“Having joined the people of Council Bluffs in celebrating in the

forenoon of this Fourth of July, 1855, we took a carriage and drove

over to Omaha about noon, crossing the Missouri on a ferry-boat.

This being the first Independence Day in Nebraska since it had

become a territory, the people of Omaha showed their patriotism

in common with the rest of the country by celebrating. It was the

first time, too, that I had stepped foot on Nebraska soil, so the

day possessed more than usual interest. We found that an oration

had been delivered by Secretary Cuming, then acting governor.

This had been followed by the usual reading of the Declaration of

Independence. The exercises were over when we reached the Douglass

House, then the only hotel in Omaha. Across the road from this

place a speaker’s stand had been erected. A dinner table was placed

on the east side of the house and covered with boughs cut from

trees for shade. Liquor flowed freely.

“Council Bluffs was then a city of 2,000 or 3,000 inhabitants.

The buildings were mostly of logs. There were no sidewalks. The

streets were not opened, beaten paths through fields of sunflowers

answering for thoroughfares in many places. The place was well

supplied with hotels. Besides the Pacific House there was the City

Hotel, a little low log building on the corner of Broadway and Glen

Avenue, kept by Mrs. Dunn; and farther up on Broadway, where the

blue barn now stands, the Robinson House kept by G. A. Robinson.

This was also an old log building covered with cottonwood boards on

the outside and lined with muslin tacked to the logs on the inside.

“PLASTERED HOUSES WERE SCARCE.

“I think there were but two or three plastered houses in the city

at that time, and no greater number built of lumber. Nearly all

were of logs covered outside on the front with cottonwood boards

and on the inside, both walls and ceiling, with unbleached muslin

sewed together and nailed on.

“Bancroft Street, now Fourth, where we had made our home, was open

but a little way from Willow Avenue, the bright bluffs extending

across to Main Street. Besides our house, which was newly built,

the frame house adjoining and a log house just below were all the

street contained, and from Bancroft to the river there was not a

house to obstruct our view. Bluff Street was not opened, and no

house of any description was built upon it. It was only a high

bluff, which extended down across Bancroft Street to Main Street.

Turley’s Glen was the only opening, being a resort for the Indians,

who frequently pitched their tents and camped there for days

together. The little valley between the bluffs contained Broadway,

the only street. No good buildings were on it except a few log

structures.

“WORSHIPPED IN LOG CHURCHES.

“Of churches I think there were but two. The Methodists had a

small frame building on the side of the hill in rear of where the

Ogden House now stands. The Rev. Mr. Shinn was the pastor. The

Congregationalists worshipped in a log building on Broadway, west

of Atkins’ drugstore. The Rev. George Rice owned this property at

that time. He lived with his family in one log house, and held

services in the one adjoining. This latter was fitted up for a

church with a row of seats around the wall made of slabs with the

flat side turned up and sticks put up through the holes bored in

the floor for legs. The pulpit was a dry-goods box turned up on

end with the open side next the preacher. The congregation was not

large and was made up of people from several denominations, many of

whom were new arrivals in the city.

“EARLY CHURCH WORK.

“One morning soon after we were settled in our new home, I had a

call from the Rev. Mr. Rice, of the Congregational church, inviting

me to attend a meeting of the sewing society at his house in the

afternoon. I went and found there about half-a-dozen ladles.

This was the annual meeting, and officers were to be elected for

the ensuing year. This church had commenced the erection of a

new edifice on a lot donated by S. S. Bayliss, on Main and Pearl

Streets, opposite the park. It was of brick and the walls already

up, but they had no money to go further. The object of the ladies

was to raise money for flooring and seating the new church, and

they evidently wanted to infuse new spirit and aid into their

society. I was consequently chosen their president, and Mrs. Sophia

Douglass who was also a newcomer was elected first director—thus

putting their affairs into the hands of two Episcopalians. Inasmuch

as there was no church of our own here and we were attendants upon

the Rev. Mr. Rice’s instructions, we took hold of the work with a

will and the following winter carried through a very successful

fair by which we raised money enough to put the new church in shape.

“DEFENDS WOMAN’S RIGHTS.

“Thanksgiving evening, 1855, by invitation of the Rev. Mr. Rice,

I gave a temperance lecture from the pulpit of the new church

and a little later, about the last of November, one on ‘Woman’s

Enfranchisement’ at the Methodist church, by invitation of the

Men’s Literary and Debating Society; and again, by invitation of

the same society and the Rev. Mr. Rice, Jan. 18, 1856, I spoke

on ‘Female Education’ at the Congregational church. During the

following years I gave several lectures on some phase of the woman

question.

“At the close of my lecture on ‘Woman Suffrage’ in the Methodist

church, in November, 1855, I was approached by Gen. William

Larimer, then of Omaha, but recently of Pittsburg, Pa., and a

member of the first Nebraska legislature, with a request that I go

to Omaha and repeat my lecture before the legislature. A few days

later I received a formal invitation from the legislature, signed

by twenty-five of its members, to give them a lecture on woman

suffrage or such phase of the woman question as I might select.

“Jan. 8, 1856, I made my appearance in the House of Representatives

of Nebraska, having accepted the invitation to appear before that

body. I was escorted to the platform by Gen. Larimer, who made

way for me through a great crowd who had congregated to hear me.

Indeed, it was a packed house, men standing up between those who

were sitting on benches around the room, and leaning against the

wall, and the platform was so packed up to the very desk that I

hardly had elbow-room. Gen. Larimer introduced me amidst silence so

profound that one could almost hear a pin drop, and I was listened

to with the most absorbed interest to the end. Then came great

applause and a request that I give the lecture for publication.

This latter I declined doing. Omaha was hardly large enough and

was without daily papers and, besides, I felt that I might wish to

make further use of the lecture and publishing it would prevent its

again being brought out.

“THE NEBRASKA LEGISLATURE INTERESTED.

“The papers gave very flattering notices of the lecture, and

it caused a great deal of excitement among the members of the

legislature; those opposed to the principles it discussed showing

opposition, while its friends, who were in the majority, were loud

in extolling it. The result of the lecture was the bringing in of

a bill in favor of woman suffrage some days later, which passed

the lower house, and was read twice by the senate, and only failed

of a passage because the session came to an end before it could

be reached for a third reading—the last hours being consumed by

the wrangling of the members over the fixing of county boundaries

and the location of city sites. Men talked to kill time till the

last hour expired and the session adjourned _sine die_. A number

of important bills were not reached, the woman-suffrage bill among

them. I was assured by Gov. Richardson and others that the bill

would undoubtedly have passed had a little more time been allowed

them. The session was one of only forty days and it was near its

close when the bill was introduced. Other matters engrossed the

attention and the speaker’s gavel stopped all further discussion of

matters in dispute.

“DANGERS MET IN CROSSING THE MISSOURI.

“In the year following I gave a lecture on ‘Woman’s Education,’

on invitation of the Library Association of Omaha, and for its

benefit. I so well remember that trip to Omaha! It was in the

winter. The river was breaking up and when I reached it I found the

ice floating and no way to get across except on a flatboat, which

was poled across. I feared to place myself upon it and came near

turning back. But I remembered my engagement and saw a carriage

waiting for me on the other shore; so, with many misgivings and

assurances from the boatmen, I ventured on board and was landed

safely on the other side. The lecture that evening was given in

the Presbyterian church to a full house, Dr. Miller presiding and

introducing me. But if I ran a risk in crossing to Omaha my heart

fairly stood still coming back. A high wind was blowing and when I

reached the river I found it filled with great blocks of floating

ice that endangered any boat it encountered. The ice was running

badly, and there was no conveyance over, except a skiff rowed by

two boatmen. The flatboat could not be managed in such a gale. The

skiff was in great danger of being swallowed up by the high tossing

waves or struck by the great cakes of floating ice and capsized.

“BUFFETS THE ICE IN A SKIFF.

“The boatmen at first positively refused to take me into the skiff.

The man waiting could go, they said, but the woman must be left

behind. I thought of my danger in embarking and being swallowed

up by waves; and I thought of husband and child awaiting me at

home, and no one to care for them; then I asked why I could not

cross as well as the man. The boatmen said, because women would

get frightened and jump and rock the boat and upset it, and there

was really great danger. Then I said if I will promise to sit very

still and not stir, can I go? The gentleman interceded, and on my

promise I was allowed to get into the boat. I sat in the middle

of my seat and held on to each side of the boat, and I am sure I

never stirred a muscle or winked an eye or hardly breathed while

those brave men guided their skiff over the tossing waves, which

seemed to engulf us at times and anon bore us on their tossing

crests. Soon we were safely over and landed, ready to take stage

for home, feeling that we had been mercifully preserved on our two

very dangerous trips, and on my part resolved never to incur a like

danger again.

“WOMAN’S EQUALITY IN LAW.

“On my previous trip to Omaha, I had gone in an old-fashioned

stagecoach and crossed the river on a ferry-boat. But the

ferry-boat was laid up at this time on account of the ice, so there

was no way of crossing but the skiff and the flatboat while the ice

was running. Thanks to enterprise and skill, we at this day know

nothing of such inconvenience and danger. And thanks to progress

and enlightenment, woman’s cause has so far advanced that there

is little need of her making extra effort to bring her claims and

the knowledge of her rights to equality in law with man before the

people.”

DESCRIBES COUNCIL BLUFFS.

Writing in 1855, soon after her arrival in her new home, Mrs. Bloomer

describes it as follows:

“Council Bluffs is located on the east side of the Missouri River,

in Iowa, instead of on the west or Nebraska side, where it is

placed on most of the maps. It lies about three miles from the

river, the level lands or bottoms being about that distance in

width; and then commences a chain of high hills, or bluffs, which

line the Missouri for thousands of miles and which, at this point,

extend eastward in the state some five or six miles. These bluffs

are composed of immense piles of yellow marl varying in height

from fifty to two hundred and fifty feet and thrown into every

conceivable shape and form—rounded, oblong, conical, and peaked.

Sometimes we see them covered with trees and bushes, but most

commonly with only grass and flowers. They present at this season

of the year, robed in their rich carpet of green, a delightful

appearance. Among these bluffs are numerous beautiful valleys,

some of them sufficiently extensive for large farms, and through

which clear and pellucid streams of water flow gurgling down to

join the mighty Missouri, forming as they find their way across

the bottoms streams which glisten as pure as silver in the sun. It

was along one of these valleys, a fourth of a mile in width and

extending for upwards of half-a-mile into the bluffs, that the old

town of Kanesville was built. Here a log city was constructed, and

here for several years dwelt from two to eight thousand of those

singular people who have now found a home in the vicinity of Great

Salt Lake. These people, or most of them, remained here until

1852 when they took their departure, selling out or surrendering

up their claims to the gentiles. Hundreds of the log cabins in

which they lived have disappeared, but many are still standing.

The gentiles who succeeded the Mormons soon began to build better

houses. Several good frame and brick buildings have already been

constructed, including a three-story brick hotel and the land

office, besides a number of stores and private residences.

“Others are in process of creation and will be carried forward

as fast as materials and labor can be obtained. On all sides we

see the work of beautifying the town going forward. Gardens are

being fenced, trees planted, streets opened and graded, and every

preparation made for accommodating the population. The city is

extending out on the bottoms towards the river, the bottom lands

being here high and dry and in no danger of being overflowed, and

the probability is that at no distant day they will be covered with

dwellings. These lands are considered very valuable and are held

at high prices by their owners. The soil is extremely rich and

productive and finely adapted to either farming or gardening.

