Would there have been no unpleasant feelings in Wendell Phillips'

mind, had Frederick Douglass and Robert Purvis been refused their

seats in a convention of reformers under similar circumstances? and,

had _they_ listened one entire day to debates on their peculiar

fitness for plantation life, and unfitness for the forum and public

assemblies, and been rejected as delegates on the ground of color,

could Wendell Phillips have so far mistaken their real feelings, and

been so insensible to the insults offered them, as to have told a

Convention of men who had just trampled on their most sacred rights,

that "they would no doubt sit with as much interest behind the bar, as

in the Convention"? To stand in that august assembly and maintain the

unpopular heresy of woman's equality was a severe ordeal for a young

man to pass through, and Wendell Phillips, who accepted the odium of

presenting this question to the Convention, and thus earned the

sincere gratitude of all womankind, might be considered as above

criticism, though he may have failed at one point to understand the

feelings of woman. The fact is important to mention, however, to show

that it is almost impossible for the most liberal of men to

understand what liberty means for woman. This sacrifice of human

rights, by men who had assembled from all quarters of the globe to

proclaim universal emancipation, was offered up in the presence of

such women as Lady Byron, Anna Jameson, Amelia Opie, Mary Howitt,

Elizabeth Fry, and our own Lucretia Mott. The clergy with few

exceptions were bitter in their opposition. Although, as

Abolitionists, they had been compelled to fight both Church and Bible

to prove the black man's right to liberty, conscience forbade them to

stretch those sacred limits far enough to give equal liberty to woman.

The leading men who championed the cause of the measure in the

Convention and voted in the affirmative, were Wendell Phillips, George

Thompson, George Bradburn, Mr. Ashurst, Dr. Bowring, and Henry B.

Stanton. Though Daniel O'Connell was not present during the

discussion, having passed out with the President, yet in his first

speech, he referred to the rejected delegates, paying a beautiful

tribute to woman's influence, and saying he should have been happy to

have added the right word in the right place and to have recorded his

vote in favor of human equality..

William Lloyd Garrison, having been delayed at sea, arrived too late

to take part in the debates. Learning on his arrival that the women

had been rejected as delegates, he declined to take his seat in the

Convention; and, through all those interesting discussions on a

subject so near his heart, lasting ten days, he remained a silent

spectator in the gallery. What a sacrifice for a principle so dimly

seen by the few, and so ignorantly ridiculed by the many! Brave, noble

Garrison! May this one act keep his memory fresh forever in the hearts

of his countrywomen!

The one Abolitionist who sustained Mr. Garrison's position, and sat

with him in the gallery, was Nathaniel P. Rogers, editor of the

_Herald of Freedom_, in Concord, New Hampshire, who died in the midst

of the Anti-Slavery struggle. However, the debates in the Convention

had the effect of rousing English minds to thought on the tyranny of

sex, and American minds to the importance of some definite action

toward woman's emancipation.

As Lucretia Mott and Elizabeth Cady Stanton wended their way arm in

arm down Great Queen Street that night, reviewing the exciting scenes

of the day, they agreed to hold a woman's rights convention on their

return to America, as the men to whom they had just listened had

manifested their great need of some education on that question. Thus a

missionary work for the emancipation of woman in "the land of the

free and the home of the brave" was then and there inaugurated. As the

ladies were not allowed to speak in the Convention, they kept up a

brisk fire morning, noon, and night at their hotel on the unfortunate

gentlemen who were domiciled at the same house. Mr. Birney, with his

luggage, promptly withdrew after the first encounter, to some more

congenial haven of rest, while the Rev. Nathaniel Colver, from Boston,

who always fortified himself with six eggs well beaten in a large bowl

at breakfast, to the horror of his host and a circle of æsthetic

friends, stood his ground to the last--his physical proportions being

his shield and buckler, and his Bible (with Colver's commentaries) his

weapon of defence.[7]

The movement for woman's suffrage, both in England and America, may be

dated from this World's Anti-Slavery Convention.

FOOTNOTES:

[6] The ladies of the Convention were fenced off behind a bar and

curtain, similar to those used in churches to screen the choir from

the public gaze.

[7] Some of the English clergy, dancing around with Bible in hand,

shaking it in the faces of the opposition, grew so vehement, that one

would really have thought that they held a commission from high heaven

as the possessors of all truth, and that all progress in human affairs

was to be squared by their interpretation of Scripture. At last George

Bradburn, exasperated with their narrowness and bigotry, sprang to the

floor, and stretching himself to his full height, said: "Prove to me,

gentlemen, that your Bible sanctions the slavery of woman--the

complete subjugation of one-half the race to the other--and I should

feel that the best work I could do for humanity would be to make a

grand bonfire of every Bible in the Universe."

CHAPTER IV.

NEW YORK.

The First Woman's Rights Convention, Seneca Falls, July 19-20,

1848--Property Rights of Women secured--Judge Fine, George

Geddes, and Mr. Hadley pushed the Bill through--Danger of

meddling with well-settled conditions of domestic happiness--Mrs.

Barbara Hertell's will--Richard Hunt's tea-table--The eventful

day--James Mott President--Declaration of sentiments--Convention

in Rochester--Clergy again in opposition with Bible arguments.

New York with its metropolis, fine harbors, great lakes and rivers;

its canals and railroads uniting the extremest limits, and controlling

the commerce of the world; with its wise statesmen and wily

politicians, long holding the same relation to the nation at large

that Paris is said to hold to France, has been proudly called by her

sons and daughters the Empire State.

But the most interesting fact in her history, to woman, is that she

was the first State to emancipate wives from the slavery of the old

common law of England, and to secure to them equal property rights.

This occurred in 1848. Various bills and petitions, with reference to

the civil rights of woman, had been under discussion twelve years, and

the final passage of the property bill was due in no small measure to

two facts. 1st. The constitutional convention in 1847, which compelled

the thinking people of the State, and especially the members of the

convention, to the serious consideration of the fundamental principles

of government. As in the revision of a Constitution the State is for

the time being resolved into its original elements in recognizing the

equality of all the people, one would naturally think that a chance

ray of justice might have fallen aslant the wrongs of woman and

brought to the surface some champion in that convention, especially as

some aggravated cases of cruelty in families of wealth and position

had just at that time aroused the attention of influential men to the

whole question. 2d. Among the Dutch aristocracy of the State there was

a vast amount of dissipation; and as married women could hold neither

property nor children under the common law, solid, thrifty Dutch

fathers were daily confronted with the fact that the inheritance of

their daughters, carefully accumulated, would at marriage pass into

the hands of dissipated, impecunious husbands, reducing them and their

children to poverty and dependence. Hence this influential class of

citizens heartily seconded the efforts of reformers, then demanding

equal property rights in the marriage relation. Thus a wise

selfishness on one side, and principle on the other, pushed the

conservatives and radicals into the same channel, and both alike found

anchor in the statute law of 1848. This was the death-blow to the old

Blackstone code for married women in this country, and ever since

legislation has been slowly, but steadily, advancing toward their

complete equality.

Desiring to know who prompted the legislative action on the Property

Bill in 1848, and the names of our champions who carried it

successfully through after twelve years of discussion and petitioning,

a letter of inquiry was addressed to the Hon. George Geddes of the

twenty-second district--at that time Senator--and received the

following reply:

FAIRMOUNT, ONONDAGA CO., N. Y.,}

_November 25, 1880_.}

MRS. MATILDA JOSLYN GAGE:

_Dear Madam_:--I was much gratified at the receipt of your letter

of the 22d inst., making inquiries into the history of the law of

1848 in regard to married women holding property independently of

their husbands. That the "truth of history" may be made plain, I

have looked over the journals of the Senate and Assembly, and

taken full notes, which I request you to publish, if you put any

part of this letter in print.

I have very distinct recollections of the whole history of this

very radical measure. Judge Fine, of St. Lawrence, was its

originator, and he gave me his reasons for introducing the bill.

He said that he married a lady who had some property of her own,

which he had, all his life, tried to keep distinct from his, that

she might have the benefit of her own, in the event of any

disaster happening to him in pecuniary matters. He had found much

difficulty, growing out of the old laws, in this effort to

protect his wife's interests.

Judge Fine was a stately man, and of general conservative

tendencies, just the one to hold on to the past, but he was a

just man, and did not allow his practice as a lawyer, or his

experience on the bench, to obscure his sense of right. I

followed him, glad of such a leader.

I, too, had special reasons for desiring this change in the law.

I had a young daughter, who, in the then condition of my health,

was quite likely to be left in tender years without a father, and

I very much desired to protect her in the little property I might

be able to leave. I had an elaborate will drawn by my old law

preceptor, Vice-Chancellor Lewis H. Sandford, creating a trust

with all the care and learning he could bring to my aid. But when

the elaborate paper was finished, neither he or I felt satisfied

with it. When the law of 1848 was passed, all I had to do was to

burn this will.

In this connection I wish to say that the Speaker of the

Assembly, Mr. Hadley, gave aid in the passage of this law that

was essential. Very near the end of the session of the

Legislature he assured me that if the bill passed the Senate, he

would see that it passed the House. By examining my notes of the

Assembly's action, you will see that the bill never went to a

committee of the whole in that body, but was sent directly to a

select committee to report complete. It was the power of the

Speaker that in this summary manner overrode the usual

legislative forms. The only reason Mr. Hadley gave me for his

zeal in this matter, was that it was a good bill and ought to

pass.

I believe this law originated with Judge Fine, without any

outside prompting. On the third day of the session he gave notice

of his intention to introduce it, and only one petition was

presented in favor of the bill, and that came from Syracuse, and

was due to the action of my personal friends--I presented it

nearly two months after the bill had been introduced to the

Senate.

The reception of the bill by the Senate showed unlooked-for

support as well as opposition. The measure was so radical, so

extreme, that even its friends had doubts; but the moment any

important amendment was offered, up rose the whole question of

woman's proper place in society, in the family, and everywhere.

We all felt that the laws regulating married women's, as well as

married men's rights, demanded careful revision and adaptation to

our times and to our civilization. But no such revision could be

perfected then, nor has it been since. We meant to strike a hard

blow, and if possible shake the old system of laws to their

foundations, and leave it to other times and wiser councils to

perfect a new system.

We had in the Senate a man of matured years, who had never had a

wife. He was a lawyer well-read in the old books, and versed in

the adjudications which had determined that husband and wife were

but one person, and the husband that person; and he expressed

great fears in regard to meddling with this well-settled

condition of domestic happiness. This champion of the past made

long and very able arguments to show the ruin this law must work,

but he voted for the bill in the final decision.

The bill hung along in Committee of the Whole until March 21st,

when its great opponent being absent, I moved its reference to a

select Committee, with power to report it complete; that is,

matured ready for its passage. So the bill was out of the arena

of debate, and on my motion was ordered to its third reading.

In reply to your inquiries in regard to debates that preceded the

action of 1848, I must say I know of none, and I am quite sure

that in our long discussions no allusion was made to anything of

the kind. Great measures often occupy the thoughts of men and

women, long before they take substantial form and become things

of life, and I shall not dispute any one who says that this

reform had been thought of before 1848. But I do insist the

record shows that Judge Fine is the author of the law which

opened the way to clothe woman with full rights, in regard to

holding, using, and enjoying in every way her own property,

independently of any husband.

I add the following extracts taken from the journals of the

Senate and Assembly of 1848, viz:

Senate journal for 1848, p. 35. January 7th. "Mr. Fine gave

notice that he would, at an early day, ask leave to introduce a

bill for the more effectual protection of the property of married

women."

