -some one had thus characterized the Irish. “Heavens! have I not, upon -the battle-field, seen those aliens do their duty to England?” It is too -soon after the great civil war to stigmatize, even by implication, a -class on whom we were then glad to call. Whole regiments of Roman -Catholics were then called into the service; Roman Catholic chaplains -were commissioned, than whom none did their duty better, or in a less -sectarian spirit. In case of another war, all these would be summoned to -duty again. We have no right, in reasoning on American institutions, to -treat this religious element as something by itself, an alien member, -not to be assimilated, virtually antagonistic to republican government. -It has never proved to be so in Switzerland, where about half the -cantons are overwhelmingly Roman Catholic, and yet the federal union is -preserved, and the republican feeling is as strong in these cantons as -in any other. - -No doubt there would be great objections to the domination of any single -religious body, and the more thorough its organization the worse; but -this is an event in the last degree improbable in any State of the -Union. It is doubtful if even the Roman Catholic Church will ever again -be relatively so powerful as in the early years of our government, when -it probably had a majority of the population in three States,—Maryland, -Louisiana, and Kentucky,—whereas now it has lost it in all. It may be -many years before we again see, as we saw for a quarter of a century, a -Roman Catholic chief justice of the United States (Taney). If we ever -see this church come into greater power, it will be because it shows, as -in England, such tact and discretion and moderation as to disarm -opposition, and earn the right to influence. The common feeling and -prejudice of American people is, and is likely to remain, overwhelmingly -against it; and none know this better than the Roman Catholic priests -themselves. They know very well that nothing would more exasperate this -feeling than to marshal women to the polls like sheep; and this alone -would prevent their doing it, were there no other obstacle. - -The abolitionists used to say that the instinct of any class of -oppressors was infallible, and that if the slaveholders, for instance, -dreaded a certain policy, that policy was the wise one for the slaves. -If the priests are such oppressors as Mr. Parkman thinks, they must have -the instinct of that class; and their present unanimous opposition to -woman suffrage is sufficient proof that it promises no good to them. How -easy it is to misinterpret their policy, has been shown in the school -suffrage matter. It was confidently stated that a certain priest in the -city where I live, had demanded from the pulpit a certain sum—two -thousand dollars—to pay the poll-taxes for women voters. Most people -believed it; yet, when it came to the point, not a Roman Catholic woman -applied for assessment. It will be thus with Mr. Parkman’s fears. Women -will ultimately vote,—as indeed, he seems rather to expect; and the -effect will be to make them more intelligent, and therefore less likely -to obey the will of any man. Roman Catholic men are learning to think -for themselves; and the best way to make women do so is to treat them as -intelligent and responsible beings. - - - - - CI. - DANGEROUS VOTERS. - - -One of the few plausible objections brought against women’s voting is -this: that it would demoralize the suffrage by letting in very dangerous -voters; that virtuous women would not vote, and vicious women would. It -is a very unfounded alarm. - -For, in the first place, our institutions rest—if they have any basis at -all—on this principle, that good is stronger than evil, that the -majority of men really wish to vote rightly, and that only time and -patience are needed to get the worst abuses righted. How any one can -doubt this, who watches the course of our politics, I do not see. In -spite of the great disadvantage of having masses of ignorant foreign -voters to deal with,—and of native black voters, who have been purposely -kept in ignorance,—we certainly see wrongs gradually righted, and the -truth by degrees prevail. Even the one great, exceptional case of New -York City has been reached at last; and the very extent of the evil has -brought its own cure. Now, why should this triumph of good over evil be -practicable among men, and not apply to women also? - -It must be either because women, as a class, are worse than men,—which -will hardly be asserted,—or because, for some special reason, bad women -have an advantage over good women such as has no parallel in the other -sex. But I do not see how this can be. Let us consider. - -It is certain that good women are not less faithful and conscientious -than good men. It is generally admitted that those most opposed to -suffrage will very soon, on being fully enfranchised, feel it their duty -to vote. They may at first misuse the right through ignorance, but they -certainly will not shirk it. It is this conscientious habit on which I -rely without fear. Never yet, when public duty required, have American -women failed to meet the emergency; and I am not afraid of it now. -Moreover, when they are once enfranchised and their votes are needed, -all the men who now oppose or ridicule the demand for suffrage will -begin to help them to exercise it. When the wives are once enfranchised, -you may be sure that the husbands will not neglect those of their own -household: they will provide them with ballots, vehicles, and policemen, -and will contrive to make the voting-places pleasanter than many -parlors, and quieter than some churches. - -On the other hand, it seems altogether probable that the very worst -women, so far from being ostentatious in their wickedness upon -election-day, will, on the contrary, so disguise and conceal themselves -as to deceive the very elect, and, if it were possible, the very -policemen. For whatever party they may vote, they will contribute to -make the voting-places as orderly as railway-stations. These covert ways -are the very habit of their lives, at least by daylight; and the women -who have of late done the most conspicuous and open mischief in our -community have done it, not in their true character as evil, but, on the -contrary, under a mask of elevated purpose. - -That women, when they vote, will commit their full share of errors, I -have always maintained. But that they will collectively misuse their -power, seems to me out of the question; and that the good women are -going to stay at home, and let bad women do the voting, appears quite as -incredible. In fact, if they do thus, it is a fair question whether the -epithets “good” and “bad” ought not, politically speaking, to change -places. For it naturally occurs to every one, on election-day, that the -man who votes, even if he votes wrong, is really a better man, so far as -political duties go, than the very loftiest saint who stays at home and -prays that other people may vote right. And it is hard to see why it -should be otherwise with women. - - - - - CII. - HOW WOMEN WILL LEGISLATE. - - -It is often said, that, when women vote, their votes will make no -difference in the count, because they will merely duplicate the votes of -their husbands and brothers. Then these same objectors go on and predict -all sorts of evil things, for which women will vote, quite apart from -their husbands and brothers. Moreover, the evils thus predicted are apt -to be diametrically opposite. Thus Goldwin Smith predicts that women -will be governed by priests, and then goes on to predict that women will -vote to abolish marriage; not seeing, that, as Professor Cairnes has -pointed out, these two predictions destroy each other. - -On the other hand, I think that the advocates of woman suffrage often -err by claiming too much,—as that all women will vote for peace, for -total abstinence, against slavery, and the rest. It seems better to rest -the argument on general principles, and not to seek to prophesy too -closely. The only thing which I feel safe in predicting is, that woman -suffrage will be used, as it should be, for the protection of woman. -Self-respect and self-protection,—these are, as has been already said, -the two great things for which woman needs the ballot. - -It is not the nature of things, I take it, that a class politically -subject can obtain justice from the governing class. Not the least of -the benefits gained by political equality for the colored people of the -South is, that the laws now generally make no difference of color in -penalties for crime. In slavery times, there were dozens of crimes which -were punished more severely by the statute if committed by a slave or a -free negro, than if done by a white. I feel very sure that under the -reign of impartial suffrage we should see fewer such announcements as -this, which I cut from a late New York “Evening Express:”— - - “Last night Capt. Lowery, of the Twenty-seventh Precinct, made a - descent upon the dance-house in the basement of 96 Greenwich Street, - and arrested fifty-two men and eight women. The entire batch was - brought before Justice Flammer, at the Tombs Police Court, this - morning. Louise Maud, the proprietress, was held in five hundred - dollars bail to answer at the Court of General Sessions. _The - fifty-two men were fined three dollars each, all but twelve paying - at once; and the eight women were fined ten dollars each, and sent - to the Island for one month._” - -The Italics are my own. When we reflect that this dance-house, whatever -it was, was unquestionably sustained for the gratification of men, -rather than of women; when we consider that every one of these fifty-two -men came there, in all probability, by his own free will, and to spend -money, not to earn it; and that the undoubted majority of the women were -driven there by necessity or betrayal, or force or despair,—it would -seem that even an equal punishment would have been cruel injustice to -the women. But when we observe how trifling a penalty was three dollars -each to these men, whose money was sure to go for riotous living in some -form, and forty of whom had the amount of the fine in their pockets; and -how hopelessly large an amount was ten dollars each to women who did -not, probably, own even the clothes they wore, and who were to be sent -to prison for a month in addition,—we see a kind of injustice which -would stand a fair chance of being righted, I suspect, if women came -into power. Not that they would punish their own sex less severely; -probably they would not: but they would put men more on a level as to -the penalty. - -It may be said that no such justice is to be expected from women; -because women in what is called “society” condemn women for mere -imprudence, and excuse men for guilt. But it must be remembered, that in -“society” guilt is rarely a matter of open proof and conviction, in case -of men: it is usually a matter of surmise; and it is easy for either -love or ambition to set the surmise aside, and to assume that the worst -reprobate is “only a little wild.” In fact, as Margaret Fuller pointed -out years ago, how little conception has a virtuous woman as to what a -dissipated young man really is! But let that same woman be a Portia, in -the judgment-seat, or even a legislator or a voter, and let her have the -unmistakable and actual offender before her, and I do not believe that -she will excuse him for a paltry fine, and give the less guilty woman a -penalty more than quadruple. - -Women will also be sure to bring special sympathy and intelligent -attention to the wrongs of children. Who can read without shame and -indignation this report from “The New York Herald”? - - - THE CHILD-SELLING CASE. - - Peter Hallock, committed on a charge of abducting Lena Dinser, a - young girl thirteen years old, whom, it was alleged, her father, - George Dinser, had sold to Hallock for purposes of prostitution, was - again brought yesterday before Judge Westbrook in the Supreme Court - Chambers, on the writ of habeas-corpus previously obtained by Mr. - William F. Howe, the prisoner’s counsel. Mr. Howe claimed that - Hallock could not be held on either section of the statute for - abduction. Under the first section the complaint, he insisted, - should set forth that the child was taken contrary to the wish and - against the consent of her parents. On the contrary, the evidence, - he urged, showed that the father was a willing party. Under the - second section, it was contended that the prisoner could not be - held, as there was no averment that the girl was of previous chaste - character. Judge Westbrook, a brief counter argument having been - made by Mr. Dana, held that the points of Mr. Howe were well taken, - and ordered the prisoner’s discharge. - -Here was a father, who, as the newspapers allege, had previously sold -two other daughters, body and soul, and against whom the evidence seemed -to be in this case clear. Yet through the defectiveness of the statute, -or the remissness of the prosecuting attorney, he goes free, without -even a trial, to carry on his infamous traffic for other children. Grant -that the points were technically well taken and irresistible,—though -this is by no means certain,—it is very sure that there should be laws -that should reach such atrocities with punishment, whether the father -does or does not consent to his child’s ruin; and that public sentiment -should compel prosecuting officers to be as careful in framing their -indictments where human souls are at stake as where the question is of -dollars only. It is upon such matters that the influence of women will -make itself felt in legislation. - - - - - CIII. - WARNED IN TIME. - - -As a reform advances, it draws in more and more people who are not -immaculate. Such people are often found, indeed, among the very pioneers -of reform; and their number naturally increases as the reform grows -popular. The larger a coral island grows, the more driftwood attaches -itself; and the coral insects might as well stipulate that every -floating log should be sound and stanch, as a reform that all its -converts should be in the highest degree reputable. We expect, sooner or -later, to be in the majority. But we certainly do not expect to find all -that majority saints. - -Yet many good people are constantly distressing themselves, and writing -letters of remonstrance, public or private, to editors, because this or -that unscrupulous person chooses to join our army. If we select that -person for a general, we are doubtless to be held responsible; but for -nothing else. People may indeed say—and justly—that every such ally -brings suspicion upon us. Very likely; then we must work harder to avert -suspicion. People may urge that no reform was ever watched so anxiously -as this, for its effect on female character especially, and that a -single discreditable instance may do incalculable harm. No doubt. And -yet, after all, we are to work with human means and under human -limitations; and God accomplishes much good in this world through rather -poor instruments—such as you and me. - -I have no manner of doubt that the great majority of those who take up -this movement will do it from tolerably pure motives, and will, on the -whole, do credit to it by their personal demeanor. But of course there -will be exceptions,—hypocrites, self-seekers, and black sheep generally. -Horace Mann used to say that the clergy were, on the whole, pure men; -but that some of the worst men in every age and place were always found -among the clergy also,—taking that disguise as a cloak for wickedness. -For “clergy” in this case read “reformers.” - -And there is this special good done, in a reform, by the sinners who -take hold of it, that they warn us in time that all reform is limited by -the imperfections of average humanity. The theory of the Roman Catholic -Church is a sublime one,—that every pope should be a saint; but it is -limited by the practical difficulty of securing a sufficient supply of -the article. So it is with the woman suffrage movement. “Would it not be -desirable,” write enthusiastic correspondents, “that every woman in this -sacred enterprise should have a heart free from guile?” Perhaps not. The -plan looks attractive certainly; but would there not be this objection, -that, could you enlist this regiment of perfect beings, they would give -a very false impression of the sex for which they stand? If women are -not all saints,—if they are capable, like men, of selfishness and -ambition, malice and falsehood,—it is of great importance that we should -be warned in time. Better see their faults now, and enfranchise them -with our eyes open, than enfranchise them as angels, and then be -dismayed when they turn out to be human beings. - -There is no use in carrying this reform, or any other, on mistaken -expectations. Multitudes of persons are looking to woman suffrage, -mainly as a means of elevating politics. Every woman who awakens -distrust or contempt damps the ardor of these persons. It is a -misfortune that they should be discouraged; but, if they have idealized -woman too much, they may as well be disenchanted first as last. Woman -does not need the ballot chiefly that she may take it in her hands, and -elevate man; but she needs it primarily for her own defence, just as men -need it. Which will use it best, who can say? Women are doubtless less -sensual than men; but the sensual vices are the very least of the vices -that corrupt our politics. Selfishness, envy, jealousy, vanity, -cowardice, bigotry, caste-prejudice, recklessness of assertion,—these -are the traits that demoralize our public men. Is there any reason to -believe that women are, on the whole, more free from these? If not, we -may as well know it by visible, though painful, examples. Knowing it, we -may take a reasonable view of woman, and legislate for her as she is. I -do not believe with Mrs. Croly, that “women are nearly all treacherous -and cruel to each other;” but I believe that they are, as Gen. Saxton -described the negroes, “intensely human,” and that we may as well be -warned of this in time. - - - - - CIV. - INDIVIDUALS _vs._ CLASSES. - - -As the older arguments against woman suffrage are abandoned, we hear -more and more of the final objection, that the majority of women have -not yet expressed themselves on the subject. It is common for such -reasoners to make the remark, that if they knew a given number of -women—say fifty, or a hundred, or five hundred—who honestly wished to -vote, they would favor it. Produce that number of unimpeachable names, -and they say that they have reconsidered the matter, and must demand -more,—perhaps ten thousand. Bring ten thousand, and the demand again -rises. “Prove that the majority of women wish to vote, and they shall -vote.”—“Precisely,” we say: “give us a chance to prove it by taking a -vote;” and they answer, “By no means.” - -And, in a certain sense, they are right. It ought not to be settled that -way,—by dealing with woman as a class, and taking the vote. The -agitators do not merely claim the right of suffrage for her as a class: -they claim it for each individual woman, without reference to any other. -Class legislation—as Mary Ann in Bret Harte’s “Lothaw” says of Brook -Farm—“is a thing of the past.” If there is only one woman in the nation -who claims the right to vote, she ought to have it. - -In Oriental countries all legislation is for classes, and in England it -is still mainly so. A man is expected to remain in the station in which -he is born; or, if he leaves it, it is by a distinct process, and he -comes under the influence, in various ways, of different laws. If the -iniquities of the “Contagious Diseases” act in England, for instance, -had not been confined in their legal application to the lower social -grades, the act would never have passed. It was easy for men of the -higher classes to legislate away the modesty of women of the lower -classes; but if the daughter of an earl could have been arrested, and -submitted to a surgical examination at the will of any policeman, as the -daughter of a mechanic now can, the law would not have stood a day. So, -through all our slave States, there was class legislation for every -person of negro blood: the laws of crime, of punishment, of testimony, -were all adapted to classes, not individuals. Emancipation swept this -all away, in most cases: classes ceased to exist before the law, so far -as men at least were concerned; there were only individuals. The more -progress, the less class in legislation. We claim the application of -this principle as rapidly as possible to women. - -Our community does not refuse permission for women to go unveiled till -it is proved that the majority of women desire it; it does not even ask -that question: if one woman wishes to show her face, it is allowed. If a -woman wishes to travel alone, to walk the streets alone, the police -protects her in that liberty. She is not thrust back into her house with -the reproof, “My dear madam, at this particular moment the overwhelming -majority of women are indoors: prove that they all wish to come out, and -you shall come.” On the contrary, she comes forth at her own sweet will: -the policeman helps her tenderly across the street, and waves back with -imperial gesture the obtrusive coal-cart. Some of us claim for each -individual woman, in the same way, not merely the right to go shopping, -but to go voting; not merely to show her face, but to show her hand. - -There will always be many women, as there are many men, who are -indifferent to voting. For a time, perhaps always, there will be a -larger percentage of this indifference among women. But the natural -right to a share in the government under which one lives, and to a voice -in making the laws under which one may be hanged,—this belongs to each -woman as an individual; and she is quite right to claim it as she needs -it, even though the majority of her sex still prefer to take their -chance of the penalty, without perplexing themselves about the law. The -demand of every enlightened woman who asks for the ballot—like the -demand of every enlightened slave for freedom—is an individual demand; -and the question whether they represent the majority of their class has -nothing to do with it. For a republic like ours does not profess to deal -with classes, but with individuals; since “the whole people covenants -with each citizen, and each citizen with the whole people, for the -common good,” as the constitution of Massachusetts says. - -And, fortunately, there is such power in an individual demand that it -appeals to thousands whom no abstract right touches. Five minutes with -Frederick Douglass settled the question, for any thoughtful person, of -that man’s right to freedom. Let any woman of position desire to enter -what is called “the lecture-field,” to support herself and her children, -and at once all abstract objections to women’s speaking in public -disappear: her friends may be never so hostile to “the cause,” but they -espouse her individual cause; the most conservative clergyman subscribes -for tickets, but begs that his name may not be mentioned. They do not -admit that women, as a class, should speak,—not they; but for this -individual woman they throng the hall. Mrs. Dahlgren abhors politics: a -woman in Congress, a woman in the committee-room,—what can be more -objectionable? But I observe, that, when Mrs. Dahlgren wishes to obtain -more profit by her husband’s inventions, all objections vanish: she can -appeal to Congressmen, she can address committees, she can, I hope, -prevail. The individual ranks first in our sympathy: we do not wait to -take the census of the “class.” Make way for the individual, whether it -be Mrs. Dahlgren pleading for the rights of property, or Lucy Stone -pleading for the rights of the mother to her child. - - - - - CV. - DEFEATS BEFORE VICTORIES. - - -After one of the early defeats in the War of the Rebellion, the -commander of a Massachusetts regiment wrote home to his father: “I wish -people would not write us so many letters of condolence. Our defeat -seemed to trouble them much more than it troubles us. Did people suppose -there were to be no ups and downs? We expect to lose plenty of battles, -but we have enlisted for the war.” - -It is just so with every successful reform. While enemies and -half-friends are proclaiming its defeats, those who advocate it are -rejoicing that they have at last got an army into the field to be -defeated. Unless this war is to be an exception to all others, even the -fact of having joined battle is a great deal. It is the first step. -Defeat first; a good many defeats, if you please: victory by and by. - -William Wilberforce, writing to a friend in the year 1817, said, “I -continue faithful to the measure of Parliamentary reform brought forward -by Mr. Pitt. I am firmly persuaded that at present a prodigious majority -of the people of this country are adverse to the measure. In my view, so -far from being an objection to the discussion, this is rather a -recommendation.” In 1832 the reform-bill was passed. - -In the first Parliamentary debate on the slave-trade, Col. Tarleton, who -boasted to have killed more men than any one in England, pointing to -Wilberforce and others, said, “The inspiration began on that side of the -house;” then turning round, “The revolution has reached to this also, -and reached to the height of fanaticism and frenzy.” The first vote in -the House of Commons, in 1790, after arguments in the affirmative by -Wilberforce, Pitt, Fox, and Burke, stood, ayes, 88; noes, 163: majority -against the measure, 75. In 1807 the slave-trade was abolished, and in -1834 slavery in the British colonies followed; and even on the very -night when the latter bill passed, the abolitionists were taunted by -Gladstone, the great Demerara slaveholder, with having toiled for forty -years and done nothing. The Roman Catholic relief-bill, establishing -freedom of thought in England, had the same experience. It passed in -1829 by a majority of a hundred and three in the House of Lords, which -had nine months before refused by a majority of forty-five to take up -the question at all. - -The English corn-laws went down a quarter of a century ago, after a -similar career of failures. In 1840, there were hundreds of thousands in -England who thought that to attack the corn-laws was to attack the very -foundations of society. Lord Melbourne, the prime minister, said in -Parliament, that “he had heard of many mad things in his life, but, -before God, the idea of repealing the corn-laws was the very maddest -thing of which he had ever heard.” Lord John Russell counselled the -House to refuse to hear evidence on the operation of the corn-laws. Six -years after, in 1846, they were abolished forever. - -How Wendell Phillips, in the anti-slavery meetings, used to lash -pro-slavery men with such formidable facts as these,—and to quote how -Clay and Calhoun and Webster and Everett had pledged themselves that -slavery should never be discussed, or had proposed that those who -discussed it should be imprisoned,—while, in spite of them all, the -great reform was moving on, and the abolitionists were forcing -politicians and people to talk, like Sterne’s starling, nothing but -slavery! - -We who were trained in the light of these great agitations have learned -their lesson. We expect to march through a series of defeats to victory. -The first thing is, as in the anti-slavery movement, so to arouse the -public mind as to make this the central question. Given this prominence, -and it is enough for this year or for many years to come. Wellington -said that there was no such tragedy as a victory, except a defeat. On -the other hand, the next best thing to a victory is a defeat, for it -shows that the armies are in the field. Without the unsuccessful attempt -of to-day, no success to-morrow. - -When Mrs. Frances Anne Kemble came to this country, she was amazed to -find Americans celebrating the battle of Bunker Hill, which she had -always heard claimed as a victory for King George. Such it was doubtless -called; but what we celebrated was the fact that the Americans there -threw up breastworks, stood their ground, fired away their -ammunition,—and were defeated. And thus the reformer, looking at his -failures, often sees in them such a step forward, that they are the -Bunker Hill of a new revolution. Give us plenty of such defeats, and we -can afford to wait a score of years for the victories. They will come. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES - - - 1. Silently corrected typographical errors and variations in spelling. - 2. Archaic, non-standard, and uncertain spellings retained as printed. - 3. Enclosed italics font in _underscores_. - 4. Enclosed bold font in =equals=. - -*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK COMMON SENSE ABOUT WOMEN *** - -***** This file should be named 63948-0.txt or 63948-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/6/3/9/4/63948/ - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where - you are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - diff --git a/old/63948-0.zip b/old/63948-0.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c328b95..0000000 --- a/old/63948-0.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/63948-h.zip b/old/63948-h.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index c291195..0000000 --- a/old/63948-h.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/63948-h/63948-h.htm b/old/63948-h/63948-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index dbb6c3f..0000000 --- a/old/63948-h/63948-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,12750 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" - "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> - <head> - <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" /> - <title>The Project Gutenberg eBook of Common Sense About Women, by Thomas Wentworth Higginson</title> - - <style type="text/css"> - body { margin-left: 8%; margin-right: 10%; } - h1 { text-align: center; font-weight: bold; font-size: xx-large; } - h2 { text-align: center; font-weight: bold; font-size: x-large; } - h3 { text-align: center; font-weight: bold; font-size: large; } - h4 { text-align: center; font-weight: bold; font-size: 1.0em; } - .pageno { right: 1%; font-size: x-small; background-color: inherit; color: silver; - text-indent: 0em; text-align: right; position: absolute; - border: thin solid silver; padding: .1em .2em; font-style: normal; - font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; } - p { text-indent: 0; margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; text-align: justify; } - sup { vertical-align: top; font-size: 0.6em; } - .fss { font-size: 75%; } - .sc { font-variant: small-caps; } - .large { font-size: large; } - .xlarge { font-size: x-large; } - .small { font-size: small; } - .lg-container-b { text-align: center; } - .x-ebookmaker .lg-container-b { clear: both; } - .lg-container-l { text-align: justify; } - .x-ebookmaker .lg-container-l { clear: both; } - .lg-container-r { text-align: right; } - .x-ebookmaker .lg-container-r { clear: both; } - .linegroup { display: inline-block; text-align: justify; } - .x-ebookmaker .linegroup { display: block; margin-left: 1.5em; } - .linegroup .group { margin: 1em auto; } - .linegroup .line { text-indent: -3em; padding-left: 3em; } - div.linegroup > :first-child { margin-top: 0; } - .linegroup .in12 { padding-left: 9.0em; } - .linegroup .in2 { padding-left: 4.0em; } - .linegroup .in21 { padding-left: 13.5em; } - .linegroup .in4 { padding-left: 5.0em; } - .linegroup .in8 { padding-left: 7.0em; } - .ol_1 li {padding-left: 1em; text-indent: -1em; } - ol.ol_1 {padding-left: 0; margin-left: 2.78%; margin-top: .5em; - margin-bottom: .5em; list-style-type: decimal; } - div.footnote > :first-child { margin-top: 1em; } - div.footnote p { text-indent: 1em; margin-top: 0.25em; margin-bottom: 0.25em; } - div.pbb { page-break-before: always; } - hr.pb { border: none; border-bottom: thin solid; margin-bottom: 1em; } - .x-ebookmaker hr.pb { display: none; } - .chapter { clear: both; page-break-before: always; } - .table0 { margin: auto; margin-top: 4em; border-collapse: collapse; } - .table1 { margin: auto; margin-top: 2em; } - .table2 { margin: auto; } - .bbt { border-bottom: thin solid; } - .blt { border-left: thin solid; } - .brt { border-right: thin solid; } - .btt { border-top: thin solid; } - .nf-center { text-align: center; } - .nf-center-c0 { text-align: justify; margin: 0.5em 0; } - .c000 { margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; } - .c001 { vertical-align: top; text-align: center; padding-left: .5em; - padding-right: .5em; } - .c002 { vertical-align: top; text-align: justify; text-indent: -1em; - padding-left: 1.5em; padding-right: .5em; } - .c003 { vertical-align: top; text-align: right; padding-left: .5em; - padding-right: .5em; } - .c004 { page-break-before: always; margin-top: 4em; } - .c005 { margin-top: 2em; } - .c006 { margin-top: 1em; } - .c007 { margin-top: 4em; } - .c008 { page-break-before:auto; margin-top: 4em; } - .c009 { vertical-align: top; text-align: right; padding-right: 1em; } - .c010 { vertical-align: top; text-align: justify; text-indent: -1em; - padding-left: 1em; padding-right: 1em; } - .c011 { vertical-align: bottom; text-align: right; } - .c012 { vertical-align: top; text-align: justify; padding-right: 1em; } - .c013 { margin-top: 2em; text-indent: 1em; margin-bottom: 0.25em; } - .c014 { text-indent: 1em; margin-top: 0.25em; margin-bottom: 0.25em; } - .c015 { page-break-before: auto; margin-top: 4em; } - .c016 { margin-top: 1em; font-size: .9em; } - .c017 { text-indent: 0; margin-top: 0.25em; margin-bottom: 0.25em; } - .c018 { text-decoration: none; } - .c019 { page-break-before: auto; margin-top: 2em; } - .c020 { margin-top: 1em; font-size: .9em; text-indent: 1em; margin-bottom: 0.25em; - } - .c021 { font-size: .9em; text-indent: 1em; margin-top: 0.25em; - margin-bottom: 0.25em; } - .c022 { text-align: center; } - .c023 { vertical-align: top; text-align: center; } - .c024 { vertical-align: top; text-align: right; } - .c025 { vertical-align: top; text-align: center; padding-right: 1em; } - .c026 { margin-top: 2em; font-size: .9em; } - .c027 { font-size: .9em; } - .c028 { vertical-align: middle; text-align: center; padding-right: 1em; } - .c029 { vertical-align: middle; text-align: center; } - .c030 { font-size: 700%; } - .c031 { margin-top: 2em; font-size: .9em; text-indent: 1em; margin-bottom: 0.25em; - } - div.tnotes { padding-left:1em;padding-right:1em;background-color:#E3E4FA; - border:1px solid silver; margin:2em 10% 0 10%; font-family: Georgia, serif; - } - .covernote { visibility: hidden; display: none; } - div.tnotes p { text-align: justify; } - .x-ebookmaker .covernote { visibility: visible; display: block; } - h1,h2,h3 { clear: both; } - .footnote {font-size: .9em; } - div.footnote p {text-indent: 2em; margin-bottom: .5em; } - .chapter { clear: both; page-break-before: always; } - .section { page-break-before: always; } - .ol_1 li {font-size: .9em; } - .x-ebookmaker .ol_1 li {padding-left: 1em; text-indent: 0em; } - body {font-family: Georgia, serif, 'DejaVu Sans'; text-align: justify; } - table {font-size: .9em; padding: 1.5em .5em 1em; page-break-inside: avoid; - clear: both; } - div.titlepage {text-align: center; page-break-before: always; - page-break-after: always; } - div.titlepage p {text-align: center; text-indent: 0em; font-weight: bold; - line-height: 1.5; margin-top: 3em; } - .ph2 { text-indent: 0em; font-weight: bold; font-size: x-large; margin: .75em auto; - page-break-before: always; } - .x-ebookmaker p.dropcap:first-letter { float: left; } - </style> - </head> - <body> -<pre style='margin-bottom:6em;'>The Project Gutenberg EBook of Common Sense about Women, by Thomas -Wentworth Higginson - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you -will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before -using this ebook. - -Title: Common Sense about Women - -Author: Thomas Wentworth Higginson - -Release Date: December 05, 2020 [EBook #63948] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -Produced by: Richard Tonsing and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team - at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images - generously made available by The Internet Archive) - -*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK COMMON SENSE ABOUT WOMEN *** -</pre> -<div class='tnotes covernote'> - -<p class='c000'><b>Transcriber’s Note:</b></p> - -<p class='c000'>The cover image was created by the transcriber and is placed in the public domain.</p> - -</div> - -<table class='table0' summary=''> - <tr> - <th class='btt blt brt c001' colspan='2'><span class='xlarge'>T. W. HIGGINSON’S BOOKS.</span></th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'> </td> - <td class='brt c003'> </td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'> </td> - <td class='brt c003'> </td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'>COMMON SENSE ABOUT WOMEN</td> - <td class='brt c003'>$1 50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'> </td> - <td class='brt c003'> </td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'>ARMY LIFE IN A BLACK REGIMENT</td> - <td class='brt c003'>1 50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'> </td> - <td class='brt c003'> </td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'>ATLANTIC ESSAYS</td> - <td class='brt c003'>1 50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'> </td> - <td class='brt c003'> </td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'>OLDPORT DAYS. With 10 Heliotype Illustrations</td> - <td class='brt c003'>2 00</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'> </td> - <td class='brt c003'> </td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'>OUT-DOOR PAPERS</td> - <td class='brt c003'>1 50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'> </td> - <td class='brt c003'> </td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'>MALBONE. An Oldport Romance</td> - <td class='brt c003'>1 50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'> </td> - <td class='brt c003'> </td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'>YOUNG FOLKS’ HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES. Illustrated. 16mo</td> - <td class='brt c003'>1 50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'> </td> - <td class='brt c003'> </td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'>YOUNG FOLKS’ BOOK OF AMERICAN EXPLORERS. Illustrated. 16mo</td> - <td class='brt c003'>1 50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'> </td> - <td class='brt c003'> </td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'>SHORT STUDIES OF AMERICAN AUTHORS. Little classic size</td> - <td class='brt c003'>75</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'> </td> - <td class='brt c003'> </td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='blt c002'> </td> - <td class='brt c003'> </td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='bbt blt brt c001' colspan='2'>LEE AND SHEPARD, PUBLISHERS, BOSTON.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<div class='titlepage'> - -<div> - <h1 class='c004'><span class='sc'>Common Sense about Women</span></h1> -</div> - -<div class='nf-center-c0'> -<div class='nf-center c005'> - <div><span class='small'>BY</span></div> - <div class='c006'><span class='xlarge'>THOMAS WENTWORTH HIGGINSON</span></div> - <div class='c005'>BOSTON</div> - <div class='c006'>LEE AND SHEPARD PUBLISHERS</div> - <div class='c006'>NEW YORK</div> - <div class='c006'>CHARLES T. DILLINGHAM</div> - <div class='c006'>1882</div> - </div> -</div> - -</div> - -<div class='nf-center-c0'> -<div class='nf-center c007'> - <div><span class='sc'>Copyright, 1881,</span></div> - <div class='c006'><span class='sc'>By</span> THOMAS WENTWORTH HIGGINSON.</div> - <div class='c006'><em>All rights reserved.</em></div> - </div> -</div> - -<div class='nf-center-c0'> -<div class='nf-center c007'> - <div><b>To</b></div> - <div class='c006'><b>My Little Daughter Margaret.</b></div> - </div> -</div> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_1'>1</span> - <h2 class='c008'>TABLE OF CONTENTS.</h2> -</div> - -<table class='table1' summary='TABLE OF CONTENTS'> - <tr> - <th class='c009'></th> - <th class='c010'> </th> - <th class='c011'><span class='small'>PAGE</span></th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'><b>Physiology</b></td> - <td class='c010'> </td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_5'>5</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>I.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Too much Natural History</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_7'>7</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>II.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Darwin, Huxley, and Buckle</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_11'>11</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>III.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Which is the Stronger?</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_16'>16</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>IV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Spirit of Small Tyranny</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_18'>18</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>V.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>The Noble Sex</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_21'>21</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>VI.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Physiological Croaking</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_24'>24</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>VII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Truth about our Grandmothers</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_28'>28</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>VIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Physique of American Women</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_33'>33</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>IX.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>Very much Fatigued</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_37'>37</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>X.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Limitations of Sex</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_40'>40</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'><b>Temperament</b></td> - <td class='c010'> </td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_43'>43</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XI.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Invisible Lady</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_45'>45</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Sacred Obscurity</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_49'>49</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XIII.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>Our Trials</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_52'>52</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XIV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Virtues in Common</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_55'>55</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Individual Differences</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_60'>60</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XVI.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Angelic Superiority</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_63'>63</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XVII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Vicarious Honors</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_66'>66</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XVIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Gospel of Humiliation</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_69'>69</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XIX.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>Celery and Cherubs</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_73'>73</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XX.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Need of Cavalry</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_77'>77</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXI.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>The Reason Firm, the Temperate Will</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_80'>80</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXII.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>Allures to Brighter Worlds, and leads the Way</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_83'>83</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'><span class='pageno' id='Page_2'>2</span><b>The Home</b></td> - <td class='c010'> </td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_87'>87</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Wanted—Homes</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_89'>89</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXIV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Origin of Civilization</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_93'>93</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Low-Water Mark</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_96'>96</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXVI.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>Obey</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_99'>99</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXVII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Woman in the Chrysalis</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_103'>103</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXVIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Two and Two</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_106'>106</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXIX.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>A Model Household</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_109'>109</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXX.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>A Safeguard for the Family</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_112'>112</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXXI.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Women as Economists</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_116'>116</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXXII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Greater includes Less</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_120'>120</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXXIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>A Co-Partnership</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_123'>123</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXXIV.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>One Responsible Head</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_127'>127</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXXV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Asking for Money</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_131'>131</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXXVI.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Womanhood and Motherhood</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_135'>135</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXXVII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>A German Point of View</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_139'>139</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXXVIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Childless Women</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_142'>142</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XXXIX.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Prevention of Cruelty to Mothers</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_145'>145</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'><b>Society</b></td> - <td class='c010'> </td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_149'>149</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XL.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Foam and Current</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_151'>151</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XLI.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>In Society</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_155'>155</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XLII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Battle of the Cards</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_159'>159</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XLIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Some Working-Women</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_163'>163</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XLIV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Empire of Manners</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_167'>167</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XLV.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>Girlsterousness</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_171'>171</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XLVI.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Are Women Natural Aristocrats?</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_175'>175</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XLVII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Mrs. Blank’s Daughters</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_178'>178</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XLVIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The European Plan</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_181'>181</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XLIX.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>Featherses</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_185'>185</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>L.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Some Man-Millinery</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_189'>189</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LI.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Sublime Princes in Distress</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_192'>192</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'><span class='pageno' id='Page_3'>3</span><b>Education</b></td> - <td class='c010'> </td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_197'>197</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LII.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>Experiments</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_199'>199</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Intellectual Cinderellas</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_203'>203</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LIV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Foreign Education</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_207'>207</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Teaching the Teachers</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_210'>210</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LVI.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>Cupid-and-Psychology</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_213'>213</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LVII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Medical Science for Women</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_216'>216</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LVIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Sewing in Schools</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_219'>219</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LIX.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Cash Premiums for Study</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_223'>223</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LX.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Mental Horticulture</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_226'>226</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'><b>Employment</b></td> - <td class='c010'> </td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_231'>231</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXI.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>Sexual Difference of Employment</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_233'>233</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Use of One’s Feet</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_237'>237</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Miss Ingelow’s Problem</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_240'>240</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXIV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Self-Support</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_245'>245</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Self-Supporting Wives</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_248'>248</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXVI.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Problem of Wages</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_251'>251</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXVII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Thorough</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_255'>255</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXVIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Literary Aspirants</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_259'>259</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXIX.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>The Career of Letters</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_263'>263</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXX.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Talking and Taking</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_266'>266</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXI.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>How to speak in Public</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_269'>269</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012' colspan='2'><b>Principles of Government</b></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_273'>273</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>We the People</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_275'>275</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Use of the Declaration of Independence</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_278'>278</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXIV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Traditions of the Fathers</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_281'>281</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Some Old-Fashioned Principles</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_285'>285</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXVI.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Founded on a Rock</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_288'>288</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXVII.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>The Good of the Governed</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_292'>292</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXVIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Ruling at Second-Hand</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_296'>296</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXIX.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>Too Many Voters already</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_299'>299</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'><span class='pageno' id='Page_4'>4</span><b>Suffrage</b></td> - <td class='c010'> </td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_303'>303</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXX.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Drawing the Line</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_305'>305</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXXI.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>For Self-Protection</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_309'>309</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXXII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Womanly Statesmanship</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_312'>312</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXXIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Too Much Prediction</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_316'>316</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXXIV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>First-Class Carriages</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_320'>320</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXXV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Education via Suffrage</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_324'>324</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXXVI.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>Off with her Head!</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_328'>328</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXXVII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Follow your Leaders</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_331'>331</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXXVIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>How to make Women understand Politics</span>.</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_335'>335</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>LXXXIX.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>Inferior to Man, and Near to Angels</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_339'>339</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012' colspan='2'><b>Objections to Suffrage</b></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_343'>343</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XC.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Fact of Sex</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_345'>345</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XCI.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>How will it result?</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_349'>349</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XCII.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>I have All the Rights I want</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_352'>352</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XCIII.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>Sense Enough to Vote</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_356'>356</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XCIV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>An Infelicitous Epithet</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_359'>359</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XCV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Rob Roy Theory</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_363'>363</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XCVI.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Votes of Non-Combatants</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_368'>368</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XCVII.</td> - <td class='c010'>“<span class='sc'>Manners repeal Laws</span>”</td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_372'>372</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XCVIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Kilkenny Arguments</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_375'>375</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>XCIX.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Women and Priests</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_379'>379</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>C.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>The Roman Catholic Bugbear</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_382'>382</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>CI.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Dangerous Voters</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_386'>386</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>CII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>How Women will legislate</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_389'>389</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>CIII.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Warned in Time</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_393'>393</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>CIV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Individuals vs. Classes</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_396'>396</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c009'>CV.</td> - <td class='c010'><span class='sc'>Defeats before Victories</span></td> - <td class='c011'><a href='#Page_400'>400</a></td> - </tr> -</table> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_5'>5</span> - <h2 class='c008'>PHYSIOLOGY.</h2> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>“<span lang="de" xml:lang="de">Allein, bevor und nachdem man Mutter ist, ist Man ein -Mensch; die mütterliche Bestimmung aber, oder gar die eheliche, -kann nicht die menschliche überwiegen oder ersetzen, -sondern sie muss das Mittel, nicht der Zweck derselben sein.</span>”—<span class='sc'> -J.P.F. Richter</span>: <i><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">Levana</span></i>, § 89.</p> - -<p class='c014'>“But, before and after being a mother, one is a human -being; and neither the motherly nor the wifely destination -can overbalance or replace the human, but must become its -means, not its end.”</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_7'>7</span> - <h2 class='c008'>COMMON SENSE ABOUT WOMEN.</h2> -</div> - -<h3 class='c015'>I.<br /> <span class='large'>TOO MUCH NATURAL HISTORY.</span></h3> - -<p class='c013'>Lord Melbourne, speaking of the fine ladies in -London who were fond of talking about their ailments, -used to complain that they gave him too much of their -natural history. There are a good many writers—usually -men—who, with the best intentions, discuss -woman as if she had merely a physical organization, -and as if she existed only for one object, the production -and rearing of children. Against this some protest -may well be made.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Doubtless there are few things more important to a -community than the health of its women. The Sandwich-Island -proverb says:—</p> - -<div class='lg-container-b c016'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>“If strong is the frame of the mother,</div> - <div class='line'>The son will give laws to the people.”</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c017'>And, in nations where all men give laws, all men -need mothers of strong frames.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Moreover, there is no harm in admitting that all the -rules of organization are imperative; that soul and -body, whether of man or woman, are made in harmony, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_8'>8</span>so that each part of our nature must accept the -limitations of the other. A man’s soul may yearn to -the stars; but so long as the body cannot jump so high, -he must accept the body’s veto. It is the same with -any veto interposed in advance by the physical structure -of woman. Nobody objects to this general principle. -It is only when clerical gentlemen or physiological -gentlemen undertake to go a step farther, and -put in that veto on their own responsibility, that it is -necessary to say, “Hands off, gentlemen! Precisely -because women are women, they, not you, are to settle -that question.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>One or two points are clear. Every specialist is -liable to overrate his own specialty; and the man -who thinks of woman only as a wife and mother is apt -to forget, that, before she was either of these, she was -a human being. “Women, as such,” says an able -writer, “are constituted for purposes of maternity and -the continuation of mankind.” Undoubtedly, and so -were men, as such, constituted for paternity. But very -much depends on what relative importance we assign to -the phrase, “as such.” Even an essay so careful, so -moderate, and so free from coarseness, as that here -quoted, suggests, after all, a slight one-sidedness,—perhaps -a natural re-action from the one-sidedness of -those injudicious reformers who allow themselves to -speak slightingly of “the merely animal function of -child-bearing.” Higher than either—wiser than both -put together—is that noble statement with which Jean -Paul begins his fine essay on the education of girls in -“Levana.” “Before being a wife or mother, one is a -human being; and neither motherly nor wifely destination -<span class='pageno' id='Page_9'>9</span>can overbalance or replace the human, but must -become its means, not end. As above the poet, the -painter, or the hero, so above the mother, does the -human being rise pre-eminent.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Here is sure anchorage. We can hold to this. And, -fortunately, all the analogies of nature sustain this -position. Throughout nature the laws of sex rule -everywhere; but they rule a kingdom of their own, -always subordinate to the greater kingdom of the vital -functions. Every creature, male or female, finds in its -sexual relations only a subordinate part of its existence. -The need of food, the need of exercise, the joy of living, -these come first, and absorb the bulk of its life, -whether the individual be male or female. This <em>Antiope</em> -butterfly, that flits at this moment past my window,—the -first of the season,—spends almost all its existence -in a form where the distinction of sex lies dormant: a -few days, I might almost say a few hours, comprise its -whole sexual consciousness, and the majority of its -race die before reaching that epoch. The law of sex is -written absolutely through the whole insect world. Yet -everywhere it is written as a secondary and subordinate -law. The life which is common to the sexes is the -principal life; the life which each sex leads, “as -such,” is a minor and subordinate thing.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The same rule pervades nature. Two riders pass -down the street before my window. One rides a horse, -the other a mare. The animals were perhaps foaled in -the same stable, of the same progenitors. They have -been reared alike, fed alike, trained alike, ridden alike; -they need the same exercise, the same grooming; nine -tenths of their existence are the same, and only the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_10'>10</span>other tenth is different. Their whole organization is -marked by the distinction of sex: but, though the -marking is ineffaceable, the distinction is not the first -or most important fact.</p> - -<p class='c014'>If this be true of the lower animals, it is far more -true of the higher. The mental and moral laws of the -universe touch us first and chiefly as human beings. -We eat our breakfasts as human beings, not as men -and women; and it is the same with nine tenths of our -interests and duties in life. In legislating or philosophizing -for woman, we must neither forget that she has -an organization distinct from that of man, nor must we -exaggerate the fact. Not “first the womanly and then -the human,” but first the human and then the womanly, -is to be the order of her training.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_11'>11</span> - <h3 class='c004'>II.<br /> <span class='large'>DARWIN, HUXLEY, AND BUCKLE.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>When any woman, old or young, asks the question, -Which among all modern books ought I to read first? -the answer is plain. She should read Buckle’s lecture -before the Royal Institution upon “The Influence -of Woman on the Progress of Knowledge.” It is -one of two papers contained in a thin volume called -“Essays by Henry Thomas Buckle.” As a means -whereby a woman may become convinced that her sex -has a place in the intellectual universe, this little essay -is almost indispensable. Nothing else takes its place.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Darwin and Huxley seem to make woman simply a -lesser man, weaker in body and mind,—an affectionate -and docile animal, of inferior grade. That there -is any aim in the distinction of the sexes, beyond the -perpetuation of the race, is nowhere recognized by -them, so far as I know. That there is any thing in -the intellectual sphere to correspond to the physical -difference; that here also the sexes are equal yet diverse, -and the natural completion and complement of -the other,—this neither Huxley nor Darwin explicitly -recognizes. And with the utmost admiration for their -great teachings in other ways, I must think that here -they are open to the suspicion of narrowness.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Huxley wrote in “The Reader,” in 1864, a short -<span class='pageno' id='Page_12'>12</span>paper called “Emancipation—Black and White,” in -which, while taking generous ground in behalf of the -legal and political position of woman, he yet does it -pityingly, <i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">de haut en bas</span></i>, as for a creature hopelessly -inferior, and so heavily weighted already by her sex, -that she should be spared all further trials. Speaking -through an imaginary critic, who seems to represent -himself, he denies “even the natural equality of the -sexes,” and declares “that in every excellent character, -whether mental or physical, the average woman -is inferior to the average man, in the sense of having -that character less in quantity and lower in quality.” -Finally he goes so far as “to defend the startling paradox -that even in physical beauty, man is the superior.” -He admits that for a brief period of early -youth the case may be doubtful, but claims that after -thirty the superior beauty of man is unquestionable. -Thus reasons Huxley; the whole essay being included -in his volume of “Lay Sermons, Addresses, and -Reviews.”<a id='r1' /><a href='#f1' class='c018'><sup>[1]</sup></a></p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f1'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r1'>1</a>. Pp. 22, 23, Am. ed.</p> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>Darwin’s best statements on the subject may be -found in his “Descent of Man.”<a id='r2' /><a href='#f2' class='c018'><sup>[2]</sup></a> He is, as usual, -more moderate and guarded than Huxley. He says, -for instance: “It is generally admitted that with -women the powers of intuition, of rapid perception, -and perhaps of imitation, are more strongly marked -than in man; but some, at least, of these faculties are -characteristic of the lower races, and therefore of a -past and lower state of civilization.” Then he passes -to the usual assertion that man has thus far attained to -a higher eminence than woman. “If two lists were -<span class='pageno' id='Page_13'>13</span>made of the most eminent men and women in poetry, -painting, sculpture, music,—comprising composition -and performance,—history, science, and philosophy, -with half a dozen names under each subject, the two -lists would not bear comparison.” But the obvious -answer, that nearly every name on his list, upon the -masculine side, would probably be taken from periods -when woman was excluded from any fair competition,—this -he does not seem to recognize at all. Darwin, -of all men, must admit that superior merit generally -arrives later, not earlier, on the scene; and the question -for him to answer is, not whether woman equalled -man in the first stages of the intellectual “struggle -for life,” but whether she is not gaining on him now.@</p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f2'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r2'>2</a>. II., 311, Am. Ed.</p> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>If, in spite of man’s enormous advantage in the -start, woman has already overtaken his very best performances -in several of the highest intellectual departments,—as, -for instance, prose fiction and dramatic -representation,—then it is mere dogmatism in Mr. -Darwin to deny that she may yet do the same in other -departments. We in this generation have actually seen -this success achieved by Rachel and Ristori in the one -art, by “George Sand” and “George Eliot” in the -other. Woman is, then, visibly gaining on man, in the -sphere of intellect; and, if so, Mr. Darwin, at least, -must accept the inevitable inference.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But this is arguing the question on the superficial -facts merely. Buckle goes deeper, and looks to principles. -That superior quickness of women, which -Darwin dismisses so lightly as something belonging to -savage epochs, is to Buckle the sign of a quality which -he holds essential, not only to literature and art, but -<span class='pageno' id='Page_14'>14</span>to science itself. Go among ignorant women, he says, -and you will find them more quick and intelligent than -equally ignorant men. A woman will usually tell you -the way in the street more readily than a man can; a -woman can always understand a foreigner more easily; -and Dr. Currie says in his letters, that when a laborer -and his wife came to consult him, he always got all the -information from the wife. Buckle illustrates this at -some length, and points out that a woman’s mind is -by its nature deductive and quick; a man’s mind, inductive -and slow; that each has its value, and that -science profoundly needs both.</p> - -<p class='c014'>“I will endeavor,” he says, “to establish two propositions. -First, that women naturally prefer the deductive -method to the inductive. Secondly, that -women, by encouraging in men deductive habits of -thought, have rendered an immense though unconscious -service to the progress of science, by preventing -scientific investigators from being as exclusively -inductive as they would otherwise be.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Then he shows that the most important scientific -discoveries of modern times—as of the law of gravitation -by Newton, the law of the forms of crystals -by Haüy, and the metamorphosis of plants by Goethe—were -all essentially the results of that <i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">a priori</span></i> or -deductive method, “which, during the last two centuries, -Englishmen have unwisely despised.” They were -all the work, in a manner, of the imagination,—of -the intuitive or womanly quality of mind. And nothing -can be finer or truer than the words in which -Buckle predicts the benefits that are to come from the -intellectual union of the sexes for the work of the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_15'>15</span>future. “In that field which we and our posterity -have yet to traverse, I firmly believe that the imagination -will effect quite as much as the understanding. -Our poetry will have to re-enforce our logic, and we -must feel quite as much as we must argue. Let us, -then, hope that the imaginative and emotional minds -of one sex will continue to accelerate the great progress -by acting upon and improving the colder and -harder minds of the other sex. By this coalition, by -this union of different faculties, different tastes, and -different methods, we shall go on our way with the -greater ease.”</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_16'>16</span> - <h3 class='c004'>III.<br /> <span class='large'>WHICH IS THE STRONGER?</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>What is strength,—the brute hardness of iron, or -the more delicate strength of steel? Which is the -stronger,—the physical frame that can strike the -harder blow, or that which can endure the greater -strain and yet last longer? “Man can lift a heavier -weight,” says a writer on physiology, “but woman -can watch more enduringly at the bedside of her sick -child.” The strain upon the system of all women who -have borne and reared children is as great in its way -as that upon the system of the carpenter or the woodchopper; -and the power to endure it is as properly to -be called strength.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Again, which is the stronger in the domain of will,—the -man who carries his points by energy and -command, or the woman who carries hers by patience -and persuasion? the man in the household who leads -and decides, or the woman who foresees, guards, manages? -the mother of the family, who puts the commas -and semicolons in her children’s lives, as Jean Paul -Richter says, or the father who puts in the colons and -periods? It may be hard to say which type of strength -is the more to be admired, but it is clear that they are -both genuine types.</p> - -<p class='c014'>One grows tired of hearing young men who can do -<span class='pageno' id='Page_17'>17</span>nothing but row, or swing dumb-bells, and are thrown -wholly “off their training” by the loss of a night’s -sleep, speak contemptuously of the physical weakness -of a woman who can watch with a sick person half a -dozen nights together. It is absurd to hear a man -who is prostrated by a single reverse in business speak -of being “encumbered” with a wife who can perhaps -alter the habits of a lifetime more easily than he can -abandon his half-dollar cigars. It is amusing to read -the criticisms of languid and graceful masculine essayists -on the want of vigorous intellect in the sex that -wrote “Aurora Leigh” and “Middlemarch” and -“Consuelo.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>It may be that a man’s strength is not a woman’s, -or a woman’s strength that of a man. I am arguing -for equivalence, not identity. The greater part played -in the phenomena of woman’s strength by sensibility -and impulse and variations and tears—this does not -affect the matter. What I have never been able to -see is, that woman as such is, in the long-run and -tried by all the tests, a weaker being than man. And -it would seem that any man, in proportion as he lives -longer and sees more of life, must have the conceit -taken out of him by actual contact with some woman—be -she mother, sister, wife, daughter, or friend—who -is not only as strong as himself in all substantial -regards, but it may be, on the whole, a little stronger.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_18'>18</span> - <h3 class='c004'>IV.<br /> <span class='large'>THE SPIRIT OF SMALL TYRANNY.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>When Mr. John Smauker and the Bath footmen -invited Sam Weller to their “swarry,” consisting of a -boiled leg of mutton, each guest had some expression -of contempt and wrath for the humble little greengrocer -who served them,—“in the true spirit,” Dickens -says, “of the very smallest tyranny.” The very -fact that they were subject to being ordered about in -their own persons gave them a peculiar delight in issuing -tyrannical orders to others: just as sophomores in -college torment freshmen because other sophomores -once teased the present tormentors themselves; and -Irishmen denounce the Chinese for underbidding them -in the labor-market, precisely as they were themselves -denounced by native-born Americans thirty years ago. -So it has sometimes seemed to me that the men whose -own positions and claims are really least commanding -are those who hold most resolutely that women should -be kept in their proper place of subordination.