“Situated as we are three hundred miles west of the railroads

connecting the Mississippi with the cities of the East, we of

course neither hear the shrill whistle of the locomotive nor see

the trains of cars dashing through our streets with a velocity that

outstrips the speed of the light-footed deer; but we are living in

full expectation of the day when these things will be as familiar

to us as they now are to my eastern readers. This city will be the

western terminus of the first railroad built across the state, and

it is fondly hoped and expected that three years hence we shall

be startled by the shrill whistle of the iron horse as he comes to

bathe his head in the waters of the Missouri, and from here, or

from Omaha, directly opposite, will he set out on his long journey

to the most western limit of the continent. Then Council Bluffs

will no longer be ‘out of the world,’ but directly in the centre

of it, and many who now hesitate about making their home here will

regret that their doubts and fears debarred them from uniting their

labors with their more enterprising countrymen in building up a

great and prosperous community in the very centre of the Union.”

It will be noted that the above was written in 1855; and with what

remarkable correctness Mrs. Bloomer prophesied as to the future of

the country in which she had just taken up her residence must strike

every one, except that it was nearly ten years instead of three

before the railroad reached Council Bluffs.

She then goes on to advise people to come West and acquire land (then

to be had at government price) and thus secure homes for themselves,

and then continues:

“My residence is on a gentle elevation at the foot of one of the

highest bluffs in the city, with a western front commanding a

fine view of the grass-carpeted bottoms upon which hundreds of

cattle are grazing, of Omaha across the river, and of the plains

of Nebraska beyond which stretch away in the distance as far as

the eye can reach. I love to ascend the bluffs in the rear of our

house, and watch the setting sun as it descends below the horizon

far off towards the blue and peaceful waters of the Pacific; and as

I do so, I contemplate the day when the wild valley before me will

be filled with the hum and stir and thronging multitude of a great

city, and these bluffs covered with elegant residences and tasteful

retreats from the turmoil and activity that will reign below,—for

no one here doubts that such is to be the future of Council Bluffs.”

DESCRIBES HER NEW HOME.

Here is also another letter written by Mrs. Bloomer in May, 1855,

giving a further description of her home in the west and of its

surroundings:

“COUNCIL BLUFFS, _May_, 1855.

“MY DEAR MRS. VAUGHAN:

“From my far-distant home among the bluffs of the Missouri I send

you greeting. We have now been here four weeks, and for two weeks I

have been installed as housekeeper in my own house. The business of

housekeeping, as you well know, is not new to me; but it is a long

time since I have confined myself to that business alone, and it

seems a little strange after the many and various duties devolving

upon me for the last six or seven years to be relieved of the

greater part of them and to settle down in this strange place with

nothing to care for save my house and garden.

“Far from the place of my nativity, far from the spot where since

childhood all the years of my life have been spent, save one, far

from dearly loved kindred and highly cherished friends, far from

all the noble spirits with whom I have long labored in the cause of

humanity, far from all I have ever best known and loved save him

who is my companion in life’s journey, I have commenced life as it

were anew. Here, surrounded by lovely flower-decked prairies and

nestled down among the hills that overlook the Missouri and the

vast plains of Nebraska beyond, we have chosen our future home and

shall do what we may by our aid and influence for the upbuilding

and prosperity of this infant city.

“Do not imagine us in a wild and uncultivated country, deprived

of the comforts of life, and of the enjoyments and advantages of

refined society, for it is not so. Neither are we surrounded by

hordes of savage Indians and in danger of falling victims to the

tomahawk and scalping-knife, as some people in the east imagine. *

* * We do not consider ourselves as far out of the world as we are

set down by those who realize nothing of the immense emigration

into the mighty West, or of the energy and ‘goaheadativeness’ of

the people who come hither. We see some Indians occasionally, it

is true, but they are only visitors from Nebraska, they do not

belong to this state. A party of Pawnees some two weeks ago pitched

their tent on the summit of a high bluff near our house where they

remained until last Sunday, when they struck their tent, packed

it and all other movables on the back of a mule and then took up

their line of march to the westward, the men riding on horseback

while the ‘squaws’ went on foot. The mule was led by a squaw. Two

squaws had papooses on their backs, and another carried a dog in

the same manner. I had frequent visits from some of them while they

remained here, and on leaving they called to bid us good-bye, in

tolerably fair English. There is something interesting to me in

these children of nature and I almost regretted their departure.

“The Indians who come here are perfectly harmless and no one pays

any attention to them. They come and go at their pleasure. We shall

see little of them hereafter, as the government has just paid off

its indebtedness to the Omahas and they were then removed to the

new quarters assigned them about a hundred miles to the northward,

in Nebraska. They were all collected at Omaha City, and from

thence started on their journey accompanied by the Indian agent

who is to pay them twenty thousand dollars in cash when they reach

their destination. The tribe now numbers but eight hundred and

five, counting men, women and children, and has but two hundred

men capable of bearing arms. Ten years ago they numbered sixteen

hundred. Their parting from their old home and the graves of their

fathers is said by those who witnessed it to have been exceedingly

interesting and pathetic. The women and the aged men wept, and

the stout-hearted warriors could ill conceal their emotion of

tenderness and affection.

“People are now flocking in here in considerable numbers, either

to settle or to make investments in real estate, in the hope and

expectation of realizing a fortune by the rise in the value

of property. We have dally stages from the east and south, and

they generally come loaded inside and out to the extent of

their capacity. The land-office is crowded both by settlers and

speculators eager to enter the choicest lands remaining unsold. The

land directly adjoining the town, and for some five or six miles

back, is all taken, and one cannot buy a farm at Uncle Sam’s prices

within that distance of the city. Good land can be obtained at

second hand for from five dollars to ten dollars per acre.

“By the laws of the state, women can own and hold property, both

real and personal, and I am happy to know that many women are

availing themselves of these provisions by securing to themselves

a share of its broad acres. I do wish that more women would become

owners of the soil, and I am especially anxious that you, Mrs.

Vaughan, and those women who labored so untiringly with you in

the cause of humanity, should come in for a share. I know that

such women do not usually carry long purses, and are not very well

rewarded for their wearing toil, yet with land at $1.25 per acre it

does seem as though they ought to be able to secure at least eighty

acres. One woman who is supporting herself by typesetting in your

state has secured an interest in this vicinity, and she is now

hoarding her wages that she may add a few acres more to those she

has already. A few years hence, these lands will be valuable and

the owners will realize something from their sale, if they do not

wish to retain them.

“This city is the western terminus of railroads to be located

across this state, and it is ardently hoped and expected that ere

many years the shrill whistle of the iron horse will be heard among

the bluffs of the Missouri. There are two newspapers published

here and both are well sustained, I am told. There are two church

edifices nearly completed, Methodist and Congregational. Each has

a settled pastor and services are held regularly on Sundays. The

people who settle here are mostly from the east, and are nearly

all Americans; consequently we have an intelligent, well-ordered

community. Omaha, the capital of Nebraska, is situated directly

opposite, on the western bank of the Missouri, and in full view of

this city. It now contains about four hundred inhabitants.

“A. B.”

The personal reminiscences of Mrs. Bloomer given above show very

fully that, in removing to Council Bluffs, she did not give up any

of her wonted zeal in behalf of those reforms to which so much of

her life had been devoted. She continued to write for the _Lily_ so

long as its publication was kept up, and the productions of her pen

frequently appeared in the columns of the city papers, and of other

papers in the state and throughout the Union.

LIFE IN COUNCIL BLUFFS.

But the first months of her life in Council Bluffs were quiet ones.

They gave her opportunity to gain the much needed rest which years

of labor and activity had rendered necessary. She spent many hours

in roaming over the bluffs and valleys. Life seemed to have opened

a new page for her, and in its daily duties she found sufficient

employment. The population of the city was small and social

intercourse amongst its members, as in all new western communities,

was pleasant and unconventional. Everybody knew everybody else,

and all whose characters were clean and untarnished met each other

on a footing of perfect equality. All attended the same church and

all joined in the same festivities. It was in many respects an

ideal state of society; being far away from railroads and the great

centres of population, there was great exemption from the cares and

anxieties of older communities. Housekeeping was the first duty that

fell upon Mrs. Bloomer, and she strove to make her new home pleasant

and inviting. It soon became the resort of many new as well as old

friends. People coming to the city very often desired to meet her and

she always received them kindly, extending to all a generous welcome.

With her husband she early joined with others in the organization of

a literary club, taking an active part in its proceedings.

AGAINST STRONG DRINK.

Mrs. Bloomer had begun her public life in New York state as an

advocate of Temperance. She had opposed at all times the use as a

beverage of intoxicating drinks in all their various forms, and in

her adopted state she continued the earnest advocate of these ideas

and principles. She wrote and spoke when called for in their advocacy

and defense. When a lodge of Good Templars was organized in 1856, she

became an active member and continued her membership in it so long as

it was kept up.

Though the custom of using strong drinks at social gatherings was

common in her new home, yet she firmly set her face against it and

nothing of the kind was ever found in her dwelling. When societies

were organized, plans adopted, money expended in promoting temperance

principles she was always found among the most zealous in promoting

sobriety in all its forms.

In subsequent years, Mrs. Bloomer became an active worker in the

Women’s Christian Temperance Union; and in an address delivered

before it in Council Bluffs, some ten years before her death, she

referred to her own and others’ labors in the city as follows:

HER EXPERIENCES.

“I have thus given you, as briefly as possible, a sketch of

the introduction and early efforts of woman in this cause of

temperance. It may not be so interesting to you as to those of

us who encountered the opposition, bore the suffering, endured

the struggle, who were subject to ridicule, censure and frowns

for the cause’s sake and for woman’s sake. It is well that you

of this later generation should know something of what has gone

before; that you should know that, long before the W. C. T. U.

arose, organizations of women did as great and greater work than

that large body of women are doing. We had a cause and a purpose,

and there was no lack of zeal and enthusiasm. There was no

cold-hearted, half-way work with the Washingtonians and those who

enlisted under them. I must mention Rev. George G. Rice, of this

city, as among the liberal-minded men of early days. On my coming

to Council Bluffs, he very soon called upon me and invited me to

give a temperance lecture in his church; and later, at his request,

I spoke on the education of girls from his pulpit, and also the

church was freely given me for woman’s-rights lectures.

“Council Bluffs has always been a hard field for temperance work.

Originally a frontier town, it was for many years almost completely

in the hands of the gambling and liquor-drinking classes of the

community. On my first coming here, in 1855, Sunday was hardly

recognized at all as a day of rest or religious observance. It was

the carnival day of the pleasure-seeking of every kind. Business

was carried on as usual. The saloons were open and games of

chance openly carried on along the streets. But even then there

were a faithful few. A division of the Sons of Temperance had

been organized, and very soon after we came we assisted in the

organization of a lodge of Good Templars. These two societies

handsomely fitted up and carpeted a large hall in Empire Block,

opposite the Pacific House, and held regular meetings on different

evenings of each week for several years. But financial troubles

coming on, they were unable to meet their expenses, and before

1860 both had ceased to exist. I do not know whether the Sons of

Temperance ever renewed their organization, but think they did

not. But the Good Templars have at different times started up anew

and I am glad to hear are quite prosperous at the present time. I

have a strong feeling of sympathy with this organization because

I was connected with it in New York, Ohio, and here, in my earlier

days, and because it admits women to its membership on a footing of

equality with men, and it was through its membership women passed

through struggles for recognition. I have frequently assisted in

the formation of lodges, and one of my last acts before coming to

Council Bluffs was going by myself as deputy grand-chief templar

to Indiana to organize two new lodges. Other organizations for

promoting temperance work have existed here at different times.

