A B C D E F
G H I J K L M 

Total read books on site:
more than 10 000

You can read its for free!


Text on one page: Few Medium Many
Conveyances for the same will be in readiness at
any time desired. In this College, now in its twentieth
annual session, woman, with the exception of one winter, has
always been equal with man in privilege and honor, and here
she shall always share an equal privilege and honor, so long
as she is willing to conform to the same standard of
culture.

Yours, most respectfully,
T. P. WILSON, _Dean_.
H. V. BIGGAR, _Registrar_.

Judge BRADWELL offered the following, which was adopted:

_Resolved_, That we urgently request all State and National
Associations, formed for the purpose of aiding in giving
suffrage to woman, to become auxiliary to, or co-operate
with the American Woman's Suffrage Association, believing
that by concert of action on the part of all Societies and
Associations formed in the nation for this purpose, suffrage
will sooner be extended to woman.

Able addresses were made during the afternoon by Rev. Charles
Marshall, pastor of one of the Presbyterian churches of
Indianapolis; Lizzie Boynton and Mrs. Swank, of Indiana; Lucy
Stone, of New Jersey; Ex-Gov. Root, of Kansas; Mary E. Ames, of
California; and Addie Ballou, of Minnesota. Rebecca Rickoff, of
Cleveland, recited an original poem, "The Convict's Mother," with
marked effect. During the entire session the hall was filled to
its utmost limit. The Convention met for the closing session at
an early hour. The hall was densely filled in every part, the man
at the ticket-office having been literally inundated with
"quarters." Mrs. Dr. Cutler occupied the chair. Mrs. STONE
announced that she would go through the audience to get names of
members of the Association, which any one could become on payment
of a dollar.

Brief speeches were made by Mr. Bellville and Mr. Lamphear, of
Ohio; Mr. Henry Blackwell, of New Jersey; and Rev. Rowland
Connor, of Massachusetts, and then Mrs. Julia Ward Howe delivered
a second address of remarkable power and unparalleled beauty. She
spoke the day before as the prophet of the Convention--this
evening, she spoke as its historian. Her address was faultless,
peerless, perfect, and though read from a manuscript, moved the
large audience deeply. Next followed Mrs. Celia Burleigh, of New
York, a woman of rare grace and culture, with an address packed
with thought and wisdom, uttered in the choicest language. Mrs.
Caroline M. Severance, of Boston, succeeded her with another
speech of like polish and impressiveness, and then the great
congregation rose, and closed the interesting meetings of the two
days with the singing of the grand old doxology, "Praise God from
whom all blessings flow," after which the Convention adjourned
_sine die_.

* * * * *

A Mass Convention for the advocacy of Woman Suffrage, under the
auspices of the American Woman Suffrage Association, was held at
Steinway Hall, New York City, May 11th and 12th, 1870. Upon each
of those days three sessions were held, and at each session the
attendance was numerous and enthusiastic. The Convention was
presided over by Rev. Henry Ward Beecher. Upon the platform were
seated many earnest, active supporters, and advocates of the
cause.[186]

The address of Rev. HENRY WARD BEECHER was as follows: _Ladies
and Gentlemen_:--It is but a little while ago that the question
whether a woman might, with modesty and propriety, appear upon
the public platform to speak her sentiments upon moral and
philanthropic questions, agitated the whole community. Although I
do not regard myself as excessively conservative, I remember
very well when the appointment of women, by the Anti-Slavery
Society of New England, to act on committees with men, grievously
shocked my prejudices; and I said to myself, "Well, where will
this matter end?" I remember very well that when many persons,
whose names are now quite familiar to the people, first began to
speak on the anti-slavery question, I felt that if the diffidence
and modesty and delicacy of woman had not been sacrificed, it
had, at any rate, been put in peril; and that, although a few
might survive, the perilous example would pervert and destroy the
imitators and followers.

