o
'v
TOli
OREGON CITY, OREGON, FRIDAY, 'SEPTEMBER SO, 1871.
NO. 47.
" " " T ss ii - m .- . - r 1 - 1 -
o
o
r)c lUccklij (enterprise.
o
" ADEMO CR.L TI C PAPER,
FOR TIIE
Q
Business Man, the Farme
jai the FAMILY CHICLE.
0 ysSlED EVERT FRIDAY BY
0 A. NOLTNER,
EDITOR AN'D rur.LisiiER.
WFiCt: In Dr. Thessing's Brick Building
KJ
TERMS of S Uli SCRIP TI ON:
f!,inv one vear. in advance $2 50
-Oillg' i J
... ,-r.Trc 71 IT- ? TfVfY7
T..n3;pnt advertisements, including all
leT;il notices, , Ul 1 - i'c.-, i vj
t'or each subsequent insertion 1 00
One Column, one year 1;200
' . i ! i : , 1 ... o e n
naif,
Q-nrter
Bu-iiueis Card, I square one year.
GO
40
12
Remlttanee to be made at therixko
S'lb-acriWrn, and at the espente of Agents.
BOOK AND JOB P HINTING.
b- tutiful. approved styles of type, and mod-e-a
.M.VCHLVH PltlCSSKS, which will enable
: . .. f . .1 , v T . ,K Pi intinrr '1 1 -i 1 1 timc
Neat, Quick and Cheap .'
EJ- Work solicited.
!t Jim in' transaction upon a Specie baiit.
IEMAIE SUFPEAGE QUES'X I0N-
A SKKMOX riSKACHKD I$Y
REV. E. GERRY,
t the Congregational Church, Oregon
City, Sept. 17, 1871.
Orkgox City, Sept. 18th. 1871.
Kkv. Ei.r.ninGK Gkkky : Sir We, the
undersigned, having listened with deep
interest to your able address, delivered in
the Congregational Church, Sunday even-in-
last, and believing as we do, that its
publication in the Okkko City Extkk
ritisK would accomplish WRch -good,
would most respectfully request a "Copy
far publication.
Chas. E. Waikikn,
A. F. FoutiK.s.
J. M. IVuox.
AV. L. Wiiitb,
AV. P. liuuxs. .
'Outfox City. Sept. 20. -IS71-.
ToMKSfcirs. Ciias. E. Wakkkx.axu others :
I thank you tor the compliment con
veyed in your request for the publication
of my address upon "YV otnan Suffrage."
II td the i lex of publicatio n on;c entered
my mind, 1 should have prepared with
greater care, so far as relates to the man
ner of expression. Sach as it is. how
ever, 1 willingly present it to yon. for the
purpose you desire, hoping thereby, thai
at least some fallacies used in the discus
sion of this question may be removed
from some minds.
Very Respectfully yours.
E. Gkruy.
I. t your ifiimicn ki t p tilence in the chvtthftx,
f .'Ki'.i not pet in tU d unto than to speak;
hut thij ore eoinmanded to he uuder obedi
ruee, rs' al,;o xtiith toe luxr. 1 Con. 14 : -84.
I aui well aware that any man who
nukes au appeal to the writings of Paul,
Xi regarded by a certain class of would-be
modern reformers as exceedingly conserv
ative. The truth is, there are certain
teachiiigs of Paul, that stand directly in
the way of what is termed, the "Woman's
Right's" movt'Rwnt. and there, ate only
two things to be done to renno-e bis testi
mony out of the way. First, ignore it al
together, call Paul a bactrekw, "which is
fi'it so certain, and refuse entirely to admit
liimipon the witness-stand. This is com
Mouly done by those who bland in the
front ranks of the movement. The other
method pursued, is to so interpret his ,
Machings on this point as to take away -all
!$eir force, so far as they relate to us
making them of local and temporary val
ue. We wish merely to say in reference
k this passage, that there is nothing in it
or the context, that will allow of any Buch '
interpretation. That be did not mean me
Q
'prohibition for the Corinthians alone is
evident from the preceding clause, which,
Uis conceded by the best scholars, is not
separated by any marks from the text
thus admitting of this reading, "as in all.
churches of the saints let your women
keep silence iu the churches." That the
rules which Paul here gives are perpetual
(jpoars (!) In the fact, that they contain
no limitations of time, expressed or un
derstood. (2) Such rules we may suppose
universal and perpetual unless founded
upon customs which pass away. (3) Paul
nowhere rests these rules of silence upon
temporary grounds. (4) To treat these
rules of silence as temporary, is to render
invalid, iu a measure at least, every pre
cept and command of the Bible.