The late D. W. Price was president of one of the most effective

of these, and really did a good work. Moved by his eloquent and

effective pleadings, many votaries of strong drink were reformed

and restored to their right minds and still remain sober citizens.

“The women of the city have not been wholly remiss in their duties

to this cause, though they have not done all they could and should.

In 1874 a society was organized, a constitution adopted, and a

committee appointed to canvass the city to obtain memberships, and

signatures to a petition to the city council asking that the laws

enacted for their protection against liquor selling be enforced,

and the license law amended. But their petitions passed unheeded,

as those of tens of thousands of women in other sections had done

before them. They were laid on the table as unworthy of notice,

and when taken up received but one vote in their favor. What cared

our city fathers for the petitions of disfranchised women? They

had no votes to give to affect them at the next election, while

the veriest drunkard had; and so should they not consult their

constituents? Temperance workers, either men or women, have never

received much help from the constituted authorities either of our

city or county. Generally they have looked upon violations of

the law with indifference. That is the case at the present time.

Although we have a rigid prohibitory law now in force in this

state, its provisions are openly violated and whatever effort is

made to enforce it comes not from the men sworn to enforce the

law but from individuals in private life, who are thus compelled

to give their time and money to do that which should be done by

officers elected for that purpose.”

Mrs. Bloomer fully believed in the virtue of prohibitory legislation.

She rejoiced when this principle was adopted into the laws of Iowa

and strove in all suitable ways to secure the advancement of those

laws. She wrote frequently and largely in their defense and the

columns of the city press bear witness to the zeal with which she

advocated her views. She was greatly distressed when her rector

came out in his pulpit and preached sermons against the virtues of

prohibition, and censured and criticised his position with great

force and spirit.

FOR WOMAN’S ENFRANCHISEMENT.

But beyond all other questions, Mrs. Bloomer’s thoughts, hopes and

labors were given to Woman’s Enfranchisement. In that cause she was a

pioneer. She studied, considered and dwelt upon it in all its various

bearings. She believed most sincerely that the Temperance principle

of which she was an ardent advocate could never fully triumph until

Woman’s voice could be fully and decisively heard in its settlement.

This was her position in all her writings and addresses on that

subject, and these were continued and frequent so long as her

strength lasted. Moreover, she fully believed that the unjust legal

enactments coming down from a semi-barbarous age, together with the

harsh teachings of legal writers, would have to be completely changed

in letter and spirit before woman could occupy the high place for

which she was designed by her Creator and become in very deed and

truth a helpmeet for man. And finally she insisted that the precious

right of suffrage, the high privilege of casting a ballot along with

man, should be accorded to woman as her inalienable birthright, and

that she should exercise that right as a solemn duty devolving upon

her as a responsible human being and as a citizen of a free republic.

These were unpopular doctrines when she first commenced to espouse

and uphold them in her paper, more than fifty years before her

decease; but she never failed to maintain them, in all suitable ways

and at all proper times, throughout her subsequent career.

Her house in Council Bluffs was always the welcome resort of those

who were engaged in proclaiming these doctrines and urging them upon

the favorable consideration of the people of the great West. From

time to time, especially in the earlier days, nearly all these

prominent advocates were her guests. Among them may be named Miss

Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Mary A. Livermore, Anna

Dickinson, Mrs. M. H. Cutler, Frederick Douglass, Phœbe Cozzens, and

many others. And frequently when these advocates of her favorite

reform visited her she arranged for public meetings for them in

church or hall, so that through Mrs. Bloomer’s instrumentality

her neighbors and friends were afforded opportunity of listening

to some of the most noted lecturers of the day; and it is here no

more than strict justice to record that she was, in all her work of

promoting temperance and woman’s enfranchisement, aided and sustained

by the cordial assistance and support of her husband. No note or

word of discord ever arose between them on these subjects (and,

indeed, very few on any other); they passed their long lives happily

trying to alleviate the sufferings and right the wrongs of their

fellow-travelers through the journey of life.

Mrs. Bloomer’s pen was also very busy and she frequently wrote for

the newspapers in her own city and in other parts of the country.

Whenever an attack was made, either upon her personally or upon her

favorite ideas, it was sure to call forth from her a vigorous reply.

She did not confine herself to temperance and woman’s rights; but

wrote freely and often upon other kindred subjects, also. It would

extend this work far beyond its prescribed limits, to republish even

a small part of the productions of her pen; but some articles will be

given further on. Just here we cannot omit to give one of her replies

to the objection that woman should not vote because she could not

fight:

VOTING AND FIGHTING.

“My reply to the argument of our opponents that ‘if women vote they

must also fight,’ is this: All men have not earned their right to

the ballot by the bullet; and, if only those who fight should vote,

there are many sickly men, many weak little men, many deformed men,

and many strong and able-bodied but cowardly men, who should at

once be disfranchised. These all vote but they do not fight, and

fighting is not made a condition precedent to the right to the

ballot. The law only requires that those of sufficient physical

strength and endurance shall take up arms in their country’s

defense, and I think not many women can be found to fill the

law’s requirement: so they would have to be excused with the weak

little men, the big cowardly men, and the men who are physically

disqualified. We know there are thousands of voters who never did

any fighting and who never will. Why then must woman be denied

the right of franchise because she cannot fight? If there are any

great strong women who want to fight for their country in its hour

of peril, they should be allowed to do so, and men have no right

to disarm them and send them home against their will. But as there

are other duties to be discharged, other interests to be cared for,

in time of war besides fighting, women will find enough to do to

look after these in the absence of their fighting men. They may

enter the hospitals on the battlefields as nurses, or they may care

for the crops or the young soldiers at home. They may also do the

voting and look after the affairs of government, the same as do

all the weak men, who vote and hold office and do not fight. And,

further, as men do not think it right for women to fight, and fear

it will be forced upon them with the ballot, they can easily make a

law to excuse them, and doubtless with the help of the women will

do so. There is great injustice, so long as the ballot is given

to all men the weak as well as the strong, without condition, in

denying to woman a voice in matters deeply affecting her interest

and happiness, and through her the happiness and welfare of mankind

because, perchance, there may come a time in the history of our

country when we shall be plunged into war and she not be qualified

to hold a musket!

“This objection, like many others we hear, is too absurd to emanate

from the brains of intelligent men and I cannot think they honestly

entertain such views. If they will but give us a voice in the

matter, we will not only save ourselves from being sent to the

battlefield, but will, if possible, keep them at home with us by

averting the threatened danger and difficulties and so compromising

matters with other powers that peace shall be maintained and

bloodshed avoided.

“A. B.”

PROGRESS.

Mrs. Bloomer was mainly instrumental in organizing a woman’s-suffrage

society in Council Bluffs, in 1870, and was its first president.

Through her influence woman’s position was greatly enlarged in

that community. In 1880, she was enabled to write as follows: “The

trustees of the public library of this city are women, the teachers

in the public schools, with one or two exceptions, are women, the

principal of the high school is a woman, and a large number of the

clerks in the dry-goods stores are women.”

The revised Code of Iowa, promulgated in 1873, almost entirely

abolished the legal distinction between men and married women as

to property rights. As to single women there was, of course, no

distinction. That code is still in force, and its liberal provisions

in regard to the rights of married women have been still further

enlarged. The wife may hold separate property, and may make contracts

and incur liabilities as to the same, which may be enforced by or

against her as though she were a single woman. So also a married

woman may sue or be sued without joining her husband in matters

relating to her separate property, and she may maintain an action

against her husband in matters relating to her separate property

rights. Their rights and interests in each other’s property are

identical. They may be witnesses for, but they cannot be against,

each other in criminal actions.

It is not claimed that, for bringing about these beneficent changes

in the laws of Iowa, Mrs. Bloomer is entitled to the sole credit.

There were other efficient workers in the same field; but it is

certain that her long residence in the state, and her continued and

persistent advocacy of the principles of justice on which they are

founded, contributed largely to their adoption by the lawmaking

powers.

STATE SUFFRAGE SOCIETY.

The first Iowa Woman’s State Suffrage Society was organized at Mount

Pleasant, in 1870. Mrs. Bloomer was present at this gathering of

the earnest workers of the state and took an active part in their

proceedings. Hon. Henry O’Conner, then attorney-general of the

state, was made its first president, and Mrs. Bloomer its first

vice-president. On her way home, she stopped over at Des Moines,

with Mrs. Anna Savary and with Mrs. H. B. Cutler; addressed in the

afternoon a large Temperance gathering on the capitol grounds, and

in the evening both ladies spoke on woman’s enfranchisement in the

Baptist church. The first annual meeting of the society was held in

Des Moines in October, 1871. Mrs. Bloomer presided and was chosen

president; she attended its annual meetings in subsequent years

so long as she had the strength to do so. She was for years in

constant correspondence with its members, and whenever the question

of woman suffrage was before the general assembly she did not fail,

by petition and otherwise, to do all in her power to promote its

success. In 1875 she was an inmate of the Cleveland Sanitorium,

and while there delivered to the inmates an address on the subject

in which she was so deeply interested. In 1867 she made a long and

wearisome journey, while in very poor health, to the city of New

York to attend the meeting of the Woman-Suffrage Association, and

was elected one of its vice-presidents, a position she continued

to hold so long as she lived. She was an interested listener to the

proceedings of the Woman’s Council held in Des Moines in 1883, but

took no part in them further than a very short address.

HISTORY OF IOWA SUFFRAGE WORK.

Mrs. Bloomer furnished the main portion of the chapter on Iowa in

the third volume of the History of Woman Suffrage, published by Mrs.

Stanton and Miss Anthony in 1887. In short, the advocacy of woman’s

enfranchisement was her life-work from 1851 down to the end of her

days. She was in constant written communication with many of its

leading advocates not only in Iowa but all over the country. They

visited her often in her home, and she was subjected to frequent

interviews from newspaper reporters. A volume could be filled with

their writings called out by conversations with her. She always

treated them with kindness and courtesy, and received many kind

notices from the press. She always had a cheerful and pleasant

greeting for her many visitors.

Mrs. Bloomer was spared to witness the triumph of many of the

reforms she had earnestly advocated. The temperance principle in

which her heart was so much absorbed made great progress during her

lifetime, and the prohibitive features she so earnestly advocated

were engrafted on the laws of her adopted state. She was not spared

to see woman accorded a right to the ballot in all the states, but

she was cheered by the wonderful progress in that direction that took

place all over the world. In Wyoming and Utah women had voted for

several years, and only a few weeks before her departure she learned

with infinite satisfaction from Mrs. Jennie A. Irvine, a favorite

niece residing in Colorado, that the right of suffrage had been

granted to women in that state. While therefore she was never herself

permitted to exercise that inestimable right, yet she died in the

full conviction that only a few years would elapse before it would be

accorded to women in all the free countries in the world.

ESSAYS BY MRS. BLOOMER.

In the following pages are given the productions of Mrs. Bloomer’s

pen on a variety of subjects. Most of these essays have been printed

in newspapers located in different parts of the country, but are here

made public again in more durable form. It is believed they will not

be devoid of interest to the reader:

“WIFELY DUTIES.

