Volume I Part 109 (1/2)
It gives the written speeches quite full, but only the skeleton of the spoken ones, which in reality const.i.tuted the cream of the affair....
This portion of the world's history in relation to these agitating questions, is very appropriately treated upon by the Lord Himself: ”_The sea and the waves roaring; men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on earth; for the power of heaven shall be shaken_.” We recognize the sea as symbolizing the ideas which are drifted over the earth's surface, and the waves roaring, the agitating topics which the times have brought upon us.
_The New York Herald_ (editorial), _Sept. 12, 1852_.
THE WOMAN'S RIGHTS CONVENTION--THE LAST ACT OF THE DRAMA.
The farce at Syracuse has been played out. We publish to-day the last act, in which it will be seen that the authority of the Bible, as a perfect rule of faith and practice for human beings, was voted down, and what are called the laws of nature set up instead of the Christian code. We have also a practical exhibition of the consequences that flow from woman leaving her true sphere where she wields all her influence, and coming into public to discuss questions of morals and politics with men. The scene in which Rev. Mr. Hatch violated the decorum of his cloth, and was coa.r.s.ely offensive to such ladies present as had not lost that modest ”feminine element,” on which he dwelt so forcibly, is the natural result of the conduct of the women themselves, who, in the first place, invited discussion about s.e.xes; and in the second place, so broadly defined the difference between the male and the female, as to be suggestive of anything but purity to the audience. The women of the Convention have no right to complain; but, for the sake of his clerical character, if no other motive influenced him, he ought not to have followed so bad an example. His speech was sound and his argument conclusive, but his form of words was not in the best taste. The female orators were the aggressors; but, to use his own language, he ought not to have measured swords with a woman, especially when he regarded her ideas and expressions as bordering upon the obscene. But all this is the natural result of woman placing herself in a false position. As the Rev. Mr. Hatch observed, if she ran with horses she must expect to be betted upon. The whole tendency of these Conventions is by no means to increase the influence of woman, to elevate her condition, or to command the respect of the other s.e.x.
Who are these women? what do they want? what are the motives that impel them to this course of action? The _dramatis personae_ of the farce enacted at Syracuse present a curious conglomeration of both s.e.xes. Some of them are old maids, whose personal charms were never very attractive, and who have been sadly slighted by the masculine gender in general; some of them women who have been badly mated, whose own temper, or their husbands, has made life anything but agreeable to them, and they are therefore down upon the whole of the opposite s.e.x; some, having so much of the virago in their disposition, that nature appears to have made a mistake in their gender--mannish women, like hens that crow; some of boundless vanity and egotism, who believe that they are superior in intellectual ability to ”all the world and the rest of mankind,” and delight to see their speeches and addresses in print; and man shall be consigned to his proper sphere--nursing the babies, was.h.i.+ng the dishes, mending stockings, and sweeping the house. This is ”the good time coming.” Besides the cla.s.ses we have enumerated, there is a cla.s.s of wild enthusiasts and visionaries--very sincere, but very mad--having the same vein as the fanatical Abolitionists, and the majority, if not all of them, being, in point of fact, deeply imbued with the anti-slavery sentiment. Of the male s.e.x who attend these Conventions for the purpose of taking a part in them, the majority are hen-pecked husbands, and all of them ought to wear petticoats.
In point of ability, the majority of the women are flimsy, flippant, and superficial. Mrs. Rose alone indicates much argumentative power.
How did woman first become subject to man as she now is all over the world? By her nature, her s.e.x, just as the negro is and always will be, to the end of time, inferior to the white race, and, therefore, doomed to subjection; but happier than she would be in any other condition, just because it is the law of her nature. The women themselves would not have this law reversed. It is a significant fact that even Mrs. Swisshelm, who formerly ran about to all such gatherings from her husband, is now ”a keeper at home,” and condemns these Conventions in her paper. How does this happen? Because, after weary years of unfruitfulness, she has at length got her rights in the shape of a baby. This is the best cure for the mania, and we would recommend a trial of it to all who are afflicted.
What do the leaders of the Woman's Rights Convention want? They want to vote, and to hustle with the rowdies at the polls. They want to be members of Congress, and in the heat of debate to subject themselves to coa.r.s.e jests and indecent language, like that of Rev. Mr. Hatch.
They want to fill all other posts which men are ambitious to occupy--to be lawyers, doctors, captains of vessels, and generals in the field. How funny it would sound in the newspapers, that Lucy Stone, pleading a cause, took suddenly ill in the pains of parturition, and perhaps gave birth to a fine bouncing boy in court!
