Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About The new Northwest. (Portland, Or.) 1871-1887 | View Entire Issue (Sept. 8, 1876)
MES. A. J. DCXIWAT, Editor and Proprietor. OFFICE Cob. Fbo t Washington Stkeets TERMS, E ADVASCE: A Journal for the People. Devoted to the Interests of Humanity. Independent In Politics and Religion. Alive to all Live Issues, and Thoroughly Radical In Opposing and Exposing the Wrongs of the Masses. One year.. -K100 Blx months .. 175 -100 Three months- Free Speech, Feee Pbess, Free People. Correspondents writing over assumed signa tures must make known their names to the ADVERTISEMENTS Inserted on Reasonable YOLTOIE VI. PORTIiAND, OREGON, FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1876. NTJ3IBER 1. Editor, or no attention will be given to their communications. Terms. v- S STJFFEAGE CONSIDERED IN EELA TION TO CITIZENSHIP. The following argument In relation to the constitutional right of women to vote In the United States was made last spring before the State Woman Suffrage Association by Hon John Mlnto, of Marlon county, and by vote of the Association ordered printed In the New Northwest. Its length, togetherwlth the fact that a serial story was occupying much of the space on the first page, prevented Its publica tion at the proper time, but fortunately It was one of those things that will keep without los ing flavor.jincl as the subject of woman's en franchisement Is again attracting much atten tlon, we now give place to the address. Ed. It will be remembered that last spring (March 29, 1875) a case was decided in the Supreme Court of tbe United States, the case of Mrs. Minor vs. the State of Missouri, for refusing to her tbe right of suffrage, she being a citizen of the United States and of tbe State of Mis souri at the time she offered to vote. The decision, in which the judges alj agreed, was to the effect that "women were citizens of the United States, but that the right of suffrage was not con ferred on citizens of the United States by tbe Constitution, aud that the Constitu tion of tbe States which commit the trust of suffrage to men alone is not therefore void." If the newspaper re ports of the case may be trusted, the judges who gave the decision did not say one word in favor of the justice of tbe judgment, only that it was law, Tbe case was presented under tbe 14th Amendmeut and the wording of the 15th Amendment was quoted to give empha sis to the decision; so that those who believe that the right of suffrage is one justly pertaining to a citizen of tbe United States must now look to aud la bor for an additional amendment to the Constitution. In advocating the rights involved in the question I shall assume: 1st. That the citizen's highest fealty and first duty is to tbe national govern ment. 2d. That tbe citizen has the right to demand of tbe national government se curity in tbe enjoyment of all bis rights and privileges. 3d. That the right of suffrage is tbe chief and most important right of citi zenship, and therefore should be guar anteed by the highest power of the gov ernment. In order to sustain my claim for se curity in the free use of the elective franchise to every capable citizen by the national governments few facts are ad duced, tending to show that the failure to do so at tbe formation of tbe Consti tution has been one poteut cause of pre serving the idea of "State Rights" in the States desirous of continuing the in stitution of slavery and extending its boundaries; that leaving the control of suffrage under the power of tbe States was a source of error in tbe late rebel States, and an element of great power and influence against the government in the late civil war. In order to make this evil influence plain, and also to fortify the claim to the right of suQrage as inherent in the citizen, a brief review of the history of tbe United States since the war of independence is submitted. The confederacy of States formed In liiS was a compact or tue mates or "sovereign free independent" communi ties. The only provision contained in tbe articles of confederation relative to the people who composed those States was that they could pass from one State to another for purposes of commerce subject to tbe same duties, restrictions, and impositions as the residents of tbe State into which they might go, with liberty to remove their property into any other State. Tbe right of suflrage, as pertaining to individuals on the peo pie, is not alluded to in the articles of confederation. Tbe voting in Congress was done by States, each State having one vote. The compact lasted eleven years, and was superseded by our pres ent Constitution, ordained and estab Iished by the people, "in order," as set forth in the preamble, "to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote tbe general welfare, and secure the blessings of lib erty to ourselves and posterity." The first Article, Sectiou 1, provides for a law-making power, consisting in a Senate and House of Representatives of the people. Section 2 provides for members of the House of Representatives being chosen by the people of the several States every second year, and the electors of these representatives are those who shall have the qualification of electors of the most numerous branch of the State Legislature of the State in which they may reside. This it is construed places the elective franchise of a citizen of tbe United States in tbe power of a State. As tbis clause seems more than any other in the Constitution to confer sov ereign power on the States, it is proper to observe here that the words "sover eign, free, independent," as applied to btates, do not occur in the instrument On tbe contrary, Article 6 declares, "This Constitution and the laws of tbe United Slates made in pursuance thereof and all treaties made or which shall be made under the authority of the United States shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges in every State shall be bound there by anything In the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding," Without admitting, therefore, .any State's right to secession to be contained in Section 2 of Article 1. 