Without discussing the passage farther,
we bring it forw ard and let it stand as
Scriptural evidence against much that is
included in the woman's rights movement.
Taking Miss Susan D. Anthony as the
leiuing representative of the Woman Suf
fragists, and her arguments as their stock
in trade, we propose to consider some of
the positions taken together with objec
tions to the whole movement :
I- The assumption is made, in the first
ptace, that the right to vote is a natural
tight, and that a hardship, an injustice is
inflicted upon woman in withholding this
right from her. But we deny that it is a
natural right at all. It is merely a politi
cal privilege, conceded by the govern
Kent of a State to certain classes of its
citizens. By an almost invariable rule, if
not by a natural law, governments at the
beginning fall into the hands of those who
have the greatest physical or mental row
er. Ya hen the government is in the hands
of the citizens, the theory is, whatever the
practice may be, to select the wiiest citi
zens to make and execute the laws. In
sjort, government is a society, organized
fi1T nnl i- - . - "
yiuiecuon, and while this society may
extend its protection to all classes that
come within its range, there is no natural
o
law compelling that society to admit all
classes to a voice in the regulation of its
affairs. The society or government once
organized does possess the right to legis
1 ite for it3 good. If it deema it right or
expedient, or thiuks that any good end
can be secured thereby, it may enfranchise
disfranchised classes, and no natural law
intervenes to say yea or nay. If the right
to vote be n natural right it can no more
be limited f o age than to class. The young
man of eighteen or twenty has the same
right to vote as the young man of twenty
one, and to deny him this right is to con
travene natural laws and work a hardship.
We wish to be clearly understood. No
class, male or female, possesses a natural
right to vote. Every society, political,
moral, or religious, has the right to decide
who shall be members and who shall be
excluded.
1 1. In the second place it is assumed
that woman suffrage is a logical conclu
sion of the principles upon which this gov
ernment was founded, that the expression
"we the people," &c. must as a logical
sequence, include women. We are told
that certain property qualifications were
thrown in the way in the begining. These
have been taken out of the way. These
are certain educational tests which have
not yet been removed. In Massachusetts
and Connecticut no man can vote even
though he be worth millions of dollars,
who cannot read and write, provided his
ability to do this be called in question,
except it be under the 15th Ameudment.
We are told that all restrictions upon ne
gro suffrage have been taken out of the
way, and now the next and "inal "step is
to concede the right to woman. But if
this reasoning be admitted, we claim that
logically it must be carried still farther.
A large class including, perhaps, two
thirds or more of the 'people, as shown on
the census rolls will even then remain
disfranchised. Almost eVcry argument
that can be brought forward in favor of
woman suffrage, can be urged in favor of
what has been termed '-Baby Suffrage7
The old deGnition of Blackstone, which
describes every person under age as an
n fan t, is recognized as the definition in
the common Vs,.- in evety State in the Un
ion, except it has been changed by statu
tory provisions, which I think has not been
done in a single instance. YYhat an out
rage upon a young man of twenty years
and eleven months, who perhaps, in his
own estimation knows more than his fath
er and mother, to be called an infant
The ballot should be placed in the hands
of all the children that this reproach may
be removed. If the Common law recog
nizes the husband as the representative of
the wife, it also recognizes him as that of
the children. They should have the bal
lot so that laws can be secured enabling
them to a-ct for themselves. If the laws
regulating the relations of husbands to
wives somewhat resemble the old slave
code, as it is argued, the laws regulating
the relations ol fathers to their children
are of the same general character. The
father can use the wages of his children, if
he feel so disposed and compel them to go
scantily fed and clothed. He can spend
their earnings for drink while they must
live in poverty and rags. If a child has a
leg or arm bro4?a i"n a railway accident,
it has no redress. It cannot sue the com
pany, l tie talber, or tue motuer, ii a wid
ow, can fcue and recover. The child ap
pears in such a suit, precisely in such a i
manner as an ox or a horse would appear i
which had been rfm over by the cars. ;
The common law gives the parent power
to exercise moderate chastisement in cases
of disobedience, and restraint, it any at
tempts be made to escape from under pa
rental control. If wives are to remedy
the so-called evils under which they suffer
by the use of the ballot, then children
should be allowed the same privileges.
They are placed under many of the same
disadvantages, if such they be called.