</p> - -<p class='c014'>A friend of mine maintains the theory that men large -and strong in person are constitutionally inclined to do -justice to women, as fearing no competition from them -in the way of bodily strength; but that small and weak -men are apt to be vehemently opposed to any thing -like equality in the sexes. He quotes in defence of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_19'>19</span>his theory the big soldier in London who justified himself -for allowing his little wife to chastise him, on the -ground that it pleased her and did not hurt him; and -on the other hand cites the extreme domestic tyranny -of the dwarf Quilp. He declares that in any difficult -excursion among woods and mountains, the guides and -the able-bodied men are often willing to have women -join the party, while it is sure to be opposed by those -who doubt their own strength or are reluctant to display -their weakness. It is not necessary to go so far -as my friend goes; but many will remember some fact -of this kind, making such theories appear not quite so -absurd as at first.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Thus it seems from the “Life and Letters” of -Sydney Dobell, the English poet, that he was opposed -both to woman suffrage and woman authorship, believing -the movement for the former to be a “blundering -on to the perdition of womanhood.” It appears that -against all authorship by women his convictions yearly -grew stronger, he regarding it as “an error and an -anomaly.” It seems quite in accordance with my -friend’s theory to hear, after this, that Sydney Dobell -was slight in person and a life-long invalid; nor is it -surprising, on the same theory, that his poetry took no -deep root, and that it will not be likely to survive long, -except perhaps in his weird ballad of “Ravelston.” -But he represents a large class of masculine intellects, -of secondary and mediocre quality, whose opinions on -this subject are not so much opinions as instinctive -prejudices against a competitor who may turn out their -superior. Whether they know it, or not, their aversion -to the authorship of women is very much like the conviction -<span class='pageno' id='Page_20'>20</span>of a weak pedestrian, that women are not naturally -fitted to take long walks; or the opinion of a man -whose own accounts are in a muddle, that his wife is -constitutionally unfitted to understand business.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is a pity to praise either sex at the expense of the -other. The social inequality of the sexes was not produced -so much by the voluntary tyranny of man, as by -his great practical advantage at the outset; human history -necessarily beginning with a period when physical -strength was sole ruler. It is unnecessary, too, to -consider in how many cases women may have justified -this distrust; and may have made themselves as -obnoxious as Horace Walpole’s maids of honor, whose -coachman left his savings to his son on condition that -he should never marry a maid of honor. But it is safe -to say that on the whole the feeling of contempt for -women, and the love to exercise arbitrary power over -them, is the survival of a crude impulse which the world -is outgrowing, and which is in general least obvious in -the manliest men. That clear and able English writer, -Walter Bagehot, well describes “the contempt for -physical weakness and for women which marks early -society. The non-combatant population is sure to fare -ill during the ages of combat. But these defects, too, -are cured or lessened; women have now marvellous -means of winning their way in the world; and mind -without muscle has far greater force than muscle without -mind.”<a id='r3' /><a href='#f3' class='c018'><sup>[3]</sup></a></p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f3'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r3'>3</a>. Physics and Politics, p. 79.</p> -</div> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_21'>21</span> - <h3 class='c004'>V.<br /> <span class='large'>“THE NOBLE SEX.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>A highly educated American woman of my acquaintance -once employed a French tutor in Paris, to assist -her in teaching Latin to her little grandson. The -Frenchman brought with him a Latin grammar, written -in his own language, with which my friend was quite -pleased, until she came to a passage relating to the -masculine gender in nouns, and claiming grammatical -precedence for it on the ground that the male sex is -the noble sex,—”<i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">le sexe noble</span></i>.” “Upon that,” she -said, “I burst forth in indignation, and the poor teacher -soon retired. But I do not believe,” she added, “that -the Frenchman has the slightest conception, up to this -moment, of what I could find in that phrase to displease -me.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>I do not suppose he could. From the time when -the Salic Law set French women aside from the royal -succession, on the ground that the kingdom of France -was “too noble to be ruled by a woman,” the claim -of nobility has been all on one side. The State has -strengthened the Church in this theory, the Church has -strengthened the State; and the result of all is, that -French grammarians follow both these high authorities. -When even the good Père Hyacinthe teaches, through -the New York Independent, that the husband is to -<span class='pageno' id='Page_22'>22</span>direct the conscience of his wife, precisely as the father -directs that of his child, what higher philosophy can -you expect of any Frenchman than to maintain the -claims of “<i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">le sexe noble</span></i>”?</p> - -<p class='c014'>We see the consequence, even among the most -heterodox Frenchmen. Rejecting all other precedents -and authorities, the poor Communists still held to this. -Consider, for instance, this translation of a marriage-contract -under the Commune, which lately came to -light in a trial reported in the “Gazette des Tribunaux:”—</p> - -<h4 class='c019'>FRENCH REPUBLIC.</h4> - -<p class='c020'>The citizen Anet, son of Jean Louis Anet, and the <i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">citoyenne</span></i> -Maria Saint; she engaged to follow the said citizen everywhere -and to love him always.—<span class='sc'>Anet. Maria Saint.</span></p> - -<p class='c021'>Witnessed by the under-mentioned citizen and <i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">citoyenne</span></i>.—<span class='sc'>Fourier. -Laroche.</span></p> - -<p class='c021'><span class='sc'>Paris</span>, April 22, 1871.</p> - -<p class='c014'>What a comfortable arrangement is this! Poor <i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">citoyenne</span></i> -Maria Saint, even when all human laws have -suspended their action, still holds by her grammar, still -must annex herself to <i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">le sexe noble</span></i>. She still must -follow citizen Anet as the feminine pronoun follows the -masculine, or as a verb agrees with its nominative case -in number and in person. But with what a lordly freedom -from all obligation does citizen Anet, representative -of this nobility of sex, accept the allegiance! The -citizeness may “follow him,” certainly,—so long as she -is not in the way,—and she must “love him always;” -but he is not bound. Why should he be? It would -be quite ungrammatical.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Yet, after all is said and done, there is a brutal honesty -<span class='pageno' id='Page_23'>23</span>in this frank subordination of the woman according -to the grammar. It has the same merit with the old -Russian marriage-consecration: “Here, wolf, take thy -lamb,” which at least put the thing clearly, and made -no nonsense about it. I do not know that anywhere in -France the wedding ritual is now so severely simple as -that, but I know that in some rural villages of that -country the bride is still married in a mourning-gown. -I should think she would be.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_24'>24</span> - <h3 class='c004'>VI.<br /> <span class='large'>PHYSIOLOGICAL CROAKING.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>A very old man once came to King Agis of Sparta, -to lament over the degeneracy of the times. The king -replied, “What you say must be true; for I remember -that when I was a boy, I heard my father say that -when he was a boy, he heard my grandfather say the -same thing.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is a sufficient answer to most of the croakers, that -doubtless the same things have been said in every generation -since the beginning of recorded time. Till within -twenty years, for instance, it has been the accepted -theory, that civilized society lost in vigor what it -gained in refinement. This is now generally admitted -to be a delusion growing out of the fact that civilization -keeps alive many who would have died under barbarism. -These feebler persons enter into the average, and -keep down the apparent health of the community; but -it is the triumph of civilization that they exist at all. -I am inclined to think, that when we come to compare -the nineteenth century with the seventeenth, as regards -the health of women and the size of families, we shall -find much the same result.</p> - -<p class='c014'>We look around us, and see many invalid or childless -women. We say the Pilgrim mothers were not like -these. We cheat ourselves by this perpetual worship -of the pioneer grandmother. How the young bachelors, -who write dashing articles in the newspapers, denounce -<span class='pageno' id='Page_25'>25</span>their “nervous” sisters, for instance, and belabor them -with cruel memories of their ancestors! “The great-grandmother -of this helpless creature, very likely, was -a pioneer in the woods; reared a family of twelve or -thirteen children; spun, scrubbed, wove, and cooked; -lived to eighty-five, with iron muscles, a broad chest -and keen, clear eyes.” But no one can study the genealogies -of our older New England families without -noticing how many of the aunts and sisters and daughters -of this imaginary Amazon died young. I think -there may be the same difference between the households -of to-day and the Puritan households that there is -confessedly between the American families and the -Irish: fewer children are born, but more survive.</p> - -<p class='c014'>And is it so sure that the families are diminishing, -even as respects the number of children born? This is -a simple question of arithmetic, for which the materials -are being rapidly accumulated by the students of family -history. Let each person take the lines of descent -which are nearest to himself, to begin with, and compare -the number of children born in successive generations. -I have, for instance, two such tables at hand, -representing two of the oldest New England families, -which meet in the same family of children in this generation.</p> - -<table class='table2' summary=''> - <tr><th class='c022' colspan='2'>FIRST TABLE.</th></tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <th class='c012'></th> - <th class='c023'>CHILDREN</th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'>First generation (emigrated 1629)</td> - <td class='c024'>9</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'>Second generation</td> - <td class='c024'>7</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'>Third generation</td> - <td class='c024'>7</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'>Fourth generation</td> - <td class='c024'>8</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'>Fifth generation</td> - <td class='c024'>7</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'>Sixth generation</td> - <td class='c024'>10</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'> </td> - <td class='c024'><hr /></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c025'>Average</td> - <td class='c024'>8</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<table class='table2' summary=''> - <tr><td class='c022' colspan='2'><span class='pageno' id='Page_26'>26</span></td></tr> - <tr><th class='c022' colspan='2'>SECOND TABLE.</th></tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <th class='c012'></th> - <th class='c023'>CHILDREN</th> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'>First generation (emigrated 1636)</td> - <td class='c024'>10</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'>Second generation</td> - <td class='c024'>7</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'>Third generation</td> - <td class='c024'>14</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'>Fourth generation</td> - <td class='c024'>7</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'>Fifth generation</td> - <td class='c024'>6</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'>Sixth generation</td> - <td class='c024'>4</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'>Seventh generation</td> - <td class='c024'>10</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c012'> </td> - <td class='c024'><hr /></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c025'>Average</td> - <td class='c024'>8.29</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p class='c014'>It will be seen that the last generation exhibits the -largest family in the first line, and almost the largest—much -beyond the average—in the other.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Now, when we consider the great change in all the -habits of living, since the Puritan days, and all the -vicissitudes to which a single line is exposed,—a whole -household being sometimes destroyed by a single hereditary -disease,—this is certainly a fair exhibit. These -two genealogies were taken at random, because they -happened to be nearest at hand. But I suspect any -extended examination of genealogies, either of the Puritan -families of New England, or the Dutch families of -New York, would show much the same result. Some -of the descendants of the old Stuyvesant race, for -instance, exhibit in this generation a physical vigor -which it is impossible that the doughty governor himself -could have surpassed.</p> - -<p class='c014'>There are undoubtedly many moral and physiological -sins committed, tending to shorten and weaken life; -but the progress of knowledge more than counterbalances -them. No man of middle age can look at a class -of students from our older colleges without seeing them -to be physically superior to the same number of college -<span class='pageno' id='Page_27'>27</span>boys taken twenty-five years ago. The organization -of girls being far more delicate and complicated, the -same reform reaches them more promptly, but it reaches -them at last. The little girls of the present day eat -better food, wear more healthful clothing, and breathe -more fresh air, than their mothers did. The introduction -of india-rubber boots and waterproof cloaks alone -has given a fresh lease of life to multitudes of women, -who otherwise would have been kept housed whenever -there was so much as a sprinkling of rain.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is desirable, certainly, to venerate our grandmothers; -but I am inclined to think, on the whole, that -their great-granddaughters will be the best.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_28'>28</span> - <h3 class='c004'>VII.<br /> <span class='large'>THE TRUTH ABOUT OUR GRANDMOTHERS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>Every young woman of the present generation, so -soon as she ventures to have a headache or a set of -nerves, is immediately confronted by indignant critics -with her grandmother. If the grandmother is living, -the fact of her existence is appealed to: if there is -only a departed grandmother to remember, the maiden -is confronted with a ghost. That ghost is endowed -with as many excellences as those with which Miss -Betsey Trotwood endowed the niece that never had -been born; and, as David Copperfield was reproached -with the virtues of his unborn sister who “would never -have run away,” so that granddaughter with the headache -is reproached with the ghostly perfections of her -grandmother, who never had a headache—or, if she -had, it is luckily forgotten. It is necessary to ask, -sometimes, what was really the truth about our grandmothers? -Were they such models of bodily perfection -as is usually claimed?</p> - -<p class='c014'>If we look at the early colonial days, we are at once -met by the fact, that although families were then often -larger than is now common, yet this phenomenon was -by no means universal, and was balanced by a good -many childless homes. Of this any one can satisfy -himself by looking over any family history; and he -<span class='pageno' id='Page_29'>29</span>can also satisfy himself of the fact,—first pointed -out, I believe, by Mrs. Dall,—that third and fourth -marriages were then obviously and unquestionably -more common than now. The inference would seem -to be, that there is a little illusion about the health of -those days, as there is about the health of savage races. -In both cases, it is not so much that the average health -is greater under less highly civilized conditions, but -that these conditions kill off the weak, and leave only -the strong. Modern civilized society, on the other -hand, preserves the health of many men and women—and -permits them to marry, and become parents—who -under, the severities of savage life or of pioneer life -would have died, and given way to others.</p> - -<p class='c014'>On this I will not dwell; because these good ladies -were not strictly our grandmothers, being farther removed. -But of those who were our grandmothers,—the -women of the Revolutionary and post-Revolutionary -epochs,—we happen to have very definite physiological -observations recorded; not very flattering, it is true, but -frank and searching. What these good women are in -the imagination of their descendants, we know. Mrs. -Stowe describes them as “the race of strong, hardy, -cheerful girls that used to grow up in country places, -and made the bright, neat New England kitchens of -olden times;” and adds, “This race of women, pride -of olden time, is daily lessening; and in their stead -come the fragile, easily-fatigued, languid girls of a -modern age, drilled in book-learning, ignorant of common -things.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>What, now, was the testimony of those who saw our -grandmothers in the flesh? As it happens, there were -<span class='pageno' id='Page_30'>30</span>a good many foreigners, generally Frenchmen, who -came to visit the new Republic during the presidency -of Washington. Let us take, for instance, the testimony -of the two following.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The Abbé Robin was a chaplain in Rochambeau’s -army during the Revolution, and wrote thus in regard -to the American ladies in his “Nouveau Voyage dans -l’Amérique Septentrionale,” published in 1782:—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“They are tall and well-proportioned; their features are -generally regular; their complexions are generally fair and -without color.... At twenty years of age the women have -no longer the freshness of youth. At thirty-five or forty they -are wrinkled and decrepit. The men are almost as premature.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Again: The Chevalier Louis Félix de Beaujour lived -in the United States from 1804 to 1814, as consul-general -and <i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">chargé d’affaires</span></i>; and wrote a book, immediately -after, which was translated into English under -the title, “A Sketch of the United States at the Commencement -of the Present Century.” In this he thus -describes American women:—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“The women have more of that delicate beauty which belongs -to their sex, and in general have finer features and more -expression in their physiognomy. Their stature is usually tall, -and nearly all are possessed of a light and airy shape,—the -breast high, a fine head, and their color of a dazzling whiteness. -Let us imagine, under this brilliant form, the most modest demeanor, -a chaste and virginal air, accompanied by those single -and unaffected graces which flow from artless nature, and we -may have an idea of their beauty; but this beauty fades and -passes in a moment. At the age of twenty-five their form -changes, and at thirty the whole of their charms have disappeared.”</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_31'>31</span>These statements bring out a class of facts, which, as -it seems to me, are singularly ignored by some of our -physiologists. They indicate that the modification of -the American type began early, and was, as a rule, due -to causes antedating the fashions or studies of the -present day. Here are our grandmothers and great-grandmothers -as they were actually seen by the eyes of -impartial or even flattering critics. These critics were -not Englishmen, accustomed to a robust and ruddy -type of women, but Frenchmen, used to a type more -like the American. They were not mere hasty travellers; -for the one lived here ten years, and the other -was stationed for some time at Newport, R.I., in a -healthy locality, noted in those days for the beauty of -its women. Yet we find it their verdict upon these -grandmothers of nearly a hundred years ago, that they -showed the same delicate beauty, the same slenderness, -the same pallor, the same fragility, the same early -decline, with which their granddaughters are now reproached.</p> - -<p class='c014'>In some respects, probably, the physical habits of -the grandmothers were better: but an examination of -their portraits will satisfy any one that they laced more -tightly than their descendants, and wore their dresses -lower in the neck; and as for their diet, we have the -testimony of another French traveller, Volney, who was -in America from 1795 to 1798, that “if a premium -were offered for a regimen most destructive to the -teeth, the stomach, and the health in general, none -could be devised more efficacious for these ends than -that in use among this people.” And he goes on to -give particulars, showing a far worse condition in -<span class='pageno' id='Page_32'>32</span>respect to cookery and diet than now prevails in any -decent American society.</p> - -<p class='c014'>We have therefore strong evidence that the essential -change in the American type was effected in the last -century, not in this. Dr. E. H. Clarke says, “A century -does not afford a period long enough for the production -of great changes. That length of time could -not transform the sturdy German <i><span lang="de" xml:lang="de">fräulein</span></i> and robust -English damsel into the fragile American miss.” And -yet it is pretty clear that the first century and a half of -our colonial life had done just this for our grandmothers. -And, if so, our physiologists ought to conform their -theories to the facts.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_33'>33</span> - <h3 class='c004'>VIII.<br /> <span class='large'>THE PHYSIQUE OF AMERICAN WOMEN.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>I was talking the other day with a New York physician, -long retired from practice, who after an absence -of a dozen years in Europe has returned within a year -to this country. He volunteered the remark, that nothing -had so impressed him since his return as the improved -health of Americans. He said that his wife -had been equally struck with it; and that they had -noticed it especially among the inhabitants of cities, -among the more cultivated classes, and in particular -among women.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It so happened, that within twenty-four hours almost -precisely the same remark was made to me by another -gentleman of unusually cosmopolitan experience, and -past middle age. He further fortified himself by a -similar assertion made him by Charles Dickens, in comparing -his second visit to this country with his first. -In answer to an inquiry as to what points of difference -had most impressed him, Dickens said, “Your people, -especially the women, look better fed than formerly.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is possible that in all these cases the witnesses -may have been led to exaggerate the original evil, while -absent from the country, and so may have felt some -undue re-action on their arrival. One of my informants -went so far as to say that he was confident that among -<span class='pageno' id='Page_34'>34</span>his circle of friends in Boston and in London a dinnerparty -of half a dozen Americans would outweigh an -English party of the same number. Granting this to -be too bold a statement, and granting the unscientific -nature of all these assertions, they still indicate a -probability of their own truth until refuted by facts or -balanced by similar impressions on the other side. -They are further corroborated by the surprise expressed -by Huxley and some other recent Englishmen at finding -us a race more substantial than they had supposed.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The truth seems to be, that Nature is endeavoring to -take a new departure in the American, and to produce -a race more finely organized, more sensitive, more -pliable, and of more nervous energy, than the races of -Northern Europe; that this change of type involves -some risk to health in the process, but promises greater -results whenever the new type shall be established. I -am confident that there has been within the last twenty -years a great improvement in the physical habits of the -more cultivated classes, at least, in this country,—better -food, better air, better habits as to bathing and exercise. -The great increase of athletic games; the greatly -increased proportion of seaside and mountain life in -summer; the thicker shoes and boots of women and -little girls, permitting them to go out more freely in all -weathers—these are among the permanent gains. The -increased habit of dining late, and of taking only a -lunch at noon, is of itself an enormous gain to the professional -and mercantile classes, because it secures time -for eating and for digestion. Even the furnaces in -houses, which seemed at first so destructive to the very -breath of life, turn out to have given a new lease to it; -<span class='pageno' id='Page_35'>35</span>and open fires are being rapidly re-introduced as a provision -for enjoyment and health, when the main body -of the house has been tempered by the furnace. There -has been, furthermore, a decided improvement in the -bread of the community, and a very general introduction -of other farinaceous food. All this has happened -within my own memory, and gives <i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">a priori</span></i> probability -to the alleged improvement in physical condition within -twenty years.</p> - -<p class='c014'>And, if these reasonings are still insufficient on the -one side, it must be remembered that the facts of the -census are almost equally inadequate when quoted on -the other. If, for instance, all the young people of a -New Hampshire village take a fancy to remove to Wisconsin, -it does not show that the race is dying out -because their children swell the birth-rate of Wisconsin -instead of New Hampshire. If in a given city the -births among the foreign-born population are twice as -many in proportion as among the American, we have -not the whole story until we learn whether the deaths -are not twice as many also. If so, the inference is, that -the same recklessness brought the children into the -world, and sent them out of it; and no physiological inference -whatever can be drawn. It was clearly established -by the medical commission of the Boston Board -of Health, a few years ago, that “the general mortality -of the foreign element is much greater than that of the -native element of our population.” “This is found -to be the case,” they add, “throughout the United -States as well as in Boston.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>So far as I can judge, all our physiological tendencies -are favorable rather than otherwise: and the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_36'>36</span>transplantation of the English race seems now likely -to end in no deterioration, but in a type more finely -organized, and more comprehensive and cosmopolitan; -and this without loss of health, of longevity, or of -physical size and weight. And, if this is to hold true, -it must be true not only of men, but of women.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_37'>37</span> - <h3 class='c004'>IX.<br /> <span class='large'>“VERY MUCH FATIGUED.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>The newspapers say that the Wyoming ladies, after -their first trial of jury-duty, looked very much fatigued. -Well, why not?</p> - -<p class='c014'>Is it not the privilege of their sex to be fatigued? -Is it not commonly said to be one of their most becoming -traits? “The strength of womanhood lies in its -weakness,” and so on; and, if emancipation does not -destroy this lovely debility, it is not so bad, after all. -If a graceful languor is desirable, then the more of it -the better. Instead of the women’s coming out of the -jury-box like Amazons, they simply came out so many -tired women. They were not spoiled into strength, -but “very much fatigued.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>In London or New York, now, this fatigue might -have come from six hours of piano-practice, from a -day’s shopping, from a night’s “German.” Then the -fatigue would be held to be charming and womanly. -But to aid in deciding on the guilt or innocence of a -fellow-creature, perhaps a fellow-woman,—is that the -only pursuit in which fatigue becomes disreputable?</p> - -<p class='c014'>Consider at any rate that in Wyoming Territory these -more genteel and feminine forms of fatigue are as yet -rare. Pianos are doubtless scarce; in the shops whiskey -is the only thing not scarce; “Germans” are uncommon, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_38'>38</span>except in the shape of wandering miners who -are looking for other shafts than those of Cupid. Thus -cut off from city frivolities, may not the Wyoming ladies -be allowed for a while to tire themselves with something -useful? Let them have their court duties until good -society and “feminine” amusements arrive. Let them -at least be serviceable till they can be ornamental—as -the English member of Parliament declared that until -a man knew which way his interest went, he was justified -in temporarily voting according to his conscience.</p> - -<p class='c014'>“Very much fatigued?” How does jury-duty affect -men? Is there any thing against which they so fight -and struggle? It is recognized by the universal masculine -heart as the greatest bore known under civilization. -There is nothing which a man will not do in preference. -He will go to church twice on a Sunday, he will abjure -tobacco for a week, he will over-state his property to -the assessor, he will speak respectfully of Congress, he -will go without a daily newspaper, he will do any -self-devoted and unmasculine thing—if you will only -contrive in some way to leave him off the jury-list. If -these things are done in the dry tree, what shall be -done in the green? That which experienced men hate -with this consummation of all hatred, shall inexperienced -women endure without fatigue? It is wrong to -claim for them such unspeakable superiority.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Look at a jury of men when they re-appear in court -after a long detention on a difficult case. What a set -of woe-begone wretches they are! What weary eyes, -what unkempt hair, what drooping and dilapidated -paper collars! Not all the tin wash-basins and soap, -not all the crackers and cheese, provided by the gentlemanly -<span class='pageno' id='Page_39'>39</span>sheriff, enable them to look any thing but “very -much fatigued.” Shall women look more forlorn than -these men? No: so long as women are women, they -will contrive during the most arduous jury duties to -“do up” their hair, they will come provided with -unseen relays of fresh cuffs and collars, and out of the -most unpromising court-room arrangements they will -concoct their cup of tea. Who has not noticed how -much better a railway detention or a prolonged trip -on a steamboat is borne, in appearance at least, by -the women than the men? Fatigued! How did the -jury-men look? Probably the jury-women, when they -bade his Honor the Judge good-morning, looked incomparably -fresher than their companions.</p> - -<p class='c014'>At any rate, when we think what things women -endured that they might nurse our sick soldiers, how -they had to spend day and night where they might possibly -inhale tobacco, probably would hear swearing, and -certainly must brave dirt; when we think that they did -these things, and were only “very much fatigued,”—why -should we fear to risk them in a court-room? -Where there is wrong to be righted, innocence to be -vindicated, and guilt to be wisely dealt with,—there -make room for woman, and she will not shrink from -the fatigue. “For thee, fair justice! welcome all,” -as Sir William Blackstone remarked, when he stopped -being a poet and began to be a lawyer.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_40'>40</span> - <h3 class='c004'>X.<br /> <span class='large'>THE LIMITATIONS OF SEX</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>Are there any inevitable limitations of sex?</p> - -<p class='c014'>Some reformers, apparently, think that there are not, -and that the best way to help woman is to deny the -fact of limitations. But I think the great majority of -reformers would take a different ground, and would -say that the two sexes are mutually limited by nature. -They would doubtless add that this very fact is an -argument for the enfranchisement of woman: for, if -woman is a mere duplicate of man, man can represent -her; but if she has traits of her own, absolutely distinct -from his, then he cannot represent her, and she -must have a voice and a vote of her own.</p> - -<p class='c014'>To this last body of believers I belong. I think -that all legal or conventional obstacles should be -removed, which debar woman from determining for -herself, as freely as man determines, what the real -limitations of sex are, and what the merely conventional -restriction. But, when all is said and done, -there is no doubt that plenty of limitations will remain -on both sides.</p> - -<p class='c014'>That man has his limitations, is clear. No matter -how finely organized a man may be, how sympathetic, -how tender, how loving, there is yet a barrier, never -to be passed, that separates the most precious part of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_41'>41</span>the woman’s kingdom from him. All the wondrous -world of motherhood, with its unspeakable delights, -its holy of holies, remains forever unknown by him; -he may gaze, but never enter. That halo of pure devotion, -which makes a Madonna out of so many a poor -and ignorant woman, can never touch his brow. Many -a man loves children more than many a woman: but, -after all, it is not he who has borne them; to that -peculiar sacredness of experience he can never arrive. -But never mind whether the loss be a great one or a -small one: it is distinctly a limitation; and to every -loving mother it is a limitation so important that she -would be unable to weigh all the privileges and powers -of manhood against this peculiar possession of her -child.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Now, if this be true, and if man be thus distinctly -limited by the mere fact of sex, can the woman complain -that she also should have some natural limitations? -Grant that she should have no unnecessary -restrictions; and that the course of human progress is -constantly setting aside, as needless, point after point -that was once held essential. Still, if she finds—as -she undoubtedly will find—that natural barriers and -hindrances remain at last, and that she can no more do -man’s whole work in the world than he can do hers, -why should she complain? If he can accept his limitations, -she must be prepared also to accept hers.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Some of our physiological reformers declare that a -girl will be perfectly healthy if she can only be sensibly -dressed, and can “have just as much out-door -exercise as the boys, and of the same sort, if she -choose it.” But I have observed that matter a good -<span class='pageno' id='Page_42'>42</span>deal, and have watched the effect of boyish exercise -on a good many girls; and I am satisfied that so far -from being safely turned loose, as boys can be, they -need, for physical health, the constant supervision of -wise mothers. Otherwise the very exposure that only -hardens the boy may make the girl an invalid for life. -The danger comes from a greater sensitiveness of -structure,—not weakness, properly so called, since it -gives, in certain ways, more power of endurance,—a -greater sensitiveness which runs through all a woman’s -career, and is the expensive price she pays for the -divine destiny of motherhood. It is another natural -limitation.</p> - -<p class='c014'>No wise person believes in any “reform against Nature,” -or that we can get beyond the laws of Nature. -If I believed the limitations of sex to be inconsistent -with woman suffrage for instance, I should oppose -this; but I do not see why a woman cannot form political -opinions by her baby’s cradle, as well as her husband -in his workshop, while her very love for the child -commits her to an interest in good government. Our -duty is to remove all the artificial restrictions we can. -That done, it will not be hard for man or woman to -acquiesce in the natural limitations.</p> - -<div><span class='pageno' id='Page_43'>43</span></div> -<div class='section ph2'> - -<div class='nf-center-c0'> -<div class='nf-center c007'> - <div>TEMPERAMENT.</div> - </div> -</div> - -</div> - -<p class='c013'><span lang="grc" xml:lang="grc">Ἀνδρὸς καὶ γυναικὸς ἡ αὐτὴ ἀρετή.</span>—<span class='sc'>Antisthenes</span> <em>in Diogenes -Laertius</em>, vi. 1, 5.</p> - -<div class='nf-center-c0'> - <div class='nf-center'> - <div>“Virtue in man and woman is the same.”</div> - </div> -</div> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_45'>45</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XI.<br /> <span class='large'>THE INVISIBLE LADY.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>The Invisible Lady, as advertised in all our cities a -good many years ago, was a mysterious individual who -remained unseen, and had apparently no human organs -except a brain and a tongue. You asked questions of -her, and she made intelligent answers; but where she -was, you could no more discover than you could find -the man inside the Automaton Chess-Player. Was she -intended as a satire on womankind, or as a sincere representation -of what womankind should be? To many -men, doubtless, she would have seemed the ideal of her -sex, could only her brain and tongue have disappeared -like the rest of her faculties. Such men would have -liked her almost as well as that other mysterious personage -on the London sign-board, labelled “The Good -Woman,” and represented by a female figure without -a head.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is not that any considerable portion of mankind -actually wishes to abolish woman from the universe. -But the opinion dies hard that she is best off when -least visible. These appeals which still meet us for -“the sacred privacy of woman” are only the Invisible -Lady on a larger scale. In ancient Bœotia, brides -were carried home in vehicles whose wheels were burned -at the door in token that they would never again be -<span class='pageno' id='Page_46'>46</span>needed. In ancient Rome, it was a queen’s epitaph, -“She staid at home, and spun,”—<i><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">Domum servavit, -lanum fecit</span></i>. In Turkey, not even the officers of justice -can enter the apartments of a woman without her -lord’s consent. In Spain and Spanish America, the veil -replaces the four walls of the house, and is a portable -seclusion. To be visible is at best a sign of peasant -blood and occupations; to be high-bred is to be invisible.</p> - -<p class='c014'>In the Azores I found that each peasant family endeavored -to secure for one or more of its daughters the -pride and glory of living unseen. The other sisters, -secure in innocence, tended cattle on lonely mountain-sides, -or toiled bare-legged up the steep ascents, their -heads crowned with orange-baskets. The chosen sister -was taught to read, to embroider, and to dwell indoors; -if she went out it was only under escort, and with her -face buried in a hood of almost incredible size, affording -only a glimpse of the poor pale cheeks, so unlike -the rosy vigor of the damsels on the mountain-side. -The girls, I was told, did not covet this privilege of -seclusion; but let us be genteel, or die.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Now all that is left of the Invisible Lady among ourselves -is only the remnant of this absurd tradition. In -the seaside town where I write, ladies usually go veiled -in the streets, and so general is the practice that little -girls often veil their dolls. They all suppose it to be -done for complexion or for ornament; just as people -still hang straps on the backs of their carriages, not -knowing that it is a relic of the days when footmen -stood there and held on. But the veil represents a tradition -of seclusion, whether we know it or not; and -<span class='pageno' id='Page_47'>47</span>the dread of hearing a woman speak in public, or of -seeing a woman vote, represents precisely the same -tradition. It is entitled to no less respect, and no more.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Like all traditions, it finds something in human nature -to which to attach itself. Early girlhood, like early -boyhood, needs to be guarded and sheltered, that it -may mature unharmed. It is monstrous to make this -an excuse for keeping a woman, any more than a man, -in a condition of perpetual subordination and seclusion. -The young lover wishes to lock up his angel in a little -world of her own, where none may intrude. The harem -and the seraglio are simply the embodiment of this -desire. But the maturer man, and the maturer race, -have found that the beloved being should be something -more.</p> - -<p class='c014'>After this discovery is made, the theory of the Invisible -Lady disappears. It is less of a shock to an -American to hear a woman speak in public than it is to -an Oriental to see her show her face in public at all. -Once open the door of the harem, and she has the freedom -of the house: the house includes the front door, -and the street is but a prolonged doorstep. With the -freedom of the street comes inevitably a free access to -the platform, the tribunal, and the pulpit. You might -as well try to stop the air in its escape from a punctured -balloon, as to try, when woman is once out of the harem, -to put her back there. Ceasing to be an Invisible Lady, -she must become a visible force: there is no middle -ground. There is no danger that she will not be anchored -to the cradle, when cradle there is; but it will -be by an elastic cable, that will leave her as free to -think and vote as to pray. No woman is less a mother -<span class='pageno' id='Page_48'>48</span>because she cares for all the concerns of the world into -which her child is born. It was John Quincy Adams -who said, defending the political petitions of the women -of Plymouth, that “women are not only justified, but -exhibit the most exalted virtue, when they do depart -from the domestic circle, and enter on the concerns of -their country, of humanity, and of their God.”</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_49'>49</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XII.<br /> <span class='large'>SACRED OBSCURITY.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>In the preface to that ill-named but delightful book, -the “Remains of the late Mrs. Richard Trench,” there -is a singular remark by the editor, her son. He says -that “the adage is certainly true in regard to the British -matron, <i><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">Bene vixit quæ bene latuit</span></i>,” the meaning of this -adage being, “She has lived well who has kept herself -well out of sight.” Applying this to his beloved mother, -he further expresses a regret at disturbing her “sacred -obscurity.” Then he goes on to disturb it pretty effectually -by printing a thick octavo volume of her most -private letters.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is a great source of strength and advantage to -reformers, that there are always men preserved to be -living examples of this good old Oriental doctrine of -“sacred obscurity.” Just as Mr. Darwin needs for -the demonstration of his theory that the lower orders -of creation should still be present in visible form for -purposes of comparison, so every reformer needs to -fortify his position by showing examples of the original -attitude from which society has been gradually -emerging. If there had been no Oriental seclusion, -many things in the present position of woman would -be inexplicable. But when we point to that; when we -show that even in the more enlightened Eastern countries -<span class='pageno' id='Page_50'>50</span>it is still held indecorous to allude to the feminine -members of a man’s family; when we see among the -Christian nations of Southern Europe many lingering -traits of this same habit of seclusion; and when we -find an archdeacon of the English Church still clinging -to the theory, even while exhibiting his mother’s family -letters to the whole world,—we more easily understand -the course of development.</p> - -<p class='c014'>These re-assertions of the Oriental theory are simply -reversions, as a naturalist would say, to the original -type. They are instances of “atavism,” like the occasional -appearance of six fingers on one hand in a -family where the great-great-grandfather happened to -possess that ornament. Such instances can always be -found, when one takes the pains to look for them. -Thus a critic, discussing in the Atlantic Monthly Mr. -Mahaffy’s book on “Social Life in Greece,” is surprised -that this writer should quote, in proof of the -degradation of woman in Athens, the remark attributed -to Pericles, “That woman is best who is least spoken -of among men, whether for good or for evil.” “In -our opinion,” adds the reviewer, “that remark was -wise then, and is wise now.” The Oriental theory is -not then, it seems, extinct; and we are spared the -pains of proving that it ever existed.</p> - -<p class='c014'>If this theory be true, how falsely has the admiration -of mankind been given! If the most obscure woman -is best, the most conspicuous must undoubtedly be -worst. Tried by this standard, how unworthy must -have been Elizabeth Barrett Browning, how reprehensible -must be Dorothea Dix, what a model of all that -is discreditable is Rosa Bonheur, what a crowning instance -<span class='pageno' id='Page_51'>51</span>of human depravity is Florence Nightingale! -Yet how consoling the thought, that, while these disreputable -persons were thus wasting their substance in -the riotous performance of what the world weakly styled -good deeds, there were always women who saw the -folly of such efforts, women who by steady devotion to -eating, drinking, and sleeping continued to keep themselves -in sacred obscurity, and to prove themselves the -ornaments of their sex, inasmuch as no human being -ever had occasion to mention their names!</p> - -<p class='c014'>But alas for human inconsistency! As for this inverse-ratio -theory,—this theory of virtue so exalted -that it has never been known or felt or mentioned -among men,—it is to be observed that those who hold -it are the first to desert it when stirred by an immediate -occasion. Just as a slaveholder, in the old times, -after demonstrating to you that freedom was a curse -to the negro, would instantly turn round, and inflict -this greatest of all curses on some slave who had saved -his life; so, I fear, would one of these philosophers, if -he were profoundly impressed with any great action -done by a woman, give the lie to all his theories, and -celebrate her fame. In spite of all his fine principles, -if he happened to be rescued from drowning by Grace -Darling, he would put her name in the newspaper; if -he were tended in hospital by Clara Barton, he would -sound her praise; and, if his mother wrote as good -letters as did Mrs. Trench, he would probably print -them to the extent of five hundred pages, as the archdeacon -did, and all his gospel of silence would exhale -itself in a single sigh of regret in the preface.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_52'>52</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XIII.<br /> <span class='large'>“OUR TRIALS.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>A Providence (R.I.) newspaper remarked some -time since that Mrs. Livermore had just delivered in -Newport her celebrated lecture, “What shall we do -with our Trials?” It was, I suppose, one of those -felicitous misprints, by which compositors build better -than they know. The real title of the lecture was, -“What shall we do with our Girls?” Perhaps it was -the unconscious witticism of some poetic young typesetter, -to whom damsels were as yet only pleasing -pains; or of some premature cynic of the printing-office, -who was in the habit of regarding himself as a -Blighted Being.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Yet to how many is this morose phrase “humanly -adaptive,” as Mrs. Browning abstrusely says! Anxious -mothers, for instance, will accept it, the mothers -of the thousands of surplus maidens—or whatever the -statistics say—in Massachusetts. Frederica Bremer -inserts in one of her novels an “Extra Leaf on Daughter-full -Houses;” an extra that should have a large -circulation in many towns of New England. The -most heroic and unflinching remedy for this class of -trials, so far as my knowledge goes, was that announced -by a small relative of my own, aged three, -who sitting on the floor thus soliloquized to her doll: -<span class='pageno' id='Page_53'>53</span>“If I had too many daughters, I’d take ’em into the -woods and lose ’em—I’d take ’em to the sea and push -’em in: I wouldn’t have too many daughters!” She -is now a happy wife and mother; but Fate, warned in -time by such exceeding plainness of speech, has judiciously -endowed her chiefly with sons.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Most of the serious assertion that women are trials -comes from masculine wisdom. One hears a good deal -of it in summer, at the seaside, from the marriageable -youth of some of our chief cities. After a languid -hour’s chat upon tailors or boots or the proper appointments -of a harness,—or of the groom, so perfectly -costumed that he seems but a part of the harness,—how -often they fall to lamenting the extravagance, -the exactions, the general unmarriageableness, of the -young women of the present day! Some wit once -said that the Pilgrim Mothers had much more to bear -than the Pilgrim Fathers, since the Mothers had not -only to endure the cold and the hunger, but to endure -the Fathers beside. In hearing these remarks I have -sometimes thought that these young ladies must be -extravagant indeed, if, in addition to their own expenses, -they take to themselves so very costly a luxury -as a fashionable husband.</p> - -<p class='c014'>And I think that wiser critics than these youths -are sometimes tempted into treating these lovely and -lovable “trials” in too severely hopeless a way. -There is folly enough on the surface, no doubt, and -something of it below the surface: yet who does -not remember how, in time of need, all these follies -proved themselves, during our civil war, but superficial -things? The very maidens over whom we had -<span class='pageno' id='Page_54'>54</span>shaken our anxious heads were suddenly those who -with pale cheeks bade their lovers leave them, or who -changed their gorgeous array for the plain garments -of the hospital. So far as I can judge, there is not a -young girl within the range of my knowledge who can -confidently be insured against marrying a poor artist -or a poorer army officer to-morrow, should she once -fall thoroughly in love. And, once married, she will -very probably develop a power of self-denial, of economy, -and of dressing herself and baby gracefully out -of the cast-off clothes of her genteel relations,—in -a way to put her critics to shame. I think we ought all -patiently to endure “trials” that turn to such blessings -in the end.</p> - -<p class='c014'>For one, I can truly say, with charming Mrs. Trench -in her letters written in 1816, “I do believe the girls -of the present day have not lost the power of blushing; -and, though I have no grown-up daughters, I enjoy -the friendship of some who might be my daughters, -in whom the greatest delicacy and modesty are united -with perfect ease of manner, and habitual intercourse -with the world.” And if this is the case,—and I think -we shall all own it to be so,—we may as well have -the typographical error corrected, after all, and hereafter -say—for “trials” read “girls.”</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_55'>55</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XIV.<br /> <span class='large'>VIRTUES IN COMMON.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>A young friend of mine, who was educated at one of -the very best schools for girls in New York City, told -me that one day her teacher requested the older girls -to write out a list of virtues suitable to manly character, -which they did. A month or more later, when this -occurrence was well forgotten, the same teacher bade -them write out a list of womanly virtues, she making -no reference to the other list. Then she made each -girl compare her lists; and they all found with surprise -that there was no substantial difference between them. -The only variation, in most cases, was, that they had -put in a rather vague special virtue of “manliness” -in the one case, and “womanliness” in the other; a -sort of miscellaneous department or “odd drawer,” apparently, -in which to group all traits not easily analyzed.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The moral is, that, as tested by the common-sense -of these young people, duty is duty, and the difference -between ethics for men and ethics for women lies simply -in practical applications, not in principles.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Who can deny that the philosopher Antisthenes was -right when he said, “The virtues of the man and the -woman are the same”? Not the Christian, certainly; -for he accepts as his highest standard the being who -in all history best united the highest qualities of both -<span class='pageno' id='Page_56'>56</span>sexes. Not the metaphysician; for his analysis deals -with the human mind as such, not with the mind of -either sex. Not the evolutionist; for he is accustomed -to trace back qualities to their source, and cannot deny -that there is in each sex at least a “survival” of every -good and every bad trait. We may say that these -qualities are, or may be, or ought to be, distributed -unequally between the sexes; but we cannot reasonably -deny that each sex possesses a share of every quality, -and that what is good in one sex is also good in the -other. Man may be the braver, and yet courage in a -woman may be nobler than cowardice. Woman may -be the purer, and yet purity may be noble in a man.</p> - -<p class='c014'>So clear is this, that some of the very coarsest writers -in all literature, and those who have been severest -upon women, have yet been obliged to acknowledge it. -Take, for instance, Dean Swift, who writes:—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“I am ignorant of any one quality that is amiable in a -woman, which is not equally so in a man. I do not except -even modesty and gentleness of nature; nor do I know one -vice or folly which is not equally detestable in both.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Mrs. Jameson, in her delightful “Commonplace -Book,” illustrates this admirably by one or two test -cases. She takes, for instance, from one of Humboldt’s -letters a much-admired passage on manly character:—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“Masculine independence of mind I hold to be in reality -the first requisite for the formation of a character of real -manly worth. The man who allows himself to be deceived -and carried away by his own weakness, may be a very amiable -person in other respects, but cannot be called a good man: -such beings should not find favor in the eyes of a woman, for -<span class='pageno' id='Page_57'>57</span>a truly beautiful and purely feminine nature should be attracted -only by what is highest and noblest in the character -of man.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>“Take now this same bit of moral philosophy,” she -says, “and apply it to the feminine character, and it -reads quite as well:—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“‘Feminine independence of mind I hold to be in reality the -first requisite for the formation of a character of real feminine -worth. The woman who allows herself to be deceived and -carried away by her own weakness, may be a very amiable -person in other respects, but cannot be called a good woman; -such beings should not find favor in the eyes of a man, for a -truly beautiful and purely manly nature should be attracted only -by what is highest and noblest in the character of woman.’”</p> - -<p class='c014'>I have never been able to perceive that there was -a quality or grace of character which really belonged -exclusively to either sex, or which failed to win honor -when wisely exercised by either. It is not thought -necessary to have separate editions of books on ethical -science, the one for man, the other for woman, like -almanacs calculated for different latitudes. The books -that vary are not the scientific works, but little manuals -of practical application,—“Duties of Men,” “Duties -of Women.” These vary with times and places: where -women do not know how to read, no advice on reading -will be found in the women’s manuals; where it is held -wrong for women to uncover the face, it will be laid -down in these manuals as a sin. But ethics are ethics: -the great principles of morals, as proclaimed either by -science or by religion, do not fluctuate for sex; their -basis is in the very foundations of right itself.</p> - -<p class='c014'>This grows clearer when we remember that it is -<span class='pageno' id='Page_58'>58</span>equally true in mental science. There is not one logic -for men, and another for women; a separate syllogism, -a separate induction: the moment we begin to state -intellectual principles, that moment we go beyond sex. -We deal then with absolute truth. If an observation -is wrong, if a process of reasoning is bad, it makes no -difference who brings it forward. Any list of mental -processes, any inventory of the contents of the mind, -would be identical, so far as sex goes, whether compiled -by a woman or a man. These things, like the circulation -of the blood or the digestion of food, belong clearly -to the ground held in common. The London Spectator -well said lately,—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“After all, knowledge is knowledge; and there is no more -a specifically feminine way of describing correctly the origin of -the Lollard movement, or the character of Spenser’s poetry, -than there is a specifically feminine way of solving a quadratic -equation, or of proving the forty-seventh problem of Euclid’s -first book.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>All we can say in modification of this is, that there -is, after all, a foundation for the rather vague item -of “manliness” and “womanliness” in these schoolgirl -lists of duties. There is a difference, after all is -said and done; but it is something that eludes analysis, -like the differing perfume of two flowers of the same -genus and even of the same species. The method of -thought must be essentially the same in both sexes; and -yet an average woman will put more flavor of something -we call instinct into her mental action, and the -average man something more of what we call logic into -his. Whipple tells us that not a man guessed the -plot of Dickens’s “Great Expectations,” while many -<span class='pageno' id='Page_59'>59</span>women did; and this certainly indicates some average -difference of quality or method. So the average opinions -of a hundred women, on some question of ethics, might -very probably differ from the average of a hundred men, -while yet it remains true that “the virtues of the man -and the woman are the same.”</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_60'>60</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XV.<br /> <span class='large'>INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>Blackburn, in his entertaining book, “Artists and -Arabs,” draws a contrast between Frith’s painting of -the “Derby Day” and Rosa Bonheur’s “Horse Fair,”—“the -former pleasing the eye by its cleverness and -prettiness, the latter impressing the spectator by its -power and its truthful rendering of animal life. The -difference between the two painters is probably more -one of education than of natural gifts. But, whilst the -style of the former is grafted on a fashion, the latter -is founded on a rock,—the result of a close study of -nature, chastened by classic feeling and a remembrance, -it may be, of the friezes of the Parthenon.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Now, it is to be observed that this description runs -precisely counter to the popular impression as to the -work of the two sexes. Novelists like Charles Reade, -for instance, who have apparently seen precisely one -woman in their lives, and hardly more than one man, -and who keep on sketching these two figures most -felicitously and brilliantly thenceforward, would be apt -to assign these qualities of the artist very differently. -Their typical man would do the truthful and powerful -work, and everybody would say, “How manly!” -Their woman would please by cleverness and prettiness, -and everybody would say, “How womanly!” -<span class='pageno' id='Page_61'>61</span>Yet Blackburn shows us that these qualities are individual, -not sexual; that they result from temperament, -or, he thinks, still more from training. If Rosa -Bonheur does better work than Frith, it is not because -she is a woman, nor is it in spite of that; but because, -setting sex aside, she is a better artist.</p> - -<p class='c014'>This is not denying the distinctions of sex, but only -asserting that they are not so exclusive and all-absorbing -as is supposed. It is easy to name other grounds -of difference which entirely ignore those of sex, striking -directly across them, and rendering a different -classification necessary. It is thus with distinctions -of race or color, for instance. An Indian man and -woman are at many points more like to one another -than is either to a white person of the same sex. A -black-haired man and woman, or a fair-haired man and -woman, are to be classified together in these physiological -aspects. So of differences of genius: a man -and woman of musical temperament and training have -more in common than has either with a person who is -of the same sex, but who cannot tell one note from -another. So two persons of ardent or imaginative -temperament are thus far alike, though the gulf of sex -divides them; and so are two persons of cold or prosaic -temperament. In a mixed school the teacher cannot -class together intellectually the boys as such, and -the girls as such: bright boys take hold of a lesson -very much as bright girls do, and slow girls like slow -boys. Nature is too rich, too full, too varied, to be -content with a single basis of classification: she has -a hundred systems of grouping, according to sex, age, -race, temperament, training, and so on; and we get -<span class='pageno' id='Page_62'>62</span>but a narrow view of life when we limit our theories -to one set of distinctions.</p> - -<p class='c014'>As a matter of social philosophy, this train of thought -logically leads to co-education, impartial suffrage, and -free co-operation in all the affairs of life. As a matter -of individual duty, it teaches the old moral to “act -well your part.” No wise person will ever trouble -himself or herself much about the limitations of sex in -intellectual labor. Rosa Bonheur was not trying to -work like a woman, or like a man, or unlike either, but -to do her work thoroughly and well. He or she who -works in this spirit works nobly, and gives an example -which will pass beyond the bounds of sex, and help -all. The Abbé Liszt, the most gifted of living pianists, -told a friend of mine, his pupil, that he had learned -more of music from hearing Madame Malibran sing, -than from any thing else whatever.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_63'>63</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XVI.<br /> <span class='large'>ANGELIC SUPERIORITY.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>It is better not to base any plea for woman on -the ground of her angelic superiority. The argument -proves too much. If she is already so perfect, there -is every inducement to let well alone. It suggests the -expediency of conforming man’s condition to hers, instead -of conforming hers to man’s. If she is a winged -creature, and man can only crawl, it is his condition -that needs mending.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Besides, one may well be a little incredulous of these -vast claims. Granting some average advantage to -woman, it is not of such completeness as to base much -argument upon it. The minister looking on his congregation, -rarely sees an unmixed angel, either at the -head or at the foot of any pew. The domestic servant -rarely has the felicity of waiting on an absolute saint -at either end of the dinner-table. The lady’s-maid has -to compare her little observations of human infirmity -with those of the valet-de-chambre. The lover worships -the beloved, whether man or woman; but marriage -bears rather hard on the ideal in either case. And -those who pray out of the same book, “Have mercy -upon us, miserable sinners,” are not supposed to be -offering up petitions for each other only.</p> - -<p class='c014'>We all know many women whose lives are made -<span class='pageno' id='Page_64'>64</span>wretched by the sins and follies of their husbands. -There are also many men whose lives are turned to -long wretchedness by the selfishness, the worldliness, -or the bad temper of their wives. Domestic tyranny -belongs to neither sex by monopoly. If man tortures -or depresses woman, she also has a fearful power to -corrupt and deprave man. On the other hand, to -quote old Antisthenes once more, “the virtues of the -man and woman are the same.” A refined man is more -refined than a coarse woman. A child-loving man is -infinitely tenderer and sweeter toward children than a -hard and unsympathetic woman. The very qualities -that are claimed as distinctively feminine are possessed -more abundantly by many men than by many of what -is called the softer sex.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Why is it necessary to say all this? Because there -is always danger that we who believe in the equality of -the sexes should be led into over-statements, which -will re-act against ourselves. It is not safe to say that -the ballot-box would be reformed if intrusted to feminine -votes alone. Had the voters of the South been -all women, it would have plunged earlier into the gulf -of secession, dived deeper, and come up even more -reluctantly. Were the women of Spain to rule its destinies -unchecked, the Pope would be its master, and -the Inquisition might be re-established. For all that -we can see, the rule of women alone would be as bad -as the rule of men alone. It would be as unsafe to -give woman the absolute control of man as to make -man the master of woman.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Let us be a shade more cautious in our reasonings. -Woman needs equal rights, not because she is man’s -<span class='pageno' id='Page_65'>65</span>better half, but because she is his other half. She -needs them, not as an angel, but as a fraction of -humanity. Her political education will not merely -help man, but it will help herself. She will sometimes -be right in her opinions, and sometimes be altogether -wrong; but she will learn, as man learns, by her own -blunders. The demand in her behalf is, that she shall -have the opportunity to make mistakes, since it is by -that means she must become wise.</p> - -<p class='c014'>In all our towns, there is a tendency toward “mixed -schools.” We rarely hear of the sexes being separated -in a school after being once united; but we constantly -hear of their being brought together after separation. -This is commonly, but mistakenly, recommended as an -advantage to the boys alone. I once heard an accomplished -teacher remonstrate against this change, when -thus urged. “Why should my girls be sacrificed,” -she said, “to improve your boys?” Six months after, -she had learned by experience. “Why,” she asked, -“did you rest the argument on so narrow a ground? -Since my school consisted half of boys, I find with surprise -that the change has improved both sexes. My -girls are more ambitious, more obedient, and more -ladylike. I shall never distrust the policy of mixed -schools again.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>What is true of the school is true of the family and -of the state. It is not good for man, or for woman, -to be alone. Granting the woman to be, on the whole, -the more spiritually minded, it is still true that each sex -needs the other. When the rivet falls from a pair of -scissors, we do not have them mended because either -half can claim angelic superiority over the other half, -but because it takes two halves to make a whole.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_66'>66</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XVII.<br /> <span class='large'>VICARIOUS HONORS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>There is a story in circulation—possibly without -authority—to the effect that a certain young lady has -ascended so many Alps that she would have been -chosen a member of the English Alpine Club, but for -her misfortune in respect to sex. As a matter of personal -recognition, however, and, as it were, of approximate -courtesy, her dog, who has accompanied her in -all her trips, and is not debased by sex, has been -elected into the club. She has therefore an opportunity -for exercising in behalf of her dog that beautiful -self-abnegation which is said to be a part of woman’s -nature, impelling her always to prefer that her laurels -should be worn by somebody else.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The dog probably made no objection to these vicarious -honors; nor is any objection made by the young -gentlemen who reply eloquently to the toast, “The -Ladies” at public dinners, or who kindly consent to -be educated at masculine colleges on “scholarships” -founded by women. At Harvard University alone there -are ten such scholarships,—their income amounting -annually to $2,340 in all. Those who receive the -emoluments of these funds must reflect within themselves, -occasionally, how grand a thing is this power -of substitution given to women, and how pleasant are -<span class='pageno' id='Page_67'>67</span>its occasional results to the substitute. It is doubtless -more blessed to give than to receive, but to receive -without giving has also its pleasures. Very likely the -holder of the scholarship, and the orator who rises -with his hand on his heart to “reply in behalf of the -ladies,” may do their appointed work well; and so did -the Alpine dog. Yet, after all, but for the work done -by his mistress, he would have won no more honor -from the Alpine Club than if he had been a chamois.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Nothing since Artemus Ward and his wife’s relations -has been finer than the generous way in which -fathers and brothers disclaim all desire for profits or -honors on the part of their feminine relatives. In a -certain system of schools once known to me, the boys -had prizes of money on certain occasions, but the successful -girls at those times received simply a testimonial -of honor for each; “the committee being convinced,” -it was said, “that this was more consonant -with the true delicacy and generosity of woman’s nature.” -So in the new arrangements for opening the -University of Copenhagen to young women, Karl Blind -writes to the New York Evening Post, that it is expressly -provided that they shall not “share in the -academic benefices and stipends which have been set -apart for male students.” Half of these charities -may, for aught that appears, have been established -originally by women, like the ten Harvard scholarships -already named. Women, however, can avail themselves -of them only by deputy, as the Alp-climbing -young lady is represented by her dog.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is all a beautiful tribute to the disinterestedness -of woman. The only pity is that this virtue, so much -<span class='pageno' id='Page_68'>68</span>admired, should not be reciprocated by showing the -like disinterestedness toward her. It does not appear -that the butchers and bakers of Copenhagen propose -to reduce in the case of women students “the benefices -and stipends” which are to be paid for daily -food. Young ladies at the university are only prohibited -from receiving money, not from needing it. -Nor will any of the necessary fatigues of Alpine -climbing be relaxed for any young lady because she -is a woman. The fatigues will remain in full force, -though the laurels be denied. The mountain-passes -will make small account of the “tenderness and delicacy -of her sex.” When the toil is over she will be -regarded as too delicate to be thanked for it; but, by -way of compensation, the Alpine Club will allow her -to be represented by her dog.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_69'>69</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XVIII.<br /> <span class='large'>THE GOSPEL OF HUMILIATION.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>“The silliest man who ever lived,” wrote Fanny -Fern once, “has always known enough, when he says -his prayers, to thank God he was not born a woman.” -President —— of —— College is not a silly man at all, -and he is devoting his life to the education of women; -yet he seems to feel as vividly conscious of his superior -position as even Fanny Fern could wish. If he had -been born a Jew, he would have thanked God, in the -appointed ritual, for not having made him a woman. -If he had been a Mohammedan, he would have accepted -the rule which forbids “a fool, a madman, or a woman” -to summon the faithful to prayer. Being a Christian -clergyman, with several hundred immortal souls, clothed -in female bodies, under his charge, he thinks it his duty, -at proper intervals, to notify his young ladies, that, -though they may share with men the glory of being -sophomores, they still are in a position, as regards the -other sex, of hopeless subordination. This is the climax -of his discourse, which in its earlier portions contains -many good and truthful things:—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“And, as the woman is different from the man, so is she -relative to him. This is true on the other side also. They are -bound together by mutual relationship so intimate and vital -that the existence of neither is absolutely complete except -<span class='pageno' id='Page_70'>70</span>with reference to the other. But there is this difference, that -the relation of woman is, characteristically, that of subordination -and dependence. This does not imply inferiority of -character, of capacity, of value, in the sight of God or man; -and it has been the glory of woman to have accepted the position -of formal inferiority assigned her by the Creator, with all -its responsibilities, its trials, its possible outward humiliations -and sufferings, in the proud consciousness that it is not incompatible -with an essential superiority; that it does not -prevent her from occupying, if she will, an inward elevation -of character, from which she may look down with pitying and -helpful love on him she calls her lord. Jesus said, ‘Ye know -that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, -and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it -shall not be so among you; but whosoever will be great among -you, let him be your minister; and whosoever will be chief -among you, let him be your servant, even as the Son of man -came, not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give -his life a ransom for many.’ Surely woman need not hesitate -to estimate her status by a criterion of dignity sustained by -such authority. She need not shrink from a position which -was sought by the Son of God, and in whose trials and griefs -she will have his sympathy and companionship.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>There is a comforting aspect to this discourse, after -all. It holds out the hope, that a particularly noble -woman may not be personally inferior to a remarkably -bad husband, but “may look down with pitying and -helpful love on him she calls her lord.” The drawback -is not merely that it insults woman by a reassertion -of a merely historical inferiority, which is -steadily diminishing, but that it fortifies this by precisely -the same talk about the dignity of subordination -which has been used to buttress every oppression since -the world began. Never yet was there a pious slaveholder -who did not quote to his slaves, on Sunday, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_71'>71</span>precisely the same texts with which President —— -favors his meek young pupils. Never yet was there a -slaveholder who would not shoot through the head, if -he had courage enough, anybody who should attempt -to place him in that beautiful position of subjection -whose spiritual merits he had been proclaiming. When -it came to that, he was like Thoreau, who believed -resignation to be a virtue, but preferred “not to practise -it unless it was quite necessary.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Thus, when the Rev. Charles C. Jones of Savannah -used to address the slaves on their condition, he proclaimed -the beauty of obedience in a way to bring tears -to their eyes. And this, he frankly assures the masters, -is the way to check insurrection and advance their -own “pecuniary interests.” He says of the slave, -that under proper religious instruction “his conscience -is enlightened and his soul is awed; ... to God he -commits the ordering of his lot, and in his station -renders to all their dues, obedience to whom obedience, -and honor to whom honor. <em>He dares not wrest from -God his own care and protection.</em> While he sees a preference -in the various conditions of men, he remembers -the words of the apostle: ‘Art thou called being a -servant? Care not for it; but, if thou mayst be free, -use it rather. For he that is called in the Lord, being -a servant, is the Lord’s freeman; likewise, also, he -that is called being free, is Christ’s servant.’”<a id='r4' /><a href='#f4' class='c018'><sup>[4]</sup></a></p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f4'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r4'>4</a>. Religious Instruction of the Negroes. Savannah, 1842, pp. 208–211.</p> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>I must say that the Rev. Mr. Jones’s preaching -seems to me precisely as good as Dr. ——’s, and that a -sensible woman ought to be as much influenced by the -one as was Frederick Douglass by the other—that is, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_72'>72</span>not at all. Let the preacher try “subordination” himself, -and see how he likes it. The beauty of service, -such as Jesus praised, lay in the willingness of the -service: a service that is serfdom loses all beauty, -whether rendered by man or by woman. My objection -to separate schools and colleges for women is, that they -are too apt to end in such instructions as this.