1 will assert and endeavor to show that it more than all tbe rest of the Constitution contains provisions which, construed in favor of anti-republican tendencies, have hereto fore prevented the establishment of jus tice, disturbed tbe domestic tranquillity, and impeded tbe general welfare of tbe United States by being used by some of tbe States In withholding tbe right of suffrage from many citizens of tbe United Stales, infringing the liberties of others, and consequently preventing them from enjoying the blessingsof lib erty tbe Constitution was ordained to secure. Equality of rights and privileges be fore the law only would accord with the Declaration of Independence, the un doubted basis of our Constitution. At the time of its formation the question of suflrage and the perpetuation of slavery (also recoguized in the section under consideration) were those which caused the most disagreement in tbe convention. Tbe practices of voting in tbe States were so diverse that it was deemed best to leave tbe matter to tbe people in their capacity of citizens of States, some of them having very lib eral constitutions, and the popular mind tending strongly toward more liberty. In New Jersey, for instance, by her con stitution adopted July 2, 1772, all inhab itants of full age worth fifty pouuds proclamation money, clear of debt, and who had a residence of twelve mouths, were entitled to vote for Representatives for Assembly and Council and all offi cers elected by tbe people. This was the law of New Jersey till 1811, when her present constitution was adopted, dropping tbe property qualifications aud conferring the right of suffrage on white malo citizens of the United States, excluding persons in the naval or military service of the United States, paupers, idiots, insane, convicted crim inals, and women. In some of tbe Stales before the late civil war the elect ive right was controlled by an intelli gence test; In others, by property test. In some a much longer residence was required than in others. In some all races of men except free white men were debarred from voting. In others men of any race or color were permitted to vote. The 15th Amendment has brought all the States into uniformity iu rights of suffrage so far as race, color, or previous condition of servitude go, but there is room for the State to exer cise tyrannical injustice for other causes or assumed causes. There is nothing to prevent a State from making a property qualification against foreign-born citi zens, as Rhode Island now does. With much show of reason an intelligence or property test might be made that would exclude from suflrage in the late rebel States many of the poor white or col ored classes. Or these latter, with tbe power of numbers, led by unprincipled men, might make discrimination against their late masters, in spite of the national desire to grant an amnesty n spirit and truth, bucli measures from such causes would not be incon sistcnt with the past history of States that by constitutional provision made the ownership of fifty acres of land the qualification ot a "free wuite man" or an elector. That required tbe owner ship of 500 acres of land aud ten negroes as a qualification for a seat in the State Legislature; or (reckoned in money) thirty times so much property and ten years' residence in tbe State to make a man eligible for the office of Governor; that debarred a man from sitting as a member of the Legislature for being a "raiuister, preacher of the gospel, or re ligious teacher." In tbis way tbe lib erty of citizens of the United States to choose whom they would to represent them and tbe privileges of others to represent were abridged, and in some of tbe same States having such tests men who did not profess certaiu religious be liefs were held ineligible "for any office of trust or profit whatever." In some of them colored persons, citizens of the United States, might be lawfully bunted with dogs, their being colored making it legally presumable they were slaves, The States that by constitutional pro vision thus outraged tbe sight of the people to choose whom they would as representatives, debared some from hold ing office and accepted others in tbe name of religion, were, up to 1SG5, Florida, Arkansas, Missouri, Missis sippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, North Car olina, New Hampshire, Maryland, and renusylvanla. Many of them yet maintain such provisions. It will be noticed that eight of the ten States thus having religious tests inconsistent with the Constitution of the United Slates are States in which tbe doctrine of "State Rights" bad a strong hold on the public mind, where indeed it was dangerous for an individual, if