“‘_Unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over

him._’—GEN., iv. 7.

“These words were addressed to Cain by the Creator. They are the

same as those used to Eve, except that in the one case they were

addressed to the one to be ruled, and in the other to the one

who was to rule. The latter is more clearly a command than the

former. And if a command, then Cain only obeyed it in ruling over

his brother; and, as there was no limit fixed to the rule, was he

very much to blame for taking the life of his brother? Did not God

command him to rule and was not God responsible for the result?

“And if God foretelling to Eve that her husband should rule over

her was a command to which all women were to be subject for all

time, does not this command to Cain to rule over his brother follow

the seed of Cain for all time, and are not all elder brothers

commanded to rule over the younger, and is it not the duty of the

younger to submit to such rule?

“Clearly the Scripture quoted was not a command in either case. We

cannot throw upon God all the fearful consequences that have grown

out of and resulted from the construction so often put upon these

words. Read them as prophecy, substitute ‘wilt’ for ‘shalt’—as I am

told the original fully warrants—and they become clear enough. In

both cases it was a prophetic declaration of what was to follow,

and the prophecy as we all know has been fulfilled to the letter.

“But read this Scripture as we may, I do not believe it has any

binding force at this day. However much the first Adam may have

ruled his wife, other Adams can derive no warrant from his case for

ruling their wives, except in the evil nature they have inherited

from him. The Adams still abound in the land, and will abound

until woman fully asserts her individuality and compels men to

acknowledge her equal right with themselves to life, liberty and

the pursuit of happiness.

“The passages from the New Testament so frequently quoted have lost

their terrors. We all know that in the early days when they were

written woman’s position was one of ignorance and subjection. Peter

and Paul were imbued with the prevalent sentiment of the times,

and wrote of things as they found them. In writing of woman they

followed the law and custom of the day in which they lived. They

thought woman’s name was ‘submission’ just as many men think now,

and wrote of her just as they write now.

“Barnard, in his ‘History and Progress of Education’ tells us that:

‘In India it was a terrible disgrace for a woman to learn to read,

and the avowal of that knowledge was sufficient to class her with

the most abandoned of her sex. Her duties and attainments were only

such as would conduce to the mere physical comfort of her lord

and master.’ Again, in writing of the ancient Persians, he says:

‘Female education was utterly neglected. The wife was the slave

of the husband, and every morning must kneel at his feet and nine

times ask the question, What do you wish that I should do? and,

having received his reply, bowing humbly, she must withdraw and

obey his commands.’

“Of Greece he says: ‘The female children were not allowed any

instruction except such as they might receive at home. The

condition of the female sex, except the abandoned portion of it,

at Athens was pitiable. Secluded from society and all intellectual

improvement, their lives must have been gloomy, dull and hopeless.’

“When we consider the condition of woman in the early ages we

cannot be surprised at the injunction laid upon her by the

apostles. But would John have her remain in that position? Clearly

he would; but not so her Creator. He has called her out of former

bondage and pointed out to her a higher mission.

“It is worthy of note that the writers of the New Testament did

not give us a ‘Thus saith the Lord’ with any of the injunctions to

women, nor did our Saviour enjoin any such rules upon her. So while

we admit that the words of the apostles may have been proper at

the day and under the circumstances of their utterance, we claim

that the condition of woman has been so changed and her mind so

educated since that time that they are not applicable to her now.

We are told by some that her condition thousands of years ago was

her natural condition, that in which God placed her and intended

her to remain. If this be so, a great wrong has been done her

by taking her out of the condition of ignorance and depravity

in which she then existed. An educated mind cannot be kept in

slavery. Our system of education is all wrong if God intended her

to remain the ignorant slave of man she then was. How comes it

that, if that was her natural God-ordained position, we find her

condition so different at the present day? Whether right or wrong,

that condition has greatly changed ever since the introduction of

Christianity. And this work, this change, is not of herself, not

of man. We must recognize in her course the direction and guidance

of a Higher Power. If this change, this progress, tend to evil (as

its opponents predict), then He who rules and overrules is for some

wise purpose of His own bringing the evil on the world. But if, as

we believe, it is for the good not only of woman but of humanity

then, too, we should recognize the Higher Power that so orders it

and do what we may to help forward His work. In any case we cannot

by opposition, Bible argument, or indifference stay His work and

will.

“Woman had a part to play in life that St. Paul never dreamed of,

and he who lives in the next generation will see greater changes

than the past has produced. As well say that men should be and

do as they were and did in the days of Abraham, as to say that

women should be kept in the state of bondage in which she existed

thousands of years ago. The world moves and woman must move with

it. She inherits the same blood, the same spirit of liberty,

that descends to her brother and for which her fathers bled and

died. To fight against this progression is like fighting against

the emancipation of the slaves. As the chains of the latter were

broken and the oppressed set free, in spite of opposition and

Bible argument, so will the All-Father, in His own good time and

way, bring about the emancipation of woman and make her the equal

with man in power and dominion that He proclaimed her to be at the

creation, that we may have—

“‘everywhere

Two heads in council, two beside the hearth,

Two in the tangled business of the world,

Two in the liberal offices of life.’

“A. B.”

Mrs. Bloomer, in commenting on an article in the Chicago _Tribune_

stating that women should not be called by their husbands’ titles,

wrote for the _Western Woman’s Journal_ as follows:

NAMES OF MARRIED WOMEN.

“I am glad the _Tribune_ has spoken out on this question, and

had it gone further and included names as well as titles in its

criticisms it would have done better. It has become so much the

fashion for women to call themselves and to be known by their

husbands’ names and titles that a woman’s Christian name is seldom

heard or known. Why a woman as soon as she is married is willing

to drop the good name of Mary or Elizabeth and take that of John,

Thomas or Harry I never could understand. And as to titles, why a

woman should be called Mrs. General, Mrs. Colonel, Mrs. Captain

or Mrs. Judge I don’t know except it be on the principle that

husband and wife are one and that one the husband, and the wife is

his appendage and must be known by his title instead of having an

individuality of her own.

“So far is this matter of appropriating names and titles carried,

that women retain them after the death of the husbands and call

themselves Mrs. Colonel or Mrs. Doctor when there is no such doctor

or colonel in existence. It would seem as though, the man being

dead, his title would die with him and henceforth his wife assume

her Christian name.

“Quite recently an inquiry came to me from New York for the

Christian name of a woman who had been quite prominent. On looking

over letters and papers bearing her name I found that in every

instance she had used her husband’s initials, and it was only after

sending a postal with the inquiry one hundred and fifty miles that

I learned her name and transmitted it to New York. This is but one

instance of the many where women use the name of the husband with

‘Mrs.’ prefixed whenever they have occasion to write their names.

“But women are not alone to blame in the matter. The press does

its part to keep up what the _Tribune_ calls a vulgar custom. We

have an instance at hand. Only a short time ago the daily press

announced that ‘Mrs. Colonel C. S. Chase, of Omaha, is very ill.’

And again a short time after it announced ‘the death of Mrs.

Colonel Chase,’ thus following the woman to the grave with her

husband’s name and title. She was not a colonel, had never been a

colonel, and it surely would have been more proper to say Mary,

the wife of Col. Chase. Doubtless all have fallen into the custom

thoughtlessly.

“Where a woman has earned a title of her own, it is right that she

should be called by it, and I see no reason why the prefix of Mrs.

should always be attached. It would be quite improper to say Mr.

Doctor Green; then why should we say Mrs. Doctor Hilton?

“There are cases where it may be allowable and necessary to use the

husband’s initials when naming or addressing his wife, but usually

it is best for her to retain and be known by the name her parents

gave her. The name or title of her husband gives no additional

dignity or character to her, and it sinks her own individuality in

him; which no woman should allow.

“Ever since the world began all women of note have been known by

their own Christian names. Adam named his wife Eve and we have no

account of her ever being called Mrs. Adam. Victoria of England has

never called herself Mrs. Albert Saxe-Coburg, nor has Eugénie been

known as Mrs. Emperor Louis Napoleon. Go back through all history

and all married queens, all members of royal houses, all married

women of any distinction such as artists, authors, scholars,

teachers, actresses, singers, etc., have ever been known and called

by their Christian names. In our own day and country this is the

universal custom. Lydia H. Sigourney, Emma Willard, Margaret

Fuller Ossoli, Lucretia Mott, Frances D. Gage, Mary A. Livermore,

Harriet Beecher Stowe, Paulina W. Davis, Isabella Beecher Hooker,

Lucy Stone Blackwell, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Celia Burleigh, and

a host of others of equal or less note never called themselves

Mrs. John, Mrs. Tom and Mrs. Henry. Anna Mary Howitt, Dinah Maria

Muloch, and Elizabeth Barrett Browning may be given as instances

of English writers who have seen fit to drop their own names and

adopt the Christian name and title of their husbands. The wife

of our first president is known and revered in memory as Martha

Washington, instead of Mrs. George or Mrs. General Washington; and

Susannah Wesley is far better known than Mrs. Rev. John Wesley.

“In law, women must use their own names and no document is legal

unless it bears the Christian name of the woman who signed it. Her

appointment to any office is always made in her own name and not

that of her husband. And yet many women have gotten the idea that

their husbands’ names and titles in some way add to their dignity

and importance and so appropriate them to their own use.

“May the day soon come when all this will be done away and women

bear honored titles of their own, earned and conferred, but not

borrowed!

“A. B.”

IS IT RIGHT FOR WOMEN TO LECTURE?

Mrs. Bloomer answered this question through the press as follows:

“The press has been very severe, in some instances, in its

strictures upon a certain woman of this state for leaving home and

husband to go before our public as a lecturer, thereby as they

claim causing her husband to commit a fearful crime.

“Now supposing, instead of being out lecturing, and home

frequently, this woman had gone away on a three months’ visit to

friends—as many ladies are in the habit of doing—would the press

be as ready to blame her as it now is? Would she be, and are other

women, guilty of all the crime and wrongdoing which she or their

husbands may commit in their absence? And would it be right, would

it be manly, to publicly accuse these women and hold them up to

censure? Is not their suffering already sufficient without this

added sting? Why, pray, is it a more heinous offense to leave home

to lecture than to visit, to travel abroad, or to sojourn for

months at fashionable watering places?

“I know nothing of the domestic affairs of the person referred to.

She has been to some extent a lecturer on temperance. Whether led

into it by pecuniary necessity, or solely from inclination or a

desire to do good, I never knew. But be the case as it may she is

the first woman lecturer, so far as my knowledge extends, whose

husband has ever disgraced both himself and her by such or any

similar crime or any crime at all; while the cases are frequent

of wives who are keepers at home and faithful guardians of family

relations being humbled and disgraced by husbands guilty of all

manner of crimes and wickedness. Men claim to be the stronger both

mentally and physically. Then why are they ready to shoulder upon

women the responsibility of their own wrongdoing? Why make the

so-called ‘weaker vessel’ the scapegoat to bear their sins?

“But it was ever thus. The first Adam, the ‘lord of creation,’

tried to shield himself by accusing Eve and putting upon her the

punishment of his transgression. And all Adams from that time to

this have imitated his weakness and meanness by doing the same

thing. Let the strong bear the burdens of the weak, is I believe

a Scripture injunction, but men have reversed this and put upon

the weak and powerless the burdens they are too cowardly to bear

themselves. In these days the Adams abound and, no matter of what

crime they may be guilty, some daughter of Eve must be made to

sorrow, not only over the fall of a loved one but by seeing herself

publicly accused of being in some way accessory to the crime.

