Volume I Part 72 (1/2)
”FAIR PLAY.”
_Knickerbocker_, Albany, March 8, 1854: GOING IT BLIND.--The editor of _The State Register_ is going it blind on woman's rights matters. He was out on Monday with a half column leader that touched everything except the matter in dispute. We quote a paragraph:
”People are beginning to inquire how far public sentiment should sanction or tolerate these uns.e.xed women, who make a scoff at religion, who repudiate the Bible, and blaspheme G.o.d; who would step out from the true sphere of the mother, the wife, and the daughter, and take upon themselves the duties and the business of men; stalk into the public gaze, and by engaging in the politics, the rough controversies, and trafficking of the world, upheave existing inst.i.tutions, and overturn all the social relations of life.”
_The Register_ either misunderstands matters, or else willfully misrepresents them. The leading women connected with this new movement do not scoff at religion, repudiate the Bible, nor blaspheme G.o.d. Mrs. Stanton and Miss Brown are no more opposed to G.o.d and religion than the editor of _The Register_ is. They are educated, Christian women, and would no sooner ”overturn society”
than they would bear false witness against their neighbors.
Before _The Register_ again attacks the reforms proposed by the Woman's Rights Conventions, it should become acquainted with them. ”Going it blind,” not only exposes one's prejudices, but ignorance. Many of the innovations proposed by Mrs. Stanton are such as every common-sense man would or should vote for. We mean those improvements which she would have made in the rights of property and the care of children. There are other propositions in her platform which we should dissent from. _The State Register_ may do the same. All the ”Woman's Rights” women claim is fair play and truthful criticism. They object, however, to any misstatements. They are willing to fall before truth, but not before detraction. _The State Register_ will please notice and act accordingly.
Mrs. Stanton's address to the Legislature was laid upon the members'
desks Monday morning, Feb. 20, 1854. When the order of pet.i.tions was reached, Mr. D. P. Wood, of Onondaga, presented in the a.s.sembly a pet.i.tion signed by 5,931 men and women, praying for the just and equal rights of women, which, after a spicy debate, was referred to the following Select Committee: James L. Angle, of Monroe Co.; George W.
Thorn, of Was.h.i.+ngton Co.; Derrick L. Boardman, of Oneida Co.; George H. Richards, of New York; James M. Munro, of Onondaga; Wesley Gleason, of Fulton; Alexander P. Sharpe, of New York.
In the Senate, on the same day, Mr. Richards, or Warren County, presented a pet.i.tion signed by 4,164 men and women, praying for the extension of the right of suffrage to women, and on his motion it was referred to the following Select Committee: George Yost, of Montgomery Co.; Ben. Field, of Orleans Co.; W. H. Robertson, of Westchester Co.
We give the report of the presentation and discussion of the pet.i.tions from _The Albany Evening Journal_ of Feb. 20, 1854:
WOMAN'S RIGHTS.
a.s.sEMBLY, Monday, _February 20, 1854_.
Mr. D. P. WOOD: I am requested by a Committee of the Woman's Rights Convention recently a.s.sembled in this city, to present to this body their address, together with a pet.i.tion signed by 5,931 men and women, asking that certain withheld rights shall be granted to the women of the State. I ask the reference of these two doc.u.ments to a Select Committee of seven; and in making this motion, I wish the Speaker to waive the courtesy which would require him, under ordinary circ.u.mstances, to place me at the head of this Committee. I am already on several Committees which are pressed with business, and I would not, in my present state of health, be able to give the subject that careful consideration which the importance requires. I am satisfied, sir, that these ladies are ent.i.tled to some relief. They think so, and they say so, in language equally eloquent and impressive.
Mr. BURNETT: I hope the House will not act at all on this subject without due consideration. I hope before even this motion is put, gentlemen will be allowed to reflect upon the important question whether these individuals deserve any consideration at the hands of the Legislature. Whatever may be their pretensions or their sincerity, they do not appear to be satisfied with having uns.e.xed themselves, but they desire to uns.e.x every female in the land, and to set the whole community ablaze with unhallowed fire. I trust, sir, the House may deliberate before we suffer them to cast this firebrand into our midst. (Here was heard a ”hiss” from some part of the chamber). True, as yet, there is nothing officially before us, but it is well known that the object of these uns.e.xed women is to overthrow the most sacred of our inst.i.tutions, to set at defiance the Divine law which declares man and wife to be one, and establish on its ruins what will be in fact and in principle but a species of legalized adultery.
That this is their real object, however they may attempt to disguise it, is well known to every one who has looked, not perhaps at the intentions of all who take part in it, but at the practical and inevitable result of the movement.