Jan. 8th, p. 47. "Mr. Fine introduced 'the bill,' and it was

referred to the Judiciary Committee," which consisted of Mr.

Wilkin, Mr. Fine, and Mr. Cole.

Feb. 7th, p. 157. Mr. Wilkin reported the bill favorably, and it

was sent to the Committee of the Whole.

Feb. 23d. Mr. Geddes presented the petition of three hundred

citizens of Syracuse praying for the passage of a law to protect

the rights of married women.

March 1st, p. 242. "The Senate spent some time in Committee of

the Whole" on the bill, and reported progress, and had leave to

sit again.

March 3d, p. 250. The Senate again in Committee of the Whole on

this bill.

March 15th, p. 314. The Senate again in Committee of the Whole on

this bill.

March 21st, p. 352. Mr. Lawrence, from Committee of the Whole,

reported the bill with some amendments. "Thereupon ordered that

said bill be referred to a Select Committee consisting of Mr.

Fine, Mr. Geddes, and Mr. Hawley to report complete."

March 21st, p. 354. "Mr. Geddes, from the Select Committee,

reported complete, with amendments, the bill entitled 'An Act for

the more effectual protection of the property of married women,'

which report was laid on the table."

March 28th, p. 420. "On motion of Mr. Geddes, the Senate then

proceeded to the consideration of the report of the Select

Committee on the bill entitled '(as above)', which report was

agreed to, and the bill ordered to a third reading."

March 29th, p. 443. The bill entitled "(as above)" was read the

third time, and passed--ayes, 23; nays, 1, as follows:

_Ayes_--Messrs. Betts, Bond, Brownson, Burch, Coffin, Cole, Cook,

Cornwell, Fine, Floyd, Fox, Fuller, Geddes, S. H. P. Hall,

Hawley, Johnson, Lawrence, Little, Martin, Smith, Wallon, Wilkin,

Williams, 23.

_Nays_--Clark, 1.

April 7th, p. 541. The bill was returned from the Assembly with

its concurrence.

Its history in the Assembly (_see its Journal_):

March 29th, p. 966. A message from the Senate, requesting the

concurrence of the Assembly to "An Act for the more effectual

protection of the property of married women." On motion of Mr.

Campbell, the bill was sent to a Committee consisting of Messrs.

Campbell, Brigham, Myers, Coe, and Crocker, to report complete

(_see page_ 967).

April 1st, page 1025. Mr. Campbell reported in favor of its

passage, p. 1026. Report agreed to by the House.

April 6, p. 1129. Mr. Collins moved to recommit to a Select

Committee for amendment. His motion failed, and the bill passed

(p. 1130). Ayes, 93. Nays, 9.

The Governor put his name to the bill and thus it became a law.

Please reply to me and let me know whether I have made this

matter clear to you.

Very respectfully,

GEO. GEDDES.

When the first bill was introduced by Judge Hertell in 1836, he made a

very elaborate argument in its favor, covering all objections, and

showing the incontestable justice of the measure. Being too voluminous

for a newspaper report it was published in pamphlet form. His wife,

Barbara Amelia Hertell, dying a few years since, by her will left a

sum for the republication of this exhaustive argument, thus keeping

the memory of her husband green in the hearts of his countrywomen, and

expressing her own high appreciation of its value.

Step by step the Middle and New England States began to modify their

laws, but the Western States, in their Constitutions, were liberal in

starting. Thus the discussions in the constitutional convention and

the Legislature, heralded by the press to every school district,

culminated at last in a woman's rights convention.

The _Seneca County Courier_, a semi-weekly journal, of July 14, 1848,

contained the following startling announcement:

SENECA FALLS CONVENTION.

WOMAN'S RIGHTS CONVENTION.--A Convention to discuss the social,

civil, and religious condition and rights of woman, will be held

in the Wesleyan Chapel, at Seneca Falls, N. Y., on Wednesday and

Thursday, the 19th and 20th of July, current; commencing at 10

o'clock A.M. During the first day the meeting will be exclusively

for women, who are earnestly invited to attend. The public

generally are invited to be present on the second day, when

Lucretia Mott, of Philadelphia, and other ladies and gentlemen,

will address the convention.

This call, without signature, was issued by Lucretia Mott, Martha C.

Wright, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and Mary Ann McClintock. At this time

Mrs. Mott was visiting her sister Mrs. Wright, at Auburn, and

attending the Yearly Meeting of Friends in Western New York. Mrs.

Stanton, having recently removed from Boston to Seneca Falls, finding

the most congenial associations in Quaker families, met Mrs. Mott

incidentally for the first time since her residence there. They at

once returned to the topic they had so often discussed, walking arm

in arm in the streets of London, and Boston, "the propriety of holding

a woman's convention." These four ladies, sitting round the tea-table

of Richard Hunt, a prominent Friend near Waterloo, decided to put

their long-talked-of resolution into action, and before the twilight

deepened into night, the call was written, and sent to the Seneca

County Courier. On Sunday morning they met in Mrs. McClintock's parlor

to write their declaration, resolutions, and to consider subjects for

speeches.[8] As the convention was to assemble in three days, the time

was short for such productions; but having no experience in the _modus

operandi_ of getting up conventions, nor in that kind of literature,

they were quite innocent of the herculean labors they proposed. On the

first attempt to frame a resolution; to crowd a complete thought,

clearly and concisely, into three lines; they felt as helpless and

hopeless as if they had been suddenly asked to construct a steam

engine. And the humiliating fact may as well now be recorded that

before taking the initiative step, those ladies resigned themselves to

a faithful perusal of various masculine productions. The reports of

Peace, Temperance, and Anti-Slavery conventions were examined, but all

alike seemed too tame and pacific for the inauguration of a rebellion

such as the world had never before seen. They knew women had wrongs,

but how to state them was the difficulty, and this was increased from

the fact that they themselves were fortunately organized and

conditioned; they were neither "sour old maids," "childless women,"

nor "divorced wives," as the newspapers declared them to be. While

they had felt the insults incident to sex, in many ways, as every

proud, thinking woman must, in the laws, religion, and literature of

the world, and in the invidious and degrading sentiments and customs

of all nations, yet they had not in their own experience endured the

coarser forms of tyranny resulting from unjust laws, or association

with immoral and unscrupulous men, but they had souls large enough to

feel the wrongs of others, without being scarified in their own flesh.

After much delay, one of the circle took up the Declaration of 1776,

and read it aloud with much spirit and emphasis, and it was at once

decided to adopt the historic document, with some slight changes such

as substituting "all men" for "King George." Knowing that women must

have more to complain of than men under any circumstances possibly

could, and seeing the Fathers had eighteen grievances, a protracted

search was made through statute books, church usages, and the customs

of society to find that exact number. Several well-disposed men

assisted in collecting the grievances, until, with the announcement of

the eighteenth, the women felt they had enough to go before the world

with a good case. One youthful lord remarked, "Your grievances must be

grievous indeed, when you are obliged to go to books in order to find

them out."

The eventful day dawned at last, and crowds in carriages and on foot,

wended their way to the Wesleyan church. When those having charge of

the Declaration, the resolutions, and several volumes of the Statutes

of New York arrived on the scene, lo! the door was locked. However, an

embryo Professor of Yale College was lifted through an open window to

unbar the door; that done, the church was quickly filled. It had been

decided to have no men present, but as they were already on the spot,

and as the women who must take the responsibility of organizing the

meeting, and leading the discussions, shrank from doing either, it was

decided, in a hasty council round the altar, that this was an occasion

when men might make themselves pre-eminently useful. It was agreed

they should remain, and take the laboring oar through the Convention.

James Mott, tall and dignified, in Quaker costume, was called to the

chair; Mary McClintock appointed Secretary, Frederick Douglass, Samuel

Tillman, Ansel Bascom, E. W. Capron, and Thomas McClintock took part

throughout in the discussions. Lucretia Mott, accustomed to public

speaking in the Society of Friends, stated the objects of the

Convention, and in taking a survey of the degraded condition of woman

the world over, showed the importance of inaugurating some movement

for her education and elevation. Elizabeth and Mary McClintock, and

Mrs. Stanton, each read a well-written speech; Martha Wright read some

satirical articles she had published in the daily papers answering the

diatribes on woman's sphere. Ansel Bascom, who had been a member of

the Constitutional Convention recently held in Albany, spoke at length

on the property bill for married women, just passed the Legislature,

and the discussion on woman's rights in that Convention. Samuel

Tillman, a young student of law, read a series of the most

exasperating statutes for women, from English and American jurists,

all reflecting the _tender mercies_ of men toward their wives, in

taking care of their property and protecting them in their civil

rights.

The Declaration having been freely discussed by many present, was

re-read by Mrs. Stanton, and with some slight amendment adopted.

DECLARATION OF SENTIMENTS.

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one

portion of the family of man to assume among the people of the

earth a position different from that which they have hitherto

occupied, but one to which the laws of nature and of nature's God

entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind

requires that they should declare the causes that impel them to

such a course.

We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women

are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with

certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty,

and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights

governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the

consent of the governed. Whenever any form of government becomes

destructive of these ends, it is the right of those who suffer

from it to refuse allegiance to it, and to insist upon the

institution of a new government, laying its foundation on such

principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them

shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established

should not be changed for light and transient causes; and

accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more

disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right

themselves by abolishing the forms to which they were accustomed.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing

invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under

absolute despotism, it is their duty to throw off such

government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

Such has been the patient sufferance of the women under this

government, and such is now the necessity which constrains them

to demand the equal station to which they are entitled.

The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and

usurpations on the part of man toward woman, having in direct

object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her. To

prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has never permitted her to exercise her inalienable right to

the elective franchise.

He has compelled her to submit to laws, in the formation of which

she had no voice.

He has withheld from her rights which are given to the most

ignorant and degraded men--both natives and foreigners.

Having deprived her of this first right of a citizen, the

elective franchise, thereby leaving her without representation in

the halls of legislation, he has oppressed her on all sides.

He has made her, if married, in the eye of the law, civilly dead.

He has taken from her all right in property, even to the wages

she earns.

He has made her, morally, an irresponsible being, as she can

commit many crimes with impunity, provided they be done in the

presence of her husband. In the covenant of marriage, she is

compelled to promise obedience to her husband, he becoming, to

all intents and purposes, her master--the law giving him power to

deprive her of her liberty, and to administer chastisement.

He has so framed the laws of divorce, as to what shall be the

proper causes, and in case of separation, to whom the

guardianship of the children shall be given, as to be wholly

regardless of the happiness of women--the law, in all cases,

going upon a false supposition of the supremacy of man, and

giving all power into his hands.

After depriving her of all rights as a married woman, if single,

and the owner of property, he has taxed her to support a

government which recognizes her only when her property can be

made profitable to it.

He has monopolized nearly all the profitable employments, and

from those she is permitted to follow, she receives but a scanty

remuneration. He closes against her all the avenues to wealth and

distinction which he considers most honorable to himself. As a

teacher of theology, medicine, or law, she is not known.

He has denied her the facilities for obtaining a thorough

education, all colleges being closed against her.

He allows her in Church, as well as State, but a subordinate

position, claiming Apostolic authority for her exclusion from the

ministry, and, with some exceptions, from any public

participation in the affairs of the Church.

He has created a false public sentiment by giving to the world a

different code of morals for men and women, by which moral

delinquencies which exclude women from society, are not only

tolerated, but deemed of little account in man.

He has usurped the prerogative of Jehovah himself, claiming it as

his right to assign for her a sphere of action, when that belongs

to her conscience and to her God.