a north eru man, an adopted citizen, to call the State constitution in question by open discussion. Public opinion in those States dominated by an aristocracy based upon slavery maintained "State Rights" asasupportof their property in terests in men; using it as a threat of disuuion during tbe period of tbe "irre pressible conflict," uutil it became a de lusion under which leaders and led plunged into tbe contest which swal lowed up the lives of tbe best and brav est in tbe land and reversed (tempora rily at least) Southern society, placing the poor and lowly negro under the special care of the government, in tbe lead, while their former masters were cast down, mourning over their dead and their cause lost, yet with no feeling I of dishonor, because unconvinced of their error. With the States' control of tbe suffrage as one cause of that error I now propose to deal, though I can do so but briefly. When the federal union superseded the confederacy of States, those who were dissatisfied with tbe change, to gether with a class who accepted Tbos. Palne's postulate in favor of "a weak government and a strong people," formed the State Rights party. To both of these classes this Section 2, of Article 1, which apparently gives the State control of the voting privilege, was satisfactory. Tbis satisfaction was enhanced to those entertaining strong proslaverysentimentsby tbe three-fifths rule in this same section, giving slave owners a property representation In Congress. Tbe effect was to keep polit ical power in the bauds of a compara tively few of the slave-holding class in the Southern communities. They hon estly believing in "State Rights," per sistently cultivated that sentiment. They were themselves men who inber- ted strong tendencies of attachment to birthplace; so that ail the forces of hon est love of their native States, natural regard for their properly interests as connected with slavery, und the still stronger love of power their dominant position gave them, impelled them in keeping before the minds of the less in formed of their fellow-citizens, the er rors of "State Rights," "slave rights," 'love of tlie South," aud kindred senti ments which were so many instrumen talities in deluding the public mind of tbe slave States and keeping out of sight tlie idea that it was a greater thing to bo a citizen of the United States than of Alabama, Georgia, or South Carolina. Southern orators were greatly aided n this from the fact that the citizen ap parently received his right to vote from the State. Such an influence cannot be measured; but let any one interested cast their mind about amongst their ac quaintances and they will not fail to find amongst them, even hero in Ore gon, men very far above tlie average, who were true lovers of the national government, yet could never give their hearty approval of the war for the union, aud for no other reason that can be imagined but that ,they were born in "Old Kaiutuck," the "Old Do minion," or some Southern State. These are of the comparatively intelli gent, energetic class of Southern men who left their native State to get away from slavery. How much stronger must the influence of nativity have been on those who could- barely come up to the privilege of electors under their State law, aud had just perception enough to perceive that to vote was all that raised them above the "poor white trash" that even the slaves held iu con tempt. His partisan leader did not fail to place his native State and her inter ests before and above those of the United States. The speech of Hon. A. H. Stephens before the convention of Georgia is an illustration. Address ing the convention of that State in order to dissuade them from tbe fatal acl they were even then resolved upon, he said to his fellow-citizens, weighing well his words and anxious they should not be misunderstood "Next to Georgia, the land of my birth, I hold the honor and glory of our com mon country." If such a man, at such a time, could rise no higher toward the true staud-point of an American citi zen, can we wonder that tbe State pride of an average Georgian or the blind zeal of an unlettered man did not look beyond the State power that seemed to confer the highest attribute of citizen ship and perceive the vastly greater privilege of United States citizenship? We have also the evidence of the great number of men who were under oath to support the government of the United States who, regardless of that, joined the confederacy, influenced thereto by tbis otherwise praiseworthy sentiment thus perverted. Its common manifesta tion was a source of great perplexity to Union commanders during the late war, when State pride, love of the South, and even family pride were advanced alike by honorable soldier and murderous bushwhacker, by high-bred city mat rons, by simple country girls, by men and women of all ages and grades, the same plea was offered, aud was pitiful, as provoking as it was made by tbe well or ill-disposed. Iu this brief outline of the influ ence of nativity combined with the influence of allowing the States to control the elective franchise, in fos tering the error of State Rights, I hardly expect to be followed or fully endorsed by citizens born in what was once denominated free States, the large majority of whom habitually en tertain correct views w their relations to tbe national Government, aud amongst whom affection for a particu lar locality is