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_73'>73</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XIX.<br /> <span class='large'>“CELERY AND CHERUBS.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>There was once a real or imaginary old lady who -had got the metaphor of Scylla and Charybdis a little -confused. Wishing to describe a perplexing situation, -this lady said,—</p> - -<p class='c014'>“You see, my dear, she was between Celery on one -side and Cherubs on the other! You know about Celery -and Cherubs, don’t you? They was two rocks somewhere; -and if you didn’t hit one, you was pretty sure -to run smack on the other.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>This describes, as a clever writer in the New York -Tribune declares, the present condition of women who -“agitate.” Their Celery and Cherubs are tears and -temper.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is a good hit, and we may well make a note of it. -It is the danger of all reformers, that they will vibrate -between discouragement and anger. When things go -wrong, what is it one’s impulse to do? To be cast -down, or to be stirred up; to wring one’s hands, or -clench one’s fists,—in short, tears or temper.</p> - -<p class='c014'>“Mother,” said a resolute little girl of my acquaintance, -“if the dinner was all spoiled, I wouldn’t sit -down, and cry! I’d say, ‘Hang it!’” This cherub -preferred the alternative of temper, on days when the -celery turned out badly. Probably her mother was -<span class='pageno' id='Page_74'>74</span>addicted to the other practice, and exhibited the -tears.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But as this alternative is found to exist for both -sexes, and on all occasions, why charge it especially -on the woman-suffrage movement? Men are certainly -as much given to ill temper as women; and, if they -are less inclined to tears, they make it up in sulks, -which are just as bad. Nicholas Nickleby, when the -pump was frozen, was advised by Mr. Squeers to -“content himself with a dry polish;” and so there is a -kind of dry despair into which men fall, which is quite -as forlorn as any tears of women. How many a man -has doubtless wished at such times that the pump of -his lachrymal glands could only thaw out, and he could -give his emotions something more than a “dry polish”! -The unspeakable comfort some women feel in sitting -for ten minutes with a handkerchief over their eyes! -The freshness, the heartiness, the new life visible in -them, when the crying is done, and the handkerchief -comes down again!</p> - -<p class='c014'>And, indeed, this simple statement brings us to the -real truth, which should have been more clearly seen -by the writer who tells this story. She is wrong in -saying, “It is urged that men and women stand on -an equality, are exactly alike.” Many of us urge the -“equality:” very few of us urge the “exactly alike.” -An apple and an orange, a potato and a tomato, a rose -and a lily, the Episcopal and the Presbyterian churches, -Oxford and Cambridge, Yale and Harvard,—we may -surely grant equality in each case, without being so -exceedingly foolish as to go on and say that they are -exactly alike.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_75'>75</span>And precisely here is the weak point of the whole -case, as presented by this writer. Women give way -to tears more readily than men? Granted. Is their -sex any the weaker for it? Not a bit. It is simply a -difference of temperament: that is all. It involves no -inferiority. If you think that this habit necessarily -means weakness, wait and see! Who has not seen -women break down in tears during some domestic calamity, -while the “stronger sex” were calm; and who -has not seen those same women, that temporary excitement -being over, rise up and dry their eyes, and be -thenceforth the support and stay of their households, -and perhaps bear up the “stronger sex” as a stream -bears up a ship? I said once to an experienced physician, -watching such a woman, “That woman is really -great.”—“Of course she is,” he answered: “did you -ever see a woman who was not great, when the emergency -required?”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Now, will women carry this same quality of temperament -into their public career? Doubtless: otherwise -they would cease to be women. Will it be betraying -confidence if I own that I have seen two of the very -bravest women of my acquaintance—women who have -swayed great audiences—burst into tears, during a -committee-meeting, at a moment of unexpected adversity -for “the cause”? How pitiable! our critical observers -would have thought. In five minutes that April -shower had passed, and those women were as resolute -and unconquerable as Queen Elizabeth: they were again -the natural leaders of those around them; and the cool -and tearless men who sat beside them were nothing—men -were “a lost art,” as some one says—compared -<span class='pageno' id='Page_76'>76</span>with the inexhaustible moral vitality of those two -women.</p> - -<p class='c014'>No: the dangers of “Celery and Cherubs” are exaggerated. -For temper, women are as good as men, -and no better. As for tears, long may they flow! -They are symbols of that mighty distinction of sex -which is as ineffaceable and as essential as the difference -between land and sea.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_77'>77</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XX.<br /> <span class='large'>THE NEED OF CAVALRY.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>In the interesting Buddhist book, “The Wheel of -the Law,” translated by Henry Alabaster, there is an -account of a certain priest who used to bless a great -king, saying, “May your majesty have the firmness of -a crow, the audacity of a woman, the endurance of a -vulture, and the strength of an ant.” The priest then -told anecdotes illustrating all of these qualities. Who -has not known occasions wherein some daring woman -has been the Joan of Arc of a perfectly hopeless cause, -taken it up where men shrank, carried it through where -they had failed, and conquered by weapons which men -would never have thought of using, and would have -lacked faith to employ even if put into their hands? -The wit, the resources, the audacity of women, have -been the key to history and the staple of novels, ever -since that larger novel called history began to be -written.</p> - -<p class='c014'>How is it done? Who knows the secret of their -success? All that any man can say is, that the heart -enters largely into the magic. Rogers asserts in his -“Table-Talk,” that often, when doubting how to act -in matters of importance, he had received more useful -advice from women than from men. “Women have -the understanding of the heart,” he said, “which is -<span class='pageno' id='Page_78'>78</span>better than that of the head.” Then this instinct, that -begins from the heart, reaches the heart also, and -through that controls the will. “Win hearts,” said -Lord Burleigh to Queen Elizabeth, “and you have -hands and purses;” and the greatest of English sovereigns, -in spite of ugliness and rouge, in spite of -coarseness and cruelty and bad passions, was adored -by the nation that she first made great.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It seems to me that women are a sort of cavalry force -in the army of mankind. They are not always to be -relied upon for that steady “hammering away,” which -was Grant’s one method; but there is a certain Sheridan -quality about them, light-armed, audacious, quick, -irresistible. They go before the main army; their -swift wits go scouting far in advance; they are the first -to scent danger, or to spy out chances of success. -Their charge is like that of a Tartar horde, or the wild -sweep of the Apaches. They are upon you from some -wholly unexpected quarter; and this respectable, systematic, -well-drilled masculine force is caught and rolled -over and over in the dust, before the man knows what -has hit him. But, even if repelled and beaten off, this -formidable cavalry is unconquered: routed and in confusion -to-day, it comes back upon you to-morrow—fresh, -alert, with new devices, bringing new dangers. -In dealing with it, as the French complained of the -Arabs in Algiers, “Peace is not to be purchased by -victory.” And, even if all seems lost, with what a -brilliant final charge it will cover a retreat!</p> - -<p class='c014'>Decidedly, we need cavalry. In older countries, -where it has been a merely undisciplined and irregular -force, it has often done mischief; and public men, from -<span class='pageno' id='Page_79'>79</span>Demosthenes down, have been lamenting that measures -which the statesman has meditated a whole year, may -be overturned in a day by a woman. Under our American -government we have foolishly attempted to leave -out this arm of the service altogether; and much of -the alleged dulness of our American history has come -from this attempt. Those who have been trained in -the various reforms where woman has taken an equal -part—the anti-slavery reform especially—know well -how much of the energy, the dash, the daring, of those -movements, have come from her. A revolution with a -woman in it is stronger than the established order that -omits her. It is not that she is superior to man, but -she is different from man; and we can no more spare -her than we could spare the cavalry from an army.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_80'>80</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXI.<br /> <span class='large'>“THE REASON FIRM, THE TEMPERATE WILL.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>It is a part of the necessary theory of republican -government, that every class and race shall be judged -by its highest types, not its lowest. The proposition -of the French revolutionary statesman, to begin the -work of purifying the world by arresting all the cowards -and knaves, is liable to the objection that it would find -victims in every circle. Republican government begins -at the other end, and assumes that the community generally -has good intentions at least, and some common -sense, however it may be with individuals. Take the -very quality which the newspapers so often deny to -women,—the quality of steadiness. “In fact, men’s -great objection to the entrance of the female mind into -politics is drawn from a suspicion of its unsteadiness -on matters in which the feelings could by any possibility -be enlisted.” Thus says the New York Nation. Let -us consider this implied charge against women, and -consider it not by generalizing from a single instance,—“just -like a woman,” as the editors would doubtless -say, if a woman had done it,—but by observing whole -classes of that sex, taken together.</p> - -<p class='c014'>These classes need some care in selection, for the -plain reason that there are comparatively few circles -in which women have yet been allowed enough freedom -<span class='pageno' id='Page_81'>81</span>of scope, or have acted sufficiently on the same plane -with men, to furnish a fair estimate of their probable -action, were they enfranchised. Still there occur to -me three such classes,—the anti-slavery women, the -Quaker women, and the women who conduct philanthropic -operations in our large cities. If the alleged -unsteadiness of women is to be felt in public affairs, it -would have been felt in these organizations. Has it -been so felt?</p> - -<p class='c014'>Of the anti-slavery movement I can personally testify,—and -I have heard the same point fully recognized -among my elders, such as Garrison, Phillips, and Quincy,—that -the women contributed their full share, if not -more than their share, to the steadiness of that movement, -even in times when the feelings were most excited, -as, for instance, in fugitive-slave cases. Who -that has seen mobs practically put down, and mayors -cowed into decency, by the silent dignity of those rows -of women who sat, with their knitting, more imperturbable -than the men, can read without a smile these -doubts of the “steadiness” of that sex? Again, -among Quaker women, I have asked the opinion of -prominent Friends, as of John G. Whittier, whether it -has been the experience of that body that women were -more flighty and unsteady than men in their official -action; and have been uniformly answered in the negative. -And finally, as to benevolent organizations, a -good test is given in the fact,—first pointed out, I believe, -by that eminently practical philanthropist, Rev. -Augustus Woodbury of Providence,—that the whole -tendency has been, during the last twenty years, to put -the management, even the financial control, of our -<span class='pageno' id='Page_82'>82</span>benevolent societies, more and more into the hands of -women, and that there has never been the slightest reason -to reverse this policy. Ask the secretaries of the -various boards of State Charities, or the officers of the -Social Science Associations, if they have found reason -to complain of the want of steadfast qualities in the -“weaker sex.” Why is it that the legislation of Massachusetts -has assigned the class requiring the steadiest -of all supervision—the imprisoned convicts—to “five -commissioners of prisons, two of whom shall be women”? -These are the points which it would be worthy -of our journals to consider, instead of hastily generalizing -from single instances. Let us appeal from the -typical woman of the editorial picture,—fickle, unsteady, -foolish,—to the nobler conception of womanhood -which the poet Wordsworth found fulfilled in his -own household:—</p> - -<div class='lg-container-b c016'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>“A being breathing thoughtful breath,</div> - <div class='line'>A traveller betwixt life and death;</div> - <div class='line'><em>The reason firm, the temperate will;</em></div> - <div class='line'><em>Endurance, foresight, strength and skill</em>;</div> - <div class='line'>A perfect woman, nobly planned</div> - <div class='line'>To warn, to comfort, to command,</div> - <div class='line'>And yet a spirit still, and bright</div> - <div class='line'>With something of an angel light.”</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_83'>83</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXII.<br /> <span class='large'>“ALLURES TO BRIGHTER WORLDS, AND LEADS THE WAY.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>When the Massachusetts House of Representatives -had “School Suffrage” under consideration, the other -day, the suggestion was made by one of the pithiest -and quaintest of the speakers, that men were always -better for the society of women, and therefore ought -to vote in their company. “If all of us,” he said, -“would stay away from all places where we cannot -take our wives and daughters with us, we should keep -better company than we now do.” This expresses a -feeling which grows more and more common among -the better class of men, and which is the key to much -progress in the condition of women. There can be -no doubt that the increased association of the sexes in -society, in school, in literature, tends to purify these -several spheres of action. Yet, when we come to -philosophize on this, there occur some perplexities on -the way.</p> - -<p class='c014'>For instance, the exclusion of woman from all these -spheres was in ancient Greece almost complete; yet -the leading Greek poets, as Homer and the tragedians, -are exceedingly chaste in tone, and in this respect beyond -most of the great poets of modern nations. Again -no European nation has quite so far sequestered and -<span class='pageno' id='Page_84'>84</span>subordinated women as has Spain; and yet the whole -tone of Spanish literature is conspicuously grave and -decorous. This plainly indicates that race has much -to do with the matter, and that the mere admission or -exclusion of women is but one among several factors. -In short, it is easy to make out a case by a rhetorical -use of the facts on one side; but, if we look at all the -facts, the matter presents greater difficulties.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Again, it is to be noted that in several countries -the first women who have taken prominent part in literature -have been as bad as the men; as, for instance, -Marguerite of Navarre and Mrs. Aphra Behn. This -might indeed be explained by supposing that they had -to gain entrance into literature by accepting the dissolute -standards which they found prevailing. But it -would probably be more correct to say that these -standards themselves were variable, and that their variation -affected, at certain periods, women as well as -men. Marguerite of Navarre wrote religious books as -well as merry stories; and we know from Lockhart’s -Life of Scott, that ladies of high character in Edinburgh -used to read Mrs. Behn’s tales and plays aloud, -at one time, with delight,—although one of the same -ladies found, in her old age, that she could not read -them to herself without blushing. Shakspeare puts -coarse repartees into the mouths of women of stainless -virtue. George Sand is not considered an unexceptionable -writer; but she tells us in her autobiography -that she found among her grandmother’s papers poems -and satires so indecent that she could not read them -through, and yet they bore the names of <i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">abbés</span></i> and -gentlemen whom she remembered in her childhood as -<span class='pageno' id='Page_85'>85</span>models of dignity and honor. Voltaire inscribes to -ladies of high rank, who doubtless regarded it as a -great compliment, verses such as not even a poet of the -English “fleshly school” would now print at all. In -“Poems by Eminent Ladies,”—published in 1755 and -reprinted in 1774,—there are one or two poems as -gross and disgusting as any thing in Swift; yet their -authors were thought reputable women. Allan Ramsay’s -“Tea-Table Miscellany”—a collection of English -and Scottish songs—was first published in 1724; -and in his preface to the sixteenth edition the editor -attributes its great success, especially among the -ladies, to the fact that he has carefully excluded all -grossness, “that the modest voice and ear of the fair -singer might meet with no affront;” and adds, “the -chief bent of all my studies being to attain their good -graces.” There is no doubt of the great popularity -enjoyed by the book in all circles; yet it contains a -few songs which the most licentious newspaper would -not now publish. The inference is irresistible, from -this and many other similar facts, that the whole tone -of manners and decency has very greatly improved -among the European races within a century and a half.</p> - -<p class='c014'>I suspect the truth to be, that, besides the visible -influence of race and religion, there has been an insensible -and almost unconscious improvement in each sex, -with respect to these matters, as time has passed on; -and that the mutual desire to please has enabled each -sex to help the other,—the sex which is naturally the -more refined taking the lead. But I should lay more -stress on this mutual influence, and less on mere feminine -superiority, than would be laid by many. It is -<span class='pageno' id='Page_86'>86</span>often claimed by teachers that co-education helps not -only boys, but also girls, to develop greater propriety -of manners. When the sexes are wholly separate, or -associate on terms of entire inequality, no such good -influence occurs: the more equal the association, the -better for both parties. After all, the Divine model is -to be found in the family; and the best ingenuity cannot -improve much upon it.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_87'>87</span> - <h2 class='c008'>THE HOME.</h2> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>“In respect to the powers and rights of married women, -the law is by no means abreast of the spirit of the age. Here -are seen the old fossil footprints of feudalism. The law relating -to woman tends to make every family a barony or a -monarchy or a despotism, of which the husband is the baron, -king, or despot, and the wife the dependent, serf, or slave. -That this is not always the fact, is not due to the law, but -to the enlarged humanity which spurns the narrow limits of -its rules. The progress of civilization has changed the family -from a barony to a republic; but the law has not kept pace -with the advance of ideas, manners, and customs.”—<span class='sc'>W. W. -Story</span>’s <cite>Treatise on Contracts not under Seal</cite>, § 84,—third -edition, p. 89.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_89'>89</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXIII.<br /> <span class='large'>WANTED—HOMES.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>We see advertisements, occasionally, of “Homes for -Aged Women,” and more rarely “Homes for Aged -Men.” The question sometimes suggests itself, whether -it would not be better to begin the provision earlier, -and see that homes are also provided, in some form, -for the middle-aged and even the young. The trouble -is, I suppose, that as it takes two to make a bargain, -so it takes at least two to make a home; and unluckily -it takes only one to spoil it.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Madame Roland once defined marriage as an institution -where one person undertakes to provide happiness -for two; and many failures are accounted for, no -doubt, by this false basis. Sometimes it is the man, -more often the woman, of whom this extravagant demand -is made. There are marriages which have proved -a wreck almost wholly through the fault of the wife. -Nor is this confined to wedded homes alone. I have -known a son who lived alone, patiently and uncomplainingly, -with that saddest of all conceivable companions, -a drunken mother. I have known another -young man who supported in his own home a mother -and sister, both habitual drunkards. All these were -American-born, and all of respectable social position. -A home shadowed by such misery is not a home, though -<span class='pageno' id='Page_90'>90</span>it might have been a home but for the sins of women. -Such instances are, however, rare and occasional compared -with the cases where the same offence in the husband -makes ruin of the home.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Then there are the cases where indolence, or selfishness, -or vanity, or the love of social excitement, in the -woman, unfits her for home life. Here we come upon -ground where perhaps woman is the greater sinner. It -must be remembered, however, that against this must -be balanced the neglect produced by club-life, or by -the life of society-membership, in a man. A brilliant -young married belle in London once told me that she -was glad her husband was so fond of his club, for -it amused him every night while she went to balls. -“Married men do not go much into society here,” she -said, “unless they are regular flirts,—which I do not -think my husband would ever be, for he is very fond -of me,—so he goes every night to his club, and gets -home about the same time that I do. It is a very nice -arrangement.” It was apparently spoken in all the -fearlessness of innocence, but I believe that it has since -ended in a “separation.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is common to denounce club-life in our large cities -as destructive of the home. The modern club is simply -a more refined substitute for the old-fashioned -tavern, and is on the whole an advance in morals as -well as manners. In our large cities a man in a certain -social coterie belongs to a club, if he can afford it, -as a means of contact with his fellows, and to have -various conveniences which he cannot so economically -obtain at home. A few haunt them constantly: the -many use them occasionally. More absorbing than -<span class='pageno' id='Page_91'>91</span>clubs, perhaps, are the secret societies which have so -revived among us since the war, and which consume -time so fearfully. There was a case mentioned in the -newspapers lately of a man who belonged to some -twenty of these associations; and when he died, and -each wished to conduct his funeral, great was the -strife! In the small city where I write, there are seventeen -secret societies down in the directory, and I suppose -as many more not so conspicuous. I meet men -who assure me that they habitually attend a societymeeting -every evening of the week except Sunday, and -a church meeting then. These are rarely men of leisure: -they are usually mechanics or business men of some -kind, who are hard at work all day, and never see their -families except at meal-times. Their case is far worse, -so far as absence from home is concerned, than that of -the “club-men” of large cities; for these are often -men of leisure, who, if married, at least make home -one of their lounging-places, which the secret-society -men do not.</p> - -<p class='c014'>I honestly believe that this melancholy desertion of -the home is largely due to the traditional separation -between the alleged spheres of the sexes. The theory -still prevails largely, that home is the peculiar province -of the woman, that she has almost no duties out of it; -and hence, naturally enough, that the husband has almost -no duties in it. If he is amused there, let him -stay there; but, as it is not his recognized sphere of -duty, he is not actually violating any duty by absenting -himself. This theory even pervades our manuals of -morals, of metaphysics, and of popular science; and -it is not every public teacher who has the manliness, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_92'>92</span>having once stated it, to modify his statement, as did -the venerable President Hopkins of Williams College, -when lecturing the other day to the young ladies of -Vassar.</p> - -<p class='c014'>“I would,” he said, “at this point correct my teaching -in ‘The Law of Love’ to the effect that home is -peculiarly the sphere of woman, and civil government -that of man. <em>I now regard the home as the joint sphere -of man and woman, and the sphere of civil government -more of an open question as between the two.</em> It is, -however, to be lamented that the present agitation concerning -the rights of woman is so much a matter of -‘rights’ rather than of ‘duties,’ as the reform of the -latter would involve the former.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>If our instructors in moral philosophy will only base -their theory of ethics as broadly as this, we shall no -longer need to advertise “Homes Wanted;” for the -joint efforts of men and women will soon provide them.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_93'>93</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXIV.<br /> <span class='large'>THE ORIGIN OF CIVILIZATION.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>Nothing throws more light on the whole history of -woman than the first illustration in Sir John Lubbock’s -“Origin of Civilization.” A young girl, almost naked, -is being dragged furiously along the ground by a party -of naked savages, armed literally to the teeth, while -those of another band grasp her by the arm, and almost -tear her asunder in the effort to hold her back. These -last are her brothers and her friends; the others are—her -enemies? As you please to call them. They are -her future husband and his kinsmen, who have come -to aid him in his wooing.</p> - -<p class='c014'>This was the primitive rite of marriage. Vestiges -of it still remain among savage nations. And all the -romance and grace of the most refined modern marriage—the -orange-blossoms, the bridal veil, the church -service, the wedding-feast—these are only the “bright -consummate flower” reared by civilization from that -rough seed. All the brutal encounter is softened into -this. Nothing remains of the barbarism except the -one word “obey,” and even that is going.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Now, to say that a thing is going, is to say that it -will presently be gone. To say that any thing is -changed, is to say that it is to change further. If it -never has been altered, perhaps it will not be; but a -<span class='pageno' id='Page_94'>94</span>proved alteration of an inch in a year opens the way -to an indefinite modification. The study of the glaciers, -for instance, began with the discovery that they -had moved; and from that moment no one doubted that -they were moving all the time. It is the same with the -position of woman. Once open your eyes to the fact -that it has changed, and who is to predict where the -matter shall end? It is sheer folly to say, “Her relative -position will always be what it has been,” when -one glance at Sir John Lubbock’s picture shows that -there is no fixed “has been,” but that her original -position was long since altered and revised. Those -who still use this argument are like those who laughed -at the lines of stakes which Agassiz planted across the -Aar glacier in 1840. But the stakes settled the question, -and proved the motion. <i><span lang="it" xml:lang="it">Pero si muove</span></i>: “But it -moves.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>The motion once proved, the whole range of possible -progress is before us. The amazement of that formerly -“heathen Chinee” in Boston, the other day, when he -saw a woman addressing a missionary meeting; the -astonishment of all English visitors when young ladies -hear classes in geometry and Latin, in our high schools; -the surprise of foreigners at seeing the rough throng in -the Cooper Institute reading-room submit to the sway -of one young woman with a crochet-needle—all these -simply testify to the fact that the stakes have moved. -That they have yet been carried half way to the end, -who knows? What a step from the horrible nuptials of -those savage days to the poetic marriage of Robert -Browning and Elizabeth Barrett—the “Sonnets from -the Portuguese” on one side, the “One Word More” -<span class='pageno' id='Page_95'>95</span>on the other! But who can say that the whole relation -between man and woman reached its climax there, and -that where the past has brought changes so vast the -future is to add nothing? Who knows that, when -“the world’s great bridals come,” people may not look -back with pity, even on this era of the Brownings? -Probably even Elizabeth Barrett promised to obey!</p> - -<p class='c014'>At any rate, it is safe to say that each step concedes -the probability of another. Even from the naked barbarian -to the veiled Oriental, from the savage hut to -the carefully enshrined harem, is a step forward. It -is another step in the spiral line of progress to the -unveiled face and comparatively free movements of the -modern English or American woman. From the kitchen -to the public lecture-room, from that to the lecture-platform, -and from that again to the ballot-box,—these -are far slighter steps than those which have -already lifted the savage girl of Sir John Lubbock’s -picture into the possession of the alphabet and the -dignity of a home. So easy are these future changes -beside those of the past, that to doubt their possibility -is as if Agassiz, after tracing year by year the motion -of his Alpine glacier, should deny its power to move -one inch farther into the sunny valley, and there to -melt harmlessly away.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_96'>96</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXV.<br /> <span class='large'>THE LOW-WATER MARK.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>We constantly see it assumed, in arguments against -any step in the elevation of woman, that her position -is a thing fixed permanently by nature, so that there -can be in it no great or essential change. Every successive -modification is resisted as “a reform against -nature;” and this argument from permanence is always -that appealing most strongly to conservative minds. -Let us see how the facts confirm it.</p> - -<p class='c014'>A story is going the rounds of the newspapers in -regard to a Russian peasant and his wife. For some -act of disobedience the peasant took the law into his -own hands; and his mode of discipline was to tie the -poor creature naked to a post in the street, and to call -on every passer-by to strike her a blow. Not satisfied -with this, he placed her on the ground, and tied heavy -weights on her limbs until one arm was broken. When -finally released, she made a complaint against him in -court. The court discharged him on the ground that -he had not exceeded the legal authority of a husband. -Encouraged by this, he caused her to be arrested in -return; and the same court sentenced her to another -public whipping for disobedience.</p> - -<p class='c014'>No authority was given for this story in the newspaper -where I saw it; but it certainly did not first -<span class='pageno' id='Page_97'>97</span>appear in a woman-suffrage newspaper, and cannot -therefore be a manufactured “outrage.” I use it -simply to illustrate the low-water mark at which the -position of woman may rest, in the largest Christian -nation of the world. All the refinements, all the education, -all the comparative justice, of modern society, -have been gradually upheaved from some such depth -as this. When the gypsies described by Leland treat -even the ground trodden upon by a woman as impure, -they simply illustrate the low plane from which all the -elevation of woman has begun. All these things show -that the position of that sex in society, so far from -being a thing in itself permanent, has been in reality the -most variable of all factors in the social problem. And -this inevitably suggests the question, Are we any more -sure that her present position is finally and absolutely -fixed than were those who observed it at any previous -time in the world’s history? Granting that her condition -was once at low-water mark, who is authorized to -say that it has yet reached high-tide?</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is very possible that this Russian wife, once -scourged back to submission, ended her days in the -conviction, and taught to her daughters, that such was -a woman’s rightful place. When an American woman -of to-day says, “I have all the rights I want,” is she -on any surer ground? Grant that the difference is vast -between the two. How do we know that even the later -condition is final, or that any thing is final but entire -equality before the laws? It is not many years since -William Story—in a legal work inspired and revised by -his father, the greatest of American jurists—wrote this -indignant protest against the injustice of the old common -law:—</p> - -<p class='c021'><span class='pageno' id='Page_98'>98</span>“In respect to the powers and rights of married women, -the law is by no means abreast of the spirit of the age. Here -are seen the old fossil footprints of feudalism. The law relating -to woman tends to make every family a barony or a monarchy, -or a despotism, of which the husband is the baron, king, -or despot, and the wife the dependent, serf, or slave. That -this is not always the fact, is not due to the law, but to the enlarged -humanity which spurns the narrow limits of its rules. -The progress of civilization has changed the family from a -barony to a republic; but the law has not kept pace with the -advance of ideas, manners, and customs. And, although public -opinion is a check to legal rules on the subject, the rules are -feudal and stern. Yet the position of woman throughout history -serves as the criterion of the freedom of the people or an -age. When man shall despise that right which is founded -only on might, woman will be free and stand on an equal level -with him,—a friend and not a dependent.”<a id='r5' /><a href='#f5' class='c018'><sup>[5]</sup></a></p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f5'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r5'>5</a>. Story’s Treatise on the Law of Contracts not under Seal, p. 89, § 84.</p> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>We know that the law is greatly changed and ameliorated -in many places since Story wrote this statement; -but we also know how almost every one of these -changes was resisted: and who is authorized to say -that the final and equitable fulfilment is yet reached?</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_99'>99</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXVI.<br /> <span class='large'>“OBEY.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>After witnessing the marriage ceremony of the Episcopal -Church, the other day, I walked down the aisle -with the young rector who had officiated. It was natural -to speak of the beauty of the Church service on -an occasion like that; but, after doing this, I felt -compelled to protest against the unrighteous pledge to -obey. “I hope,” I said, “to live to see that word -expunged from the Episcopal service, as it has been -from that of the Methodists.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>“Why?” he asked. “Is it because you know that -they will not obey, whatever their promise?”</p> - -<p class='c014'>“Because they ought not,” I said.</p> - -<p class='c014'>“Well,” said he, after a few moments’ reflection, -and looking up frankly, “I do not think they ought!”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Here was a young clergyman of great earnestness -and self-devotion, who included it among the sacred -duties of his life to impose upon ignorant young girls -a solemn obligation, which he yet thought they ought -not to incur, and did not believe that they would keep. -There could hardly be a better illustration of the confusion -in the public mind, or the manner in which “the -subjection of woman” is being outgrown, or the subtile -way in which this subjection has been interwoven -with sacred ties, and baptized “duty.”</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_100'>100</span>The advocates of woman suffrage are constantly -reproved for using the terms “subjection,” “oppression,” -and “slavery,” as applied to woman. They -simply commit the same sin as that committed by the -original abolitionists. They are “as harsh as truth, -as uncompromising as justice.” Of course they talk -about oppression and emancipation. It is the word -<em>obey</em> that constitutes the one, and shows the need of -the other. Whoever is pledged to obey is technically -and literally a slave, no matter how many roses surround -the chains. All the more so if the slavery is -self-imposed, and surrounded by all the prescriptions -of religion. Make the marriage-tie as close as Church -or State can make it; but let it be equal, impartial. -That it may be so, the word <em>obey</em> must be abandoned -or made reciprocal. Where invariable obedience is -promised, equality is gone.</p> - -<p class='c014'>That there may be no doubt about the meaning of -this word in the marriage-covenant, the usages of nations -often add symbolic explanations. These are generally -simple and brutal enough to be understood. The -Hebrew ceremony, when the bridegroom took off his -slipper and struck the bride on the neck as she crossed -his threshold, was unmistakable. As my black sergeant -said, when a white prisoner questioned his authority, -and he pointed to the <i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">chevrons</span></i> on his sleeve, -“Dat mean guv’ment.” All these forms mean simply -government also. The ceremony of the slipper has -now no recognition, except when people fling an old -shoe after the bride, which is held by antiquarians to -be the same observance. But it is all preserved and -concentrated into a single word, when the bride promises -to obey.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_101'>101</span>The deepest wretchedness that has ever been put -into human language, or that has exceeded it, has grown -out of that pledge. There is no misery on earth like -that of a pure and refined woman who finds herself -owned, body and soul, by a drunken, licentious, brutal -man. The very fact that she is held to obedience by -a spiritual tie makes it worse. Chattel-slavery was not -so bad; for, though the master might pervert religion -for his own satisfaction, he could not impose upon the -slave. Never yet did I see a negro slave who thought -it a duty to obey his master; and therefore there was -always some dream of release. But who has not -heard of some delicate and refined woman, one day of -whose torture was equivalent to years of that possible -to an obtuser frame,—who had the door of escape -ready at hand for years, and yet died a lingering death -rather than pass through it; and this because she had -promised to obey!</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is said of one of the most gifted women who ever -trod American soil,—she being of English birth,—that, -before she obtained the divorce which separated -her from her profligate husband, she once went for counsel -to the wife of her pastor. She unrolled before her -the long catalogue of merciless outrages to which she had -been subject, endangering finally her health, her life, -and that of her children born and to be born. When -she turned at last for advice to her confessor, with the -agonized inquiry, “What is it my duty to do?”—“Do?” -said the stern adviser: “Lie down on the -floor, and let your husband trample on you if he will. -That is a woman’s duty.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>The woman who gave this advice was not naturally -<span class='pageno' id='Page_102'>102</span>inhuman nor heartless: she had simply been trained in -the school of obedience. The Jesuit doctrine, that a -priest should be as a corpse, <i><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">perinde ac cadaver</span></i>, in the -hands of a superior priest, is not worse. Woman has -no right to delegate, nor man to assume, a responsibility -so awful. Just in proportion as it is consistently -carried out, it trains men from boyhood into self-indulgent -tyrants; and, while some women are transformed -by it to saints, others are crushed into deceitful slaves. -That this was the result of chattel-slavery, this nation -has at length learned. We learn more slowly the profounder -and more subtile moral evil that follows from -the unrighteous promise to obey.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_103'>103</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXVII.<br /> <span class='large'>WOMAN IN THE CHRYSALIS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>When the bride receives the ring upon her finger, -and utters—if she utters it—the unnatural promise -to obey, she fancies a poetic beauty in the rite. Turning -of her own free will from her maiden liberty, she -voluntarily takes the yoke of service upon her. This -is her view; but is this the historic fact in regard to -marriage? Not at all. The pledge of obedience—the -whole theory of inequality in marriage—is simply -what is left to us of a former state of society, in which -every woman, old or young, must obey somebody. -The state of tutelage, implied in such a marriage, is -merely what is left of the old theory of the “Perpetual -Tutelage of Women,” under the Roman law.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Roman law, from which our civil law is derived, -has its foundation evidently in patriarchal tradition. -It recognized at first the family only, and that family -was held together by parental power (<i><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">patria potestas</span></i>). -If the father died, his powers passed to the son -or grandson, as the possible head of a new family; -but these powers never could pass to a woman, and -every woman, of whatever age, must be under somebody’s -legal control. Her father dying, she was still -subject through life to her nearest male relations, or -to her father’s nominees, as her guardians. She was -<span class='pageno' id='Page_104'>104</span>under perpetual guardianship, both as to person or -property. No years, no experience, could make her -any thing but a child before the law.</p> - -<p class='c014'>In Oriental countries the system was still more complete. -“A man,” says the Gentoo Code of Laws, -“must keep his wife so much in subjection that she by -no means be mistress of her own action. If the wife -have her own free will, notwithstanding she be of a -superior caste, she will behave amiss.” But this authority, -which still exists in India, is not merely conjugal. -The husband exerts it simply as being the -wife’s legal guardian. If the woman be unmarried or -a widow, she must be as rigorously held under some -other guardianship. It is no uncommon thing for a -woman in India to be the ward of her own son. Lucretia -Mott or Florence Nightingale would there be in -personal subjection to somebody. Any man of legal -age would be recognized as a fit custodian for them, -but there must be a man.</p> - -<p class='c014'>With some variation of details at different periods, -the same system prevailed essentially at Rome, down -to the time when Rome became Christian. Those who -wish for particulars will find them in an admirable -chapter (the fifth) of Maine’s “Ancient Law.” At -one time the husband was held to possess the <i><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">patria -potestas</span></i>, or parental power, in its full force. By law -“the woman passed <i><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">in manum viri</span></i>, that is, she became -the daughter of her husband.” All she had became -his, and after his death she was retained in the same -strict tutelage by any guardians his will might appoint. -Afterwards, to soften this rigid bond, the woman was -regarded in law as being temporarily deposited by her -<span class='pageno' id='Page_105'>105</span>family with her husband; the family appointed guardians -over her: and thus, between the two tyrannies, -she won a sort of independence. Then came Christianity, -and swept away the parental authority for -married women, concentrating all upon the husband. -Hence our legislation bears the mark of a double origin, -and woman is half recognized as an equal and half as -a slave.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is necessary to remember, therefore, that all the -relation of subjection in marriage is merely the residue -of an unnatural system, of which all else is long -since outgrown. It would have seemed to an ancient -Roman a matter of course that a woman should, all -her life long, obey the guardians set over her person. -It still seems to many people a matter of course that -she should obey her husband. To others among us, on -the contrary, both these theories of obedience seem barbarous, -and the one is merely a relic of the other.</p> - -<p class='c014'>We cannot disregard the history of the Theory of -Tutelage. If we could believe that a chrysalis is -always a chrysalis, and a butterfly always a butterfly, -we could easily leave each to its appropriate sphere; -but when we see the chrysalis open, and the butterfly -come half out of it, we know that sooner or later it -must spread wings, and fly. The theory of tutelage is -the chrysalis. Woman is the butterfly. Sooner or -later she will be wholly out.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_106'>106</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXVIII.<br /> <span class='large'>TWO AND TWO.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>A young man of very good brains was telling me, -the other day, his dreams of his future wife. Rattling -on, more in joke than in earnest, he said, “She must -be perfectly ignorant, and a bigot: she must know -nothing, and believe every thing. I should wish to have -her call to me from the adjoining room, ‘My dear, -what do two and two make?’”</p> - -<p class='c014'>It did not seem to me that his demand would be so -very hard to fill, since bigotry and ignorance are to be -had almost anywhere for the asking; and, as for two -and two, I should say that it had always been the habit -of women to ask that question of some man, and to rest -easily satisfied with the answer. They have generally -called, as my friend wished, from some other room, saying, -“My dear, what do two and two make?” and the -husband or father or brother has answered and said, -“My dear, they make four for a man, and three for a -woman.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>At any given period in the history of woman, she -has adopted man’s whim as the measure of her rights; -has claimed nothing; has sweetly accepted any thing: -the law of two-and-two itself should be at his discretion. -At any given moment, so well was his interpretation -received, that it stood for absolute right. In -<span class='pageno' id='Page_107'>107</span>Rome a woman, married or single, could not testify in -court; in the middle ages, and down to quite modern -times, she could not hold real estate; ten years ago -she could not, in New England, obtain a collegiate -education; even now she cannot vote.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The first principles of republican government are so -rehearsed and re-rehearsed, that one would think they -must become “as plain as that two and two make -four.” But we find throughout, that, as Emerson said -of another class of reasoners, “Their two is not the -real two; their four is not the real four.” We find -different numerals and diverse arithmetical rules for -the two sexes; as, in some Oriental countries, men and -women speak different dialects of the same language.</p> - -<p class='c014'>In novels the hero often begins by dreaming, like -my friend, of an ideal wife, who shall be ignorant of -every thing, and have only brains enough to be bigoted. -Instead of sighing, like Falstaff, “Oh for a fine -young thief, of the age of two and twenty or thereabouts!” -the hero sighs for a fine young idiot of similar -age. When the hero is successful in his search and -wooing, the novelist sometimes mercifully removes the -young woman early, like David Copperfield’s Dora, she -bequeathing the bereaved husband, on her death-bed, -to a woman of sense. In real life these convenient -interruptions do not commonly occur, and the foolish -youth regrets through many years that he did not select -an Agnes instead.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The acute observer Stendhal says,—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“In Paris, the highest praise for a marriageable girl is to -say, ‘She has great sweetness of character and the disposition -of a lamb.’ Nothing produces more impression on fools who -<span class='pageno' id='Page_108'>108</span>are looking out for wives. I think I see the interesting couple, -two years after, breakfasting together on a dull day, with three -tall lackeys waiting upon them!”</p> - -<p class='c014'>And he adds, still speaking in the interest of men,—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“Most men have a period in their career when they might -do something great, a period when nothing seems impossible. -The ignorance of women spoils for the human race this magnificent -opportunity; and love, at the utmost, in these days, -only inspires a young man to learn to ride well, or to make a -judicious selection of a tailor.”<a id='r6' /><a href='#f6' class='c018'><sup>[6]</sup></a></p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f6'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r6'>6</a>. De L’Amour, par de Stendhal (Henri Beyle). Paris, 1868 [written in -1822], pp. 182, 198.</p> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>Society, however, discovers by degrees that there are -conveniences in every woman’s knowing the four rules -of arithmetic for herself. Two and two come to the -same amount on a butcher’s bill, whether the order be -given by a man or a woman; and it is the same in -all affairs or investments, financial or moral. We shall -one day learn that with laws, customs, and public -affairs it is even so. Once get it rooted in a woman’s -mind, that, for her, two and two make three only, and -sooner or later the accounts of the whole human race -fail to balance.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_109'>109</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXIX.<br /> <span class='large'>A MODEL HOUSEHOLD.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>There is an African bird called the hornbill, whose -habits are in some respects a model. The female builds -her nest in a hollow tree, lays her eggs, and broods -on them. So far, so good. Then the male feels that -he must also contribute some service; so he walls up -the hole closely, giving only room for the point of the -female’s bill to protrude. Until the eggs are hatched, -she is thenceforth confined to her nest, and is in the -mean time fed assiduously by her mate, who devotes -himself entirely to this object. Dr. Livingstone has -seen these nests in Africa, Layard and others in Asia, -and Wallace in Sumatra.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Personally I have never seen a hornbill’s nest. The -nearest approach I ever made to it was when in Fayal -I used to pass near a gloomy mansion, of which the -front windows were walled up, and only one high window -was visible in the rear, beyond the reach of eyes -from any neighboring house. In this cheerful abode, -I was assured, a Portuguese lady had been for many -years confined by her jealous husband. It was long -since any neighbor had caught a glimpse of her, but it -was supposed that she was alive. There is no reason -to doubt that her husband fed her well. It was simply -a case of human hornbill, with the imprisonment made -perpetual.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_110'>110</span>I have more than once asked lawyers whether, in -communities where the old common law prevailed, there -was any thing to prevent such an imprisonment of a -married woman; and they have always answered, -“Nothing but public opinion.” Where the husband -has the legal custody of the wife’s person, no <i><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">habeas -corpus</span></i> can avail against him. The hornbill household -is based on a strict application of the old common law. -A Hindoo household was a hornbill household: “a -woman, of whatsoever age, should never be mistress of -her own actions,” said the code of Menu. An Athenian -household was a hornbill’s nest, and great was the -outcry when some Aspasia broke out of it. When Mrs. -Sherman petitions Congress against the emancipation -of woman, we seem to hear the twittering of the hornbill -mother, imploring to be left inside.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Under some forms, the hornbill theory becomes respectable. -There are many peaceful families, innocent -though torpid, where the only dream of existence is to -have plenty of quiet, plenty of food, and plenty of -well-fed children. For them this African household is -a sufficient model. The wife is “a home body.” The -husband is “a good provider.” These are honest people, -and have a right to speak. The hornbill theory is -only dishonest when it comes—as it often comes—from -women who lead the life, not of good stay-at-home -fowls, but of paroquets and humming-birds,—who -sorrowfully bemoan the active habits of enlightened -women, while they themselves</p> - -<div class='lg-container-b c016'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>“Bear about the mockery of woe</div> - <div class='line'>To midnight dances and the public show.”</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c017'><span class='pageno' id='Page_111'>111</span>It is from these women, in Washington, New York, -and elsewhere, that the loudest appeal for the hornbill -standard of domesticity proceeds. Put them to the -test, and give them their chicken-salad and champagne -through a hole in the wall only, and see how they like it.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But even the most honest and peaceful conservatives -will one day admit that the hornbill is not the highest -model. Plato thought that “the soul of our grandame -might haply inhabit the body of a bird;” but Nature -has kindly provided various types of bird-households -to suit all varieties of taste. The bright orioles, filling -the summer boughs with color and with song, are as -truly domestic in the freedom of their airy nest as the -poor hornbills who ignorantly make home into a dungeon. -And certainly each new generation of orioles, -spreading their free wings from that pendent cradle, -are a happier illustration of judicious nurture than are -the uncouth little offspring of the hornbills, whom -Wallace describes as “so flabby and semi-transparent -as to resemble a bladder of jelly, furnished with head, -legs, and rudimentary wings, but with not a sign of a -feather, except a few lines of points indicating where -they would come.”</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_112'>112</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXX.<br /> <span class='large'>A SAFEGUARD FOR THE FAMILY.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>Many German-Americans are warm friends of woman -suffrage; but the editors of “Puck,” it seems, are -not. In a late number of that comic journal, it had an -unfavorable cartoon on this reform; and in a following -number,—the number, by the way, which contains that -amusing illustration of the vast seaside hotels of the -future, with the cheering announcement, “Only one -mile to the barber’s shop,” and “Take the cars to the -dining-room,”—a lady comes to the rescue, and bravely -defends woman suffrage. It seems that the original -cartoon depicted in the corner a pretty family scene, -representing father, mother, and children seated happily -together, with the melancholy motto, “Nevermore, -nevermore!” And when the correspondent, Mrs. -Blake, very naturally asks what this touching picture -has to do with woman suffrage, Puck says, “If the -husband in our ‘pretty family scene’ should propose to -vote for the candidate who was obnoxious to his wife, -would this ‘pretty family scene’ continue to be a domestic -paradise, or would it remind the spectator of the -region in which Dante spent his ‘fortnight off’?”</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is beautiful to see how much anxiety there is to -preserve the family. Every step in the modification of -the old common law, whereby the wife was, in Baron -<span class='pageno' id='Page_113'>113</span>Alderson’s phrase, “the servant of her husband,” was -resisted as tending to endanger the family. That the -wife should control her own earnings, so that her husband -should not have the right to collect them in order -to pay his gambling-debts, was declared by English -advocates, in the celebrated case of the Hon. Mrs. -Norton, the poetess, to imperil all the future peace of -British households. Even the liberal-minded “Punch,” -about the time Girton College was founded in England, -expressed grave doubts whether the harmony of wedded -unions would not receive a blow, from the time when -wives should be liable to know more Greek than their -husbands. Yet the marriage relation has withstood -these innovations. It has not been impaired, either -by separate rights, private earnings, or independent -Greek: can it be possible that a little voting will overthrow -it?</p> - -<p class='c014'>The very ground on which woman suffrage is opposed -by its enemies might assuage these fears. If, as we -are told, women will not take the pains to vote except -upon the strongest inducements, who has so good an -opportunity as the husband to bring those inducements -to bear? and, if so, what is the separation? Or if, as -we are told, women will merely reflect their husbands’ -political opinions, why should they dispute about them? -The mere suggestion of a difference deep enough to -quarrel for, implies a real difference of convictions or -interests, and indicates that there ought to be an independent -representation of each; unless we fall back, -once for all, on the common-law tradition that man and -wife are one, and that one is the husband. Either the -antagonisms which occur in politics are comparatively -<span class='pageno' id='Page_114'>114</span>superficial, in which case they would do no harm; or -else they touch matters of real interest and principle, -in which case every human being has a right to independent -expression, even at a good deal of risk. In -either case, the objection falls to the ground.</p> - -<p class='c014'>We have fortunately a means of testing, with some -fairness of estimate, the probable amount of this peril. -It is generally admitted,—and certainly no German-American -will deny,—that the most fruitful sources of -hostility and war in all times have been religious, not -political. All merely political antagonism, certainly -all which is possible in a republic, fades into insignificance -before this more powerful dividing influence. Yet -we leave all this great explosive force in unimpeded -operation,—at any moment it may be set in action, -in any one of those “pretty family scenes” which -“Puck” depicts,—while we are solemnly warned -against admitting the comparatively mild peril of a -political difference! It is like cautioning a manufacturer -of dynamite against the danger of meddling with -mere edge-tools. Even with all the intensity of feeling -on religious matters, few families are seriously divided -by them; and the influence of political differences would -be still more insignificant.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The simple fact is, that there is no better basis for -union than mutual respect for each other’s opinions; -and this can never be obtained without an intelligent -independence. “I would rather have a thorn in my -side than an echo,” said Emerson of friendship; and -the same is true of married life. It is the echoes, the -nonentities, of whom men grow tired; it is the women -with some flavor of individuality who keep the hearts -<span class='pageno' id='Page_115'>115</span>of their husbands. This is only applying in a higher -sense what Shakspeare’s Cleopatra saw. When her -handmaidens are questioning how to hold a lover, and -one says,—</p> - -<div class='lg-container-b c016'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>“Give way to him in all: cross him in nothing,”—</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c017'>Cleopatra, from the depth of an unequalled experience, -retorts,—</p> - -<div class='lg-container-b c016'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>“Thou speakest like a fool: the way to lose him!”</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c017'>And what “the serpent of old Nile” said, the wives of -the future, who are to be wise as serpents and harmless -as doves, may well ponder. It takes two things different -to make a union; and part of that difference may -as well lie in matters political as anywhere else.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_116'>116</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXXI.<br /> <span class='large'>WOMEN AS ECONOMISTS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>An able lawyer of Boston, arguing the other day -before a legislative committee in favor of giving to the -city council a check upon the expenditures of the school -committee, gave as one reason that this body would -probably include more women henceforward, and that -women were ordinarily more lavish than men in their -use of money. The truth of this assumption was questioned -at the time: and, the more I think of it, the more -contrary it is to my whole experience. I should say that -women, from the very habit of their lives, are led to be -more particular about details, and more careful as to -small economies. The very fact that they handle less -money tends to this. When they are told to spend -money, as they often are by loving or ambitious husbands, -they no doubt do it freely: they have naturally -more taste than men, and quite as much love of luxury. -In some instances in this country they spend money -recklessly and wickedly, like the heroines of French -novels; but as, even in brilliant Paris, the women of -the middle classes are notoriously better managers than -the men, so we often see, in our scheming America, the -same relative superiority. Often have I heard young -men say, “I never knew how to economize until after -my marriage;” and who has not seen multitudes of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_117'>117</span>instances where women accustomed to luxury have accepted -poverty without a murmur for the sake of those -whom they loved?</p> - -<p class='c014'>I remember a young girl, accustomed to the gayest -society of New York, who engaged herself to a young -naval officer, against the advice of the friends of both. -One of her near relatives said to me, “Of all the -young girls I have ever known, she is the least fitted -for a poor man’s wife.” Yet from the very moment of -her marriage she brought their joint expenses within -his scanty pay, and even saved a little money from it. -Everybody knows such instances. We hear men denounce -the extravagance of women, while those very -men spend on wine and cigars, on clubs and horses, -twice what their wives spend on their toilet. If the -wives are economical, the husbands perhaps urge them -on to greater lavishness. “Why do you not dress -like Mrs. So-and-so?”—“I can’t afford it.”—“But -<em>I</em> can afford it;” and then, when the bills come in, -the talk of extravagance recommences. At one time -in Newport that lady among the summer visitors who -was reported to be Worth’s best customer was also well -known to be quite indifferent to society, and to go into -it mainly to please her husband, whose social ambition -was notorious.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It has often happened to me to serve in organizations -where both sexes were represented, and where expenditures -were to be made for business or pleasure. In -these I have found, as a rule, that the women were -more careful, or perhaps I should say more timid, than -the men, less willing to risk any thing: the bolder -financial experiments came from the men, as one might -<span class='pageno' id='Page_118'>118</span>expect. In talking the other day with the secretary -of an important educational enterprise, conducted by -women, I was surprised to find that it was cramped for -money, though large subscriptions were said to have -been made to it. On inquiry it appeared that these -ladies, having pledged themselves for four years, had -divided the amount received into four parts, and were -resolutely limiting themselves, for the first year, to one -quarter part of what had been subscribed. No board -of men would have done so. Any board of men would -have allowed far more than a quarter of the sum for -the first year’s expenditures, justly reasoning that if -the enterprise began well it would command public -confidence, and bring in additional subscriptions as -time went on. I would appeal to any one whose -experience has been in joint associations of men and -women, whether this is not a fair statement of the -difference between their ways of working. It does not -prove that women are more honest than men, but that -their education or their nature makes them more cautious -in expenditure.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The habits of society make the dress of a fashionable -woman far more expensive than that of a man of fashion. -Formerly it was not so; and, so long as it was -not so, the extravagance of men in this respect quite -equalled that of women. It now takes other forms, -but the habit is the same. There is not a club-house -in Boston furnished with such absence of luxury as the -Women’s Club rooms on Park Street: the contrast was -at first so great as to seem almost absurd. The waiters -at any fashionable restaurant will tell you that what is -a cheap dinner for a man would be a dear dinner for a -<span class='pageno' id='Page_119'>119</span>woman. Yet after all, the test is not in any particular -class of expenditures, but in the business-like habit. -Men are of course more business-like in large combinations, -for they are more used to them; but for the -small details of daily economy women are more watchful. -The cases where women ruin their husbands by -extravagance are exceptional. As a rule, the men are -the bread-winners; but the careful saving and managing -and contriving come from the women.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_120'>120</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXXII.<br /> <span class='large'>GREATER INCLUDES LESS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>I was once at a little musical party in New York, -where several accomplished amateur singers were present, -and with them the eminent professional, Miss -Adelaide Phillips. The amateurs were first called on. -Each chose some difficult operatic passage, and sang her -best. When it came to the great opera-singer’s turn, -instead of exhibiting her ability to eclipse those rivals on -her own ground, she simply seated herself at the piano, -and sang “Kathleen Mavourneen” with such thrilling -sweetness, that the young Irish girl who was setting -the supper-table in the next room forgot all her plates -and teaspoons, threw herself into a chair, put her apron -over her face, and sobbed as if her heart would break. -All the training of Adelaide Phillips—her magnificent -voice, her stage experience, her skill in effects, -her power of expression—went into the performance -of that simple song. The greater included the less. -And thus all the intellectual and practical training -that any woman can have, all her public action and her -active career, will make her, if she be a true woman, -more admirable as a wife, a mother, and a friend. The -greater includes the less for her also.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Of course this is a statement of general facts and -tendencies. There must be among women, as among -<span class='pageno' id='Page_121'>121</span>men, an endless variety of individual temperaments. -There will always be plenty whose career will illustrate -the infirmities of genius, and whom no training can -convince that two and two make four. But the general -fact is sure. As no sensible man would seriously prefer -for a wife a Hindoo or Tahitian woman rather than one -bred in England or America, so every further advantage -of education or opportunity will only improve, not -impair, the true womanly type.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Lucy Stone once said, “Woman’s nature was stamped -and sealed by the Almighty, and there is no danger -of her unsexing herself while his eye watches her.” -Margaret Fuller said, “One hour of love will teach a -woman more of her true relations than all your philosophizing.” -These were the testimony of women who -had studied Greek, and were only the more womanly -for the study. They are worth the opinions of a million -half-developed beings like the Duchess de Fontanges, -who was described as being “as beautiful as an angel -and as silly as a goose.” The greater includes the less. -Your view from the mountain-side may be very pretty, -but she who has taken one step higher commands your -view and her own also. It was no dreamy recluse, but -the accomplished and experienced Stendhal, who wrote, -“The joys of the gay world do not count for much -with happy women.”<a id='r7' /><a href='#f7' class='c018'><sup>[7]</sup></a></p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f7'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r7'>7</a>. De l’Amour, par de Stendhal (Henri Beyle): “Les plaisirs du grand -monde n’en sont pas pour les femmes heureuses,” p. 189.</p> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>If a highly educated man is incapable and unpractical, -we do not say that he is educated too well, but not well -enough. He ought to know what he knows, and other -things also. Never yet did I see a woman too well -<span class='pageno' id='Page_122'>122</span>educated to be a wife and a mother; but I know multitudes -who deplore, or have reason to deplore, every -day of their lives, the untrained and unfurnished minds -that are so ill-prepared for these sacred duties. Every -step towards equalizing the opportunities of men and -women meets with resistance, of course; but every -step, as it is accomplished, leaves men still men, and -women still women. And as we who heard Adelaide -Phillips felt that she had never had a better tribute to -her musical genius than that young Irish girl’s tears; -so the true woman will feel that all her college training -for instance, if she has it, may have been well invested, -even for the sake of the baby on her knee. -And it is to be remembered, after all, that each human -being lives to unfold his or her own powers, and do his -or her own duties first, and that neither woman nor man -has the right to accept a merely secondary and subordinate -life. A noble woman must be a noble human -being; and the most sacred special duties, as of wife -or mother, are all included in this, as the greater includes -the less.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_123'>123</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXXIII.<br /> <span class='large'>A CO-PARTNERSHIP.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>Marriage, considered merely in its financial and -business relations, may be regarded as a permanent -co-partnership.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Now, in an ordinary co-partnership, there is very -often a complete division of labor among the partners. -If they manufacture locomotive-engines, for instance, -one partner perhaps superintends the works, another -attends to mechanical inventions and improvements, -another travels for orders, another conducts the correspondence, -another receives and pays out the money. -The latter is not necessarily the head of the firm. -Perhaps his place could be more easily filled than some -of the other posts. Nevertheless, more money passes -through his hands than through those of all the others -put together. Now, should he, at the year’s end, call -together the inventor and the superintendent and the -traveller and the correspondent, and say to them, “I -have earned all this money this year, but I will generously -give you some of it,”—he would be considered -simply impertinent, and would hardly have a chance to -repeat the offence, the year after.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Yet precisely what would be called folly in this business -partnership is constantly done by men in the co-partnership -of marriage, and is there called “common-sense” -<span class='pageno' id='Page_124'>124</span>and “social science” and “political economy.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>For instance, a farmer works himself half to death -in the hay-field, and his wife meanwhile is working -herself wholly to death in the dairy. The neighbors -come in to sympathize after her demise; and, during -the few months’ interval before his second marriage, -they say approvingly, “He was always a generous -man to his folks! He was a good provider!” But -where was the room for generosity, any more than the -member of any other firm is to be called generous, -when he keeps the books, receipts the bills, and divides -the money?</p> - -<p class='c014'>In case of the farming business, the share of the -wife is so direct and unmistakable that it can hardly be -evaded. If any thing is earned by the farm, she does -her distinct and important share of the earning. But -it is not necessary that she should do even that, to -make her, by all the rules of justice, an equal partner, -entitled to her full share of the financial proceeds.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Let us suppose an ordinary case. Two young -people are married, and begin life together. Let us -suppose them equally poor, equally capable, equally -conscientious, equally healthy. They have children. -Those children must be supported by the earning of -money abroad, by attendance and care at home. If it -requires patience and labor to do the outside work, no -less is required inside. The duties of the household -are as hard as the duties of the shop or office. If the -wife took her husband’s work for a day, she would -probably be glad to return to her own. So would the -husband if he undertook hers. Their duties are ordinarily -<span class='pageno' id='Page_125'>125</span>as distinct and as equal as those of two partners -in any other co-partnership. It so happens, that the -out-door partner has the handling of the money; but -does that give him a right to claim it as his exclusive -earnings? No more than in any other business operation.</p> - -<p class='c014'>He earned the money for the children and the household. -She disbursed it for the children and the household. -The very laws of nature, by giving her the -children to bear and rear, absolve her from the duty -of their support, so long as he is alive who was left -free by nature for that purpose. Her task on the -average is as hard as his: nay, a portion of it is so -especially hard that it is distinguished from all others -by the name “labor.” If it does not earn money, -it is because it is not to be measured in money, while -it exists—nor to be replaced by money, if lost. If a -business man loses his partner, he can obtain another: -and a man, no doubt, may take a second wife; but he -cannot procure for his children a second mother. Indeed, -it is a palpable insult to the whole relation of -husband and wife when one compares it, even in a -financial light, to that of business partners. It is only -because a constant effort is made to degrade the practical -position of woman below even this standard of -comparison, that it becomes her duty to claim for herself -at least as much as this.</p> - -<p class='c014'>There was a tradition in a town where I once lived, -that a certain Quaker, who had married a fortune, was -once heard to repel his wife, who had asked him for -money in a public place, with the response, “Rachel, -where is that ninepence I gave thee yesterday?” -<span class='pageno' id='Page_126'>126</span>When I read in Scribner’s Monthly an article deriding -the right to representation of the Massachusetts -women who pay two millions of tax on one hundred -and thirty-two million dollars of property,—asserting -that they produced nothing of it; that it was only -“men who produced this wealth, and bestowed it upon -these women;” that it was “all drawn from land -and sea by the hands of men whose largess testifies -alike of their love and their munificence,”—I must -say that I am reminded of Rachel’s ninepence.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_127'>127</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXXIV.<br /> <span class='large'>“ONE RESPONSIBLE HEAD.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>When we look through any business directory, there -seem to be almost as many co-partnerships as single -dealers; and three-quarters of these co-partnerships -appear to consist of precisely two persons, no more, no -less. These partners are, in the eye of the law, equal. -It is not found necessary under the law, to make a -general provision that in each case one partner should -be supreme and the other subordinate. In many cases, -by the terms of the co-partnership there are limitations -on one side and special privileges on the other,—marriage -settlements, as it were; but the general law of -co-partnership is based on the presumption of equality. -It would be considered infinitely absurd to require, that, -as the general rule, one party or the other should be in -a state of <em>coverture</em>, during which the very being and -existence of the one should be suspended, or entirely -merged and incorporated into that of the other.