He has endeavored, in every way that he could, to destroy her

confidence in her own powers, to lessen her self-respect, and to

make her willing to lead a dependent and abject life.

Now, in view of this entire disfranchisement of one-half the

people of this country, their social and religious

degradation--in view of the unjust laws above mentioned, and

because women do feel themselves aggrieved, oppressed, and

fraudulently deprived of their most sacred rights, we insist that

they have immediate admission to all the rights and privileges

which belong to them as citizens of the United States.

In entering upon the great work before us, we anticipate no small

amount of misconception, misrepresentation, and ridicule; but we

shall use every instrumentality within our power to effect our

object. We shall employ agents, circulate tracts, petition the

State and National legislatures, and endeavor to enlist the

pulpit and the press in our behalf. We hope this Convention will

be followed by a series of Conventions embracing every part of

the country.

The following resolutions were discussed by Lucretia Mott, Thomas and

Mary Ann McClintock, Amy Post, Catharine A. F. Stebbins, and others,

and were adopted:

WHEREAS, The great precept of nature is conceded to be, that "man

shall pursue his own true and substantial happiness." Blackstone

in his Commentaries remarks, that this law of Nature being

coeval with mankind, and dictated by God himself, is of course

superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the

globe, in all countries and at all times; no human laws are of

any validity if contrary to this, and such of them as are valid,

derive all their force, and all their validity, and all their

authority, mediately and immediately, from this original;

therefore.

_Resolved_, That such laws as conflict, in any way, with the true

and substantial happiness of woman, are contrary to the great

precept of nature and of no validity, for this is "superior in

obligation to any other."

_Resolved_, That all laws which prevent woman from occupying such

a station in society as her conscience shall dictate, or which

place her in a position inferior to that of man, are contrary to

the great precept of nature, and therefore of no force or

authority.

_Resolved_, That woman is man's equal--was intended to be so by

the Creator, and the highest good of the race demands that she

should be recognized as such.

_Resolved_, That the women of this country ought to be

enlightened in regard to the laws under which they live, that

they may no longer publish their degradation by declaring

themselves satisfied with their present position, nor their

ignorance, by asserting that they have all the rights they want.

_Resolved_, That inasmuch as man, while claiming for himself

intellectual superiority, does accord to woman moral superiority,

it is pre-eminently his duty to encourage her to speak and teach,

as she has an opportunity, in all religious assemblies.

_Resolved_, That the same amount of virtue, delicacy, and

refinement of behavior that is required of woman in the social

state, should also be required of man, and the same

transgressions should be visited with equal severity on both man

and woman.

_Resolved_, That the objection of indelicacy and impropriety,

which is so often brought against woman when she addresses a

public audience, comes with a very ill-grace from those who

encourage, by their attendance, her appearance on the stage, in

the concert, or in feats of the circus.

_Resolved_, That woman has too long rested satisfied in the

circumscribed limits which corrupt customs and a perverted

application of the Scriptures have marked out for her, and that

it is time she should move in the enlarged sphere which her great

Creator has assigned her.

_Resolved_, That it is the duty of the women of this country to

secure to themselves their sacred right to the elective

franchise.

_Resolved_, That the equality of human rights results necessarily

from the fact of the identity of the race in capabilities and

responsibilities.

_Resolved, therefore_, That, being invested by the Creator with

the same capabilities, and the same consciousness of

responsibility for their exercise, it is demonstrably the right

and duty of woman, equally with man, to promote every righteous

cause by every righteous means; and especially in regard to the

great subjects of morals and religion, it is self-evidently her

right to participate with her brother in teaching them, both in

private and in public, by writing and by speaking, by any

instrumentalities proper to be used, and in any assemblies proper

to be held; and this being a self-evident truth growing out of

the divinely implanted principles of human nature, any custom or

authority adverse to it, whether modern or wearing the hoary

sanction of antiquity, is to be regarded as a self-evident

falsehood, and at war with mankind.

At the last session Lucretia Mott offered and spoke to the following

resolution:

_Resolved_, That the speedy success of our cause depends upon the

zealous and untiring efforts of both men and women, for the

overthrow of the monopoly of the pulpit, and for the securing to

woman an equal participation with men in the various trades,

professions, and commerce.

The only resolution that was not unanimously adopted was the ninth,

urging the women of the country to secure to themselves the elective

franchise. Those who took part in the debate feared a demand for the

right to vote would defeat others they deemed more rational, and make

the whole movement ridiculous.

But Mrs. Stanton and Frederick Douglass seeing that the power to

choose rulers and make laws, was the right by which all others could

be secured, persistently advocated the resolution, and at last carried

it by a small majority.

Thus it will be seen that the Declaration and resolutions in the very

first Convention, demanded all the most radical friends of the

movement have since claimed--such as equal rights in the universities,

in the trades and professions; the right to vote; to share in all

political offices, honors, and emoluments; to complete equality in

marriage, to personal freedom, property, wages, children; to make

contracts; to sue, and be sued; and to testify in courts of justice.

At this time the condition of married women under the Common Law, was

nearly as degraded as that of the slave on the Southern plantation.

The Convention continued through two entire days, and late into the

evenings. The deepest interest was manifested to its close.

The proceedings were extensively published, unsparingly ridiculed by

the press, and denounced by the pulpit, much to the surprise and

chagrin of the leaders. Being deeply in earnest, and believing their

demands pre-eminently wise and just, they were wholly unprepared to

find themselves the target for the jibes and jeers of the nation. The

Declaration was signed by one hundred men, and women, many of whom

withdrew their names as soon as the storm of ridicule began to break.

The comments of the press were carefully preserved,[9] and it is

curious to see that the same old arguments, and objections rife at the

start, are reproduced by the press of to-day. But the brave protests

sent out from this Convention touched a responsive chord in the hearts

of women all over the country.

Conventions were held soon after in Ohio, Massachusetts, Indiana,

Pennsylvania, and at different points in New York.

Mr. Douglass, in his paper, _The North Star_, of July 28, 1848, had

the following editorial leader:

THE RIGHTS OF WOMEN.--One of the most interesting events of the

past week, was the holding of what is technically styled a

Woman's Rights Convention at Seneca Falls. The speaking,

addresses, and resolutions of this extraordinary meeting were

almost wholly conducted by women; and although they evidently

felt themselves in a novel position, it is but simple justice to

say that their whole proceedings were characterized by marked

ability and dignity. No one present, we think, however much he

might be disposed to differ from the views advanced by the

leading speakers on that occasion, will fail to give them credit

for brilliant talents and excellent dispositions. In this

meeting, as in other deliberative assemblies, there were frequent

differences of opinion and animated discussion; but in no case

was there the slightest absence of good feeling and decorum.

Several interesting documents setting forth the rights as well as

grievances of women were read. Among these was a Declaration of

Sentiments, to be regarded as the basis of a grand movement for

attaining the civil, social, political, and religious rights of

women. We should not do justice to our own convictions, or to the

excellent persons connected with this infant movement, if we did

not in this connection offer a few remarks on the general subject

which the Convention met to consider and the objects they seek to

attain. In doing so, we are not insensible that the bare mention

of this truly important subject in any other than terms of

contemptuous ridicule and scornful disfavor, is likely to excite

against us the fury of bigotry and the folly of prejudice. A

discussion of the rights of animals would be regarded with far

more complacency by many of what are called the _wise_ and the

_good_ of our land, than would be a discussion of the rights of

women. It is, in their estimation, to be guilty of evil thoughts,

to think that woman is entitled to equal rights with man. Many

who have at last made the discovery that the negroes have some

rights as well as other members of the human family, have yet to

be convinced that women are entitled to any. Eight years ago a

number of persons of this description actually abandoned the

anti-slavery cause, lest by giving their influence in that

direction they might possibly be giving countenance to the

dangerous heresy that woman, in respect to rights, stands on an

equal footing with man. In the judgment of such persons the

American slave system, with all its concomitant horrors, is less

to be deplored than this _wicked_ idea. It is perhaps needless to

say, that we cherish little sympathy for such sentiments or

respect for such prejudices. Standing as we do upon the

watch-tower of human freedom, we can not be deterred from an

expression of our approbation of any movement, however humble,

to improve and elevate the character of any members of the human

family. While it is impossible for us to go into this subject at

length, and dispose of the various objections which are often

urged against such a doctrine as that of female equality, we are

free to say that in respect to political rights, we hold woman to

be justly entitled to all we claim for man. We go farther, and

express our conviction that all political rights which it is

expedient for man to exercise, it is equally so for woman. All

that distinguishes man as an intelligent and accountable being,

is equally true of woman; and if that government only is just

which governs by the free consent of the governed, there can be

no reason in the world for denying to woman the exercise of the

elective franchise, or a hand in making and administering the

laws of the land. Our doctrine is that "right is of no sex." We

therefore bid the women engaged in this movement our humble

Godspeed.

THE ROCHESTER CONVENTION, AUGUST 2, 1848.

Those who took part in the Convention at Seneca Falls, finding at the

end of the two days, there were still so many new points for

discussion, and that the gift of tongues had been vouchsafed to them,

adjourned, to meet in Rochester in two weeks. Amy Post, Sarah D. Fish,

Sarah C. Owen, and Mary H. Hallowell, were the Committee of

Arrangements. This Convention was called for August 2d, and so well

advertised in the daily papers, that at the appointed hour, the

Unitarian Church was filled to overflowing.

Amy Post called the meeting to order, and stated that at a gathering

the previous evening in Protection Hall, Rhoda De Garmo, Sarah Fish,

and herself, were appointed a committee to nominate officers for the

Convention, and they now proposed Abigail Bush, for President; Laura

Murray, for Vice-President; Elizabeth McClintock, Sarah Hallowell, and

Catherine A. F. Stebbins, for Secretaries. Mrs. Mott, Mrs. Stanton,

and Mrs. McClintock, thought it a most hazardous experiment to have a

woman President, and stoutly opposed it.

To write a Declaration and Resolutions, to make a speech, and debate,

had taxed their powers to the uttermost; and now, with such feeble

voices and timid manners, without the slightest knowledge of Cushing's

Manual, or the least experience in public meetings, how could a woman

preside? They were on the verge of leaving the Convention in disgust,

but Amy Post and Rhoda De Garmo assured them that by the same power by

which they had resolved, declared, discussed, debated, they could also

preside at a public meeting, if they would but make the experiment.

And as the vote of the majority settled the question on the side of

woman, Abigail Bush took the chair, and the calm way she assumed the

duties of the office, and the admirable manner in which she discharged

them, soon reconciled the opposition to the seemingly ridiculous

experiment.

The proceedings were opened with prayer, by the Rev. Mr. Wicher, of

the Free-will Baptist Church. Even at that early day, there were many

of the liberal clergymen in favor of equal rights for women. During

the reading of the minutes of the preliminary meeting by the

Secretary, much uneasiness was manifested concerning the low voices of

women, and cries of "Louder, louder!" drowned every other sound, when

the President, on rising, said:

Friends, we present ourselves here before you, as an oppressed

class, with trembling frames and faltering tongues, and we do not

expect to be able to speak so as to be heard by all at first, but

we trust we shall have the sympathy of the audience, and that you

will bear with our weakness now in the infancy of the movement.

Our trust in the omnipotency of right is our only faith that we

shall succeed.

As the appointed Secretaries could not be heard, Sarah Anthony Burtis,

an experienced Quaker school-teacher, whose voice had been well

trained in her profession, volunteered to fill the duties of that

office, and she read the reports and documents of the Convention with

a clear voice and confident manner, to the great satisfaction of her

more timid coadjutors.

