CHAPTER V.

W O M A N 'S F R A N C H I S E.

With woman's enfranchisement comes her unqualified individuality. Without it, just so much, or so little, as men choose to allow her; and that allowance is according to the preconceived opinions, or prejudices, of the men with whom she is related.

The different measures of justice to woman, is according to circumstances, or in the English way of speaking, "it depends" -- none of these measures full , save in a few instances, where laws, or the want of laws, would not make any material difference with them.

God has given to woman just as defined an important rights of individuality, as He has to man; and any manmade laws that deprive her of any rights or privileges, that are enjoyed by himself, are usurpations of power. Such laws are an outrage, and as much a contravention of God's laws, as though man deprived woman of her life; for her aspirations and 109 freedom of soul, are as dear to her as is her life.

Deity intended a free and full development of all of woman's powers, as well as man's, and gave her a mind to decide for herself in all things. There are thousands of cases on every hand, where more wretchedness, aye, agony , would be prevented by man's taking woman's life from her, than taking liberties that the Franchise would secure to her. The mass of man do not see this, as they are too apathetic to do so, for all men are not so selfish that they would not see and help to right the wrongs of woman, if the subject were presented to them so that they truly felt her position.

Man not having been deprived of his individuality, does not know the feeling of degradation, that a woman experiences, and how her soul writhes under the chains that have inscribed upon them "thus far and no farther," because you are a woman. Why should there be anything said about what shall be the bounds of a woman's abilities, or where shall be the limits, any more than those of a man? He is free to make of himself what he is capable of doing, and no one is expected to interfere in his plans, because he is a man enfranchised.

110

It is not surprising that there are a thousand covered wrongs where the victims and their friends see no remedy from exposure; but they do see disgrace from acts that they had not a particle of control over, not only, but before years, and the knowledge that comes with them, were theirs. The personal violence on little girls, as young as four or five years, has been known in dozens of instances, by men old enough to be their fathers. The trickery and deception of artful men, and young and trusting maidens, clearly prove that the individuality of woman has no recognition, but that she should be the toy and tool of man, and thus the victims are compelled to acknowledge the superiority of a brute force, that would not have been let loose, but for the ideas of a woman's rights of perfect individuality having been ignored.

No man fully believing in the enfranchisement of women, would be guilty of such crimes, and if any pretender to such principles has been, it is because some sinister motives have led him to the advocacy of principles, the very nature of which, would lead to a practical recognition of justice. The recognition of the individuality of woman, is simply an acknowledgment of human rights, which all human beings have 111 guaranteed them, by the fact of their having an existence; as surely is this, as is the right to exist at all.

Every age sighs over the injustice of the men to women, in former ages, or among a certain people, and are proud of progress in this direction in their own time. Our men of to-day in the United States boast of more individuality for woman, than in any age or country. Who can be found that does not denounce the people who kill their parents so soon as they become old and useless? And yet the young women have been so deprived of individuality, that they are seen when old, often in prison of a poorhouse, or shivering over a few apples or matches on the corners of streets, while their protectors , men, walk by unmoved, and loudly prating about women having more rights than themselves, while they are at the same time their slaves and protectors and providers.

Until God has taken from woman the greatest token of an individual, that he could by any possibility have given her, that is, not only the right of going out of life into the great eternity alone, -- but the impossibility of having a man to act for her, or even to accompany her through the valley and shadow of death, (what the Hindoo husband fears so much, that the compels his 112 wife to go with him, ) not until then, should man assume even more than Deity Himself.

The great mass of man seem not to have thuought [sic] that a woman stands in intimate relations to human rights as well as themselves, and yet they censure her if she does not assume all, in the sphere that they have marked out -- all that the dictators decide to belong to said sphere.

Men do not respect women who do not respect their own individuality. They may not have the sickly sentiment of sham or pretended respect, which is so transitory, for those who are individualized, that they do for those who are not , but while they hate the women of metal, they cannot fail to respect.

No woman can sacrifice individuality, for gold or love, or anything whatever, without losing, in the very act, all that would be worth a purchase or a gift. The mass of women who do this, are either indolent, or are living objectless lives. It is true that some are indolent because of physical inability, for the construction of woman's clothing is such that she cannot be otherwise. Some are living objectless lives, because they see how terrible the battles that must be waged, if they live to some purpose in what would be tasteful to them. There are a 113 thousand things that man does not see the whys and wherefores, simply because he has not fought the world with a woman's obstacles to surmount, or perish.