How many little favors which children
like would be secured, and what a re
straint would be placed upon a father's
authority when he knew that each one of
bis Gve or ten little children could cast
ballot against him, and perhaps defeat him
for Governor or Congressman. If it be
said that all this is absurd, we as&ert that
we are not to blame. The fault must be
in the reasoning that will admit of such
absurd conclusions, for we claim that they
are legitimately drawn from the premisses
laid down by the woman suffragists.
They say, we as wives suffer disadvant
ages under the law. The ballot is the
remedy, therefore give us the ballot. YVe
say, children suffer many of the same dis
advantages. If the ballot is a remedy in
the former ease, it is in the latter, unless
there is evidence to the contrary, and none
has ever been presented, therefore child
ren should have the ballot. Again, they
say, the government rests upon the peo
ple. This was conceded in the beginning ;
has been gradually carried into practice
in its history. We are a part of the peo
ple, therefore we should have a voice in
the government. We say, upon the same
major premiss, that children are a part of
the people, and theretore should have a
voice in the government. An argument
that proves too much is sometimes as val
ufiless as an arcument that proves too
little.
III. Farther, it is claimed by the ad
vocates of woman suffrage, that the agita
tion of the question of rights has secured
to their eex many of the rights demanded.
They are advancing rapidly, they tell us,
toward the goal of their desires. The
Statute Books of almost every State indi
cate marked changes in their favor. We
admit the fact, and simply call in question
the causes which have produced these
changes. We are ready to admit that the
agitation of this question, has been, per
haps, only one of several causes operating
to secure the same end. But, however
this may be, the question arises, if the wo
men are securing the rights tliey wish
without the ballot, why Ehould they de
mand the ballot! It may be questioned
whether changes are not even now being
made in their favor as rapidly as is con
sistent with the good order of society.
But the question ari?es, what is the posi
tion of woman in civilized society and in
the eye of the law? Are the women in
our communities, in such a slavish abject
condition as to demand that they should
exercise revolutionary rights ? What is
her social position ? Is she not respected ?
Dj women, who respect themselves meet
with insults at every turn ? Is it true, as
Miss Anthony told us, in substance, that
men have no chivalrous feelings ? No
respect for women outside of their own
households ? Has the fact been suddenly
revealed to us that we, the men, are all
savages, brutes, looking upon women as
legitimate prey? Such a statement is a
libel, not only upon men but women also,
for it gives no recognition to the moral
influence which, in every well-regulated
household, wives and sisters exert over
husbands and brothers. Mrs. Young told
us the other night that she had mingled
with the lower classes of men, that she
had visited and lectured in saloons, where
a man would not have been allowed to
speak, and that she never met with an in
sult from a sane, sober man. These mm
accorded her privileges from deference to
her sex. I venture the assertion, tbal
there is not a man in this community', trav
eling over the land by railway and steam
boat lines, who would meet with the res
pect from employees and strangers, that
his wife and daughter would, were they
traveling aloce and unprotected. Many
a man, iu traveling, is compelled to take
his wife with him iu order to secure ordi
nary rights and privileges, which will be
conceded for his wife's sake. What sav
ages men are in their relation to women !
You may go into some of our large cities
and acquaint yourselves with missionary
operations, and you will find that it often
happens that if there is any specially hard
field to cultivate they send a woman into
it. It is hardly safe sometimes to send a
man. But the most degraded will respect
a woman. There are some lingering rem
nants of chivalrous feeling after almost
every other sentiment has died out of the
heart. It may be replied that certain
women can do these things. But it is safe
to assert that as a rule, every woman who ;
preserves the integrity of her character,
and maintains a womanly deportment is
comparatively safe. It may be said that
in the cities women are templed, bribed
With gold, but notwithstanding all the
power of temptation, no woman ever yet
voluntarily entered upon a life of sin and
shame without there being, at icast, two
guilty parties. Do the thousands of wo
men who walk the streets of our lar.e
cities after nightfall, as decoys, present no
temptation ? Is the virtue all a possession j
of the female sex and men the guilty par-
ties? Give women the ballot, draw them
out from their homes, make them a '
factor in politics, and they will have po- j
litical ends to gain, and the chances are
that the temptations to lead a life of easy
virtue will be at least two where there is
one now.