overshadowed by the proud consciousness of being Americans. But the naturalized citizen, who has paid for the same title (in part, at least,) by severing tbe ties that bound him to bis "fatherland" or "mother country," will understand my estimate of tbe sen timent. To these, now about three millions in number, State pride In tbe sense here treated of is impossible. Tbe bitter price of recent experience proves its cultivation to be impolitic, tendiug to discord, and wisdom aswell as justice points to the adoption of some uniform law that will tend to tbe homogeneous- ness of citizenship and patriotic im pulse. Such a law, in my judgment, would be one that secures to all citizens of full age the crowning jewels of citi zenship tbe right to vote as a funda mental right, inalienable, inherent, and upon which the Constitution rests. A late writer upon our political sys tem says that "at the base of the Repub lican idea of government will be found the Golden Rule." He might have been more specific aud shown the author of tbe Golden Rule directing bis followers as to tbe ordering of their governmeut in these words: "Ye know that tbe Prince of the Gentiles exercises domin ion over them, and their great ones ex ercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you. But who ever will be great among you, let him" be your minister. And whoever will be chief among you, let him he your ser vant." This is Republicanism most comprehensive. Thus spoke Jesus Christ, the "wonderful counselor," the "Prince of Peace." A. D., 1620, a small band of bis followers, English Colonists, about to land iu America from the deck of the "Mawflower," drew up for'their better enduring and preser vation tbe first written constitution, or foundatson to just and equal laws, which they lived up to and amended as the obscure light and erroneous preju dices of their times and circumstances would permit. One hundred and fifty- four years later the descendants of these Colonists, by tbe pen of Tbos. Jefferson, whose mind had studied and endorsed tbe Christian theory of government, published to the world the glorious dec laration that "Governments derive their just powers from the couseut of the governed." To vote is the Ameri can mode or giving consent to tue power of the governmeut, aud the right to do so is as plainly inherent in tbe free citizen as that the citizen, by tho exer cise of it, renders himself or herself subject of the government so in stituted. That the right is inherent in the citi zen, usage, it not law independent ot any State power to control, bears wit ness. By its exercise, as citizens of the United States, the people have estab lished law, aud organized government over almost the entire domain of the United States outside the limits of the Iprlginal thirteen States, a district now embracing some twenty-three states and nine organized Territories. A few officers were appointed by tbe national government, aud the citizens of the Uuited States did the work. The right of suflrage exercised as an inherent right was the potent agency by which these states were created, and a stream cannot rise higher than its fountain. Oregon affords a good illustration of tbe sovereignty of citizenship by the estab lishment of a provisional government before the national government had set tled its clai ms of eminent domain, the occupation of the country by cit izens giving it the chief title. The case of California was another and different illustration. The energetic action of the people in that case demanded aud received admission iuto the Union as a State without the so-called probationary stage of a territorial government. The case of West Virginia affords a case still different. Her citizens very cor rectly resolved that State authority should not transfer tbem from where their chief fealty was due. Red tape was nonplussed, but the sovereignty of citizenship was endorsed, aud justly. These illustrations are given to show that, if the judgment of tbe Supreme Court in tbe case of Mrs. Minor that the right of suffrage is not conferred by the Constitution of the United States- be correct, it only proves, so fur as the law is concerned, that the freest and most energetic portion of American citizens have been "making brick with out straw" these many years, as they have added State after State to the nation. (Jan any sano person give a reason why an American citizen should be less a citizen because of being engaged iu creating additional States, rather than remaining a stationary citizen of an old community, subject to tbe local preju dices and narrow views of citizenship that have prevailed In tho South? That the former class live and labor more nearly the spirit of American lib erty, a few words of proof are offered Compare, if you please, tbe constitution of Rhode Island, which makes discrim ination jngaiust a citizen of foreign birth, with that of Minnesota, which secures universal manhood suffrage. Compare, if you please, any of the old States with Wyoming Territory, where universal suffrage without regard to th sex of the citizen obtains. Especially compare tbe just aud equal rights of women citizeus in Wyoming with the same class in Connecticut cr Massachu setts, where .men citizens now eujoy an unjust measureof representation in Con gres3 under the three-fifths rule, by-rea son of the predominating numbers of women in those States, operatiug to some extent as the slave