Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote

shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any

State on account of sex.

Sec. 2. The Congress shall have power, by appropriate legislation,

to enforce the provisions of this article.

Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, the joint resolution introduced by my

friend, the Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. BLAIR], proposing an

amendment to the Constitution of the United States, conferring the

right to vote upon the women of the United States, is one of paramount

importance, as it involves great questions far reaching in their

tendency, which seriously affect the very pillars of our social

fabric, which involve the peace and harmony of society, the unity of

the family, and much of the future success of our Government. The

question should therefore he met fairly and discussed with firmness,

but with moderation and forbearance.

No one contributes anything valuable to the debate by the use of harsh

terms, or by impugning motives, or by disparaging the arguments of the

opposition. Where the prosperity of the race and the peace of society

are involved, we should, on both sides, meet fairly the arguments of

our respective opponents.

This question has been discussed a great deal outside of Congress,

sometimes in bad temper and sometimes illogically and unprofitably,

but the advocates of the proposed amendment and the opponents of it

have each put forth, probably in their strongest form, the reasons and

arguments which are considered by each as conclusive in favor of the

cause they advocate. I do not expect to contribute much that is new

on a subject that has been so often and so ably discussed; but what I

have to say will be in the main a reproduction in substance of what

I and others have already said on the subject, and which I think

important enough to be placed upon the record in the argument of the

case.

In connection with my friend, the honorable Senator from Missouri [Mr.

COCKRELL], I have in a report set forth substantially the reasons

and arguments which to my mind establish the fact that the proposed

legislation would be injudicious and unwise, and I shall not hesitate

to reiterate here such portions of what was then said as seem to me to

be important.

I believe that the Creator intended that the sphere of the males and

females of our race should be different, and that their duties and

obligations, while they differ materially, are equally important and

equally honorable, and that each sex is equally well qualified by

natural endowments for the discharge of the important duties which

pertain to each, and that each sex is equally competent to discharge

those duties.

We find an abundance of evidence, both in the works of nature and in

the Divine revelation, to establish the fact that the family properly

regulated is the foundation and pillar of society, and is the most

important of any other human institution.

In the Divine economy it is provided that the man shall be the head

of the family, and shall take upon himself the solemn obligation of

providing for and protecting the family.

Man, by reason of his physical strength, and his other endowments and

faculties, is qualified for the discharge of those duties that

require strength and ability to combat with the sterner realities and

difficulties of life. The different classes of outdoor labor which

require physical strength and endurance are by nature assigned to man,

the head of the family, as part of his task. He discharges such labors

as require greater physical endurance and strength than the female sex

are usually found to possess.

It is not only his duty to provide for and protect the family, but

as a member of the community it is also his duty to discharge the

laborious and responsible obligations which the family owe to the

State, and which obligations must be discharged by the head of the

family, until the male members of the family have grown up to manhood

and are able to aid in the discharge of those obligations, when it

becomes their duty each in his turn to take charge of and rear a

family, for which he is responsible.

Among other duties which the head of the family owes to the State, is

military duty in time of war, which he, when able-bodied, is able to

discharge, and which the female members of the family are unable to

discharge.

He is also under obligation to discharge jury duty, and by himself

or his representatives to perform his part of the labor necessary to

construct and keep in order roads, bridges, streets, and all grades

of public highways. And in this progressive age upon the male sex is

devolved the duty of constructing and operating our railroads, and

the engines and other rolling-stock with which they are operated; of

building, equipping, and launching, shipping and other water craft of

every character necessary for the transportation of passengers and

freight upon our rivers, our lakes, and upon the high seas.

The labor in our fields, sowing, cultivating, and reaping crops must

be discharged mainly by the male sex, as the female sex, for want of

physical strength, are generally unable to discharge these duties.

As it is the duty of the male sex to perform the obligations to the

State, to society, and to the family, already mentioned, with numerous

others that might be enumerated, it is also their duty to aid in

the government of the State, which is simply a great aggregation

of families. Society can not be preserved nor can the people be

prosperous without good government. The government of our country is a

government of the people, and it becomes necessary that the class of

people upon whom the responsibility rests should assemble together and

consider and discuss the great questions of governmental policy which

from time to time are presented for their decision.