</p> - -<p class='c014'>And yet this requirement, which would be an admitted -absurdity in the case of two business partners, is -precisely that which the English common law still lays -down in case of husband and wife. The words which -I employed to describe it, in the preceding sentence, -are the very phrases in which Blackstone describes the -legal position of women. And though the English -<span class='pageno' id='Page_128'>128</span>common law has been, in this respect, greatly modified -and superseded by statute law; yet, when it comes to -an argument on woman suffrage, it is constantly this -same tradition to which men and even women habitually -appeal,—the necessity of a single head to the domestic -partnership, and the necessity that the husband -should be that head. This is especially true of English -men and women; but it is true of Americans as well. -Nobody has stated it more tersely than Fitzjames -Stephen, in his “Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity” -(p. 216), when arguing against Mr. Mill’s view of the -equality of the sexes.</p> - -<p class='c021'>“Marriage is a contract, one of the principal objects in -which is the government of a family.</p> - -<p class='c021'>“This government must be vested, either by law or by contract, -in the hands of one of the two married persons.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>[Then follow some collateral points, not bearing on -the present question.]</p> - -<p class='c021'>“Therefore if marriage is to be permanent, the government -of the family must be put by law and by morals into the -hands of the husband, for no one proposes to give it to the -wife.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>This argument he calls “as clear as that of a proposition -in Euclid.” He thinks that the business of life -can be carried on by no other method. How is it, then, -that when we come to what is called technically and -especially the “business” of every day, this whole finespun -theory is disregarded, and men come together in -partnership on the basis of equality?</p> - -<p class='c014'>Nobody is farther than I from regarding marriage as -a mere business partnership. But it is to be observed -<span class='pageno' id='Page_129'>129</span>that the points wherein it differs from a merely mercantile -connection are points that should make equality -more easy, not more difficult. The tie between two -ordinary business partners is merely one of interest: it -is based on no sentiments, sealed by no solemn pledge, -enriched by no home associations, cemented by no new -generation of young life. If a relation like this is -found to work well on terms of equality,—so well that -a large part of the business of the world is done by it,—is -it not absurd to suppose that the same equal relation -cannot exist in the married partnership of husband -and wife? And if law, custom, society, all recognize -this fact of equality in the one case, why, in the name -of common-sense, should they not equally recognize it -in the other?</p> - -<p class='c014'>And, again, it must be far easier to assign a sphere -to each partner in marriage than in business; and -therefore the double headship of a family will involve -less need of collision. In nine cases out of ten, the -external support of the family can devolve upon the -husband, unquestioned by the wife; and its internal -economy upon the wife, unquestioned by the husband. -No voluntary distribution of powers and duties between -business partners can work so naturally, on the whole, -as this simple and easy demarcation, with which the -claim of suffrage makes no necessary interference. It -may require angry discussion to decide which of two -business partners shall buy, and which shall sell; which -shall keep the books, and which do the active work, -and so on; but all this is usually settled in married life -by the natural order of things. Even in regard to the -management of children, where collision is likely to -<span class='pageno' id='Page_130'>130</span>come, if anywhere, it can commonly be settled by that -happy formula of Jean Paul’s, that the mother usually -supplies the commas and the semicolons in the child’s -book of life, and the father the colons and periods. -And as to matters in general, the simple and practical -rule, that each question that arises should be decided -by that partner who has personally most at stake in -it, will, in ninety-nine times out of a hundred, carry -the domestic partnership through without shipwreck. -Those who cannot meet the hundredth case by mutual -forbearance are in a condition of shipwreck already.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_131'>131</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXXV.<br /> <span class='large'>ASKING FOR MONEY.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>One of the very best wives and mothers I have ever -known once said to me, that, whenever her daughters -should be married, she should stipulate in their behalf -with their husbands for a regular sum of money to be -paid them, at certain intervals, for their personal expenditures. -Whether this sum was to be larger or -smaller, was a matter of secondary importance,—that -must depend on the income, and the style of living; -but the essential thing was, that it should come to the -wife regularly, so that she should no more have to -make a special request for it than her husband would -have to ask her for a dinner. This lady’s own husband -was, as I happened to know, of a most generous -disposition, was devotedly attached to her, and denied -her nothing. She herself was a most accurate and -careful manager. There was every thing in the household -to make the financial arrangements flow smoothly. -Yet she said to me, “I suppose no man can possibly -understand how a sensitive woman shrinks from <em>asking</em> -for money. If I can prevent it, my daughters shall -never have to ask for it. If they do their duty as -wives and mothers they have a right to their share of -the joint income, within reasonable limits; for certainly -no money could buy the services they render. -<span class='pageno' id='Page_132'>132</span>Moreover, they have a right to a share in determining -what those reasonable limits are.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Now, it so happened that I had myself gone through -an experience which enabled me perfectly to comprehend -this feeling. In early life I was for a time in the -employ of one of my relatives, who paid me a fair -salary but at no definite periods: I was at liberty to -ask him for money up to a certain amount whenever I -needed it. This seemed to me, in advance, a most -agreeable arrangement; but I found it quite otherwise. -It proved to be very disagreeable to ask for money: -it made every dollar seem a special favor; it brought -up all kinds of misgivings, as to whether he could -spare it without inconvenience, whether he really -thought my services worth it, and so on. My employer -was a thoroughly upright and noble man, and I -was much attached to him. I do not know that he -ever refused or demurred when I asked for money. -The annoyance was simply in the process of asking; -and this became so great, that I often underwent serious -inconvenience rather than ask. Finally, at the -year’s end, I surprised my relative very much by saying -that I would accept, if necessary, a lower salary, -on condition that it should be paid on regular days, -and as a matter of business. The wish was at once -granted, without the reduction; and he probably never -knew what a relief it was to me.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Now, if a young man is liable to feel this pride and -reluctance toward an employer, even if a kinsman, it is -easy to understand how many women may feel the same, -even in regard to a husband. And I fancy that those -who feel it most are often the most conscientious and -<span class='pageno' id='Page_133'>133</span>high-minded women. It is unreasonable to say of such -persons, “Too sensitive! Too fastidious!” For it -is just this quality of finer sensitiveness which men -affect to prize in a woman, and wish to protect at all -hazards. The very fact that a husband is generous; -the very fact that his income is limited,—these may -bring in conscience and gratitude to increase the restraining -influence of pride, and make the wife less -willing to ask money of such a husband than if he -were a rich man or a mean one. The only dignified -position in which a man can place his wife is to treat -her at least as well as he would treat a housekeeper, -and give her the comfort of a perfectly clear and definite -arrangement as to money matters. She will not -then be under the necessity of nerving herself to solicit -from him as a favor what she really needs and has a -right to spend. Nor will she be torturing herself, on -the other side, with the secret fear lest she has asked -too much and more than they can really spare. She -will, in short, be in the position of a woman and a -wife, not of a child or a toy.</p> - -<p class='c014'>I have carefully avoided using the word “allowance” -in what has been said, because that word seems -to imply the untrue and mean assumption that the -money is all the husband’s to give or withhold as he will. -Yet I have heard this sort of phrase from men who -were living on a wife’s property or a wife’s earnings; -from men who nominally kept boarding-houses, working -a little, while their wives worked hard,—or from -farmers, who worked hard, and made their wives work -harder. Even in cases where the wife has no direct -part in the money-making, the indirect part she performs, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_134'>134</span>if she takes faithful charge of her household, is -so essential, so beyond all compensation in money, -that it is an utter shame and impertinence in the husband -when he speaks of “giving” money to his wife -as if it were an act of favor. It is no more an act -of favor than when the business manager of a firm -pays out money to the unseen partner who directs the -indoor business or runs the machinery. Be the joint -income more or less, the wife has a claim to her honorable -share, and that as a matter of right, without -the daily ignominy of sending in a petition for it.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_135'>135</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXXVI.<br /> <span class='large'>WOMANHOOD AND MOTHERHOOD.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>I always groan in spirit when any advocate of -woman suffrage, carried away by zeal, says any thing -disrespectful about the nursery. It is contrary to the -general tone of feeling among us, I am sure, to speak -of this priceless institution as a trivial or degrading -sphere, unworthy the emancipated woman. It is -rarely that anybody speaks in this way; but a single -such utterance hurts us more than any arguments of -the enemy. For every thoughtful person sees that the -cares of motherhood, though not the whole duty of -woman, are an essential part of that duty, wherever -they occur; and that no theory of womanly life is -good for any thing which undertakes to leave out the -cradle. Even her school-education is based on this -fact, were it only on Stendhal’s theory that the sons -of a woman who reads Gibbon and Schiller will be -more likely to show talent than those of one who only -tells her beads and reads Mme. de Genlis. And so -clearly is this understood among us, that, when we ask -for suffrage for woman, it is almost always claimed -that she needs it for the sake of her children. To -secure her in her right to them; to give her a voice in -their education; to give her a vote in the government -beneath which they are to live,—these points are seldom -<span class='pageno' id='Page_136'>136</span>omitted in our statement of her claims. Any -thing else would be an error.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But there is an error at the other extreme, which is -still greater. A woman should no more merge herself -in her child than in her husband. Yet we often hear -that she should do just this. What is all the public -sphere of woman, it is said,—what good can she do -by all her speaking, and writing, and action,—compared -with that she does by properly training the -soul of one child? It is not easy to see the logic of -this claim.</p> - -<p class='c014'>For of what service is that child to be in the universe, -except that he, too, may write and speak and act -for that which is good and true? And if the mother -foregoes all this that the child, in growing up, may -simply do what the mother has left undone, the world -gains nothing. In sacrificing her own work to her -child’s, moreover, she exchanges a present good for -a prospective and merely possible one. If she does -this through overwhelming love, we can hardly blame -her; but she cannot justify it before reason and truth. -Her child may die, and the service to mankind be done -by neither. Her child may grow up with talents unlike -hers, or with none at all; as the son of Howard -was selfish, the son of Chesterfield a boor, and the son -of Wordsworth in the last degree prosaic.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Or the special occasion when she might have done -great good may have passed before her boy or girl -grows up to do it. If Mrs. Child had refused to write -“An Appeal for that Class of Americans called Africans,” -or Mrs. Stowe had laid aside “Uncle Tom’s -Cabin,” or Florence Nightingale had declined to go to -<span class='pageno' id='Page_137'>137</span>the Crimea, on the ground that a woman’s true work -was through the nursery, and they must all wait for -that, the consequence would be that these things would -have remained undone. The brave acts of the world -must be done when occasion offers, by the first brave -soul who feels moved to do them, man or woman. If -all the children in all the nurseries are thereby helped -to do other brave deeds when their turn comes, so -much the better. But when a great opportunity offers -for direct aid to the world, we have no right to transfer -that work to other hands—not even to the hands -of our own children. We must do the work, and train -the children besides.</p> - -<p class='c014'>I am willing to admit, therefore, that the work of -education, in any form, is as great as any other work; -but I fail to see why it should be greater. Usefulness -is usefulness: there is no reason why it should be postponed -from generation to generation, or why it is better -to rear a serviceable human being than to be one in person. -Carry the theory consistently out: each mother -must simply rear her daughter that she in turn may -rear somebody else; from each generation the work -will devolve upon a succeeding generation, so that it -will be only the last woman who will personally do -any service, except that of motherhood; and when her -time comes it will be too late for any service at all.</p> - -<p class='c014'>If it be said, “But some of these children will be -men, who are necessarily of more use than women,” I -deny the necessity. If it be said, “The children may -be many, and the mother, who is but one, may well be -sacrificed,” it might be replied, that as one great act may -be worth many smaller ones, so all the numerous children -<span class='pageno' id='Page_138'>138</span>and grandchildren of a woman like Lucretia Mott may -not collectively equal the usefulness of herself alone. -If she, like many women, had held it her duty to renounce -all other duties and interests from the time her -motherhood began, I think that the world, and even -her children, would have lost more than ever could -have been gained by her more complete absorption in -the nursery.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The true theory seems a very simple one. The very -fact that during one-half the years of a woman’s average -life she is made incapable of child-bearing, shows -that there are, even for the most prolific and devoted -mothers, duties other than the maternal. Even during -the most absorbing years of motherhood, the wisest -women still try to keep up their interest in society, in -literature, in the world’s affairs—were it only for their -children’s sake. Multitudes of women will never be -mothers; and those more fortunate may find even the -usefulness of their motherhood surpassed by what they -do in other ways. If maternal duties interfere in -some degree with all other functions, the same is true, -though in a far less degree, of those of a father. But -there are those who combine both spheres. The German -poet Wieland claimed to be the parent of fourteen -children and forty books; and who knows by -which parentage he served the world the best?</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_139'>139</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXXVII.<br /> <span class='large'>A GERMAN POINT OF VIEW.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>Many Americans will remember the favorable impression -made by Professor Christlieb of Germany, -when he attended the meeting of the Evangelical Alliance -in New York some four or five years ago. His -writings, like his presence, show a most liberal spirit; -and perhaps no man has ever presented the more advanced -evangelical theology of Germany in so attractive -a light. Yet I heard a story of him the other -day, which either showed him in an aspect quite undesirable, -or else gave a disagreeable view of the social -position of women in Germany.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The story was to the effect, that a young American -student recently called on Professor Christlieb with a -letter of introduction. The professor received him cordially, -and soon entered into conversation about the -United States. He praised the natural features of the -country, and the enterprising spirit of our citizens, but -expressed much solicitude about the future of the nation. -On being asked his reasons, he frankly expressed -his opinion that “the Spirit of Christ” was -not here. Being still further pressed to illustrate his -meaning, he gave, as instances of this deficiency, not -the Crédit Mobilier or the Tweed scandal, but such -alarming facts as the following. He seriously declared, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_140'>140</span>that, on more than one occasion, he had heard an -American married woman say to her husband, “Dear, -will you bring me my shawl?” and the husband had -brought it. He further had seen a husband return -home at evening, and enter the parlor where his wife -was sitting,—perhaps in the very best chair in the -room,—and the wife not only did not go and get -his dressing-gown and slippers, but she even remained -seated, and left him to find a chair as he could. These -things, as Professor Christlieb pointed out, suggested a -serious deficiency of the Spirit of Christ in the community.</p> - -<p class='c014'>With our American habits and interpretations, it is -hard to see this matter just as the professor sees it. -One would suppose, that, if there is any meaning in the -command, “Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so -fulfil the law of Christ,” a little of such fulfilling -might sometimes be good for the husband, as for the -wife. And though it would undoubtedly be more -pleasing to see every wife so eager to receive her -husband that she would naturally spring from her chair -and run to kiss him in the doorway, yet, where such -devotion was wanting, it would be but fair to inquire -which of the two had had the more fatiguing day’s -work, and to whom the easy-chair justly belonged. -The truth is, I suppose, that the good professor’s -remark indicated simply a “survival” in his mind, or -in his social circle, of a barbarous tradition, under -which the wife of a Mexican herdsman cannot eat at -the table with her “lord and master,” and the wife of -a German professor must vacate the best arm-chair at -his approach.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_141'>141</span>If so, it is not to be regretted that we in this country -have outgrown a relation so unequal. Nor am I at all -afraid that the great Teacher, who, pointing to the -multitude for whom he was soon to die, said of them, -“This is my brother and my sister and my mother,” -would have objected to any mutual and equal service -between man and woman. If we assume that two -human beings have immortal souls, there can be no -want of dignity to either in serving the other. The -greater equality of woman in America seems to be, on -this reasoning, a proof of the presence, not the absence, -of the spirit of Christ; nor does Dr. Christlieb seem to -me quite worthy of the beautiful name he bears, if he -feels otherwise.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But, if it is really true that a German professor has -to cross the Atlantic to witness a phenomenon so very -simple as that of a lover-like husband bringing a shawl -for his wife, I should say, Let the immigration from -Germany be encouraged as much as possible, in order -that even the most learned immigrants may discover -something new.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_142'>142</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXXVIII.<br /> <span class='large'>CHILDLESS WOMEN.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>It has not always been regarded as a thing creditable -to woman, that she was the mother of the human -race. On the contrary, the fact was often mentioned, -in the Middle Ages, as a distinct proof of inferiority. -The question was discussed in the mediæval Council of -Maçon, and the position taken that woman was no more -entitled to rank as human, because she brought forth -men, than the garden-earth could take rank with the -fruit and flowers it bore. The same view was revived -by a Latin writer of 1595, on the thesis “<i><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">Mulieres non -homines esse</span></i>,” a French translation of which essay was -printed under the title of “<i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">Paradoxe sur les femmes</span></i>,” -in 1766. Napoleon Bonaparte used the same image, -carrying it almost as far:—</p> - -<p class='c014'>“Woman is given to man that she may bear children. -Woman is our property; we are not hers: because she -produces children for us; we do not yield any to her: -she is therefore our possession, as the fruit-tree is that -of the gardener.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Even the fact of parentage, therefore, has been -adroitly converted into a ground of inferiority for -women; and this is ostensibly the reason why lineage -has been reckoned, almost everywhere, through the -male line only, ignoring the female; just as, in tracing -<span class='pageno' id='Page_143'>143</span>the seed of some rare fruit, the gardener takes no -genealogical account of the garden where it grew. -The view is now seldom expressed in full force: the -remnant of it is to be found in the lingering impression, -that, at any rate, a woman who is not a mother is of -no account; as worthless as a fruitless garden or a -barren fruit-tree. Created only for a certain object, -she is of course valueless unless that object be fulfilled.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But the race must have fathers as well as mothers; -and, if we look for evidence of public service in great -men, it certainly does not always lie in leaving children -to the republic. On the contrary, the rule has rather -seemed to be, that the most eminent men have left their -bequest of service in any form rather than in that of a -great family. Recent inquiries into the matter have -brought out some remarkable facts in this regard.</p> - -<p class='c014'>As a rule, there exist no living descendants in the -male line from the great authors, artists, statesmen, -soldiers, of England. It is stated that there is not one -such descendant of Chaucer, Shakespeare, Spenser, Butler, -Dryden, Pope, Cowper, Goldsmith, Scott, Byron, -or Moore; not one of Drake, Cromwell, Monk, Marlborough, -Peterborough, or Nelson; not one of Strafford, -Ormond, or Clarendon; not one of Addison, Swift, or -Johnson; not one of Walpole, Bolingbroke, Chatham, -Pitt, Fox, Burke, Grattan, or Canning; not one of -Bacon, Locke, Newton, or Davy; not one of Hume, -Gibbon, or Macaulay; not one of Hogarth or Reynolds; -not one of Garrick, John Kemble, or Edmund Kean. -It would be easy to make a similar American list, beginning -with Washington, of whom it was said that -“Providence made him childless that his country might -call him Father.”</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_144'>144</span>Now, however we may regret that these great men -have left little or no posterity, it does not occur to any -one as affording any serious drawback upon their service -to their nation. Certainly it does not occur to us -that they would have been more useful had they left -children to the world, but rendered it no other service. -Lord Bacon says that “he that hath wife and children -hath given hostages to fortune; for they are impediments -to great enterprises, either of virtue or mischief. -Certainly the best works, and of greatest merit to -the public, have proceeded from unmarried or childless -men; which, both in affection and means, have married -and endowed the public.” And this is the view generally -accepted,—that the public is in such cases rather -the gainer than the loser, and has no right to complain.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Since, therefore, every child must have a father and -a mother both, and neither will alone suffice, why should -we thus heap gratitude on men who from preference -or from necessity have remained childless, and yet -habitually treat women as if they could render no service -to their country except by giving it children? If -it be folly and shame, as I think, to belittle and decry -the dignity and worth of motherhood, as some are said -to do, it is no less folly, and shame quite as great, to -deny the grand and patriotic service of many women who -have died and left no children among their mourners. -Plato puts into the mouth of a woman,—the eloquent -Diotima, in the “Banquet,”—that, after all, we are -more grateful to Homer and Hesiod for the children of -their brain than if they had left human offspring.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_145'>145</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XXXIX.<br /> <span class='large'>THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO MOTHERS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>From the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to -Animals we have now advanced to a similar society for -the benefit of children. When shall we have a movement -for the prevention of cruelty to mothers?</p> - -<p class='c014'>A Rhode Island lady, who had never taken any -interest in the woman suffrage movement, came to me -in great indignation the other day, asking if it was -true that under Rhode Island laws a husband might, -by his last will, bequeath his child away from its -mother, so that she might, if the guardian chose, never -see it again. I said that it was undoubtedly true, and -that such were still the laws in many States of the -Union.</p> - -<p class='c014'>“But,” she said, “it is an outrage. The husband -may have been one of the weakest or worst men in -the world; he may have persecuted his wife and children; -he may have made the will in a moment of -anger, and have neglected to alter it. At any rate, he -is dead, and the mother is living. The guardian whom -he appoints may turn out a very malicious man, and -may take pleasure in torturing the mother; or he may -bring up the children in a way their mother thinks ruinous -for them. Why do not all the mothers cry out -against such a law?”</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_146'>146</span>“I wish they would,” I said. “I have been trying -a good many years to make them even understand what -the law is; but they do not. People who do not vote -pay no attention to the laws, until they suffer from -them.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>She went away protesting that she, at least, would -not hold her tongue on the subject, and I hope she will -not. The actual text of the law is as follows:—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“Every person authorized by law to make a will, except -married women, shall have a right to appoint by his will a -guardian or guardians for his children during their minority.”<a id='r8' /><a href='#f8' class='c018'><sup>[8]</sup></a></p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f8'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r8'>8</a>. Gen. Statutes R. I., chap. 154, sect. 1.</p> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>There is not associated with this, in the statute, the -slightest clause in favor of the mother; nor any thing -which could limit the power of the guardian by requiring -deference to her wishes, although he could, in case -of gross neglect or abuse, be removed by the court, and -another guardian appointed. There is not a line of -positive law to protect the mother. Now, in a case of -absolute wrong, a single sentence of law is worth all -the chivalrous courtesy this side of the Middle Ages.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is idle to say that such laws are not executed. -They are executed. I have had letters, too agonizing -to print, expressing the sufferings of mothers under -laws like these. There lies before me a letter,—not -from Rhode Island,—written by a widowed mother -who suffers daily tortures, even while in possession of -her child, at the knowledge that it is not legally hers, -but held only by the temporary permission of the -guardian appointed under her husband’s will. “I beg -you,” she says, “to take this will to the hill-top, and -<span class='pageno' id='Page_147'>147</span>urge law-makers in our next Legislature to free the -State record from the shameful story that no mother -can control her child unless it is born out of wedlock.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>“From the moment,” she says, “when the will was -read to me, I have made no effort to set it aside. I -wait till God reveals his plans, so far as my own condition -is concerned. But out of my keen comprehension -of this great wrong, notwithstanding my submission for -myself, my whole soul is stirred,—for my child, who -is a little woman; for all women, that the laws may be -changed which subject a true woman, a devoted wife, -a faithful mother, to such mental agonies as I have -endured, and shall endure till I die.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>In a later letter she says, “I now have his [the -guardian’s] solemn promise that he will not remove her -from my control. To some extent my sufferings are -allayed; and yet never, till she arrives at the age of -twenty-one, shall I fully trust.” I wish that mothers -who dwell in sheltered and happy homes would try to -bring to their minds the condition of a mother whose -possession of her only child rests upon the “promise” -of a comparative stranger. We should get beyond -the meaningless cry, “I have all the rights I want,” if -mothers could only remember that among these rights, -in most States of the Union, the right of a widowed -mother to her child is not included.</p> - -<p class='c014'>By strenuous effort, the law on this point has in -Massachusetts been gradually amended, till it now -stands thus: The father is authorized to appoint a -guardian by will; but the powers of this guardian do -not entitle him to take the child from the mother.</p> - -<p class='c021'><span class='pageno' id='Page_148'>148</span>“The guardian of a minor ... shall have the custody and -tuition of his ward; and the care and management of all his -estate, except that the father of the minor, if living, and in -case of his death the mother, they being respectively competent -to transact their own business, shall be entitled to the custody -of the person of the minor and the care of his education.”<a id='r9' /><a href='#f9' class='c018'><sup>[9]</sup></a></p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f9'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r9'>9</a>. Public Statutes, chap. 139, sect. 4.</p> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>Down to 1870 the cruel words “while she remains -unmarried” followed the word “mother” in the above -law. Until that time, the mother if remarried had no -claim to the custody of her child, in case the guardian -wished otherwise; and a very painful scene once took -place in a Boston court-room, where children were -forced away from their mother by the officers, under -this statute; in spite of her tears and theirs; and this -when no sort of personal charge had been made against -her. This could not now happen in Massachusetts, but -it might still happen in some other States. It is true -that men are almost always better than their laws; but, -while a bad law remains on the statute-book, it gives to -any unscrupulous man the power to be as bad as the -law.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_149'>149</span> - <h2 class='c008'>SOCIETY.</h2> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>“Place the sexes in right relations of mutual respect, and -a severe morality gives that essential charm to woman which -educates all that is delicate, poetic, and self-sacrificing, breeds -courtesy and learning, conversation and wit, in her rough -mate; so that I have thought a sufficient measure of civilization -is the influence of good women.”—<span class='sc'>Emerson</span>: <cite>Society -and Solitude</cite>, p. 21.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_151'>151</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XL.<br /> <span class='large'>FOAM AND CURRENT.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>Sometimes, on the beach at Newport, I look at the -gayly dressed ladies in their phaëtons, and then at the -foam which trembles on the breaking wave, or lies palpitating -in creamy masses on the beach. It is as pretty -as they, as light, as fresh, as delicate, as changing; -and no doubt the graceful foam, if it thinks at all, -fancies that it is the chief consummate product of the -ocean, and that the main end of the vast currents of -the mighty deep is to yield a few glittering bubbles -like those. At least, this seems to me what many of -the fair ladies think.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Here is a nation in which the most momentous social -and political experiment ever tried by man is being -worked out, day by day. There is something oceanlike -in the way in which the great currents of life, race, -religion, temperament, are here chafing with each other, -safe from the storms through which all monarchical -countries may yet have to pass. As these great currents -heave, there are tossed up in every watering-place -and every city in America, as on an ocean-beach, certain -pretty bubbles of foam; and each spot, we may -suppose, counts its own bubbles brighter than those of -its neighbors, and christens them “society.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is an unceasing wonder to a thoughtful person, at -<span class='pageno' id='Page_152'>152</span>any such resort, to see the unconscious way in which -fashionable society accepts the foam, and ignores the -currents. You hear people talk of “a position in society,” -“the influential circles in society,” as if the position -they mean were not liable to be shifted in a day; -as if the essential influences in America were not mainly -to be sought outside the world of fashion. In other -countries it is very different. The circle of social caste, -whose centre you touch in London, radiates to the -shores of the island; the upper class controls, not -merely fashion, but government; it rules in country -as well as city; genius and wealth are but its tributaries. -Wherever it is not so, it is because England is -so far Americanized. But in America the social prestige -of the cities is nothing in the country; it is a -matter of the pavement, of a three-mile radius.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Go to the farthest borders of England: there are still -the “county families,” and you meet servants in livery. -On the other hand, in a little village in Northern New -Hampshire, my friend was visited in the evening by the -landlady, who said that several of their “most fashionable -ladies” had happened in, and she would like to -exhibit to them her guest’s bonnet. Then the different -cities ignore each other: the rulers of select circles in -New York find themselves nobodies in Washington, -while a Washington social passport counts for as little -in New York. Boston and Philadelphia affect to ignore -both; and St. Louis and San Francisco have their own -standards. The utmost social prestige in America is -local, provincial, a matter of the square inch: it is as -if the foam of each particular beach along the seacoast -were to call itself “society.”</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_153'>153</span>There is something pathetic, therefore, in the unwearied -pains taken by ambitious women to establish a place -in some little, local, transitory domain, to “bring out” -their daughters for exhibition on a given evening, to -form a circle for them, to marry them well. A dozen -years hence the millionnaires whose notice they seek -may be paupers, or these ladies may be dwelling in -some other city, where the visiting cards will bear -wholly different names. How idle to attempt to transport -into American life the social traditions and delusions -which require monarchy and primogeniture, and -a standing army, to keep them up—and which cannot -hold their own in England, even with the aid of these!</p> - -<p class='c014'>Every woman, like every man, has a natural desire -for influence; and if this instinct yearns, as it often -should yearn, to take in more than her own family, she -must seek it somewhere outside. I know women who -bring to bear on the building-up of a frivolous social -circle—frivolous, because it is not really brilliant, but -only showy; not really gay, but only bored—talent and -energy enough to influence the mind and thought of the -nation, if only employed in some effective way. Who -are the women of real influence in America? They are -the school-teachers, through whose hands each successive -American generation has to pass; they are those -wives of public men who share their husbands’ labor, -and help mould their work; they are those women, who, -through their personal eloquence or through the press, -are distinctly influencing the American people in its -growth. The influence of such women is felt for good -or for evil in every page they print, every newspaper-column -they fill: the individual women may be unworthy -<span class='pageno' id='Page_154'>154</span>their posts, but it is they who have got hold of -the lever, and gone the right way to work. As American -society is constituted, the largest “social success” -that can be attained here is trivial and local; and you -have to “make believe very hard,” like that other -imaginary Marchioness, to find in it any career worth -mentioning. That is the foam, but these other women -are dealing with the main currents.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_155'>155</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XLI.<br /> <span class='large'>“IN SOCIETY.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>One sometimes hears from some lady the remark -that very few people “in society” believe in any -movement to enlarge the rights or duties of women. -In a community of more marked social gradations -than our own, this assertion, if true, might be very -important; and even here it is worth considering, because -it leads the way to a little social philosophy. -Let us, for the sake of argument, begin by accepting -the assumption that there is an inner circle, at least in -our large cities, which claims to be “society,” <i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">par -excellence</span></i>. What relation has this favored circle, if -favored it be, to any movement relating to women?</p> - -<p class='c014'>It has, to begin with, the same relation that “society” -has to every movement of reform. The proportion -of smiles and frowns offered from this quarter -to the woman-suffrage movement, for instance, is about -that offered to the anti-slavery agitation: I see no -great difference. In Boston, for example, the names -contributed by “society” to the woman-suffrage festivals -are about as numerous as those formerly contributed -to the anti-slavery bazaars; no more, no less. -Indeed, they are very often the same names; and it has -been curious to see, for nearly fifty years, how radical -tendencies have predominated in some of the wellknown -<span class='pageno' id='Page_156'>156</span>Boston families, and conservative tendencies in -others. The traits of blood seem to outlast successive -series of special reforms. Be this as it may, -it is safe to assume, that, as the anti-slavery movement -prevailed with only a moderate amount of sanction -from “our best society,” the woman-suffrage movement, -which has at least an equal amount, has no -reason to be discouraged.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But on looking farther, we find that not reforms -alone, but often most important and established institutions, -exist and flourish with only incidental aid from -those “in society.” Take, for instance, the whole public-school -system of our larger cities. Grant that out of -twenty ladies “in society,” taken at random, not more -than one would personally approve of women’s voting: -it is doubtful whether even that proportion of them -would personally favor the public-school system so far -as to submit their children, or at least their girls, to it. -Yet the public schools flourish, and give a better training -than most private schools, in spite of this inert -practical resistance from those “in society.” The -natural inference would seem to be, that if an institution -so well established as the public schools, and so -generally recognized, can afford to be ignored by “society,” -then certainly a wholly new reform must expect -no better fate.</p> - -<p class='c014'>As a matter of fact, I apprehend that what is called -“society,” in the sense of the more fastidious or exclusive -social circle in any community, exists for one -sole object,—the preservation of good manners and -social refinements. For this purpose it is put very -largely under the sway of women, who have, all the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_157'>157</span>world over, a better instinct for these important things. -It is true that “society” is apt to do even this duty -very imperfectly, and often tolerates, and sometimes -even cultivates, just the rudeness and discourtesy that -it is set to cure. Nevertheless, this is its mission; but -so soon as it steps beyond this, and attempts to claim -any special weight outside the sphere of good manners, -it shows its weakness, and must yield to stronger -forces.</p> - -<p class='c014'>One of these stronger forces is religion, which should -train men and women to a far higher standard than -“society” alone can teach. This standard should be -embodied, theoretically, in the Christian Church; but -unhappily “society” is too often stronger than this -embodiment, and turns the church itself into a mere -temple of fashion. Other opposing forces are known -as science and common-sense, which is only science -written in short-hand. On some of these various -forces all reforms are based, the woman-suffrage reform -among them. If it could really be shown that -some limited social circle was opposed to this, then the -moral would seem to be, “So much the worse for the -social circle.” It used to be thought in anti-slavery -days that one of the most blessed results of that agitation -was the education it gave to young men and -women who would otherwise have merely grown up -“in society,” but were happily taken in hand by a -stronger influence. It is Goethe who suggests, when -discussing Hamlet in “Wilhelm Meister,” that, if an -oak be planted in a flower-pot, it will be worse in the -end for the flower-pot than for the tree. And to those -who watch, year after year, the young human seedlings -<span class='pageno' id='Page_158'>158</span>planted “in society,” the main point of interest lies in -the discovery which of these are likely to grow into -oaks.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But the truth is, that the very use of the word -“society” in this sense is narrow and misleading. -We Americans are fortunate enough to live in a larger -society, where no conventional position or family traditions -exert an influence that is to be in the least degree -compared with the influence secured by education, -energy, and character. No matter how fastidious the -social circle, one is constantly struck with the limitations -of its influence, and with the little power exerted -by its members as compared with that which may easily -be wielded by tongue and pen. No merely fashionable -woman in New York, for instance, has a position -sufficiently important to be called influential compared -with that of a woman who can speak in public so as to -command hearers, or can write so as to secure readers. -To be at the head of a normal school, or to be a professor -in a college where co-education prevails, is to -have a sway over the destinies of America which reduces -all mere “social position” to a matter of cards -and compliments and page’s buttons.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_159'>159</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XLII.<br /> <span class='large'>THE BATTLE OF THE CARDS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>The great winter’s contest of the visiting-cards recommences -at the end of every autumn. Suspended -during the summer, or only renewed at Newport and -such thoroughbred and thoroughly sophisticated haunts, -it will set in with fury in the habitable regions of our -cities once more. Now will the atmosphere around -Fifth Avenue in New York be darkened—or whitened—at -the appointed hour by the shower of pasteboard -transmitted from dainty kid-gloved hands to the cotton-gloved -hands of “John,” through him to reach the -possibly gloveless hands of some other John, who stands -obsequious in the doorway. Now will every lady, after -John has slammed the door, drive happily on to some -other door, re-arranging, as she goes, her display of -cards, laid as if for a game on the opposite seat of her -carriage, and dealt perhaps in four suits,—her own -cards, her daughters’, her husband’s, her “Mr. and -Mrs.” cards, and who knows how many more? With -all this ammunition, what a very <i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">mitrailleuse</span></i> of good -society she becomes; what an accumulation of polite -attentions she may discharge at any door! That one -well-appointed woman, as she sits in her carriage, -represents the total visiting power of self, husband, -daughters, and possibly a son or two beside. She has -<span class='pageno' id='Page_160'>160</span>all their counterfeit presentments in her hands. How -happy she is! and how happy will the others be on her -return, to think that dear mamma has disposed of so -many dear, beloved, tiresome, social foes that morning! -It will be three months at least, they think, before the -A’s and the B’s and the C’s will have to be “done” -again.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Ah! but who knows how soon these fatiguing letters -of the alphabet, rallying to the defence, will come, -pasteboard in hand, to return the onset? In this contest, -fair ladies, “there are blows to take, as well as -blows to give,” in the words of the immortal Webster. -Some day, on returning, you will find a half-dozen -cards on your own table that will undo all this morning’s -work, and send you forth on the war-path again. -Is it not like a campaign? It is from this subtle military -analogy, doubtless, that when gentlemen happen -to quarrel, in the very best society, they exchange -cards as preliminary to a duel; and that, when French -journalists fight, all other French journalists show their -sympathy for the survivor by sending him their cards. -When we see, therefore, these heroic ladies riding forth -in the social battle’s magnificently stern array, our -hearts render them the homage due to the brave. -When we consider how complex their military equipment -has grown, we fancy each of these self-devoted -mothers to be an Arnold Winkelried, receiving in her -martyr-breast the points of a dozen different cards, -and shouting, “Make way for liberty!” For is it not -securing liberty to have cleared off a dozen calls from -your list, and found nobody at home?</p> - -<p class='c014'>If this sort of thing goes on, who can tell where the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_161'>161</span>paper warfare shall end? If ladies may leave cards -for their husbands, who are never seen out of Wall -Street, except when they are seen at their clubs; or -for their sons, who never forsake their billiards or their -books,—why can they not also leave them for their -ancestors, or for their remotest posterity? Who knows -but people may yet drop cards in the names of the -grandchildren whom they only wish for, or may reconcile -hereditary feuds by interchanging pasteboard in -behalf of two hostile grandparents who died half a -century ago?</p> - -<p class='c014'>And there is another social observance in which the -introduction of the card system may yet be destined -to save much labor,—the attendance on fashionable -churches. Already, it is said, a family may sometimes -reconcile devout observance with a late breakfast, by -stationing the family carriage near the church-door—empty. -Really, it would not be a much emptier observance -to send the cards alone by the footman; and -doubtless, in the progress of civilization, we shall yet -reach that point. It will have many advantages. The -<i><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">effete</span></i> of society, as some cruel satirist has called them, -may then send their orisons on pasteboard to as many -different shrines as they approve; thus insuring their -souls, as it were, at several different offices. Church -architecture may be simplified, for it will require nothing -but a card-basket. The clergyman will celebrate -his solemn ritual, and will then look in that convenient -receptacle for the names of his fellow worshippers, as a -fine lady, after her “reception,” looks over the cards -her footman hands her, to know which of her dear -friends she has been welcoming. Religion as well as -<span class='pageno' id='Page_162'>162</span>social proprieties will glide smoothly over a surface of -glazed pasteboard; and it will be only very humble -Christians indeed who will do their worshipping in person, -and will hold to the worn-out and obsolete practice -of “No Cards.”</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_163'>163</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XLIII.<br /> <span class='large'>SOME WORKING-WOMEN.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>It is almost a stereotyped remark, that the women of -the more fashionable and worldly class, in America, are -indolent, idle, incapable, and live feeble and lazy lives. -It has always seemed to me that, on the contrary, -they are compelled, by the very circumstances of their -situation, to lead very laborious lives, requiring great -strength and energy. Whether many of their pursuits -are frivolous, is a different question; but that they are -arduous, I do not see how any one can doubt. I think -it can be easily shown that the common charges against -American fashionable women do not hold against the -class I describe.</p> - -<p class='c014'>There is, for instance, the charge of evading the -cares of housekeeping, and of preferring a boarding-house -or hotel. But no woman with high aims in the -world of fashion can afford to relieve herself from -household cares in this way, except as an exceptional -or occasional thing. She must keep house in order to -have entertainments, to form a circle, to secure a position. -The law of give and take is as absolute in society -as in business; and the very first essential to social -position in our larger cities is a household and a hospitality -of one’s own. It is far more practicable for a -family of high rank in England to live temporarily in -<span class='pageno' id='Page_164'>164</span>lodgings in London, than for any family with social -aspirations to do the same in New York. The married -woman who seeks a position in the world of society, -must, therefore, keep house.</p> - -<p class='c014'>And, with housekeeping, there comes at once to the -American woman a world of care far beyond that of -her European sisters. Abroad, every thing in domestic -life is systematized; and services of any grade, up to -that of housekeeper or steward, can be secured for -money, and for a moderate amount of that. The mere -amount of money might not trouble the American woman; -but where to get the service? Such a thing as a -trained housekeeper, who can undertake, at any salary, -to take the work off the shoulders of the lady of the -house,—such a thing America hardly affords. Without -this, the multiplication of servants only increaseth -sorrow; the servants themselves are commonly an undisciplined -mob, and the lady of the house is like a -general attempting to drill his whole command personally, -without the aid of a staff-officer or so much as a -sergeant. For an occasional grand entertainment, she -can, perhaps, import a special force; some fashionable -sexton can arrange her invitations, and some genteel -caterer her supper. But for the daily routine of the -household—guests, children, door-bell, equipage—there -is one vast, constant toil every day; and the -woman who would have these things done well must -give her own orders, and discipline her own retinue. -The husband may have no “business,” his wealth may -supersede the necessity of all toil beyond daily billiards; -but for the wife wealth means business, and, -the more complete the social triumph, the more overwhelming -the daily toil.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_165'>165</span>For instance, I know a fair woman in an Atlantic -city who is at the head of a household including six -children and nine servants. The whole domestic management -is placed absolutely in her hands: she engages -or dismisses every person employed, incurs every expense, -makes every purchase, and keeps all the accounts; -her husband only ordering the fuel, directing -the affairs of the stable, and drawing checks for the -bills. Every hour of her morning is systematically appropriated -to these things. Among other things, she -has to provide for nine meals a day; in dining-room, -kitchen, and nursery, three each. Then she has to plan -her social duties, and to drive out, exquisitely dressed, -to make her calls. Then there are constantly dinner-parties -and evening entertainments; she reads a little, -and takes lessons in one or two languages. Meanwhile -her husband has for daily occupation his books, his -club, and the above-mentioned light and easy share -in the cares of the household. Many men in his -position do not even keep an account of personal -expenditures.</p> - -<p class='c014'>There is nothing exceptional in this lady’s case, except -that the work may be better done than usual: the -husband could not well contribute more than his present -share without hurting domestic discipline; nor does -the wife do all this from pleasure, but in a manner from -necessity. It is the condition of her social position: -to change it, she must withdraw herself from her social -world. A few improvements, such as “family hotels,” -are doing something to relieve this class to whom luxury -means labor. The great under-current which is -sweeping us all toward some form of associated life is -<span class='pageno' id='Page_166'>166</span>as obvious in this new improvement in housekeeping, as -in co-operative stores or trades-unions; but it will -nevertheless be long before the “women of society” -in America can be any thing but a hard-working class.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The question is not whether such a life as I have -described is the ideal life. My point is that it is, at -any rate, a life demanding far more of energy and toil, -at least in America, than the men of the same class are -called upon to exhibit. There is growing up a class of -men of leisure in America; but there are no women -of leisure in the same circle. They hold their social -position on condition of “an establishment,” and an -establishment makes them working-women. One result -is the constant exodus of this class to Europe, -where domestic life is just now easier. Another consequence -is, that you hear woman suffrage denounced by -women of this class, not on the ground that it involves -any harder work than they already do, but on the -ground that they have work enough already, and will -not bear the suggestion of any more.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_167'>167</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XLIV.<br /> <span class='large'>THE EMPIRE OF MANNERS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>I was present at a lively discourse, administered by -a young lady just from Europe to a veteran politician. -“It is of very little consequence,” she said, “what -kind of men you send out as foreign ministers. The -thing of real importance is that they should have the -right kind of wives. Any man can sign a treaty, I -suppose, if you tell him what kind of treaty it must be. -But all his social relations with the nations to which -you send him will depend on his wife.” There was -some truth, certainly, in this audacious conclusion. It -reminded me of the saying of a modern thinker, “The -only empire freely conceded to women is that of manners—but -it is worth all the rest put together.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Every one instinctively feels that the graces and -amenities of life must be largely under the direction of -women. The fact that this feeling has been carried -too far, and has led to the dwarfing of women’s intellect, -must not lead to a rejection of this important -social sphere. It is too strong a power to be ignored. -George Eliot says well that “the commonest man, who -has his ounce of sense and feeling, is conscious of the -difference between a lovely, delicate woman, and a -coarse one. Even a dog feels a difference in their -presence.” At a summer resort, for instance, one -<span class='pageno' id='Page_168'>168</span>sees women who may be intellectually very ignorant -and narrow, yet whose mere manners give them a -social power which the highest intellects might envy. -To lend joy and grace to all one’s little world of friendship; -to make one’s house a place which every guest -enters with eagerness, and leaves with reluctance; to -lend encouragement to the timid, and ease to the awkward; -to repress violence, restrain egotism, and make -even controversy courteous,—these belong to the empire -of woman. It is a sphere so important and so -beautiful, that even courage and self-devotion seem not -quite enough, without the addition of this supremest -charm.</p> - -<p class='c014'>This courtesy is so far from implying falsehood, that -its very best basis is perfect simplicity. Given a naturally -sensitive organization, a loving spirit, and the -early influence of a refined home, and the foundation of -fine manners is secured. A person so favored may be -reared in a log-hut, and may pass easily into a palace; -the few needful conventionalities are so readily acquired. -But I think it is a mistake to tell children, as -we sometimes do, that simplicity and a kind heart are -absolutely all that are needful in the way of manners. -There are persons in whom simplicity and kindness are -inborn, and who yet never attain to good manners for -want of refined perceptions. And it is astonishing -how much refinement alone can do, even if it is not -very genuine or very full of heart, to smooth the paths -and make social life attractive.</p> - -<p class='c014'>All the acute observers have recognized the difference -between the highest standard, which is nature’s, and -that next to the highest, which is art’s. George Eliot -<span class='pageno' id='Page_169'>169</span>speaks of that fine polish which is “the expensive -substitute for simplicity,” and Tennyson says of manners,—</p> - -<div class='lg-container-b c016'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>“Kind nature’s are the best: those next to best</div> - <div class='line'>That fit us like a nature second-hand;</div> - <div class='line'>Which are indeed the manners of the great.”</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c017'>In our own national history, we have learned to recognize -that the personal demeanor of women may be a -social and political force. The slave-power owed much -of its prolonged control at Washington, and the larger -part of its favor in Europe, to the fact that the manners -of Southern women had been more sedulously trained -than those of Northern women. Even at this moment, -one may see at any watering-place that the relative social -influence of different cities does not depend upon -the intellectual training of their women, so much as -on the manners. And, even if this is very unreasonable, -the remedy would seem to be, not to go about lecturing -on the intrinsic superiority of the Muses to the Graces, -but to pay due homage at all the shrines.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is a great deal to ask of reformers, especially, that -they should be ornamental as well as useful; and I -would by no means indorse the views of a lady who -once told me that she was ready to adopt the most -radical views of the women-reformers if she could see -one well-dressed woman who accepted them. The place -where we should draw the line between independence -and deference, between essentials and non-essentials, -between great ideas and little courtesies, will probably -never be determined—except by actual examples. -Yet it is safe to fall back on Miss Edgeworth’s maxim -<span class='pageno' id='Page_170'>170</span>in “Helen,” that “Every one who makes goodness disagreeable -commits high treason against virtue.” And -it is not a pleasant result of our good deeds, that others -should be immediately driven into bad deeds by the -burning desire to be unlike us.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_171'>171</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XLV.<br /> <span class='large'>“GIRLSTEROUSNESS.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>They tell the story of a little boy, a young scion -of the house of Beecher, that, on being rebuked for -some noisy proceeding, in which his little sister had -also shared, he claimed that she also should be included -in the indictment. “If a boy makes too much -noise,” he said, “you tell him he mustn’t be boisterous. -Well, then, when a girl makes just as much noise, -you ought to tell her not to be <em>girlsterous</em>.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>I think that we should accept, with a sense of gratitude, -this addition to the language. It supplies a name -for a special phase of feminine demeanor, inevitably -brought out of modern womanhood. Any transitional -state of society develops some evil with the good. -Good results are unquestionably proceeding from the -greater freedom now allowed to women. The drawback -is, that we are developing, here and now, more of -“girlsterousness” than is apt to be seen in less-enlightened -countries.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The more complete the subjection of woman, the -more “subdued” in every sense she is. The typical -woman of savage life is, at least in youth, gentle, shy, -retiring, timid. A Bedouin woman is modest and humble; -an Indian girl has a voice “gentle and low.” -The utmost stretch of the imagination cannot picture -<span class='pageno' id='Page_172'>172</span>either of them as “girlsterous.” That perilous quality -can only come as woman is educated, self-respecting, -emancipated. “Girlsterousness” is the excess attendant -on that virtue, the shadow which accompanies that -light. It is more visible in England than in France, -in America than in England.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is to be observed, that, if a girl wishes to be noisy, -she can be as noisy as anybody. Her noise, if less -clamorous, is more shrill and penetrating. The shrieks -of schoolgirls, playing in the yard at recess-time, seem -to drown the voices of the boys. As you enter an evening -party, it is the women’s tones you hear most conspicuously. -There is no defect in the organ, but at -least an adequate vigor. In travelling by rail, when -sitting near some rather under-bred party of youths -and damsels, I have commonly noticed that the girls -were the noisiest. The young men appeared more regardful -of public opinion, and looked round with solicitude, -lest they should attract too much attention. It is -“girlsterousness” that dashes straight on, regardless -of all observers.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Of course reformers exhibit their full share of this -undesirable quality. Where the emancipation of women -is much discussed in any circle, some young girls -will put it in practice gracefully and with dignity, -others rudely. Yet even the rudeness may be but a -temporary phase, and at last end well. When women -were being first trained as physicians, years ago, I remember -a young girl who came from a Southern State -to a Northern city, and attended the medical lectures. -Having secured her lecture-tickets, she also bought -season-tickets to the theatre and to the pistol-gallery, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_173'>173</span>laid in a box of cigars, and began her professional training. -If she meant it as a satire on the pursuits of the -young gentlemen around her, it was not without point. -But it was, I suppose, a clear case of “girlsterousness;” -and I dare say that she sowed her wild oats -much more innocently than many of her male contemporaries, -and that she has long since become a sedate -matron. But I certainly cannot commend her as a -model.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Yet I must resolutely deny that any sort of hoydenishness -or indecorum is an especial characteristic of -radicals, or even “provincials,” as a class. Some of -the fine ladies who would be most horrified at the “girlsterousness” -of this young maiden would themselves -smoke their cigarettes in much worse company, morally -speaking, than she ever tolerated. And, so far as manners -are concerned, I am bound to say that the worst -cases of rudeness and ill-breeding that have ever come -to my knowledge have not occurred in the “rural districts,” -or among the lower ten thousand, but in those -circles of America where the whole aim in life might -seem to be the cultivation of its elegances.</p> - -<p class='c014'>And what confirms me in the fear that the most -profound and serious types of this disease are not to -be found in the wildcat regions is the fact that so much -of is transplanted to Europe, among those who have -the money to travel. It is there described broadly as -“Americanism;” and, so surely as any peculiarly -shrill group is heard coming through a European picture-gallery, -it is straightway classed by all observers -as belonging to the great Republic. If the observers -<span class='pageno' id='Page_174'>174</span>are enamoured at sight with the beauty of the young -ladies of the party, they excuse the voices;</p> - -<div class='lg-container-b c016'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>“Strange or wild, or madly gay,</div> - <div class='line'>They call it only pretty Fanny’s way.”</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>But other observers are more apt to call it only Columbia’s -way; and if they had ever heard the word “girlsterousness,” -they would use that too.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Emerson says, “A gentleman makes no noise; a lady -is serene.” If we Americans often violate this perfect -maxim of good manners, it is something that America -has, at least, furnished the maxim. And, between Emerson -and “girlsterousness,” our courteous philosopher -will yet carry the day.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_175'>175</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XLVI.<br /> <span class='large'>ARE WOMEN NATURAL ARISTOCRATS?</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>A clergyman’s wife in England has lately set on -foot a reform movement in respect to dress; and, like -many English reformers, she aims chiefly to elevate the -morals and manners of the lower classes, without much -reference to her own social equals. She proposes that -“no servant, under pain of dismissal, shall wear flowers, -feathers, brooches, buckles or clasps, ear-rings, lockets, -neck-ribbons, velvets, kid gloves, parasols, sashes, -jackets, or trimming of any kind on dresses, and, above -all, no crinoline; no pads to be worn, or frisettes, or -<i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">chignons</span></i>, or hair-ribbons. The dress is to be gored -and made just to touch the ground, and the hair to be -drawn closely to the head, under a round white cap, -without trimming of any kind. The same system of -dress is recommended for Sunday-school girls, school-mistresses, -church-singers, and the lower orders generally.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>The remark is obvious, that in this country such -a course of discipline would involve the mistress, not -the maid, in the “pain of dismissal.” The American -clergyman and clergyman’s wife who should even “recommend” -such a costume to a school-mistress, church-singer, -or Sunday-school girl,—to say nothing of the -rest of the “lower orders,”—would soon find themselves -<span class='pageno' id='Page_176'>176</span>without teachers, without pupils, without a choir, -and probably without a parish. It is a comfort to -think that even in older countries there is less and less -of this impertinent interference: the costume of different -ranks is being more and more assimilated; and the -incidental episode of a few liveries in our cities is not -enough to interfere with the general current. Never -yet, to my knowledge, have I seen even a livery worn -by a white native American; and to restrain the Sunday -bonnets of her handmaidens, what lady has attempted?</p> - -<p class='c014'>This is as it should be. The Sunday bonnet of the -Irish damsel is only the symbol of a very proper effort -to obtain her share of all social advantages. Long may -those ribbons wave! Meanwhile I think the fact that -it is easier for the gentleman of the house to control the -dress of his groom than for the lady to dictate that of -her waiting-maid,—this must count against the theory -that it is women who are the natural aristocrats.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Women are no doubt more sensitive than men upon -matters of taste and breeding. This is partly from -a greater average fineness of natural perception, and -partly because their more secluded lives give them less -of miscellaneous contact with the world. If Maud -Müller and her husband had gone to board at the same -boarding-house with the Judge and his wife, that lady -might have held aloof from the rustic bride, simply -from inexperience in life, and not knowing just how -to approach her. But the Judge, who might have been -talking politics or real estate with the young farmer -on the doorsteps that morning, would certainly find it -easier to deal with him as a man and a brother at the -dinner-table. From these different causes women get -<span class='pageno' id='Page_177'>177</span>the credit or discredit of being more aristocratic than -men are; so that in England the Tory supporters of -female suffrage base it on the ground that these new -voters at least will be conservative.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But, on the other hand, it is women, even more -than men, who are attracted by those strong qualities -of personal character which are always the antidote -to aristocracy. No bold revolutionist ever defied the -established conventionalisms of his times without drawing -his strongest support from women. Poet and novelist -love to depict the princess as won by the outlaw, -the gypsy, the peasant. Women have a way of turning -from the insipidities and proprieties of life to the wooer -who has the stronger hand; from the silken Darnley to -the rude Bothwell. This impulse is the natural corrective -to the aristocratic instincts of womanhood; and -though men feel it less, it is still, even among them, -one of the supports of republican institutions. We need -to keep always balanced between the two influences of -refined culture and of native force. The patrician class, -wherever there is one, is pretty sure to be the more -refined; the plebeian class, the more energetic. That -woman is able to appreciate both elements, is proof -that she is quite capable of doing her share in social -and political life. This English clergyman’s wife, who -devotes her soul to the trimmings and gored skirts of -the lower orders, is no more entitled to represent her -sex than are those ladies who give their whole attention -to the “novel and intricate bonnets” advertised this -season on Broadway.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_178'>178</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XLVII.<br /> <span class='large'>MRS. BLANK’S DAUGHTERS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>Mrs. Blank, of Far West—let us not draw her from -the “sacred privacy of woman” by giving the name or -place too precisely—has an insurmountable objection -to woman’s voting. So the newspapers say; and this -objection is, that she does not wish her daughters to -encounter disreputable characters at the polls.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is a laudable desire, to keep one’s daughters from -the slightest contact with such persons. But how does -Mrs. Blank precisely mean to accomplish this? Will -she shut up the maidens in a harem? When they go -out, will she send messengers through the streets to -bid people hide their faces, as when an Oriental queen -is passing? Will she send them travelling on camels, -veiled by <em>yashmaks</em>? Will she prohibit them from -being so much as seen by a man, except when a physician -must be called for their ailments, and Miss -Blank puts her arm through a curtain, in order that he -may feel her pulse and know no more?</p> - -<p class='c014'>Who is Mrs. Blank, and how does she bring up her -daughters? Does she send them to the post-office? If -so, they may wait a half-hour at a time for the mail to -open, and be elbowed by the most disreputable characters, -waiting at their side. If it does the young ladies -no harm to encounter this for the sake of getting their -<span class='pageno' id='Page_179'>179</span>letters out, will it harm them to do it in order to get -their ballots in? If they go to hear Gough lecture, -they may be kept half an hour at the door, elbowed by -saint and sinner indiscriminately. If it is worth going -through this to hear about temperance, why not to vote -about it? If they go to Washington to the President’s -inauguration, they may stand two hours with Mary -Magdalen on one side of them and Judas Iscariot -on the other. If this contact is rendered harmless by -the fact that they are receiving political information, -will it hurt them to stay five minutes longer in order to -act upon the knowledge they have received?</p> - -<p class='c014'>This is on the supposition that the household of -Blank are plain, practical women, unversed in the vanities -of the world. If they belong to fashionable circles, -how much harder to keep them wholly clear of disreputable -contact! Should they, for instance, visit Newport, -they may possibly be seen at the Casino, looking -very happy as they revolve rapidly in the arms of -some very disreputable characters; they will be seen -in the surf, attired in the most scanty and clinging -drapery, and kindly aided to preserve their balance by -the devoted attentions of the same companions. Mrs. -Blank, meanwhile, will look complacently on, with the -other matrons: they are not supposed to know the -current reputation of those whom their daughters meet -“in society;” and, so long as there is no actual harm -done, why should they care? Very well; but why, -then, should they care if they encounter those same -disreputable characters when they go to drop a ballot -in the ballot-box? It will be a more guarded and -distant meeting. It is not usual to dance round-dances -<span class='pageno' id='Page_180'>180</span>at the ward-room, so far as I know, or to bathe in -clinging drapery at that rather dry and dusty resort. -If such very close intimacies are all right under the -gas-light or at the beach, why should there be poison -in merely passing a disreputable character at the City -Hall?</p> - -<p class='c014'>On the whole, the prospects of Mrs. Blank are not -encouraging. Should she consult a physician for her -daughters, he may be secretly or openly disreputable; -should she call in a clergyman, he may, though a -bishop, have carnal rather than spiritual eyes. If Miss -Blank be caught in a shower, she may take refuge -under the umbrella of an undesirable acquaintance; -should she fall on the ice, the woman who helps to -raise her may have sinned. There is not a spot in any -known land where a woman can live in absolute seclusion -from all contact with evil. Should the Misses -Blank even turn Roman Catholics, and take to a convent, -their very confessor may be secretly a scoundrel; -and they may be glad to flee for refuge to the busy, -buying, selling, dancing, voting world outside.</p> - -<p class='c014'>No: Mrs. Blank’s prayers for absolute protection will -never be answered, in respect to her daughters. Why -not, then, find a better model for prayer in that made -by Jesus for his disciples: “I pray Thee, not that -Thou shouldst take them out of the world, but that -Thou shouldst keep them from the evil.” A woman -was made for something nobler in the world, Mrs. -Blank, than to be a fragile toy, to be put behind a -glass case, and protected from contact. It is not her -mission to be hidden away from all life’s evil, but -bravely to work that the world may be reformed.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_181'>181</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XLVIII.<br /> <span class='large'>THE EUROPEAN PLAN.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>Every mishap among American women brings out -renewed suggestions of what maybe called the “European -plan” in the training of young girls,—the -plan, that is, of extreme seclusion and helplessness. -It is usually forgotten, in these suggestions, that not -much protection is really given anywhere to this particular -class as a whole. Everywhere in Europe, the -restrictions are of caste, not of sex. Even in Turkey, -travellers tell us, women of the humbler vocations are -not much secluded. It is not the object of the “European -plan,” in any form, to protect the virtue of -young women, as such, but only of young ladies; and -the protection is pretty effectually limited to that order. -Among the Portuguese, in the island of Fayal, I found -it to be the ambition of each humble family to bring up -one daughter in a sort of ladylike seclusion: she never -went into the street alone, or without a hood which was -equivalent to a veil; she was taught indoor industries -only; she was constantly under the eye of her mother. -But, in order that one daughter might be thus protected, -all the other daughters were allowed to go alone, day -or evening, bare-headed or bare-footed, by the loneliest -mountain-paths, to bring oranges or firewood or whatever -their work may be—heedless of protection. The -<span class='pageno' id='Page_182'>182</span>safeguard was for a class: the average exposure of -young womanhood was far greater than with us. So in -London, while you rarely see a young lady alone in -the streets, the housemaid is sent on errands at any hour -of the evening with a freedom at which our city domestics -would quite rebel; and one has to stay but a short -time in Paris to see how entirely limited to a class is -the alleged restraint under which young French girls -are said to be kept.