It was in the year 1856 that I first made a profession of my
faith in Woman's Rights. During the Fremont campaign I had so far
had my eyes opened and my understanding enlightened, as to see
that if it is right for the people of Great Britain to put a
politician at the head of their government, and she a woman--if,
in all the civilized nations of the world, it is deemed both
seemly and proper for women to be in public meetings and take
part therein, provided they are duchesses or the ladies of
lords--if it is right, in other words, for aristocracy to give to
their women the right of public speech, then it is right, also,
for democracy to give their women the right of public speech.
Does any one question whether Lucy Stone may speak? or Mrs.
Livermore? or Mrs. Stanton? There is not a city or town in the
nation that does not hail their coming; and there are no persons
so refined, and no persons so conservative as not to listen to
them; and there are none that listen who do not always admit that
women may speak. God does not give such gifts for nothing.

We are in a community that is constantly growing, expanding,
developing. We do not believe that human nature has reached its
limits. There are new combinations, new developments, taking
place. Nor do we believe that men have reached the ultimatum of
their practical efficiency, any more than women have. It is in
the order of things, that having met, tried, and settled this
question--the right of woman to public speech--we should meet the
next question, the right of women to act. She has a right to
think,--has she a right to practice? May she vote, or sit upon
committees in matters pertaining to local or National interests?
It is this question which is under discussion now. It seems wild
and wandering to many, but not more wild and wandering than
fifteen years ago, to the great majority of our citizens, seemed
the question of woman's right to public speech. I venture to say
that within the fifteen years next coming it will seem strange to
the great mass of the people that it should have been considered
of doubtful propriety for woman to exercise the privilege, or, I
should rather say, the duty of suffrage.

And so within the last few years this question has risen up, to
the suppression, I may say, of everything else; for everything
else is conceded. I don't know what advanced step may be next
proposed. If I did, I should propose it to-day--for this reason,
that I notice that each advance becomes the acceptance of the
disputed question immediately in its rear. When the doctrine of
physiognomy--Lavater's doctrine--was first propounded, men
laughed it to scorn, and contemned the idea that there could be
anything true or noble in it, until phrenology came and asserted
that the brain's proportional parts could be known, and that the
mind could be outwardly ascertained, and then men said: "Oh,
this phrenology is a humbug! Physiognomy is rational; we can see
how a man can judge that way; there is something in physiognomy."
So they swallowed physiognomy in order to be strong enough to
combat phrenology. Animal magnetism, I believe, came up next; and
the people ridiculed it as they had ridiculed those that had gone
before. They now thought that there might be some sense in
physiognomy and phrenology, but animal magnetism was
preposterous. Then came mesmerism. "Why," people said, "this is
nothing in the world but animal magnetism, in which, of course,
there is some reason." Then came spiritualism. "Oh," people said,
"that is nothing but mesmerism." So they admitted each anterior
heresy for the sake of refuting the new one. And now, may a woman
be an artist? May she sing in public? May she speak in public?
"Well," said people, "she can sing, if she has the gift; there is
no harm in that; but this delivering an oration, this is not
woman's sphere." Then if we say, "Shall a woman vote?" they say,
"Oh! vote! vote! Let her speak if she wants to speak; but as for
voting, that will never do!"

Therefore, as I have said, if I could but see the next point
ahead, I would immediately proclaim it, because then people would
say, "Let women vote if they want to vote, but that is as far as
we can go." I rejoice in your presence this morning. I, for one,
need not assert that I am from my whole heart and conviction
thoroughly of opinion that the nature of woman, the purity and
sweetness of the family, the integrity and strength of the State,
will all be advantaged when woman shall be, like man, a
participator in public affairs.

* * * * *

Rev. JAMES FREEMAN CLARKE said--Ladies and gentlemen:--This is a
very serious question, whichever way we look at it. I do not
suppose that, if the women of the country were to be admitted
to-day to vote, the consequences would appear to-day, or for some
time to come, because women everywhere would vote very much as
those around them are in the habit of voting. Young men growing
up generally vote as their fathers and brothers are in the habit
of voting--those with whom they are in the habit of
communication; so it would be with women.