population of the South formerly did. Women cit izens of those two States are large prop erty-owners, and consequently they are the subjects of taxation without repre sentation in the very communities where one hundred years ago the popu Iar voice was tbe most general aud tbe battle-ory of "taxation without repre sentation Is tyranny," and "resistance to tyrants is obedience tojjod," rang the loudest and clearest. "Do men gather grapes of tborn3 or figs of thistles" any better now than 187G years ago ? Is it reasonable to ex pect that the mothers of the nation, while they believe themselves unjustly discriminated against, will rear sons ready and eager to devote "their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor" to support that injustice? Does history afford us no bint whither we are tend ing when continuing injustice to wom en? In particular, the laws which bear njustiy against widows as compared with widowers are transmitted to us from the civil laws of Rome, modified. Originally an article of barter, bought by tbe husband, the Roman mother was rated in law as one of her own chil- ren, or the slaves and cattle of her hus band, over which bis control was abso lute, but the time came when the Ro man nation aspired to the common ben efits of a free aud opulent republic; aud we are told that their wishes to some extent were "gratified by tho indul gence of fathers and lovers." Cato, tbe censor, endeaved to hold them to the old condition of slavish obedience, but 'they declined the solemnities of the old nuptails," and without losing their name or independence subscribed tbe liberal and definite terms of a marriage contract. This spirit of liberality, of iqual rights, never became the law of Rome; aud the student of her history will find that about tlie time tbe votes f men were publicly bought aud sold u the streets, lovely women of the first families so frequently sought refuge from despair in suicide that a law was passed to exposo the nude bodies after death to the public gaze, iu order that natural modesty might be called in to prevent self-destruction. Did republi can Rome flourish long after that? Or was the "decline" then begun, when men who might proudly glory in their citizen's privileges denied the same rights to their mothers, wives and daughters. I don't pretend to believe that all the evils of society will be removed by the most just and equal system of laws, and t remains to be proven whether the ex ercise of the right of suffrage and par ticipation in public affairs will exert the same beneficial influence upon women that it does upon men, and thus place tho interests of home and country more immediately iu their care; but I recognize the fact that every woman born of woman received as many rights from her Maker as I did, and tbe inal ienability of those rights and the right to give her consent to the laws which secure them is freely accorded, by vot ing or not voting, as seems best. The rights I claim as a citizen I freely ac cord to others. This is the Golden Rule, Carried into law, it secures the inherent right of suflrage to all citizens, to vote at every election from the School Dis trict to the Presidehtial election, witli no State authority allowed to intervene between the citizen and the chief depos itory of his or her rights a governmeut of the people, for tho people, and as strong as the people. A Natural Mistake. This morning a gentleman entered a house on Fifth street, aud asked the clerk: "What is the price of knit under shirts with breast pockets?" and then added: I travel a good deal, and carry large amount of money, and I. think that idea of pockets an excellent one, and I am surprised that some one has never thought of it before." "Really, sir," replied the clerk, think myself it would be a good plan, but 1 am sorry to say we have none, and I did not know that there were any made.' "You did not?" said the customer. "Well, that's singular. They are ex bibited in your own show window, aud caught my eve as 1 was passing." "You must be mistaken," said the clerk, store." "I know every article iu the But I am not," persisted tbe gen tlemau, "Step around and see for yourself." The wondering suon-ueeper did as re quested. He stepped briskly to the rrunt ot the window, looKeu m, men looked at the gentleman, then coughed and acted as though he hud just felt a sudden pain in the stomach, und then rammed a handkerchief into Ins mouth, and stepped behind the counter. "Well," exclaimed tue gentleman triumphantly, "ain't they there?" "Ye-yes," said the clerk, appearing as though he bad a fish bone in his throat, "they are there, sure enough But, sir, those undershirts are not for men, and those pockets are " and at this point ho dived behind the counter and disappeared, while a young lady clerk standing near smothered a con vulsive sigule in a cambric handker chief, and started off with a very red face on important business in the rear part ot tlie store. A sudden light seemed to break in unou the stranger, and ho departed hurriedly, muttering, "How in thunder could I tell? 1 ain't a married man and cau't be expected to know every thing." Cincinnati. Commercial. . That Norwich man who courted his wife fifty years before lie married her, was a prudent fellow. Fifty years takes tlie strength out of most any arm, aud makes it convenient for a woman to get down on her kuees aud urge tbe head of tbe house to come out from under