“If a man commits suicide, it is forthwith charged to unpleasant

domestic relations. If another, in a fit of insanity, takes himself

out of the world his wife’s extravagance is the cause. So, too,

‘the extravagance of the wife’ is offered as an excuse for the

reckless spendthrift and defaulter. If a man deserts his wife and

family and goes after strange women, the wife is in some way to

blame for it; and if he gratifies his lust by the ruin of innocent

girls, there are enough of his fellows to come to his defense by

implicating his wife as the guilty cause of his ruin. And so on to

the end of the chapter, the same old story: ‘The woman whom Thou

gavest me did it.’ What a pitiful sneaking plea to come from the

self-styled ‘lords of creation,’ the boasted superiors of woman!

“I object to this frequent blaming of women for the misdeeds of men

and in the name of all womanhood protest against its injustice.

“A. B.”

WOMAN’S RIGHT TO PREACH.

On this subject Mrs. Bloomer wrote as follows:

“The question of woman’s right to preach has been agitated more

since the action of the Brooklyn presbytery in arraigning Dr.

Cuyler for allowing Miss Smiley to occupy his pulpit than ever

before. Instead of this action having the effect of preventing a

repetition of the offense, or of convincing the people of its wrong

or sinfulness, and silencing women preachers, the discussion has

resulted favorably to the women and encouraged them in their good

work.

“Two weeks ago Miss Smiley preached on Sunday both in a Methodist

and Presbyterian church in Buffalo, N. Y., by invitation of the

pastors of the churches, and she has preached in other orthodox

churches since the Brooklyn trial, and no one has been called to

account for a transgression of the rules.

“In St. Louis, the women of the Union Methodist church lately

held a meeting to express their sense of the propriety and need

of an ordained ministry for women in the church. The meeting is

said to have been spirited and earnest, and embraced many of the

leading women of the Methodist church and of other denominations.

They offered their own prayers, made their own speeches, and called

no man to their aid. The proceedings and speeches are reported at

length in the _Democrat_, and reflect much credit upon the able

women engaged in them. The following memorial reported by the

committee was unanimously adopted:

“‘To the General Conference of the Methodist Church. Fathers and

Brethren: We the undersigned members of the Methodist church

respectfully but earnestly petition your venerable body to take

such action, at your coming session in Brooklyn, New York, as may

be necessary to allow women to be ordained as preachers, subject

only to such requirements as are defined in our discipline.’

“In this, as in all other reforms, persecution and opposition

strengthen the cause they would crush. The result of the

anti-slavery movement should convince all that any God-ordained

progressive movement, though it may be stayed for a time, cannot

be killed and buried because men will it so.”

PETTICOAT PRESENTATION.

Some ladies of Quincy having presented a petticoat to some obnoxious

individual, Mrs. Bloomer wrote as follows:

“It has long been customary for men, when they wish to express

great contempt for the action of an individual, or to hold him

up to the scorn and ridicule of the world, to present him with a

_petticoat_. No matter whether the action be one of meanness and

cowardice, or one of heroism in defense of a good cause, the man so

acting must be degraded in the eyes of the world by the offer of

a woman’s garment—no other being found sufficiently expressive of

the disgust of its contemners. It has always seemed strange to me

that men were willing to dishonor the mothers who bore them and the

wives they have chosen for life-companions by thus selecting one of

their garments as the most fitting badge of cowardice, of meanness,

of treachery, of weakness, of littleness of soul; and I have never

heard of an instance of the kind but my cheek has tingled with

shame and indignation—shame that men could thus unblushingly offer

insult to woman, indignation that woman must receive and submit

tamely to the insult.

“But if such action on the part of men has been painful to me,

much more so is the action of the women of Quincy as given in last

week’s _Chronotype_. It is bad enough for men thus to dishonor

and insult us; but when woman imitates them in wrongdoing and

desecrates her own garment to so bad a use, it is doubly to be

deplored, for it is an admission that we are guilty of all the

weakness and meanness they attribute to us and that our garment is

chosen to represent. It should rather be woman’s part to frown down

all such acts with any part of her costume, and ever stand ready to

defend it from dishonor.

“I by no means wish to condemn the ladies of Quincy for showing

their contempt of the ‘gallant soldier of Kansas.’ Far from it,

I admit their spirit and glory in their womanly courage; for I

hold it to be the right and duty of woman to mark the slanderer,

to speak out against wrong, to defend the injured and innocent,

and to drive out and put down immorality and crime, by the

power of her own might if need be. I only differ with them in

the manner of punishing the coward and would have counseled a

more womanly course. Had they waited upon the ‘slanderer’ and

‘coward,’ expressed in strong terms their scorn and contempt for

his actions, and warned him to leave the town, it would have been

more creditable to them and to the sex than was the presentation

of the ‘red flannel garment’—a woman’s garment—as a badge of all

that is most despicable in man. I am too jealous of the good name

of woman, and hold in too much respect a woman’s petticoat to see

it disgraced by any ‘slanderer,’ ‘coward’ or ‘whipped puppy,’ and I

would to the last defend it from such disgrace.

“If that garment is in reality the badge of cowardice and

inferiority that men would make it to be, then the sooner it is

abandoned by woman and one more appropriate to her true character

substituted the better. But it is not so. On the contrary it is

honored by having been worn by the good, the great, the noble, the

heroic, the virtuous, the honorable, the gifted, the most highly

praised and exalted among women; and so long as it continues to be

so worn it is entitled to respect from both men and women, and he

who dares treat it with disrespect should receive the censures of

men and the scorn of women.

“The error of the Quincy women was one of the head and not of the

heart. Women are sometimes led into error by unthinkingly imitating

the follies and vices of men, or by acting under their direction.

In the ‘good time coming,’ when women learn to do their own

thinking and to rely more on their own judgments, they will rarely

be led into wrong or unwise action. May the day hasten speedily

on when woman’s dormant powers shall be so developed by education

that she will stand forth before the world in all the nobleness

and excellence of her being! Then no longer will men revile her

garments or taunt her as they now too often do, directly or

indirectly, with cowardice, inferiority and weakness of intellect.

“A. B.”

OBJECTIONS TO WOMAN SUFFRAGE ANSWERED.

While the woman-suffrage amendment was before the general assembly

of Iowa, Senator Gaylord, a member of that body, published a list of

twenty-one reasons why it should not be adopted. These Mrs. Bloomer,

in a letter to the Des Moines _Register_, answered as follows:

“1. He says ‘it is not in the interest or in the disposition of

man to legislate against woman,’ etc. And yet for ages men have

legislated against woman and deprived her of all right to her own

person, her earnings, her property, and her children. The common

law places woman in a position little better than that of slavery.

And this law was made by men; and it was not until the agitation

of the woman’s-rights question by women, and their exposure of the

injustice of the laws and their demands for redress of grievances,

that changes were made in their favor. If the senator does not know

of this, let him read up the common law on these points and the

history of the woman-suffrage question for the last thirty years,

and he will find that up to that time it _was_ the ‘disposition of

men to legislate against’ every interest of woman.

“2. He says ‘she ought not to be compelled by law to work out a

poll-tax in the public highway, nor to learn the art of butchery

on the battlefield.’ Most certainly she ought not, but she could

hire a substitute to do these things, just as Senator Gaylord does.

I venture the assertion, without knowing, that he did not earn

his right to the ballot by the bullet or by shoveling dirt on the

highways. If only those who do these things were allowed to vote

the number of voters would be small indeed.

“3. ‘Because there is no evidence that the most intelligent women

ask for the miserable privilege of becoming politicians.’ Does the

senator think that it is a miserable privilege to have the right to

the ballot, the right to vote for good men and measures, the right

to self-protection, the right to sit in the halls of legislation

making wise and just laws for the government of his country, which

shall tend to the interest and happiness of the whole people? One

who prizes these privileges so lightly should be deprived of them

and the wonder is that, holding such opinions as he does, we find

a ‘miserable politician’ having his seat in the legislative hall

of this great state, where he surely ought not to be. The fact

that the women and the men who are asking for the enfranchisement

of women are among the most intelligent, refined, affectionate and

exemplary citizens is too patent to need proof from me.

“4. ‘Because woman is superior to man, and she owes her superiority

to the fact that she has never waded in the dirty pool of

politics.’ Dear me! how worried this man is about the ‘dirty,’

‘miserable’ politics! And again how strange, knowing the pool to

be so muddy, that he has waded in so deep! and to think of his

going home to his family with all this filth upon him! Really, if

the place is so muddy it is high time that woman come in, with all

the purity and goodness he gives her credit for, and sweep out the

dirt that is befouling her husband and sons and make it a more fit

place for them. An atmosphere that is too impure for her to breathe

cannot but be dangerous to them, and it is her duty to rescue them

from the ‘muddy’ pool or so to cleanse it that it will be safe for

both.

“5. Senator Gaylord may call himself a wizard if he likes, and

we shall not object; but women prefer not to be angels while

sojourning here below, but rather good, sensible, practical wives

and mothers, prepared to discharge life’s duties in whatever

situation they may be placed—in the home, at the ballot-box or in

legislative halls, wherever duty, interest and inclination may lead

them.

“6. ‘Because a deference is now shown to women, which would be

denied,’ etc. Deference shown to women does not make up for

deprivation of rights, Mr. Gaylord. Besides, it is not a fact, but

on the contrary, that equality of rights, politically or otherwise,

leads men to disrespect woman. Give us rights and then, if you

must, withhold courtesy: I trust we should have strength to bear it.

“7. ‘Because, if married women should vote against their husbands,

there would be war.’ And who would make the war, Mr. Gaylord? No

man, except one who wishes to play the tyrant in his family and

enslave his wife’s thought and actions, could ever utter so silly

a reason for depriving her of rights to which she is as justly

entitled as himself. Does he question the right of a man to do his

own thinking and vote as he pleases? Why then a woman? The very

fact that he thus claims the right to make her action subservient

to his wishes, or to make war upon her if she does not submit to

his own dictation, is reason sufficient why her individuality and

right to self-government should be recognized and secured to her by

making her an enfranchised citizen.

“8. ‘Because there are bad women,’ etc. Well, why may not bad women

vote as well as bad men? If they had had a vote long ago perhaps

they would not be bad now, and perhaps there would not be so many

bad men either. I would sooner trust those women to vote right than

many men who now disgrace the ballot; and as to any contamination

at the polls, we no more fear it than on the streets, at public

gatherings, in the stores, and in various places where we meet and

brush by them unharmed. We have more to fear from the men who make

women bad. But, inasmuch as many women are compelled to associate

in the closest relations with these men, and we all have to

tolerate them in society, and come in contact with them in business

matters, we think no great harm can come to us by dropping a bit

of paper in the same box. But if there is really danger from such

contact, we can avoid it by having voting places for our own sex

away from theirs.