This often requires the assembling of caucuses in the night time, as

well as public assemblages in the daytime. It is a laborious task, for

which the male sex is infinitely better fitted than the female sex;

and after proper consideration and discussion of the measures that may

divide the country from time to time, the duty devolves upon those who

are responsible for the government, at times and places to be fixed by

law, to meet and by ballot to decide the great questions of government

upon which the prosperity of the country depends.

These are some of the active and sterner duties of life to which

the male sex is by nature better fitted than the female sex. If in

carrying out the policy of the State on great measures adjudged vital

such policy should lead to war, either foreign or domestic, it would

seem to follow very naturally that those who have been responsible for

the management of the State should be the parties to take the hazards

and hardships of the struggle.

Here, again, man is better fitted by nature for the discharge of the

duty--woman is unfit for it. So much for some of the duties imposed

upon the male sex, for the discharge of which the Creator has endowed

them with proper strength and faculties.

On the other hand, the Creator has assigned to woman very laborious

and responsible duties, by no means less important than those imposed

upon the male sex, though entirely different in their character. In

the family she is a queen. She alone is fitted for the discharge of

the sacred trust of wife and the endearing relation of mother.

While the man is contending with the sterner duties of life, the whole

time of the noble, affectionate, and true woman is required in the

discharge of the delicate and difficult duties assigned her in the

family circle, in her church relations, and in the society where her

lot is cast. When the husband returns home weary and worn in the

discharge of the difficult and laborious task assigned him, he finds

in the good wife solace and consolation, which is nowhere else

afforded. If he is despondent and distressed, she cheers his heart

with words of kindness; if he is sick or languishing, she soothes,

comforts, and ministers to him as no one but an affectionate wife

can do. If his burdens are onerous, she divides their weight by the

exercise of her love and her sympathy.

But a still more important duty devolves upon the mother. After

having brought into existence the offspring of the nuptial union, the

children are dependent upon the mother as they are not upon any other

human being. The trust is a most sacred, most responsible, and most

important one. To watch over them in their infancy, and as the mind

begins to expand to train, direct, and educate it in the paths of

virtue and usefulness is the high trust assigned to the mother. She

trains the twig as the tree should be inclined.

She molds the character. She educates the heart as well as the

intellect, and she prepares the future man, now the boy, for honor or

dishonor. Upon the manner in which she discharges her duty depends the

fact whether he shall in future be a useful citizen or a burden to

society. She inculcates lessons of patriotism, manliness, religion,

and virtue, fitting the man by reason of his training to be an

ornament to society, or dooming him by her neglect to a life of

dishonor and shame. Society acts unwisely when it imposes upon her

the duties that by common consent have always been assigned to the

stronger and sterner sex, and the discharge of which causes her to

neglect those sacred and all important duties to her children and to

the society of which they are members.

In the church, by her piety, her charity, and her Christian purity,

she not only aids society by a proper training of her own children,

but the children of others, whom she encourages to come to the sacred

altar, are taught to walk in the paths of rectitude, honor, and

religion. In the Sunday-school room the good woman is a princess, and

she exerts an influence which purifies and ennobles society, training

the young in the truths of religion, making the Sunday-school the

nursery of the church, and elevating society to the higher planes of

pure religion, virtue, and patriotism. In the sick room and among the

humble, the poor, and the suffering, the good woman, like an angel

of light, cheers the hearts and revives the hopes of the poor, the

suffering, and the despondent.

It would be a vain attempt to undertake to enumerate the refining,

endearing, and ennobling influences exercised by the true woman in her

relations to the family and to society when she occupies the sphere

assigned to her by the laws of nature and the Divine inspiration,

which are our surest guide for the present and the future life. But

how can woman be expected to meet these heavy responsibilities, and to

discharge these delicate and most important duties of wife, Christian,

teacher, minister of mercy, friend of the suffering, and consoler of

the despondent and needy, if we impose upon her the grosser, rougher,

and harsher duties which nature has assigned to the male sex?