Several gentlemen took part in the debates of this Convention. Some in

favor, some opposed, and others willing to make partial concessions to

the demands as set forth in the Declaration and Resolutions. Frederick

Douglass, William C. Nell, and William C. Bloss advocated the

emancipation of women from all the artificial disabilities, imposed by

false customs, creeds, and codes. Milo Codding, Mr. Sulley, Mr.

Pickard, and a Mr. Colton, of Connecticut, thought "woman's sphere was

home," and that she should remain in it; he would seriously deprecate

her occupying the pulpit.

Lucretia Mott replied, that the gentleman from New Haven had objected

to woman occupying the pulpit, and indeed she could scarcely see how

any one educated in New Haven, Ct., could think otherwise than he did.

She said, we had all got our notions too much from the clergy, instead

of the Bible. The Bible, she contended, had none of the prohibitions

in regard to women; and spoke of the "honorable women not a few,"

etc., and desired Mr. Colton to read his Bible over again, and see if

there was anything there to prohibit woman from being a religious

teacher. She then complimented the members of that church for opening

their doors to a Woman's Eights Convention, and said that a few years

ago, the Female Moral Reform Society of Philadelphia applied for the

use of a church in that city, in which to hold one of their meetings;

they were only allowed the use of the basement, and on condition that

none of the women should speak at the meeting. Accordingly, a D.D. was

called upon to preside, and another to read the ladies' report of the

Society.

Near the close of the morning session, a young bride in traveling

dress,[10] accompanied by her husband, slowly walked up the aisle, and

asked the privilege of saying a few words, which was readily granted.

Being introduced to the audience, she said, on her way westward,

hearing of the Convention, she had waited over a train, to add her

mite in favor of the demand now made, by the true women of this

generation:

It is with diffidence that I speak upon this question before us,

not a diffidence resulting from any doubt of the worthiness of

the cause, but from the fear that its depth and power can be but

meagerly portrayed by me.... Woman's rights--her civil

rights--equal with man's--not an equality of moral and religious

influence, for who dares to deny her that?--but an equality in

the exercise of her own powers, and a right to use all the

sources of erudition within the reach of man, to build unto

herself a name for her talents, energy, and integrity. We do not

positively say that our intellect is as capable as man's to

assume, and at once to hold, these rights, or that our hearts are

as willing to enter into his actions; for if we did not believe

it, we would not contend for them, and if men did not believe it,

they would not withhold them with a smothered silence.... In

closing, she said: There will be one effect, perhaps unlooked

for, if we are raised to equal administration with man. It will

classify intellect. The heterogeneous triflings which now, I am

very sorry to say, occupy so much of our time, will be neglected;

fashion's votaries will silently fall off; dishonest exertions

for rank in society will be scorned; extravagance in toilet will

be detested; that meager and worthless pride of station will be

forgotten; the honest earnings of dependents will be paid;

popular demagogues crushed; impostors unpatronized; true genius

sincerely encouraged; and, above all, pawned integrity redeemed!

And why? Because enfranchised woman then will feel the burdens of

her responsibilities, and can strive for elevation, and will

reach all knowledge within her grasp.... If all this is

accomplished, man need not fear pomposity, fickleness, or an

unhealthy enthusiasm at his dear fireside; we can be as dutiful,

submissive, endearing as daughters, wives, and mothers, even if

we hang the wreath of domestic harmony upon the eagle's talons.

Thus for twenty minutes the young and beautiful stranger held her

audience spell-bound with her eloquence, in a voice whose pathos

thrilled every heart. Her husband, hat and cane in hand, remained

standing, leaning against a pillar near the altar, and seemed a most

delighted, nay, reverential listener. It was a scene never to be

forgotten, and one of the most pleasing incidents of the Convention.

Sarah Owen read an address on woman's place and pay in the world of

work. In closing, she said:

An experienced cashier of this city remarked to me that women

might be as good book-keepers as men; but men have monopolized

every lucrative situation, from the dry-goods merchant down to

whitewashing. Who does not feel, as she sees a stout, athletic

man standing behind the counter measuring lace, ribbons, and

tape, that he is monopolizing a woman's place, while thousands of

rich acres in our western world await his coming? This year, a

woman, for the first time, has taken her place in one of our

regular medical colleges. We rejoice to hear that by her dignity

of manner, application to study, and devotion to the several

branches of the profession she has chosen, she has secured the

respect of her professors and class, and reflected lasting honor

upon her whole sex. Thus we hail, in Elizabeth Blackwell, a

pioneer for woman in this profession.

It is by this inverted order of society that woman is obliged to

ply the needle by day and by night, to procure even a scanty

pittance for her dependent family. Let men become producers, as

nature has designed them, and women be educated to fill all those

stations which require less physical strength, and we should soon

modify many of our social evils. I am informed by the

seamstresses of this city, that they get but thirty cents for

making a satin vest, and from twelve to thirty for making pants,

and coats in the same proportion. Man has such a contemptible

idea of woman, that he thinks she can not even sew as well as he

can; and he often goes to a tailor, and pays him double and even

treble for making a suit, when it merely passes through his

hands, after a woman has made every stitch of it so neatly that

he discovers no difference. Who does not see gross injustice in

this inequality of wages and violation of rights? To prove that

woman is capable of prosecuting the mercantile business, we have

a noble example in this city in Mrs. Gifford, who has sustained

herself with credit. She has bravely triumphed over all obloquy

and discouragement attendant on such a novel experiment, and made

for herself an independent living.

In the fields of benevolence, woman has done great and noble

works for the safety and stability of the nation. When man shall

see the wisdom of recognizing a co-worker in her, then may be

looked for the dawning of a perfect day, when woman shall stand

where God designed she should, on an even platform with man

himself.

Mrs. Roberts, who had been requested to investigate the wrongs of the

laboring classes, and to invite that oppressed portion of the

community to attend the Convention, and take part in its

deliberations, made some appropriate remarks relative to the

intolerable servitude and small remuneration paid to the working-class

of women. She reported the average price of labor for seamstresses to

be from 31 to 38 cents a day, and board from $1.25 to $1.50 per week

to be deducted therefrom, and they were generally obliged to take half

or more in due bills, which were payable in goods at certain stores,

thereby obliging them many times to pay extortionate prices.

Mrs. Galloy corroborated the statement, having herself experienced

some of the oppressions of this portion of our citizens, and expressed

her gratitude that the subject was claiming the attention of this

benevolent and intelligent class of community. It did not require much

argument, to reconcile all who took part in the debates, to woman's

right to equal wages for equal work, but the gentlemen seemed more

disturbed as to the effect of equality in the family. With the old

idea of a divinely ordained head, and that, in all cases, the man,

whether wise or foolish, educated or ignorant, sober or drunk, such a

relation to them did not seem feasible. Mr. Sully asked, when the two

heads disagree, who must decide? There is no Lord Chancellor to whom

to apply, and does not St. Paul strictly enjoin obedience to husbands,

and that man shall be head of the woman?

Lucretia Mott replied that in the Society of Friends she had never

known any difficulty to arise on account of the wife's not having

promised _obedience_ in the marriage contract. She had never known any

mode of decision except an appeal to reason; and, although in some of

the meetings of this Society, women are placid on an equality, none of

the results so much dreaded had occurred. She said that many of the

opposers of Woman's Rights, who bid us to obey the bachelor St. Paul,

themselves reject his counsel. He advised them not to marry. In

general answer she would quote, "One is your master, even Christ."

Although Paul enjoins silence on women in the Church, yet he gives

directions how they should appear when publicly speaking, and we have

scriptural accounts of honorable women not a few who were religious

teachers, viz: Phebe, Priscilla, Tryphena, Triphosa, and the four

daughters of Philip, and various others.

Mrs. Stanton thought the gentleman might be easily answered; saying

that the strongest will or the superior intellect now governs the

household, as it will in the new order. She knew many a woman, who, to

all intents and purposes, is at the head of her family.

Mr. Pickard asked who, after marriage, should hold the property, and

whose name should be retained. He thought an umpire necessary. He did

not see but all business must cease until the consent of both parties

be obtained. He saw an impossibility of introducing such rules into

society. The Gospel had established the unity and oneness of the

married pair.

Mrs. Stanton said she thought the Gospel, rightly understood, pointed

to a oneness of equality, not subordination, and that property should

be jointly held. She could see no reason why marriage by false creeds

should be made a degradation to woman; and, as to the name, the custom

of taking the husband's name is not universal. When a man has a bad

name in any sense, he might be the gainer by burying himself under the

good name of his wife. This last winter a Mr. Cruikshanks applied to

our Legislature to have his name changed. Now, if he had taken his

wife's name in the beginning, he might have saved the Legislature the

trouble of considering the propriety of releasing the man from such a

burden to be entailed on the third and fourth generation. When a slave

escapes from a Southern plantation, he at once takes a name as the

first step in liberty--the first assertion of individual identity. A

woman's dignity is equally involved in a life-long name, to mark her

individuality. We can not overestimate the demoralizing effect on

woman herself, to say nothing of society at large, for her to consent

thus to merge her existence so wholly in that of another.

A well-written speech was read by William C. Nell, which Mrs. Mott

thought too flattering. She said woman is now sufficiently developed

to prefer justice to compliment.

A letter was read from Gerrit Smith, approving cordially of the object

of the Convention.

Mrs. Stanton read the Declaration that was adopted at Seneca Falls,

and urged those present who did not agree with its sentiments, to make

their objections then and there. She hoped if there were any clergymen

present, they would not keep silent during the Convention and then on

Sunday do as their brethren did in Seneca Falls--use their pulpits

throughout the city to denounce them, where they could not, of course,

be allowed to reply.

The resolutions[11] were freely discussed by Amy Post, Rhoda De Garmo,

Ann Edgeworth, Sarah D. Fish, and others. While Mrs. Mott and Mrs.

Stanton spoke in their favor, they thought they were too tame, and

wished for some more stirring declarations. Elizabeth McClintock read,

in an admirable manner, a spirited poetical reply, from the pen of

Maria Weston Chapman, to "A Clerical Appeal" published in 1840. Mrs.

Chapman was one of the grand women in Boston, who, during the early

days of Anti-Slavery, gave her unceasing efforts to that struggle. Her

pen was a power in the journals and magazines, and her presence an

inspiration in their fairs and conventions. When Abby Kelly, Angelina

Grimke, and Lucretia Mott first began to speak to promiscuous

assemblies in Anti-Slavery Conventions, "a clerical appeal" was issued

and sent to all the clergymen in New England, calling on them to

denounce in their pulpits this unmannerly and unchristian proceeding.

Sermons were preached, portraying in the darkest colors the fearful

results to the Church, the State, and the home, in thus encouraging

women to enter public life.

"PASTORAL LETTER."

Extract from a Pastoral Letter of "the General Association of

Massachusetts (Orthodox) to the Churches under their care"--1837:

III. We invite your attention to the dangers which at present

seem to threaten the female character with wide-spread and

permanent injury.

The appropriate duties and influence of woman are clearly stated

in the New Testament. Those duties and that influence are

unobtrusive and private, but the source of mighty power. When the

mild, dependent, softening influence of woman upon the sternness

of man's opinions is fully exercised, society feels the effects

of it in a thousand forms. The power of woman is her dependence,

flowing from the consciousness of that weakness which God has

given her for her protection, (!) and which keeps her in those

departments of life that form the character of individuals, and

of the nation. There are social influences which females use in

promoting piety and the great objects of Christian benevolence

which we can not too highly commend.