tin bed and talk the matter over. Bridge port Standard. "What would you like?" said Jones the other night to Miss Smith, as lie led her into the reiresiiment room "Pop," was the blushing response. Jones didn't see It. NOTES FB0M THE LE0TUBE FIELD. BY DR. J. L.YORK. If I may presume upon your courtesy for a little space in your columns, per mit me, for tbe benefit of some of your readers, to give a few notes of travel from tbe lecture-field. On leaving Portland soon after the State Liberal organization was effected. ariy iu July, I took up my work of canvassing the State in tbe interest of reform, filling first tbe engagements made last full and pending at tbe time was unavoidably recalled to Cali fornia. My first appointment was met at Forest Grove, giving five lectures to large and intelligent audiences; in fact, was surprised to find so large a num ber of liberal people whose hearts beat in unison and respond to tbe gospel of nature; and, best of all, the Liberals in tbis west-side region are all good peo ple, and for moral status will compare favorably with their neighbors who profess religious beliefs. My meetings here were attended by the best citizens, and with tbe best order except in one instance. A Meth odist lady attended by her husband, both of whom, I was told, had never heard a liberal lecture, for the time be ing were quite unmindful of time, place, and occasion. Had any one behaved as they did iu their own church, they would have felt justified in appealing to civij law. These ignorant people had just waked up to the fact that there are two sides to ecclesiastical dogmas, and much depends upon the stand-point one occupies as to convictions reached. And I fully forgive them the annoy ance they caused to the entire audience by uutimeiy remarks during the dis course; but I shall not forget soon tbe withering look of hatred this lady gave me as she passed on her way to the door after tbe meeting was dismissed. When opposite the speaker's stand, in full hearing of a large number of peo ple, she gave vent to her pent-up feel ings with a good deal of unction in the following style, directing her remarks to the cause of her unrest: "Oh, I wish I had Divine Poiver ! I would make you smart.'" The opportunity was so good that I could not well withhold the remark: "I am so glad, dear sister, that you have not that power, as we suppose Di vine Power to be coupled with intelli gence, love, goodness and justice. But am afraid if you possessed such power, your unchristian spirit would lead you to do mischief." At our last meeting we organized a Liberal Union with a full board of offi cers, or whom J. M. limes is President. Leaving the people of Forest Grove in high spirits, I met my appoint ments at North Yamhill, Lafayette and Dayton, speaking to large audiences, and making the acquaintance of many people of sterling worth; and I am glad in tills public manuer to" thank tbe young people of Lafayette, and es pecially a niece of the editor of the New Northwest, for the music and songs which added so much to the interest of the meetings. I had thought, from my former can vass, that I bad seen tbe largest aud best portion of Oregon in the Wil lamette Valley from Salem to Eugene. But not until my eyes rested on the beautiful rolling plains of Yamhill county, could I say "Eureka 1" As I gazed entranced upon the landscape spread out before me at North Yam hill, so rich in the golden beauty of har vest time, my mind went back to the home of my childhood in Western New York, so similar to this west-side in richness and beauty; and I must say a rolling country has charms not to be found in valley land, as there is some thing about the rising and falling swells of an undulating country that rests the eye; and I may say of this county, it cheers the heart. Having finished my work in tills county, occupying about four weeks of lecturing almost every night and twice ou Sundays, I took leave of friends at Dayton, aud by steamer found my way to Albany, where I was greeted by very large audiences on Sunday afternoon aud evening. Finding that Professor Baldwin was to show on the following Monday evening, I deferred my lec tures, and left appointments for three weeks from that time. I have lectured at Lebanon, Harris burg, Brownsville, Eugene, Oakland and Roseburg. Four of the above places had never been favored or "oth erwise" with a liberal lecture on theol ogy, and in every instance I was well received, and everybody was surprised at the number of Liberals coming to tbe front. Of Roseburg, I may say that Nature has been prodigal in her outfit. Like a gem nestled among the bills, she rules like a queen at tbe end of the railroad I gave five lectures here to fine audi euces, a large proportion of whom were vouncr people aud ladles. And this fact is the most encouraging feature of my labors; as, when woman is redeemed from the slavery of superstition, tbe children will be raised in the lap reason and common sense. Then, and not until then, will we realize fully the beauties of God's kingdom in nature, and attain to a fuller manhood, rounded out in manly and moral virtues. Of Eugene, I am proud to say she carries in triumph he batuner of free thought with a large number of noble men and women, who are not ashamed to give a reason for the hope that Is in them. Long may she wave with her fine country town and highly-endowed college. Of the latter they may Indeed e