Pages: | Prev | | 1 | | 2 | | 3 | | 4 | | 5 | | 6 | | 7 | | 8 | | 9 | | 10 | | 11 | | 12 | | 13 | | 14 | | 15 | | 16 | | 17 | | 18 | | 19 | | 20 | | 21 | | 22 | | 23 | | 24 | | 25 | | 26 | | 27 | | 28 | | 29 | | 30 | | 31 | | 32 | | 33 | | 34 | | 35 | | 36 | | 37 | | 38 | | 39 | | 40 | | 41 | | 42 | | 43 | | 44 | | 45 | | 46 | | 47 | | 48 | | 49 | | 50 | | 51 | | 52 | | 53 | | 54 | | 55 | | 56 | | 57 | | 58 | | 59 | | 60 | | 61 | | 62 | | 63 | | 64 | | 65 | | 66 | | 67 | | 68 | | 69 | | 70 | | 71 | | 72 | | 73 | | 74 | | 75 | | 76 | | 77 | | 78 | | 79 | | 80 | | 81 | | 82 | | 83 | | 84 | | 85 | | 86 | | 87 | | 88 | | 89 | | 90 | | 91 | | 92 | | 93 | | 94 | | 95 | | 96 | | 97 | | 98 | | 99 | | 100 | | 101 | | 102 | | 103 | | 104 | | 105 | | 106 | | 107 | | 108 | | 109 | | 110 | | 111 | | 112 | | 113 | | 114 | | 115 | | 116 | | 117 | | 118 | | 119 | | 120 | | 121 | | 122 | | 123 | | 124 | | 125 | | 126 | | 127 | | 128 | | 129 | | 130 | | 131 | | 132 | | 133 | | 134 | | 135 | | 136 | | 137 | | 138 | | 139 | | 140 | | 141 | | 142 | | 143 | | 144 | | 145 | | 146 | | 147 | | 148 | | 149 | | 150 | | 151 | | 152 | | 153 | | 154 | | 155 | | 156 | | 157 | | 158 | | 159 | | 160 | | 161 | | 162 | | 163 | | 164 | | 165 | | 166 | | 167 | | 168 | | 169 | | 170 | | 171 | | 172 | | 173 | | 174 | | 175 | | 176 | | 177 | | 178 | | 179 | | 180 | | 181 | | 182 | | 183 | | 184 | | 185 | | 186 | | 187 | | 188 | | 189 | | 190 | | 191 | | 192 | | 193 | | 194 | | 195 | | 196 | | 197 | | 198 | | 199 | | 200 | | 201 | | 202 | | 203 | | 204 | | 205 | | 206 | | 207 | | 208 | | 209 | | 210 | | 211 | | 212 | | 213 | | 214 | | 215 | | 216 | | 217 | | 218 | | 219 | | 220 | | 221 | | 222 | | 223 | | 224 | | 225 | | 226 | | 227 | | 228 | | 229 | | 230 | | 231 | | 232 | | 233 | | 234 | | 235 | | 236 | | 237 | | 238 | | 239 | | 240 | | 241 | | 242 | | 243 | | 244 | | 245 | | 246 | | 247 | | 248 | | 249 | | 250 | | 251 | | 252 | | 253 | | 254 | | 255 | | 256 | | 257 | | 258 | | 259 | | 260 | | 261 | | 262 | | 263 | | 264 | | 265 | | 266 | | 267 | | 268 | | 269 | | 270 | | 271 | | 272 | | 273 | | 274 | | 275 | | 276 | | 277 | | 278 | | 279 | | 280 | | 281 | | 282 | | 283 | | 284 | | 285 | | 286 | | 287 | | 288 | | 289 | | 290 | | 291 | | 292 | | 293 | | 294 | | 295 | | 296 | | 297 | | 298 | | 299 | | 300 | | 301 | | 302 | | 303 | | 304 | | 305 | | 306 | | 307 | | 308 | | 309 | | 310 | | 311 | | 312 | | 313 | | 314 | | 315 | | 316 | | 317 | | 318 | | 319 | | 320 | | 321 | | 322 | | 323 | | 324 | | 325 | | 326 | | 327 | | 328 | | 329 | | 330 | | 331 | | 332 | | 333 | | 334 | | 335 | | 336 | | 337 | | 338 | | 339 | | 340 | | 341 | | 342 | | 343 | | 344 | | 345 | | 346 | | 347 | | 348 | | 349 | | 350 | | 351 | | 352 | | 353 | | 354 | | 355 | | 356 | | 357 | | 358 | | 359 | | 360 | | Next |

N O P Q R S T
U V W X Y Z 

Your last read book:

You dont read books at this site.