But What ate the rights of women before
the law? So far as property is concerned
there are many statutes which manifestly
discriminate in her favor. She can hold
property in her own right, exempt from
liability for the debts of her husband, or
even her own debts contracted whilst in
ttre marriage relation. But the husband'ts
property is liable for all honest debts con
tracted by wife or children. -The wife
dying without will, the husdand cannot
inherit. The husband dying without will
the wife and children inherit all his estate,
and if there be no children the wife alone
is heir. The property which the wife
holds in her own right, cannot be touched
to meat the common necessities of domes
tic life, even though the household be in
a slate of poverty. In short, the wife can
hold property, and bear non of the res
ponsibilities connected with the mainten
ance of the family, while the man must
bear all these responsibilities, whether he
has any property or not. This may not
be true in every State, but these are some
of the tyrannical laws, which brutal men
have enacted here in Oregon. I know it
may be replied, that there are not many
women in Oregon holding property in
their own right, but we reply that under
such legislation there is a fair prospect
that their numbers will rapidly increase.
It is argued that there is an injustice in
allowing a husband to claim and use the
earnings of a wife. But it may be replied
that the husband cannot compel the wife
to go out to service, and if she voluntarily
assumes the burden, is there any reason
why her wages should not be united with
those of her husband for the common sup
port of the household ? In the eye of the
law their interests are united. Moreover,
the husband, as the representative of the
familyja made responsible for the support
ofthefamilv. Where is the injustice in
his receiving the earnings of the family ?
lr tne wife is au invalid, and cannot even
attend to domestic duties, the husband
must maintain her and supply her lack of
service, it a wile slanders ber neiguoor
or engages in a quarrel with another wo
man, the husband must pav for the luxury
If a husband becomes an invalid, the wife
has no legal responsibility for his care, or
even that of their children. If a husband
knocks a man down in defending the ia-
x r l:. c :i t . . -
tegrny oi uis ia,muy, ne must pay nis own
costs, it is true, mere are case3 where in
justice may be done uader the law, as, for
instance, where there are drunken hna
bands, but even in such cases, where a
husband treats his family with npglect
ana contempt, he can be legally placed
under a guardian. The difficulty, arter
all. is not so much with the laws as the
neglect in communities to pnt the law in
lorce. The law which places a wife's
wages m the hands of her husband seems
to be founded upon the just principle,
that he who is compelled to bear respon
sibilities should have all proper facilities
jor meeting those responsibilities, and the
injustice that may arise in individual cases
is in great measure guarded against by
other laws for the protection of society.
1 V. Again, the inequality in the wages
paid to men and women, is one of the
great evils which women are to remedy
when the ballot is placed in their hands.
But according to their own testimony this
u fast being remedied without the ballot.
Moreover, that rule of society which reg
ulates this matter of wages is not so un
just after all. It seems to be based upon
the principle, that a woman is required to
meet present necessities. Her work is
temporary. Her destination is marriage.
The man must provide for the future, lie
is expected to provide for the support of
a family. And he never becomes a man
in the social definition of the word, until
he does this. It is true, society i3 sadly
out of joint in respect to these regulations,
and the only remedy I can conceive of,
from a legal point of view, is for the wo
men, when once they have secured the
ballot, to enact a law compelling every
young man to lead a virtuous and honest
life and get married, and in this way pro
viding homes for these thousands of home
less women. But the question is not po
liticalit is financial. Men employing
help, will employ that which, all things
considered, is cheapest and best. In many
of these departments where women's la
bor Is made use of, it is simply for the
reason that it is cheaper. Let their wages
be raised to the level of men's wages, men
would be employed in preference. We
claim this as a rule, of couise, admitting
exceptions.
To illustrate : Capt. Hervey of Passaic
Laundry near Belleville, N. J . was forced
to employ Chinese labor. His business
was the preparation for market of newly
manufactured linen, the process being one
of washing by machinery and ironing by
band. His Laundry was of a capacity to
give employment to two hundred women,
and the work was of a kind properly be
longing to women, but it was impossible
for him to obtain and retain more than
sixty or seventy good workers at a time.
Usually a girl's first month in the Laundry
was ber most remunerative one, simply
because she did not choose, when she had
her first month's wages to work through
the second, but insisted on going home or
to the nearest city to spend ber earnings
and her time. Fresh hands were no soon
er instructed than they left Belleville for
Laundries nearer their former home or in
the neighboring city. Labor so untrust
worthy was fast interfering with the en
gagements of Mr. Hervey and he found
that he must either shut up shop or em
ploy the Chinese, and be chone the latter
alternative. YVe mention this fact to show
that there are various considerations that
give rise to, and perpetuate this inequality
of wages, and this condition of things can
not be changed by any arbitrary law. To
attempt it, would be to destroy large man
ufacturing interests, and thus limit the
market for labor.