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Again, it is to be remembered that the whole “European -plan,” so far as it is applied on the Continent -of Europe, is a plan based upon utter distrust and -suspicion, not only as to chastity, but as to all other -virtues. It is applied among the higher classes almost -as consistently to boys as to girls. In every school -under church auspices, it is the French theory that boys -are never to be left unwatched for a moment; and it is -as steadily assumed that girls will be untruthful if left -to themselves, as that they will do every other wrong. -This to the Anglo-Saxon race seems very demoralizing. -“Suspicion,” said Sir Philip Sidney, “is the way -to lose that which we fear to lose.” Readers of the -Brontë novels will remember the disgust of the English -pupils and teachers in French schools at the constant -espionage around them; and I have more than once -heard young girls who had been trained at such institutions -say that it was a wonder if they had any truthfulness -left, so invariable was the assumption that it -was the nature of young girls to lie. I cannot imagine -any thing less likely to create upright and noble character, -in man or woman, than the systematic application -of the “European plan.”</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_183'>183</span>And that it produces just the results that might be -feared, the whole tone of European literature proves. -Foreigners, no doubt, do habitual injustice to the morality -of French households; but it is impossible that -fiction can utterly misrepresent the community which -produces and reads it. When one thinks of the utter -lightness of tone with which breaches, both of truth -and chastity, are treated even, in the better class of -French novels and plays, it seems absurd to deny the -correctness of the picture. Besides, it is not merely a -question of plays and novels. Consider, for instance, -the contempt with which Taine treats Thackeray for -representing the mother of Pendennis as suffering agonies -when she thinks that her son has seduced a young -girl, his social inferior. Thackeray is not really considered -a model of elevated tone, as to such matters, -among English writers; but the Frenchman is simply -amazed that the Englishman should describe even the -saintliest of mothers as attaching so much weight to -such a small affair.</p> - -<p class='c014'>An able newspaper writer, quoted with apparent approval -by the Boston Daily Advertiser, praises the supposed -foreign method for the “habit of dependence and -deference” that it produces; and because it gives to a -young man a wife whose “habit of deference is established.” -But it must be remembered, that, where this -theory is established, the habit of deference is logically -carried much farther than mere conjugal convenience -would take it. Its natural outcome is the authority of -the priest, not of the husband. That domination of -the women of France by the priesthood which forms -to-day the chief peril of the republic,—which is the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_184'>184</span>strength of legitimism and imperialism and all other -conspiracies against the liberty of the French people,—is -only the visible and inevitable result of this dangerous -docility.</p> - -<p class='c014'>One thing is certain, that the best preparation for -freedom is freedom; and that no young girls are so -poorly prepared for American life as those whose early -years are passed in Europe. The worst imprudences, -the most unmaidenly and offensive actions, that I have -ever heard of in decent society, have been on the part -of young women educated in Europe, who have been -launched into American life without its early training,—have -been treated as children until they suddenly -awakened to the freedom of women. On the other -hand, I remember with pleasure, that a cultivated -French mother, whose daughter’s fine qualities were -the best seal of her motherhood, once told me that the -models she had chosen in her daughter’s training were -certain families of American young ladies, of whom -she had, through peculiar circumstances, seen much in -Paris.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_185'>185</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XLIX.<br /> <span class='large'>“FEATHERSES.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>One of the most amusing letters ever quoted in any -book is that given in Curzon’s “Monasteries of the -Levant,” as the production of a Turkish sultana who -had just learned English. It is as follows:—</p> - -<div class='nf-center-c0'> -<div class='nf-center c026'> - <div><span class='sc'>Note from Adile Sultana, the betrothed of Abbas Pasha, to her Armenian Commissioner.</span></div> - </div> -</div> - -<div class='lg-container-r c027'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'><span class='sc'>Constantinople</span>, 1844.</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c021'><em>My Noble Friend</em>:—Here are the featherses sent my soul, -my noble friend, are there no other featherses leaved in the -shop beside these featherses? and these featherses remains, -and these featherses are ukly. They are very dear, who -buyses dheses? And my noble friend, we want a noat from -yorself; those you brought last tim, those you sees were very -beautiful; we had searched; my soul, I want featherses again, -of those featherses. In Kalada there is plenty of feather. -Whatever bees, I only want beautiful featherses; I want -featherses of every desolation to-morrow.</p> - -<p class='c021'>(Signed)</p> - -<div class='lg-container-r c027'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'><span class='sc'>You Know Who</span>.</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>The first steps in culture do not, then, it seems, remove -from the feminine soul the love of finery. Nor -do the later steps wholly extinguish it; for did not -Grace Greenwood hear the learned Mary Somerville -conferring with the wise Harriet Martineau as to -whether a certain dress should be dyed to match a certain -shawl? Well! why not? Because women learn -<span class='pageno' id='Page_186'>186</span>the use of the quill, are they to ignore “featherses”? -Because they learn science, must they unlearn the arts, -and above all the art of being beautiful? If men -have lost it, they have reason to regret the loss. Let -women hold to it, while yet within their reach.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Mrs. Rachel Howland of New Bedford, much prized -and trusted as a public speaker among Friends, and a -model of taste and quiet beauty in costume, delighted -the young girls at a Newport Yearly Meeting, a few -years since, by boldly declaring that she thought God -meant women to make the world beautiful, as much as -flowers and butterflies, and that there was no sin in -tasteful dress, but only in devoting to it too much -money or too much time. It is a blessed doctrine. -The utmost extremes of dress, the love of colors, of -fabrics, of jewels, of “featherses,” are, after all, but -an effort after the beautiful. The reason why the -beautiful is not always the result is because so many -women are ignorant or merely imitative. They have -no sense of fitness: the short wear what belongs to -the tall, and brunettes sacrifice their natural beauty to -look like blondes. Or they have no adaptation; and -even an emancipated woman may show a disregard -for appropriateness, as where a fine lady sweeps the -streets, or a fair orator the platform, with a silken or -velvet train which accords only with a carpet as luxurious -as itself. What is inappropriate is never beautiful. -What is merely in the fashion is never beautiful. -But who does not know some woman whose taste and -training are so perfect that fashion becomes to her a -means of grace instead of a despot, and the worst excrescence -that can be prescribed—a <i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">chignon</span></i>, a hoop, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_187'>187</span>a panier—is softened into something so becoming that -even the Parisian bondage seems but a chain of roses?</p> - -<p class='c014'>In such hands, even “featherses” become a fine -art, not a matter of vanity. Are women so much -more vain than men? No doubt they talk more about -their dress, for there is much more to talk about; yet -did you never hear the men of fashion discuss boots -and hats and the liveries of grooms? A good friend -of mine, a shoemaker, who supplies very high heels -for a great many pretty feet on Fifth Avenue in New -York, declares that women are not so vain of their feet -as men. “A man who thinks he has a handsome foot,” -quoth our fashionable Crispin, “is apt to give us more -trouble than any lady among our customers. I have -noticed this for twenty years.” The testimony is consoling—to -women.</p> - -<p class='c014'>And this naturally suggests the question, What is to -be the future of masculine costume? Is the present -formlessness and gracelessness and monotony of hue -to last forever, as suited to the rough needs of a work-a-day -world? It is to be remembered that the difference -in this respect between the dress of the sexes is a -very recent thing. Till within a century or so men -dressed as picturesquely as women, and paid as minute -attention to their costume. Even the fashions in armor -varied as extensively as the fashions in gowns. One -of Henry III.’s courtiers, Sir J. Arundel, had fifty-two -complete suits of cloth of gold. No satin, no velvet, -was too elegant for those who sat to Copley for their -pictures. In Puritan days the laws could hardly be -made severe enough to prevent men from wearing silver-lace -and “broad bone-lace,” and shoulder-bands of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_188'>188</span>undue width, and double ruffs and “immoderate great -breeches.” What seemed to the Cavaliers the extreme -of stupid sobriety in dress, would pass now for the most -fantastic array. Fancy Samuel Pepys going to a wedding -of to-day in his “new colored silk suit and coat -trimmed with gold buttons, and gold broad lace round -his hands, very rich and fine.” It would give to the -ceremony the aspect of a fancy ball; yet how much -prettier a sight is a fancy ball than the ordinary entertainment -of the period!</p> - -<p class='c014'>Within the last few years the rigor of masculine costume -is a little relaxed; velvets are resuming their picturesque -sway: and, instead of the customary suit of -solemn black, gentlemen are appearing in blue and -gold editions at evening parties. Let us hope that -good sense and taste may yet meet each other, for -both sexes; that men may borrow for their dress some -womanly taste, women some masculine sense; and -society may again witness a graceful and appropriate -costume, without being too much absorbed in “featherses.”</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_189'>189</span> - <h3 class='c004'>L.<br /> <span class='large'>SOME MAN-MILLINERY.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>We may breathe more freely. The religious prospects -of America brighten. Our dealers have received -the “Catalogue of Clerical Vestments and Improved -Church Ornaments manufactured by Simon Jeune, 34 -Rue de Cléry, Paris.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Why are we not a nation of saints? Plainly, because -the church-apparatus has hitherto been so very -deficient. Religion has been, so to speak, naked. The -dry-goods stores, supplying only the laity, have left the -clergy unclothed. In what ready-made-clothing store -can you find any thing like a proper alb? Ask your -tailor, if you dare, for a chasuble. At Stewart’s shop -New Yorkers boast that you can buy any thing; but -fancy a respectable citizen entering those marble portals, -and demanding a cope or a dalmatic! As for -an ombrellino, or an antependium, you might as well -attempt to go buffalo-hunting in Broadway. In that -case you would at least find the dried skin of the animal; -but we doubt if there is to be found on sale any -thing nearer an ombrellino than a lady’s parasol. They -order this thing otherwise in France.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Mr. Simon Jeune provides every one of these simple -luxuries. Not a device by which a rich man may enter -the kingdom of heaven, but he has it at his fingers’ -<span class='pageno' id='Page_190'>190</span>ends. None of your cheap salvations mar the dignity -of 34 Rue de Cléry. “We do not manufacture these -articles at a low price,” he calmly announces. There -is no limit in the other direction. You can lead souls -to heaven in a robe worth twenty-five guineas; but, if -you insist on parsimony in your piety, you must patronize -some other establishment.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Yet who that reads this catalogue, and revels for a -half-hour amid its gold and jewels, would care to be -parsimonious? What is money worth, except as a -means of putting one’s favorite minister into a chasuble -“in gold cloth with glazed friz ground, double superior -quality”? Since the Christian must at any rate bear -his cross, is it not a satisfaction to have it “on a gold -ground, richly worked in gold and silver”? If there -is no true religion without a cope, is it not well that its -“hood and orfraies” should be “surrounded with -glazed gold-columned galloon”? And, as death must -come at any rate, is it not something that your pall may -bear “a handsome design of silver tears in emboss in -the centre of the cross,” price only six guineas?</p> - -<p class='c014'>Time would fail to tell of the banners and the dais, the -altar-cloths and frontals, the pastoral stoles and benediction-scarfs, -the pyxes and chalices, and, in short, all -dear delights of consecrated souls. This saintly upholsterer -makes as many “fresh sacrifices,” it would appear, -as any other retailer; but, as this does not prevent -him from pricing a dais as high as four hundred -pounds sterling, there is no danger of the purchasers -finding any thing cheap enough to be really discreditable. -And the goods are all warranted to be as indestructible -as the lowly virtues they symbolize.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_191'>191</span>M. Jeune positively announces that he “supplies -every article connected with the Roman Catholic -Church.” Perhaps he reserves the faith, hope, and -charity for the next catalogue, as they do not appear -largely in this. In other respects, reading this catalogue -is as good as a seat in the most fashionable church, -and leaves much the same impression. It is especially -useful for summer-time, when one may wander in the -country, to the peril of one’s soul, and may consider -the lilies a great deal too much, and may come to -thinking religion a thing obtainable on cheap terms, -after all. This would not do for M. Jeune’s business: -let us return to the realities of time and eternity, and -consider this “embroidered glory of spangles and prul,”—whatever -prul may be.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But can it, after all, be possible that these gorgeous -garments are to be worn by men only, and that those -same men will sometimes treat it as a reproach to -women that they are fond of dress?</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_192'>192</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LI.<br /> <span class='large'>SUBLIME PRINCES IN DISTRESS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>In looking over some miscellaneous papers which -came, the other day, into my hands, I found among -them a newspaper scrap, expressing certain criticisms -familiar to the inquiring mind. It stated the predominant -attribute of women to be frivolity; an inordinate -love of show, display, rank, title, dress; a habit of absorption -in the petty details of these follies, to the exclusion -of all serious thought and purpose. In reading -this lucubration, one was led to suppose that the whole -aim of all women was to meet in little circles where -they could wear costly attire, call themselves by fine -names, and, in the concise Italian phrase, “peacock -themselves” generally.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But there happened to be among the same papers -another class of documents which tended to unsettle -the mind a little on these topics. These documents -were in print, and were not marked as private, or -addressed to any particular name, so that there can be -no harm in reprinting one of them, suppressing, however, -all reference to particular persons or places, lest I -should be innocently betraying some awful secret. The -paper affording most information was as follows, the -dashes of omission (——) being mine, but all the rest -being given <i><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">verbatim</span></i>:—</p> - -<table class='table2' summary=''> - <tr><td class='c022' colspan='5'><span class='pageno' id='Page_193'>193</span></td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c028'> </td> - <td class='c028'> </td> - <td class='c028'>“<span lang="la" xml:lang="la">Lux e tenebris.</span>”</td> - <td class='c028'> </td> - <td class='c029'> </td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c028'> </td> - <td class='c028'> </td> - <td class='c028'>—— <span class='sc'><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">Consistory.</span></span></td> - <td class='c028'> </td> - <td class='c029'> </td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c028' rowspan='5'>S. P. R. S.</td> - <td class='c028' rowspan='5'><span class='c030'>{</span></td> - <td class='c028'><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">Non nobis</span></td> - <td class='c028' rowspan='5'><span class='c030'>}</span></td> - <td class='c029' rowspan='5'>32°</td> - </tr> - <tr> - - - <td class='c028'><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">Domine non</span></td> - - - </tr> - <tr> - - - <td class='c028'><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">nobis, sed</span></td> - - - </tr> - <tr> - - - <td class='c028'><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">nomini tuo</span></td> - - - </tr> - <tr> - - - <td class='c028'><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">da gloriam</span></td> - - - </tr> -</table> - -<p class='c021'>Sublime Prince:</p> - -<p class='c021'>A stated rendezvous of —— Consistory, A. A. S. Rite, -will be held on the 15th day of the month Adar, A. H. 5640, -in —— Hall, under the c. c. of the 3, near the B. B. at -Five o’clock P.M.</p> - -<div class='lg-container-r c027'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>Per order of</div> - <div class='line in8'>____ ____</div> - <div class='line in12'>Ill. Com. in Chief.</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<div class='lg-container-l c027'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>—— ——</div> - <div class='line in4'>Ill. Grand Secretary.</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>The object of this meeting is thus stated: “Work: -the grade of Knight Kadosh, the 30th, will be worked -in full at this Rendezvous.” And it appears that this -work must have something of a military character; for -it seems from another circular, which I will not quote -in full, that the purpose of the rendezvous can be much -better carried out if the members will provide themselves -with a costly uniform, including a sword and other -equipments. Yet it would also appear that the expenses -of this organization, apart from the uniform, are so -great as to call forth the following notice:—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“<span class='sc'>Delinquents.</span>—The Finance Committee recommend the -discharge from Membership of the following Sublime Princes, -for non-payment of dues, they having failed to make any satisfactory -reply to repealed notices of their indebtedness.” [Then -follows a list of names and amounts varying from $17 to $23.]</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_194'>194</span>One of the most brilliant of recent French novels, -Daudet’s “Les Rois en Exil,” lays its whole plot among -the forlorn class of dethroned sovereigns in Paris; but -really their sorrows do not touch an American heart -so deeply as this black-list. Here are nearly twenty -Princes on our own soil who are publicly exposed in a -single circular as refusing, after “repeated notices of -their indebtedness,” even to reply satisfactorily. What -pleasure can there be in the most attractive “rendezvous,” -what joy in the most absorbing “work,” when -one thinks of all these fallen Sublime Princes wandering, -like Milton’s angels, into outer darkness? I almost -blush to own that I recognize among the names of these -outcasts one or two acquaintances of my own, who -certainly passed for honest men before they became -princes.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But the most interesting question for women to consider -is this: Who conducts this picturesque consistory, -with its rites, its titles, and its uniforms? Which sex -is it that makes up this society, and twenty other -societies so absorbing in their “work” that some worthy -persons have a “society” for almost every evening -in the week? Is it the sex which is alleged to be frivolous, -dressy, and eager for rank and title? Or is it the -grave sex, the serious and hard-working sex, the “noble -sex,” <i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">le sexe noble</span></i>, as some of the French grammars -call it? No doubt there is under all this display and -formality, in this “consistory,” as in most similar organizations, -a great deal of mutual help and friendliness. -But so there is under even the seeming frivolities -of women: the majority of fashionable women -have good hearts, and do good. If substantial and -<span class='pageno' id='Page_195'>195</span>practical men like to cover even their benevolent organizations -with something of show and display, and to -“peacock themselves” a little, why should not women -be permitted the same privilege? Surely Sublime -Princes should stand by their order, and not look with -disdain on those who would like to be Sublime Princesses -if they only could.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_197'>197</span> - <h2 class='c008'>EDUCATION.</h2> -</div> - -<p class='c031'><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">“Movet me ingens scientiarum admiratio, seu legis communis -æquitas, ut in nostro sexu, rarum non esse feram, id -quod omnium votis dignissimum est. Nam cum sapientia -tantum generis humani ornamentum sit, ut ad omnes et -singulos (quoad quidem per sortem cujusque liceat) extendi -jure debeat, non vidi, cur virgini, in qua excolendi sese ornandique -sedulitatem admittimus, non conveniat mundus hic -omnium longè pulcherrimus.”—<span class='sc'>Annæ Mariæ À Schurman -Epistolæ.</span></span> (1638.)</p> - -<p class='c014'>“A great reverence for knowledge and the natural sense of -justice urge me to encourage in my own sex that which is most -worthy the aspirations of all. For, since wisdom is so great an -ornament of the human race that it should of right be extended -(so far as practicable) to each and every one, I did not -see why this fairest of ornaments should not be appropriate -for the maiden, to whom we permit all diligence in the decoration -and adornment of herself.”</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_199'>199</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LII.<br /> <span class='large'>“EXPERIMENTS.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>Why is it, that, whenever any thing is done for women -in the way of education, it is called “an experiment,”—something -that is to be long considered, stoutly opposed, -grudgingly yielded, and dubiously watched,—while, -if the same thing is done for men, its desirableness -is assumed as a matter of course, and the thing is -done? Thus, when Harvard College was founded, it -was not regarded as an experiment, but as an institution. -The “General Court,” in 1636, “agreed to -give 400<em>l.</em> towards a schoale or colledge,” and the -affair was settled. Every subsequent step in the expanding -of educational opportunities for young men -has gone in the same way. But when there seems a -chance of extending, however irregularly, some of the -same collegiate advantages to women, I observe that -the Boston Daily Advertiser and the Atlantic Monthly, -in all good faith, speak of the measure as an “experiment.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>It seems to me no more of an “experiment” than -when a boy who has hitherto eaten up his whole apple -becomes a little touched with a sense of justice, and -finally decides to offer his sister the smaller half. If -he has ever regarded that offer as an experiment, -the first actual trial will put the result into the list of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_200'>200</span>certainties; and it will become an axiom in his mind -that girls like apples. Whatever may be said about the -position of women in law and society, it is clear that -their educational disadvantages have been a prolonged -disgrace to the other sex, and one for which women -themselves are in no way accountable. When Françoise -de Saintonges, in the sixteenth century, wished -to establish girls’ schools in France, she was hooted in -the streets, and her father called together four doctors -of law to decide whether she was possessed of a devil -in planning to teach women,—”<i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">pour s’assurer qu’instruire -des femmes n’était pas un œuvre du démon</span></i>.” -From that day to this, we have seen women almost -always more ready to be taught than was any one else -to teach them. Talk as you please about their wishing -or not wishing to vote: they have certainly wished for -instruction, and have had it doled out to them almost -as grudgingly as if it were the ballot itself.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Consider the educational history of Massachusetts, -for instance. The wife of President John Adams was -born in 1744; and she says of her youth that “female -education, in the best families, went no farther than -writing and arithmetic.” Barry tells us in his History -of Massachusetts, that the public education was first -provided for boys only; “but light soon broke in, and -girls were allowed to attend the public schools two -hours a day.”<a id='r10' /><a href='#f10' class='c018'><sup>[10]</sup></a> It appears from President Quincy’s -“Municipal History of Boston,”<a id='r11' /><a href='#f11' class='c018'><sup>[11]</sup></a> that from 1790 girls -were there admitted to such schools, but during the -summer months only, when there were not boys enough -to fill them,—from April 20 to Oct. 20 of each year. -<span class='pageno' id='Page_201'>201</span>This lasted until 1822, when Boston became a city. -Four years after, an attempt was made to establish -a high school for girls, which was not, however, to -teach Latin and Greek. It had, in the words of the -school committee of 1854, “an alarming success;” -and the school was abolished after eighteen months’ -trial, because the girls crowded into it; and as Mr. -Quincy, with exquisite simplicity, records, “not one -voluntarily quitted it, and there was no reason to -suppose that any one admitted to the school would -voluntarily quit for the whole three years, except in -case of marriage!”</p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f10'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r10'>10</a>. III., 323.</p> -</div> - -<div class='footnote' id='f11'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r11'>11</a>. p. <a href='#Page_21'>21</a>.</p> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>How amusing seems it now to read of such an -“experiment” as this, abandoned only because of -its overwhelming success! How absurd now seem the -discussions of a few years ago!—the doubts whether -young women really desired higher education, whether -they were capable of it, whether their health would -bear it, whether their parents would permit it. The -address I gave before the Social Science Association -on this subject, at Boston, May 14, 1873, now seems -to me such a collection of platitudes that I hardly see -how I dared come before an intelligent audience with -such needless reasonings. It is as if I had soberly -labored to prove that two and two make four, or that -ginger is “hot i’ the mouth.” Yet the subsequent -discussion in that meeting showed that around even -these harmless and commonplace propositions the battle -of debate could rage hot; and it really seemed as if -even to teach women the alphabet ought still to be mentioned -as “a promising experiment.” Now, with the -successes before us of Vassar and Wellesley and Smith -<span class='pageno' id='Page_202'>202</span>Colleges, of Michigan and Cornell and Boston Universities; -with the spectacle at Cambridge of young women -actually reading Plato “at sight” with Professor Goodwin,—it -surely seems as if the higher education of -women might be considered quite beyond the stage -of experiment, and might henceforth be provided for -in the same common-sense and matter-of-course way -which we provide for the education of young men.</p> - -<p class='c014'>And, if this point is already reached in education, -how long before it will also be reached in political life, -and women’s voting be viewed as a matter of course, -and a thing no longer experimental?</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_203'>203</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LIII.<br /> <span class='large'>INTELLECTUAL CINDERELLAS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>When, some thirty years ago, the extraordinary -young mathematician, Truman Henry Safford, first -attracted the attention of New England by his rare -powers, I well remember the pains that were taken to -place him under instruction by the ablest Harvard professors: -the greater his abilities, the more needful that -he should have careful and symmetrical training. The -men of science did not say, “Stand off! let him alone! -let him strive patiently until he has achieved something -positively valuable, and he may be sure of prompt and -generous recognition—when he is fifty years old.” If -such a course would have been mistaken and ungenerous -if applied to Professor Safford, why is it not something -to be regretted that it was applied to Mrs. Somerville? -In her case, the mischief was done: she was, happily, -strong enough to bear it; but, as the English critics -say, we never shall know what science has lost by it. -We can do nothing for her now; but we could do something -for future women like her, by pointing this obvious -moral for their benefit, instead of being content -with a mere tardy recognition of success, after a woman -has expended half a century in struggle.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is commonly considered to be a step forward in -civilization, that whereas ancient and barbarous nations -<span class='pageno' id='Page_204'>204</span>exposed children to special hardships, in order to kill -off the weak and toughen the strong, modern nations -aim to rear all alike carefully, without either sacrificing -or enfeebling. If we apply this to muscle, why not to -mind? and, if to men’s minds, why not to women’s? -Why use for men’s intellects, which are claimed to be -stronger, the forcing process,—offering, for instance, -many thousand dollars a year in gratuities at Harvard -College, that young men may be induced to come and -learn,—and only withhold assistance from the weaker -minds of women? A little schoolgirl once told me that -she did not object to her teacher’s showing partiality, -but thought she “ought to show partiality to all alike.” -If all our university systems are wrong, and the proper -diet for mathematical genius consists of fifty years’ -snubbing, let us employ it, by all means; but let it be -applied to both sexes.</p> - -<p class='c014'>That it is the duty of women, even under disadvantageous -circumstances, to prove their purpose by labor, -to “verify their credentials,” is true enough; but this -moral is only part of the moral of Mrs. Somerville’s -book, and is cruelly incomplete without the other half. -What a garden of roses was Mrs. Somerville’s life, -according to some comfortable critics! “All that for -which too many women nowadays are content to sit -and whine, or fitfully and carelessly struggle, came -naturally and quietly to Mrs. Somerville. And the -reason was, that she never asked for any thing until -she had earned it; or, rather, she never asked at all, -but was content to earn.” Naturally and quietly! -You might as well say that Garrison fought slavery -“quietly,” or that Frederick Douglass’s escape came to -<span class='pageno' id='Page_205'>205</span>him “naturally.” Turn to the book itself, and see -with what strong, though never bitter, feeling, the author -looks back upon her hard struggle.</p> - -<p class='c021'>“I was intensely ambitious to excel in something; for I felt -in my own breast that women were capable of taking a higher -place in creation than that assigned them in my early days, -which was very low” (p. <a href='#Page_60'>60</a>). “Nor ... should I have had -courage to ask any of them a question, for I should have been -laughed at. I was often very sad and forlorn; not a hand held -out to help me” (p. <a href='#Page_47'>47</a>). “My father came home for a short -time, and, somehow or other finding out what I was about, -said to my mother, ‘Peg, we must put a stop to this, or we shall -have Mary in a strait-jacket one of these days’” (p. <a href='#Page_54'>54</a>). “I -continued my mathematical and other pursuits, but under -great disadvantages; for, although my husband did not prevent -me from studying, I met with no sympathy whatever from -him, as he had a very low opinion of the capacity of my sex, -and had neither knowledge of nor interest in science of any -kind” (p. <a href='#Page_57'>57</a>). “I was considered eccentric and foolish; and -my conduct was highly disapproved of by many, especially by -some members of my own family” (p. <a href='#Page_80'>80</a>). “A man can always -command his time under the plea of business: a woman -is not allowed any such excuse” (p. <a href='#Page_164'>164</a>). And so on.</p> - -<p class='c014'>At last in 1831—Mrs. Somerville being then fifty-one—her -work on “The Mechanism of the Heavens” -appeared. Then came universal recognition, generous -if not prompt, a tardy acknowledgment. “Our relations,” -she says, “and others who had so severely -criticised and ridiculed me, astonished at my success, -were now loud in my praise.”<a id='r12' /><a href='#f12' class='c018'><sup>[12]</sup></a> No doubt. So were, -probably, Cinderella’s sisters loud in her praise, when -the prince at last took her from the chimney-corner, -and married her. They had kept for themselves, to be -<span class='pageno' id='Page_206'>206</span>sure, as long as they could, the delights and opportunities -of life; while she had taken the place assigned her -in her early days,—“which was very low,” as Mrs. -Somerville says. But, for all that, they were very kind -to her in the days of her prosperity; and no doubt -packed their little trunks, and came to visit their dear -sister at the palace, as often as she could wish. And, -doubtless, the Fairyland Monthly of that day, when it -came to review Cinderella’s “Personal Recollections,” -pointed out, that, as soon as that distinguished lady had -“achieved something positively valuable,” she received -“prompt and generous recognition.”</p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f12'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r12'>12</a>. p. <a href='#Page_176'>176</a>.</p> -</div> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_207'>207</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LIV.<br /> <span class='large'>FOREIGN EDUCATION.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>There is a fashionable phrase which always awakens -my inward protest,—“the advantages of foreign education.” -Every summer brings within my view a large -class of people who have perhaps spent their youth in -Europe, and then have taken Europe for their wedding-tour; -and then, after a year or two at home, have found -it an excellent reason for going abroad again “to give -the children the advantage of foreign education, you -know.” And, as it is in regard to girls that this advantage -is especially claimed, it is in respect to them -that I wish to speak.</p> - -<p class='c014'>In some ways, undoubtedly, the early foreign training -offers an advantage. It is a thing of very great -convenience to have the easy colloquial command of -one or two languages beside one’s own; and this can -no doubt be obtained far more readily by a few years of -early life abroad than by any method employed in later -years at home. There are also some unquestionable -advantages in respect to music, art, and European -geography and history. The trouble is, that, when we -have enumerated these advantages, we have mentioned -all.</p> - -<p class='c014'>And, as a further trouble, it comes about that these -things, being all that are better learned in Europe, are -<span class='pageno' id='Page_208'>208</span>easily assumed, by what may be called our Europeanized -classes, to be all that are worth learning, especially -for girls. When, in such circles, you hear of -a young lady as “splendidly educated,” it commonly -turns out that she speaks several languages admirably, -and plays well on the piano, or sketches well. It is -not needful for such an indorsement that she should -have the slightest knowledge of mathematics, of logic, -of rhetoric, of metaphysics, of political economy, of -physiology, of any branch of natural science, or of any -language, or literature, or history, except those of -modern Europe. All these missing branches she would -have been far more likely to study, if she had never -been abroad: all these, or a sufficient number of them, -she would have been pretty sure to study at a first-class -American “academy” or high school. But all these -she is almost sure to have missed in Europe,—missed -them so thoroughly, indeed, that she is likely to regard -with suspicion any one who knows any thing about -them, as being “awfully learned.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Yet it needs no argument to show that the studies -thus omitted by girls taught in Europe are the studies -which train the intellect. That a girl should know her -own powers of body and mind, should know how to -observe, how to combine, how to think; that she should -know the history and literature of the world at large, -and in particular of the country in which she is to live,—this -is certainly more important than that she should -be able to speak two or three languages as well as a -European courier, and should have nothing to say in -any of them.</p> - -<p class='c014'>A very few persons I have known who contrived, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_209'>209</span>while living abroad, to keep a home atmosphere round -their children, and who, by great personal effort, succeeded -in giving to their girls that solid early training -which is to be had in every high school in this country, -but is only to be obtained by personal effort, and under -great disadvantages, in Europe. Wiser still, in my -judgment, were those who trusted America for the -main training, but contrived early to secure for their -children the needful year or two of foreign life, for -the learning of languages alone. Perhaps we exaggerate, -too, the absolute necessity of foreign study, even -for modern languages. The Russians, who are the best -linguists in Europe, are not in the habit of expatriating -themselves for that purpose; and perhaps we have -something to learn from them in this direction, as well -as in the line of Professor Runkle’s machine-shops.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_210'>210</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LV.<br /> <span class='large'>TEACHING THE TEACHERS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>Cotton Mather says of his father, Increase Mather, -that, when he became president of Harvard College, it -was from the desire to teach those who were to teach -others, or, as he expresses it, not to shape the building -but the builders,—<i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">non lapides dolare sed architectos</span></i>. It -is curious to see that women are admitted more readily -to this higher work than to the lower. Thus I know -a lady who teaches elocution professionally, and has -clerical pupils among others. One of these assures -me that he finds his power and influence in the pulpit -much increased through her instruction. Yet there is -scarcely a denomination which would admit her into the -pulpit: she can direct the builders, but can take no -share in the building.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It sometimes occurred to me, when a member of the -legislature of Massachusetts, that the little I knew of -political economy was mainly due to the assiduous reading, -in childhood, of Miss Martineau’s stories founded -on that science. Yet it would have been thought something -very astounding, were some such woman to have -a seat in that legislature. So I have seen classes of -young men and maidens, in a high school, reciting -political economy out of Mrs. Fawcett’s excellent textbook,—and -sometimes reciting it to a woman; and yet, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_211'>211</span>should any one of these boys ever become a member of -“the Great and General Court,” as the legislature is -called in Massachusetts, he could not even invite this -teacher, or Mrs. Fawcett herself, to sit beside him and -aid him with her advice. Can any one help seeing that -this distinction is a merely traditional thing, and one -that cannot last?</p> - -<p class='c014'>At the last teachers’ convention which I attended, I -heard a lady, Mrs. Knox, give an address on the best -way of teaching English composition. There was -assembled a great body of teachers, some five or six -hundred; the church was crowded; and yet this lady -faced the audience for some three-quarters of an hour,—she -being armed only with a piece of chalk and a -blackboard,—and held it in close attention. Without -perceptible effort, and without a word or an attitude -that was otherwise than womanly and graceful, she -taught the teachers, men and women alike. I do not -see how it is possible that the alleged supremacy of -man can long withstand such influences.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It seems very appropriate to read from town after -town, in reference to the late school elections, “The -first lady to deposit her ballot was Miss ——, a teacher -in the high school.” Who else should be first? I do -not think that men generally comprehend how absurd -it is to an experienced teacher, who has for years been -putting into the brains of dull boys all the activity they -possess, to see those boys grow up to be men and voters, -and decide what to do with the money she pays in -taxes, while she is set aside as “only a woman.” -Her pupils cannot make a speech in town-meeting, -they cannot present a report on any subject, they cannot -<span class='pageno' id='Page_212'>212</span>show any capacity of leadership, without exhibiting -the influence she has had over them. Yet they are now -as entirely beyond her direct reach as if she were a hen -who had hatched ducklings, and had lived to see them -swimming away. But the teachers are worse off than -the hens; because they have actually taught their ducklings -to swim, and could swim themselves if permitted. -After all, Horace Mann builded better than he knew. -Every step in the training of women as teachers implies -a farther step.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_213'>213</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LVI.<br /> <span class='large'>“CUPID-AND-PSYCHOLOGY.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>The learned Master of Trinity College, Cambridge, -England, is frequently facetious; and his jokes are -quoted with the deference due to the chief officer of -the chief college of that great university. Now, it is -known that the Cambridge colleges, and Trinity College -in particular, are doing a great deal for the instruction -of women. The young women of Girton -College and Newnham College,—both of these being -institutions for women, in or near Cambridge,—not -only enjoy the instruction of the university, but they -share it under a guaranty that it shall be of the best -quality; because they attend, in many cases, the very -same lectures with the young men. Where this is not -done, they sometimes use the vacant lecture-rooms of -the college; and it was in connection with an application -for this privilege that the Master of Trinity College -made his last joke,—the last, at any rate, that has -crossed the Atlantic. When told that the lecture-room -was needed for a class of young women in psychology, -he said, “Psychology? What kind of psychology? -Cupid-and-Psychology, I suppose.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Cupid-and-Psychology is, after all, not so bad a -department of instruction. It may be taken as a good -enough symbol of that mingling of head and heart -<span class='pageno' id='Page_214'>214</span>which is the best result of all training. One of the -worst evils of the separate education of the sexes has -been the easy assumption that men were to be made all -head, and women all heart. It was to correct the evils -of this, that Ben Jonson proposed for his ideal woman</p> - -<div class='lg-container-b c016'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>“a learned and a manly soul.”</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c017'>It was an implied recognition of it from the other side -when the great masculine intellect, Goethe, held up as -a guiding force in his Faust “the eternal womanly” -(<i><span lang="de" xml:lang="de">das ewige weibliche</span></i>). After all, each sex must teach -the other, and impart to the other. It will never do to -have all the brains poured into one human being, and -christened “man;” and all the affections decanted -into another, and labelled “woman.” Nature herself -rejects this theory. Darwin himself, the interpreter of -nature, shows that there is a perpetual effort going on, -by unseen forces, to equalize the sexes, since sons -often inherit from the mother, and daughters from the -father. And we all take pleasure in discovering in -the noblest of each sex something of the qualities of -the other,—the tender affections in great men, the imperial -intellect in great women.</p> - -<p class='c014'>On the whole, there is no harm, but rather good, in -the new science of Cupid-and-Psychology. There are -combinations for which no single word can suffice. The -phrase belongs to the same class with Lowell’s witty -denunciation of a certain tiresome letter-writer, as -being, not his incubus, but his “pen-and-inkubus.” It -is as well to admit it first as last: Cupid-and-Psychology -will be taught wherever young men and women study -together. Not in the direct and simple form of mutual -<span class='pageno' id='Page_215'>215</span>love-making, perhaps; for they tell the visitor, at universities -which admit both sexes, that the young men -and maidens do not fall in love with each other, but -are apt to seek their mates elsewhere. The new science -has a wider bearing, and suggests that the brain is incomplete, -after all, without the affections; and so are -the affections without the brain. The very professorship -at Harvard University which Rev. Dr. Peabody is -just leaving, and which Rev. Phillips Brooks has been -invited to fill, was founded by a woman, Miss Plummer; -and the name proposed by her for it was “a professorship -of the heart,” though they after all called it -only a professorship of “Christian morals.” We need -the heart in our colleges, it seems, even if we only get -it under the ingenious title of Cupid-and-Psychology.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_216'>216</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LVII.<br /> <span class='large'>MEDICAL SCIENCE FOR WOMEN.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>In reading, the other day, a speech on the Medical -Education of Women, it struck me that the most important -reason for this education was one which the -speaker had not mentioned,—the fact that the medical -profession stands for science; and that women peculiarly -need science, since their natural bent is supposed to be -a little the other way. The other professions represent -tradition very generally: the lawyer must be bound by -precedents; the clergyman generally admits that he -must go back to his texts. But the physician claims, -at least, to be a man of science, and stands for that -before the world. Hence the sacredness with which -his position has always been surrounded. The Florida -Indians, according to the early voyagers, not only took -the physician’s medicine, but they took the physician -himself internally, after his death. All other men were -buried; but the body of the physician was burned, and -his ashes mixed with water, by way of a permanent -prescription.</p> - -<p class='c014'>At any rate, the physician himself popularly stands -for science; and, in this point of view, his position is -very noble. I have known physicians whose professed -materialism was more elevated than most of what the -world calls religion. To trace that wondrous power -<span class='pageno' id='Page_217'>217</span>called life, which takes these particles of matter, and -makes them think with thought, or glow with passion, -or put forth an activity so intense as to be the parent -of new life from generation to generation,—this study -is something sublime. He who reverently ponders on -this may call himself theist or atheist, he is yet worthy -to be revered: if he can teach us, he blesses us. “I -touch heaven,” said Novalis, “when I lay my hand on -a human body;” and the popularity among physicians -of that fine engraving of Vesalius standing ready for -his first dissection, shows that they take a higher view -of their vocation than the world sometimes admits.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It seems to me peculiarly important that women -should have a share in these studies. They often have -time enough. It takes more time for a woman to make -herself charming than to make herself learned, Sydney -Smith says; and he thinks it a pity that she should -often hang up her brains on the wall in poor pictures, -or waft them into the air in poor music, when they -might be better employed. Yet a great physician, Dr. -Currie, says in his letters that he always preferred to -have an ignorant patient bring his wife with him, because -he could always get more careful observation and -quicker suggestions from the woman. This point lies -directly in the line of medical education.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The study lies also directly in their path as prospective -wives and mothers, and this alone would furnish a -sufficient reason for it. A woman of superior gifts, -who had studied medicine, but never adopted it as a -profession, told me that the mere domestic use of her -knowledge had more than repaid her for all the trouble -it had cost. For a man who should thus abandon the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_218'>218</span>pursuit, it would be of comparatively little service, apart -from the general training; but for a woman, if she fulfills -the commoner duties of a woman’s life, this early -knowledge will always be a source of direct strength. -This applies in a degree to surgery also; and I have -always wondered, in view of the old proverb that a -surgeon should have “a lion’s heart and a lady’s -hand,” why our professors do not oftener aim at developing -this heart, if need be, in those who have the -hand without training.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_219'>219</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LVIII.<br /> <span class='large'>SEWING IN SCHOOLS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>Mr. N. T. Allen, of West Newton, Mass., who has -had much experience and success as a teacher of both -sexes, has been visiting the German public schools. -He has lately given an interesting report of his observations -to the Middlesex County Teachers’ Association. -The reporter says (the Italics being my own),—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“Mr. Allen paid particular attention to the Dorf Schule of -the cities, and the Bürger Schule of the country, both being of -the lower grades; and contended that the educational system -of Germany was far from being perfect, and was inferior in -certain respects to that adopted in some of our own States, -and carried into successful operation in several towns and -communities. It was compulsory and autocratic, in that parents -were not allowed any choice in the education of their -children; <em>it was unjust toward girls, in establishing and perpetuating -the idea of their great mental inferiority to the boys</em>; it -was undemocratic, in having different schools for different -castes and classes of society; and it was extremely sectarian -and bigoted in the religious dogmatic instruction prescribed -and forced upon all.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is well known that in the German schools a certain -number of hours are given by the girls to sewing, and -that their course of study, as compared with that of the -boys, is narrowed to make room for this. It is for this -reason that I, for one, dread to see sewing brought into -<span class='pageno' id='Page_220'>220</span>our public schools. So strong is still the disposition in -many minds to put off girls with less schooling than -boys, that it seems unsafe to provide so good an excuse -for this inequality.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The whole theory of industrial schools is liable to a -similar danger,—that of introducing class distinctions -into our education. It tends toward that other evil of -the German system, described by Mr. Allen, “having -different schools for different castes in society.” I -hold to the old theory of providing all boys and girls, -whatever their parentage or probable pursuit, with a -good basis of common-school education, and then trusting -the intellectual faculties, thus sharpened, to help -them in the struggle for life. Just as it was found in -the army that a well-educated young man who had -never handled a musket soon overtook and passed a -comrade of inferior brains who had been in the militia -from boyhood, so is it found to be with those whose -minds have been well taught in our public schools. But -whether this criticism holds, or not, against industrial -schools, as such, it certainly holds when we further -make an industrial discrimination against all girls. -This we do, if we take an hour of their time for sewing, -when the boys give that hour to study.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But it will be said, Ought not girls to be taught to -sew? Undoubtedly. All boys ought to be taught the -use of hammer and plane and screw-driver, and, for -that matter, plain sewing also. Girls need sewing -no doubt; and they should be taught it at home, or -at school, or wherever they can find a teacher. But, -for all this, to assign to sewing any thing like the -same relative importance that belonged to it a hundred -<span class='pageno' id='Page_221'>221</span>years ago, or even twenty years ago, is to overlook the -changed conditions of modern society. Let us consider -this a moment.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The Old-World theory was that all imaginable hard -work was to be done by human hands. But the New-World -theory is—for it is a New World wherever the -theory is recognized—that all this work should be -done, as far as possible, by human brains. Napoleon -defined it as his ultimate intention for the French -people, “to convert all trades into arts,” the head -doing the work of the hands. This applies to woman’s -work as much as any other. The epoch of private -spinning and weaving was an epoch of barbarism; the -vast mills of Lowell and Fall River now do that toil. -The sewing-machine does a day’s work in an hour. -But all this machinery came out of somebody’s brain, -and is adapted to a race of women with brains. The -treasurer of half a dozen manufacturing corporations -told me last week, that, though the mills were filled -with French and Irish, the superiority of American -“help” was just as manifest as ever, and the manufacturers -would gladly keep them if they could: they -could almost always tend more looms, for instance. -Those who have tried to teach the use of the sewing-machine -to the Southern negroes or poor whites know -how hard it is. A sewing-machine is a step in civilization: -its presence in a house, like that of a piano, -proves a certain stage of advancement. Its course -runs parallel with that of the common-school; and an -agent for this machine, like those who sell improved -agricultural implements, would instinctively avoid those -regions where there are no schoolhouses.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_222'>222</span>I do not undervalue the use of the hands, or the -need of physical training for both boys and girls. But, -after all, the hands must be kept subordinate to the -head. If industrial training is to be the first thing, -then every Irish parent who takes his ten-year-old girl -from school, and sends her to the factory, is in the -path of virtue. If, on the other hand, it be found that -some time can be advantageously taken from books, -and given to some handiwork, without loss of intellectual -progress, that is a different thing. That is only -an intellectual eight-hour bill or five-hour bill; and, for -one, I should gladly favor that. But let it be done as -securing the best education for all; not as a class-education, -or as merely utilitarian: and let it be done -as rigidly for boys as for girls. Let us not set out with -the theory that a boy may avail himself of all the divisions -of labor in modern society, but that every girl -must still spin her own cloth, and sew her own seam.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_223'>223</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LIX.<br /> <span class='large'>CASH PREMIUMS FOR STUDY.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>On looking over the Harvard College catalogue, I -am struck with the great pecuniary inducements which -are held out to tempt young gentlemen to study. -There are, to begin with, one hundred and seventeen -“scholarships;” yielding incomes ranging from $40 to -$350 annually, but averaging $225. The total income -of these is $19,635. Then there are “loan” and -“beneficiary” funds, amounting to $4,700 annually, -and given or lent in sums from $25 to $75. Then -there are “monitorships,” yielding $700 per annum; -and various money prizes, amounting to some $1,200. -The whole amount that is or may be paid in cash to -undergraduates every year is more than $25,000, which -may perhaps reach a hundred and fifty young men. -No wonder that the catalogue asserts that “The experience -of the past warrants the statement that good -scholars of high character, but slender means, are seldom -or never obliged to leave college for want of -money.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Probably one-sixth of the eight hundred undergraduates -of Harvard College receive direct pecuniary aid in -studying there; and, as scholarship is an essential in -securing most of this pecuniary aid, it is probable that -half the high scholars in every class are thus directly -<span class='pageno' id='Page_224'>224</span>helped. Observe that this is in addition to the general -value of the college endowments to all students, over -and above what they pay for tuition,—an amount lately -estimated by the academical authorities at one thousand -dollars, at least, for every graduate. Apart from all -this, I was told many years ago, by that very acute observer, -the late President James Walker of Harvard -University, that in his opinion one-quarter of the undergraduates -were maintained in college through the -personal self-denial and sacrifices of mothers and sisters.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But what a tremendous protective tariff, what an irresistible -“discriminating duty,” is this! While boys -are thus bribed largely, year by year, to come to Cambridge, -and study,—so that the influence of all this -promise of pecuniary aid is felt through every academy -and high school in the land,—we find, on the other -hand, that every girl who wishes to pursue similar -studies is expected to pay at the full market rates for -all she gets, and even then cannot enter Harvard College. -In some of our normal schools her board may -be paid, I believe, on condition that she becomes a -teacher; but I know of no place where she herself is -paid, as young men are paid, merely to come and -study. Ex-Gov. Bullock founded one scholarship at -Amherst, of which the income is to be given by preference -to a woman—when a woman is admitted! -But unfortunately that time has not come. And yet -those who sit by the banks of this golden stream, and -monopolize all its benefits, have a tone of sublime contempt -for those who are not permitted to approach it, -and never can quite forgive the impecunious condition -<span class='pageno' id='Page_225'>225</span>of these outcasts! “Your scholarship is not to be -compared to ours,” they say to women. “Certainly -not,” the women may fairly reply: “we were never -paid salaries that we might become scholars.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>The thing that perpetually neutralizes all claims of -chivalry, all professions of justice, all talk of fairness, -as between the sexes, is this class of facts. Woman is -systematically excluded from training, and then told -she must not compete; if admitted to compete, she is -so weighted by artificial disadvantages, that it is hard -for her to win. If her brain is inferior, she should be -helped; if her natural obstacles are greater, all other -hinderances should be the more generously swept away. -Give girls a chance at a high school, they use it, and -they there equal boys in scholarship; in our academies, -in our normal schools, there is no deficiency on their -part. Even in our colleges they ask, as yet, only admittance, -not cash premiums. Only admit them, and -see if they do not hold their own unpaid, with the young -men to whom you pay, collectively, twenty-five thousand -dollars a year to stay there. Only a seat in a recitation-room, -to be paid for at the full price,—is this so -very much for a young girl to ask? Do be at least as -generous as that school committee in a Massachusetts -town which shall be nameless, who said seriously in -their report, speaking of a certain appointment, “As -this place offers neither honor nor profit, we do not see -why it should not be filled by a woman”!</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_226'>226</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LX.<br /> <span class='large'>MENTAL HORTICULTURE.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>There was once a public meeting held, at the request -of some excellent ladies, to consider the question -whether it might be possible for roses and lilies to -grow together in the same garden. Many of the -ladies were quite used to gardening, and had opinions -of their own; but, as it was not proper for them to -open their lips before people, they of course could not -testify. So several respectable gentlemen—clergymen -and professors—were invited to tell them all -about it. Some of these gentlemen had seen a rose, -and some had seen a lily, but it turned out that very -few of them had ever happened to see a garden. Still, -as they were learned men, they could give very valuable -suggestions. One of them explained, that, as roses -and lilies assimilated very different juices from the soil, -they could not possibly grow in the same soil. Another -pointed out, that, as they needed different proportions -of sun and of air, they should have very different -exposures, and therefore must be kept apart. -Another, more daring, suggested, that, as God had put -the two species into the same world, it was quite possible -that they might grow in the same enclosure for a -time, perhaps for about fourteen years, but that, if -they were left longer together, they would certainly -<span class='pageno' id='Page_227'>227</span>blight and destroy each other. All this seemed very -conclusive; and the meeting was about to vote that -roses and lilies should never be allowed to exist in the -same garden, unless with a brick wall twenty feet high -between.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But it so happened that a sensible gardener from a -distant State was present, and got up to say a word -before the debate closed. “Bless your souls, my good -people, what are you talking about?” said he. “Roses -and lilies are already growing together by the thousand, -all over the country, and you may as well close your -discussion.” Upon which the meeting broke up in -some confusion: the brick wall was never built; but -the clergyman went back to his study, the professor to -his lecture-room, the physician to his patients, and all -remained in the conviction that the gardener was a good -sort of man, but strangely ignorant of scientific horticulture.</p> - -<p class='c014'>“Which things are an allegory.” The writer has -been reading the report, in the Boston Daily Advertiser, -of a recent debate on female education.</p> - -<p class='c014'>I suppose that those born and bred in New England -can never quite abandon the feeling that this region -should still lead the nation, as it once led, in all educational -matters. For one, I cannot help a slight sense -of mortification, when, in an assemblage of Boston professors, -undertaking to discuss a simple practical matter, -everybody begins in the clouds, ignoring the facts -before everybody’s eyes, and discussing as a question -of theory only, what has long since become a matter -of common practice. The mortification is not diminished -when the common-sense has to be at last imported -<span class='pageno' id='Page_228'>228</span>from beyond the borders of New England, in -the shape of a college president from Central New -York. To him alone it seems to have occurred to remind -these dwellers in the clouds that what they persisted -in treating as theory had been a matter of daily -experience in half the large towns in New England for -the last quarter of a century.</p> - -<p class='c014'>What is the question at issue? Simply this: New -England is full of normal schools, high schools, and -endowed academies. In the majority of these, pupils -of both sexes, from fourteen to twenty-five or thereabouts, -study together and recite together, living either -at home or in boarding-houses, or in academic dormitories, -as the case may be. This has gone on for -many years, without cavil or scandal. As a general -rule, teachers have testified that they prefer to teach -these mixed schools; at any rate, the fact is certain, -that the sexes, once united in schools of this grade, -are very seldom separated again; while we often hear -of the separate schools as being abandoned, and the -sexes brought together. Certainly the experiment of -joint education has been very extensively tried in all -parts of New England; indeed, for schools of this kind, -in most regions, the association of the sexes is the rule, -their separation the exception. Now, the only remaining -question is: This being the case, will it make any -essential difference if you widen the course of instruction -a little, and call the institution a college?</p> - -<p class='c014'>This is really the only problem left to be solved; and -yet on this question, thus limited, not a speaker at the -above—except President White of Cornell University—had -apparently a word to say. Every other speaker -<span class='pageno' id='Page_229'>229</span>appeared to approach the general theme in as profound -and blissful an ignorance as if he had lived all his life in -Turkey or in France, or in some other country where -no young man had ever recited algebra in the same -room with a young woman since the world began.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_231'>231</span> - <h2 class='c008'>EMPLOYMENT.</h2> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>“The non-combatant population is sure to fare ill during -the ages of combat. But these defects, too, are cured or -lessened; women have now marvellous ways of winning their -way in the world; and mind without muscle has far greater -force than muscle without mind.”—<span class='sc'>Bagehot’s</span> <cite>Physics and -Politics</cite>, c. ii., § 3.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_233'>233</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXI.<br /> <span class='large'>“SEXUAL DIFFERENCE OF EMPLOYMENT.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>I am at a loss to understand an assertion made by -Rev. Dr. Hedge, at an educational meeting in Boston, -that “the course of civilization hitherto has tended to -develop and confirm sexual difference of employment.” -He adds, according to the report in the Daily Advertiser, -that, “the more civilized the country, the more the -vocations of men and women divide: the more savage -the nation, the more they blend and coincide.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>With due respect for Dr. Hedge on many grounds, -and especially as having been the first man to demand -publicly in presence of the Harvard alumni the admission -of women to the university, I must yet express -great surprise at his taking what seems to me so utterly -untenable a position. To me it seems, on the contrary, -that it is the savage period which is remarkable for the -industrial separation of the sexes; and that every -epoch of advancing civilization—as the present—blends -them more and more. The fact would have -seemed to me so plain as hardly to need more than -simply to state it, but for the authority of Dr. Hedge -upon the other side.</p> - -<p class='c014'>As we trace society back to savage life, what are the -prevailing employments of the male sex? More and -more exclusively, war and the chase. From these two -<span class='pageno' id='Page_234'>234</span>vocations, monopolizing literally the whole active life -of the savage man, the savage woman is almost absolutely -excluded. Precisely at the point where the man’s -sphere leaves off, in each of these pursuits, the woman’s -sphere begins. Among American Indians, the man -takes the captive, the woman tortures him. The man -kills the deer, carries it till within sight of his own village, -and then throws it down, that the squaw may go -out and drag it in. Much that seems cruel and selfish -in Indian life is the result, as Mrs. Jameson long since -pointed out, of this complete separation of functions. -The reason why the Indian woman carries the lodgepoles -and the provisions on the march is that the man’s -limbs may be left free and agile for the far severer labors -of war and of the chase, from which she is excluded. -The reason why she finally brings the deer to the camp -is because he has had the more exhausting labor of -hunting and killing it.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Contrast now this absolute “sexual difference of -employment” with the greater and greater blending of -civilized society,—a blending, observe, which proceeds -from both sides, and not from woman only. It is hard -to say which is more remarkable, within the last half-century,—the -way in which women have encroached -on men’s work, or the way in which men have encroached -on women’s.</p> - -<p class='c014'>In many mechanical and commercial pursuits,—as -printing and bookkeeping,—once almost monopolized -by men, you now find a very large number of women. -In some pursuits, as in education, the women have -come to outnumber the men enormously, at least in -America; in others, as telegraphy, they seem likely to -<span class='pageno' id='Page_235'>235</span>do the same. We constantly hear of new channels -opening. A friend of mine, the other day, just before -addressing an audience on woman suffrage, stepped -into a barber’s shop, and to his great amazement was -shaved by a woman. On inquiry, he learned for the -first time, that a good many of that sex, mostly Germans, -pursued this occupation in New York and elsewhere. -Thus do the vocations of men and women now -“blend and coincide.” On the other hand, the leading -dressmaker of the world is a man; our bonnetshops -are largely conducted by men; the eminent hotel -cooks, whose salaries exceed any paid by Harvard -University, are men; and the lady who goes to rest in -a sleeping-car on our railroads has her pillow smoothed -and her curtains drawn, not by a chambermaid, but by -a chamberman.</p> - -<p class='c014'>These are the facts which seem to me, I must say, -quite fatal to Dr. Hedge’s theory. And there is one -thing worth noticing in the very different criticisms -passed on men and on women as to these invasions of -each other’s province. If you call attention to the way -in which men are everywhere taking part in women’s -work, people say approvingly, “To be sure! greater -energy, greater skill! they do even women’s work -better than women themselves can.” But if you point -out, that, on the other hand, women are also doing -men’s work, and in some cases—as in literature and -lecturing—are actually obtaining higher prices than -most men can obtain, the same people shake their -heads disapprovingly, and say, “Unsexed; out of -their sphere!” Now, if we lived in an age of chivalrous -protection of women, it would be a different thing; -<span class='pageno' id='Page_236'>236</span>but, as we live in an age of political economy, there is -no reason why men alone should have the benefit of its -laws. If practical life is to be regarded as a game of -puss-in-the-corner, I should recommend to each ejected -puss to make for the best corner she finds open, without -much deference to the theories of the sages.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_237'>237</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXII.<br /> <span class='large'>THE USE OF ONE’S FEET.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>Is it better to stand on one’s own feet, or to depend -on those of other people? We need clear views on that -matter, certainly; and there is not much doubt which -theory will ultimately prevail.</p> - -<p class='c014'>For one, I believe the whole theory of a leisure-class, -whether for man or woman, to be a snare and a delusion. -It seems to me that there is one great drawback -that a young American may encounter,—namely, the -possession of an independent property; and that there -is one great piece of good fortune,—to be thrown on -one’s self for support. Of all influences for development -or usefulness, I know of none so great as “the -wholesome stimulus of pecuniary necessity.” Of all -forms of social organization, that seems to me the most -favorable which opens to all most freely the opportunity -of early education, and then calls upon each to exert -himself for his own support.</p> - -<p class='c014'>To be sure, it is hardly possible to overrate the value -of cultivated companionship and refined association. -In other countries it may be worth while, for the sake -of these, to be born to wealth: it is so hard to get them -without wealth. But the happiest and best American -households are apt to be found among such as Miss -Alcott, for instance, habitually describes, where there is -<span class='pageno' id='Page_238'>238</span>plenty of refinement and very little money; where perhaps -there has been wealth in times past, but it has -been lost just in time for the good of the children. All -that money can bring—all books, all travel, all art—are -not worth so much as the power to stand on one’s -own feet. It is an essential to the character, and it is -certainly the greatest of delights. To have earned, for -a single year, one’s own support, gives one, in a manner, -the freedom of the universe. Till that is done, we -are children: after that we are mature human beings.</p> - -<p class='c014'>In England, where the whole social atmosphere is so -different, there are many instances of much service -done to art and philanthropy by persons born to leisure. -And yet, even in England, if the admissions of English -people may be trusted, these instances are bought by a -frightful disproportion of wasted lives; and the best -work is, after all, done by those who have learned to -stand on their own feet. This last fact is certainly true -of France, Germany, and America. So far as my own -observation goes, for one American born to leisure who -makes a good use of it, there are a dozen who lead empty -or vicious lives. And even that exceptional one, with -all his advantages, is often distanced in the race by the -men who have early had to stand on their own feet. -The man of leisure is usually so limited, either by the -absence of stimulus or by the tiresome narrowness of -a petty circle, or by missing the wholesome attrition of -other minds, that he dwindles and grows feeble. If -such a man attains by the aid of wealth what the man -of the next inferior grade attains without it, we are all -glad, and say it is “an honorable instance.” Not that -the rich are worse than other men. It is no calamity -<span class='pageno' id='Page_239'>239</span>to earn wealth, or even to inherit it after we have -learned the lesson of self-reliance. It is the children -of wealth who are to be pitied.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Now, all women who are born outside of actual poverty -in America are as badly off as if they had been -born to wealth. They are systematically discouraged -from the delightful tonic of self-support. But when -it is said that they never even feel the desire to support -themselves, I must dissent. For twenty years I have -been encountering young women who so longed for the -sense of an independent position that even the happiest -paternal home could not satisfy them unless it gave -them so much to do that they might honestly feel that -they earned their living. Otherwise the most luxurious -arm-chairs in their own houses would not satisfy them, -they so longed to learn the use of their own feet. I -have known girls to rejoice in their father’s loss of -property, because it would release them to enjoy the -happiness of self-reliance; and, for one, had I the good -fortune to have a dozen daughters, I should wish them -all to be of this way of thinking. Any other theory -would give us a world of mere amateurs and dilettantes, -and very little work would be done. We are getting -over the theory that it is undignified for a man to stand -upon his own feet; and we shall one day get over it in -regard to women.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_240'>240</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXIII.<br /> <span class='large'>MISS INGELOW’S PROBLEM.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>In a certain New England town I lived opposite the -house of a thriving mechanic. His wife, a young and -pretty woman, soon attracted the attention of my household -by the grace and vivacity of her bearing, and the -peculiar tastefulness of her own and her little boy’s -costume. On further acquaintance, we found that she -did every atom of her housework, washing and all; -that she cut and made every garment for herself and -her child; and that, finding her energies still unsatisfied, -she took in sewing-work from a tailor’s shop, and thus -earned most of the money for their wardrobe. It may -be well to add, to complete this story of New England -social life, that her husband was one of the very earliest -volunteers for the war of the Rebellion; that he went in -captain, came out brigadier-general, and now holds an -important government office.