Some women do not wish to be enfranchised, because their husbands or fathers are in some positions that are for life, and they will be pensioned after such supporter's death, and they are so wanting in benevolence to others, that they are perfectly regardless of the interests of others, so long as they are provided for themselves.

Ignorance or selfishness covers the whole ground of the opposition to woman being enfranchised, whether it comes from woman or man.

That the Political equality of the sexes will produce radical changes in society generally and the marriage relation specially, is evident to all. Men have felt this in a poignant degree, and so great has been their fear that they will lose their assumed power over woman as wife, that they have opposed even the discussion of the subject, unless it has been in the presence of those who were so little in the habit or arguing in a logical manner, that they had no fears that their wives, or those they 114 hoped to be such, would be likely to get "woman's rights notions into their heads."

Men have from time to time made concessions to woman in the statutes, for the purpose of quieting those who were restless under great wrongs; but it has always been with an argument upon their lips, that "women were better off than men; that they were better protected by law, and had more rights than men, under the law." And they have labored to make them feel, that, because the power was in their hands to make laws more just to themselves, and because they had given these privileges to women , the women ought to feel under the greatest of obligations to them. They have conceded with the one hand, and chained with the other, and then charged women with the greatest of ingratitude if she dared to complain that the chains were too grievous to be borne!

Twenty years ago, scarcely a man could be found who could hear the words "woman's rights," without immediately becoming angry. His usurpation of the God-given rights of woman to her own person, he saw at a glance would be endangered, and if allowed to come up fairly and squarely, would in time take 115 from moan his assumed power to act the petty tyrant in the household over his wife.

Man do not come out boldly and declare that the real ground of their opposition to the Franchise of woman, is as we have stated, for they well know that it would be an acknowledgment that the greatest of wrongs to soul and body of woman , were not inflicted without her having the power to prevent them.

Those men who are prating so loudly that if women have the Ballot in their hands, the marriage relation will be in time ignored, and the homes all destroyed, are men who in reality are not honestly afraid that such a condition of affairs will result; but they are afraid that public sentiment will be so purified, that they will not be tolerated in decent society, if they are not as pure as they now demand their wives to be, and accord to woman the same rights in all social and Political affairs, which they arrogate unto themselves because they are men.

Thousands of women's hearts are at this very hour echoing the sentiments just expressed, and if they were not so bound down that they have lost the power to dare express themselves on this subject, the cry of "it's true, it's true!" would not only be heard from the great mass 116 of women, but our halls where we are having quiet and orderly discussions, would be one vast scene of confusion, where the great and agonizing wrongs of the marriage relation would burst forth from the lips of women, in voices a thousand strong at once! They would not allow us, who have been so many years pleading their cause and acting their representatives, to keep back the great reason of all reasons, why men oppose woman's equality with them at the Ballot-box.

Here and there are found women who can hardly hold their peace, but are afraid to enter into a discussion that they feel themselves incompetent to close, with full credit to themselves, because, while their ideas are clear, and connected, and logical in their brains, their long servile condition, and the terrible ridicule meted out to them, prevent hem from taking them out of their brains.

Men may attempt to turn the great question in other directions, and give other reasons why they oppose the enfranchisement of woman. They man talk of her unfitness for office, and of her crowding men out of position. They man talk about the children and homes being so neglected if women go to the polls once a year to vote. They may get up all the hobgoblins 117 and side issues that their brains are capable of manufacturing, but still, the great question that underlies the whole, is the loss of assumption of power over the wife.

It is plain to be seen that they would yield everything that woman demands, if the tyranny as husband could be saved. This is the question that underlies all others, and she who now speaks, expects nothing but abuse from such men, and even some women, who do not themselves understand the great question, or do not dare be full exponents of principles, that the sham modest cannot open to the public. She has dared for twenty years to advocate and live principles in the face of a tyrannical public sentiment, and the time has come when she does not dare walk all around the question, as some others do, and thus postpone for many years, the agitation of the real question at issue.

Men know that the time has passed, that they can, in America, control the minds of women successfully, and now the time is almost at hand, when they will be unable to control the bodies. The great mass of men are to-day assuming to be lords over women, and the great mass of women deny any such right , and hence the quarrel.