V. Again the demand is made that all
occupations and professions shall be open
to women, and compliance with this de
mand is to be secured by the ballot. I
am not aware that there is any law exclud
ing them from any occupation or profes
sion, and certainly r.o law can be made
forcing them into these positions. Women
are lawyers, doctors, clergymen, editors.
You find them working at many of the
trades, on farms, as clerks. Wherever
tbey show themselves qualified to fill any
place they are recognized as entitled to
that place. The ballot could do no more
for them. In the matter of education.
they not only have Seminaries of high
grade and Colleges, some of the best en
dowed in the land, exclusively their own,
to which men cannot be admitted, but they
are seeking and gaining admission to Col
leges founded for the benefit of young
men. They are coming out upon the lec
ture platform, and receiving as much (or
services as the most popular men. In short
they are crowding in upon every side, in
to those occupations which have hereto
fore been regarded as the exclusive prov
ince of men. While this may be advan
tageous to individuals who secure posi
tions, there is a rapidly growing evil in
consequence of it. Every young woman
who steps into the place of a young man
in a trade or calling, is diminishing every
young man s opportunities tor remunera
tive employment, and thereby removing
the probabilities of marriage lartlier and
farther away, and adding, especially in
the older States, to the rapidly increasing
number of men and women who grow up
into middle life and old age without any
expectations of the enjoyments of domes
tic life. And taking human nature as it
is to-day, we feel safe in asserting that
every man or woman growing up in so
cietr in an unmarried condition, adds to
the danger of moral corruption. In the
attempt to escape from one evil, we are
exposed to another. These women's
rights advocates tell us of the sufferings
of women in large cities, because of scant
wages and scant employment. We do not
call in question their statements, but we
do deny that the, ballot is a remedy. There
are thousands of men at times, and many
at all times without employment in our
cities, sometimes thrown out to give place
to women, and these are in a condition of
poverty and suffering. Many have, not
only their own burdens to bear, but the
support of a family rests upon them.
These men have the ballot. Is it any ad
vantage to them ? It will not do to say
that imprudence and intemperance is the
cause of this suffering, for this argument
has force on both sides of the question.
If it be said that these men are not oblig
ed to remain in the city, that there are
millions of acres waiting for some one to
cultivate them, we reply that there are
hundreds of homes waiting and anxious to
secure assistance in household duties.
There is a tendency both on the part of
men and wonun to seek city life and many
prefer to suffer there, rather than en
joy comforts in the country. The ballot
cannot remedy this.
But there are certain fallacies connect
ed with the ideas put forth by the advo
cates of woman suffrage. Among these
we may mention.
1. The idea that the ballot educates
There is no evidence that the ballot, in
and of itself, ever made a man any more
of a man. The uneducated negro, with a
vote, is still the mere tool of the artful
domacrofiue. "If any expected that by
the loth Amendment the negroes would
be elevated to a level with the whites,
thfv were doomed to disappointment."
It is by education that the ballot can be
COURTESY OF BANCROFT LIBRARY,
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA,
made of worth to a man. . There is tio ev
idence that the ballot will make a woman
any more of a woman, and the danger is
that it may prodace the opposite effect.
Another idea put forward is, that
2. The ballot will give a woman pow
er. - But it will give her power only by
placing her in antagonism to man and
thereby introducing a new element of dis
cord into Rociety. Moreover, the power
sue acquires, will be political power, and
the danger is that in securing political
power elie will lose in moral power, and
the result will be. that this loss .will re-act
upon and neutralize her political influ
ence. The possibilities are In some local
ities and under certain circumstances Tshe
might by the possession of the ballot se
cure personal advantages, but the chances
are equally m favor of her losing them.
As it cow is. she is not taken into the ac
count at all by employers who have po
litical ends to gain. Give her. the ballot
and her position in this respect would be
changed. For instance, here is a capital
ist employing a thousand women, each
one holding a ballot. By their aid he can
secure some important office. But they
all cast their votes against him and he is
defeated. How long do you suppose they
woulc remain in his employ. Capitalists
employ men who will labor for their in
terests, and when women have equal po
litical power, they will be employed upon
the same terms. They must do their mas
ter's bidding, and thus greater oppor
tunities for political corruption, will
be thrown in the way of desiguing men.
It will not do to argue that the women
have such perfect moral characters that
they can resist such attempts to influence
them. The bread and butter question,
after all, is the paramount one. with wo
men as well as men, in this condition of
material existence, and it cannot be push
ed into the back-ground. YVhere then is
the power of the ballot, especially in the
hands of those who need most to enjoy the
advantages ot its power?