</p> - -<p class='c014'>There is nothing isolated or unexampled about this -instance. My pretty and ladylike neighbor was only -energetic, ready, capable, and ambitious, or, to sum -it all up in the New England vernacular, “smart.” -Whatever she saw in society or life that was desirable -for herself or her husband or her child, that she aimed -at, and generally obtained.</p> - -<p class='c014'>She “hadn’t a lazy bone in her body;” and she -<span class='pageno' id='Page_241'>241</span>never will have, though she may wear that body out -prematurely by nervous tension. Wherever she goes, -she will carry the same restless, tireless energy; and, -should her husband ever go to Congress or to the Court -of St. James, she will carry herself with perfect fearlessness -and ease. And in all this she represents one -great type of New England women.</p> - -<p class='c014'>When you ask of such a woman if she shrinks from -work, it is as if you asked, Does a deer shrink from -running, or a swallow from flying? She loves the work: -indeed she loves it, in my opinion, far too much, and -sets a dangerous example. All theories of the natural -indolence of man—or woman—fall defeated before -the New England temperament, traditions, training, climate; -before that “whip of the sky,” as a poet has -sung, that urges us on. If, therefore, “household -work is thought degrading,”—and Miss Ingelow asserts -too hastily that “nowhere is this so much the case as -in America,”—it certainly is not merely because it is -work.</p> - -<p class='c014'>For myself, I doubt the fact, and demand the evidence. -So far as the free States of the Union are concerned, -it seems to me that household labor is thought -less degrading than in England, and that the proportion -of well-taught and ladylike women who contentedly do -their own work is far greater in America, and keeps -pace with the greater spread of average education. -There is not a city in the land, I suppose,—certainly -not a village,—where the housework in a large majority -of the American-born families is not done by Americans; -for the large majority are always mechanics and -laborers, among whom, as a rule, the work is done by -<span class='pageno' id='Page_242'>242</span>the wives and sisters and daughters. The wages of -domestics are so much higher in America than in England,—being -almost double,—that it is here a more -serious expenditure to employ such aid.</p> - -<p class='c014'>I think, therefore, that we must be very cautious -before we say that housework, as such, is held degrading -in the free States. No doubt, American women -feel, as their husbands and brothers feel, that all -work should be done by machinery, as far as possible, -and that the washing-machine and the carpet-sweeper -are as legitimate as the patent reaper or -mower. They would be foolish if they did not. They -also feel, as American men feel, that, in this great assemblage -of all nations, the place for the American is -rather in posts of command than in the ranks. In our -ships you find men of all nations in the forecastle, but -Americans in the cabin. In the regular army it is the -officers, commissioned or non-commissioned, who are -Americans. Go as far west as you please, you are -surprised to find that the railway officials, superintendents, -conductors, baggage-masters, are not merely -American-born but often New-England-born. The -better average education tells. It is in the fitness of -things that the under-work of household life also should -be done by the under-class of foreign elements, and -that it should be Americans who do the direction and -guidance. Some such instinct as this is the explanation -of much that Miss Ingelow takes for a contempt of -household labor. An American woman does not despise -such labor, properly speaking, any more than an -American man despises mechanical labor. Both aim, -if they can, to rise to occupations more lucrative and -more intellectual.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_243'>243</span>It is not the labor, it is not even the household -labor, to which objection is made. When you come to -household labor for other people, done in a capacity -recognized as menial,—ay, there’s the rub! There is a -widespread feeling that domestic service in other people’s -families is menial.</p> - -<p class='c014'>For one I have publicly remonstrated against the -excess of this feeling, and think it is carried too far. -Women will never compete equally with men, until they -are willing, like men, to do any honest work without -sense of degradation. This is one point where enfranchisement -will help them. So long as a man bears in -his hand the ballot, that symbol of substantial equality, -his self-respect is not easily impaired by the humblest -position. “A man’s a man for a’ that,” he knows, -before the law. But a woman, not having this, has -only the usages of society to guide her; and, so long -as society talks about “master” and “servant,” I do -not blame the American girl for refusing to accept such -a position,—just as I do not blame, but applaud, the -American man for refusing to wear livery. I only -condemn them, in either case, when the alternative is -starvation or sin. Then pride should yield.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But this is the conclusive proof that it is not the -housework which is held degrading: the fact that there -is no difficulty in securing any number of American girls -in our large country hotels, where they associate with -their employers as equals, and call no man master. The -fact that the proprietors of such hotels invariably prefer -American “help” to Irish, shows that the philosophy -of the whole question lies in a different direction from -that indicated by our good friend Miss Ingelow. The -<span class='pageno' id='Page_244'>244</span>evil of which she speaks does not properly exist: the -real difficulty lies in a different direction, and cannot be -settled till we see farther into the social organization -that is to come.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_245'>245</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXIV.<br /> <span class='large'>SELF-SUPPORT.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>It is the English theory, that society needs a leisure -class, not self-supporting, from whom public services -and works of science and art may proceed. Even Darwin -recognizes this theory. But how little is England -doing for science and art, compared to Germany! and -the German work of that kind is not done by a leisure -class, but by poor men. I believe that the necessity -of self-support, at least in the earlier years of life, -is the best training for manhood; and it does not seem -desirable that women should be wholly set free from it.</p> - -<p class='c014'>A clever writer, on the other hand, maintains in the -New York Independent that women should never support -themselves if it be possible honorably to avoid it. -“Pecuniary dependence, degrading to men, is not only -not undignified, but is the only thoroughly dignified -condition, for women. In a renovated and millennial -society all women will be supported by men,—will have -no more to do with bringing in money than the lilies of -the field.” This statement is delightfully uncompromising, -and it is a great thing to hear an extreme position -so clearly and unequivocally put. Especially on a -question so difficult as the labor and wages of women, -it is particularly desirable to have each extreme worked -out to its logical results.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_246'>246</span>It is certainly the normal condition of woman to be -a wife and a mother. It is equally certain that this -condition withdraws woman from the labor-market, -during the prime of her life. The very years during -which a man attains his highest skill, and earns his -highest wages,—say, from twenty-five to forty,—are -lost to woman, in this normal condition, so far as earning -money is concerned. This is the main fact, as I -judge, which keeps down the standard of both work -and pay among women, as a class. If men, as a class, -were thus heavily weighted, the result would be as -clearly seen. Where one sex brings into the market -the full vigor of its life, and the other has only crude -labor, or occasional labor, or broken labor, to offer, -the result cannot be doubtful. Yet this is precisely the -state of the competition between man and woman.</p> - -<p class='c014'>I believe, therefore, with this writer, that woman -was not intended to be the equal competitor of man in -business pursuits—or, indeed, to be self-supporting at -all—during her career of motherhood. It is generally -recognized as a calamity, when she is obliged to support -herself at that time. Most people believe with -Miss Mitford that “women were not meant to earn the -bread of a family,” and that men are. But to earn -the bread of a family is not self-support: it is much -more than self-support. And when this writer takes a -step beyond, and says, “I think the necessity of earning -her own living is always a woman’s misfortune,” -then she seems to theorize beyond good sense, and to -confuse things very different. Self-support is one -thing: supporting seven small children is quite another -thing.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_247'>247</span>That which should never be left out of sight is the -essential dignity of labor. Woman during the period -of maternity is rightly excused from earning money; -but it is because she is better occupied. She is not -exempted in the character of lily of the field, but in -the capacity of mother of a family. It is an important -distinction. For labor in the lower sense, she substitutes -what, in a higher and more sacred sense, we still -call “labor.” She is not supported because she is a -woman, but because, in her capacity as woman, she -happens to have home-duties. If she had no such -duties, there seems no reason why she should be supported -any more than if she were a man. To be a -wife and mother is a vocation, and one which usually -for a time precludes all others. Merely to be a -woman is not a vocation; and, so long as one can -make no better claim on the world than that, the world -has a right to demand something more. The Irishwoman -who locks her little children into her one room, -that she may go out to earn their bread, seems to me -in a position no falser than that of the over-worked -father who breaks himself down with toil that his -daughters may live like the lilies of the field.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_248'>248</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXV.<br /> <span class='large'>SELF-SUPPORTING WIVES.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>For one, I have never been fascinated by the style -of domestic paradise that English novels depict,—half -a dozen unmarried daughters round the family hearth, -all assiduously doing worsted-work and petting their -papa. I believe a sufficiency of employment to be the -only normal and healthy condition for a human being; -and where there is not work enough to employ the full -energies of all, at home, it seems as proper for young -women as for young birds to leave the parental nest. -If this additional work is done for money, very well. -It is the conscious dignity of self-support that removes -the traditional curse from labor, and woman has a -right to claim her share in that dignified position.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Yet I cannot agree, on the other hand, with Celia -Burleigh when she says that her “True Woman” -should be self-supporting, even in marriage. Women’s -part of the family task—the care of home and -children—is just as essential to building up the family -fortunes as the very different toil of the out-door partner. -For young married women to undertake any more -direct aid to the family income is in most cases utterly -undesirable, and is asking of themselves a great deal -too much. And this is not because they are to be encouraged -in indolence, but because they already, in a -<span class='pageno' id='Page_249'>249</span>normal condition of things, have their hands full. As, -on this point, I may differ from some of my readers, -let me explain precisely what I mean.</p> - -<p class='c014'>As I write, there are at work, in another part of the -house, two paper-hangers, a man and his wife, each -forty-five or fifty years of age. Their children are -grown up, and some of them married: they have a -daughter at home, who is old enough to do the housework, -and leave the mother free. There is no way of -organizing the labors of this household better than this: -the married pair toil together during the day, and go -home together to their evening rest. A happier couple I -never saw; it is a delight to see them cheerily at work -together, cutting, pasting, hanging: their life seems like -a prolonged industrial picnic; and, if I had the ill-luck -to own as many palaces as an English duke, I should -keep them permanently occupied in putting fresh papers -on the walls.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But the merit of this employment for the woman is, -that it interferes with no other duty. Were she a -young mother with little children, and obliged by her -paper-hanging to neglect them, or to leave them at a -“day-nursery,” or to overwork herself by combining -too many cares, then the sight of her would be very sad. -So sacred a thing does motherhood seem to me, so paramount -and absorbing the duty of a mother to her -child, that in a true state of society I think she should -be utterly free from all other duties,—even, if possible, -from the ordinary cares of housekeeping. If she -has spare health and strength to do these other things -as pleasures, very well; but she should be relieved -from them as duties. And, as to the need of self-support, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_250'>250</span>I can hardly conceive of an instance where it -can be to the mother of young children any thing but -a disaster. As we all know, this calamity often occurs; -I have seen it among the factory-operatives at the North, -and among the negro-women in the cotton-fields at the -South: in both cases it is a tragedy, and the bodies -and brains of mother and children alike suffer. That -the mother should bear and tend and nurture, while -the father supports and protects,—this is the true -division.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Does this bear in any way upon suffrage? Not at -all. The mother can inform herself upon public questions -in the intervals of her cares, as the father among -his; and the baby in the cradle is a perpetual appeal to -her, as to him, that the institutions under which that -baby dwells may be kept pure. One of the most devoted -young mothers I ever knew—the younger sister -of Margaret Fuller Ossoli—made it a rule, no matter -how much her children absorbed her, to read books or -newspapers for an hour every day; in order, she said, -that their mother should be more than a mere source -of physical nurture, and that her mind should be kept -fresh and alive for them. But to demand in addition -that such a mother should earn money for them, is to -ask too much; and there is many a tombstone in New -England, which, if it told the truth, would tell what -comes of such an effort.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_251'>251</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXVI.<br /> <span class='large'>THE PROBLEM OF WAGES.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>Talking, the other day, with one of the leading -dressmakers of a New England town, I asked her why -it was, that, when women suffered so much from scanty -employments and low pay, there should yet be so few -good dressmakers. “You are all overrun and worn -out with work,” I said, “all the year round; every -lady in town complains that there are so few of you; -and it is the same in every town where I ever lived.” -She answered, as such witnesses always answer, “Women -do not engage in occupations, as men do, for a lifetime. -They expect only to continue in them for a year -or two, until they shall be married. I employ twelve -girls, and not one of them expects to be a dressmaker -for life. They work their ten hours a day, under my -direction, and that is all.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Here lies the point of difference between the work of -women and that of men, as a class: I mean, in their -industrial pursuits, the work that earns money. Until -we reach this point, or get a social philosophy that -explains this, we are yet upon the surface only. The -enfranchisement of woman will help us towards this, -but will not, of itself, solve the problem of wages; -because that depends on other than political considerations.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_252'>252</span>Why do the mass of men work? Not from taste, -or for love of the work, but from conscious need. If -they do not work, they and their families will starve. -It is a necessity, and a permanent necessity. It will -last all their lives, except in the case of a few who -will “come into their property” by and by, like Mr. -Toots—and their work is usually worth about as much -as his. We see this every day in the sons of rich -men. Their fathers may bring them up to work, yet -the mere fact that they are to be relieved from this -compulsion within a dozen years is apt to paralyze -their active faculties. They study law or medicine, or -dabble in “business;” but they only play at the practice -of their pursuits, because there is no conscious -necessity behind them. There are exceptions, but the -exceptions are remarkable men.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Now, theorize as we may, the fact at present is, that -what thus paralyzes the energies of a few young men -brings the same paralysis to many young women. -Those whose parents are wealthy do not learn any -regular occupation at all. Those whose parents are -poor are obliged by necessity to learn one: yet they do -not learn it as men in general learn theirs, but only as -rich young men do, as if it were something to be followed -for a time only,—till they “come into their -property.” To the rich young man the property is a -landed estate or some bank-stock. To the poor girl -the prospective property is a husband. She expects to -be married; and after that her money-making occupation -is gone, and a new avocation—that of housekeeping -and maternity—begins. It is no less arduous, no -less honorable; but it is different. In it her previous -<span class='pageno' id='Page_253'>253</span>special training goes for nothing; and the thought of -this must diminish her interest in the previous special -training. It is only a temporary thing, like the few -years’ labor of a rich young man. There are exceptions, -but they are extraordinary.</p> - -<p class='c014'>One reason why women’s work is not at present so -well paid as that of men is because it is not ordinarily -so well done, especially in the more difficult parts. -All employers, male and female, tell you this; and one -great reason why it is not so well done is because -women have not, as men have, a spring of permanent -necessity to urge them on. How shall we supply the -spring? This is the question we need to answer. As -yet I do not think we have reached it. It does not -seem to me to be, like the suffrage question, one easily -settled. The reader will find very important facts and -testimonies bearing upon it in Virginia Penny’s “Cyclopædia -of Female Employments.”<a id='r13' /><a href='#f13' class='c018'><sup>[13]</sup></a></p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f13'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r13'>13</a>. Especially on pp. 110, 146, 235, 238, 243, 245, 247, 300, 318, 322, 367, 380.</p> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>I confess myself unable, even after a good many -years of study, to solve it fully; but a few propositions, -I think, are sure, and may be taken as axioms to -begin with. The general wages of women will always -depend greatly on the amount of skill acquired by the -mass of them. The mass of women will always look -forward to being married, and, when married, to being -necessarily withdrawn from the labor-market. Those -who look forward to this withdrawal will not, as a rule, -concentrate themselves upon learning their vocation as -if it were for life; and, at any rate, when they leave it, -they will take their skill with them, and so lower the -average skill of the whole.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_254'>254</span>The problem, therefore, is, how to equalize wages -between a sex which works continually throughout life, -driven by conscious necessity, and a sex which habitually -works with temporary expectations, looking forward -to a withdrawal from the labor-market in a few -years, and which, when so withdrawn, carries its acquired -skill with it, leaving only inexperience in its -place. We all wish to solve the problem: every man -would like to have his daughters as well paid for their -labor as his sons. The ballot will help to elucidate it, -no doubt, by putting woman’s political protection, at -least, into her own hands: but wholly to solve the problem -will take the wisdom of several generations; nor -will it be done, perhaps, until the greater problem of -association <i><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">vs.</span></i> competition is also understood. It certainly -never will be solved by slighting the marriage-relation, -or by advocating either “free love” or celibacy -for women or for men.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_255'>255</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXVII.<br /> <span class='large'>THOROUGH.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>“The hopeless defect of women in all practical matters,” -said a shrewd merchant the other day, “is, that -it is impossible to make them thorough.” It was -a shallow remark, and so I told him. Women are -thorough in the things which they have accepted as -their sphere,—in their housekeeping and their dress -and their social observances. There is nothing more -thorough on earth than the way housework is done in a -genuine New England household. There is an exquisite -thoroughness in the way a milliner’s or a dressmaker’s -work is done,—a work such as clumsy man cannot rival, -and can hardly estimate. No general plans his campaigns -or marshals his armies better than some women -of society manage the circles of which they are the -centre. Day and night, winter and summer, at city or -watering-place, year in and year out, such a woman -keeps open house for her gay world. She has a perpetual -series of guests who must be fed luxuriously, and -amused profusely; she talks to them in four or five languages; -at her entertainments, she notes who is present -and who absent, as carefully as Napoleon watched his -soldiers; her interchange of cards, alone, is a thing as -complex as the army muster-rolls: thus she plans, organizes, -conquers, and governs. People speak of her -<span class='pageno' id='Page_256'>256</span>existence as that of a doll or a toy, when she is the -most untiring of campaigners. Grant that her aim is, -after all, unworthy, and that you pity the worn face -which has to force so many smiles. No matter: the -smiles are there, and so is the success. I often wish -that the reformers would do their work as thoroughly -as the women of society do theirs.</p> - -<p class='c014'>No, there is no constitutional want of thoroughness -in women. The trouble is, that into the new work upon -which they are just entering, they have not yet brought -their thoroughness to bear. They suffer and are defrauded -and are reproached, simply because they have -not yet nerved themselves to do well the things which -they have asserted their right to do. A distinguished -woman, who earns perhaps the largest income ever -honestly earned by any woman off the stage, told me -the other day that she left all her business affairs to -the management of others, and did not even know how -to draw a check on a bank. What a melancholy self-exhibition -was that of a clever American woman, the -author of half a dozen successful books, refusing to -look her own accounts in the face until they had got -into such a tangle that not even her own referees could -disentangle them to suit her! These things show, not -that women are constitutionally wanting in thoroughness, -but that it is hard to make them carry this quality -into new fields.</p> - -<p class='c014'>I wish I could possibly convey to the young women -who write for advice on literary projects something of -the meaning of this word “thorough” as applied to -literary work. Scarcely any of them seem to have a -conception of it. Dash, cleverness, recklessness, impatience -<span class='pageno' id='Page_257'>257</span>of revision or of patient investigation, these -are the common traits. To a person of experience, no -stupidity is so discouraging as a brilliancy that has no -roots. It brings nothing to pass; whereas a slow stupidity, -if it takes time enough, may conquer the world. -Consider that for more than twenty years the path of -literature has been quite as fully open for women as for -men, in America,—the payment the same, the honor -the same, the obstacles no greater. Collegiate education -has until very lately been denied them, but how many -men succeed as writers without that advantage! Yet -how little, how very little, of really good literary work -has yet been done by American women! Young girls appear -one after another: each writes a single clever story -or a single sweet poem, and then disappears forever. -Look at Griswold’s “Female Poets of America,” and -you are disposed to turn back to the title-page, and see -if these utterly forgotten names do not really represent -the “female poets” of some other nation. They are -forgotten, as most of the more numerous “female -prose writers” are forgotten, because they had no root. -Nobody doubts that women have cleverness enough, -and enough of power of expression. If you could open -the mails, and take out the women’s letters, as somebody -says, they would prove far more graphic and -entertaining than those of the men. They would be -written, too, in what Macaulay calls—speaking of -Madame d’Arblay’s early style—“true woman’s English, -clear, natural, and lively.” What they need, in -order to convert this epistolary brilliancy into literature, -is to be thorough.</p> - -<p class='c014'>You cannot separate woman’s rights and her responsibilities. -<span class='pageno' id='Page_258'>258</span>In all ages of the world she has had a certain -limited work to do, and has done that well. All that -is needed, when new spheres are open, is that she -should carry the same fidelity into those. If she will -work as hard to shape the children of her brain as to -rear her bodily offspring, will do intellectual work as -well as she does housework, and will meet her moral -responsibilities as she meets her social engagements, -then opposition will soon disappear. The habit of -thoroughness is the key to all high success. Whatever -is worth doing is worth doing well. Only those who -are faithful in a few things will rightfully be made rulers -over many.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_259'>259</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXVIII.<br /> <span class='large'>LITERARY ASPIRANTS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>The brilliant Lady Ashburton used to say of herself -that she had never written a book, and knew nobody -whose book she would like to have written. This does -not seem to be the ordinary state of mind among those -who write letters of inquiry to authors. If I may judge -from these letters, the yearning for a literary career -is just now greater among women than among men. -Perhaps it is because of some literary successes lately -achieved by women. Perhaps it is because they have -fewer outlets for their energies. Perhaps they find -more obstacles in literature than young men find, and -have, therefore, more need to write letters of inquiry -about it. It is certain that they write such letters quite -often; and ask questions that test severely the supposed -omniscience of the author’s brain,—questions -bearing on logic, rhetoric, grammar, and orthography; -how to find a publisher, and how to obtain a well-disciplined -mind.</p> - -<p class='c014'>These letters may sometimes be too long or come too -often for convenience, nor is the consoling postage-stamp -always remembered. But they are of great -value as giving real glimpses of American social life, -and of the present tendencies of American women. -They sometimes reveal such intellectual ardor and imagination, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_260'>260</span>such modesty, and such patience under difficulties, -as to do good to the reader, whatever they -may do to the writer. They certainly suggest a few -thoughts, which may as well be expressed, once for all, -in print.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Behind almost all these letters there lies a laudable -desire to achieve success. “Would you have the goodness -to tell us how success can be obtained?” How -can this be answered, my dear young lady, when you -leave it to the reader to guess what your definition of -success may be? For instance, here is Mr. Mansfield -Tracy Walworth, who was murdered the other day in -New York. He was at once mentioned in the newspapers -as a “celebrated author.” Never in my life -having heard of him, I looked in Hart’s “Manual of -American Literature,” and there found that Mr. Walworth’s -novel of “Warwick” had a sale of seventy-five -thousand copies, and his “Delaplaine” of forty-five -thousand. Is it a success to have secured a sale -like that for your books, and then to die, and have -your brother penmen ask, “Who was he?” Yet, -certainly, a sale of seventy-five thousand copies is not -to be despised; and I fear I know many youths and -maidens who would willingly write novels much poorer -than “Warwick” for the sake of a circulation like -that. I do not think that Hawthorne, however, would -have accepted these conditions; and he certainly did -not have this style of success.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Nor do I think he had any right to expect it. He -had made his choice, and had reason to be satisfied. -The very first essential for literary success is to decide -what success means. If a young girl pines after the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_261'>261</span>success of Marion Harland and Mrs. Southworth, let -her seek it. It is possible that she may obtain it, or -surpass it; and, though she might do better, she might -do far worse. It is, at any rate, a laudable aim to be -popular: popularity may be a very creditable thing, -unless you pay too high a price for it. It is a pleasant -thing, and has many contingent advantages,—balanced -by this great danger, that one is apt to mistake it for -success.</p> - -<p class='c014'>“Learning hath made the most,” said old Fuller, -“by those books on which the booksellers have lost.” -If this be true of learning, it is quite as true of genius -and originality. A book may be immediately popular -and also immortal, but the chances are the other way. -It is more often the case, that a great writer gradually -creates the taste by which he is enjoyed. Wordsworth -in the last generation and Emerson in the present have -been striking instances of this; and authors of far -less fame have yet the same choice which they had. -You can take the standard which the book-market -offers, and train yourself for that. This will, in the -present age, be sure to educate certain qualities in you,—directness, -vividness, animation, dash,—even if it -leaves other qualities untrained. Or you can make a -standard of your own, and aim at that, taking your -chance of seeing the public agree with you. Very -likely you may fail; perhaps you may be wrong in your -fancy, after all, and the public may be right: if you -fail, you may find it hard to bear; but, on the other -hand, you may have the inward “glory and joy” which -nothing but fidelity to an ideal standard can give. All -this applies to all forms of work, but it applies conspicuously -to literature.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_262'>262</span>Instead, therefore, of offering to young writers the -usual comforting assurance, that, if they produce any -thing of real merit, it will be sure to succeed, I should -caution them first to make their own definition of -success, and then act accordingly. Hawthorne succeeded -in his way, and Mr. M. T. Walworth in his way; -and each of these would have been very unreasonable -if he had expected to succeed in both ways. There is -always an opening for careful and conscientious literary -work; and, by such work, many persons obtain a -modest support. There are also some great prizes to -be won; but these are commonly, though not always, -won by work of a more temporary and sensational -kind. Make your choice; and, when you have got -precisely what you asked for, do not complain because -you have missed what you would not take.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_263'>263</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXIX.<br /> <span class='large'>“THE CAREER OF LETTERS.”</span></h3> -</div> -<p class='c013'>A young girl of some talent once told me that she -had devoted herself to “the career of letters.” I -found, on inquiry, that she had obtained a situation as -writer of “society” gossip for a New York newspaper. -I can hardly imagine any life that leads more directly -away from any really literary career, or any life about -which it is harder to give counsel. The work of a -newspaper-correspondent, especially in the “society” -direction, is so full of trials and temptations, for one of -either sex, in our dear, inquisitive, gossiping America, -that one cannot help watching with especial solicitude -all women who enter it. Their special gifts as women -are a source of danger: they are keener of observation -from the very fact of their sex, more active in curiosity, -more skilful in achieving their ends; in a world of -gossip they are the queens, and men but their subjects, -hence their greater danger.</p> - -<p class='c014'>In Newport, New York, Washington, it is the same -thing. The unbounded appetite for private information -about public or semi-public people creates its own purveyors; -and these, again, learn to believe with unflinching -heartiness in the work they do. I have rarely -encountered a successful correspondent of this description -who had not become thoroughly convinced that the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_264'>264</span>highest desire of every human being is to see his name -in print, no matter how. Unhappily there is a great -deal to encourage this belief: I have known men to -express great indignation at an unexpected newspaper-puff, -and then to send ten dollars privately to the -author. This is just the calamity of the profession, -that it brings one in contact with this class of social -hypocrites; and the “personal” correspondent gradually -loses faith that there is any other class to be -found. Then there is the perilous temptation to pay off -grudges in this way, to revenge slights, by the use of -a power with which few people are safely to be trusted. -In many cases, such a correspondent is simply a child -playing with poisoned arrows: he poisons others; and it -is no satisfaction to know that in time he will also poison -himself, and paralyze his own power for mischief.</p> - -<p class='c014'>There lies before me a letter written some years ago -to a young lady anxious to enter on this particular -“career of letters,”—a letter from an experienced -New York journalist. He has employed, he says, hundreds -of lady correspondents, for little or no compensation; -and one of his few successful writers he thus -describes: “She succeeds by pushing her way into -society, and extracting information from fashionable -people and officials and their wives.... She flatters -the vain, and overawes the weak, and gets by sheer -impudence what other writers cannot.... I would -not wish you to be like her, or reduced to the necessity -of doing what she does, for any success journalism can -possibly give.” And who can help echoing this opinion? -If this is one of the successful laborers, where -shall we place the unsuccessful; or, rather, is success, -or failure, the greater honor?</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_265'>265</span>Personal journalism has a prominence in this country -with which nothing in any other country can be compared. -What is called publicity in England or France -means the most peaceful seclusion, compared with the -glare of notoriety which an enterprising correspondent -can flash out at any time—as if by opening the bull’s-eye -of a dark lantern—upon the quietest of his contemporaries. -It is essentially an American institution, -and not one of those in which we have reason to feel -most pride. It is to be observed, however, that foreigners, -if in office, take to it very readily; and it is said that -no people cultivate the reporters at Washington more -assiduously than the diplomatic corps, who like to -send home the personal notices of themselves, in order -to prove to their governments that they are highly esteemed -in the land to which they are appointed. But, -however it may be with them, it is certain that many -people still like to keep their public and private lives -apart, and shrink from even the inevitable eminence -of fame. One of the very most popular of American -authors has said that he never, to this day, has overcome -a slight feeling of repugnance on seeing his own -name in print.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_266'>266</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXX.<br /> <span class='large'>TALKING AND TAKING.</span></h3> -</div> -<p class='c013'>Every time a woman does any thing original or remarkable,—inventing -a rat-trap, let us say, or carving -thirty-six heads on a walnut-shell,—all observers shout -applause. “There’s a woman for you, indeed! Instead -of talking about her rights, she takes them. -That’s the way to do it. What a lesson to these declaimers -upon the platform!”</p> - -<p class='c014'>It does not seem to occur to these wise people that -the right to talk is itself one of the chief rights in -America, and the way to reach all the others. To -talk, is to make a beginning, at any rate. To catch -people with your ideas, is more than to contrive a rat-trap; -and Isotta Nogarola, carving thirty-six empty -heads, was not working in so practical a fashion as -Mary Livermore when she instructs thirty-six hundred -full ones.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It shows the good sense of the woman suffrage agitators, -that they have decided to begin with talk. In -the first place, talking is the most lucrative of all professions -in America; and therefore it is the duty of -American women to secure their share of it. Mrs. -Frances Anne Kemble used to say that she read Shakspeare -in public “for her bread;” and when, after -melting all hearts by a course of farewell readings, she -<span class='pageno' id='Page_267'>267</span>decided to begin reading again, she said she was -doing it “for her butter.” So long as women are -often obliged to support themselves and their children, -and perhaps their husbands, by their own labor, they -have no right to work cheaply, unless driven to it. -Anna Dickinson has no right to make fifteen dollars a -week by sewing, if, by stepping out of the ranks of -needle-women into the ranks of the talkers, she can -make a hundred dollars a day. Theorize as we may, the -fact is, that there is no kind of work in America which -brings such sure profits as public speaking. If women -are unfitted for it, or if they “know the value of peace -and quietness,” as the hand-organ-man says, and can -afford to hold their tongues, let them do so. But if -they have tongues, and like to use them, they certainly -ought to make some money by the performance.</p> - -<p class='c014'>This is the utilitarian view. And when we bring in -higher objects, it is plain that the way to get any thing -in America is to talk about it. Silence is golden, no -doubt, and like other gold remains in the bank-vaults, -and does not just now circulate very freely as currency. -Even literature in America is utterly second to oratory -as a means of immediate influence. Of all sway, that -of the orator is the most potent and most perishable; -and the student and the artist are apt to hold themselves -aloof from it, for this reason. But it is the one means -in America to accomplish immediate results, and women -who would take their rights must take them through -talking. It is the appointed way.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Under a good old-fashioned monarchy, if a woman -wished to secure any thing for her sex, she must cajole -a court, or become the mistress of a monarch. That -<span class='pageno' id='Page_268'>268</span>epoch ended with the French Revolution. When Bonaparte -wished to silence Madame de Staël, he said, -“What does that woman want? Does she want the -money the government owes to her father?” When -Madame de Staël heard of it, she said, “The question -is not what I want, but what I think.” Henceforth -women, like men, are to say what they think. For all -that flattery and seduction and sin, we have substituted -the simple weapon of talk. If women wish education, -they must talk; if better laws, they must talk. The -one chief argument against woman suffrage, with men, -is that so few women even talk about it.</p> - -<p class='c014'>As long as talk can effect any thing, it is the duty of -women to talk; and in America, where it effects every -thing, they should talk all the time. When they have -obtained, as a class, absolute equality of rights with -men, their talk on this subject may be silent, and they -may accept, if they please, that naughty masculine definition -of a happy marriage,—the union of a deaf man -with a dumb woman.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_269'>269</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXI.<br /> <span class='large'>HOW TO SPEAK IN PUBLIC.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>There are other things that women wish to do, it -seems, beside studying and voting. There are a good -many—if I may judge from letters that occasionally -come to me—who are taking, or wish to take, their -first lessons in public speaking. Not necessarily very -much in public, or before mixed audiences, but perhaps -merely to say to a room-full of ladies, or before the committee -of a Christian Union, what they desire to say. -“How shall I make myself heard? How shall I learn -to express myself? How shall I keep my head clear? -Is there any school for debate?” And so on. My -dear young lady, it does not take much wisdom, but -only a little experience, to answer some of these questions. -So I am not afraid to try.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The best school for debate is debating. So far as -mere confidence and comfort are concerned, the great -thing is to gain the habit of speech, even if one speaks -badly. And the practice of an ordinary debating society -has also this advantage, that it teaches you to talk -sense (lest you be laughed at), to speak with some animation -(lest your hearers go to sleep), to think out -some good arguments (because you are trying to convince -somebody), and to guard against weak reasoning -or unfounded assertion (lest your opponent trip you -<span class='pageno' id='Page_270'>270</span>up). Speaking in a debating society thus gives you -the same advantage that a lawyer derives from the -presence of an opposing counsel: you learn to guard -yourself at all points. It is the absence of this check -which is the great intellectual disadvantage of the pulpit. -When a lawyer says a foolish thing in an argument, he -is pretty sure to find it out; but a clergyman may go -on repeating his foolish thing for fifty years without -finding it out, for want of an opponent.</p> - -<p class='c014'>For the art of making your voice heard, I must refer -you to an elocutionist. Yet one thing at least you -might acquire for yourself,—a thing that lies at the -foundation of all good speaking,—the complete and -thorough enunciation of every syllable. So great is the -delight, to my ear at least, of a perfectly distinct and -clear-cut utterance, that I fear I should rather listen -for an hour to the merest nonsense, so uttered, than to -the very wisdom of angels if given in a confused or -nasal or slovenly way. If you wish to know what I -mean by a clear and satisfactory utterance, go to the -next woman suffrage convention, and hear Miss Eastman.</p> - -<p class='c014'>As to your employment of language, the great aim -is to be simple, and, in a measure, conversational, and -then let eloquence come of itself. If most people -talked as well in public as in private, public meetings -would be more interesting. To acquire a conversational -tone, there is good sense in Edward Hale’s suggestion, -that every person who is called on to speak,—let -us say, at a public dinner,—instead of standing up -and talking about his surprise at being called on, should -simply make his last remark to his neighbor at the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_271'>271</span>table the starting-point for what he says to the whole -company. He will thus make sure of a perfectly natural -key, to begin with; and can go on from this quiet -“As I was just saying to Mr. Smith,” to discuss the -gravest question of Church or State. It breaks the ice -for him, like the remark upon the weather by which we -open our interview with the person whom we have longed -for years to meet. Beginning in this way at the level -of the earth’s surface, we can join hands and rise to the -clouds. Begin in the clouds,—as some of my most -esteemed friends are wont to do,—and you have to sit -down before reaching the earth.</p> - -<p class='c014'>And, to come last to what is first in importance, I -am taking it for granted that you have something to -say, and a strong desire to say it. Perhaps you can -say it better for writing it out in full beforehand. But, -whether you do this or not, remember that the more -simple and consecutive your thought, the easier it will -be both to keep it in mind and to utter it. The more -orderly your plan, the less likely you will be to “get -bewildered,” or to “lose the thread.” Think it out -so clearly that the successive parts lead to one another, -and then there will be little strain upon your memory. -For each point you make, provide at least one good -argument and one good illustration, and you can, after -a little practice, safely leave the rest to the suggestion -of the moment. But so much as this you must have, -to be secure. Methods of preparation of course vary -extremely; yet I suppose the secret of the composure -of an experienced speaker to lie usually in this, that -he has made sure beforehand of a sufficient number of -good points to carry him through, even if nothing good -<span class='pageno' id='Page_272'>272</span>should occur to him on the spot. Thus wise people, in -going on a fishing-excursion, take with them not merely -their fishing-tackle, but a few fish; and then, if they -are not sure of their luck, they will be sure of their -chowder.</p> - -<p class='c014'>These are some of the simple hints that might be -given, in answer to inquiring friends. I can remember -when they would have saved me some anguish of spirit; -and they may be of some use to others now. I -write, then, not to induce any one to talk for the sake -of talking,—Heaven forbid!—but that those who are -longing to say something should not fancy the obstacles -insurmountable, when they are really slight.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_273'>273</span> - <h2 class='c008'>PRINCIPLES OF GOVERNMENT.</h2> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>“That liberty, or freedom, consists in having an actual -share in the appointment of those who frame the laws, and -who are to be the guardians of every man’s life, property, and -peace; for the all of one man is as dear to him as the all of -another, and the poor man has an equal right, but more need, -to have representatives in the legislature than the rich one. -That they who have no voice nor vote in the electing of -representatives do not enjoy liberty, but are absolutely enslaved -to those who have votes, and to their representatives; -for to be enslaved is to have governors whom other men have -set over us, and be subject to laws made by the representatives -of others, without having had representatives of our own -to give consent in our behalf.”—<span class='sc'>Benjamin Franklin</span>, <em>in -Sparks’s Franklin</em>, ii. 372.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_275'>275</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXII.<br /> <span class='large'>WE THE PEOPLE.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>I remember, that, when I went to school, I used to -look with wonder on the title of a newspaper of those -days which was often in the hands of one of the older -scholars. I remember nothing else about the newspaper, -or about the boy, except that the title of the sheet -he used to unfold was “We the People;” and that he -derived from it his school nickname, by a characteristic -boyish parody, and was usually mentioned as “Us the -Folks.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Probably all that was taught in that school, in regard -to American history, was not of so much value as the -permanent fixing of this phrase in our memories. It -seemed very natural, in later years, to come upon my -old friend “Us the Folks,” reproduced in almost every -charter of our national government, as thus:—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“<span class='sc'>We the People</span> of the United States, in order to form a -more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, -provide for the common defence, promote the general -welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our -posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the -United States of America.”—<cite>United States Constitution, Preamble.</cite></p> - -<p class='c021'>“<span class='sc'>We the People</span> of Maine do agree,” etc.—<cite>Constitution -of Maine.</cite></p> - -<p class='c021'>“All government of right originates from <span class='fss'>THE PEOPLE</span>, is -<span class='pageno' id='Page_276'>276</span>founded in their consent, and instituted for the general good.”—<cite>Constitution -of New Hampshire.</cite></p> - -<p class='c021'>“The body politic is formed by a voluntary association of -individuals; it is a social compact, by which <span class='fss'>THE WHOLE -PEOPLE</span> covenants with each citizen, and each citizen with -the whole people, that all shall be governed by certain laws -for the common good.”—<cite>Constitution of Massachusetts.</cite></p> - -<p class='c021'>“<span class='sc'>We the People</span> of the State of Rhode Island and Providence -Plantations ... do ordain and establish this constitution -of government.”—<cite>Constitution of Rhode Island.</cite></p> - -<p class='c021'>“<span class='sc'>The People</span> of Connecticut do, in order more effectually -to define, secure, and perpetuate the liberties, rights, and privileges -which they have derived from their ancestors, hereby -ordain and establish the following constitution and form of -civil government.”—<cite>Constitution of Connecticut.</cite></p> - -<p class='c014'>And so on through the constitutions of almost every -State in the Union. Our government is, as Lincoln -said, “a government of the people, by the people, and -for the people.” There is no escaping it. To question -this is to deny the foundations of the American government. -Granted that those who framed these provisions -may not have understood the full extent of the principles -they announced. No matter: they gave us those -principles; and, having them, we must apply them.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Now, women may be voters or not, citizens or not; -but that they are a part of the people, no one has denied -in Christendom—however it may be in Japan, -where, as Mrs. Leonowens tells us, the census of population -takes in only men, and the women and children -are left to be inferred. “<span class='sc'>We the people</span>,” then, includes -women. Be the superstructure what it may, the -foundation of the government clearly provides a place -for them: it is impossible to state the national theory -in such a way that it shall not include them. It is impossible -<span class='pageno' id='Page_277'>277</span>to deny the natural right of women to vote, -except on grounds which exclude all natural right. Dr. -Bushnell, in annihilating, as he thinks, the claims of -women to the ballot, annihilates the rights of the community -as a whole, male or female. He may not be -consistent enough to allow this, but Mr. Wasson is. -That keen destructive strikes at the foundation of the -building, and aims to demolish “We the people” altogether.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The fundamental charters are on our side. There are -certain statute limitations which may prove greater or -less. But these are temporary and trivial things, always -to be interpreted, often to be modified, by reference to -the principles of the Constitution. For instance, when -a constitutional convention is to be held, or new conditions -of suffrage to be created, the whole people should -vote upon the matter, including those not hitherto enfranchised. -This is the view insisted on, a few years -since, by that eminent jurist, William Beach Lawrence. -He maintained, in a letter to Charles Sumner and in -opposition to his own party, that if the question of -“negro suffrage” in the Southern States of the Union -were put to vote, the colored people themselves had a -natural right to vote on the question. The same is -true of women. It should never be forgotten by advocates -of woman suffrage, that, the deeper their reasonings -go, the stronger foundation they find; and that we -have always a solid fulcrum for our lever in that phrase -of our charters, “We the people.”</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_278'>278</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXIII.<br /> <span class='large'>THE USE OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>When young people begin to study geometry, they -expect to begin with hard reasoning on the very first -page. To their surprise, they find that the first few -pages are not occupied by reasoning, but by a few -simple, easy, and rather commonplace sentences, called -“axioms,” which are really a set of pegs on which all -the reasoning is hung. Pupils are not expected to go -back in every demonstration, and prove the axioms. If -Almira Jones happens to be doing a problem at the -blackboard on examination-day, at the high school, and -remarks in the course of her demonstration that “things -which are equal to the same thing are equal to one -another,” and if a sharp questioner jumps up, and -says, “How do you know it?” she simply lays down -her bit of chalk, and says fearlessly, “That is an -axiom,” and the teacher sustains her. Some things -must be taken for granted.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The same service rendered by axioms in the geometry -is supplied, in regard to government, by the simple -principles of the Declaration of Independence. -Right or wrong, they are taken for granted. Inasmuch -as all the legislation of the country is supposed to be -based in them,—they stating the theory of our government, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_279'>279</span>while the Constitution itself only puts into -organic shape the application,—we must all begin -with them. It is a great convenience, and saves great -trouble in all reforms. To the Abolitionists, for instance, -what an inestimable labor-saving machine was -the Declaration of Independence! Let them have that, -and they asked no more. Even the brilliant lawyer -Rufus Choate, when confronted with its plain provisions, -could only sneer at them as “glittering generalities,” -which was equivalent to throwing down his brief, and -throwing up his case. It was an admission, that, if -you were so foolish as to insist on applying the first -principles of the government, it was all over with him.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Now, the whole doctrine of woman suffrage follows -so directly from these same political axioms, that they -are especially convenient for women to have in the -house. When the Declaration of Independence enumerates -as among “self-evident” truths the fact of -governments “deriving their just powers from the -consent of the governed,” then that point may be -considered as settled. In this school-examination of -maturer life, in this grown-up geometry-class, the student -is not to be called upon by the committee to prove -that. She may rightfully lay down her demonstrating -chalk, and say, “That is an axiom. You admit that -yourselves.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is a great convenience. We cannot always be -going back, like a Hindoo history, to the foundations -of the world. Some things may be taken for granted. -How this simple axiom sweeps away, for instance, the -cobweb speculations as to whether voting is a natural -right, or a privilege delegated by society! No matter -<span class='pageno' id='Page_280'>280</span>which. Take it which way you please. That is an -abstract question; but the practical question is a very -simple one. “Governments owe their just powers -to the consent of the governed.” Either that axiom -is false, or, whenever women as a class refuse their -consent to the present exclusively masculine government, -it can no longer claim just powers. The remedy -then may be rightly demanded, which the Declaration -of Independence goes on to state: “Whenever any -form of government becomes destructive of these ends, -it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and -to institute a new government, laying its foundation on -such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, -as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety -and happiness.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>This is the use of the Declaration of Independence. -Women, as a class, may not be quite ready to use it. -It is the business of this book to help make them ready. -But, so far as they are ready, these plain provisions are -the axioms of their political faith. If the axioms mean -any thing for men, they mean something for women. If -men deride the axioms, it is a concession, like that of -Rufus Choate, that these fundamental principles are very -much in their way. But, so long as the sentences stand -in that document, they can be made useful. If men try -to get away from the arguments of women by saying, -“But suppose we have nothing in our theory of government -which requires us to grant your demand?” then -women can answer, as the straightforward Traddles -answered Uriah Heep, “But you have, you know: -therefore, if you please, we won’t suppose any such -thing.”</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_281'>281</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXIV.<br /> <span class='large'>THE TRADITIONS OF THE FATHERS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>It is fortunate for reformers that our fathers were -clear-headed men. If they did not foresee all the -applications of their own principles,—and who does?—they -at least stated those principles very distinctly. -This is a great convenience to us who preach, in season -and out of season, on the texts they gave. Thus we -are constantly told, “You are mistaken in thinking -that the fathers of the Republic, when they proclaimed -‘taxation without representation,’ referred to individual -rights. They were speaking only of national -rights. They fought for national independence, not for -personal rights at all.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is in order to refute this sort of reasoning that -women very often need to read American history -afresh. They will soon be satisfied that such reasoning -may be met with a plain, distinct denial. It -is contrary to the facts. The plain truth is, that our -fathers not only did not make national independence -their exclusive aim, but they did not make it an aim at -all until the war had actually begun. “I verily believe,” -wrote the brave Dr. Warren, “that the night -preceding the barbarous outrages committed by the -soldiery at Lexington, Concord, etc., there were not -fifty people in the whole colony that ever expected any -<span class='pageno' id='Page_282'>282</span>blood would be shed in the contest between us and -Great Britain.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>What was it, then, that had kept the colonists in a -turmoil for years? Let us see.</p> - -<p class='c014'>On Monday, the 6th of March, 1775, the “freeholders -and other inhabitants of Boston” met in town-meeting -at Faneuil Hall, Samuel Adams being moderator. -The committee appointed, the year before, to -appoint an orator “to perpetuate the memory of the -horrid massacre perpetrated on the evening of the 5th -of March, 1770, by a party of soldiers,” reported that -they had selected Joseph Warren, Esq. The meeting -confirmed this, and adjourned to meet at the Old South -at half-past eleven, Faneuil Hall being too small. At -the appointed hour, the church was crowded. The -pulpit was draped in black. Forty British officers, in -uniform, sat in the front pews or on the gallery-stairs. -So great was the crowd, that Warren, in his orator’s -robe, entered the pulpit by a ladder through the window. -He stood there before the representatives of -royalty, and in defiance of the “Regulating Act,” one -of whose objects was to suppress meetings for any -such purpose. What doctrines did he stand there to -proclaim?</p> - -<p class='c014'>Richard Frothingham in his admirable “Life of -Warren”<a id='r14' /><a href='#f14' class='c018'><sup>[14]</sup></a> states the following as the fundamental -proposition of this celebrated address:—</p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f14'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r14'>14</a>. p. 430.</p> -</div> - -<p class='c021'>“That personal freedom is the right of every man, and that -property, or an exclusive right to dispose of what he has honestly -acquired by his own labor, necessarily arises therefrom, -are truths which common-sense has placed beyond the reach -<span class='pageno' id='Page_283'>283</span>of contradiction; and no man or body of men can, without -being guilty of flagrant injustice, claim a right to dispose of -the persons or acquisitions of any other man, or body of men, -unless it can be proved that such a right had arisen from some -compact between the parties in which it has been explicitly -and freely granted.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>“The orator then traced,” says Frothingham, “the -rise and progress of the aggressions on the natural -right of the colonists to enjoy personal freedom and -representative government.” Not a word in behalf -of national independence: on the contrary, he said, -“An independence on Great Britain is not our aim. -No: our wish is that Britain and the colonies may, like -the oak and ivy, grow and increase together.” What -he protested against was the taking of individual property -without granting the owner a voice in it, personally -or through some authorized representative. And—observe!—this -authorization must not be a merely negative -or vaguely understood thing: it must be attested -by “some compact between the parties in which it has -been explicitly and freely granted.” Any thing short -of this was “a wicked policy,” under whose influence -the American had begun to behold the Briton as a -ruffian, ready “first to take his property, and next, -what is dearer to every virtuous man, the liberty of -his country.” The loss of the country’s liberty was -thus staked as a result, a deduction, a corollary; the -original offence lay in the violation of the natural -right of each to control his own personal freedom -and personal property, or else, if these must be subordinated -to the public good, to have at least a voice in -the matter. This, and nothing else than this, was the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_284'>284</span>principle of those who fought the Revolution, according -to the statement of their first eminent martyr.</p> - -<p class='c014'>And it was for announcing these great doctrines, and -for sealing them, three months later, with his blood, -that it was said of him, on the fifth of March following, -“We will erect a monument to thee in each of our -grateful hearts, and to the latest ages will teach our -tender infants to lisp the name of Warren with veneration -and applause.” That the opinions he expressed -were the opinions current among the people, is proved -by the general use of the cry “ Liberty and Property” -among all classes, at the time of the Stamp Act; a cry -which puzzles the young student, until he sees that the -Revolution really began with personal rights, and only -slowly reached the demand for national independence. -“Liberty and Property” was just as distinctly the claim -of Joseph Warren as it is the claim of those women who -now refuse to pay taxes because they believe in the -principles of the American Revolution.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_285'>285</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXV.<br /> <span class='large'>SOME OLD-FASHIONED PRINCIPLES.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>There has been an effort, lately, to show that when -our fathers said, “Taxation without representation is -tyranny,” they referred not to personal liberties, but -to the freedom of a state from foreign power. It is -fortunate that this criticism has been made, for it has -led to a more careful examination of passages; and -this has made it clear, beyond dispute, that the Revolutionary -patriots carried their statements more into -detail than is generally supposed, and affirmed their -principles for individuals, not merely for the state as a -whole.</p> - -<p class='c014'>In that celebrated pamphlet by James Otis, for instance, -published as early as 1764, “The Rights of the -Colonies Vindicated,” he thus clearly lays down the -rights of the individual as to taxation:—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“The very act of taxing, exercised over those who are not -represented, appears to me to be depriving them of one of their -most essential rights as freemen; and, if continued, seems to -be, in effect, an entire disfranchisement of every civil right. -For what one civil right is worth a rush, after a man’s property -is subject to be taken from him at pleasure, without his consent? -If a man is not his own assessor, in person or by deputy, -his liberty is gone, or he is entirely at the mercy of others.”<a id='r15' /><a href='#f15' class='c018'><sup>[15]</sup></a></p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f15'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r15'>15</a>. Otis: Rights of the Colonies, p. 58.</p> -</div> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_286'>286</span>This fine statement has already done duty for liberty, -in another contest; for it was quoted by Mr. Sumner in -his speech of March 7, 1866, with this commentary:—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“Stronger words for universal suffrage could not be employed. -His argument is, that, if men are taxed without being represented, -they are deprived of essential rights; and the continuance -of this deprivation despoils them of every civil right, thus -making the latter depend upon the right of suffrage, which by -a neologism of our day is known as a political right instead of -a civil right. Then, to give point to this argument, the patriot -insists that in determining taxation, ‘every man must be his -own assessor, in person or by deputy,’ without which his liberty -is entirely at the mercy of others. Here, again, in a different -form, is the original thunderbolt, ‘Taxation without representation -is tyranny;’ and the claim is made not merely for communities, -but for ‘every man.’”</p> - -<p class='c014'>In a similar way wrote Benjamin Franklin, some six -years after, in that remarkable sheet found among his -papers, and called “Declaration of those Rights of the -Commonalty of Great Britain, without which they cannot -be free.” The leading propositions were these -three:—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“That every man of the commonalty (excepting infants, -insane persons, and criminals) is of common right and by the -laws of God a freeman, and entitled to the free enjoyment of -liberty. That liberty, or freedom, consists in having an actual -share in the appointment of those who frame the laws, and -who are to be the guardians of every man’s life, property, and -peace; for the all of one man is as dear to him as the all of -another; and the poor man has an equal right, but more need, -to have representatives in the legislature than the rich one. -That they who have no voice nor vote in the electing of representatives -do not enjoy liberty, but are absolutely enslaved to -those who have votes, and to their representatives; for to be -enslaved is to have governors whom other men have set over -<span class='pageno' id='Page_287'>287</span>us, and be subject to laws made by the representatives of -others, without having had representatives of our own to give -consent in our behalf.”<a id='r16' /><a href='#f16' class='c018'><sup>[16]</sup></a></p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f16'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r16'>16</a>. Sparks’s Franklin, ii. 372.</p> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>In quoting these words of Dr. Franklin, his latest -biographer feels moved to add, “These principles, so -familiar to us now and so obviously just, were startling -and incredible novelties in 1770, abhorrent to nearly all -Englishmen, and to great numbers of Americans.” -Their fair application is still abhorrent to a great many; -or else, not willing quite to deny the theory, they limit -the application by some such device as “virtual representation.” -Here, again, James Otis is ready for them; -and Charles Sumner is ready to quote Otis, as thus:—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“No such phrase as virtual representation was ever known -in law or constitution. It is altogether a subtlety and illusion, -wholly unfounded and absurd. We must not be cheated by -any such phantom, or any other fiction of law or politics, or -any monkish trick of deceit or blasphemy.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>These are the sharp words used by the patriot Otis, -speaking of those who were trying to convince American -citizens that they were virtually represented in Parliament. -Sumner applied the same principle to the -freedmen: it is now applied to women. “Taxation -without representation is tyranny.” “Virtual representation -is altogether a subtlety and illusion, wholly -unfounded and absurd.” No ingenuity, no evasion, -can give any escape from these plain principles. Either -you must revoke the maxims of the American Revolution, -or you must enfranchise woman. Stuart Mill well -says in his autobiography, “The interest of woman is -included in that of man exactly as much (and no more) -as that of subjects in that of kings.”</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_288'>288</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXVI.<br /> <span class='large'>FOUNDED ON A ROCK.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>Gov. Long’s letter on woman suffrage is of peculiar -value, as recalling us to the simple principles of -“right,” on which alone the agitation can be solidly -founded. The ground once taken by many, that women -as women would be sure to act on a far higher political -plane than men as men, is now urged less than formerly: -the very mistakes and excesses of the agitation -itself have partially disproved it. No cause can safely -sustain itself on the hypothesis that all its advocates -are saints and sages; but a cause that is based on a -principle rests on a rock.</p> - -<p class='c014'>If there is any one who is recognized as a fair -exponent of our national principles, it is our martyr-president -Abraham Lincoln; whom Lowell calls, in his -noble Commemoration Ode at Cambridge,—</p> - -<div class='lg-container-b c016'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>“New birth of our new soil, the first American.”</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>What President Lincoln’s political principle was, we -know. On his journey to Washington for his first -inauguration, he said, “I have never had a feeling -that did not spring from the sentiments embodied in -the Declaration of Independence.” To find out what -was his view of those sentiments, we must go back -several years earlier, and consider that remarkable -<span class='pageno' id='Page_289'>289</span>letter of his to the Boston Republicans who had invited -him to join them in celebrating Jefferson’s birthday, -in April, 1859. It was well called by Charles Sumner -“a gem in political literature;” and it seems to me -almost as admirable, in its way, as the Gettysburg -address.</p> - -<p class='c021'>“The principles of Jefferson are the definitions and axioms -of free society. And yet they are denied and evaded with no -small show of success. One dashingly calls them ‘glittering -generalities.’ Another bluntly styles them ‘self-evident lies.’ -And others insidiously argue that they apply only to ‘superior -races.’”</p> - -<p class='c021'>“These expressions, differing in form, are identical in object -and effect,—the subverting the principles of free government, -and restoring those of classification, caste, and legitimacy. -They would delight a convocation of crowned heads -plotting against the people. They are the vanguard, the sappers -and miners of returning despotism. We must repulse -them, or they will subjugate us.”</p> - -<p class='c021'>“All honor to Jefferson!—the man who, in the concrete -pressure of a struggle for national independence by a single -people, had the coolness, forecast, and capacity to introduce -into a merely revolutionary document <em>an abstract truth applicable -to all men and all times</em>, and so to embalm it there that -to-day and in all coming days it shall be a rebuke and a -stumbling-block to the harbingers of re-appearing tyranny and -oppression.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>The special “abstract truth” to which President -Lincoln thus attaches a value so great, and which he -pronounces “applicable to all men and all times,” is -evidently the assertion of the Declaration that governments -derive their just powers from the consent of the -governed, following the assertion that all men are born -free and equal; that is, as some one has interpreted it, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_290'>290</span>equally men. I do not see how any person but a -dreamy recluse can deny that the strength of our -republic rests on these principles; which are so thoroughly -embedded in the average American mind that -they take in it, to some extent, the place occupied in -the average English mind by the emotion of personal -loyalty to a certain reigning family. But it is impossible -to defend these principles logically, as Senator -Hoar has well pointed out, without recognizing that -they are as applicable to women as to men. If this -is the case, the claim of women rests on a right,—indeed, -upon the same right which is the foundation -of all our institutions.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The encouraging fact in the present condition of the -whole matter is, not that we get more votes here or -there for this or that form of woman suffrage—for experience -has shown that there are great ups and downs -in that respect; and States that at one time seemed -nearest to woman suffrage, as Maine and Kansas, now -seem quite apathetic. But the real encouragement is, -that the logical ground is more and more conceded; and -the point now usually made is, not that the Jeffersonian -maxim excludes women, but that “the consent of the -governed” is substantially given by the general consent -of women. That this argument has a certain plausibility, -may be conceded; but it is equally clear that the -minority of women, those who do wish to vote, includes -on the whole the natural leaders,—those who are foremost -in activity of mind, in literature, in art, in good -works of charity. It is, therefore, pretty sure that they -only predict the opinions of the rest, who will follow -them in time. And, even while waiting, it is a fair -<span class='pageno' id='Page_291'>291</span>question whether the “governed” have not the right to -give their votes when they wish, even if the majority of -them prefer to stay away from the polls. We do not -repeal our naturalization laws, although only the minority -of our foreign-born inhabitants as yet take the -pains to become naturalized.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_292'>292</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXVII.<br /> <span class='large'>“THE GOOD OF THE GOVERNED.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>In Paris, some years ago, I was for a time a resident -in a cultivated French family, where the father was -non-committal in politics, the mother and son were -republicans, and the daughter was a Bonapartist. Asking -the mother why the young lady thus held to a -different creed from the rest, I was told that she had -made up her mind that the streets of Paris were kept -cleaner under the empire than since its disappearance: -hence her imperialism.</p> - -<p class='c014'>I have heard American men advocate the French -empire at home and abroad, without offering reasons -so good as those of the lively French maiden. But -I always think of her remark when the question is -seriously asked, as Mr. Parkman, for instance, gravely -puts it in his late rejoinder in “The North American -Review,”—“The real issue is this: Is the object of -government the good of the governed, or is it not?” -Taken in a general sense, there is probably no disposition -to discuss this conundrum, for the simple reason -that nobody dissents from it. But the important point -is: What does “the good of the governed” mean? -Does it merely mean better street-cleaning, or something -more essential?</p> - -<p class='c014'>There is nothing new in the distinction. Ever since -<span class='pageno' id='Page_293'>293</span>De Tocqueville wrote his “Democracy in America,” -forty years ago, this precise point has been under -active discussion. That acute writer himself recurs to -it again and again. Every government, he points out, -nominally seeks the good of the people, and rests on -their will at last. But there is this difference: A -monarchy organizes better, does its work better, cleans -the streets better. Nevertheless De Tocqueville, a monarchist, -sees this advantage in a republic, that when all -this is done by the people for themselves, although the -work done may be less perfect, yet the people themselves -are more enlightened, better satisfied, and, in the end, -their good is better served. Thus in one place he -quotes a “a writer of talent” who complains of the -want of administrative perfection in the United States, -and says, “We are indebted to centralization, that -admirable invention of a great man, for the uniform -order and method which prevails alike in all the municipal -budgets (of France) from the largest town to the -humblest commune.” But, says De Tocqueville,—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“Whatever may be my admiration of this result, when I see -the communes (municipalities) of France, with their excellent -system of accounts, plunged in the grossest ignorance of their -true interests, and abandoned to so incorrigible an apathy that -they seem to vegetate rather than to live; when, on the other -hand, I observe the activity, the information, and the spirit of -enterprise which keeps society in perpetual labor, in these -American townships, whose budgets are drawn up with small -method and with still less uniformity,—I am struck by the -spectacle; <em>for, to my mind, the end of a good government is to -insure the welfare of a people</em>, and not to establish order and -regularity in the midst of its misery and its distress.”