“9. ‘Because, if a woman trains up her children right, they will

vote right.’ etc. No, not always. The training of the mother is

often counteracted by the influence, authority and example of the

father, and the two might differ as to what was right. The mother

might teach her son that the ballot is a high and sacred thing, a

mighty power to be wielded for the best interests and happiness

of humanity, a power for the putting down of evil and for the

forming and sustaining just governments; while the father might

teach him that the right of the elective franchise is a ‘miserable

privilege,’ that it leads to a ‘muddy pool’ into which all must

wade, that it is all ‘moonshine and monsoons’ and that the

‘privilege of voting is not to be so much desired as the privilege

of being voted for.’ Which training is he to follow? Where lies the

danger?

“10. The senator here claims that men are ‘vain, ambitious and

aspiring, caring more to be voted for than to vote,’ and he

fears that women will show the same weakness if permitted to

vote. It is to be hoped, for the credit of womanhood, that if a

woman ever takes his seat she will not disgrace herself by the

utterance of such senseless twaddle in opposition to any measure as

characterized his effort on the proposed amendment!

“13. ‘Because there must be a dividing line, somewhere, between

those who may vote and who may not,’ etc. Then why not let the

educated, intelligent, sober and moral of both sexes vote, and shut

out the ignorant, drunken and immoral? Why let men vote and make

laws, no matter how low and vile they may be, simply because they

are men while those who are subject to the man-made laws are denied

the right to vote, simply because they are women? The line so drawn

is unnatural, unjust, and productive of great wrong to all parties.

The line as now drawn shuts out only Indians, idiots, and women.

“14. Here our senator throws all the responsibility upon the

‘All-wise Author of our natures,’ and claims that He has made laws

to prevent woman entering the ‘moonshine and monsoon of politics,’

forgetting that God called Deborah to the political field and

made her a judge in Israel, and that for all time there have been

queens and rulers among women, evidently with God’s approval.

The All-Father gave woman an intelligent mind and capacity for

governing, and then left her free to exercise her gifts as she saw

fit; and if there be times when by sickness or other circumstance

she may be prevented from the discharge of political duties, so

also there are times and circumstances when men are kept from the

polls and from office, and if this be reason why the former should

not be enfranchised then it is also reason why the latter should be

disfranchised.

“15. ‘Because the wife has a voice and a vote already, and her

husband is her agent to carry that vote to the ballot-box.’ How is

it about the thousands of women who have no husbands to do such

errands for them? How does this proxy-voting work when the wife

differs with the husband on the question to be voted on? Does he

waive his own preference and deposit the vote in accordance with

her wishes? If he does not, then does he represent her? The only

just course is to let her deposit her own vote; then both will be

represented. Now, they are not. Man deposits his vote regardless of

his wife’s interests and wishes.

“17. ‘Because there cannot be two equal heads in the same family.’

‘Where the wife is anybody, the husband must be a nobody.’ ‘If

the wife has sense enough to vote, the husband is dwarfed.’ So,

according to our senator, the wife should be a weak-minded,

senseless thing deprived of all right of opinion, so that the

husband may rise to the dignity of a voter. Is not this sound

logic? Did the superior brain of man ever before conceive of so

strong an argument why woman should not vote? Two heads are better

than one, Mr. Senator, and there may be two equal heads in the

same family, at the same time, and neither of them be ‘dwarfed’

or belittled by the superiority of the other. If such is not the

condition of your family, your wife is a subject for sympathy.

“18. ‘Because politics would pervert and destroy woman’s nature,

the religious element,’ etc. God implanted in woman’s nature a

love of home and a love of her offspring, and also an instinctive

knowledge of what is proper and what improper for her to do; and

it needs no laws of man’s making to incite the one or compel the

other. Give her her rights and her own good sense will teach her

how to use them. Does the ballot change man’s nature for the worse?

Why then woman’s?

“Pp. 11, 12, 19, 20 and 21. These concluding reasons show a

dreadful imaginative picture of the condition of things that would

exist in the family should women be permitted to go to the polls

and exercise the rights secured to them by the laws of their

country. ‘Strife, contention, jealousy, hatred, slander, rivalry,

intemperance, licentiousness, temper, retaliation, suicide,

suspicion, discord, divorce,’ all these are to come to our good

senator’s family when his wife has a right to vote. He anticipates

it all and is doing all he can to avert the dire calamity. But

while he is to be commiserated, he must remember that all families

are not alike, and where he sees only dire disaster other men see

the dawning of a better day and are ready to ‘turn the crank’ that

shall hasten it on. Other men do not fear and tremble; but calmly

await the time when they can take their wives on their arms and,

side by side, go to the polls and drop in the little paper that

declares them equal in rights and privileges. In these families

there will be no war, for such men are proud to own their wives

their equals and do not feel that they themselves are dwarfed

thereby. As the ballot elevates and ennobles man, so they believe

it will be with woman, and they cannot understand how rendering

justice to her is going to convert her into the coarse, vile,

quarrelsome thing our senator predicts, or how acknowledging her

the equal of her husband is going to ‘dwarf’ men and convert them

into ruffians and nobodies.

“A. B.”

ON HOUSEKEEPING—WOMAN’S BURDENS.

The following essay on this subject was read by Mrs. Bloomer before a

local society or club in Council Bluffs:

“It has always seemed to me that there was something wrong in

the present system of housekeeping. Men have particular branches

of business to which they give their exclusive attention, and

never attempt to carry on three or four trades at the same

time. Housekeeping comprises at least three trades, that of

cook, laundress and seamstress, to which might be added that of

house cleaning; and yet it is expected of woman that she will

single-handed successfully carry on these various trades, and at

the same time bear and rear children and teach them to become great

and good. How long would men undergo a like amount of labor without

devising some means of lightening and separating its burdens?

“I wish to call your attention to the fact that in the mythical

second chapter of Genesis, upon which men lay so much stress as

their authority for subjugating and belittling the position of

woman, no toil was imposed on our Mother Eve. The ground was cursed

for man’s sake, and he was to labor and eat his bread in the sweat

of his face. But to woman no command to labor was given, no toil

laid upon her, no ground or stove cursed for her sake. She was to

bear children; but motherhood was never cursed by the Almighty.

Woman is the mother of mankind, the living Providence (under God)

who gives to every human being its mental, moral and physical

organization, who stamps upon every human heart her seal for good

or for evil. How important then that her surroundings be pleasant,

her thoughts elevated, her mind imbued with the best and noblest

traits, her individuality acknowledged, her freedom assured, that

she may impart wise and noble characters to her children, surround

them with good influences and train them in all goodness and

virtue! This is the part of woman. But how can she be fitted for

such life work when subjected to the whims and commands of another,

to the constant round of housekeeping labor, to toil and drudgery,

to cares, annoyances and perplexities which she has not health and

strength and nerve to bear? How can one woman cook and wash dishes

three times a day, sweep and dust the house, wash and iron, scrub

and clean, make and mend and darn for a family, and yet have time

or spirit for the improvement of her own mind so that she may stamp

strong characters upon her children? How can a mother whose every

hour from early morn to late at night is filled with cares and

worries and toil to supply the physical needs of her family find

time or be prepared to instruct properly the tender minds committed

to her care?

“It is to woman’s weary hours and broken health, and to her

subject, unhappy and unsatisfactory position, that we may impute

much of the evil, vice and crime that are abroad. And to the same

cause are due so many domestic quarrels, separations and divorces.

Children are born into the world with the stamp of the mother’s

mind upon them. I believe it is conceded that children are more

indebted to their mothers than to their fathers for their natural

gifts. How important then that every facility be afforded the

mother for making good impressions on her child! How strange that

men so entirely overlook this law of inheritance! What can they

expect of children when the mother is degraded and enslaved?

“Is there not some way of relief from this drudging, weary work

over the cook stove, washtub and sewing machine; from this load of

labor and care? Why should one hundred women in each of one hundred

separate houses be compelled to do the work that could equally as

well or better be done by less than one-fifth of that number by

some reasonable and just system of coöperation? Why cannot the

cooking and washing and sewing be all attended to in a coöperative

establishment, and thus relieve women, and mothers particularly,

of the heavy burdens their fourfold labors now impose upon them,

and give them time for self-improvement and the care and culture

of their children? It is said that in the city of New York there

are but 30,000 household servants to more than 270,000 families. By

this we see that nine out of every ten wives and mothers in that

city are subjected to the daily round of household labor. Can we

not trace a large percentage of the vice and degradation of that

city to that cause? And this state of things will hold good to a

large extent over the whole country.

“Time is not allowed me to go into the details of coöperative

housekeeping, even had I the matter well matured in my own mind,

which I have not. But I have given reasons why some plan should

be devised to relieve woman of hard labor and crushing care, and

I leave it for her who is to follow on my side of the question to

present a plan that shall recommend itself to our approval.

“A. B.”

THE CIVIL WAR.

The War of the Rebellion aroused the feelings, as also the

patriotism, of the women of the Northern states to a high state of

activity. Perhaps at first they did not enter into the contest so

earnestly as did the women of the South, that is, their feelings were

not so deeply aroused; but ere long, as the war went on, they came

up nobly to the duties before them and were henceforward unwearied

and unremitting in their discharge. Their fathers, brothers, sons

and husbands were in the armies of the Union periling their lives

for its complete restoration. They could but hope that success might

crown their efforts, and in various ways they sought to help on the

contest until the end should be reached, the republic saved; and many

also hoped and prayed that, when victory came, it would bring also

the complete destruction of slavery. Mrs. Bloomer entered into this

feeling, and the work done by the women of the North, with all the

energies of her ardent spirit. Two regiments were raised in Council

Bluffs and the vicinity, and many of the young men of the city were

in their ranks. The women did a great deal towards providing them

with camp conveniences and furnishing them with needed clothing and

other comforts necessary for the arduous and dangerous life on which

they were about to enter. Each day, dress parade found very many on

the regimental grounds encouraging “the boys” in the discharge of

their duties. Among other things, a beautiful flag was prepared and

Mrs. Bloomer was delegated by the ladies to present it to company

A, which had been mainly recruited in the city. This she did in the

presence of the whole regiment, in the following short speech:

MRS. BLOOMER’S ADDRESS.

“Captain Craig, Sir: In behalf of the loyal ladies of Council

Bluffs I present to you, and through you to the company you

command, this flag. Its materials are not of so rich a texture as

we could have wished, but they are the best our city afforded; and

we hope that you will accept it as an expression of our respect for

yourself and your company, and our warm sympathy for the cause you

go forth to uphold. This flag has emblazoned upon it the stars and

stripes of our country. It was under these that our Fathers fought

the battle of the Revolution and secured for us that priceless

gift, the Constitution of the United States.

“You are now going forth to sustain and defend that Constitution

against an unjust and monstrous rebellion, fomented and carried

on by wicked and ambitious men, who have for their object the

overthrow of the best government the world has ever seen. To this

noble cause we dedicate this flag. We know you will carry it

proudly, gallantly and bravely on the field of battle and wherever

you go, and we trust it may ever be to you the emblem of victory.

“Soldiers: We cannot part with you without a few words of counsel

and warning. In the new and dangerous path you are entering upon,

let us entreat you to guard well your steps and keep yourselves

aloof from every vice. Avoid, above all things, profanity and the

intoxicating cup. The latter slays annually more than fall on the

battlefield. The hearts of mothers, wives and sisters go forth

after you. Many tears will be shed and many prayers will be offered

in your behalf. See to it, then, that you so conduct yourselves

that whatever may befall you, whether you fall in the service of

your country or return to gladden the hearts of the loved ones you

leave behind and to enjoy the peace you will have conquered—that no

sting shall pierce their hearts, no stain rest on your fair fame.