3. Another fallacious idea is that the
ballot in the hands of women is eroingr to
change the moral tone of Society. Once
allow them to vote, and there will be no
more recreant husbands, all social evils
will be buried in oblivion, saloons and
disreputable houses, gamblers and black
legs, will all be swept into oblivion. This
condition of things would be very desira
ble and if it could be secured, I should
certainly favor woman suffrage. But this
pre supposes that all women will vote on
ly as they are influenced by high moral
purposes, it pre supposes mat men can
je educated into morality by legislative
enactments. But such an object never
was and never will be accomplished. The
truth is, there is net such a vast difference
between the morality of men and women
in our communities. The women are not
all angels and the men all brutes. As a
general rule in married life, the husband
or wife will bring the other in process of
time, up or down to his her own level of
morality the one having the strongest
intellect, the greatest force of character,
winning the victory, and among the un
married, associations have a great influ
ence in determining character. We are
willing to admit that more men than wo
men are addicted to certain prominent
vices, and that women with the baliot
might pass more stringent laws regulating
these vices, and here lies our first objec
tion to woman suffrage.
1. The objection is based upon the
supposition that women will, as it is claim
ed for them, secure the enactment of more
stringent laws regulating the morals of
community. This may be well doubted,
but if it be true, it is a kind of legislation
that will work more evil than good. In
almost every civilized community the law
making power is entrusted to the more
noral class of citizens. As a rule we do
not send thieves and murdeVere to legis
late for us. YVe send men who by then
conduct have won the respect and confi
dence of the great body of their fellow
citizens. The constquence is that we have
in almost every Slate, laws so far in ad
vance oi the general moral sentiment, that
thty cannot be executed, no attempt is
made to execute them. In some of the
States there is a law against profanity ,but
I never knew but one man to be arrested
for swearing. You can scarcely measure
the distance between the moral sentiment
of community and such a law. It is prac
tically a dead letter, and every such law
which beeomes ot no force weakens res
pect for all law. The fact is, we do not
deem it expedient mat mere should be
any more stringent laws until the moral
sentiment of community is educated to
that point where vitality will be given to
those we already have, and there is no
danger but that civilized men will keep
their laws in advance of their morals.
The work to be done, and a work in which
woman is fitted to bear an honorable part
is to advance the average moral sentiment
of communities until we can execute the
laws we already have.
2. Auother objection closely allied to
this has been recently advanced bv the
London Spectator. It is claimed that it is
impossible to combine lemale suffrage
with the safety of a free State. It argues.
'that the first necessity of a free govern
ment is, that the majority shall have pow
er to govern, that it shall not be liable in
the last resort to be summarily set at de
fiance. If it can be. whether by soldiers
or rioters, or by individual genius, then
government itself, not this or that ruler,
but government, is ol necessity destroyed.
And under female suffrage, this might al
ways happen. Suppose, for instance, that
the women of England, having votes and
being as they are, in the majority, were
to decree, as they almost infallibly would
decree, that the sale of liquor shoultl cease
and that, as is quite possible also, the ma
jority of rough men rose in armed insur
rection against the Act. Clearly the Leg
islature though with a majority at its back
would have to yield ignominiously, and
government by the majority, that is, the
only form of free government which the
world has as yet been able to devise,
would be summarily brought to an end.
i orce, if not the foundation of govern
ment, is at least an indispensable element
in it, and force and opinion would be
permanently divided, or rather would la
bor under a permanent possibility of
division." Tho same illustration might
be used in reference to our own States
and communities.
3. A third objection is that with all
..I , a . II. M. 1 -..
mis laiit auom ngms we near little or
nothing about corresponding duties. It
is very easy to pass laws, not always so
easv to execute them. It is verv easy to
pronounce for war on provocation, not go
easy to shoukler a musket and march to
the battle. Force is the last resort, when
difficulties arise between nations, or indi
viduals persist in transgressing laws.
The question hag been very pertinently
asked, "Is it right that women should have
anquai or determining voice in the en
actment of laws which they do not pro
pose io execute, wnicn they do not pro
pose to assist m executing, which they
could not execute If ihey -would, and
which they expect men to execute for them.
And again it is asked, Is it right, is it kind
and courteous to men. for women to de
mand ah equal or determining roice in
the establishment of a national policy
which they do not propose to defend,
which they do not propose to assist in de
fending, which they could not defend if
they would, and which they expect men
to defend lor them ?" When women are
ready to meet all the responsibilities that
grow ont of the position they would as
sume then the subject will present itself
to men in an altogether different light.