Had woman Political equality, she would 118 also have social equality, and if she had social equality, the great causes for bickerings would be removed, and thus the marriage relation would, as a natural consequence, be bettered. Men would no more attempt to coerce their wives to think or act according to their own ideas or wishes, than they would other women. They would not assume any rights of control on the ground of the marriage relation.

One human being has no right to assume control over another, and the smallest of all mean smallnesses, is that which is assumed by the husband over the wife, because of his greater physical strength, and her political weakness. Suppose that principle were carried out into all the relations of life, and every man who met another, weaker physically than himself, should rob him of all his money, and threaten to "kill him if he told of it;" men would soon see that physical strength ought not to be the criterion to judge the God-given rights of human beings never be righted, until woman shall stand side by side with man, as an equal in the legislating. The most important of all laws that come within the sphere of legislation, are the Marriage laws; 119 and until woman has a voice in making them, they must of necessity be imperfect, as are all laws, where physical force is required to execute them, and woman has had no voice in their making.

To say that the happiness of the marriage relation is not affected by oppressive laws that make women wretched, in such relation, would be to make an affirmation glaringly false. Where the most just laws are enacted, there are the happiest marriages. The most unjust are found where the wife is caught and compelled to live in such a relation; as is the case in the South Sea Islands, where "woman's influence in politics" in any shape, would be considered to be much further out of "her sphere," then the Ballot is by the most ignorant in America.

The shortest-sighted can readily see the relation the Ballot would have to social life, in such a degraded condition as in the Isles just referred to. It could hardly be possible to find an individual, who made any pretence of possessing intelligence, who would not acknowledge that the Ballot, even if in the hands of but half the people, would be instrumental in making much better laws for the other half, than where there was no people's Ballot. In such a case, those who were at all disposed to 120 mete out a respectable measure of justice, would be much more likely to do so. It may be argued further, that if all the people helped to frame the laws, none but those who had the general good of society at heart, would attempt to speak otherwise than in this direction, and it would therefore follow that the greatest good would result to the many, and as the causes for dissensions in society generally would be in a great measure removed, so would the marriage relation be bettered in the same proportion.

Equals are not the ones to have dissensions of any magnitude as a rule, but the troubles of life arise mainly out of the real or assumed superiority of the one, on one side, and the assumed inferiority on the other. If a pugilist charges another with inferiority, the question is settled very soon by a trial of physical strength. And if two minds were to debate the question of mental power, they would not be so simple as to undertake to enforce their mental superiority by physical means. And yet in the marriage relation, without the majority of men seeming to realize it, they are doing so in regard to woman.

When men think more upon this subject they will be surprised at their own unjust 121 ideas, which have so grown with them, that they have become a part of their very being. It cannot be denied that many are kind and very just according to their own ideas of those qualities. But the effects in many respects are the same as though there were different ruling motives.

But many wretched women do not ask for the Ballot. They do not want the right to vote , but they want simply the "rights that women ought to have, without meddling with politics, the business of men." They say this because they do not understand the relation that the Ballot has to them in their domestic wrongs. Poor martyrs, you would be able to right those wrongs if you had the Ballot in your hand, and the simple fact of your having the Ballot would carry with it a respect for your human rights.

Look at the late Negro slaves, and see the difference in their treatment, even in matters that are away beyond the sphere of Legislation! There would be just as noticeable a difference in the respect of man for woman. Struggle for political rights, for it is through such, and such alone, that you will ever obtain human rights. It is not simply for yourself , but for that great army of young women, who 122 cannot yet see the necessity for anything but smiles and gallantry from the future husbands. We who are laboring for the enfranchisement of woman, represent the strongest of maternal natures, for we would protect the young and innocent, and the helpless everywhere , from encroachments, and the wrongs that result from physical force. Instead of being "out of our spheres," we are just in them, only in a wider, more important and more potent sense.

As a Physician, the author believes that her duties are not all in the sick-room, for , after an experience of over fifteen years, she finds herself loudly called to diagnose the great body politic, more thoroughly than ever before, and her prognosis is, that doubling the dose at the Ballot-box will produce convalescence . Every one knows that the people are happier when well, than when sick, and after the important dose has been taken and health secured, the marriage relation will be something better than the least binding contract that is ever made. There will be no such terrible binding , as in South Carolina, where no divorces are ever granted, no matter how terrible the wrongs, and where a man can be law give a certain portion of his property to his mistress, the same as though his wife were dead. Neither will 123 Massachusetts and New York go to Indiana to right wrongs that never can be righted in their own States; for every State in the Union will have such just laws, that there will be no necessity for fleeing to the protection of another State.