<a id='r17' /><a href='#f17' class='c018'><sup>[17]</sup></a></p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f17'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r17'>17</a>. Reeves’s translation, London, 1838, vol. i. p. 97, note.</p> -</div> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_294'>294</span>The Italics are my own; but it will be seen that he -uses a phrase almost identical with Mr. Parkman’s, -and that he uses it to show that there is something to -be looked at beyond good laws,—namely, the beneficial -effect of self-government. In another place he comes -back to the subject again:—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“It is incontestable that the people frequently conducts -public business very ill; but it is impossible that the lower -order should take a part in public business without extending -the circle of their ideas, and without quitting the ordinary -routine of their mental acquirements; the humblest individual -who is called upon to co-operate in the government of society -acquires a certain degree of self-respect; and, as he possesses -authority, he can command the services of minds much more -enlightened than his own. He is canvassed by a multitude of -applicants, who seek to deceive him in a thousand different -ways, but who instruct him by their deceit.... Democracy -does not confer the most skilful kind of government upon the -people; but it produces that which the most skilful governments -are frequently unable to awaken, namely, an all-pervading -and restless activity, a superabundant force, and an -energy which is inseparable from it, and which may, under -favorable circumstances, beget the most amazing benefits. -These are the true advantages of democracy.”<a id='r18' /><a href='#f18' class='c018'><sup>[18]</sup></a></p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f18'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r18'>18</a>. Ibid., vol. ii. pp. 74, 75.</p> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>These passages and others like them are worth careful -study. They clearly point out the two different -standards by which we may criticise all political systems. -One class of thinkers, of whom Froude is the -most conspicuous, holds that the “good of the people” -means good laws and good administration, and that, if -these are only provided, it makes no sort of difference -whether they themselves make the laws, or whether -some Cæsar or Louis Napoleon provides them. All -<span class='pageno' id='Page_295'>295</span>the traditions of the early and later Federalists point -this way. But it has always seemed to me a theory -of government essentially incompatible with American -institutions. If we could once get our people saturated -with it, they would soon be at the mercy of some Louis -Napoleon of their own.</p> - -<p class='c014'>When President Lincoln claimed, following Theodore -Parker, that ours was not merely a government for the -people, but of the people and by the people as well, he -recognized the other side of the matter,—that it is not -only important what laws we have, but who makes the -laws; and that “the end of a good government is to -insure the welfare of a people,” in this far wider sense. -That advantage which the French writer admits in -democracy, that it develops force, energy, and self-respect, -is as essentially a part of “the good of the -governed,” as is any perfection in the details of government. -And it is precisely these advantages which we -expect that women, sooner or later, are to share. For -them, as for men, “the good of the governed” is not -genuine unless it is that kind of good which belongs -to the self-governed.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_296'>296</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXVIII.<br /> <span class='large'>RULING AT SECOND-HAND.</span></h3> -</div> -<div class='lg-container-b c026'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>“Women ruled all; and ministers of state</div> - <div class='line'>Were at the doors of women forced to wait,—</div> - <div class='line'>Women, who’ve oft as sovereigns graced the land,</div> - <div class='line'>But never governed well at second-hand.”</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>So wrote in the last century the bitter satirist Charles -Churchill, and this verse will do something to keep alive -his name. He touches the very kernel of the matter, -and all history is on his side. The Salic Law excluded -women from the throne of France,—“the kingdom of -France being too noble to be governed by a woman,” -as it said. Accordingly the history of France shows -one long line of royal mistresses ruling in secret for -mischief; while more liberal England points to the -reigns of Elizabeth and Anne and Victoria, to show -how usefully a woman may sit upon a throne.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It was one of the merits of Margaret Fuller Ossoli, -that she always pointed out this distinction. “Any -woman can have influence,” she said, “in some way. -She need only to be a good cook or a good scold, to -secure that. Woman should not merely have a share -in the power of man,—for of that omnipotent Nature -will not suffer her to be defrauded,—but it should be a -<em>chartered</em> power, too fully recognized to be abused.” -We have got to meet, at any rate, this fact of feminine -<span class='pageno' id='Page_297'>297</span>influence in the world. Demosthenes said that the -measures which a statesman had meditated for a year -might be overturned in a day by a woman. How infinitely -more sensible, then, to train the woman herself in -statesmanship, and give her open responsibility as well -as concealed power!</p> - -<p class='c014'>The same principle of demoralizing subordination -runs through the whole position of women. Many a husband -makes of his wife a doll, dresses her in fine clothes, -gives or withholds money according to his whims, and -laughs or frowns if she asks any questions about his -business. If only a petted slave, she naturally develops -the vices of a slave; and when she wants more money -for more fine clothes, and finds her husband out of -humor, she coaxes, cheats, and lies. Many a woman -half ruins her husband by her extravagance, simply -because he has never told her frankly what his income -is, or treated her, in money matters, like a rational being. -Bankruptcy, perhaps, brings both to their senses; and -thenceforward the husband discovers that his wife is a -woman, not a child. But, for want of this, whole families -and generations of women are trained to deception. -I knew an instance where a fashionable dressmaker in -New York urged an economical young girl, about to -be married, to buy of her a costly <i><span lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">trousseau</span></i> or wedding -outfit. “But I have not the money,” said the maiden. -“No matter,” said the complaisant tempter: “I will -wait four years, and send in the bill to your husband -by degrees. Many ladies do it.” Fancy the position of -a pure young girl, wishing innocently to make herself -beautiful in the eyes of her husband, and persuaded to -go into his house with a trick like this upon her conscience! -<span class='pageno' id='Page_298'>298</span>Yet it grows directly out of the whole theory -of life which is preached to many women,—that all -they seek must be won by indirect manœuvres, and not -by straightforward living.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is a mistaken system. Once recognize woman as -born to be the equal, not inferior, of man, and she accepts -as a right her share of the family income, of -political power, and of all else that is capable of distribution. -As it is, we are in danger of forgetting that -woman, in mind as in body, was born to be upright. -The women of Charles Reade—never by any possibility -moving in a straight line where it is possible to find a -crooked one—are distorted women; and Nature is no -more responsible for them than for the figures produced -by tight lacing and by high-heeled boots. These physical -deformities acquire a charm, when the taste adjusts -itself to them; and so do those pretty tricks and those -interminable lies. But after all, to make a noble woman, -you must give a noble training.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_299'>299</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXIX.<br /> <span class='large'>“TOO MANY VOTERS ALREADY.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>Curiously enough, the commonest argument against -woman suffrage does not now take the form of an -attack on women, but on men. Formerly we were told -that women, as women, were incapable of voting; that -they had not, as old Theophilus Parsons wrote in -1780, “a sufficient acquired discretion;” or that they -had not physical strength enough; or that they were -too delicate and angelic to vote. Now these remarks -are waived, and the argument is: Women are certainly -unfit for suffrage, since even men are unfit. It is -something to have women at last recognized as politically -equal to men, even if it be only in the fact of -unfitness.</p> - -<p class='c014'>A spasm of re-action is just now passing over the -minds of many men, especially among educated Americans, -against universal suffrage. Possibly it is a re-action -from that too great confidence in mere numbers -which at one time prevailed. All human governments -are as yet very imperfect; and, unless we view them -reasonably, they are all worthless. We try them by -unjust or whimsical tests. I do not see that anybody -who objects to universal suffrage has any working -theory to suggest as a substitute: the only plan he even -implies is usually that he himself and his friends, and -<span class='pageno' id='Page_300'>300</span>those whom he thinks worthy, should make the laws, or -decide who should make them. From this I should -utterly dissent: I should far rather be governed by the -community, as a whole, than by my ablest friend and -his ablest friends; for, if the whole community governs, -I know it will not govern very much, and that the -tendency will be towards personal freedom by common -consent. But if my particular friend once begins to -govern me, or I him, the love of power would be in -danger of growing very much. It may be that he -could be safely trusted with such authority, but I am -very sure that I could not.</p> - -<p class='c014'>We shall never get much beyond that pithy question -of Jefferson’s, “It is said that man cannot govern -himself: how, then, can he govern another?” There is -absolutely no test by which we can determine, on any -large scale, who are fit to exercise suffrage, and who -are not. John Brown would exclude John Smith; and -John Smith would wish to keep out John Brown, especially -if he had inconvenient views, like him of Harper’s -Ferry. The safeguard of scientific legislation may be -in the heads of a cultivated few, but the safeguard of -personal freedom is commonly in the hands of the -uncultivated many. The most moderate republican -thinker might find himself under the supervision of -Bismarck’s police at any moment, should he visit -Berlin; and how easily he might himself fall into the -Bismarck way of thinking, is apparent when we consider -that the excellent Dr. Joseph P. Thompson, -writing from Germany, is understood gravely to recommend -the exclusion of German communists from the -ports of the United States. When we consider how -<span class='pageno' id='Page_301'>301</span>easily the first principles of liberty might thus be sacrificed -by the wise few, let us be grateful that we are -protected by the presence of the multitude.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Whenever the vote goes against us, we are apt to -think that there must be something wrong in the moral -nature of the voters. It would be better to see if their -votes cannot teach us something,—if the fact of our -defeat does not show that we left out something, -or failed to see some fact which our opponents saw. -There could not be a plainer case of this than in recent -Massachusetts elections. Many good men regarded -it as a hopeless proof of ignorance or depravity in the -masses, that more than a hundred thousand voters sustained -General Butler for governor. For one, I regard -that candidate as a demagogue, no doubt; but can -anybody in Massachusetts now help seeing that the -instinct which led that large mass of men to his support -was in great measure a true one? Every act of -the Republican legislatures since assembled has been -influenced by that vague protest in behalf of State -reform and economy which General Butler represented. -He complicated it with other issues, very likely, and -swelled the number of his supporters by unscrupulous -means. It may have been very fortunate that -he did not succeed; but it is fortunate that he tried, -and that he found supporters. In this remarkable -instance we see how the very dangers and excesses of -popular suffrage work for good.</p> - -<p class='c014'>For myself, I do not see how we can have too many -voters. I am very sure, that, in the long-run, voting -tends to educate and enlighten men, to make them -more accessible to able leadership, to give them a feeling -<span class='pageno' id='Page_302'>302</span>of personal self-respect and independence. This -is true not merely of Americans and Protestants, but -of the foreign-born and the Roman Catholic; since -experience shows that the political control and interference -of the priesthood are exceedingly over-rated. -I believe that the poor and the ignorant eminently -need the ballot, first for self-respect, and then for self-protection; -and, if so, why do not women need it for -precisely the same reasons?</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_303'>303</span> - <h2 class='c008'>SUFFRAGE.</h2> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>“No such phrase as virtual representation was ever known -in law or constitution. It is altogether a subtlety and illusion, -wholly unfounded and absurd. We must not be cheated by -any such phantom or any other trick of law and politics.”—<span class='sc'>James -Otis</span>, <em>quoted by</em> <span class='sc'>Charles Sumner</span> <em>in speech March</em> 7, -1866.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_305'>305</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXX.<br /> <span class='large'>DRAWING THE LINE.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>When in Dickens’s “Nicholas Nickleby” the coal-heaver -calls at the fashionable barber’s to be shaved, -the barber declines that service. The coal-heaver -pleads that he saw a baker being shaved there the day -before. But the barber points out to him that it is -necessary to draw the line somewhere, and he draws -it at bakers.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is, doubtless, an inconvenience, in respect to -woman suffrage, that so many people have their own -theories as to drawing the line, and deciding who shall -vote. Each has his hobby; and as the opportunity for -applying it to men has passed by, each wishes to catch -at the last remaining chance, and apply it to women. -One believes in drawing an educational line; another, -in a property qualification; another, in new restrictions -on naturalization; another, in distinctions of race; and -each wishes to keep women, for a time, as the only -remaining victims for his experiment.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Fortunately the answer to all these objections, on -behalf of woman suffrage, is very brief and simple. -It is no more the business of its advocates to decide -upon the best abstract basis for suffrage, than it is to -decide upon the best system of education, or of labor, -or of marriage. Its business is to equalize, in all these -<span class='pageno' id='Page_306'>306</span>directions; nothing more. When that is done, there -will be plenty still left to do, without doubt; but it will -not involve the rights of women, as such. Simply to -strike out the word “male” from the statute,—that is -our present work. “What is sauce for the goose”—but -the proverb is somewhat musty. These educational -and property restrictions may be of value; but, -wherever they are already removed from the men, they -must be removed from women also. Enfranchise them -equally, and then begin afresh, if you please, to legislate -for the whole human race. What we protest -against is that you should have let down the bars for -one sex, and should at once become conscientiously -convinced that they should be put up again for the -other.</p> - -<p class='c014'>When it was, proposed to apply an educational qualification -at the South after the war, the Southern white -loyalists all objected to it. If you make it universal, -they said, it cuts off many of the whites. If you apply -it to the blacks alone, it is manifestly unjust. The case -is the same with women in regard to men. As woman -needs the ballot primarily to protect herself, it is manifestly -unjust to restrict the suffrage for her, when man -has it without restriction. If she needs protection, -then she needs it all the more from being poor, or -ignorant, or Irish, or black. If we do not see this, the -freedwomen of the South did. There is nothing like -personal wrong to teach people logic.</p> - -<p class='c014'>We hear a great deal said in dismay, and sometimes -even by old abolitionists, about “increasing the number -of ignorant voters.” In Massachusetts, there is an -educational restriction for men, such as it is; in Rhode -<span class='pageno' id='Page_307'>307</span>Island, a property qualification is required for voting -on certain questions. Personally, I believe with “Warrington,” -that, if ignorant voting be bad, ignorant nonvoting -is worse; and that the enfranchised “masses,” -which have a legitimate outlet for their political opinions, -are far less dangerous than disfranchised masses, -which must rely on mobs and strikes. I will go farther, -and say that I believe our Republic is, on the whole, in -less danger from its poor men, who have got to stay in -it and bring up their children, than from its rich men, -who have always Paris and Dresden to fall back upon. -As to a property qualification, there is no dispute that -Rhode Island—the only New England State which has -one—is the only State where votes are publicly bought -and sold on any large scale. I do not see that even a -poll-tax or registry-tax is of any use as a safeguard; -for, if men are to be bought, the tax merely offers a -more indirect and palatable form in which to pay the -price. Many a man consents to have his poll-tax paid -by his party or his candidate, when he would reject the -direct offer of a dollar-bill.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But this is all private speculation, and has nothing to -do with the woman suffrage movement. All that we can -ask, as advocates of this reform, is, that the inclusion -or the exclusion should be the same for both sexes. -We cannot put off the equality of woman till that -time, a few centuries hence, when the Social Science -Association shall have-succeeded in agreeing on the -true basis of “scientific legislation.” It is as if we -urged that wives should share their husbands’ dinners, -and were told that the physicians had not decided -<span class='pageno' id='Page_308'>308</span>whether beefsteak were wholesome. The answer is, -“Beefsteak or tripe, yeast or saleratus, which you -please. But, meanwhile, what is good enough for the -wife is good enough for the husband.”</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_309'>309</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXXI.<br /> <span class='large'>FOR SELF-PROTECTION.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>I remember to have read, many years ago, the life -of Sir Samuel Romilly, the English philanthropist. He -was the author of more beneficent legal reforms than -any man of his day, and there was in this book a long -list of the changes he still meant to bring about. It -struck me very much, that, among these proposed reforms, -not one of any importance referred to the laws -about women.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It shows—what all experience has shown—that no -class or race or sex can safely trust its protection in -any hands but its own. The laws of England in regard -to woman were then so bad that Lord Brougham afterwards -said they needed total reconstruction, if they -were to be touched at all. And yet it is only since -woman suffrage began to be talked about, that the -work of law-reform has really taken firm hold. In -many cases in America the beneficent measures are directly -to be traced to some appeal from feminine advocates. -Even in Canada, as stated the other day by Dr. -Cameron, formerly of Toronto, the bill protecting the -property of married women was passed under the immediate -pressure of Lucy Stone’s eloquence. And, even -where this direct agency could not be traced, the general -fact that the atmosphere was full of the agitation had -<span class='pageno' id='Page_310'>310</span>much to do with all the reforms that took place. Legislatures, -unwilling to give woman the ballot, were shamed -into giving her something. The chairman of the judiciary -committee in Rhode Island told me, that, until he -heard women address the committee, he had not reflected -upon their legal disabilities, or thought how unjust these -were. While the matter was left to the other sex only, -even men like Sir Samuel Romilly forgot the wrongs of -woman. When she began to advocate her own cause -men also waked up.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But now that they are awake, they ask, is not this -sufficient? Not at all. If an agent who has cheated -you surrenders reluctantly one-half your stolen goods, -you do not stop there and say, “It is enough. Your -intention is honorable. Please continue my agent with -increased pay.” On the contrary, you say, “Your -admission of wrong is a plea of guilty. Give me the -rest of what is mine.” There is no defence like self-defence, -no protection like self-protection.</p> - -<p class='c014'>All theories of chivalry and generosity and vicarious -representation fall before the fact that woman has been -grossly wronged by man. That being the case, the -only modest and honest thing for man to do is to say, -“Henceforward have a voice in making your own -laws.” Till this is done, she has no sure safeguard, -since otherwise the same men who made the old barbarous -laws may at any time restore them.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is common to say that woman suffrage will make -no great difference; for that women will think very much -as men do, and it will simply double the vote without -varying the result. About many matters this may be -true. To be sure, it is probable that on questions of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_311'>311</span>conscience, like slavery and temperance, the woman’s -vote would by no means coincide with man’s. But -grant that it would. The fact remains,—and all history -shows it,—that on all that concerns her own protection -a woman needs her own vote. Would a woman vote -to give her husband the power of bequeathing her -children to the control and guardianship of somebody -else? Would a woman vote to sustain the law by which -a Massachusetts chief justice bade the police take those -crying children from their mother’s side in the Boston -court-room a few years ago, and hand them over to a -comparative stranger, because that mother had married -again? You might as well ask whether the colored -vote would sustain the Dred Scott decision. Tariffs or -banks may come or go the same, whether the voters be -white or black, male or female. But, when the wrongs -of an oppressed class or sex are to be righted, the ballot -is the only guaranty. After they have gained a -potential voice for themselves, the Sir Samuel Romillys -will remember them.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_312'>312</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXXII.<br /> <span class='large'>WOMANLY STATESMANSHIP.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>The newspapers periodically express a desire to know -whether women have given evidence, on the whole, of -superior statesmanship to men. There are constant -requests that they will define their position as to the -tariff and the fisheries and the civil-service question. -If they do not speak, it is naturally assumed that they -will forever after hold their peace. Let us see how -that matter stands.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is said that the greatest mechanical skill in America -is to be found among professional burglars who come -here from England. Suppose one of these men were -in prison, and we were to stand outside and taunt him -through the window: “Here is a locomotive engine: -why do you not mend or manage it? Here is a steam -printing-press: if you know any thing, set it up for me! -You a mechanic, when you have not proved that you -understand any of these things? Nonsense!”</p> - -<p class='c014'>But Jack Sheppard, if he condescended to answer us -at all, would coolly say, “Wait a while, till I have -finished my present job. Being in prison, my first -business is to get out of prison. Wait till I have -picked this lock, and mined this wall; wait till I have -made a saw out of a watch-spring, and a ladder out of -a pair of blankets. Let me do my first task, and get -<span class='pageno' id='Page_313'>313</span>out of limbo, and then see if your little printing-presses -and locomotives are too puzzling for my fingers.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Politically speaking, woman is in prison, and her -first act of skill must be in getting through the wall. -For her there is no tariff question, no question of the -fisheries. She will come to that by and by, if you -please; but for the present her statesmanship must be -employed nearer home. The “civil-service reform” -in which she is most concerned is a reform which shall -bring her in contact with the civil service. Her political -creed, for the present, is limited to that of Sterne’s -starling in the cage,—“I can’t get out.” If she is -supposed to have any common-sense at all, she will -best show it by beginning at the point where she is, -instead of at the point where somebody else is. She -would indeed be as foolish as these editors think her -if she now spent her brains upon the tariff question, -which she cannot reach, instead of upon her own enfranchisement -which she is fast reaching.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The woman suffrage movement in America, in all its -stages and subdivisions, has been the work of woman. -No doubt men have helped in it: much of the talking -has been done by them, and they have furnished many -of the printed documents. But the energy, the methods, -the unwearied purpose, of the movement, have come -from women: they have led in all councils; they have -established the newspapers, got up the conventions, -addressed the legislatures, and raised the money. -Thirty years have shown, with whatever temporary -variations, one vast wave of progress toward success, -both in this country and in Europe. Now, success is -statesmanship.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_314'>314</span>I remember well the shouts of laughter that used to -greet the anti-slavery orators when they claimed that -the real statesmen of the country were not the Calhouns -and Websters, who spent their strength in trying to -sustain slavery, and failed, but the Garrisons, who devoted -their lives to its overthrow, and were succeeding. -Yet who now doubts this? Tried by the same standard, -the statesmanship of to-day does not lie in the -men who can find no larger questions before them than -those which concern the fisheries, but in the women -whose far-reaching efforts will one day make every existing -voting-list so much waste paper.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Of course, when the voting-lists with the women’s -names are ready to be printed, it will be interesting to -speculate as to how these new monarchs of our destiny -will use their power. For myself, a long course of observation -in the anti-slavery and woman suffrage movements -has satisfied me that women are not idiots, and -that, on the whole, when they give their minds to a -question, whether moral or practical, they understand -it quite as readily as men. In the anti-slavery movement -it is certain that a woman, Elizabeth Heyrick, -gave the first impulse to its direct and simple solution -in England; and that another woman, Mrs. Stowe, did -more than any man, except perhaps Garrison and John -Brown, to secure its right solution here. There was -never a moment, I am confident, when any great political -question growing out of the anti-slavery struggle -might not have been put to vote more safely among -the women of New England than among the clergy, or -the lawyers, or the college-professors. If they have -done so well in the last great issue, it is fair to assume, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_315'>315</span>that, after they have a sufficient inducement to study -out future issues, they at least will not be very much -behind the men.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But we cannot keep it too clearly in view, that the -whole question, whether women would vote better or -worse than men on general questions, is a minor matter. -It was equally a minor matter in case of the negroes. -We gave the negroes the ballot, simply because they -needed it for their own protection; and we shall by and -by give it to women for the same reason. Tried by -that test, we shall find that their statesmanship will be -genuine. When they come into power, drunken husbands -will no longer control their wives’ earnings, and a -chief justice will no longer order a child to be removed -from its mother, amid its tears and outcries, merely -because that mother has married again. And if, as we -are constantly assured, woman’s first duty is to her -home and her children, she may count it a good beginning -in statesmanship to secure to herself the means of -protecting both. That once settled, it will be time -enough to “interview” her in respect to the proper -rate of duty on pig-iron.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_316'>316</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXXIII.<br /> <span class='large'>TOO MUCH PREDICTION.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>“Seek not to proticipate,” says Mrs. Gamp, the -venerable nurse in “Martin Chuzzlewit”—“but take -’em as they come, and as they go.” I am persuaded -that our woman-suffrage arguments would be improved -by this sage counsel, and that at present we indulge in -too many bold anticipations.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Is there not altogether too much tendency to predict -what women will do when they vote? Could that -good time come to-morrow, we should be startled to -find to how many different opinions and “causes” the -new voters were already pledged. One speaker wishes -that women should be emancipated, because of the -fidelity with which they are sure to support certain -desirable measures, as peace, order, freedom, temperance, -righteousness, and judgment to come. Then -the next speaker has his or her schedule of political -virtues, and is equally confident that women, if once -enfranchised, will guarantee clear majorities for them -all. The trouble is, that we thus mortgage this new -party of the future, past relief, beyond possibility of -payment, and incur the ridicule of the unsanctified by -committing our cause to a great many contradictory -pledges.</p> - -<p class='c014'>I know an able and high-minded woman of foreign -<span class='pageno' id='Page_317'>317</span>birth, who courageously, but as I think mistakenly, -calls herself an atheist, and who has for years advocated -woman-suffrage as the only antidote to the rule of -the clergy. On the other hand, an able speaker in the -late Boston convention advocated the same thing as -the best way of defeating atheism, and securing the -positive assertion of religion by the community. Both -cannot be correct: neither is entitled to speak for -woman. That being the case, would it not be better -to keep clear of this dangerous ground of prediction, -and keep to the argument based on rights and needs? -If our theory of government be worth any thing, -woman has the same right to the ballot that man has: -she certainly needs it as much for self-defence. How -she will use it, when she gets it, is her own affair. It -may be that she will use it more wisely than her brothers; -but I am satisfied to believe that she will use it as -well. Let us not attribute infallible wisdom and virtue, -even to women; for, as dear Mrs. Poyser says in -Adam Bede, “God Almighty made some of ’em foolish, -to match the men.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is common to assume, for instance, that all women -by nature favor peace; and that, even if they do not -always seem to promote it in their social walk and conversation, -they certainly will in their political. When -we consider how all the pleasing excitements, achievements, -and glories of war, such as they are, accrue to -men only, and how large a part of the miseries are -brought home to women, it might seem that their vote -on this matter, at least, would be a sure thing. Thus -far the theory: the fact being that we have but just -emerged from a civil war which convulsed the nation, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_318'>318</span>and cost half a million lives; and which was, from the -very beginning, fomented, stimulated, and applauded, -at least on one side, by the united voice of the women. -It will be generally admitted by those who know, that, -but for the women of the seceding States, the war of -the Rebellion would have been waged more feebly, been -sooner ended, and far more easily forgotten. Nay, I -was told a few days since by an able Southern lawyer, -who was long the mayor of one of the largest Southern -cities, that in his opinion the practice of duelling—which -is an epitome of war—owes its continued existence -at the South to a sustaining public sentiment -among the women.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Again, where the sympathy of women is wholly on -the side of right, it is by no means safe to assume that -their mode of enforcing that sentiment will be equally -judicious. Take, for instance, the temperance cause. -It is usual to assume that women are a unit on that -question. When we look at the two extremes of -society,—the fine lady pressing wine upon her New -Year’s visitors, and the Irishwoman laying in a family -supply of whiskey to last over Sunday,—the assumption -seems hasty. But grant it. Is it equally sure, -that when woman takes hold of that most difficult of all -legislation, the license and prohibitory laws, she will -handle them more wisely than men have done? Will -her more ardent zeal solve the problem on which so much -zeal has already been lavished in vain? In large cities, -for instance, where there is already more law than can -be enforced, will her additional ballots afford the means -to enforce it? It may be so; but it seems wiser not -to predict nor to anticipate, but to wait and hope.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_319'>319</span>It is no reproach on woman to say that she is not infallible -on particular questions. There is much reason -to suppose that in politics, as in every other sphere, the -joint action of the sexes will be better and wiser than -that of either singly. It seems obvious that the experiment -of republican government will be more fairly -tried when one-half the race is no longer disfranchised. -It is quite certain, at any rate, that no class can trust -its rights to the mercy and chivalry of any other, but -that, the weaker it is, the more it needs all political -aids and securities for self-protection. Thus far, we -are on safe ground; and here, as it seems to me, the -claim for suffrage may securely rest. To go farther in -our assertions, seems to me unsafe, although many -of our wisest and most eloquent may differ from me; -and, the nearer we approach success, the more important -it is to look to our weapons. It is a plausible and -tempting argument, to claim suffrage for woman on -the ground that she is an angel; but I think it will -prove wiser, in the end, to claim it for her as being -human.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_320'>320</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXXIV.<br /> <span class='large'>FIRST-CLASS CARRIAGES.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>In a hotly contested municipal election, the other -day, an active political manager was telling me his tactics. -“We have to send carriages for some of the -voters,” he said. “First-class carriages! If we -undertake to wait on ’em, we must do it in good shape, -and not leave the best carriages to be hired by the -other party.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>I am not much given to predicting just what will -happen when women vote; but I confidently assert -that they will be taken to the polls, if they wish, in -first-class carriages. If the best horses are to be harnessed, -and the best cushions selected, and every panel -of the coach rubbed till you can see your face in it, -merely to accommodate some elderly man who lives -two blocks away, and could walk to the polls very -easily, then how much more will these luxuries be -placed at the service of every woman, young or old, -whose presence at the polls is made doubtful by mud, -or snow, or the prospect of a shower!</p> - -<p class='c014'>But the carriage is only the beginning of the polite -attentions that will soon appear. When we see the -transformation undergone by every ferry-boat and -every railway-station, so soon as it comes to be frequented -by women, who can doubt that voting-places -<span class='pageno' id='Page_321'>321</span>will experience the same change? They will soon -have—at least in the “ladies’ department,”—elegance -instead of discomfort, beauty for ashes, plenty -of rocking-chairs, and no need of spittoons.<a id='r19' /><a href='#f19' class='c018'><sup>[19]</sup></a> Very -possibly they may have all the modern conveniences -and inconveniences,—furnace-registers, tea-kettles, -Washington-pies, and a young lady to give checks for -bundles. Who knows what elaborate comforts, what -queenly luxuries, may be offered to women at voting-places, -when the time has finally arrived to sue for -their votes?</p> - -<div class='footnote' id='f19'> -<p class='c014'><a href='#r19'>19</a>. Since this was written, the legislature of Massachusetts has passed, -with little opposition, a law prohibiting smoking at voting-places,—an -explicit fulfilment of this prophecy.</p> -</div> - -<p class='c014'>The common impression has always been quite different -from this. People look at the coarseness and -dirt now visible at so many voting-places, and say, -“Would you expose women to all that?” But these -places are not dirtier than a railway smoking-car; and -there is no more coarseness than in any ferry-boat -which is, for whatever reason, used by men only. -You do not look into those places, and say with indignation, -“Never, if I can help it, shall my wife or my -beloved great-grandmother travel by steamboat or by -rail!” You know that with these exemplary relatives -will enter order and quiet, carpets and curtains, brooms -and dusters. Why should it be otherwise with wardrooms -and town-halls?</p> - -<p class='c014'>There is not an atom more of intrinsic difficulty in -providing a decorous ladies’ room for a voting-place, -than for a post-office or a railway-station; and it is as -simple a thing to vote a ticket as to buy one. This -<span class='pageno' id='Page_322'>322</span>being thus easily practicable, all men will desire to provide -it. And the example of the first-class carriages -shows that the parties will vie with each other in these -pleasing arrangements. They will be driven to it, -whether they wish it or not. The party which has -most consistently and resolutely kept woman away -from the ballot-box will be the very party compelled, -for the sake of self-preservation, to make her “rights” -agreeable to her when once she gets them. A few -stupid or noisy men may indeed try to make the polls -unattractive to her, the very first time; but the result -of this little experiment will be so disastrous that the -offenders will be sternly suppressed by their own party-leaders, -before another election-day comes. It will -soon become clear, that, of all possible ways of losing -votes, the surest lies in treating women rudely.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Lucy Stone tells a story of a good man in Kansas, -who, having done all he could to prevent women from -being allowed to vote on school questions, was finally -comforted, when that measure passed, by the thought -that he should at least secure his wife’s vote for a pet -schoolhouse of his own. Election-day came, and the -newly enfranchised matron showed the most culpable -indifference to her privileges. She made breakfast as -usual, went about her housework, and did on that perilous -day precisely the things that her anxious husband -had always predicted that women never would do -under such circumstances. His hints and advice found -no response; and nothing short of the best pair of -horses and the best wagon finally sufficed to take the -farmer’s wife to the polls. I am not the least afraid -that women will find voting a rude or disagreeable -<span class='pageno' id='Page_323'>323</span>arrangement. There is more danger of their being -treated too well, and being too much attacked and allured -by these cheap cajoleries. But women are pretty -shrewd, and can probably be trusted to go to the polls, -even in first-class carriages.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_324'>324</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXXV.<br /> <span class='large'>EDUCATION <i><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">via</span></i> SUFFRAGE.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>I know a rich bachelor of large property, who fatigues -his friends by perpetual denunciations of every -thing American, and especially of universal suffrage. -He rarely votes; and I was much amazed, when the -popular vote was to be taken on building an expensive -schoolhouse, to see him go to the polls, and vote in the -affirmative. On being asked his reason, he explained, -that, while we labored under the calamity of universal -(male) suffrage, he thought it best to mitigate its evils -by educating the voters. In short, he wished, as Mr. -Lowe said in England when the last Reform Bill -passed, “to prevail upon our future masters to learn -their alphabets.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>These motives may not be generous; but the schoolhouses, -when they are built, are just as useful. Even -girls get the benefit of them, though the long delay in -many places before girls got their share came in part -from the want of this obvious stimulus. It is universal -male suffrage that guarantees schoolhouse and -school. The most selfish man understands that argument: -“We must educate the masses, if it is only to -keep them from our throats.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>But there is a wider way in which suffrage guarantees -education. At every election-time, political information -<span class='pageno' id='Page_325'>325</span>is poured upon the whole voting community, till it -is deluged. Presses run night and day to print newspaper -extras; clerks sit up all night to frank congressional -speeches; the most eloquent men in the -community expound the most difficult matters to the -ignorant. Of course each party affords only its own -point of view; but every man has a neighbor who is -put under treatment by some other party, and who is -constantly attacking all who will listen to his provoking -and pestilent counter-statements. All the common-school -education of the United States does not equal -the education of election-day; and, as in some States -elections are held very often, this popular university -seems to be kept in session almost the whole year -round. The consequence is a remarkable average popular -knowledge of political affairs,—a training which -American women now miss, but which will come to -them with the ballot.</p> - -<p class='c014'>And in still another way, there will be an education -coming to woman from the right of suffrage. It will -come from her own sex, proceeding from highest to -lowest. We often hear it said, that, after enfranchisement, -the more educated women will not vote, while -the ignorant will. But Mrs. Howe admirably pointed -out, at a Philadelphia convention, that, the moment -women have the ballot, it will become the pressing -duty of the more educated women, even in self-protection, -to train the rest. The very fact of the danger -will be a stimulus to duty, with women, as it already is -with men.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It has always seemed to me rather childish, in a man -of superior education, or talent, or wealth, to complain -<span class='pageno' id='Page_326'>326</span>that when election-day comes he has no more votes -than the man who plants his potatoes or puts in his -coal. The truth is, that under the most thorough -system of universal suffrage the man of wealth or -talent or natural leadership has still a disproportionate -influence, still casts a hundred votes where the poor -or ignorant or feeble man throws but one. Even the -outrages of New York elections turned out to be caused -by the fact that the leading rogues had used their -brains and energy, while the men of character had not. -When it came to the point, it was found that a few -caricatures by Nast and a few columns of figures in -the Times were more than a match for all the repeaters -of the ring. It is always so. Andrew Johnson, with -all the patronage of the nation, had not the influence -of “Nasby” with his one newspaper. The whole -Chinese question was perceptibly and instantly modified -when Harte wrote “The Heathen Chinee.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>These things being so, it indicates feebleness or -dyspepsia when an educated man is heard whining, -about election-time, with his fears of ignorant voting. -It is his business to enlighten and control that ignorance. -With a voice and a pen at his command, with -a town-hall in every town for the one, and a newspaper -in every village for the other, he has such advantages -over his ignorant neighbors that the only doubt is -whether his privileges are not greater than he deserves. -For one, in writing for the press, I am impressed by -the undue greatness, not by the littleness, of the power -I wield. And what is true of men will be true of -women. If the educated women of America have not -brains or energy enough to control, in the long-run, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_327'>327</span>the votes of the ignorant women around them, they -will deserve a severe lesson, and will be sure, like the -men in New York, to receive it. And thenceforward -they will educate and guide that ignorance, instead of -evading or cringing before it.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But I have no fear about the matter. It is a libel -on American women to say that they will not go anywhere -or do any thing which is for the good of their -children and their husbands. Travel West on any of -our great lines of railroad, and see what women undergo -in transporting their households to their new homes. -See the watching and the feeding, and the endless answers -to the endless questions, and the toil to keep -little Sarah warm, and little Johnny cool, and the baby -comfortable. What a hungry, tired, jaded, forlorn -mass of humanity it is, as the sun rises on it each -morning, in the soiled and breathless railway-car! Yet -that household group is America in the making; those -are the future kings and queens, the little princes and -princesses, of this land. Now, is the mother who has -undergone for the transportation of these children all -this enormous labor, to shrink at her journey’s end -from the slight additional labor of going to the polls to -vote whether those little ones shall have schools or -rumshops? The thought is an absurdity. A few fine -ladies in cities will fear to spoil their silk dresses, as a -few foppish gentlemen now fear for their broadcloth. -But the mass of intelligent American women will vote, -as do the mass of men.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_328'>328</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXXVI.<br /> <span class='large'>“OFF WITH HER HEAD!”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>In “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland,” the Queen -of Hearts settles all disputes at croquet by ordering -somebody’s head to be taken off. It is the old royal -remedy. The Roman Tarquin, when his son sent to ask -him the best way of reducing a discontented city, merely -slashed off the heads of the tallest poppies, as he walked -in the garden. The young man took the hint, and performed -a similar process upon the leading citizens.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Every year makes it plainer that the community must -imitate Tarquinius Superbus and the Queen of Hearts -if it wishes to get rid of the woman suffrage movement. -So long as every woman favors it whenever she gets -her head above a certain point, so long those conspicuous -heads must be recognized. You must either put -them on the voting-list, or on the list ordered for immediate -execution: there is no middle ground.</p> - -<p class='c014'>There are the women who write books, for instance. -When authorship first came up among the women of -America, they not only claimed nothing more than the -mere privilege of having brains, but they almost apologized -for that. Their early authors, as Mrs. Child -and Mrs. Leslie, had a way of preparing a cookery-book -apiece, as a propitiation to the tyrant man, before -proceeding to what is called “the intellectual feast.” -<span class='pageno' id='Page_329'>329</span>They held, with Miss Bremer, that you can get any -thing you like from a man if you will only have something -nice to pop into his mouth. Mrs. Sarah J. Hale, -in her “Woman’s Record,” published twenty years ago, -adopted a different form of submission. She seemed -very anxious to prove that women had taken a prominent -part in the world; but also to show, that, if they -were only forgiven for this, they would never, never, -never make themselves any more prominent. It is but -within a few years that literary women have dared to go -beyond literature, and ask for a vote besides.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But now, with what a terrible confidence they come to -the demand for suffrage when they acquire voice enough -to make themselves heard! Mrs. Stowe helps to free -Uncle Tom in his cabin, and then strikes for the freedom -of women in her own “Hearth and Home.” Mrs. -Howe writes the “Battle Hymn of the Republic,” and -keeps on writing more battle-hymns in behalf of her -own sex. Miss Alcott not only delineates “Little -Women,” but wishes to emancipate them. Miss Phelps -desires to see the “Gates Ajar” for her sex, both in -heaven and on earth. Mrs. Child, who risked her -literary popularity in early life by her “Appeal for that -Class of Americans called Africans,” was as ready to -risk it again for that class of Americans called women.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Of course, there are social circles in America where -all desire for leadership on the part of literary women -would be repudiated; nay, where the fact that a -woman had written a book would imply a loss of caste. -When Karl von Beethoven signed himself “<em>Gutsbesitzer</em>,” -or “land proprietor,” his brother Ludwig signed -himself “<em>Hirnbesitzer</em>,” or “proprietor of a brain.” -<span class='pageno' id='Page_330'>330</span>Posterity remembers only the great musical composer; -yet, doubtless, to the society of that period, the stupid -elder brother was by far the greater man. Such perversities -cannot be helped; but I write for reasonable -people. Among the women who dance the German, -woman suffrage may be just now unpopular; but the -women who translate German will in the long-run have -most influence, and their verdict seems to tend the -other way. It is said that the leading dancer among -the young men of one of our cities was transformed -into an equally prominent lawyer by a single suggestion -from an elder sister, that it was “better to be a man of -books than a man of toes.” It is likely that America -will be more influenced at last by the women of heads -than by the women of heels.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_331'>331</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXXVII.<br /> <span class='large'>FOLLOW YOUR LEADERS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>“There go thirty thousand men,” shouted the Portuguese, -as Wellington, with a few staff-officers, rode -along the mountain-side. The action of the leaders’ -minds, in any direction, has a value out of all proportion -to their numbers. In a campaign, there is a council -of officers,—Grant and Sherman and Sheridan perhaps. -They are but a trifling minority, yet what they -plan the whole army will do; and such is the faith in -a real leader, that, were all the restraints of discipline -for the moment relaxed, the rank and file would still -follow his judgment. What a few general officers see -to be the best to-day, the sergeants and corporals and -private soldiers will usually see to be best to-morrow.</p> - -<p class='c014'>In peace, also, there is a silent leadership; only -that in peace, as there is more time to spare, the -leaders are expected to persuade the rank and file, -instead of commanding them. Yet it comes to the -same thing in the end. The movement begins with -certain guides, and, if you wish to know the future, -keep your eye on them. If you wish to know what is -already decided, ask the majority; but, if you wish to -find out what is likely to be done next, ask the leaders.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is constantly said that the majority of women do -not yet desire to vote, and it is true. But, to find out -<span class='pageno' id='Page_332'>332</span>whether they are likely to wish for it, we must keep -our eyes on the women who lead their sex. The representative -women,—those who naturally stand for the -rest, those most eminent for knowledge and self-devotion,—how -do they view the thing? The rank and file -do not yet demand the ballot, you say; but how is it -with the general officers?</p> - -<p class='c014'>Now, it is a remarkable fact, about which those who -have watched this movement for twenty years can -hardly be mistaken, that almost any woman who -reaches a certain point of intellectual or moral development -will presently be found desiring the ballot for her -sex. If this be so, it predicts the future. It is the -judgment of Grant and Sherman and Sheridan as -against that of the average private soldier of the Two -Hundredth Infantry. Set aside, if you please, the specialists -of this particular agitation,—those who were -first known to the public through its advocacy. There -is no just reason why they should be set aside, yet concede -that for a moment. The fact remains that the -ablest women in the land—those who were recognized -as ablest in other spheres, before they took this particular -duty upon them—are extremely apt to assume -this cross when they reach a certain stage of development.</p> - -<p class='c014'>When Margaret Fuller first came forward into literature, -she supposed that literature was all she wanted. -It was not till she came to write upon woman’s position -that she discovered what woman needed. Clara Barton, -driving her ambulance or her supply-wagon at the -battle’s edge, did not foresee, perhaps, that she should -make that touching appeal, when the battle was over, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_333'>333</span>imploring her own enfranchisement from the soldiers -she had befriended. Lydia Maria Child, Julia Ward -Howe, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Louisa Alcott, came to -the claim for the ballot earlier than a million others, -because they were the intellectual leaders of American -womanhood. They saw farthest, because they were in -the highest place. They were the recognized representatives -of their sex before they gave in their adhesion -to the new demand. Their judgment is as the -judgment of the council of officers; while Flora McFlimsey’s -opinion is as the opinion of John Smith, -unassigned recruit. But, if the generals make arrangements -for a battle, the chance is that John Smith will -have to take a hand in it, or else run away.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is a rare thing for the petition for suffrage from -any town to comprise the majority of women in that -town. It makes no difference: if there are few women -in the town who want to vote, there is as much -propriety in their voting as if there were ten millions, -so long as the majority are equally protected in their -right to stay at home. But, when the names of petitioners -come to be weighed as well as counted, the -character, the purity, the intelligence, the social and -domestic value, of the petitioners, is seldom denied. -The women who wish to vote are not the idle, the ignorant, -the narrow-minded, or the vicious; they are -not “the dangerous classes:” they represent the best -class in the community, when tried by the highest -standard. They are the natural leaders. What they -now see to be right, will also be perceived even by the -foolish and the ignorant by and by.</p> - -<p class='c014'>In a poultry-yard in spring, when the first brood of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_334'>334</span>ducklings go toddling to the water-side, no doubt all -the younger or feebler broods, just hatched out of -similar eggs, think these innovators dreadfully mistaken. -“You are out of place,” they feebly pipe. -“See how happy we are in our safe nests. Perhaps, -by and by, when properly introduced into society, we -may run about a little on land, but to swim!—never!” -Meanwhile their elder kindred are splashing and diving -in ecstasy; and, so surely as they are born ducklings, -all the rest will swim in their turn. The instinct -of the first duck solves the problem for all the rest. It -is a mere question of time. Sooner or later, all the -broods in the most conservative yard will follow their -leaders.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_335'>335</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXXVIII.<br /> <span class='large'>HOW TO MAKE WOMEN UNDERSTAND POLITICS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>An English member of Parliament said in a speech, -some years ago, that the stupidest man had a clearer -understanding of political questions than the brightest -woman. He did not find it convenient to say what must -be the condition of a nation which for many years has -had a woman for its sovereign; but he certainly said -bluntly what many men feel. It is not indeed very -hard to find the source of this feeling. It is not -merely that women are inexperienced in questions of -finance or administrative practice, for many men are -equally ignorant of these. But it is undoubtedly true -of a large class of more fundamental questions,—as, -for instance, of some now pending at Washington,—which -even many clear-headed women find it hard to -understand, while men of far less general training comprehend -them entirely. Questions of the distribution -of power, for instance, between the executive, judicial, -and legislative branches of government,—or between -the United States government and those of the separate -States,—belong to the class I mean. Many -women of great intelligence show a hazy indistinctness -of views when the question arises whether it is -the business of the General Government to preserve -<span class='pageno' id='Page_336'>336</span>order at the voting-places at a congressional election, -for instance, as the Republicans hold; or whether it -should be left absolutely in the hands of the State officials, -as the Democrats maintain. Most women would -probably say that so long as order was preserved, it -made very little difference who did it. Yet, if one -goes into a shoe-shop or a blacksmith’s shop, one may -hear just these questions discussed in all their bearings -by uneducated men, and it will be seen that they involve -a principle. Why is this difference? Does it -show some constitutional inferiority in women, as to -this particular faculty?</p> - -<p class='c014'>The question is best solved by considering a case -somewhat parallel. The South Carolina negroes were -considered very stupid, even by many who knew them; -and they certainly were densely ignorant on many subjects. -Put face to face with a difficult point of finance -legislation, I think they would have been found to -know even less about it than I do. Yet the abolition -of slavery was held in those days by many great statesmen -to be a subject so difficult that they shrank from -discussing it; and nevertheless I used to find that -these ignorant men understood it quite clearly in all -its bearings. Offer a bit of sophistry to them, try to -blind them with false logic on this subject, and they -would detect it as promptly, and answer it as keenly, as -Garrison or Phillips would have done; and, indeed, -they would give very much the same answers. What -was the reason? Not that they were half wise and half -stupid; but that they were dull where their own interests -had not trained them, and they were sharp and -keen where their own interests were concerned.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_337'>337</span>I have no doubt that it will be so with women when -they vote. About some things they will be slow to -learn; but, about all that immediately concerns themselves, -they will know more at the very beginning than -many wise men have learned since the world began. -How long it took for English-speaking men to correct, -even partially, the iniquities of the old common law!—but -a parliament of women would have set aside at a -single sitting the alleged right of the husband to correct -his wife with a stick no bigger than his thumb. -It took the men of a certain State of this Union a good -many years to see that it was an outrage to confiscate -to the State one-half the property of a man who died -childless, leaving his widow only the other half; but a -legislature of women would have annihilated that enormity -by a single day’s work. I have never seen reason -to believe that women on general questions would -act more wisely or more conscientiously, as a rule, -than men: but self-preservation is a wonderful quickener -of the brain; and, in all questions bearing on -their own rights and opportunities as women, it is -they who will prove shrewd and keen, and men who -will prove obtuse, as indeed they have usually been.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Another point that adds force to this is the fact that -wherever women, by their special position, have more -at stake than usual in public affairs, even as now organized, -they are apt to be equal to the occasion. -When the men of South Carolina were ready to go to -war for the “States-Rights” doctrines of Calhoun, the -women of that State had also those doctrines at their -fingers’-ends. At Washington, where politics make the -breath of life, you will often find the wives of members -<span class='pageno' id='Page_338'>338</span>of Congress following the debates, and noting every -point gained or lost, because these are matters in which -they and their families are personally concerned; and, -as for that army of women employed in the “departments” -of the government, they are politicians every -one, because their bread depends upon it.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The inference is, that, if women as a class are now -unfitted for politics, it is because they have not that -pressure of personal interest and responsibility by -which men are unconsciously trained. Give this, and -self-interest will do the rest; aided by that power of -conscience and affection which is certainly not less in -them than in men, even if we claim no more. A -young lady of my acquaintance opposed woman suffrage -in conversation on various grounds, one of -which was that it would, if enacted, compel her to -read the newspapers, which she greatly disliked. I -pleaded that this was not a fatal objection; since many -men voted “early and often” without reading them, -and in fact without knowing how to read at all. She -said, in reply, that this might do for men, but that -women were far more conscientious, and, if they were -once compelled to vote, they would wish to know what -they were voting for. This seemed to me to contain -the whole philosophy of the matter; and I respected -the keenness of her suggestion, though it led me to an -opposite conclusion.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_339'>339</span> - <h3 class='c004'>LXXXIX.<br /> <span class='large'>“INFERIOR TO MAN, AND NEAR TO ANGELS.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>If it were anywhere the custom to disfranchise persons -of superior virtue because of their virtue, and to -present others with the ballot, simply because they -had been in the State Prison,—then the exclusion of -women from political rights would be a high compliment, -no doubt. But I can find no record in history -of any such legislation, unless so far as it is contained -in the doubtful tradition of the Tuscan city of Pistoia, -where men are said to have been ennobled as a punishment -for crime. Among us crime may often be a -covert means of political prominence, but it is not the -ostensible ground; nor are people habitually struck -from the voting-lists for performing some rare and -eminent service, such as saving human life, or reading -every word of a Presidential message. If a man has -been President of the United States, we do not disfranchise -him thenceforward; if he has been governor, -we do not declare him thenceforth ineligible to the -office of United States senator. On the contrary, the -supposed reward of high merit is to give higher civic -privileges. Sometimes these are even forced on unwilling -recipients, as when Plymouth Colony in 1633 -imposed a fine of twenty pounds on any one who should -refuse the office of governor.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_340'>340</span>It is utterly contrary to all tradition and precedent, -therefore, to suppose that women have been hitherto -disfranchised because of any supposed superiority. -Indeed, the theory is self-annihilating, and involves all -supporters in hopeless inconsistency. Thus the Southern -slaveholders were wont to argue that a negro was -only blest when a slave, and there was no such inhumanity -as to free him. Then, if a slave happened to -save his master’s life, he was rewarded by emancipation -immediately, amid general applause. The act -refuted the theory. And so, every time we have disfranchised -a rebel, or presented some eminent foreigner -with the freedom of a city, we have recognized that -enfranchisement, after all, means honor, and disfranchisement -implies disgrace.</p> - -<p class='c014'>I do not see how any woman can help a thrill of -indignation, when she first opens her eyes to the fact -that it is really contempt, not reverence, that has so -long kept her sex from an equal share of legal, political, -and educational rights. In spite of the duty paid -to individual women as mothers, in spite of the reverence -paid by the Greeks and the Germanic races -to certain women as priestesses and sibyls, the fact -remains that this sex has been generally recognized, -in past ages of the human race, as stamped by hopeless -inferiority, not by angelic superiority. This is carried -so far, that a certain taint of actual inferiority is held -to attach to women, in barbarous nations. Among -certain Indian tribes, the service of the gods is defiled -if a woman but touches the implements of sacrifice; -and a Turk apologizes to a Christian physician for the -mention of the women of his family, in the phrases -<span class='pageno' id='Page_341'>341</span>used to soften the mention of any degrading creature. -Mr. Leland tells us, that, among the English gypsies, -any object that a woman treads upon, or sweeps with -the skirts of her dress, is destroyed or made away with -in some way, as unfit for use. In reading the history -of manners, it is easy to trace the steps from this -degradation up to the point now attained, such as it is. -Yet even the habit of physiological contempt is not -gone, as readers of late controversies on “Sex in Education” -know full well; and I do not see how any -one can read history without seeing, all around us, in -society, education, and politics, the tradition of inferiority. -Many laws and usages which in themselves -might not strike all women as intrinsically worth -striving for—as the exclusion of women from colleges -or from the ballot-box—assume great importance to -a woman’s self-respect, when she sees in these the plain -survival of the same contempt that once took much -grosser forms.</p> - -<p class='c014'>And it must be remembered that in civilized communities -the cynics, who still frankly express this utter -contempt, are better friends to women than the flatterers, -who conceal it in the drawing-room, and only utter -it freely in the lecture-room, the club, and the North -American Review. Contempt at least arouses pride -and energy. To be sure, in the face of history, the -contemptuous tone in regard to women seems to me -untrue, unfair, and dastardly; but, like any other extreme -injustice, it leads to re-action. It helps to awaken -women from that shallow dream of self-complacency -into which flattery lulls them. There is something -tonic in the manly arrogance of Fitzjames Stephen, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_342'>342</span>who derides the thought that the marriage-contract can -be treated as in any sense a contract between equals; -but there is something that debilitates in the dulcet -counsel given by an anonymous gentleman, in an old -volume of the Ladies’ Magazine that lies before me, -“She ought to present herself as a being made to -please, to love, and to seek support; <em>a being inferior -to man, and near to angels.</em>”</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_343'>343</span> - <h2 class='c008'>OBJECTIONS TO SUFFRAGE.</h2> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>“When you were weak and I was strong, I toiled for you. -Now you are strong and I am weak. Because of my work for -you, I ask your aid. I ask the ballot for myself and my sex. -As I stood by you, I pray you stand by me and mine.”—<span class='sc'>Clara -Barton</span>.</p> - -<p class='c014'>[Appeal to the returned soldiers of the United States, written -from Geneva, Switzerland, by Clara Barton, invalided by -long service in the hospitals and on the field during the civil -war.]</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_345'>345</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XC.<br /> <span class='large'>THE FACT OF SEX.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>It is constantly said that the advocates of woman -suffrage ignore the fact of sex. On the contrary, they -seem to me to be the only people who do not ignore it.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Were there no such thing as sexual difference, the -wrong done to woman by disfranchisement would be -far less. It is precisely because her traits, habits, -needs, and probable demands are distinct from those -of man, that she is not, never was, never can, and -never will be, justly represented by him. It is not -merely that a vast number of human individuals are -disfranchised; it is not even because in many of our -States the disfranchisement extends to a majority, that -the evil is so great; it is not merely that we disfranchise -so many units and tens: but we exclude a special -element, a peculiar power, a distinct interest,—in a -word, a sex.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Whether this sex is more or less wise, more or less -important, than the other sex, does not affect the argument: -it is a sex, and, being such, is more absolutely -distinct from the other than is any mere race from any -other race. The more you emphasize the fact of sex, -the more you strengthen our argument. If the white -man cannot justly represent the negro,—although the -two races are now so amalgamated that not even the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_346'>346</span>microscope can always decide to which race one belongs,—how -impossible that one sex should stand in -legislation for the other sex!</p> - -<p class='c014'>This is so clear, that, so soon as it is stated, there is -a shifting of the ground. “But consider the danger -of introducing the sexual influence into legislation!” ... -Then we are sure to be confronted with the case -of Miss Vinnie Ream, the sculptor. See how that -beguiling damsel cajoled all Congress into buying poor -statues! they say. If one woman could do so much, -how would it be with one hundred? Precisely the Irishman’s -argument against the use of pillows: he had put -one feather on a rock, and found it a very uncomfortable -support. Grant, for the sake of argument, that -Miss Ream gave us poor art; but what gave her so -much power? Plainly, that she was but a single feather. -Congress being composed exclusively of men, the -mere fact of her sex gave her an exceptional and dangerous -influence. Fill a dozen of the seats in Congress -with women, and that danger at least will be cancelled. -The taste in art may be no better; but an artist will -no more be selected for being a pretty girl than now -for being a pretty boy. So in all such cases. Here, -as everywhere, it is the advocate of woman suffrage -who wishes to recognize the fact of sex, and guard -against its perils.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is precisely so in education. Believing boys and -girls to be unlike, and yet seeing them to be placed by -the Creator on the same planet and in the same family, -we hold it safer to follow his method. As they are born -to interest each other, to stimulate each other, to excite -each other, it seems better to let this impulse work itself -<span class='pageno' id='Page_347'>347</span>off in a natural way,—to let in upon it the fresh air -and the daylight, instead of attempting to suppress and -destroy it. In a mixed school, as in a family, the fact -of sex presents itself as an unconscious, healthy, mutual -stimulus. It is in the separate schools that the -healthy relation vanishes, and the thought of sex becomes -a morbid and diseased thing. This observation -first occurred to me when a pupil and a teacher in boys’ -boarding-schools years ago: there was such marked -superiority as to sexual refinement in the day-scholars, -who saw their sisters and the friends of their sisters -every day. All later experience of our public-school -system has confirmed this opinion. It is because I -believe the distinction of sex to be momentous, that -I dread to see the sexes educated apart.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The truth of the whole matter is, that Nature will -have her rights—innocently if she can, guiltily if she -must; and it is a little amusing that the writer of an -ingenious paper on the other side, called “Sex in Politics,” -in an able New York journal, puts our case -better than I can put it, before he gets through, only -that he is then speaking of wealth, not women: “Anybody -who considers seriously what is meant by the -conflict between labor and capital, of which we are -only just witnessing the beginning, and what is to be -done <em>to give money legitimately that influence on legislation -which it now exercises illegitimately</em>, must acknowledge -at once that the next generation will have a thorny -path to travel.” The Italics are my own. Precisely -what this writer wishes to secure for money, we claim -for the disfranchised half of the human race,—open -instead of secret influence; the English tradition instead -<span class='pageno' id='Page_348'>348</span>of the French; women as rulers, not as kings’ -mistresses; women as legislators, not merely as lobbyists; -women employing in legitimate form that power -which they will otherwise illegitimately wield. This is -all our demand.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_349'>349</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XCI.<br /> <span class='large'>HOW WILL IT RESULT?</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>“It would be a great convenience, my hearers,” -said old Parson Withington of Newbury, “if the moral -of a fable could only be written at the beginning of it, -instead of the end. But it never is.” Commonly the -only thing to be done is to get hold of a few general -principles, hold to those, and trust that all will turn out -well. No matter how thoroughly a reform may have -been discussed,—negro-emancipation or free-trade, for -instance,—it is a step in the dark at last, and the detailed -results never turn out to be precisely according -to the programme.</p> - -<p class='c014'>An “esteemed correspondent,” who has written -some of the best things yet said in America in behalf -of the enfranchisement of woman, writes privately to -express some solicitude, since, as she thinks, we are -not ready for it yet. “I am convinced,” she writes, -“of the abstract right of women to vote; but all I see -of the conduct of the existing women, into whose -hands this change would throw the power, inclines me -to hope that this power will not be conceded till education -shall have prepared a class of women fit to take -the responsibilities.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Gradual emancipation, in short!—for fear of trusting -truth and justice to take care of themselves. Who -<span class='pageno' id='Page_350'>350</span>knew, when the negroes were set free, whether they -would at first use their freedom well, or ill? Would -they work? would they avoid crimes? would they justify -their freedom? The theory of education and preparation -seemed very plausible. Against that, there was -only the plain theory which Elizabeth Heyrick first -announced to England,—“Immediate, unconditional -emancipation.” “The best preparation for freedom -is freedom.” What was true of the negroes then is -true of women now.</p> - -<p class='c014'>“The lovelier traits of womanhood,” writes earnestly -our correspondent, “simplicity, faith, guilelessness, -unfit them to conduct public affairs, where one -must deal with quacks and charlatans.... We are -not all at once ‘as gods, knowing good and evil;’ and -the very innocency of our lives, and the habits of pure -homes, unfit us to manage a certain class who will flock -to this standard.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>But the basis of all republican government is in the -assumption that good is ultimately stronger than evil. -If we once abandon this, our theory has gone to pieces, -at any rate. If we hold to it, good women are no -more helpless and useless than good men. The argument -that would here disfranchise women has been used -before now to disfranchise clergymen. I believe that -in some States they are still disfranchised; and, if they -are not, it is partly because good is found to be as -strong as evil, after all, and partly because clergymen -are not found to be so angelically good as to be useless. -I am very confident that both these truths will -be found to apply to women also.