4. A fourth objection to this movement
lies in the introduction of too much senti
mentalism into politics and into judicial
affairs. Sentiment in social and domestic
relations may be all very well, but in the
real uustness ol life we are compelled to
deal with iacts and not sentiments. It
wilt not do to determine the guilt or in
nocence of those who are accused by tho
color of the hair or the eye, as is propos
ed in the Republic of the close-coming fu
ture. Some writer has observed that a
woman's reasoning consists in asserting
that a thing is so because it is so. but this
is not the kind of logic that will secure
impartial justice. Facts. Gentlemen, are
what we need, are the universal demand
of judicial tribunals. This tendency to
sentimentalism in politics is already re
vealing itself in ihe discussion of the ques
tion, and making woman's rights advo
cates the lackeys of the vilest demagogues
that ever came to the surface in politics.
5. Out of this grows another objection,
the addition of a new element of corrup
tion to politics. While there may be no
ble, brave, heroic women bearing a part
in political life, there is no disputing the
position that there will be multitudeswho
can and will be easily influenced to party
measure for corrupt ends. If there are
women who will sell their virtue for "-old.
they will sell their votes for gold, for po
sition, tor worldly advantage.
6. Our last objection lies in tlm C-Aoi
that the promoters of this movement ig
nore the fact that men and women belong
to different sexes, or that the sexual pas
sions have any influence in determining
human activity. A writer in the Nation,
presents this in a strong light. "No peo
ple can safely heed the political counsels
of persons who take no note of this most
tremendous of all the social forces. Let
"ns go back ever so far into the night of
ages, and we find it there shaping nearly
every one of the problems by which the
race has ever since been vexed. Go down
as far as we can into the recesses of human
character, and we find it there, it may be
enriching and elevating, it may be dwarf
ing and degrading, but still active and po
tential. There is no custom or habit which
it has not originated or Colored, no war
or migration which has not owed some
thing to its instigation. It has had to do
with the building up and the downfall of
great empires, and with the fighting of
great battles. It has blasted some of the
greatest names of hisiory and adorned
others. It has been, in short, in ail ages
the source of the greatest virtues and the
foulest vices. In fact, if history as well
as individual experience teaches us any
thing clearly, it is that no system of society
or government which does not take note
of its tremendous energy, can hope for a
long d)r a prosperous existence. No man
can tell what would be tire effect on such
persons as now compose our legislatures
of the accession of a body of the kind of
women, who, in all probability, as soon as
the first excitement and novelty was over,
would devote themselves to the work of
politics. They might be Motts and Howes
and Livermores, but reasoning from ex
perience the great mass of them would be
but we will not mention names, and we
should have added to the corruption of
money, which is bad enough, a deeper and
darker corruption still." There has nev
er bten a time in our history when more
important questions were crowding upon
us, or when we were called to settle more
difficult problems, and it is no time to add
to the sources of distraction, by bringing
the influence of sex into play in the polit
ical arena. Men and women have their
separate and legitimate spheres of action
equally honorable, founded in nature, in
reason and the Word of God. Any change
must ignore eternal principles, and result
in comusion and moral decay.
Long Braxcii. Forney's "Oli-
va nas been taking a look at
things to be seen at Long Branch.
She says : "All gatherings,whether
they take place in the water, on
the lawn, or in the large parlors, re
mind the observer of a woman
suffrage convention. While men
are at home toiling at their self
appointed tasks, women are here
spending money as though it were
water. A married women of the
fashionable kind has a suite of
rooms set apart for her own ex
clusive use. She has servants who
have neither ears nor eyes. She
has a carriage lined! with satin as
luxurious as eider down. She has
a professional bather to take Iter
into the briny fluid, who knows
how to manaire so that even the
Vtlantic shall not visit her cheek
too rougly. She has usually a
very young man attached to her
by invisible reins, after the dra
matic manner of Aunt Trotwood
and Mr. Dick. This innocent crea
ture fills the measure of her vanity
when nothing better has been
gathered lor the slaughters, The
most desperate flirtations are seelh
ing and bubbling while the bus
band is growing bald with hard
thinking in Wall street. Why,
Queen Elizabeth was denied more
than halt the luxuries this Ameri
can princess enjoys."
m
"Tie Them: Together."-" What
do you mean by a cat and dog
life V" said a husband to his angry
wife. "Look at Carlo and Kitty
asleep on the rug ! I wish men
lived half so peacefully with their
wives." "Stop," said tho lady,
"tie them together and see hovv
1 -11 , 5
muy Win ayn;e,
The editor of the Detroit Most
has retired to become a minister of
the Gospel. To leave the editorial
chair of a Kadical paper for the
pulpit, is a longer jump than most
people would presume possible.