If the wife and the mother is required to leave the sacred precincts

of home, and to attempt to do military duty when the state is in

peril; or if she is to be required to leave her home from day to day

in attendance upon the court as a juror, and to be shut up in the jury

room from night to night with men who are strangers while a question

of life or property is being discussed; if she is to attend political

meetings, take part in political discussions, and mingle with the male

sex at political gatherings; if she is to become an active politician;

if she is to attend political caucuses at late hours of the night;

if she is to take part in all the unsavory work that may be deemed

necessary for the triumph of her party; and if on election day she is

to leave her home and go upon the streets electioneering for votes for

the candidates who receive her support, and mingling among the crowds

of men who gather round the polls, she is to press her way through

them to the precinct and deposit her ballot; if she is to take part

in the corporate struggles of the city or town in which she resides,

attend to the duties of his honor, the mayor, the councilman, or of

policeman, to say nothing of the many other like obligations which are

disagreeable even to the male sex, how is she, with all these heavy

duties of citizen, politician, and officeholder resting upon her

shoulders, to attend to the more sacred, delicate, and refining trust

to which we have already referred, and for which she is peculiarly

fitted by nature? If she is to discharge the duties last mentioned,

how is she, in connection with them, to discharge the more refining,

elevating, and ennobling duties of wife, mother, Christian, and

friend, which are found in the sphere where nature has placed her?

Who is to care for and train the children while she is absent in the

discharge of these masculine duties?

If it were proper to reverse the order of nature and assign woman

to the sterner duties devolved upon the male sex, and to attempt to

assign man to the more refining, delicate, and ennobling duties of the

woman, man would be found entirely incompetent to the discharge of

the obligations which nature has devolved upon the gentler sex, and

society must be greatly injured by the attempted change. But if we are

told that the object of this movement is not to reverse this order of

nature, but only to devolve upon the gentler sex a portion of the more

rigorous duties imposed by nature upon the stronger sex, we reply that

society must be injured, as the woman would not be able to discharge

those duties so well, by reason of her want of physical strength, as

the male, upon whom they are devolved, and to the extent that the

duties are to be divided, the male would be infinitely less competent

to discharge the delicate and sacred trusts which nature has assigned

to the female.

But it has been said that the present law is unjust to woman; that she

is often required to pay tax on the property she holds without being

permitted to take part in framing or administering the laws by

which her property is governed, and that she is taxed without

representation. That is a great mistake.

It may be very doubtful whether the male or female sex in the present

state of things has more influence in the administration of the

affairs of the Government and the enactment of the laws by which we

are governed.

While the woman does not discharge military duty, nor does she attend

courts and serve on juries, nor does she labor on the public streets,

bridges, or highways, nor does she engage actively and publicly in

the discussion of political affairs, nor does she enter the crowded

precincts of the ballot-box to deposit her suffrage, still the

intelligent, cultivated, noble woman is a power behind the throne. All

her influence is in favor of morality, justice, and fair dealing, all

her efforts and her counsel are in favor of good government, wise and

wholesome regulations, and a faithful administration of the laws. Such

a woman, by her gentleness, kindness, and Christian bearing, impresses

her views and her counsels upon her father, her husband, her brothers,

her sons, and her other male friends who imperceptibly yield to her

influence many times without even being conscious of it. She rules not

with a rod of iron, but with the queenly scepter; she binds not with

hooks of steel but with silken cords; she governs not by physical

efforts, but by moral suasion and feminine purity and delicacy. Her

dominion is one of love, not of arbitrary power.

We are satisfied, therefore, that the pure, cultivated, and pious

ladies of this country now exercise a very powerful, but quiet,

imperceptible influence in popular affairs, much greater than they

can ever again exercise if female suffrage should be enacted and they

should be compelled actively to take part in the affairs of state and

the corruptions of party politics.

It would be a gratification, and we are always glad to see the ladies

gratified, to many who have espoused the cause of woman suffrage if

they could take active part in political affairs, and go to the polls

and cast their votes alongside the male sex; but while this would be

a gratification to a large number of very worthy and excellent

ladies who take a different view of the question from that which we

entertain, we feel that it would be a great cruelty to a much larger

number of the cultivated, refined, delicate, and lovely women of

this country who seek no such distinction, who would enjoy no such

privilege, who would with woman-like delicacy shrink from the

discharge of any such obligation, and who would sincerely regret that,

what they consider the folly of the state, had imposed upon them any

such unpleasant duties.