We appreciate the unostentatious prayers and efforts of woman in

advancing the cause of religion at home and abroad; in

Sabbath-schools; in leading religious inquirers to the pastors

(!) for instruction; and in all such associated effort as becomes

the modesty of her sex; and earnestly hope that she may abound

more and more in these labors of piety and love. But when she

assumes the place and tone of man as a public reformer, our care

and protection of her seem unnecessary; we put ourselves in

self-defence (!) against her; she yields the power which God has

given her for her protection, and her character becomes

unnatural. If the vine, whose strength and beauty is to lean upon

the trellis-work, and half conceal its clusters, thinks to assume

the independence and the overshadowing nature of the elm, it will

not only cease to bear fruit, but fall in shame and dishonor into

the dust. We can not, therefore, but regret the mistaken conduct

of those who encourage females to bear an obtrusive and

ostentatious part in measures of reform, and countenance any of

that sex who so far forget themselves as to itinerate in the

character of public lecturers and teachers. We especially deplore

the intimate acquaintance and promiscuous conversation of females

with regard to things which ought not to be named; by which that

modesty and delicacy which is the charm of domestic life, and

which constitutes the true influence of woman in society, is

consumed, and the way opened, as we apprehend, for degeneracy and

ruin.

We say these things not to discourage proper influences against

sin, but to secure such reformation (!) as we believe is

Scriptural, and will be permanent.

William Lloyd Garrison, in a cordial letter, accompanying the above

extract, which he had copied for us with his own hand from the files

of _The Liberator_, said: "This 'Clerical Bull' was fulminated with

special reference to those two noble South Carolina women, Sarah M.

and Angelina E. Grimke, who were at that time publicly pleading for

those in bonds as bound with them, while on a visit to Massachusetts.

It was written by the Rev. Dr. Nehemiah Adams, of Boston, author of 'A

South-side View of Slavery.'"

Maria Weston Chapman's amusing answer in rhyme, shows that the days

for ecclesiastical bulls were fast passing away, when women, even,

could thus make light of them.

MRS. CHAPMAN'S POEM.

"THE TIMES THAT TRY MEN'S SOULS."

Confusion has seized us, and all things go wrong,

The women have leaped from "their spheres,"

And, instead of fixed stars, shoot as comets along,

And are setting the world by the ears!

In courses erratic they're wheeling through space,

In brainless confusion and meaningless chase.

In vain do our knowing ones try to compute

Their return to the orbit designed;

They're glanced at a moment, then onward they shoot,

And are neither "to hold nor to bind;"

So freely they move in their chosen ellipse,

The "Lords of Creation" do fear an eclipse.

They've taken a notion to speak for themselves,

And are wielding the tongue and the pen;

They've mounted the rostrum; the termagant elves,

And--oh horrid!--are talking to men!

With faces unblanched in our presence they come

To harangue us, they say, in behalf of the dumb.

They insist on their right to petition and pray,

That St. Paul, in Corinthians, has given them rules

For appearing in public; despite what those say

Whom we've trained to instruct them in schools;

But vain such instructions, if women may scan

And quote texts of Scripture to favor their plan.

Our grandmothers' learning consisted of yore

In spreading their generous boards;

In twisting the distaff, or mopping the floor,

And _obeying the will of their lords_.

Now, misses may reason, and think, and debate,

Till unquestioned submission is quite out of date.

Our clergy have preached on the sin and the shame

Of woman, when out of "her sphere,"

And labored _divinely_ to ruin her fame,

And shorten this horrid career;

But for spiritual guidance no longer they look

To Fulsom, or Winslow, or learned Parson Cook.

Our wise men have tried to exorcise in vain

The turbulent spirits abroad;

As well might we deal with the fetterless main,

Or conquer ethereal essence with sword;

Like the devils of Milton, they rise from each blow,

With spirit unbroken, insulting the foe.

Our patriot fathers, of eloquent fame,

Waged war against tangible forms;

Aye, _their_ foes were men--and if ours were the same,

_We_ might speedily quiet their storms;

But, ah! their descendants enjoy not such bliss--

The assumptions of Britain were nothing to this.

Could we but array all our force in the field,

We'd teach these usurpers of power

That their bodily safety demands they should yield,

And in the presence of manhood should cower;

But, alas! for our tethered and impotent state,

Chained by notions of knighthood--we can but debate.

Oh! shade of the prophet Mahomet, arise!

Place woman again in "her sphere,"

And teach that her soul was not born for the skies,

But to flutter a brief moment here.

This doctrine of Jesus, as preached up by Paul,

If embraced in its spirit, will ruin us all.

--_Lords of Creation_.

On reading the "Pastoral Letter," our Quaker poet, John Greenleaf

Whittier, poured out his indignation on the New England clergy in

thrilling denunciations. Mr. Whittier early saw that woman's only

protection against religious and social tyranny, could be found in

political equality. In the midst of the fierce conflicts in the

Anti-Slavery Conventions of 1839 and '40, on the woman question _per

se_, Mr. Whittier remarked to Lucretia Mott, "_Give woman the right to

vote_, and you end all these persecutions by reform and church

organizations."

THE PASTORAL LETTER.

So, this is all--the utmost reach

Of priestly power the mind to fetter!

When laymen think--when women preach--

A war of words--a "Pastoral Letter!"

Now, shame upon ye, parish Popes!

Was it thus with those, your predecessors,

Who sealed with racks, and fire, and ropes

Their loving-kindness to transgressors?

A "Pastoral Letter," grave and dull--

Alas! in hoof and horns and features,

How different is your Brookfield bull,

From him who bellows from St. Peter's!

Your pastoral rights and powers from harm,

Think ye, can words alone preserve them?

Your wiser fathers taught the arm

And sword of temporal power to serve them.

Oh, glorious days--when Church and State

Were wedded by your spiritual fathers!

And on submissive shoulders sat

Yours Wilsons and your Cotton Mathers.

No vile "itinerant" then could mar

The beauty of your tranquil Zion,

But at his peril of the scar

Of hangman's whip and branding-iron.

Then, wholesome laws relieved the Church

Of heretic and mischief-maker.

And priest and bailiff joined in search,

By turns, of Papist, witch, and Quaker!

The stocks were at each church's door,

The gallows stood on Boston Common,

A Papist's ears the pillory bore--

The gallows-rope, a Quaker woman!

Your fathers dealt not as ye deal

With "non-professing" frantic teachers;

They bored the tongue with red-hot steel,

And flayed the backs of "female preachers."

Old Newbury, had her fields a tongue,

And Salem's streets could tell their story,

Of fainting woman dragged along,

Gashed by the whip, accursed and gory!

And will ye ask me, why this taunt

Of memories sacred from the scorner?

And why with reckless hand I plant

A nettle on the graves ye honor?

Not to reproach New England's dead

This record from the past I summon,

Of manhood to the scaffold led,

And suffering and heroic woman.

No--for yourselves alone, I turn

The pages of intolerance over,

That, in their spirit, dark and stern,

Ye haply may your own discover!

For, if ye claim the "pastoral right,"

To silence freedom's voice of warning,

And from your precincts shut the light

Of Freedom's day around ye dawning;

If when an earthquake voice of power,

And signs in earth and heaven, are showing

That forth, in the appointed hour,

The Spirit of the Lord is going!

And, with that Spirit, Freedom's light

On kindred, tongue, and people breaking,

Whose slumbering millions, at the sight,

In glory and in strength are waking!

When for the sighing of the poor,

And for the needy, God hath risen,

And chains are breaking, and a door

Is opening for the souls in prison!

If then ye would, with puny hands,

Arrest the very work of Heaven,

And bind anew the evil bands

Which God's right arm of power hath riven,--

What marvel that, in many a mind,

Those darker deeds of bigot madness

Are closely with your own combined,

Yet "less in anger than in sadness"?

What marvel, if the people learn

To claim the right of free opinion?

What marvel, if at times they spurn

The ancient yoke of your dominion?

A glorious remnant linger yet,

Whose lips are wet at Freedom's fountains,

The coming of whose welcome feet

Is beautiful upon our mountains!

Men, who the gospel tidings bring

Of Liberty and Love forever,

Whose joy is an abiding spring,

Whose peace is as a gentle river!

But ye, who scorn the thrilling tale

Of Carolina's high-souled daughters,

Which echoes here the mournful wail

Of sorrow from Edisto's waters,

Close while ye may the public ear--

With malice vex, with slander wound them--

The pure and good shall throng to hear,

And tried and manly hearts surround them.

Oh, ever may the power which led

Their way to such a fiery trial,

And strengthened womanhood to tread

The wine-press of such self-denial,

Be round them in an evil land,

With wisdom and with strength from Heaven,

With Miriam's voice, and Judith's hand,

And Deborah's song, for triumph given!

And what are ye who strive with God

Against the ark of His salvation,

Moved by the breath of prayer abroad,

With blessings for a dying nation?

What, but the stubble and the hay

To perish, even as flax consuming,

With all that bars His glorious way,

Before the brightness of His coming?

And thou, sad Angel, who so long

Hast waited for the glorious token,

That Earth from all her bonds of wrong

To liberty and light has broken--

Angel of Freedom! soon to thee

The sounding trumpet shall be given,

And over Earth's full jubilee

Shall deeper joy be felt in Heaven!

In answer to the many objections made, by gentlemen present, to

granting to woman the right of suffrage, Frederick Douglass replied in

a long, argumentative, and eloquent appeal, for the complete equality

of woman in all the rights that belong to any human soul. He thought

the true basis of rights was the capacity of individuals; and as for

himself, he should not dare claim a right that he would not concede to

woman.

This Convention continued through three sessions, and was crowded with

an attentive audience to the hour of adjournment. The daily papers

made fair reports, and varied editorial comments, which, being widely

copied, called out spicy controversies in different parts of the

country. The resolutions and discussions regarding woman's right to

enter the professions, encouraged many to prepare themselves for

medicine and the ministry. Though few women responded to the demand

for political rights, many at once saw the importance of equality in

the world of work.

The Seneca Falls Declaration was adopted, and signed by large numbers

of influential men and women of Rochester and vicinity, and at a late

hour the Convention adjourned, in the language of its President, "with

hearts overflowing with gratitude."

FOOTNOTES:

[8] The antique mahogany center-table on which this historic document

was written now stands in the parlor of the McClintock family in

Philadelphia.

[9] See Appendix.

[10] Rebecca Sanford, now Postmaster at Mt. Morris, N. Y.

[11] See Appendix.

CHAPTER V.

REMINISCENCES.

EMILY COLLINS.

The first Suffrage Society--Methodist class-leader whips his

wife--Theology enchains the soul--The status of women and slaves

the same--The first medical college opened to women, Geneva, N.

Y.--Petitions to the Legislature laughed at, and laid on the

table--Dependence woman's best protection; her weakness her

sweetest charm--Dr. Elizabeth Blackwell's letter.

I was born and lived almost forty years in South Bristol, Ontario

County--one of the most secluded spots in Western New York; but from

the earliest dawn of reason I pined for that freedom of thought and

action that was then denied to all womankind. I revolted in spirit

against the customs of society and the laws of the State that crushed

my aspirations and debarred me from the pursuit of almost every object

worthy of an intelligent, rational mind. But not until that meeting at

Seneca Falls in 1848, of the pioneers in the cause, gave this feeling

of unrest form and voice, did I take action. Then I summoned a few

women in our neighborhood together and formed an Equal Suffrage

Society, and sent petitions to our Legislature; but our efforts were

little known beyond our circle, as we were in communication with no

person or newspaper. Yet there was enough of wrong in our narrow

horizon to rouse some thought in the minds of all.