Had woman a Ballot in her hand, there would not exist in any State such sham codes of morals, as are on our New York Statutes, where no divorces can be had except for the crime of adultery; which all know is, by the very nature of such crime, almost impossible to prove. Then , in another act, it takes away the power to prove the same, by not allowing the husband or wife to testify against each other, and by allowing the guilty parties to remain silent as regards their own crimes. Those who are not guilty, could with an honest face testify, while those who are, ought to be made to testify accordingly, and have the severest punishment for perjury enforced, if the latter crime were added to the former.

New York, and all States with such tyrannical laws, show that they do not wish to be just, or have not the ability to frame equitable laws, or are afraid that they are powerless to enforce them. Any one reason is a disgrace to a great State. But when the plea for the continuance 124 of such laws, is, that it is to "promote morality that stringent divorce laws are still on the Statutes," the idea is too absurd for serious arguments, were it not for the terrible wrongs that are constantly resulting to the best citizens, while the worst pursue the vilest course of life under legal cover.

Women, those who are neither idiots nor criminals in any respect, are the greater sufferers from such laws. It is true that the same State prohibits the one who is divorced, from ever marrying again, while the one who obtains a divorce, is at liberty to do so -- but at the same time, if it be a woman, it sends her into a house of ill fame, as public sentiment will not allow her to have a shelter, it hardly matters what were the circumstances connected with the case. She is deprived of every dollar of the property she may have helped to indirectly accumulate by serving and saving, and she is turned into the street characterless, moneyless, friendless, without health, to beg, starve, or sell herself. Begging will not avail, for she has not as fair a chance as the filthiest vagabond. If she were able to work no man who would not sink her still lower in his selfish purposes, will employ her--woman who has a sympathy for her condition does not dare employ her, because 125 "she will disgrace her house," and so if she prefers to live in a disreputable house, where she has some voice in the rent of her body, instead of dying in the street, where perhaps she would have no voice in the matter, she does the best she can under the circumstances, and the men who made the laws that sent her there, and the men to execute the laws , visit her until she becomes to degraded for respectable gentlemen.

This is one of the degraded women that we hear just such men talk about exercising the rights of Franchise with their wives and daughters, if women are "allowed to vote." These women are the lega l nonentities , except when law degrade. Men, the legal protectors of women , ask you what would be the condition of society, if all the women in certain houses were allowed to vote? But they do not ask us, what is the condition of society now that all the men who keep up such houses are voters!

But to return. If it be a man who is divorced, he simply pursues the same course of iniquity, and to carry out his tyrannical spirit, presents quibble after quibble to delay and annoy as long as it is possible, often for years and years; and when his legal oppression fails to compel her to condone, he brings charges 126 against her, of the same character of which he is actually guilty. Having the purse-strings in his grasp, he buys up witnesses against himself, or sends them to parts not known, where they die, and the evidence is buried forever. He also buys witnesses to swear against a pure spirit they never saw, until in the Court-room; and if, after series of years and the pure one has waded through all the seas of law that can be brought to bear upon the case, and Justice extends her hand with the scroll of freedom, the scrawny fingers that receive it, must spend the best part of the remaining years in toil, to pay the costs of Courts and borrowed money that paid expenses to sea-sides, and mountains, and for journeys, that saved the poor victim from a lunatic asylum!

But it will be said men are obliged to pay all court expenses, and support the wife while getting a bill from him. Yes, if he has any money, and if she swears she does not know anything, and can't do anything to support herself, or is too sick to do so, the court will eke out a something, according to his ideas of the case, and every body will pity the husband who has such an apology for a wife, little thinking that many who have gone to their graves, in consequence of such troubles, could not even 127 survive long enough, to be living apologies for women, whose every look speaks of the terrible wrongs of man--made laws! Husbands are obliged to provide for wives who get a bill of Divorce. Yes, if they have any property, and if they have not taken it to another State, where it can't be reached by law, and if they do not manage to run away and change their names, and if and if and if!

It is just as much the duty of Congress to make general laws respecting marriage and Divorce, as to make any other laws; and when we see the terrible effects of unrighteous laws on this world-wide discussed subject, and realize the importance of Marriage to the perpetuity of an intelligent government, we can but believe that its necessity will not long be overlooked. The days are not distant when England will do this, and thus prevent more terrible cases of the Yelverton type, where a noble woman and her children are wronged for life.