Or that Rev. Antoinette Brown was arrested in the middle of her sermon in the pulpit from the same cause, and presented a ”pledge” to her husband and the congregation; or, that Dr. Harriot K. Hunt, while attending a gentleman patient for a fit of the gout or _fistula in ano_, found it necessary to send for a doctor, there and then, and to be delivered of a man or woman child--perhaps twins. A similar event might happen on the floor of Congress, in a storm at sea, or in the raging tempest of battle, and then what is to become of the woman legislator?
WORLD'S TEMPERANCE CONVENTION.
COMMENTS OF THE PRESS.
”_The New York Herald_” (editorial article), _September 9, 1853_.
.... ”We are at length--praised be the stars!--drawing to the termination of the clamorous conventions, which have kept the city in a state of ferment and agitation, excitement and fun, for the past two weeks....
”The World's Temperance Convention commenced its sittings on Tuesday, and is still in session. This organization was calculated to effect much good, had it not been leavened with the elements of discord, which had brought contempt and ridicule on that of the 'Whole World.'
The Rev. Miss Antoinette Brown cast the brand of disorder into it, by presenting herself as a delegate from the other a.s.sociation. This was a virtual declaration of Woman's Rights, and a resolute effort to have them recognized by the Convention. Neal Dow, as President and as a man of gallantry, decided on receiving Miss Antoinette's credentials, and for a time victory appeared to smile on the Amazons. The triumph, however, was only ephemeral and illusive. The motion was put and carried that none but the officers and invited guests of the Convention should be permitted to occupy places on the platform, and so, by this indirect movement, Miss Brown saw herself, in the moment of her brightest hopes, expelled from the stage, and once more the Anti-Woman's Righters were in the ascendancy.
”This was on Tuesday. Next day another stormy scene, arising from the same cause, was enacted. The meek, temperate Dow--the light of the reformation, the apostle of the Maine Liquor Law, the President of the World's Temperance Convention--no longer able to control the stormy elements which had developed themselves in the council, resolved by a _coup d'etat_ to give the world an instance of his temperate demeanor and of the liberality of the reformers, and accordingly directed the police officers in attendance to clear the hall. The order was enforced, and even Miss Antoinette Brown, notwithstanding she was the bearer of credentials, was compelled to evacuate with the rest of the throng, and leave Metropolitan Hall to the quiet and peaceful possession of the male delegates to the World's Temperance Convention.
Thus harmony was restored in that obstreperous a.s.sembly.
”'They made a solitude, and called it peace.'”
”_Herald,” September 10, 1853_.
.... ”Thus stands the case, then. This World's Temperance, or Maine Law Convention, headed by Neal Dow, the founder of the aforesaid statute, has turned adrift the Woman's Rights party, male and female, black and white, the Socialists, the Amalgamationists, the Infidels, the Vegetarians, and the Free Colored Americans ... What is to follow from these proceedings, excluding Miss Brown, Phillips, Dougla.s.s, and Smith from the holy cause of temperance? Agitation? Of course. What else? Very likely a separate Maine Law coalition movement, comprising the Abolitionists, the strong-minded women, and Free Colored Americans all over the North, in opposition to Neal Dow and the orthodox Maine Law party. Thus the house will be divided--is, indeed, already divided--against itself. What then? The Scriptures say that such a house can't stand. It can't. And thus the Maine Law is crippled in a miserable squabble with fugitive slaves, Bloomers, and Abolitionists.
How strange! Great country this, anyhow.”
”_National Democrat,” September 5_ (Rev. Chauncey C. Burr, editor).
”Time was when a full-blooded n.i.g.g.e.r meeting in New York would have been heralded with the cry of 'Tar and feathers!' but, alas! in these degenerate days, we are called to lament only over an uproarious disturbance. _The Tribune_ groans horribly, it is true, because a set of deistical fanatics were interrupted in their villainous orgies; but it should rather rejoice that no harsher means were resorted to than 'tufts of gra.s.s.' Talk about freedom! Is any land so lost in self-respect--so sunk in infamy--that G.o.d-defying, Bible-abhorring sacrilege will be civilly allowed? Because the bell-wether of _The Tribune_, accompanied by a phalanx of blue petticoats, is installed as the grand-master of outrages, is that any reason for personal respect and public humiliation? In view of all the aggravating circ.u.mstances of the case, we congratulate the foolhardy fanatics on getting off as easy as they did; and we commend the forbearance of the considerate crowd in not carrying their coercive measures to extremes, because, the humbug being exploded, all that is necessary now is to laugh, hiss, and vociferously applaud. When men make up their minds to vilify the Bible, denounce the Const.i.tution, and defame their country (although this is a free country), they should go down in some obscure cellar, remote from mortal ken, and, even there, whisper their hideous treason against G.o.d and liberty.”
MOB CONVENTION, 1853.