It is, therefore, a matter of duty, a duty to ourselves, to our consciences, to our const.i.tuents, and to G.o.d, who is the source of all law and of all obligations, to reflect long and deliberatively before we shall even seem to countenance a movement so unholy as this. The Spartan mothers asked no such immunities as are asked for by these women. The Roman mothers were content to occupy their legitimate spheres; and our own mothers, who possessed more than Spartan or Roman virtue, asked for no repudiation of the duties, obligations, or sacred relations of the marital rite.
Are we, sir, to give the least countenance to claims so preposterous, disgraceful, and criminal as are embodied in this address? Are we to put the stamp of truth upon the libel here set forth, that men and women, in the matrimonial relation, are to be equal? We know that G.o.d created man as the representative of the race; that after his creation, his Creator took from his side the material for woman's creation; and that, by the inst.i.tution of matrimony, woman was restored to the side of man, and became one flesh and one being, he being the head. But this law of G.o.d and creation is spurned by these women who present themselves here as the exponents of the wishes of our mothers, wives, and daughters.
They ask no such exponents, and they repel their sacrilegious doctrines.
But again, sir, our old views of matrimony were, that it was a holy rite, having holy relations based on mutual love and confidence; and that while woman gave herself up to man, to his care, protection, and love, man also surrendered something in exchange for this confidence and love. He placed his happiness and his honor, all that belongs to him of human hopes and of human happiness, in the keeping of the being he received in the sacred relations.h.i.+p of wife. I say, sir, that this ordinance, sought to be practically overthrown by these persons, was established by G.o.d Himself; and was based on the mutual love and confidence of husband and wife. But we are now asked to have this ordinance based on jealousy and distrust; and, as in Italy, so in this country, should this mischievous scheme be carried out to its legitimate results, we, instead of reposing safe confidence against a.s.saults upon our honor in the love and affection of our wives, shall find ourselves obliged to close the approaches to those a.s.saults by the padlock. (The ”hiss” was here repeated).
Mr. LOZIER: Mr. Speaker, twice I have heard a hiss from the lobby. I protest against the toleration of such an insult to any member of this House, and call for proper action in view of it.
The SPEAKER: The chair observed the interruption, and was endeavoring to discover its source, but has been unable to do so.
If, however, its author can be recognized, the chair will immediately order the person to the bar of the House.
Mr. BURNETT: I have nothing further. The leading features of this address are well known; and I do not wish at present to further enter upon the argument of its character. I merely wish that members be afforded time for consideration. I therefore move to lay the pending motion on the table.
D. P. WOOD: I am surprised that the gentleman from Ess.e.x, who professes to desire light, and to afford members time for examination, should make a motion which, if carried, will preclude light and prevent examination. The gentleman sees fit to regard the memorial of these 6,000 men and women as a firebrand.
I do not believe the ladies who presented it intended it as such; and they will be surprised to learn that a gentleman of his age and experience should have taken fire from it. Their requests are simple. They ask for ”justice and equal rights,” and this simple request is made the excuse for an attack upon them as unheard of as it is unjust. They ask only for ”justice and equal rights.” If the House does not see fit to grant them what they ask, let my motion be voted down, and send the memorial to the Judiciary Committee, of which the gentleman from Ess.e.x is chairman. Let such a disposition be made of it, and there will then be no danger that any one will be fired up by it, for it will then be sure to sleep the sleep of death.
Sir, when a pet.i.tion like this comes before the Legislature, it should not only be respectfully received, but courteously considered; particularly when it asks, as this pet.i.tion does, a review of the entire code of our statute laws. It should not be sent to a Committee adverse to its request. That would be unparliamentary and the end of it. If sent to such a Committee it would be smothered. The House, I am sure, is not prepared for any such disposition of the matter, but is willing to look candidly at the alleged grievances, and, if consistent with public policy, redress them, although in doing so we may infringe upon time-honored notions and usages.
Mr. PETERS: I am not surprised at the direction which the gentleman from Ess.e.x seeks to give this memorial. Any gentleman who would a.s.sail these ladies as he has done, would be prepared to make any disrespectful disposition of their rights. I may regret that he has sought to deny a hearing to these pet.i.tioners, but I am not surprised that he has done so. I trust that no other member on this floor will refuse, practically, to receive this pet.i.tion--refuse to our mothers, wives, and sisters, what we every day grant to our fathers, brothers, and sons. These women come here with a respectful pet.i.tion, and we should give them a candid and respectful hearing. If it be true, and true it is, that there are real grievances complained of, I hope they may be redressed after careful and candid consideration.