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Whatever else happens, we may be pretty sure that -<span class='pageno' id='Page_351'>351</span>one thing will. The first step towards the enfranchisement -of women will blow to the winds the tradition of -the angelic superiority of women. Just as surely as -women vote, we shall have occasionally women politicians, -women corruptionists, and women demagogues. -Conceding, for the sake of courtesy, that none such -now exist, they will be born as instantaneously, after -enfranchisement, as the frogs begin to pipe in the -spring. Those who doubt it ignore human nature; -and, if they are not prepared for this fact, they had -better consider it in season, and take sides accordingly. -In these pages, at least, they have been warned.</p> - -<p class='c014'>What then? Suppose women are not “as gods, -knowing good and evil:” they are not to be emancipated -as gods, but as fallible human beings. They -are to come out of an ignorant innocence, that may -be only weakness, into a wise innocence that will be -strength. It is too late to remand American women -into a Turkish or Jewish tutelage: they have emerged -too far not to come farther. In a certain sense, no -doubt, the butterfly is safest in the chrysalis. When -the soft thing begins to emerge, the world certainly -seems a dangerous place; and it is hard to say what -will be the result of the emancipation. But when she -is once half out, there is no safety for the pretty creature -but to come the rest of the way, and use her wings.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_352'>352</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XCII.<br /> <span class='large'>“I HAVE ALL THE RIGHTS I WANT.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>When Dr. Johnson had published his English Dictionary, -and was asked by a lady how he chanced to -make a certain mistake that she pointed out, he answered, -“Ignorance, madam, pure ignorance.” I -always feel disposed to make the same comment on the -assertion of any woman that she has all the rights she -wants. For every woman is, or may be, or might have -been, a mother. And when she comes to know that -even now, in many parts of the Union, a married mother -has no legal right to her child, I should think her tongue -would cleave to her mouth before she would utter those -foolish words again.</p> - -<p class='c014'>All the things I ever heard or read against slavery -did not fix in my soul such a hostility to it as a single -scene in a Missouri slave-market some twenty-five years -ago. As I sat there, a purchaser came in to buy a -little girl to wait on his wife. Three little sisters were -brought in, from eight to twelve years old: they were -mulattoes, with sweet, gentle manners; they had evidently -been taken good care of, and their pink-calico -frocks were clean and whole. The gentleman chose one -of them, and then asked her, good-naturedly enough, -if she did not wish to go with him. She burst into -tears, and said, “I would rather stay with my mother.” -<span class='pageno' id='Page_353'>353</span>But her tears were as powerless, of course, as so many -salt drops from the ocean.</p> - -<p class='c014'>That was all. But all the horrors of “Uncle Tom’s -Cabin,” the stories told me by fugitive slaves, the -scarred backs I afterwards saw by dozens among colored -recruits, did not impress me as did that hour in the jail. -The whole probable career of that poor, wronged, -motherless, shrinking child passed before me in fancy. -It seemed to me that a man must be utterly lost to all -manly instincts who would not give his life to overthrow -such a system. It seemed to me that the woman who -could tolerate, much less defend it, could not herself be -true, could not be pure, or must be fearfully and grossly -ignorant.</p> - -<p class='c014'>You acquiesce, fair lady. You say it was horrible -indeed, but, thank God! it is past. Past? Is it so? -Past, if you please, as to the law of slavery, but, as to -the legal position of woman, still a fearful reality. It -is not twelve years since a scene took place in a Boston -court-room, before Chief-Justice Chapman, which was -worse, in this respect, than that scene in St. Louis, inasmuch -as the mother was present when the child was -taken away, and the wrong was sanctioned by the highest -judicial officer of the State. Two little girls, who -had been taken from their mother by their guardian, -their father being dead, had taken refuge with her -against his wishes; and he brought them into court -under a writ of <i><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">habeas corpus</span></i>, and the court awarded -them to him as against their mother. “The little ones -were very much affected,” says the Boston Herald, “by -the result of the decision which separated them from -their mother; and force was required to remove them -<span class='pageno' id='Page_354'>354</span>from the court-room. The distress of the mother was -also very evident.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>There must have been some special reason, you say, -for such a seeming outrage: she was a bad woman. -No: she was “a lady of the highest respectability.” -No charge was made against her: but, being left a -widow, she had married again; and for that, and that -only, so far as appears, the court took from her the -guardianship of her own children,—bone of her bone, -and flesh of her flesh, the children for whom she had -borne the deepest physical agony of womanhood,—and -awarded them to somebody else.</p> - -<p class='c014'>You say, “But her second husband might have misused -the children.” Might? So the guardian might, -and that where they had no mother to protect them. -Had the father been left a widower, he might have -made a half-dozen successive marriages, have brought -stepmother after stepmother to control these children, -and no court could have interfered. The father is recognized -before the law as the natural guardian of the -children. The mother, even though she be left a widow, -is not. The consequence is a series of outrages of which -only a few scattered instances come before the public; -just as in slavery, out of a hundred little girls sold away -from their parents, only one case might ever be mentioned -in any newspaper.</p> - -<p class='c014'>This case led to an alteration of the law in Massachusetts, -but the same thing might yet happen in some -States of the Union. The possibility of a single such -occurrence shows that there is still a fundamental wrong -in the legal position of woman. And the fact that -most women do not know it, only deepens the wrong—as -<span class='pageno' id='Page_355'>355</span>Dr. Channing said of the contentment of the -Southern slaves. The mass of men, even of lawyers, -pass by such things, as they formerly passed by the -facts of slavery.</p> - -<p class='c014'>There is no lasting remedy for these wrongs, except -to give woman the political power to protect herself. -There never yet existed a race, nor a class, nor a sex, -which was noble enough to be trusted with political -power over another sex, or class, or race. It is for -self-defence that woman needs the ballot. And, in view -of a single such occurrence as I have given, I charge -that woman who professes to have “all the rights she -wants,” either with a want of all feeling of motherhood, -or with “ignorance, madam, pure ignorance.”</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_356'>356</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XCIII.<br /> <span class='large'>“SENSE ENOUGH TO VOTE.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>There is one special point on which men seem to me -rather insincere toward women. When they speak to -women, the objection made to their voting is usually -that they are too angelic. But when men talk to each -other, the general assumption is, that women should not -vote because they have not brains enough—or, as old -Theophilus Parsons wrote a century ago, have not “a -sufficient acquired discretion.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is an important distinction. Because, if women are -too angelic to vote, they can only be fitted for it by -becoming more wicked, which is not desirable. On the -other hand, if there is no objection but the want of -brains, then our public schools are equalizing that matter -fast enough. Still, there are plenty of people who -have never got beyond this objection. Listen to the -first discussion that you encounter among men on this -subject, wherever they may congregate. Does it turn -upon the question of saintliness, or of brains? Let us -see.</p> - -<p class='c014'>I travelled the other day upon the Boston and Providence -Railroad with a party of mechanics, mostly English -and Scotch. They were discussing this very question, -and, with the true English habit, thought it was -all a matter of property. Without it a woman certainly -<span class='pageno' id='Page_357'>357</span>should not vote, they said; but they all favored, to my -surprise, the enfranchisement of women of property. -“As a general rule,” said the chief speaker, “a woman -that’s got property has got sense enough to vote.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>There it was! These foreigners, who had found -their own manhood by coming to a land which not only -the Pilgrim Fathers but the Pilgrim Mothers had settled, -and subdued, and freed for them, were still ready to -disfranchise most of the daughters of those mothers, -on the ground that they had not “sense enough to -vote.” I thanked them for their blunt truthfulness, -so much better than the flattery of most of the native-born.</p> - -<p class='c014'>My other instance shall be a conversation overheard -in a railway-station near Boston, between two intelligent -citizens, who had lately listened to Anna Dickinson. -“The best of it was,” said one, “to see our -minister introduce her.”—“Wonder what the Orthodox -churches would have said to that ten years ago?” said -the other. “Never mind,” was the answer. “Things -have changed. What I think is, it’s all in the bringing -up. If women were brought up just as men are, they’d -have just as much brains.” (Brains again!) “That’s -what Beecher says. Boys are brought up to do business, -and take care of themselves: that’s where it is. -Girls are brought up to dress and get married. Start -’em alike! That’s what Beecher says. Start ’em alike, -and see if girls haven’t got just as much brains.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>“Still harping on my daughter,” and on the condition -of her brains! It is on this that the whole question -turns, in the opinion of many men. Ask ten men -their objections to woman suffrage. One will plead -<span class='pageno' id='Page_358'>358</span>that women are angels. Another fears discord in families. -Another points out that women cannot fight,—he -himself being very likely a non-combatant. Another -quotes St. Paul for this purpose,—not being, perhaps, -in the habit of consulting that authority on any other -point. But with the others, very likely, every thing will -turn on the question of brains. They believe, or think -they believe, that women have not sense enough to vote. -They may not say so to women, but they habitually say -it to men. If you wish to meet the common point of -view of masculine voters, you must find it here.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is fortunate that it is so. Of all points, this is the -easiest to settle; for every intelligent woman, even if she -be opposed to woman suffrage, helps to settle it. Every -good lecture by a woman, every good book written by -one, every successful business enterprise carried on, -helps to decide the question. Every class of girls that -graduates from every good school helps to pile up the -argument on this point. And the vast army of women, -constituting nine out of ten of the teachers in our -American schools, may appeal as logically to their pupils, -and settle the argument based on brains. “If we -had sense enough to educate you,” they may say to -each graduating class of boys, “we have sense enough -to vote beside you.”</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_359'>359</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XCIV.<br /> <span class='large'>AN INFELICITOUS EPITHET.</span></h3> -</div> -<p class='c031'>“The ladies actively working to secure the co-operation of -their sex in caucuses and citizens’ conventions are not actuated -by love of notoriety, and are not, therefore, to be classed with -the absolute woman suffragists.”—<cite>Boston Daily Transcript</cite>, -Sept. 1, 1879.</p> - -<p class='c014'>When the eloquent colored abolitionist, Charles -Remond, once said upon the platform that George -Washington, having been a slaveholder, was a villain, -Wendell Phillips remonstrated by saying, “Charles, -the epithet is not felicitous.” Reformers are apt to -be pelted with epithets quite as ill-chosen. How often -has the charge figured in history, that they were “actuated -by love of notoriety”! The early Christians, -it was generally believed, took a positive pleasure in -being thrown to the lions, under the influence of this -motive; and at a later period there was a firm conviction -that the Huguenots consented readily to being -broken on the wheel, or sawed in pieces between two -boards, feeling amply rewarded by the pleasure of being -talked about. During the whole anti-slavery movement, -while the abolitionists were mobbed, fined, and -imprisoned,—while they were tabooed by good society, -depleted of their money, kept out of employment, -checked in their advancement, by the mere fact -<span class='pageno' id='Page_360'>360</span>of their abolitionism,—there never was a moment when -their sole motive was not considered by many persons -to be the love of notoriety. Why should the advocates -of woman suffrage expect any different treatment -now?</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is not necessary, in order to dispose of this charge, -to claim that all reformers are heroes or saints. Even -in the infancy of any reform, it takes along with it -some poor material; and unpleasant traits are often -developed by the incidents of the contest. Doubtless -many reformers attain to a certain enjoyment of a fight, -at last: it is one of the dangerous tendencies which -those committed to this vocation must resist. But, so -far as my observation goes, those who engage in reform -for the sake of notoriety generally hurt the reform so -much that they render it their chief service when they -leave it; and this happy desertion usually comes pretty -early in their career. The besetting sin of reformers -is not, so far as I can judge, the love of notoriety, but -the love of power and of flattery within their own small -circle,—a temptation quite different from the other, -both in its origin and its results.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Notoriety comes so soon to a reformer, that its -charms, whatever they may be, soon pall upon the -palate, just as they do in case of a popular poet or -orator, who is so used to seeing his name in print that -he hardly notices it. I suppose there is no young person -so modest that he does not, on first seeing his name -in a newspaper, cut out the passage with a certain tender -solicitude, and perhaps purchase a few extra copies of -the fortunate journal. But when the same person has -been battered by a score or two of years in successive -<span class='pageno' id='Page_361'>361</span>unpopular reforms, I suppose that he not only would -leave the paper uncut or unpurchased, but would hardly -take the pains even to correct a misstatement, were it -asserted that he had inherited a fortune or murdered -his grandmother. The moral is, that the love of notoriety -is soon amply filled, in a reformer’s experience, -and that he will not, as a rule, sacrifice home and comfort, -money and friends, without some stronger inducement. -This is certainly true of most of the men who -have interested themselves in this particular movement, -the “weak-minded men,” as the reporters, with witty -antithesis, still describe them; and it must be much the -same with the “strong-minded women” who share -their base career.</p> - -<p class='c014'>And it is to be remembered, above all, that, considered -as an engine for obtaining notoriety, the woman -suffrage agitation is a great waste of energy. The -same net result could have been won with far less -expenditure in other ways. There is not a woman connected -with it who could not have achieved far more -real publicity as a manager of charity fairs or as a -sensation letter-writer. She could have done this, too, -with far less trouble, without the loss of a single -“genteel” friend, without forfeiting a single social -attention, without having a single ill-natured thing said -about her—except perhaps that she bored people, a -charge to which the highest and lowest forms of prominence -are equally open. Nay, she might have done -even more than this, if notoriety was her sole aim: for -she might have become a “variety” minstrel or a female -pedestrian; she might have written a scandalous -novel; she might have got somebody to aim at her that -<span class='pageno' id='Page_362'>362</span>harmless pistol, which has helped the fame of so many -a wandering actress, while its bullet somehow never -hits any thing but the wall. All this she might have -done, and obtained a notoriety beyond doubt. Instead -of this, she has preferred to prowl about, picking up a -precarious publicity by giving lectures to willing lyceums, -writing books for eager publishers, organizing -schools, setting up hospitals, and achieving for her sex -something like equal rights before the law. Either she -has shown herself, as a seeker after notoriety, to be a -most foolish or ill-judging person,—or else, as was -said of Washington’s being a villain, “the epithet is -not felicitous.”</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_363'>363</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XCV.<br /> <span class='large'>THE ROB ROY THEORY.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>The Saturday Review, in an article which denounces -all equality in marriage-laws and all plans of -woman-suffrage, admits frankly the practical obstacles -in the way of the process of voting. “Possibly the -presence of women as voters would tend still further to -promote order than has been done by the ballot.” It -plants itself wholly on one objection, which goes far -deeper, thus:—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“If men choose to say that women are not their equals, -women have nothing to do but to give in. Physical force, the -ultimate basis of all society and all government, must be on the -side of the men; and those who have the key of the position -will not consent permanently to abandon it.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is a great pleasure when an opponent of justice is -willing to fall back thus frankly upon the Rob Roy -theory:—</p> - -<div class='lg-container-b c016'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line in21'>“The good old rule</div> - <div class='line in2'>Sufficeth him, the simple plan</div> - <div class='line'>That they should take who have the power,</div> - <div class='line in2'>And they should keep who can.”</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c017'>It is easy, I think, to show that the theory is utterly -false, and that the basis of civilized society is not -physical force, but, on the contrary, brains.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_364'>364</span>In the city where the Saturday Review is published, -there are three regiments of “Guards” which -are the boast of the English army, and are believed by -their officers to be the finest troops in the world. They -have deteriorated in size since the Crimean war; but I -believe that the men of one regiment still average six -feet two inches in height; and I am sure that nobody -ever saw them in line, without noticing the contrast -between these magnificent men and the comparatively -puny officers who command them. These officers are -from the highest social rank in England, the governing -classes; and, if it were the whole object of this military -organization to give a visible proof of the utter -absurdity of the Saturday Review’s theory, it could -not be better done. There is no country in Europe, -I suppose, where the hereditary aristocracy is physically -equal to that of England, or where the intellectual class -has so good a physique. But set either the House of -Lords or the Saturday Review contributors upon a -hand-to-hand fight against an equal number of “navvies” -or “costermongers,” and the patricians would -have about as much chance as a crew of Vassar girls -in a boat-race with Yale or Harvard. Take the men -of England alone, and it is hardly too much to say -that physical force, instead of being the basis of political -power in any class, is apt to be found in inverse -ratio to it. In case of revolution, the strength of the -governing class in any country is not in its physical, -but in its mental power. Rank and money, and the -power to influence and organize and command, are -merely different modifications of mental training, -brought to bear by somebody.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_365'>365</span>In our country, without class distinctions, the same -truth can be easily shown. Physical power lies mainly -in the hands of the masses: wherever a class or profession -possesses more than its numerical share of -power, it has usually less than its proportion of physical -vigor. This is easily shown from the vast body of -evidence collected during our civil war. In the volume -containing the medical statistics of the Provost Marshal -General’s Bureau, we have the tabulated reports -of about 600,000 persons subject to draft, and of -about 500,000 recruits, substitutes, and drafted men; -showing the precise physical condition of more than a -million men.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It appears, that, out of the whole number examined, -rather more than 257 in each 1,000 were found unfit for -military service. It is curious to see how generally -the physical power among these men is in inverse ratio -to the social and political prominence of the class they -represent. Out of 1,000 unskilled laborers, for instance, -only 348 are physically disqualified; among -tanners, only 216; among iron-workers, 189. On the -other hand, among lawyers, 544 out of 1,000 are disqualified; -among journalists, 740; among clergymen, -954. Grave divines are horrified at the thought of -admitting women to vote, when they cannot fight; -though not one of twenty of their own number is fit for -military duty, if he volunteered. Of the editors who -denounce woman suffrage, only about one in four could -himself carry a musket; while, of the lawyers who fill -Congress, the majority could not be defenders of their -country, but could only be defended. If we were to -distribute political power with reference to the “physical -<span class='pageno' id='Page_366'>366</span>basis” which the Saturday Review talks about, -it would be a wholly new distribution, and would put -things more hopelessly upside down than did the worst -phase of the French Commune. If, then, a political -theory so utterly breaks down when applied to men, -why should we insist on resuscitating it in order to -apply it to women? The truth is, that, as civilization -advances, the world is governed more and more unequivocally -by brains; and whether those brains are -deposited in a strong body or a weak one becomes a -matter of less and less importance. But it is only in -the very first stage of barbarism that mere physical -strength makes mastery; and the long head has controlled -the long arm since the beginning of recorded -time.</p> - -<p class='c014'>And it must be remembered that even these statistics -very imperfectly represent the case. They do not apply -to the whole male sex, but actually to the picked portion -only, to the men presumed to be of military age, -excluding the very old and the very young. Were -these included, the proportion unfit for military duty -would of course be far greater. Moreover, it takes no -account of courage or cowardice, patriotism or zeal. -How much all these considerations tell upon the actual -proportion, may be seen from the fact, that in the town -where I am writing, for instance, out of some twelve -thousand inhabitants and about three thousand voters, -there are only some three hundred who actually served -in the civil war,—a number too small to exert a perceptible -influence on any local election. When we see -the community yielding up its voting power into the -hands of those who have actually done military service, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_367'>367</span>it will be time enough to exclude women for not -doing such service. If the alleged physical basis operates -as an exclusion of all non-combatants, it should -surely give a monopoly to the actual combatants.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_368'>368</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XCVI.<br /> <span class='large'>THE VOTES OF NON-COMBATANTS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>The tendency of modern society is not to concentrate -power in the hands of the few, but to give a greater and -greater share to the many. Read Froissart’s Chronicles, -and Scott’s novels of chivalry, and you will see -how thoroughly the difference between patrician and -plebeian was then a difference of physical strength. -The knight, being better nourished and better trained, -was apt to be the bodily superior of the peasant, to -begin with; and this strength was re-enforced by armor, -weapons, horse, castle, and all the resources of feudal -warfare. With this greater strength went naturally the -assumption of greater political power. To the heroes -of “Ivanhoe,” or “The Fair Maid of Perth,” it would -have seemed as absurd that yeomen and lackeys should -have any share in the government, as it would seem to -the members in an American legislature that women -should have any such share. In a contest of mailed -knights, any number of unarmed men were but so many -women. As Sir Philip Sidney said, “The wolf asketh -not how many the sheep may be.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>But time and advancing civilization have tended -steadily in one direction. “He giveth power to the -weak, and to them who have no might He increaseth -strength.” Every step in the extension of political -<span class='pageno' id='Page_369'>369</span>rights has consisted in opening them to a class hitherto -humbler. From kings to nobles, from nobles to burghers, -from burghers to yeomen; in short, from strong to -weak, from high to low, from rich to poor. All this is -but the unconscious following-out of one sure principle,—that -legislation is mainly for the protection of -the weak against the strong, and that for this purpose -the weak must be directly represented. The strong -are already protected by their strength: it is the weak -who need all the vantage-ground that votes and legislatures -can give them. The feudal chiefs were stronger -without laws than with them. “Take care of yourselves -in Sutherland,” was the anxious message of the -old Highlander: “the law has come as far as Tain.” -It was the peaceful citizen who needed the guaranty of -law against brute force.</p> - -<p class='c014'>But can laws be executed without brute force? Not -without a certain amount of it, but that amount under -civilization grows less and less. Just in proportion as -the masses are enfranchised, statutes execute themselves -without crossing bayonets. “In a republic,” -said De Tocqueville, “if laws are not always respectable, -they are always respected.” If every step in -freedom has brought about a more peaceable state of -society, why should that process stop at this precise -point? Besides, there is no possibility in nature of a -political division in which all the men shall be on one -side and all the women on the other. The mutual influence -of the sexes forbids it. The very persons who -hint at such a fear refute themselves at other times, by -arguing that “women will always be sufficiently represented -by men,” or that “every woman will vote as -<span class='pageno' id='Page_370'>370</span>her husband thinks, and it will merely double the numbers.” -As a matter of fact, the law will prevail in all -English-speaking nations: a few men fighting for it will -be stronger than many fighting against it; and, if those -few have both the law and the women on their side, -there will be no trouble.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The truth is, that, in this age, <i><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">cedant arma togæ</span></i>: it is -the civilian who rules on the throne or behind it, and -who makes the fighting-men his mere agents. Yonder -policeman at the corner looks big and formidable: he -protects the women, and overawes the boys. But away -in some corner of the City Hall, there is some quiet -man, out of uniform, perhaps a consumptive or a dyspeptic -or a cripple, who can overawe the burliest -policeman by his authority as city marshal or as -mayor. So an army is but a larger police; and its -official head is that plain man at the White House, who -makes or unmakes, not merely brevet-brigadiers, but -major-generals in command,—who can by the stroke of -the pen convert the most powerful man of the army -into the most powerless. Take away the occupant of -the position, and put in a woman, and will she become -impotent because her name is Elizabeth or Maria -Theresa? It is brains that more and more govern the -world; and whether those brains be on the throne, or -at the ballot-box, they will soon make the owner’s -sex a subordinate affair. If woman is also strong in -the affections, so much the better. “Win the hearts -of your subjects,” said Lord Burleigh to Queen Elizabeth, -“and you will have their hands and purses.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>War is the last appeal, and happily in these days -the rarest appeal, of statesmanship. In the multifarious -<span class='pageno' id='Page_371'>371</span>other duties that make up statesmanship, we cannot -spare the brains, the self-devotion, and the enthusiasm, -of woman. One of the most important treaties of -modern history, the peace of Cambray, in 1529, was -negotiated, after previous attempts had failed, by two -women,—Margaret, aunt of Charles V., and Louisa, -mother of Francis I. Voltaire said that Christina of -Sweden was the only sovereign of her time who maintained -the dignity of the throne against Mazarin and -Richelieu. Frederick the Great said that the Seven -Years’ War was waged against three women,—Elizabeth -of Russia, Maria Theresa, and Mme. Pompadour. -There is nothing impotent in the statesmanship of -women when they are admitted to exercise it: they are -only powerless for good when they are obliged to obtain -by wheedling and flattery a sway that should be recognized, -responsible, and limited.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_372'>372</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XCVII.<br /> <span class='large'>“MANNERS REPEAL LAWS.”</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>There is in Boswell’s Life of Johnson a correspondence -which is well worth reading by both advocates and -opponents of woman suffrage. Boswell, who was of -an old Scotch family, had a difference of opinion with -his father about an entailed estate which had descended -to them. Boswell wished the title so adjusted as to -cut off all possibility of female heirship. His father, -on the other hand, wished to recognize such a contingency. -Boswell wrote to Johnson in 1776 for advice, -urging a series of objections, physiological and moral, -to the inheritance of a family estate by a woman; -though, as he magnanimously admits, “they should be -treated with great affection and tenderness, and always -participate of the prosperity of the family.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Dr. Johnson, for a wonder, took the other side, defended -female heirship, and finally summed up thus: -“It cannot but occur that women have natural and -equitable claims as well as men, and these claims are -not to be capriciously or lightly superseded or infringed. -When fiefs inspired military service, it is easily discerned -why females could not inherit them; but the -reason is at an end. <em>As manners make laws, so manners -likewise repeal them.</em>”</p> - -<p class='c014'>This admirable statement should be carefully pondered -<span class='pageno' id='Page_373'>373</span>by those who hold that suffrage should be only -co-extensive with military duty. The position that -woman cannot properly vote because she cannot fight -for her vote efficiently, is precisely like the position of -feudalism and of Boswell, that she could not properly -hold real estate because she could not fight for it. -Each position may have had some plausibility in its -day, but the same current of events has made each -obsolete. Those who in 1881 believe in giving woman -the ballot argue precisely as Dr. Johnson did in 1776. -Times have changed, manners have softened, education -has advanced, public opinion now acts more forcibly; -and the reference to physical force, though still implied, -is implied more and more remotely. The political event -of the age, the overthrow of American slavery, would -not have been accomplished without the “secular arm” -of Grant and Sherman, let us agree; but neither would -it have been accomplished without the moral power of -Garrison the non-resistant, and Harriet Beecher Stowe -the woman. When the work is done, it is unfair to disfranchise -any of the participants. Dr. Johnson was -right: “When fiefs [or votes] implied military service, -it is easily discerned why women should not inherit -[or possess] them; but the reason is at an end. As -manners make laws, so manners likewise repeal them.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Under the feudal system it would have been absurd -that women should hold real estate, for the next armed -warrior could dispossess her. By Gail Hamilton’s -reasoning, it is equally absurd now: “One man is -stronger than one woman, and ten men are stronger -than ten women; and the nineteen millions of men in -this country will subdue, capture, and execute or expel -<span class='pageno' id='Page_374'>374</span>the nineteen millions of women just as soon as they set -about it.” Very well: why, then, do not all the landless -men in a town unite, and take away the landed -property of all the women? Simply because we now -live in civilized society and under a reign of law; because -those men’s respect for law is greater than their -appetite for property; or, if you prefer, because even -those landless men know that their own interest lies, -in the long-run, on the side of law. It will be precisely -the same with voting. When any community is civilized -up to the point of enfranchising women, it will be -civilized up to the point of sustaining their vote, as it -now sustains their property-rights, by the whole material -force of the community. When the thing is once -established, it will no more occur to anybody that a -woman’s vote is powerless because she cannot fight, -than it now occurs to anybody that her title to real -estate is invalidated by the same circumstance.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Woman is in the world; she cannot be got rid of: -she must be a serf or an equal; there is no middle -ground. We have outgrown the theory of serfdom in a -thousand ways, and may as well abandon the whole. -Women have now a place in society: their influence -will be exerted, at any rate, in war and in peace, legally -or illegally; and it had better be exerted in direct, -legitimate, and responsible methods, than in ways that -are dark, and by tricks that have not even the merit of -being plain.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_375'>375</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XCVIII.<br /> <span class='large'>KILKENNY ARGUMENTS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>It always helps a good cause when its opponents are -in the position of the famous Kilkenny cats, and mutually -eat each other up. In the anti-slavery movement, -it was justly urged that the slaves might possibly be (as -slaveholders alleged) a race of petted children, whose -hearts could not possibly be alienated from their masters; -or they might be (as was also alleged by slaveholders) -a race of fiends, whom a whisper could madden: -but they could not well be both. Every claim -that the negro was happy was stultified by that other -claim, that the South was dwelling on a barrel of gunpowder, -and that the mildest anti-slavery tract meant -fire and explosion. The twin arguments saved abolitionists -a great deal of trouble. Either by itself would -have required an answer; but the two answered each -other,—devoured each other, in fact, like the Kilkenny -cats.</p> - -<p class='c014'>So, whenever the advocates of woman suffrage are -assailed on the ground that women are too superstitious, -and will, if enfranchised, be governed by religion and -the Church alone, there is always sure to come in some -obliging advocate with his “Besides, the tendency of -the movement is to utter lawlessness, to the destruction -of religion, the marriage-vows, the home”—and all -<span class='pageno' id='Page_376'>376</span>the rest of it. The boy in the story is hardly more selfcontradictory, -when, in answer to his friend’s appeal for -his jack-knife, he replies, “I haven’t any. Besides, I -want to use it.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>Here, for instance, is Mr. Nathan N. Withington of -Newbury, Mass., who in an address on woman suffrage, -while waiving many arguments against it, plants himself -strongly on the ground that it must be fatal to the -family. “No one whose opinion is worth reckoning, -with whom I have talked on the matter, ever denied entirely -that the logical result of the movement was what -is called free love.” My inference would be, in passing, -that my old neighbor Mr. Withington must confine -himself to a very narrow circle, in the way of conversation; -or, that he must find nobody’s opinion “worth -reckoning” if it differs from his own. Certainly I have -talked with hardly an advocate of woman suffrage in -New England who would not deny entirely—and -with a good deal of emphasis—any such assumptions -as he here makes. But let that go: the subject has -already been discussed far more than its intrinsic importance -required; and convention after convention has -taken unnecessary pains to refute a charge more baseless -than the slaveholders’ fears of insurrection. What -I wish to point out is, that such charges have, in one -way, great value: they precisely neutralize and utterly -annihilate the equally baseless terror of “Too superstitious.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>If it is true, as is sometimes alleged, that women are -constitutionally under the dominion of religion and the -Church, then it is pretty sure, that, under these auspices, -the moral restraints of the community, as marriage and -<span class='pageno' id='Page_377'>377</span>the home, will be maintained. If it is true on the other -hand, as Mr. Withington honestly thinks, that the tendency -of woman suffrage is to create a deluge that shall -sweep away the home, then it is certain that all vestiges -of churchly superstition will be swamped in the -process. The logical outcome of the movement may -be, if you please, to establish the Spanish Inquisition or -to bring back the horrors of the French Revolution, but -it seems clear that it cannot simultaneously bring both. -The advocates of both theories are equally sincere, -doubtless, in their predictions of alarm; but one set of -alarmists or the other set of alarmists must be wofully -disappointed when the time comes. And, if either, why -not both?</p> - -<p class='c014'>The simple fact is, that whosoever draws upon his -imagination, for possible disasters from any particular -measure, has a great fund at his disposal, whether he -looks right or left. He has always this advantage over -the practical reformer, that whereas the claims of the -reformer are, or should be, definite, coherent, practical, -the opponent can, if he wishes, have the whole cloudy -domain of possibility to draw upon: he can marshal an -army in the atmosphere, while the practical reformer -must stay on earth. It is a comfort when two of these -nebulous armies of imaginary obstacles fight in the air, -as in the present case, like the shadowy hosts in Kaulbach’s -great cartoon; and so destroy one another, -bringing back clear sky.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Woman needs the ballot for self-respect and self-protection, -and to do her share for the education and -moral safety of the children she bears. This is enough -to begin with. In seeking after this we have firm foothold. -<span class='pageno' id='Page_378'>378</span>The old Eastern fable describes a certain man -as finding a horse-shoe. His neighbor soon begins to -weep and wail, because, as he justly points out, the -man who has found a horse-shoe may some day find a -horse, and may shoe him; and the neighbor’s child may -some day go so near the horse’s heels as to be kicked, -and die; and then the two families may quarrel and -fight, and several valuable lives be lost through that -finding of a horse-shoe. The gradual advancement of -women must meet many fancies as far-fetched as this, -and must see them presented as arguments; and we -must be very grateful if they prove Kilkenny arguments, -and destroy one another.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_379'>379</span> - <h3 class='c004'>XCIX.<br /> <span class='large'>WOMEN AND PRIESTS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>The chief reason given by the Italian radicals for -not supporting woman suffrage was the alleged readiness -of women to accept the control of the priests. -The same objection has, before now, been heard in -other countries,—in France, England, and America. -John Bright, especially, made it the ground of his opposition -to a movement in which several members of -his family have been much engaged. The same point -of view was presented, in this country, several years -ago, by Mr. Abbot of the Index. But to how much, -after all, does this objection amount?</p> - -<p class='c014'>No one doubts that the religious sentiment seems -stronger in women than in men; but it must be remembered -that this sentiment has been laboriously encouraged -by men, while the field of action allowed to women -has been sedulously circumscribed, and her intellectual -education every way restricted. It is no wonder if, -under these circumstances, she has gone where she has -been welcomed, and not where she has been snubbed. -Priests were glad to hail her as a saint, while legislators -and professors joined in repelling her as a student or -a reformer. What wonder that she turned from the -study or the law-making of the world to its religion? -But in all this, whose was the fault,—hers, or those -<span class='pageno' id='Page_380'>380</span>who took charge of her? If she did not trust the -clergy, who alone befriended her, whom should she -trust?</p> - -<p class='c014'>But observe that the clergy of all ages, in concentrating -the strength of woman on her religious nature, -have summoned up a power that they could not control. -When they had once lost the confidence of those ruled -by this mighty religious sentiment, it was turned against -them. In the Greek and Roman worship, women were -the most faithful to the altars of the gods; yet, when -Christianity arose, the foremost martyrs were women. -In the Middle Ages women were the best Catholics, but -they were afterwards the best Huguenots. It was a -woman, not a man, who threw her stool at the offending -minister’s head in a Scotch kirk; it was a woman -who made the best Quaker martyr on Boston Common. -And, from vixenish Jenny Geddes to high-minded -Mary Dyer, the whole range of womanly temperament -responds as well to the appeal of religious freedom as -of religious slavery. It is religion that woman needs, -men say; but they omit to see that the strength of -her religious sentiment is seen when she resists her -clerical advisers as well as when she adores them or -pets them. Frances Wright and Lucretia Mott are -facts to be considered, quite as much as the matrons -and maids who work ecclesiastical slippers, and hold -fancy fairs to send their favorite clergymen to Europe.</p> - -<p class='c014'>At any rate, if the clergy still retain too much of -their control, the evil is not to be corrected by leaving -the whole matter in their hands. The argument itself -must be turned the other way. Women need the -mental training of science to balance the over-sympathy -<span class='pageno' id='Page_381'>381</span>of religion; they need to participate in statesmanship -to develop the practical side of their lives. We -are outgrowing the sarcasm of the Frenchman who -said that in America there were but two amusements,—politics -for the men, and religion for the women. When -both women and men learn to mingle the two more -equally, both politics and religion will become something -more than an amusement.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_382'>382</span> - <h3 class='c004'>C.<br /> <span class='large'>THE ROMAN CATHOLIC BUGBEAR.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c031'>“Those who wish the Roman Catholic Church to subvert -our school system, control legislation, and become a mighty -political force, cannot do better than labor day and night for -woman suffrage. This, it is true, is opposed to every principle -and tradition of that great church, which nevertheless would -reap from it immense benefits. The priests have little influence -over a considerable part of their male flock; but their -power is great over the women, who would repair to the polls -at the word of command, with edifying docility and zeal.”—<span class='sc'>Francis -Parkman</span> <em>on “The Woman Question” in North -American Review</em>, September, 1879.</p> - -<p class='c014'>I am surprised that a man like Mr. Parkman, who -has done so much to vindicate the share of Roman -Catholic priests and laymen in the early settlement of -this continent, should have introduced this paragraph -into a serious discussion of what he himself recognizes -as an important question. Here is the case. One-half -the citizens of every State are unrepresented in the -government: the ordinary means of republican influence -are withheld from them, as they are from idiots -and criminals. It is the rights and claims of these -women, as women, that statesmanship has to consider. -Whether their enfranchisement will help the nation or -the race, as a whole, is legitimate matter for argument. -Whether their votes will temporarily tell for this or -<span class='pageno' id='Page_383'>383</span>that party or sect, is a wholly subordinate matter, that -ought not to be obtruded into a serious debate. If -republican government is not strong enough to stand -on its own principles, if its fundamental theory must -be interpreted and modified so that it shall work for or -against a particular church or class of citizens, then it -is a worse failure than even Mr. Parkman represents -it. The “woman question,” whenever it is settled, -must be settled on its own merits, with no more reference -to Roman Catholics, as such, than to Mormons or -Chinese. Having said this before, when advocates of -woman suffrage were presenting the movement as an -anti-Catholic movement, I can consistently repeat it -now, when the movement is charged with being unconsciously -pro-Catholic in its tendencies. It is not its -business to be for or against any religion: its business -is with principles.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The paragraph throws needless odium on a large and -an inseparable portion of the community,—the Roman -Catholics. “Aliens to our blood and race!” cried -indignantly the orator Shiel, in the House of Commons, -when some one had thus characterized the Irish. -“Heavens! have I not, upon the battle-field, seen -those aliens do their duty to England?” It is too -soon after the great civil war to stigmatize, even by -implication, a class on whom we were then glad to call. -Whole regiments of Roman Catholics were then called -into the service; Roman Catholic chaplains were commissioned, -than whom none did their duty better, or in -a less sectarian spirit. In case of another war, all -these would be summoned to duty again. We have no -right, in reasoning on American institutions, to treat -<span class='pageno' id='Page_384'>384</span>this religious element as something by itself, an alien -member, not to be assimilated, virtually antagonistic to -republican government. It has never proved to be so -in Switzerland, where about half the cantons are overwhelmingly -Roman Catholic, and yet the federal union -is preserved, and the republican feeling is as strong in -these cantons as in any other.</p> - -<p class='c014'>No doubt there would be great objections to the -domination of any single religious body, and the more -thorough its organization the worse; but this is an -event in the last degree improbable in any State of the -Union. It is doubtful if even the Roman Catholic -Church will ever again be relatively so powerful as in -the early years of our government, when it probably -had a majority of the population in three States,—Maryland, -Louisiana, and Kentucky,—whereas now it -has lost it in all. It may be many years before we again -see, as we saw for a quarter of a century, a Roman -Catholic chief justice of the United States (Taney). -If we ever see this church come into greater power, it -will be because it shows, as in England, such tact and -discretion and moderation as to disarm opposition, and -earn the right to influence. The common feeling and -prejudice of American people is, and is likely to remain, -overwhelmingly against it; and none know this better -than the Roman Catholic priests themselves. They -know very well that nothing would more exasperate -this feeling than to marshal women to the polls like -sheep; and this alone would prevent their doing it, -were there no other obstacle.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The abolitionists used to say that the instinct of any -class of oppressors was infallible, and that if the slaveholders, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_385'>385</span>for instance, dreaded a certain policy, that -policy was the wise one for the slaves. If the priests -are such oppressors as Mr. Parkman thinks, they must -have the instinct of that class; and their present unanimous -opposition to woman suffrage is sufficient proof -that it promises no good to them. How easy it is to -misinterpret their policy, has been shown in the school -suffrage matter. It was confidently stated that a certain -priest in the city where I live, had demanded from -the pulpit a certain sum—two thousand dollars—to -pay the poll-taxes for women voters. Most people -believed it; yet, when it came to the point, not a -Roman Catholic woman applied for assessment. It -will be thus with Mr. Parkman’s fears. Women will -ultimately vote,—as indeed, he seems rather to expect; -and the effect will be to make them more intelligent, -and therefore less likely to obey the will of any man. -Roman Catholic men are learning to think for themselves; -and the best way to make women do so is to -treat them as intelligent and responsible beings.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_386'>386</span> - <h3 class='c004'>CI.<br /> <span class='large'>DANGEROUS VOTERS.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>One of the few plausible objections brought against -women’s voting is this: that it would demoralize the -suffrage by letting in very dangerous voters; that virtuous -women would not vote, and vicious women would. -It is a very unfounded alarm.</p> - -<p class='c014'>For, in the first place, our institutions rest—if they -have any basis at all—on this principle, that good is -stronger than evil, that the majority of men really wish -to vote rightly, and that only time and patience are -needed to get the worst abuses righted. How any one -can doubt this, who watches the course of our politics, -I do not see. In spite of the great disadvantage of -having masses of ignorant foreign voters to deal with,—and -of native black voters, who have been purposely -kept in ignorance,—we certainly see wrongs gradually -righted, and the truth by degrees prevail. Even the -one great, exceptional case of New York City has been -reached at last; and the very extent of the evil has -brought its own cure. Now, why should this triumph -of good over evil be practicable among men, and not -apply to women also?</p> - -<p class='c014'>It must be either because women, as a class, are -worse than men,—which will hardly be asserted,—or -because, for some special reason, bad women have an -<span class='pageno' id='Page_387'>387</span>advantage over good women such as has no parallel in -the other sex. But I do not see how this can be. Let -us consider.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is certain that good women are not less faithful -and conscientious than good men. It is generally admitted -that those most opposed to suffrage will very -soon, on being fully enfranchised, feel it their duty to -vote. They may at first misuse the right through ignorance, -but they certainly will not shirk it. It is this -conscientious habit on which I rely without fear. Never -yet, when public duty required, have American women -failed to meet the emergency; and I am not afraid of -it now. Moreover, when they are once enfranchised -and their votes are needed, all the men who now oppose -or ridicule the demand for suffrage will begin to help -them to exercise it. When the wives are once enfranchised, -you may be sure that the husbands will not -neglect those of their own household: they will provide -them with ballots, vehicles, and policemen, and will contrive -to make the voting-places pleasanter than many -parlors, and quieter than some churches.</p> - -<p class='c014'>On the other hand, it seems altogether probable that -the very worst women, so far from being ostentatious -in their wickedness upon election-day, will, on the contrary, -so disguise and conceal themselves as to deceive -the very elect, and, if it were possible, the very policemen. -For whatever party they may vote, they will -contribute to make the voting-places as orderly as -railway-stations. These covert ways are the very habit -of their lives, at least by daylight; and the women who -have of late done the most conspicuous and open mischief -in our community have done it, not in their true -<span class='pageno' id='Page_388'>388</span>character as evil, but, on the contrary, under a mask -of elevated purpose.</p> - -<p class='c014'>That women, when they vote, will commit their full -share of errors, I have always maintained. But that -they will collectively misuse their power, seems to me -out of the question; and that the good women are going -to stay at home, and let bad women do the voting, appears -quite as incredible. In fact, if they do thus, it -is a fair question whether the epithets “good” and -“bad” ought not, politically speaking, to change -places. For it naturally occurs to every one, on election-day, -that the man who votes, even if he votes -wrong, is really a better man, so far as political duties -go, than the very loftiest saint who stays at home and -prays that other people may vote right. And it is hard -to see why it should be otherwise with women.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_389'>389</span> - <h3 class='c004'>CII.<br /> <span class='large'>HOW WOMEN WILL LEGISLATE.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>It is often said, that, when women vote, their votes -will make no difference in the count, because they will -merely duplicate the votes of their husbands and brothers. -Then these same objectors go on and predict all -sorts of evil things, for which women will vote, quite -apart from their husbands and brothers. Moreover, -the evils thus predicted are apt to be diametrically -opposite. Thus Goldwin Smith predicts that women -will be governed by priests, and then goes on to predict -that women will vote to abolish marriage; not -seeing, that, as Professor Cairnes has pointed out, -these two predictions destroy each other.</p> - -<p class='c014'>On the other hand, I think that the advocates of -woman suffrage often err by claiming too much,—as -that all women will vote for peace, for total abstinence, -against slavery, and the rest. It seems better to rest -the argument on general principles, and not to seek to -prophesy too closely. The only thing which I feel -safe in predicting is, that woman suffrage will be used, -as it should be, for the protection of woman. Self-respect -and self-protection,—these are, as has been already -said, the two great things for which woman needs -the ballot.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is not the nature of things, I take it, that a class -<span class='pageno' id='Page_390'>390</span>politically subject can obtain justice from the governing -class. Not the least of the benefits gained by -political equality for the colored people of the South is, -that the laws now generally make no difference of -color in penalties for crime. In slavery times, there -were dozens of crimes which were punished more -severely by the statute if committed by a slave or a -free negro, than if done by a white. I feel very sure -that under the reign of impartial suffrage we should -see fewer such announcements as this, which I cut -from a late New York “Evening Express:”—</p> - -<p class='c021'>“Last night Capt. Lowery, of the Twenty-seventh Precinct, -made a descent upon the dance-house in the basement of 96 -Greenwich Street, and arrested fifty-two men and eight women. -The entire batch was brought before Justice Flammer, at the -Tombs Police Court, this morning. Louise Maud, the proprietress, -was held in five hundred dollars bail to answer at -the Court of General Sessions. <em>The fifty-two men were fined -three dollars each, all but twelve paying at once; and the eight -women were fined ten dollars each, and sent to the Island for -one month.</em>”</p> - -<p class='c014'>The Italics are my own. When we reflect that this -dance-house, whatever it was, was unquestionably sustained -for the gratification of men, rather than of -women; when we consider that every one of these fifty-two -men came there, in all probability, by his own free -will, and to spend money, not to earn it; and that the -undoubted majority of the women were driven there by -necessity or betrayal, or force or despair,—it would -seem that even an equal punishment would have been -cruel injustice to the women. But when we observe -how trifling a penalty was three dollars each to these -<span class='pageno' id='Page_391'>391</span>men, whose money was sure to go for riotous living in -some form, and forty of whom had the amount of the -fine in their pockets; and how hopelessly large an -amount was ten dollars each to women who did not, -probably, own even the clothes they wore, and who -were to be sent to prison for a month in addition,—we -see a kind of injustice which would stand a fair chance -of being righted, I suspect, if women came into power. -Not that they would punish their own sex less severely; -probably they would not: but they would put men more -on a level as to the penalty.</p> - -<p class='c014'>It may be said that no such justice is to be expected -from women; because women in what is called “society” -condemn women for mere imprudence, and excuse -men for guilt. But it must be remembered, that in -“society” guilt is rarely a matter of open proof and -conviction, in case of men: it is usually a matter of -surmise; and it is easy for either love or ambition to -set the surmise aside, and to assume that the worst -reprobate is “only a little wild.” In fact, as Margaret -Fuller pointed out years ago, how little conception has -a virtuous woman as to what a dissipated young man -really is! But let that same woman be a Portia, in the -judgment-seat, or even a legislator or a voter, and let -her have the unmistakable and actual offender before -her, and I do not believe that she will excuse him for -a paltry fine, and give the less guilty woman a penalty -more than quadruple.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Women will also be sure to bring special sympathy -and intelligent attention to the wrongs of children. -Who can read without shame and indignation this report -from “The New York Herald”?</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_392'>392</span> - <h4 class='c019'>THE CHILD-SELLING CASE.</h4> -</div> - -<p class='c020'>Peter Hallock, committed on a charge of abducting Lena -Dinser, a young girl thirteen years old, whom, it was alleged, -her father, George Dinser, had sold to Hallock for purposes -of prostitution, was again brought yesterday before Judge -Westbrook in the Supreme Court Chambers, on the writ of -habeas-corpus previously obtained by Mr. William F. Howe, -the prisoner’s counsel. Mr. Howe claimed that Hallock could -not be held on either section of the statute for abduction. -Under the first section the complaint, he insisted, should set -forth that the child was taken contrary to the wish and against -the consent of her parents. On the contrary, the evidence, he -urged, showed that the father was a willing party. Under the -second section, it was contended that the prisoner could not be -held, as there was no averment that the girl was of previous -chaste character. Judge Westbrook, a brief counter argument -having been made by Mr. Dana, held that the points of Mr. -Howe were well taken, and ordered the prisoner’s discharge.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Here was a father, who, as the newspapers allege, -had previously sold two other daughters, body and -soul, and against whom the evidence seemed to be in -this case clear. Yet through the defectiveness of the -statute, or the remissness of the prosecuting attorney, -he goes free, without even a trial, to carry on his infamous -traffic for other children. Grant that the points -were technically well taken and irresistible,—though -this is by no means certain,—it is very sure that there -should be laws that should reach such atrocities with -punishment, whether the father does or does not consent -to his child’s ruin; and that public sentiment -should compel prosecuting officers to be as careful in -framing their indictments where human souls are at -stake as where the question is of dollars only. It is -upon such matters that the influence of women will -make itself felt in legislation.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_393'>393</span> - <h3 class='c004'>CIII.<br /> <span class='large'>WARNED IN TIME.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>As a reform advances, it draws in more and more -people who are not immaculate. Such people are often -found, indeed, among the very pioneers of reform; and -their number naturally increases as the reform grows -popular. The larger a coral island grows, the more -driftwood attaches itself; and the coral insects might -as well stipulate that every floating log should be sound -and stanch, as a reform that all its converts should be -in the highest degree reputable. We expect, sooner or -later, to be in the majority. But we certainly do not -expect to find all that majority saints.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Yet many good people are constantly distressing -themselves, and writing letters of remonstrance, public -or private, to editors, because this or that unscrupulous -person chooses to join our army. If we select that -person for a general, we are doubtless to be held responsible; -but for nothing else. People may indeed -say—and justly—that every such ally brings suspicion -upon us. Very likely; then we must work harder -to avert suspicion. People may urge that no reform -was ever watched so anxiously as this, for its effect on -female character especially, and that a single discreditable -instance may do incalculable harm. No doubt. -And yet, after all, we are to work with human means -<span class='pageno' id='Page_394'>394</span>and under human limitations; and God accomplishes -much good in this world through rather poor instruments—such -as you and me.</p> - -<p class='c014'>I have no manner of doubt that the great majority -of those who take up this movement will do it from -tolerably pure motives, and will, on the whole, do credit -to it by their personal demeanor. But of course there -will be exceptions,—hypocrites, self-seekers, and black -sheep generally. Horace Mann used to say that the -clergy were, on the whole, pure men; but that some -of the worst men in every age and place were always -found among the clergy also,—taking that disguise as -a cloak for wickedness. For “clergy” in this case -read “reformers.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>And there is this special good done, in a reform, by -the sinners who take hold of it, that they warn us in -time that all reform is limited by the imperfections of -average humanity. The theory of the Roman Catholic -Church is a sublime one,—that every pope should be -a saint; but it is limited by the practical difficulty of -securing a sufficient supply of the article. So it is -with the woman suffrage movement. “Would it not -be desirable,” write enthusiastic correspondents, “that -every woman in this sacred enterprise should have a -heart free from guile?” Perhaps not. The plan looks -attractive certainly; but would there not be this objection, -that, could you enlist this regiment of perfect -beings, they would give a very false impression of the -sex for which they stand? If women are not all saints,—if -they are capable, like men, of selfishness and -ambition, malice and falsehood,—it is of great importance -that we should be warned in time. Better see -<span class='pageno' id='Page_395'>395</span>their faults now, and enfranchise them with our eyes -open, than enfranchise them as angels, and then be -dismayed when they turn out to be human beings.</p> - -<p class='c014'>There is no use in carrying this reform, or any -other, on mistaken expectations. Multitudes of persons -are looking to woman suffrage, mainly as a means -of elevating politics. Every woman who awakens distrust -or contempt damps the ardor of these persons. -It is a misfortune that they should be discouraged; -but, if they have idealized woman too much, they may -as well be disenchanted first as last. Woman does not -need the ballot chiefly that she may take it in her -hands, and elevate man; but she needs it primarily for -her own defence, just as men need it. Which will use -it best, who can say? Women are doubtless less sensual -than men; but the sensual vices are the very least -of the vices that corrupt our politics. Selfishness, envy, -jealousy, vanity, cowardice, bigotry, caste-prejudice, -recklessness of assertion,—these are the traits that -demoralize our public men. Is there any reason to believe -that women are, on the whole, more free from -these? If not, we may as well know it by visible, -though painful, examples. Knowing it, we may take -a reasonable view of woman, and legislate for her as -she is. I do not believe with Mrs. Croly, that “women -are nearly all treacherous and cruel to each other;” -but I believe that they are, as Gen. Saxton described -the negroes, “intensely human,” and that we may as -well be warned of this in time.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_396'>396</span> - <h3 class='c004'>CIV.<br /> <span class='large'>INDIVIDUALS <i><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">vs.</span></i> CLASSES.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>As the older arguments against woman suffrage are -abandoned, we hear more and more of the final objection, -that the majority of women have not yet expressed -themselves on the subject. It is common for such reasoners -to make the remark, that if they knew a given -number of women—say fifty, or a hundred, or five -hundred—who honestly wished to vote, they would -favor it. Produce that number of unimpeachable -names, and they say that they have reconsidered the -matter, and must demand more,—perhaps ten thousand. -Bring ten thousand, and the demand again -rises. “Prove that the majority of women wish to -vote, and they shall vote.”—“Precisely,” we say: -“give us a chance to prove it by taking a vote;” and -they answer, “By no means.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>And, in a certain sense, they are right. It ought not -to be settled that way,—by dealing with woman as a -class, and taking the vote. The agitators do not merely -claim the right of suffrage for her as a class: they claim -it for each individual woman, without reference to any -other. Class legislation—as Mary Ann in Bret Harte’s -“Lothaw” says of Brook Farm—“is a thing of the -past.” If there is only one woman in the nation who -claims the right to vote, she ought to have it.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_397'>397</span>In Oriental countries all legislation is for classes, -and in England it is still mainly so. A man is expected -to remain in the station in which he is born; or, if he -leaves it, it is by a distinct process, and he comes under -the influence, in various ways, of different laws. If -the iniquities of the “Contagious Diseases” act in -England, for instance, had not been confined in their -legal application to the lower social grades, the act -would never have passed. It was easy for men of the -higher classes to legislate away the modesty of women -of the lower classes; but if the daughter of an earl -could have been arrested, and submitted to a surgical -examination at the will of any policeman, as the daughter -of a mechanic now can, the law would not have -stood a day. So, through all our slave States, there -was class legislation for every person of negro blood: -the laws of crime, of punishment, of testimony, were all -adapted to classes, not individuals. Emancipation -swept this all away, in most cases: classes ceased to -exist before the law, so far as men at least were concerned; -there were only individuals. The more progress, -the less class in legislation. We claim the application -of this principle as rapidly as possible to women.</p> - -<p class='c014'>Our community does not refuse permission for -women to go unveiled till it is proved that the majority -of women desire it; it does not even ask that question: -if one woman wishes to show her face, it is allowed. If -a woman wishes to travel alone, to walk the streets -alone, the police protects her in that liberty. She is -not thrust back into her house with the reproof, “My -dear madam, at this particular moment the overwhelming -majority of women are indoors: prove that they -<span class='pageno' id='Page_398'>398</span>all wish to come out, and you shall come.” On the -contrary, she comes forth at her own sweet will: the -policeman helps her tenderly across the street, and -waves back with imperial gesture the obtrusive coal-cart. -Some of us claim for each individual woman, in -the same way, not merely the right to go shopping, but -to go voting; not merely to show her face, but to show -her hand.</p> - -<p class='c014'>There will always be many women, as there are many -men, who are indifferent to voting. For a time, -perhaps always, there will be a larger percentage -of this indifference among women. But the natural -right to a share in the government under which one -lives, and to a voice in making the laws under which -one may be hanged,—this belongs to each woman as -an individual; and she is quite right to claim it as she -needs it, even though the majority of her sex still prefer -to take their chance of the penalty, without perplexing -themselves about the law. The demand of -every enlightened woman who asks for the ballot—like -the demand of every enlightened slave for freedom—is -an individual demand; and the question -whether they represent the majority of their class has -nothing to do with it. For a republic like ours does -not profess to deal with classes, but with individuals; -since “the whole people covenants with each citizen, and -each citizen with the whole people, for the common -good,” as the constitution of Massachusetts says.</p> - -<p class='c014'>And, fortunately, there is such power in an individual -demand that it appeals to thousands whom no -abstract right touches. Five minutes with Frederick -Douglass settled the question, for any thoughtful -<span class='pageno' id='Page_399'>399</span>person, of that man’s right to freedom. Let any -woman of position desire to enter what is called “the -lecture-field,” to support herself and her children, and -at once all abstract objections to women’s speaking in -public disappear: her friends may be never so hostile -to “the cause,” but they espouse her individual cause; -the most conservative clergyman subscribes for tickets, -but begs that his name may not be mentioned. They -do not admit that women, as a class, should speak,—not -they; but for this individual woman they throng -the hall. Mrs. Dahlgren abhors politics: a woman in -Congress, a woman in the committee-room,—what can -be more objectionable? But I observe, that, when -Mrs. Dahlgren wishes to obtain more profit by her -husband’s inventions, all objections vanish: she can -appeal to Congressmen, she can address committees, -she can, I hope, prevail. The individual ranks first in -our sympathy: we do not wait to take the census of -the “class.” Make way for the individual, whether it -be Mrs. Dahlgren pleading for the rights of property, -or Lucy Stone pleading for the rights of the mother -to her child.</p> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_400'>400</span> - <h3 class='c004'>CV.<br /> <span class='large'>DEFEATS BEFORE VICTORIES.</span></h3> -</div> - -<p class='c013'>After one of the early defeats in the War of the -Rebellion, the commander of a Massachusetts regiment -wrote home to his father: “I wish people would not -write us so many letters of condolence. Our defeat -seemed to trouble them much more than it troubles us. -Did people suppose there were to be no ups and downs? -We expect to lose plenty of battles, but we have enlisted -for the war.”</p> - -<p class='c014'>It is just so with every successful reform. While -enemies and half-friends are proclaiming its defeats, -those who advocate it are rejoicing that they have at -last got an army into the field to be defeated. Unless -this war is to be an exception to all others, even the -fact of having joined battle is a great deal. It is the -first step. Defeat first; a good many defeats, if you -please: victory by and by.</p> - -<p class='c014'>William Wilberforce, writing to a friend in the year -1817, said, “I continue faithful to the measure of Parliamentary -reform brought forward by Mr. Pitt. I am -firmly persuaded that at present a prodigious majority -of the people of this country are adverse to the measure. -In my view, so far from being an objection to -the discussion, this is rather a recommendation.” In -1832 the reform-bill was passed.</p> - -<p class='c014'><span class='pageno' id='Page_401'>401</span>In the first Parliamentary debate on the slave-trade, -Col. Tarleton, who boasted to have killed more men -than any one in England, pointing to Wilberforce and -others, said, “The inspiration began on that side of -the house;” then turning round, “The revolution has -reached to this also, and reached to the height of fanaticism -and frenzy.” The first vote in the House of -Commons, in 1790, after arguments in the affirmative -by Wilberforce, Pitt, Fox, and Burke, stood, ayes, 88; -noes, 163: majority against the measure, 75. In 1807 -the slave-trade was abolished, and in 1834 slavery in -the British colonies followed; and even on the very -night when the latter bill passed, the abolitionists were -taunted by Gladstone, the great Demerara slaveholder, -with having toiled for forty years and done -nothing. The Roman Catholic relief-bill, establishing -freedom of thought in England, had the same experience. -It passed in 1829 by a majority of a hundred -and three in the House of Lords, which had nine -months before refused by a majority of forty-five to -take up the question at all.</p> - -<p class='c014'>The English corn-laws went down a quarter of a -century ago, after a similar career of failures. In -1840, there were hundreds of thousands in England -who thought that to attack the corn-laws was to attack -the very foundations of society. Lord Melbourne, the -prime minister, said in Parliament, that “he had heard -of many mad things in his life, but, before God, the -idea of repealing the corn-laws was the very maddest -thing of which he had ever heard.” Lord John Russell -counselled the House to refuse to hear evidence on the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_402'>402</span>operation of the corn-laws. Six years after, in 1846, -they were abolished forever.</p> - -<p class='c014'>How Wendell Phillips, in the anti-slavery meetings, -used to lash pro-slavery men with such formidable facts -as these,—and to quote how Clay and Calhoun and -Webster and Everett had pledged themselves that -slavery should never be discussed, or had proposed -that those who discussed it should be imprisoned,—while, -in spite of them all, the great reform was moving -on, and the abolitionists were forcing politicians -and people to talk, like Sterne’s starling, nothing but -slavery!</p> - -<p class='c014'>We who were trained in the light of these great agitations -have learned their lesson. We expect to march -through a series of defeats to victory. The first thing -is, as in the anti-slavery movement, so to arouse the -public mind as to make this the central question. Given -this prominence, and it is enough for this year or for -many years to come. Wellington said that there was -no such tragedy as a victory, except a defeat. On the -other hand, the next best thing to a victory is a defeat, -for it shows that the armies are in the field. Without -the unsuccessful attempt of to-day, no success to-morrow.</p> - -<p class='c014'>When Mrs. Frances Anne Kemble came to this country, -she was amazed to find Americans celebrating the -battle of Bunker Hill, which she had always heard -claimed as a victory for King George. Such it was -doubtless called; but what we celebrated was the fact -that the Americans there threw up breastworks, stood -their ground, fired away their ammunition,—and -<span class='pageno' id='Page_403'>403</span>were defeated. And thus the reformer, looking at -his failures, often sees in them such a step forward, -that they are the Bunker Hill of a new revolution. -Give us plenty of such defeats, and we can afford to -wait a score of years for the victories. They will -come.</p> - -<div class='pbb'> - <hr class='pb c006' /> -</div> -<div class='tnotes'> - -<div class='section ph2'> - -<div class='nf-center-c0'> -<div class='nf-center c007'> - <div>TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES</div> - </div> -</div> - -</div> - - <ol class='ol_1 c005'> - <li>Silently corrected typographical errors and variations in spelling. - - </li> - <li>Archaic, non-standard, and uncertain spellings retained as printed. - </li> - </ol> - -</div> - -<pre style='margin-top:6em'> -*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK COMMON SENSE ABOUT WOMEN *** - -This file should be named 63948-h.htm or 63948-h.zip - -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: -http://www.gutenberg.org/6/3/9/4/63948/ - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where - you are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - -</pre> -</body> -</html> |