But there is no necessity for out travelling thousands of miles from our native shores, to gather wrongs that result from the want of just and universal laws, in relation to marriage, for every month brings victims to the surface, that have been buried in injustice. Thousands of 128 noble Sage-Richardsons are suffering this hour! Nothing but the Ballot in woman's hand will right these wrongs, by making just laws, wherein a pure marriage relation may be perpetuated, just as nothing but the power of woman in Legislative and Congressional halls, will perpetuate the Union of States.

As a last reason urged against the Ballot for women, we hear that they cannot be warriors, and defend a country, and therefore have no right to take part in a government. Such reasoners are always found to be either ignorant of the histories of part and present ages, or are selfish tricksters, who well know that they would never succeed in their plans if women were enfranchised. The instances of bravery, starvation, suffering, wounds and death of women both North and South during our late war, ought to forever close the mouths of such reasoners, even if wholly ignorant of the thousands of instances in all ages, of the never by man excelled courage, bravery, endurance and patriotism, of the women of the past. The following is a list of the last mentioned.

England owed its deliverance from the tyrannic yoke of the Danes, to Judith, the stepmother of Alfred.

Philippa of Hainault, the Queen of Edward 129 [sic]Third of England, was celebrated for her skill and prudence in military affairs.

The women were formost in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries in Hungary, the islands of the Archipelago and the Mediterranean in resisting the aggressions of the Turks.

Ancient history furnishes splendid instances of woman's heroism in defence of country and religion, in the mediaeval ages. There were also many brave warlike women in the French revolution, and in the Peninsular War. In the revolution of 1789 the women of Paris were the foremost actors as actual combatants. The women marched on Versailles to bring back the King of France to Paris. During the campaign of the army of Republican France, under Dumouriez on the Sambre and the Meuse in 1793, Theophile and Felicite Fernig, the daughters of Mortagne, fought at the head of Philippe Egalite's columns, as they had previously, at Valmy, the noisiest battle on record.

Augustina Saragossa, a Spanish woman, called the "Maid of Saragossa," during the Spanish war of independence in the Peninsula, at the time that the most exposed battery had been silenced by the men having been killed, sprang over the dead and dying, snatched a match 130 form a dead artilleryman, fired off a twenty-six pounder, and made a vow not to quit it alive during the siege, and she so inspired the men that the French were repulsed with great loss.

The Helvetian lady warriors are praised by Caesar, in his Commentaries on the Gallic war. More than once have the Roman soldiers fled from the women soldiers of Switzerland.

According to the testimony of Tacitus, a Queen of the ancient Britons led her armies to battle. There were women warriors in her army. During the crusade, many women died with arms in their hands, fighting with other soldiers by their side.

Joan of Arc, the Maid of Orleans, and Joan of Montford, and the celebrated Margaret of Anjou, all were as brave as ever men were.

Boadicea or Bunduca, the Queen of the Iceni, resisted with her armies, and that in person, the legions of Rome, in the fiercest and most deadly conflicts in which that empire ever engaged. Etahelfreda, the eldest daughter of Peter the Great, commanded armies and gained victories. Renee Bordereau, whose father was butchered before her eyes, and who lost forty-two relatives in the 131 civil war of La Vendee; during the course of sic years fought in more than two hundred battles, on foot and on horseback, with the most determined intrepidity. In one battle she killed twenty-one of the enemy. She liberated fifty priests at one time and eight hundred at another, all of whom would have been executed. A price of 40,000 francs was set on her head. She was thrown into prison for a crime for which she could only prove her innocence by a discovery of her sex, where she remained five years, until the accession of Louis Eighteenth to the throne of France.

The King of Dahomey has a National Guard that is composed entirely of women, numbering 5,000.

Ex-Queen Isabella of Spain at one time went with her soldiers into her revolted states and entirely quieted them.

About 720 years since, the Moors sought to regain Tortosa, and for a length of time the male inhabitants bore the siege firmly and with the utmost bravery; but after having suffered extreme privations, and every hope had vanished, and they had proposed to yield to the Moors, the women attired themselves in men's clothes and made a resolute sally upon their enemies, with such heroism, that they were 132 compelled to raise the siege, and the Tortosa women returned triumphant to their city, while the Moors fled in dismay and made no further attempt upon Tortosa. For the same, Don Raymond instituted an order of knighthood, in which none but these brave women were admitted. He also ordained that women should be exempt from taxes, and that al all public meetings the women should have the best seats, and that all of the apparel and jewels left by their husbands should be lawfully their own. There the women were universally honored and esteemed.