But should female suffrage be once established it would become an

imperative necessity that the very large class, indeed much the

largest class, of the women of this country of the character last

described should yield, contrary to their inclinations and wishes, to

the necessity which would compel them to engage in political strife.

We apprehend no one who has properly considered this question will

doubt if female suffrage should be established that the more ignorant

and less refined portions of the female population of this country,

to say nothing of the baser class of females, laying aside feminine

delicacy and disregarding the sacred duties devolving upon them, to

which we have already referred, would rush to the polls and take

pleasure in the crowded association which the situation would compel,

of the two sexes in political meetings, and at the ballot-box.

If all the baser and more ignorant portion of the female sex crowd to

the polls and deposit their suffrage this compels the very large class

of intelligent, virtuous, and refined females, including wives and

mothers, who have much more important duties to perform, to leave

their sacred labors at home, relinquishing for a time the God-given

important trust which has been placed in their hands, to go contrary

to their wishes to the polls and vote, to counteract the suffrage of

the less worthy class of our female population. If they fail to do

this the best interests of the country must suffer by a preponderance

of ignorance and vice at the polls.

It is now a problem which perplexes the brain of the ablest statesmen

to determine how we will best preserve our republican system as

against the demoralizing influence of the large class of our present

citizens and voters who by reason of their illiteracy are unable to

read or write the ballot they cast.

Certainly no statesman who has carefully observed the situation would

desire to add very largely to this burden of ignorance. But who

does not apprehend the fact if universal female suffrage should be

established that we will, especially in the Southern States, add a

very large number to the voting population whose ignorance utterly

disqualifies them for discharging the trust. If our colored population

who were so recently slaves that even the males who are voters have

had but little opportunity to educate themselves or to be educated,

whose ignorance is now exciting the liveliest interest of our

statesmen, are causes of serious apprehension, what is to be said in

favor of adding to the voting population all the females of that race,

who, on account of the situation in which they have been placed, have

had much less opportunity to be educated than even the males of their

own race.

We do not say it is their fault that they are not educated, but the

fact is undeniable that they are grossly ignorant, with very few

exceptions, and probably not one in a hundred of them could read and

write the ballot that they would be authorized to cast. What says the

statesman to the propriety of adding this immense mass of ignorance to

the voting population of the Union in its present condition?

It may be said that their votes could be offset by the ballots of the

educated and refined ladies of the white race in the same section;

but who does not know that the ignorant female voters would be at

the polls _en masse_, while the refined and educated, shrinking from

public contact on such occasions, would remain at home and attend to

their domestic and other important duties, leaving the country too

often to the control of those who could afford under the circumstances

to take part in the strifes of politics, and to come in contact with

the unpleasant surroundings before they could reach the polls. Are

we ready to expose the country to the demoralization, and our

institutions to the strain, which would be placed upon them for the

gratification of a minority of the virtuous and good of our female

population at the expense of the mortification of a very large

majority of the same sex?

It has been frequently urged with great earnestness by those who

advocate woman suffrage that the ballot is necessary to the women to

enable them to protect themselves in securing occupations, and to

enable them to realize the same compensation for the like labor which

is received by men. This argument is plausible, but upon a closer

examination it will be found to possess but little real force. The

price of labor is and must continue to be governed by the law of

supply and demand, and the person who has the most physical strength

to labor, and the most pursuits requiring such strength open for

employment, will always command the higher prices.

Ladies make excellent teachers in public schools; many of them are

every way the equals of their male competitors, and still they secure

less wages than males. The reason is obvious. The number of ladies who

offer themselves as teachers is much larger than the number of males

who are willing to teach. The larger number of females offer to teach

because other occupations are not open to them. The smaller number of

males offer to teach because other more profitable occupations are

open to most males who are competent to teach. The result is that the

competition for positions of teachers to be filled by ladies is so

great as to reduce the price: but as males can not be employed at

that price, and are necessary in certain places in the schools, those

seeking their services have to pay a higher rate for them.

Persons having a larger number of places open to them with fewer

competitors command higher wages than those who have a smaller number

of places open to them with more competitors. This is the law of

society. It is the law of supply and demand, which can not be changed

by legislation. Then it follows that the ballot can not enable those

who have to compete with the larger number to command the same prices

as those who compete with the smaller number in the labor market. As

the Legislature has no power to regulate in practice that of which

the advocates of woman suffrage complain, the ballot in the hands of

females could not aid its regulation.