In those early days a husband's supremacy was often enforced in the

rural districts by corporeal chastisement, and it was considered by

most people as quite right and proper--as much so as the correction of

refractory children in like manner. I remember in my own neighborhood

a man who was a Methodist class-leader and exhorter, and one who was

esteemed a worthy citizen, who, every few weeks, gave his wife a

beating with his horsewhip. He said it was necessary, in order to keep

her in subjection, and because she scolded so much. Now this wife,

surrounded by six or seven little children, whom she must wash, dress,

feed, and attend to day and night, was obliged to spin and weave cloth

for all the garments of the family. She had to milk the cows, make

butter and cheese, do all the cooking, washing, making, and mending

for the family, and, with the pains of maternity forced upon her every

eighteen months, was whipped by her pious husband, "because she

scolded." And pray, why should he not have chastised her? The laws

made it his privilege--and the Bible, as interpreted, made it his

duty. It is true, women repined at their hard lot; but it was thought

to be fixed by a divine decree, for "The man shall rule over thee,"

and "Wives, be subject to your husbands," and "Wives, submit

yourselves unto your husbands as unto the Lord," caused them to

consider their fate inevitable, and to feel that it would be

contravening God's law to resist it. It is ever thus; where Theology

enchains the soul, the Tyrant enslaves the body. But can any one, who

has any knowledge of the laws that govern our being--of heredity and

pre-natal influences--be astonished that our jails and prisons are

filled with criminals, and our hospitals with sickly specimens of

humanity? As long as the mothers of the race are subject to such

unhappy conditions, it can never be materially improved. Men exhibit

some common sense in breeding all animals except those of their own

species.

All through the Anti-Slavery struggle, every word of denunciation of

the wrongs of the Southern slave, was, I felt, equally applicable to

the wrongs of my own sex. Every argument for the emancipation of the

colored man, was equally one for that of woman; and I was surprised

that all Abolitionists did not see the similarity in the condition of

the two classes. I read, with intense interest, everything that

indicated an awakening of public or private thought to the idea that

woman did not occupy her rightful position in the organization of

society; and, when I read the lectures of Ernestine L. Rose and the

writings of Margaret Fuller, and found that other women entertained

the same thoughts that had been seething in my own brain, and realized

that I stood not alone, how my heart bounded with joy! The arguments

of that distinguished jurist, Judge Hurlburt, encouraged me to hope

that men would ultimately see the justice of our cause, and concede to

women their natural rights.

I hailed with gladness any aspiration of women toward an enlargement

of their sphere of action; and when, in the early part of 1848, I

learned that Miss Elizabeth Blackwell had been admitted as a student

to the medical college at Geneva, N. Y., being the first lady in the

United States that had attained that privilege, and knowing the tide

of public sentiment she had to stem, I could not refrain from writing

her a letter of approval and encouragement. In return I received the

following:

PHILADELPHIA, _August 12, 1848_.

DEAR MADAM:--Your letter, I can assure you, met with a hearty

welcome from me. And I can not refrain from writing to you a warm

acknowledgment of your cordial sympathy, and expressing the

pleasure with which I have read your brave words. It is true, I

look neither for praise nor blame in pursuing the path which I

have chosen. With firm religious enthusiasm, no opinion of the

world will move me, but when I receive from a woman an approval

so true-hearted and glowing, a recognition so clear of the

motives which urge me on, then my very soul bounds at the

thrilling words, and I go on with renewed energy, with hope, and

holy joy in my inmost being.

My whole life is devoted unreservedly to the service of my sex.

The study and practice of medicine is in my thought but one means

to a great end, for which my very soul yearns with in tensest

passionate emotion, of which I have dreamed day and night, from

my earliest childhood, for which I would offer up my life with

triumphant thanksgiving, if martyrdom could secure that glorious

end:--the true ennoblement of woman, the full harmonious

development of her unknown nature, and the consequent redemption

of the whole human race. "Earth waits for her queen." Every noble

movement of the age, every prophecy of future glory, every throb

of that great heart which is laboring throughout Christendom,

call on woman with a voice of thunder, with the authority of a

God, to listen to the mighty summons to awake from her guilty

sleep, and rouse to glorious action to play her part in the great

drama of the ages, and finish the work that man has begun.

Most fully do I respond to all the noble aspirations that fill

your letter. Women are feeble, narrow, frivolous at present:

ignorant of their own capacities, and undeveloped in thought and

feeling; and while they remain so, the great work of human

regeneration must remain incomplete; humanity will continue to

suffer, and cry in vain for deliverance, for woman has her work

to do, and no one can accomplish it for her. She is bound to

rise, to try her strength, to break her bonds;--not with noisy

outcry, not with fighting or complaint; but with quiet strength,

with gentle dignity, firmly, irresistibly, with a cool

determination that never wavers, with a clear insight into her

own capacities, let her do her duty, pursue her highest

conviction of right, and firmly grasp whatever she is able to

carry.

Much is said of the oppression woman suffers; man is reproached

with being unjust, tyrannical, jealous. I do not so read human

life. The exclusion and constraint woman suffers, is not the

result of purposed injury or premeditated insult. It has arisen

naturally, without violence, simply because woman has desired

nothing more, has not felt the soul too large for the body. But

when woman, with matured strength, with steady purpose, presents

her lofty claim, all barriers will give way, and man will

welcome, with a thrill of joy, the new birth of his sister

spirit, the advent of his partner, his co-worker, in the great

universe of being.

If the present arrangements of society will not admit of woman's

free development, then society must be remodeled, and adapted to

the great wants of all humanity. Our race is one, the interests

of all are inseparably united, and harmonic freedom for the

perfect growth of every human soul is the great want of our time.

It has given me heartfelt satisfaction, dear madam, that you

sympathize in my effort to advance the great interests of

humanity. I feel the responsibility of my position, and I shall

endeavor, by wisdom of action, purity of motive, and unwavering

steadiness of purpose, to justify the noble hope I have excited.

To me the future is full of glorious promise, humanity is

arousing to accomplish its grand destiny, and in the fellowship

of this great hope, I would greet you, and recognize in your

noble spirit a fellow-laborer for the true and the good.

ELIZABETH BLACKWELL.

MRS. EMILY COLLINS.

But, it was the proceedings of the Convention, in 1848, at Seneca

Falls, that first gave a direction to the efforts of the many women,

who began to feel the degradation of their subject condition, and its

baneful effects upon the human race. They then saw the necessity for

associated action, in order to obtain the elective franchise, the only

key that would unlock the doors of their prison. I wrote to Miss Sarah

C. Owen, Secretary of the Women's Protective Union, at Rochester, as

to the line of procedure that had been proposed there. In reply, under

date of October 1, 1848, she says:

Your letter has just reached me, and with much pleasure I reply

to the echo of inquiry, beyond the bounds of those personally

associated with us in this enterprise. It is indeed encouraging

to hear a voice from South Bristol in such perfect unison with

our own.

Possibly, extracts from my next letter to Miss Owen, dated Oct. 23,

1848, will give you the best idea of the movement:

I should have acknowledged the receipt of yours of the 1st inst.

earlier, but wished to report somewhat of progress whenever I

should write. Our prospects here are brightening. Every lady of

any worth or intelligence adopts unhesitatingly our view, and

concurs in our measures. On the 19th inst. we met and organized a

Woman's Equal Rights Union. Living in the country, where the

population is sparse, we are consequently few; but hope to make

up in zeal and energy for our lack of numbers. We breathe a

freer, if not a purer atmosphere here among the mountains, than

do the dwellers in cities,--have more independence,--are less

subject to the despotism of fashion, and are less absorbed with

dress and amusements.... A press entirely devoted to our cause

seems indispensable. If there is none such, can you tell me of

any paper that advocates our claims more warmly than the _North

Star_?[12] A lecturer in the field would be most desirable; but

how to raise funds to sustain one is the question. I never really

wished for Aladdin's lamp till now. Would to Heaven that women

could be persuaded to use the funds they acquire by their

sewing-circles and fairs, in trying to raise their own condition

above that of "infants, idiots, and lunatics," with whom our

statutes class them, instead of spending the money in decorating

their churches, or sustaining a clergy, the most of whom are

striving to rivet the chains still closer that bind, not only our

own sex, but the oppressed of every class and color.

The elective franchise is now the one object for which we must

labor; that once attained, all the rest will be easily acquired.

Moral Reform and Temperance Societies may be multiplied _ad

infinitum_, but they have about the same effect upon the evils

they seek to cure, as clipping the top of a hedge would have

toward extirpating it. Please forward me a copy of the petition

for suffrage. We will engage to do all we can, not only in our

own town, but in the adjoining ones of Richmond, East Bloomfield,

Canandaigua, and Naples. I have promises of aid from people of

influence in obtaining signatures. In the meantime we wish to

disseminate some able work upon the enfranchisement of women. We

wish to present our Assemblyman elect, whoever he may be, with

some work of this kind, and solicit his candid attention to the

subject. People are more willing to be convinced by the calm

perusal of an argument, than in a personal discussion....

Our Society was composed of some fifteen or twenty ladies, and we met

once in two weeks, in each other's parlors, alternately, for

discussion and interchange of ideas. I was chosen President; Mrs.

Sophia Allen, Vice-President; Mrs. Horace Pennell, Treasurer; and one

of several young ladies who were members was Secretary. Horace

Pennell, Esq., and his wife were two of our most earnest helpers. We

drafted a petition to the Legislature to grant women the right of

suffrage, and obtained the names of sixty-two of the most intelligent

people, male and female, in our own and adjoining towns, and sent it

to our Representative in Albany. It was received by the Legislature as

something absurdly ridiculous, and laid upon the table. We introduced

the question into the Debating Clubs, that were in those days such

popular institutions in the rural districts, and in every way sought

to agitate the subject. I found a great many men, especially those of

the better class, disposed to accord equal rights to our sex. And,

now, as the highest tribute that I can pay to the memory of a husband,

I may say that during our companionship of thirty-five years, I was

most cordially sustained by mine, in my advocacy of equal rights to

women. Amongst my own sex, I found too many on whom ages of repression

had wrought their natural effect, and whose ideas and aspirations were

narrowed down to the confines of "woman's sphere," beyond whose limits

it was not only impious, but infamous to tread. "Woman's sphere"

_then_, was to discharge the duties of a housekeeper, ply the needle,

and teach a primary or ladies' school. From press, and pulpit, and

platform, she was taught that "to be unknown was her highest praise,"

that "dependence was her best protection," and "her weakness her

sweetest charm." She needed only sufficient intelligence to comprehend

her husband's superiority, and to obey him in all things. It is not

surprising, then, that I as often heard the terms "strong-minded" and

"masculine" as opprobrious epithets used against progressive women, by

their own sex as by the other; another example only of the stultifying

effect of subjection, upon the mind, exactly paralleled by the

Southern slaves, amongst many of whom the strongest term of contempt

that could be used was "_Free Nigger_." Our Equal Rights Association

continued to hold its meetings for somewhat over a year, and they were

at last suspended on account of bad weather and the difficulty of

coming together in the country districts. We, however, continued to

send petitions to the Legislature for the removal of woman's

disabilities.

From 1858 to 1869 my home was in Rochester, N. Y. There, by brief

newspaper articles and in other ways, I sought to influence public

sentiment in favor of this fundamental reform. In 1868 a Society was

organized there for the reformation of abandoned women. At one of its

meetings I endeavored to show how futile all their efforts would be,

while women, by the laws of the land, were made a subject class; that

only by enfranchising woman and permitting her a more free and

lucrative range of employments, could they hope to suppress the

"social evil." My remarks produced some agitation in the meeting and

some newspaper criticisms. In Rochester, I found many pioneers in the

cause of Woman Suffrage, and from year to year we petitioned our

Legislature for it.