Go forth in your sense of right, relying on the justice of your

cause. Seek peace with God your Saviour, that you may be prepared

to meet His summons should it come suddenly, or to enjoy life

should it please Him to spare you for many days.

“Our good wishes go with you, and we shall ever hold you in

honorable remembrance; and when this important war is ended which

calls you from us, and you are discharged from duty, we shall

heartily welcome you back to your home and friends.”

This address was delivered at dress parade just as the sun was going

down and only a day or two before the regiment left for the front.

The volunteer soldiers listened with deep emotion, and when allusion

was made to the homes and friends left behind many a stout heart

heaved and tears trickled down many a manly face.

Lieutenant Kinsman, in behalf of Captain Craig, accepted the flag

from Mrs. Bloomer in a neat and appropriate address.

Lieutenant Kinsman had been a partner of her husband and a dear

friend of Mrs. Bloomer’s; over his subsequent career she watched with

the greatest interest. He soon rose to be the captain of his company,

then a lieutenant-colonel, and then colonel of an Iowa regiment at

whose head he fell bravely fighting at the Battle of Black River

Bridge, in Mississippi, in 1863. As showing the earnest patriotism of

Mrs. Bloomer and her intelligent appreciation of the great questions

involved in it, the following letter written by her to the convention

of loyal women in New York City in 1864 is here inserted:

LETTER TO CONVENTION OF LOYAL WOMEN.

“MISS ANTHONY:

“Your letter inviting me to meet in council with the loyal women of

the nation on the 14th inst. in the city of New York is received.

Most gladly does my heart respond to the call for such a meeting,

and most earnestly do I hope that the deliberations on that

occasion will result in much good to woman and to the cause you

meet to promote.

“The women of the North are charged by the press with a lack of

zeal and enthusiasm in the war. The charge may be true to some

extent. Though for the most part the women of the loyal states

are loyal to the government, and in favor of sustaining its every

measure for putting down the rebellion, yet they do not I fear

enter fully into the spirit of the revolution, or share greatly in

the enthusiasm and devotion which sustain the women of the South

in their struggle for what they believe their independence and

freedom from oppression. This is owing, doubtless, to the war being

waged on soil remote from us, to women having no part in the active

contest, and to the deprivation and heart-sorrows it has occasioned

them. There are too many who think only of themselves and too

little of the sufferings of the soldiers who have volunteered to

save their country. While they are willing to give of their time

and means to relieve the sick and wounded, they at the same time

decry the war, lament the sacrifices and expenditure it occasions,

think it should have been prevented by a compromise and long for

peace on almost any terms. These think not of the great cause at

stake, they care not for the poor slave, think not of the future

of our country, and fail to see the hand of God in the movement

punishing the nation for sin and leading it up through much

suffering and tribulation to a brighter and more glorious destiny.

“But there is a class of women who have looked beyond the mere

clash of arms and the battlefield of the dead and dying, and

recognize the necessity and importance of this dark hour of trial

to our country. The first cannon fired at Sumter sounded in their

ears the death knell of slavery and proclaimed the will of the

Almighty to this nation. These have never believed we should have

peace or great success until the doom of slavery was irrevocably

sealed. That seal has been set. Our noble President has bowed to

the will of the Supreme Power and by the guidance and sustaining

spirit of that Power will, I trust, lead our country successfully

through the great and fearful struggle and place it upon a firm and

more enduring basis.

“The contest has outlasted the expectation of all, and has cost the

nation a vast amount of blood and treasure. It has called into the

field a million or more of soldiers, and the number of fathers,

brothers and sons slain upon the battlefield and wasted away in

camps and hospitals is counted by hundreds of thousands, while its

expenses run up to billions. And still the war for the Union, for

Freedom, and the integrity of our national boundaries goes forward;

and in the hearts of true Union men everywhere the firm resolve has

been made that it shall go on until the rebellion is crushed, cost

what it may, and continue though it should last as long as did the

war which brought our nation into existence.

“Now the question for us to consider is: Are we prepared for

the further and continued sacrifice? Have we yet more sons and

brothers to yield up on the altar of our country? To this question

let every loyal woman address herself; and I fondly hope that the

proceedings of your convention will be such as to nerve woman for

whatever sacrifice and trial await her.

“I know there are many women in whose hearts the love of country

and of justice is strong, and who are willing to incur any loss and

make almost any sacrifice rather than that the rebellion should

succeed and the chains of the bondmen be more firmly riveted. If

they manifest less enthusiasm than their patriotic brothers it is

because they have not so great an opportunity for its exercise. The

customs of society do not permit any stormy or noisy manifestation

of feeling on the part of woman. But the blood of Revolutionary

sires flows as purely in her veins as in those of her more favored

brothers, and she can feel as deeply, suffer as intensely, and

endure as bravely as do they.

“But I would have her do more than suffer and endure. I would that

she should not only resolve to stand by the government of the

Union in its work of defeating the schemes of its enemies, but

that she should let her voice go forth to the government in clear

and unmistakable tones against any peace with rebels, except upon

the basis of entire submission to the authority of the government.

Against the schemes and plans of the ‘peace party’ in the North the

loyal women everywhere protest. That party seeks to obtain peace

through compromise, and it advocates an armistice with rebels who

ask for none. Such a peace we do not want, for it would be either

brought about by the recognition of the rebel government, or by

base and dishonorable submission to its demands. To either of these

results we are alike opposed. When peace comes, let it come through

the complete triumph of the Union army; and with the destruction of

the great cause of the rebellion, which we all know to be African

Slavery.

“What part woman is to take in the work, and in what way she can

best hold up the hands and cheer the heart of the great man who

is at the head of our government, will be for the loyal women in

council to determine.

“A. B.”

The ladies of Council Bluffs were zealous in sending clothing and

necessary hospital stores to the soldiers fighting at the front.

Mrs. Bloomer was one of the most active in this work. She was placed

on many committees, often at the head of them, and her house was a

centre around which their efforts were directed. She was a thorough

patriot, and did all in her power to promote the welfare of those

who were fighting the battle of the Union. She attended for three

weeks the great Sanitary Fair held in Chicago in the early part of

1865, and previous to going to it had been largely instrumental in

collecting the noble contribution sent thither by Iowa. Here, for

the first time, she met General Grant, the illustrious commander

of the Union armies. Mrs. Bloomer had never been classed among the

“abolitionists,” but she was nevertheless an intense hater of slavery

and the slave power, and no one rejoiced more sincerely that the war

finally ended with the overthrow of that blight upon the fair name of

our country.

VISITS WASHINGTON.

Mrs. Bloomer, after her removal to the West, made occasional visits

to her old home in New York, there spending several weeks with

relatives and friends. In the autumn of 1880, with her husband,

she passed nearly a week in the national capital viewing the noble

buildings and the wonderful collections of nature and art with which

they are so abundantly filled. One day was spent at the Smithsonian

Institution, where the ethnological department attracted great

attention. The Patent Office was looked through, and the Corcoran

gallery of paintings and statuary admired and carefully inspected.

One day was given to Mount Vernon and the former residence of the

Father of his Country visited. It was a beautiful day and the passage

down and up the Potomac delightful. The scenes at Mount Vernon were

most impressive, and made a place in her memory never to be effaced.

IN NEW YORK CITY.

Proceeding from Washington northward, they spent one day in

Philadelphia very pleasantly; and, on arriving in New York, Mrs.

Bloomer and her husband arranged for a stop in the great metropolis

of several weeks. They spent two days with relatives in Westchester

County, and after her return Mrs. Bloomer met her old and dear

friends, Mrs. Douglass and Mrs. Chamberlain, and had very pleasant

visits with them. A day was taken up in visiting some of the noted

places in the city, and then Mrs. Bloomer accepted an invitation to

visit Mrs. Stanton at her residence in Tenyfly, in New Jersey; but

before she had time to do this, word came to her of the dangerous

illness of her sister. Giving up all her plans, she at once repaired

to the residence of Mr. John Lowden, at Waterloo, N. Y., and remained

by the bedside of her sister until her spirit passed away. Of a large

family of brothers and sisters, Mrs. Bloomer was then the only one

left. After attending the funeral, she spent a few days with her

husband in the excellent family of her niece, Mrs. N. J. Milliken,

at Canandaigua, N. Y., being present at the marriage of one of her

daughters; and then, after another stop in Buffalo of a few days

more, returned to Council Bluffs.

One more visit was made to New York, in 1889, to attend the golden

anniversary of her husband’s brother, Mr. C. A. Bloomer, of Buffalo.

The occasion was a very happy one; and after some days spent in

that city, she once more passed on to her old home in Seneca Falls,

visiting also at Canandaigua and other places in the vicinity.

VISITS COLORADO.

In 1879 Mrs. Bloomer made her first journey to Colorado, its

mountains and magnificent scenery. This was repeated in subsequent

years, the last trip having been made in 1894, only a few months

before her death. During these tours she spent many days in Denver,

Leadville, Idaho Springs, Pueblo, Colorado Springs, and Manitou. All

the points round the latter famous watering place were visited. She

rode through the Garden of the Gods, Monument Park, and Cheyenne

Cañon, and traversed the great caves opened up in the mountains.

Climbing Cheyenne Mountain, she stood on the spot where the famous

poet and writer Helen H. Jackson was laid at rest. The scenery

from this point over the surrounding mountains and valleys is truly

wonderful and makes a great impression on all beholders.

A LETTER.

The following descriptive letter written to a local paper by Mrs.

Bloomer from Manitou, Colorado, August 12, 1879, gives her impression

of that place and vicinity at that time:

“Our stay at Denver was a short one, as we found the weather at

that place about as hot as in Council Bluffs. After looking over

that city for one day, we hastened on to this famed resort for

invalids and summer tourists seeking pleasure and recreation. As

usual at this season, the hotels are crowded, and scores of camp

tents dot the hills in every direction.

“We took up our temporary abode at the Cliff House, principally

because of its nearness to the springs, three of which are in the

immediate vicinity. This is a popular house and is crowded with

guests. The Manitou and Beebe, though farther from the springs, are

full and are first-class houses. Scores of cottages are leased for

a few weeks or months by visitors, and many private houses take

temporary lodgers or boarders. Among owners of the latter is Mrs.

Dr. Leonard, formerly of Council Bluffs. She is proprietor of the

bath-houses here, and is doing a good paying business, sometimes as

many as a hundred a day taking baths. She has built a house of her

own, but leases the bath-house, which belongs to the town company.

She has also considerable practice as a physician.

“Cheyenne Cañon, Ute Pass, Williams Pass, Pike’s Peak, the Garden

of the Gods, Glen Eyrie, Queen’s Cañon, and Monument Park are the

principal points of interest visited daily by people here. A few

mornings since, a party of seventeen gentlemen and ladies left

one hotel on horseback for the ascent of Pike’s Peak. They made

the journey safely and returned at dark, some of them feeling

little worse for the trip, while others were pretty well used up.

Yesterday a gentleman and lady made the same journey on foot. As

the distance is twelve miles, all the way up the steep mountain

side, this was considered quite a feat. To-day the same parties

have gone on foot to Cheyenne Cañon, a distance of twelve miles. I

have not heard that the lady is one of the celebrated ‘walkers,’

but she certainly deserves that her name be added to the list.