Getting Ready for Fairs.
Theie is a private spot in Stim
son s crarden that I happened td
stumble upon the other day. It is
encompassed by a great frino-e of
weeds. Nobody would suspect
that those weeds meant anything
but sheer slovenliness ; but they
do. 1 have seen something of tho
world and of the tricks that ar6
vain, and I knew Stimson well
v,...sll jvuuw max ir there were
any weeds left on his farm thev
meant something. So one morn
ing early, I walked through them.
And 1 found growing in a highly
manured and well-cultivated ppacd
m ; their midst, a ftremeiidoni
squash I It was enormous ! The
vino was in close proximity to the
pig pen and there was plenty of
pure pig manure to feed it. Every
bud but three had been pinched
oil, and three squashes were bein
developed by a vine thirty or fifty
ieC J0"S 1 Jid ot measure it.
"That's a big squash you've got
I said to Stimson, at tho breakfast
table.
;'A big squash ? Where ?" saii
btimson, with unaffected astonish
ment. "Where! Why out there in
the weeds where do you suppose?
Do you think I am 'going to de
liberately look at a plantation of
weeds three or four days without
Knowing why a good farmer lets
them ptow ?
Ah Stimson, 16
find you, like
are deceitful !"
the whole gender,
Stimson stammered and blushed-,
but finally owned up. He wanted
to beat so and so's big squash of
last year at the fair without letting
his Jieighbors know how he did it.
I've told this story to show how
-ome people -'prepare for the fairs."
there is a tremendous amount of
humbug involved in the prepara
tion. Really the fair that will do
the most good is that kind of a
fair which demands sample pro
ducts of crops that hnvo vibll
the greatest net cash results in pro
portion to the investment of time,
labor and money. That's what's
the matter! Our shows are tod
often lies intended to belies; de
signed to deceive. The cattle'that
are shown are washed and rubbed,
and fattened and greased, and
combed and groomed until they
look hke pictures that not one
farmer in ten thousand" can 'realize
if he has siock of the same blood;
and so of horses, and onions and
turnips, potatoes, squashes and
corn. The figures do not come in
to the account at all in the matter
of judging. Stimson's squash is a
fair expose- of the way shows are
made up, and I do not care who
says to the contrary. Mural JScib
J'KArr.
Legality of Sunday Marriages-
In New York the question of
the legality of Sunday marriages
is exciting considerable attention,
in legal as well as clerical minds-.
There seems to be about an equal
division of both parties in this im
portant matter. It is held that as
marriage is a legal civil contract
and that legal civil contracts are.
illegal if made on the Sabbath, ifc
is voiil if performed on this day.
An interesting tost, ensn ia n niir
pending in Rochester, N. Y. A
millionaire died there recently, and
winedi ins property to the children
Of his Second! Wlfp. diKmhovilinrr
two of his own children. The
marriage was performed on Sun
day. It is not clear how- this will
invalidate the will, should the de
cision be against Sunday marriages
but some lawyers believe that in
SUCll a Case tllR will P.Anld nnrl
would be broken. If the court de
cides that marriages are invalid if
performed on that day, no doubt
many more interesting and point
ed cases will arise. Lawyers will
grow fat on contested rights rjf
property, while in ordinary divorce
they would not pay their rent. But
no decent court will decide against
the legality of pure marriages
.
Ills Answer. A professor in a
certain college had taken his class
out on a pleasant afternoon, to cx
ercise them in practical surveying.
The next morning they were to be
examined on the same The first
man was called up. Said! the pro
fessor; "How would you go to
work to survey a lot ot land ?"
(Deep thought, but no answer.)
"If a man should come to you to
ret you to survey a lot of land,
what would you do ?" "I think,"
said the student, thoughtfully, "I
should tell him he had better get
somebody else."
A prominent Government official
at Washington, recently wrote to
a friend in New York, inquiring as
to the position, financially or other
wise, ot a resident of that city. "I
am happy to inform you that Mr
stands at the very top of re
spectability here. He owns a fast
horse, a New York Judge, and in
tends to steal the first railroad he
sees lying around loose." -
O