The ballot can not impart to the female physical strength which she

does not possess, nor can it open to her pursuits which she does not

have physical ability to engage in; and as long as she lacks the

physical strength to compete with men in the different departments of

labor, there will be more competition in her department, and she must

necessarily receive less wages.

But it is claimed again, that females should have the ballot as a

protection against the tyranny of bad husbands. This is also delusive.

If the husband is brutal, arbitrary, or tyrannical, and tyrannizes

over her at home, the ballot in her hands would be no protection

against such injustice, but the husband who compelled her to conform

to his wishes in other respects would also compel her to use the

ballot, if she possessed it, as he might please to dictate. The ballot

would therefore be of no assistance to the wife in such case, nor

could it heal family strifes or dissensions. On the contrary, one

of the gravest objections to placing the ballot in the hands of the

female sex is that it would promote unhappiness and dissensions in the

family circle. There should be unity and harmony in the family.

At present the man represents the family in meeting the demands of the

law and of society upon the family. So far as the rougher, coarser

duties are concerned, the man represents the family, and the

individuality of the woman is not brought into prominence; but when

the ballot is placed in the hands of woman her individuality is

enlarged, and she is expected to answer for herself the demands of the

law and of society on her individual account, and not as the weaker

member of the family to answer by her husband. This naturally draws

her out from the dignified and cultivated refinement of her womanly

position, and brings her into a closer contact with the rougher

elements of society, which tends to destroy that higher reverence and

respect which her refinement and dignity in the relation of wife

and mother have always inspired in those who approached her in her

honorable and useful retirement.

When she becomes a voter she will be more or less of a politician, and

will form political alliances or unite with political parties which

will frequently be antagonistic to those to which her husband

belongs. This will introduce into the family circle new elements

of disagreement and discord which will frequently end in unhappy

divisions, if not in separation or divorce. This must frequently occur

when she becomes an active politician, identified with a party which

is distasteful to her husband. On the other hand, if she unites with

her husband in party associations and votes with him on all occasions

so as not to disturb the harmony and happiness of the family, then the

ballot is of no service as it simply duplicates the vote of the male

on each side of the question and leaves the result the same.

Again, if the family is the unit of society, and the state is composed

of an aggregation of families, then it is important to society that

there be as many happy families as possible, and it becomes the duty

of man and woman alike to unite in the holy relations of matrimony.

As this is the only legal and proper mode of rendering obedience to

the early command to multiply and replenish the earth, whatever tends

to discourage the holy relation of matrimony is in disobedience of

this command, and any change which encourages such disobedience is

violative of the Divine law, and can not result in advantage to the

state. Before forming this relation it is the duty of young men who

have to take upon themselves the responsibilities of providing for and

protecting the family to select some profession or pursuit that is

most congenial to their tastes, and in which they will be most likely

to be successful; but this can not be permitted to the young ladies,

or if permitted it can not be practically carried out after matrimony.

As it might frequently happen that the young man had selected one

profession or pursuit, and the young lady another, the result would

be that after marriage she must drop the profession or pursuit of her

choice, and employ herself in the sacred duties of wife and mother at

home, and in rearing, educating, and elevating the family, while the

husband pursues the profession of his choice.

It may be said, however, that there is a class of young ladies who

do not choose to marry, and who select professions or avocations and

follow them for a livelihood. This is true, but this class, compared

with the number who unite in matrimony with the husbands of their

choice, is comparatively very small, and it is the duty of society to

encourage the increase of marriages rather than of celibacy. If the

larger number of females select pursuits or professions which require

them to decline marriage, society to that extent is deprived of the

advantage resulting from the increase of population by marriage.

It is said by those who have examined the question closely that the

largest number of divorces is now found in the communities where

the advocates of female suffrage are most numerous, and where the

individuality of woman as related to her husband, which such a

doctrine inculcates, is increased to the greatest extent.

If this be true, it is a strong plea in the interests of the family

and of society against granting the petition of the advocates of woman

suffrage.

After all, this is a local question, which properly belongs to the

different States of the Union, each acting for itself, and to the

Territories of the Union, when not acting in conflict with the laws of

the United States.