What of our half Republican country; what of the appreciation of American women? What!

Men of America -- the best and most appreciative of you, will see new charms in woman, or at least you will have an added respect for women generally, when the power of the Ballot is in their hands; as surely as you feel thus towards an enfranchised foreigner with elegance of manners, cultured mind, and well filled purse. With all the above advantages -- the wealth, education, elegant appearance and the position that they give -- you feel that all are but toys to a man-resident of America, if the power of the Ballot is wanting,133 although he is as well protected as women. There is a feeling that he is something less than yourselves, although he may be superior to you in all things else.

Power always carries with it a certain amount of respect, whether it be of brain, body, purse, or Ballot. But to a native of a republican country, there must ever be a feeling of insecurity, it matters not how much of all other powers one has, if deprived of the Ballot, the real birthright of every American child.

Men of America -- you have robbed us of our most precious inheritance--you have robbed us of what you feel a necessity to your protection, with all your superior physical strength. Because we are weaker physically than you, is an incontrovertible reason why we should have what you deem the greatest protection to person, property and liberty. That you are our protectors , is not true; for if you were, who would there be to protect us from? That you are our providers , is equally false, for there are over a million of women in these United States that are toiling early and late in shops, and factories, and garrets, to keep soul and body together -- a body half clothed and half starved, and an equally famished soul that weary hours 134 of toil, and half or quarter pay, prevent the possibility of ablutions and clear clothes for the soul!

You would spend the last dime you have; you would spill your last drop of blood before you would see your sons causelessly disfranchised! And yet you lie quietly and unconcernedly down and die, without one thought about your disfranchised daughters. You believe that their husbands will be their protectors, providers, law-makers, and in a word, all that they will be for themselves when they are full fledged citizens in reality --you trust all this to a man that you would not to-morrow dare to trust your filthy lucre with! Your daughter's all, is in the hands of a man, while she is deprived of the Ballot, while you would not, with your superior strength, trust your all in his hands, even with the power of the Ballot. That man with daughters, who does not labor for their enfranchisement, is unworthy of the name father, and ought to be classed with the senseless fops, or the poor unfortunate old bachelors, whose paternal love has never been awakened.

Men--I need not tell you that the burning facts are the same, "whether you hear, or whether you forbear" -- but the results are in 135 your hands, for you have the Ballot yoursleves, and withhold it from women.

To say that "women shall have it when they ask in mass," is as inconsistent as to say that children shall be clothed and educated when they come on their bended knees and pray to you for such essentials. If you are so much the superiors of women, why do you wait for them to ask you for protecting power? If they are so ignorant that they do not see the necessity for such protection, treat them as children and give it to them, and teach them its value and use. If it is not best for them to have such power, why do you promise it, as soon as a certain number express a desire for it? Is a right inherited by all, and desired but by a few, any the less a right now , than it will be when all see its uses? Will a large number possessing an advantage in itself wrong, make that right, which would not be, if exercised by a few?

If I am talking instinctively , you must listen and act; for you say instinct does not err. But if I am reasoning the cause, do not show your want of the power to cope with me, by your anger, but come up like men and acknowledge the truth , or bring arguments from your master minds to prove what you in your sphere 136 are able to do. Through the power of brute force I see the ballot in your hands, but through the telescope of justice I see woman having it, is equally certain.

The zephyrs that shall waft the sounds of joy, to be uttered by woman enfranchised, are already "pluming their wings;" and when that time shall arrive, in every State husband and wife will walk side by side, in all the important duties of life, being equals socially as well as politically. Bickerings will cease, for there will be no more necessity for strife; and the marriage relation will be a beautiful friendship, such as Heaven designed it should be. Then the great principle that just Governments derive their power from the consent of the governed, will be a living one, in our dearly loved America -- then it will be a whole Republic in reality, instead of being scarcely a half one, as it is to-day.

___________________________________________________________

Note.--This book was written over a year since, before the territories of Wyoming and Utah had enfranchised the women; or England had enfranchised the single women who pay taxes.