Since 1869 I have been a citizen of Louisiana. Here, till recently,

political troubles engrossed the minds of men to the exclusion of

every other consideration. They glowed with fiery indignation at

being, themselves, deprived of the right of suffrage, or at having

their votes annulled, and regarded it as an intolerable outrage; yet,

at the same time, they denied it to all women, many of whom valued the

elective franchise as highly, and felt as intensely, as did men, the

injustice that withheld it from them. In 1879, when the Convention met

to frame a new Constitution for the State, we strongly petitioned it

for an enlargement of our civil rights and for the ballot. Mrs.

Elizabeth L. Saxon was indefatigable in her efforts, and went before

the Convention in person and plead our cause. But the majority of the

members thought there were cogent reasons for not granting our

petitions; but they made women eligible to all school offices--an

indication that Louisiana will not be the last State in the Union to

deny women their inalienable rights.

EMILY COLLINS.

The newspaper comments on Elizabeth Blackwell as a physician, both in

the French and American papers, seem very ridiculous to us at this

distance of time. _The American_, Rochester, N. Y., July, 1848:

A NOVEL CIRCUMSTANCE.--Our readers will perhaps remember that

some time ago a lady, Miss Elizabeth Blackwell, applied for

admission as a student in one of the medical colleges of

Philadelphia, her purpose being to go through an entire course of

the study of medicine. The application was denied, and the lady

subsequently entered the Geneva Medical College, where, at the

Annual Commencement on the 23d instant, she graduated with high

honors and received the degree of M.D., the subject of her thesis

being "ship fever." On receiving her diploma she thus addressed

the President: "With the help of the Most High, it shall be the

effort of my life to shed honor on this diploma." Professor Lee,

who delivered the customary oration, complimented the lady by

saying that she had won the distinction of her class by attending

faithfully to every duty required of candidates striving for the

honor. Eighteen young gentlemen received the degree of M.D. at

the same time.

After graduating with high honors in this country, Dr. Elizabeth

Blackwell went to France to secure still higher advantages of

education than could be found here. What was thought of her there will

be seen by the following letter of a Paris correspondent in the New

York _Journal of Commerce_:

AN AMERICAN DOCTRESS.--The medical community of Paris is all agog

by the arrival of the celebrated American doctor, Miss Blackwell.

She has quite bewildered the learned faculty by her diploma, all

in due form, authorizing her to dose and bleed and amputate with

the best of them. Some of them think Miss Blackwell must be a

socialist of the most rabid class, and that her undertaking is

the entering wedge to a systematic attack on society by the whole

sex. Others, who have seen her, say that there is nothing very

alarming in her manner; that, on the contrary, she is modest and

unassuming, and talks reasonably on other subjects. The ladies

attack her in turn. One said to me a few days since, "Oh, it is

too horrid! I'm sure I never could touch her hand! Only to think

that those long fingers of hers had been cutting up dead people."

I have seen the doctor in question, and must say in fairness,

that her appearance is quite prepossessing. She is young, and

rather good-looking; her manner indicates great energy of

character, and she seems to have entered on her singular career

from motives of duty, and encouraged by respectable ladies of

Cincinnati. After about ten days' hesitation, on the part of the

directors of the Hospital of Maternity, she has at last received

permission to enter the institution as a pupil.

* * * * *

ERNESTINE L. ROSE.

BY L. E. BARNARD.

Ernestine L. Rose--maiden name Siismund Potoski--was born January 13,

1810, at Pyeterkow, in Poland. Her father, a very pious and learned

rabbi, was so conscientious that he would take no pay for discharging

the functions of his office, saying he would not convert his duty into

a means of gain. As a child she was of a reflective habit, and though

very active and cheerful, she scarcely ever engaged with her young

companions in their sports, but took great delight in the company of

her father, for whom she entertained a remarkable affection.

At a very early age she commenced reading the Hebrew Scriptures, but

soon became involved in serious difficulties respecting the formation

of the world, the origin of evil, and other obscure points suggested

by the sacred history and cosmogony of her people. The reproofs which

met her at every step of her biblical investigations, and being

constantly told that "little girls must not ask questions," made her

at that early day an advocate of religious freedom and woman's rights;

as she could not see, on the one hand, why subjects of vital interest

should be held too sacred for investigation, nor, on the other, why a

"little girl" should not have the same right to ask questions as a

little boy. Despite her early investigation of the Bible, she was

noted for her strict observance of all the rites and ceremonies of the

Jewish faith, though some of them, on account of her tender age, were

not demanded of her. She was, however, often painfully disturbed by

her "carnal reason" questioning the utility of these multifarious

observances. As an illustration, she one day asked her father, with

much anxiety, why he fasted[13] so much more than others, a habit

which was seriously impairing his health and spirits; and being told

that it was to please God, who required this sacrifice at his hands,

she, in a serious and most emphatic tone, replied, "If God is pleased

in making you sick and unhappy, I hate God." This idea of the cruelty

of God toward her father had a remarkable influence upon her; and at

the age of fourteen she renounced her belief in the Bible and the

religion of her father, which brought down upon her great trouble and

persecution alike from her own Jewish friends and from Christians.

At the age of sixteen she had the misfortune to lose her mother. A

year afterward her father married again, and through misdirected

kindness involved her in a lawsuit, in which she plead her own case

and won it; but she left the property with her father, declaring that

she cared nothing for it, but only for justice, and that her

inheritance might not fall into mercenary hands. She subsequently

traveled in Poland, Russia, the Germanic States, Holland, Belgium,

France, and England; during which time she witnessed and took part in

some interesting and important affairs. While in Berlin she had an

interview with the King of Prussia concerning the right of Polish Jews

to remain in that city. The Jews of Russian Poland were not permitted

to continue in Prussia, unless they could bring forward as security

Prussian citizens who were holders of real estate. But even then they

could get a permit to tarry only on a visit, and not to transact any

business for themselves. Mlle. Potoski, being from Poland and a

Jewess, was subject to this disability. Though she could have obtained

the requisite security by applying for it, she preferred to stand upon

her natural rights as a human being. She remonstrated against the

gross injustice of the law, and obtained the right to remain as long

as she wished, and to do what she pleased.

In Hague, she became acquainted with a very distressing case of a poor

sailor, the father of four children, whose wife had been imprisoned

for an alleged crime of which he insisted she was innocent. Inquiring

into the case, Mlle. Potoski drew up a petition which she personally

presented to the King of Holland, and had the satisfaction of seeing

the poor woman restored to her family. She was in Paris during the

Revolution of July, 1830, and witnessed most of its exciting scenes.

On seeing Louis Phillipe presented by Lafayette to the people of Paris

from the balcony of the Tuilleries, she remarked to a friend, "That

man, as well as Charles X., will one day have good reason to wish

himself safely off the throne of France."

In England she became acquainted with Lord Grosvenor and family, with

Frances Farrar, sister of Oliver Farrar, M.P., the Miss Leeds, and

others of the nobility; also with many prominent members of the

Society of Friends, among them Joseph Gurney and his sister Elizabeth

Fry, the eminent philanthropist, in whose company she visited Newgate

Prison. In 1832 she made the acquaintance of Robert Owen, and warmly

espoused his principles. In 1834 she presided at the formation of a

society called "The Association of all Classes of all Nations,

without distinction of sect, sex, party condition, or color." While in

England she married William E. Rose, and in the spring of 1836, came

to the United States, and resided in the city of New York. Soon after

her arrival she commenced lecturing on the evils of the existing

social system, the formation of human character, slavery, the rights

of woman, and other reform questions.

[Illustration: ERNESTINE L. ROSE (with autograph).]

At a great public meeting in the Broadway Tabernacle to consider the

necessity of an improved system of Free Schools, J. S. Buckingham,

M.P., of England, and Rev. Robert Breckenridge, of Kentucky, were

among the speakers. Mrs. Rose, sitting in the gallery, called the

reverend gentleman to order for violating the sense of the audience,

in entirely overlooking the important object which had called the

people together, and indulging in a violent clerical harangue against

a class whom he stigmatized as infidels. This bold innovation of a

woman upon the hitherto unquestioned prerogatives of the clergy, at

once caused a tremendous excitement. Loud cries of "Throw her down!"

"Drag her out!" "She's an infidel!" resounded in all parts of the

building. She, however, held her ground, calm and collected while the

tumult lasted, and after quiet was restored, continued her remarks in

a most dignified manner, making a deep impression upon all present.

Certain religious papers declared it a forewarning of some terrible

calamity, that a woman should call a minister to account, and that,

too, in a church.

Mrs. Rose has lectured in not less than twenty-three different States

of the Union. Some of them she has visited often, and on several

occasions she has addressed legislative bodies with marked effect,

advocating the necessity of legal redress for the wrongs and

disabilities to which her sex are subject. As an advocate of woman's

rights, anti-slavery and religious liberty, she has earned a

world-wide celebrity. For fifty years a public speaker, during which

period she has associated with the influential classes in Europe and

America, and borne an active part in the great progressive movements

which mark the present as the most glorious of historical epochs,

Ernestine L. Rose has accomplished for the elevation of her sex and

the amelioration of social conditions, a work which can be ascribed to

few women of our time.

In the spring of 1854, Mrs. Rose and Miss Anthony took a trip together

to Washington, Alexandria, Baltimore, Philadelphia, speaking two or

three times in each place. This was after the introduction of the

Kansas-Nebraska Bill in Congress, and the excitement of the country

upon the slavery question was intense. Mrs. Rose's third lecture in

Washington was on the "Nebraska Question." This lecture was scarcely

noticed, the only paper giving it the least report, being _The

Washington Globe_, which, though it spoke most highly of her as a

lecturer, misrepresented her by ascribing to her the arguments of the

South. _The National Era_, the only anti-slavery paper in Washington,

was entirely silent, taking no notice of the fact that Mrs. Rose had

spoken in that city against the further spread of slavery. Whether

this was due to editorial prejudice against sex, or against freedom of

religious belief, is unknown.

In the winter of 1855, Mrs. Rose spoke in thirteen of the fifty-four

County Conventions upon woman suffrage held in the State of New York,

and each winter took part in the Albany Conventions and hearings

before the Legislature, which in 1860 resulted in the passage of the

bill securing to women the right to their wages and the equal

guardianship of their children.

Mrs. Rose was sustained in her work by the earnest sympathy of her

husband, who gladly furnished her the means of making her extensive

tours, so that through his sense of justice she was enabled to preach

the Gospel of Woman's Rights, Anti-Slavery, and Free Religion without

money and without price.

_The Boston Investigator_ of January 15, 1881, speaking of a letter

just received from her, says: "Thirty years ago Mrs. Rose was in her

prime--an excellent lecturer, liberal, eloquent, witty, and we must

add, decidedly handsome--'the Rose that all were praising.' Her

portrait, life-size and very natural, hangs in Investigator Hall, and

her intelligent-looking and expressive countenance, and black glossy

curls, denote intellect and beauty. As an anti-slavery lecturer, a

pioneer in the cause of woman's rights, and an advocate of Liberalism,

she did good service, and is worthy to be classed with such devoted

friends of humanity and freedom as Frances Wright, Harriet Martineau,

Lucretia Mott, and Lydia Maria Child, who will long be pleasantly

remembered for their 'works' sake.'"

LONDON, _January 9, 1877_.