The fact that a State adopts the rule of female suffrage neither

increases nor diminishes its power in the Union, as the number of

Representatives in Congress to which each State is entitled and the

number of members in the electoral college appointed by each is

determined by its aggregate population and not by the proportion of

its voting population, so long as no race or class as defined by the

Constitution is excluded from the exercise of the right of suffrage.

Now, Mr. President, I shall make no apology for adding to what I have

said some extracts from an able and well-written volume, entitled

"Letters from the Chimney Corner," written by a highly cultivated lady

of Chicago. This gifted lady has discussed the question with so much

clearness and force that I can make no mistake by substituting some

of the thoughts taken from her book for anything I might add on this

question. While discussing the relations of the sexes, and showing

that neither sex is of itself a whole, a unit, and that each requires

to be supplemented by the other before its true structural integrity

can be achieved, she adds:

Now, everywhere throughout nature, to the male and female ideal,

certain distinct powers and properties belong. The lines of

demarkation are not always clear, not always straight lines: they are

frequently wavering, shadowy, and difficult to follow, yet on the

whole whatever physical strength, personal aggressiveness, the

intellectual scope and vigor which manage vast material enterprises

are emphasized, there the masculine ideal is present. On the other

hand, wherever refinement, tenderness, delicacy, sprightliness,

spiritual acumen, and force, are to the fore, there the feminine ideal

is represented, and these terms will be found nearly enough for all

practical purposes to represent the differing endowments of actual men

and women. Different powers suggest different activities, and under

the division of labor here indicated the control of the state,

legislation, the power of the ballot, would seem to fall to the share

of man. Nor does this decision carry with it any injustice, any

robbery of just or natural right to woman.

In her hands is placed a moral and spiritual power far greater than

the power of the ballot. In her married or reproductive state the

forming and shaping of human souls in their most plastic period is her

destiny. Nor do her labors or her responsibilities end with infancy or

childhood. Throughout his entire course, from the cradle to the grave,

man is ever under the moral and spiritual influence and control of

woman. With this power goes a tremendous responsibility for its true

management and use. If woman shall ever rise to the full height of her

power and privileges in this direction, she will have enough of the

world's work upon her hands without attempting legislation.

It may be argued that the possession of civil power confers dignity,

and is of itself a re-enforcement of whatever natural power an

individual may possess; but the dignity of womanhood, when it is fully

understood and appreciated, needs no such re-enforcement, nor are the

peculiar needs of woman such as the law can reach.

Whenever laws are needed for the protection of her legal status and

rights, there has been found to be little difficulty in obtaining them

by means of the votes of men; but the deeper and more vital needs of

woman and of society are those which are outside altogether of the

pale of the law, and which can only be reached by the moral forces

lodged in the hands of woman herself, acting in an enlarged and

general capacity.

For instance, whenever a man or woman has been wronged in marriage the

law may indeed step in with a divorce, but does that divorce give back

to either party the dream of love, the happy home, the prattle of

children, and the sweet outlook for future years which were destroyed

by that wrong? It is not a legal power which is needed in this case;

it is a moral power which shall prevent the wrong, or, if committed,

shall induce penitence, forgiveness, a purer life, and the healing of

the wound.

This power has been lodged by the Creator in the hands of woman

herself, and if she has not been rightly trained to use it there is

no redress for her at the hands of the law. The law alone can never

compel men to respect the chastity of woman. They must first recognize

its value in themselves by living up to the high level of their duties

as maidens, wives, and mothers; they must impress men with the beauty

and sacredness of purity, and then whatever laws are necessary

and available for its protection will be easily obtained, with

a certainty, also, that they can be enforced, because the moral

sentiments of men will be enlisted in their support.

Privileges bring responsibilities, and before women clamor for more

work to do, it were better that they should attend more thoughtfully

to the duties which lie all about them, in the home and social circle.

Until society is cleansed of the moral foulness which infests it,

which, as we have seen, lies beyond the reach of civil law, women have

no call to go forth into wider fields, claiming to be therein the

rightful and natural purifiers. Let them first make the home sweet and

pure, and the streams which flow therefrom will sweeten and purify all

the rest.