proud. Leaving Roseburg with a promise to return, I met my second appointment at Albany, the most thrifty business town on tbis line of road. I found the M. E. Conference in session, aud the town full of preachers. I seemed an nwelcome visitor among my former friends, the clergy, but not to the Lib erals of Albany, who are a host whose hearts are in the right place. I had engaged tho Court-house to peak in, and had posters struck off, when I learned that my ministerial brethren, through the forgetfulness of the Sheriff, had crowded me out of the Court-house; so I changed bills, and took the Opera House. I have no unkindly word for tho Sheriff, nor yet for my Methodist friends; but I thought, as did many oth ers, with so many beautiful churches dedicated to God at their command, they might have spared my feelings, and al lowed me the use of the peoples' house dedicated to human uses. I was forcibly reminded, by tbe conduct of these Chris tians, of a pullet straining to cover a nestful of goose eggs. I close my lectures here to-morrow night. Have had large audiences, and with many assurances of good will and acceptance from the people. On Sunday we organized a Liberal Union with sixty good and true mem bers, with G. F. Crawford as President. On Sunday next I hope to be in Port land on my way to Walla Walla, Pen dleton, Dayton and The Dalles, from thence to Astoria and Hillsboro, and then to turn my face toward the dear ones at home. Albany, August 28, 1876. The Eepresentative English "Woman. If death had aimed to remove the representative woman of England as lately in France, in the person of George Sand Harriet Martlneau would doubt less have been selected. She was, though forced by ill health into com parative retirement of late years, strictly a cotemporary of the more brilliant, more imaginative French woman, being only two years her senior; and they stand iu rather strik ing coutrast to each other when It is re membered that Miss Martiueau'a an cestors were Huguenot refugees who set tled at Norwich, England, after tbe Revocation of the Edict of Nantes. Mine. Sand's irregular and passionate pedigree, ending iu the single lite of a grass widow if we may be allowed tbe term finds its very opposite In the de scent of Miss Martiueau. The Huguenot severity of morals, transplanted to tbe congenial soil of England, produced a family whose regularity is proved oy the fact that the profession of surgeou, beginning with the founder, was handed down In it for every generation to Miss Martineau'b, her uncle, wno gave ner her education, attaining a provincial eminence. At tbe time (1831) when Mme. Dudevaut was arranging a sepa ration from her husband, Miss Mar ti ueau, who bad already made her mark as a writer of religious and practical works having a distinct social bearing, began her popular series of tales illus trative of political economy. In 1831 she visited the United States, staying long enough to master fully the polit ical sitnation. In Washington and elsewhere she received the most grati- fvlutr attentions, but her views ou the question of slavery led her to seek the society ot tue Abolition leauers, anu the friendships thus formed were among the strongest and most cher ished to her dying day. To ner most intimate friend ou this side, Mrs. Maria Weston Chapman, she entrusted, we believe, her autobiography, which will doubtless soon be given to the world. Already an orbituary notice, prepared by herself some tweuty years ago, has appeared in the London Daily News, a journal to which she was a frequent ed itorial contributor. Une iooks in vain, indeed, for a parallel to this remarkable woman as a moulder of public opinion through the press and through printed works. A sister of the Rev. James Martlneau, and, like him, at one time a Unitarian, she afterwards experienced such a change of views as to undertake an abridgment of Comte's "Positive Philosophy." She also wrote a "His tory of England during the Thirty Years' Peace," "Eastern Life," (the re sult of Eastern travel in 1846), and nu merous works of fiction, buedied June 27th. New York Nation. A Pair of Wits. Chesterfield and Voltaire, born in the same year (1691), wre warm and life-Ioug friends. Whatever may have been the erratic Frenchman's vagaries and miffs, (for he never had a friend whom he did not at some time abuse), Lord Chesterfield was too much of a gentleman to take of fense, or even notice. On a certain occasion the two friends were in company at a grand ball in Paris, given by the king's favorite. Chesterfield stood by a marble pillar, gazing upon tbe brilliant assemblage of ladies, when Voltaire accosted him: "My lord, you should be a judge in such matters. Now, seriously, do you not think our French ladies the most beautiful you ever saw ?" "Upon my word," replied Chester field, with a nod and a smile, "lam not a judge of paintings." Not long afterwards Voltaire crossed over to England, and was present one evening at a party given by an English nobleman in London. A lady in the company, .sparkling in jewels and highly rouged, was particularly at tentive to the noted Frenchman, en crossing most of bis discourse. Ches terfield, observing, came up and tapped bis friend on the shoulder. "Be wary, monsieur, or you will be captivated. "No fear, my lord," quickly retorted Voltaire. "lam not to be captured by an English craft sailing under French colors!" A put-up job Building a chimney.