MY DEAR MISS ANTHONY:--Sincerely do I thank you for your kind

letter. Believe me it would give me great pleasure to comply with

your request, to tell you all about myself and my past labors;

but I suffer so much from neuralgia in my head and general

debility, that I could not undertake the task, especially as I

have nothing to refer to. I have never spoken from notes; and as

I did not intend to publish anything about myself, for I had no

other ambition except to work for the cause of humanity,

irrespective of sex, sect, country, or color, and did not expect

that a Susan B. Anthony would wish to do it for me, I made no

memorandum of places, dates, or names; and thirty or forty years

ago the press was not sufficiently educated in the rights of

woman, even to notice, much less to report speeches as it does

now; and therefore I have not anything to assist me or you.

All that I can tell you is, that I used my humble powers to the

uttermost, and raised my voice in behalf of Human Rights in

general, and the elevation and Rights of Woman in particular,

nearly all my life. And so little have I spared myself, or

studied my comfort in summer or winter, rain or shine, day or

night, when I had an opportunity to work for the cause to which I

had devoted myself, that I can hardly wonder at my present state

of health.

Yet in spite of hardships, for it was not as easy to travel at

that time as now, and the expense, as I never made a charge or

took up a collection, I look back to that time, when a stranger

and alone, I went from place to place, in high-ways and by-ways,

did the work and paid my bills with great pleasure and

satisfaction; for the cause gained ground, and in spite of my

heresies I had always good audiences, attentive listeners, and

was well received wherever I went.

But I can mention from memory the principal places where I have

spoken. In the winter of 1836 and '37, I spoke in New York, and

for some years after I lectured in almost every city in the

State; Hudson, Poughkeepsie, Albany, Schenectady; Saratoga,

Utica, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo, Elmira, and other places; in

New Jersey, in Newark and Burlington; in 1837, in Philadelphia,

Bristol, Chester, Pittsburg, and other places in Pennsylvania,

and at Wilmington in Delaware; in 1842, in Boston, Charlestown,

Beverly, Florence, Springfield, and other points in

Massachusetts, and in Hartford, Connecticut; in 1844, in

Cincinnati, Dayton, Zanesville, Springfield, Cleveland, Toledo,

and several settlements in the backwoods of Ohio, and also in

Richmond, Indiana; in 1845 and '46, I lectured three times in the

Legislative Hall in Detroit, and at Ann Arbor and other places in

Michigan; and in 1847 and '48, I spoke in Charleston and

Columbia, in South Carolina.

In 1850, I attended the first National Woman's Rights Convention

in Worcester, and nearly all the National and State Conventions

since, until I went to Europe in 1869. Returning to New York in

1874, I was present at the Convention in Irving Hall, the only

one held during my visit to America.

I sent the first petition to the New York Legislature to give a

married woman the right to hold real estate in her own name, in

the winter of 1836 and '37, to which after a good deal of trouble

I obtained five signatures. Some of the ladies said the gentlemen

would laugh at them; others, that they had rights enough; and the

men said the women had too many rights already. Woman at that

time had not learned to know that she had any rights except those

that man in his generosity allowed her; both have learned

something since that time which they will never forget. I

continued sending petitions with increased numbers of signatures

until 1848 and '49, when the Legislature enacted the law which

granted to woman the right to keep what was her own. But no

sooner did it become legal than all the women said, "Oh! that is

right! We ought always to have had that."

During the eleven years from 1837 to 1848, I addressed the New

York Legislature five times, and since 1848 I can not say

positively, but a good many times; you know all that better than

any one else.

Your affectionate friend,

ERNESTINE L. ROSE.

In collecting the reminiscences of those who took the initiative steps

in this movement, Mrs. Rose was urged to send us some of her

experiences, but in writing that it was impossible for her to do so,

and yet giving us the above summary of all she has accomplished,

_multum in parvo_, she has in a good measure complied with our

request.

All through these eventful years Mrs. Rose has fought a double battle;

not only for the political rights of her sex as women, but for their

religious rights as individual souls; to do their own thinking and

believing. How much of the freedom they now enjoy, the women of

America owe to this noble Polish woman, can not be estimated, for

moral influences are too subtle for measurement.

Those who sat with her on the platform in bygone days, well remember

her matchless powers as a speaker; and how safe we all felt while she

had the floor, that neither in manner, sentiment, argument, nor

repartee, would she in any way compromise the dignity of the occasion.

She had a rich musical voice, with just enough of foreign accent and

idiom to add to the charm of her oratory. As a speaker she was

pointed, logical, and impassioned. She not only dealt in abstract

principles clearly, but in their application touched the deepest

emotions of the human soul.

FOOTNOTES:

[12] Published by Frederick Douglass, the first colored man that

edited a paper in this country. His press was presented to him by the

women of England, who sympathized with the anti-slavery movement.

[13] Fasting with Jews meant abstaining from food and drink from

before sunset one evening, until after the stars were out the next

evening.

CHAPTER VI.

OHIO.

The promised land of fugitives--"Uncle Tom's Cabin"--Salem

Convention, 1850--Akron, 1851--Massilon, 1852--The address to the

women of Ohio--The Mohammedan law forbids pigs, dogs, women, and

other impure animals to enter a Mosque--The _New York Tribune_--

Cleveland Convention, 1853--Hon. Joshua R. Giddings--Letter from

Horace Greeley--A glowing eulogy to Mary Wollstonecroft--William

Henry Channing's Declaration--The pulpit responsible for public

sentiment--President Asa Mahan debates--The Rev. Dr. Nevin pulls

Mr. Garrison's nose--Antoinette L. Brown describes her exit from

the World's Temperance Convention--Cincinnati Convention, 1855--

Jane Elizabeth Jones' Report, 1861.

There were several reasons for the early, and more general agitation

of Woman's Rights in Ohio at this period, than in other States. Being

separated from the slave border by her river only, Ohio had long been

the promised land of fugitives, and the battle-ground for many

recaptured victims, involving much litigation.

Most stringent laws had been passed, called "the black laws of Ohio,"

to prevent these escapes through her territory. Hence, this State was

the ground for some of the most heated anti-slavery discussions, not

only in the Legislature, but in frequent conventions. Garrison and his

followers, year after year, had overrun the "Western Reserve,"

covering the north-eastern part of the State, carrying the gospel of

freedom to every hamlet.

A radical paper, called _The Anti-Slavery Bugle_, edited by Oliver

Johnson, was published in Salem. It took strong ground in favor of

equal rights for woman, and the editor did all in his power to sustain

the conventions, and encourage the new movement.

Again, Abby Kelly's eloquent voice had been heard all through this

State, denouncing "the black laws of Ohio," appealing to the ready

sympathies of woman for the suffering of the black mothers, wives, and

daughters of the South. This grand woman, equally familiar with the

tricks of priests and politicians, the action of Synods, General

Assemblies, State Legislatures, and Congresses, who could maintain an

argument with any man on the slavery question, had immense influence,

not only in the anti-slavery conflict, but by her words and example

she inspired woman with new self-respect.

These anti-slavery conventions, in which the most logical reasoners,

and the most eloquent, impassioned orators the world ever produced,

kept their audiences wrought up to the highest pitch of enthusiasm

hour after hour, were the school in which woman's rights found its

ready-made disciples. With such women as Frances D. Gage, Hannah Tracy

Cutler, Josephine S. Griffing, J. Elizabeth Jones, Mariana Johnson,

Emily Robinson, Maria Giddings, Betsey Cowles, Caroline M. Severance,

Martha J. Tilden, Rebecca A. S. Janney, to listen to the exhaustive

arguments on human rights, verily the seed fell on good ground, and

the same justice, that in glowing periods was claimed for the black

man, they now claimed for themselves, and compelled the law-makers of

this State to give some consideration to the wrongs of woman.

Again, in 1850, Ohio held a Constitutional Convention, and these

women, thoroughly awake to their rights, naturally thought, that if

the fundamental laws of the State were to be revised and amended, it

was a fitting time for them to ask to be recognized.

In 1851, Harriet Beecher Stowe commenced the publication of "Uncle

Tom's Cabin" in the _National Era_, in Washington, D. C., which made

Ohio, with its great river, classic soil, and quickened the pulsations

of every woman's heart in the nation.

Reports of the New York Conventions, widely copied and ridiculed in

leading journals, from Maine to Texas, struck the key-note for similar

gatherings in several of the Northern States. Without the least

knowledge of one another, without the least concert of action, women

in Ohio, Indiana, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts, sprang up as if by

magic, and issued calls for similar conventions. The striking

uniformity in their appeals, petitions, resolutions, and speeches;

making the same complaints and asking the same redress for grievances,

shows that all were moved by like influences. Those who made the

demand for political freedom in 1848, in Europe as well as America,

were about the same age. Significant facts to show that new liberty

for woman was one of the marked ideas of the century, and that as the

chief factor in civilization, the time had come for her to take her

appropriate place.

The actors in this new movement were not, as the London and New York

journals said, "sour old maids," but happy wives and faithful mothers,

who, in a higher development, demanded the rights and privileges

befitting the new position. And if they may be judged by the vigor and

eloquence of their addresses, and the knowledge of parliamentary

tactics they manifested in their conventions, the world must accord

them rare common-sense, good judgment, great dignity of character, and

a clear comprehension of the principles of government. In order to

show how well those who inaugurated this movement, understood the

nature of our republican institutions, and how justly they estimated

their true position in a republic, we shall give rather more of these

early speeches and letters than in any succeeding chapters.

In 1849, Mrs. Elizabeth Wilson, of Cadiz, Ohio, aroused some attention

to the general question, by the publication of "A Scriptural View of

Woman's Rights and Duties," clearly demonstrating the equality of man

and woman in the creation, as well as the independent, self-reliant

characteristics sanctioned in woman, by the examples of the sex given

in the Bible. As woman has ever been degraded by the perversion of the

religious element of her nature, the scriptural arguments were among

the earliest presentations of the question. When opponents were

logically cornered on every other side, they uniformly fell back on

the decrees of Heaven. The ignorance of women in general as to what

their Bibles really do teach, has been the chief cause of their

bondage. They have accepted the opinions of men for the commands of

their Creator. The fulminations of the clergy against the

enfranchisement of woman, were as bitter and arrogant as against the

emancipation of the African, and they defended their position in both

cases by the Bible. This led Abolitionists and women to a very careful

study of the Scriptures, and enabled them to meet their opponents most

successfully. No clergyman ever quoted Scripture with more readiness

and force than did Lucretia Mott and William Lloyd Garrison, who alike

made the Bible a power on the side of freedom.

SALEM CONVENTION.

In 1850 the first convention in Ohio was held at Salem, April 19th and

20th, in the Second Baptist Church.[14] The meeting convened at 10

o'clock, and was called to order by Emily Robinson, who proposed

Mariana W. Johnson as President _pro tem._, Sarah Coates, Secretary

_pro tem._ On taking the chair, Mrs. Johnson read the following call:

We, the undersigned, earnestly call on the women of Ohio to meet

in Convention, on Friday, the 19th of April, 1850, at 10 o'clock

A.M., in the town of Salem, to concert measures to secure to all

persons the recognition of equal rights, and the extension of the

privileges of government without distinction of sex, or color; to

inquire into the origin and design of the rights of humanity,

whether they are coeval with the human race, of universal

inheritage and inalienable, or merely conventional, held by

sufferance, dependent for a basis on location, position, color,

and sex, and like government scrip, or deeds of parchment,

transferable, to be granted or withheld, made immutable or

changeable, as caprice, popular favor, or the pride of power and

place may dictate, changing ever, as the weak and the strong, the

oppressed and the oppressor, come in conflict or change places.

Feeling that the subjects proposed for discussion are vitally

important to the interests of humanity, we unite in most

earnestly inviting every one who sincerely desires the progress

of true reform to be present at the Convention.