As between the power of the ballot and this moral force exerted by

women there can not be an instant's doubt as to the choice. In natural

refinement and elevation of character, the ideal woman stands a step

above the ideal man. If she descends from this fortunate position to

take part in the coarse scramble for material power, what chance will

she have as against man's aggressive forces; and what can she possibly

gain that she can not win more directly, more effectually, and with

far more dignity and glory to herself by the exercise of her own

womanly prerogatives? She has, under God, the formation and rearing of

men in her own hands.

If they do not turn out in the end to be men who respect woman, who

will protect and defend her in the exercise of every one of her

God-given rights, it is because she has failed in her duty toward

them; has not been taught to comprehend her own power and to use it

to its best ends. For women to seek to control men by the power of

suffrage is like David essaying the armor of Saul. What woman needs is

her own sheepskin sling and her few smooth pebbles from the bed of the

brook, and then let her go forth in the name of the Lord God of Hosts,

and a victory as sure and decisive as that of the shepherd of Israel

awaits her.

Again, in chapter 4, entitled "The Power of the Home," the author

says, in substance: It is, perhaps, of minor consequence that women

should have felt themselves emancipated from buttons and bread

making; but that they should have learned to look in the least degree

slightingly upon the great duties of women as lovers of husbands, as

lovers of children, as the fountain and source of what is highest and

purest and holiest, and not less of what is homely and comfortable and

satisfying in the home, is a serious misfortune. Women can hardly

be said to have lost, perhaps what they have so rarely in any age

generally attained, that dignity which knows how to command, united

with a sweetness which seems all the while to be complying, the power,

supple and strong, which rescues the character of the ideal woman from

the charge of weakness, and at the same time exhibits its utmost of

grace and fascination.

But that of late years the gift has not been cultivated, has not, in

fact, thrown out such natural off-shoots as gave grace and glory to

some earlier social epochs, must be evident, it would seem, to any

thoughtful observer.

If, instead of trying to grasp more material power, women would pursue

those studies and investigations which tend to make them familiar with

what science teaches concerning the influence of the mother and the

home upon the child; of how completely the Creator in giving the

genesis of the human race into the hands of woman has made her not

only capable of, but responsible for, the regeneration of the world;

if they would reflect that nature by making man the bond slave of his

passions has put the lever into the hands of woman by which she can

control him, and if they would learn to use these powers, not as bad

women do for vile and selfish ends, but as the mothers of the race

ought, for pure, holy, and redemptive purposes, then would the sphere

of women be enlarged to some purpose; the atmosphere of the home would

be purified and vitalized, and the work of redeeming man from his

vices would be hopefully begun.

The following thoughts are also from the same source: Is this

emancipation of woman, if that is the proper phrase for it, a final

end, or only the means to an end? Are women to be as the outcome of it

emancipated from their world-old sphere of marriage and motherhood,

and control of the moral and spiritual destinies of the race, or are

they to be emancipated, in order to the proper fulfillment of these

functions? It would seem that most of the advanced women of the day

would answer the first of these questions affirmatively. Women, I

think it has been authoritatively stated, are to be emancipated in

order that they may become fully developed human beings, something

broader and stronger, something higher and finer, more delicate,

more aesthetic, more generally rarefied and sublimated than the

old-fashioned type of womanhood, the wife and the mother.

And the result of the woman movement seems more or less in a line thus

far with this theoretic aim. Of advanced women a less proportion are

inclined to marry than of the old-fashioned type; of those who do

marry a great proportion are restless in marriage bonds or seek

release from them, while of those who do remain in married life many

bear no children, and few, indeed, become mothers of large families.

The woman's vitality is concentrated in the brain and fructifies more

in intellectual than in physical forms.

Now, women who do not marry are one of two things; either they belong

to a class which we shrink from naming or they become old maids.

An old maid may be in herself a very useful and commendable person and

a valuable member of society; many are all this. But she has still

this sad drawback, she can not perpetuate herself; and since all

history and observation go to prove that the great final end of

creation, whatever it may be, can only be achieved through the

perpetuity and increasing progress of the race, it follows that

unmarried woman is not the most necessary, the indispensable type of

woman. If there were no other class of females left upon the earth but

the women who do not bear children, then the world would be a failure,

creation would be nonplussed.