“Yesterday we made up a party of six and started soon after

breakfast for the Garden of the Gods, Glen Eyrie, and Monument

Park. The day was one of the finest imaginable, the air cool and

invigorating, and our driver a man experienced in the business of

showing to tourists the wonders of this section of this wonderful

state. We found him a very intelligent and much-traveled man, and

learned that he was one of the magistrates of the town. Our road

to the Garden of the Gods was ascending all the way. In reply to

a query as to why the place was so named, the guide told us a

story of how a southern gentleman came to the spot some years ago

bringing with him two colored slaves, a man and a woman. He built

here a cabin, and soon after took his gun and started out for a

further journey, leaving the slaves behind and promising an early

return. But days and weeks passed on and he returned not, and never

was heard of more. The negroes remained in their new home, made

improvements and planted a garden, which in this new land was a

sight to gladden the eye. This, in connection with the grand works

of nature surrounding it, grew to be the Garden of the Gods, the

name which has made it famous throughout the world. So much for the

story. The negroes, Jupiter and Juno, are no more; but the great

works of nature remain in all their grandeur, and a visit to them

well repays the traveler for the journey he takes to see them.

“The rocks in this so-called garden have been shaped into every

conceivable form by the action of wind, water and frost. Many of

them, by a little stretch of the imagination, are made to bear a

strong resemblance to men and animals. The prevailing formation is

red sandstone, but there are also conglomerate, gypsum and other

varieties. At the south entrance, is a huge rock standing upon the

narrowest foundation, and seemingly ready at any moment to topple

over on the people who are constantly passing. As the incline is a

little away from the road, it is to be hoped no such catastrophe

will ever happen, even should the rock in ages to come be so

top-heavy as to break loose from its foundations. The Grand Gateway

is a narrow passageway between immense piles of rocks over three

hundred feet high, of irregular outline and surface, which rise

sharply and perpendicularly like a mighty wall. These rocks are

full of holes, rifts and crevices and chasms in which thousands

of swallows have built their nests, and we could plainly hear the

twittering of the young ones from the ledge of rocks a few feet

distant, on which we climbed. Our guide led us to a cave under one

of these walls. The opening was near the base, and so low that one

had to bend the knees and crawl in. The guide assured us that once

inside the cave was high and roomy. Half of our party ventured

in, but they found it too dark to see far beyond. Those of us who

remained outside could hear the echoes of their voices high up

in the rocks, showing that there is a high open space within the

seemingly solid stone. Other rocks but a few feet distant are of

gray color, and a little further on are large white rocks composed

of gypsum, very soft and pliable. This is now being taken out in

large quantities to be converted into plaster of Paris.

“At the time we were passing through this huge gateway, an Iowa boy

was standing on the top of one of these towering red walls waving

a white flag, and upon the other stood a young woman waving her

handkerchief. They looked like pygmies at that great elevation,

and but for their moving about we should have supposed them a

slight projection of rock. These we are told are the same persons

who made the journey to Pike’s Peak mentioned above. Their ascent

up the rocks was a difficult and dangerous one, and though our

guide proposed to lead us also up to their summit, we declined

the temptation to view the surrounding mountains from so dizzy a

height. It is very singular that these different varieties of rock

formation should be found in so close proximity, and they furnish

abundant food for the study of the geologist. The prevailing shape

of the rocks is high and narrow, and some of the forms into which

they have been brought by the forces of nature are remarkably

beautiful and unique.

“Passing on from this famed locality over a smooth and level

road, we visited Glen Eyrie. This spot derives its name from an

eagle’s nest high up in a crevice or shelf of the rocks, so our

guide informed us, and also that within a year the eagles had

occupied the nest, which was plainly visible to us, looking the

size of a bushelbasket. They have now abandoned the place. The

name Glen Eyrie is given to a large tract of land belonging to

General Palmer, president of the Denver and Rio Grande Railroad. He

has fenced in this wild tract, opened a road across it, and in a

nook close under the towering rocks by which it is surrounded and

far from any other habitation he has built a costly and elegant

residence. The dwelling stands at the foot or entrance to Queen’s

Cañon, a narrow gorge up which we traveled on foot the distance of

half a mile till we reached a pool or basin of water, eight or ten

feet in diameter, which blocked our further progress. This pool is

known as the Devil’s Punchbowl, but General Palmer has named it the

Mermaid’s Bathtub. Whether either devils or mermaids come here to

either drink or bathe, history does not record. Our path was over

big stones and rocks, and along the bed of a mountain torrent,

which we crossed several times, stepping from rock to rock as our

path led first to one side and then to the other. High above us

on either side the mountains rose to a great height, their sides

covered at times with the evergreen pine and scrub-oak, and again

consisting simply of bare and naked rocks ready at any moment

apparently to tumble down upon our heads. Our guide informed us

that General Palmer has already spent forty or fifty thousand

dollars upon the house and grounds of Glen Eyrie. I would not give

him one thousand for the whole thing.

“After the exploration of Queen’s Cañon our party voted unanimously

to proceed to Monument Park, a distance of five miles, which we

reached just in time to enjoy a most excellent dinner prepared for

us by Mrs. Lewis, whose husband is an extensive cattle-raiser and

lives in a comfortable dwelling at the entrance of the park. We

are told that he came a confirmed consumptive, but has now become

a strong and healthy man. This we could well believe, for in this

locality the air was wonderfully pure, dry and bracing, and our

party greatly enjoyed its exhilarating effects. Dinner over, we

proceeded to explore the Park and gaze upon its unique formations.

I do not feel competent to adequately describe them. The rocks

are unlike any others in Colorado. They are nearly white with a

yellowish tinge and often pyramidal in form. Standing out from the

general mass are numerous statue-like columns, which seem to have

been carved by the hand of man. They bear various designations,

such as Adam and Eve, Lot’s Wife, the Democratic Caucus, Henry Ward

Beecher’s Pulpit, the Dutch Wedding, the Anvil, etc., etc. They

range from eight to fifteen feet in height and, what is singular,

all of them are crowned with a flat rocky cap considerably larger

than the top of the column on which it rests. This covering is

composed of materials different from the statue itself, being of

a harder or darker substance, considerable iron being mixed with

its other constituents. I noticed one exact form of a bottle or

decanter, large and round, with a small neck. This was smaller than

the forms that surrounded it, but it had the same flat cap-stone

that surmounted all the others. How came these statues here? Who

can tell? Some of our party said the rocks had been washed away

in the progress of ages from around them and left them standing

out boldly by themselves, a puzzle and a wonder to all beholders.

But some of them rise from a level plain, standing alone, with no

rocks near them, and no evidence of any having been washed away.

They rise from the ground, a solid column, and look as though

placed there by the hand of man to mark the spot of some great

event or the tomb of some departed one. Men have their theories,

but the mystery is buried in the darkness of ages and none solve it

satisfactorily. We leave them to their solitude and silence and,

awe-stricken and subdued, turn our faces whence we came.

“A. B.”

ADOPTED CHILDREN.

No children of her own came to the home of Mrs. Bloomer, but she

cared carefully and almost continually for the children of others.

Her residence, whether in the east or the west, was hardly ever

without their presence. Nieces and nephews were nearly always under

her roof, and some of them remained with her until they had homes of

their own. Soon after her removal to Council Bluffs, a little boy

was adopted into her family and his sister came to it a few years

later. These were carefully cared for, instructed and educated, and

remained with her until they took their welfare into their own hands.

Both have now families of their own, one residing in Oregon and the

other in Arizona. The boy, Edward, took her name, and his children

bear it also. For him as a boy and a man, and for his children,

she ever manifested the warmest interest, preparing and sending to

them each year boxes of clothing and other articles designed to add

to their comfort and happiness in their distant home. In the early

days of Council Bluffs, not a few of the teachers in the public

schools resided in her family. They were mostly young women and she

always strove to afford to them a pleasant and comfortable home.

She ever insisted that the wages of young women employed as teachers

by the school board should be the same as those paid to men. Her

position was that, so long as they did an equal amount of work and

did it equally well, they should receive equal pay, and this is an

argument which never has been and never can be successfully answered,

although school boards continue to set it aside as unworthy of their

consideration.

CHRISTIAN LIFE AND WORK.

Mrs. Bloomer was a zealous worker in the church of which she was

a member, as well as in all efforts to promote the spread of true

Christianity. While a resident of Seneca Falls, she contributed her

full share to the various agencies employed to advance the interests

of the parish. She was zealous and faithful in attending church

services and all gatherings whether social or festive to advance

church interests. Modest and retiring in demeanor, she took her place

calmly and pleasantly wherever called upon to labor, and found her

chief reward In the approval of a good conscience.

After her removal to her new home in the West, much additional labor

came to her in the untrodden field in which her lot was cast. When

she took up her residence in Council Bluffs, society was unorganized,

without places of worship, and without any of the religious or moral

agencies of older communities. We have seen in her personal memoirs

how she was very soon called into the work before her. For two years

none of the religious services to which she had been accustomed were

held in the town, except that occasionally a bishop or minister made

his way thither; when they came along, these always found a genuine

welcome in her home. It is remembered that Bishops Kemper and Lee,

and the Rev. Edward W. Peet, were among her guests during the first

year of her residence. They all held religious services in the little

Congregational church building which then stood on Main Street. At

last a young missionary arrived and took up his residence, making

his first home with Mrs. Bloomer in her modest dwelling under the

bluff. And so it was in future years; whenever new clergymen of her

denomination came to begin their work in town, they all uniformly

found a home and resting place in her house until permanent quarters

were secured. Clergymen, temperance lecturers, reformers of almost

all kinds, among them advocates of woman’s enfranchisement, always

found a welcome place at her table. On one occasion, being alone

in the house during her husband’s absence, she was thrown into

great trepidation at finding that her guest for the night (who had

just come up from the bloody fields of Kansas) was armed both with

bowie-knife and revolver; but the night passed in safety, for the

owner of these appalling weapons was one of the noble men who periled

their lives to win that state for freedom.

The building up of a new community was in those days attended

with great labor and called for unflinching courage and steady

perseverance. Churches had to be erected, school-houses built,

libraries established and good works of all kinds encouraged. In all

this Mrs. Bloomer did her full part. The support of the minister and

the building of churches, especially, fell largely upon the women.

They held festivals and collected money for these objects. They

organized and maintained sewing societies and gave entertainments of

various kinds for these objects. Mrs. Bloomer was among the active

workers in this field. She was for many years secretary and treasurer

of the Woman’s Aid Society in her parish, a society which contributed

many thousands of dollars towards the erection of three successive

churches and wholly built the rectory, as well as contributed largely

in other ways towards the support of the parish. In 1880 she was

president of the Art Loan-Exhibition given for the joint benefit of

the city library and the church, one of the most successful efforts

of the kind ever held in the city. On the parish register of her

church under the date of 1856 her name stands as that of the first

woman admitted to membership, and until within a few months of her

decease, when she was prevented by bodily infirmities, she was

a regular attendant upon the services. She was, however, no mere

copyist, taking the words or teachings of others without thought

or examination; but looked into all questions, theological, social

or reformatory, for herself, and her clergymen will bear testimony

to the many discussions they held with her on these and kindred

subjects. One occasion her husband recalls: He came to his dinner at

the usual hour, but found his wife and a visiting clergyman engaged

in warm argument. They had been at it all the forenoon, the breakfast

table standing as left in the morning and all preparations for dinner

being forgotten. Of course, he enjoyed a good laugh at their expense.

HER CHARACTER ANALYZED.