If, then, the movement for the emancipation of woman has for its final

end the making of never so fine a quality, never so sublimated a sort

of non-child-bearing women, it is an absurdity upon the face of it.

From the standpoint of the Chimney Corner it appears that too many

even of the most gifted and liberal-minded of the leaders in the

woman's rights movement have not yet discovered this flaw in their

logic. They seek to individualize women, not seeing, apparently,

that individualized women, old maids, and individualized men, old

bachelors, though they may be useful in certain minor ways, are, after

all, to speak with the relentlessness of science, fragmentary and

abortive, so far as the great scheme of the universe is concerned, and

often become, in addition, seriously detrimental to the right progress

of society. The man and woman united in marriage form the unit of the

race; they alone rightly wield the self-perpetuating power upon which

all human progress depends; without which the race itself must perish,

the universe become null.

Reaching this point of the argument, it becomes evident that while the

development of the individual man or individual woman is no doubt of

great importance, since, as Margaret Fuller has justly said, "there

must be units before there can be union," it is chiefly so because of

their relation to each other. Their character should be developed

with a view to their future union with each other, and not to be

independent of it. When the leaders of the woman's movement fully

realize this, and shape their course accordingly, they will have made

a great advance both in the value of their work and its claim upon

public sympathy. Moreover, they will have reached a point from which

it will be possible for them to investigate reform and idealize the

relations existing between men and women.

Mr. President, it is no part of my purpose in any manner whatever

to speak disrespectfully of the large number of intelligent ladies,

sometimes called strong-minded, who are constantly going before the

public, agitating this question of female suffrage. While some of them

may, as is frequently charged, be courting notoriety, I have no

doubt they are generally earnestly engaged in a work which, in their

opinion, would better their condition and would do no injury to

society.

In all this, however, I believe they are mistaken.

I think the mental and physical structure of the sexes, of itself,

sufficiently demonstrates the fact that the sterner, more laborious,

and more difficult duties of society are to be performed by the male

sex; while the more delicate duties of life, which require less

physical strength, and the proper training of youth, with the proper

discharge of domestic duties, belong to the female sex. Nature has so

arranged it that the male sex can not attend properly to the duties

assigned by the law of nature to the female sex, and that the female

sex can not discharge the more rigorous duties required of the male

sex.

This movement is an attempt to reverse the very laws of our being,

and to drag woman into an arena for which she is not suited, and to

devolve upon her onerous duties which the Creator never intended that

she should perform.

While the husband discharges the laborious and fatiguing duties of

important official positions, and conducts political campaigns, and

discharges the duties connected with the ballot-box, or while he bears

arms in time of war, or discharges executive or judicial duties, or

the duties of juryman, requiring close confinement and many times

great mental fatigue; or while the husband in a different sphere of

life discharges the laborious duties of the plantation, the workshop,

or the machine shop, it devolves upon the wife to attend to the duties

connected with home life, to care for infant children, and to train

carefully and properly those who in the youthful period are further

advanced towards maturity.

The woman with the infant at the breast is in no condition to plow

on the farm, labor hard in the workshop, discharge the duties of a

juryman, conduct causes as an advocate in court, preside in important

cases as a judge, command armies as a general, or bear arms as a

private. These duties, and others of like character, belong to the

male sex; while the more important duties of home, to which I have

already referred, devolve upon the female sex. We can neither reverse

the physical nor the moral laws of our nature, and as this movement is

an attempt to reverse these laws, and to devolve upon the female

sex important and laborious duties for which they are not by nature

physically competent, I am not prepared to support this bill.

My opinion is that a very large majority of the American people, yes,

a large majority of the female sex, oppose it, and that they act

wisely in doing so. I therefore protest against its passage.

Mr. DOLPH. Mr. President, I shall not detain the Senate long. I do

not feel satisfied when a measure so important to the people of this

country and to humanity is about to be submitted to a vote of the

Senate to remain wholly silent.

The pending question is upon the adoption of a joint resolution in the

usual form submitting to the legislatures of the several States of the

Union for their ratification an additional article as an amendment to

the Federal Constitution, which is as follows:

ARTICLE--,

Debate on Woman Suffrage in the Senate of the United States, 2d Session, 49th Congress, December 8, 1886, and January 25, 1887 · 第 2 / 5 章