California Agriculturist and Live Stock Journal. 



iiess, will disgust the mind to the for- 

 saking of all that will vitiate, blunt, or 

 ^ destroy the finer sensibilities. 



Our own emulation is the Addison 

 school, believing that the holding up be- 

 fore all people truth, purity and beauty, 

 all that refines, elevates and touches, will 

 at last bring about purer morals, finer 

 feelings, more tender and beautiful ex- 

 amples of human love aud human sac- 

 rifice. 



Especially do we realize this when we 

 consider that much of what the world 

 contemns is only in the seeming — that, 

 from its very nature, evil must destroy 

 itself eventually. We would not say that 

 the immortal Dean's proclivities were 

 vile or ignoble, but his greatest forte 

 seemed to be in exciting the more com- 

 risibilities of his readers by rather indel- 

 icate, vulgarly-si^okeu comjjurisons and 

 allusions. However, all this is neither 

 here nor there for the question before us, 

 viz,: social association, interest, merit, 

 demerit, and consequences, which takes 

 iu both sexes equally, with only this dif- 

 ference, viz.: that there are involved by 

 far the most largely and lastingly, femi- 

 nine morals and perfection. 



First— It is very gratifying to contem- 

 plate true womanhood, the sublime mis- 

 sion and responsibility of the feminine 

 soul; but we do not love to think of our 

 sex's enslavement to fashion, pride, friv- 

 olity, and often inexcusable ignorance. 

 And we may deserve sometimes to be 

 told of these faults with censorious harsh- 

 ness, but in person we must protest 

 against Gail Hamilton pitching us all 

 about so summardy, although she says 

 many thing only too true, and many a 

 gem of thought flashes from her potent 

 pen, yet she is too cau^ic. Also wise 

 • Dr. Holland, of i<crihnef's monihhj. 



We cannot all be Martha Washingtons, 

 Mrs, John Adamses, Isabellas, Queen 

 Elizabeths, Victorias, aud Cornelias, 

 mother of the Gracchi. Why? Because 

 circumstances, fortunate or unfortunate, 

 gov£ru the world. Those whom fortuit- 

 ous chance places in the way of all life's 

 blessings and helps can be cultivated, 

 refined aud intellectual — they can accom- 

 plish a mighty work iu the domestic and 

 social realm. Such wives, mothers, sis- 

 ters aud daughters are "the cities set on 

 a hill." But those women to whom life 

 is unavoidably nothing but a tread-mill 

 of deprivation of all educational influ- 

 ences, bringing to them poverty, toil, 

 hardship, disappointment, obscurity aud 

 destitution, whose very existence the 

 beast of burden is which keeps the mill 

 revolving — Ihese iironicn! what can tlicy do 

 toward Isegettiug men and women of 

 God-like souls, great intellects, exhaust- 

 less patience and aft'ection? 



We are told that "it is the father's 

 place to provide the material of the 

 household; the mother's, to train the in- 

 tellectual." But these women — these 

 loomen! how are they to train the intellec- 

 tual? They who often aud often have 

 neither time to eat or sleep sufficient for 

 physical, mental or moral growth, and of 

 whom the full half (including all nations 

 and countries) can neither read nor 

 write, who are unable to think of any- 

 thing beside inexorable tasks, the endless 

 chain-power which compels stepping, 

 stepping, ceaselessly stepping, but get- 

 ting no farther on — these are the candles 

 destiny lights and places "under a 

 bushel. ' 



Dear ladies, let us not be understood 

 as charging the blame of the existence of 

 poverty, crime and misery upon any 

 class, any community, or individuals, as 

 abstract cause. The bare fact, none can 

 prevent; but it is with its details, its 

 amelioration, palliation, extent, and 

 control that we, the differing easts and 



classes, have to do. It is in keeping 

 evil down — destroying it — that men and 

 women ought to be interested, earnest 

 and vigilant. Overcoming evil with its 

 opposite, is the great work of men and 

 women to-day aud hecceforth, because 

 everything good and god-like depends 

 upon virtuous action. 



But it is indeed true that too many of 

 us who can labor for human regeneration 

 have too long been content to seek 

 amusement in fashion, ostentation and 

 rivalry. Our mania has not been very 

 severe for self-elevation and mental ac- 

 quirements — perquisites stronger and 

 more enduring than was ever "a love of 

 a bonnet, " latest styles of apparel, or 

 faultless coiffm-e. Feminine excitements 

 are generally not of a high character to 

 educate and develop, in a jiroper direc- 

 tion, the masses of women for auy and 

 all exigencies of individual thought aud 

 action. 



Masculinity, too, has bad a large in- 

 fluence iu making our character what it 

 is — an influence which they are begin- 

 ning to see and to be ashamed of. Sen- 

 timental jjhilosophy holds out the seduc- 

 tive idea that woman is man's treasure, 

 his charmer, his hope, his pride; but as 

 yet it helps us very little to find out why 

 we are of so much value, and how a 

 correct valuation of ourselves is best at- 

 tained. 



We must not longer deceive ourselves 

 with the impression that men's respect 

 and esteem is secondary to their love 

 and admiration, and to secure these last, 

 the truer, better feelings must be sup- 

 pressed, allowing the inferior iu human 

 nature to be the only requisition as aids 

 and counselors. 



We should always speak the truth, and 

 confess that their admiration, their love, 

 is of immeuRe importance to us; but it is 

 a vital mistake to suppose that, iu order 

 to possess it, we need only know how to 

 make superficial little speeches to them — 

 to flirt, fascinate, and lead captive bj' 

 "ijhysical eye batteries," instead of real, 

 intellectual, earnest soul-power. 



High mental preferment should beget 

 a more lady-like bearing aud attractive- 

 ness, enhancing appreciation of social 

 aud sexual relations; and, certainly, that 

 woman who excels iu piquant brilliancy, 

 where desultory badinage is requisite, 

 passing easily and ably to graver, pro- 

 founder themes, bringing out depth aud 

 strength of soul-endowment — surely ahe 

 can, aud must, call forth a greater de- 

 gree of reliable admiration from the mas- 

 culine-add zest to pursuit enjoyment 

 to possession. 



What, pray, iu all ages has made, aud 

 at present makes women what they are? 

 AVill men or women denj- that it is the 

 ignorant ojipression — narrow selfishness 

 — a waut of intellectual culture, induced 

 by the prevailing h.abit in American so- 

 ciety among men of indulging and hu- 

 moriug the weaknesses and foibles of 

 woman, aud requiriug too little mentality 

 of them? — a course most unwise, depre- 

 cicting aud ignoble — the real fomidalion 

 of what, in later times, has become 

 known as masculine oppression, injustice 

 and wrong. Out of this habit comes 

 another danger, of which we will speak 

 at another time. 



Taxation 



Represen- 



We have always regarded Harper's 

 Mayazine as very conservative upon the 

 question of woman's sufi'rage. In the 

 March number of this excellent monthly 

 we find, in the "Easy Chair," the fol- 

 lowing, which our better half requests us 

 to quote as very much to the point, and 

 of interest: 



Last year, when the celebration of the 



Centennial auniversaaies began at Con- 

 cord and Lexington, some of the sincer- 

 est aud most faithful friends of fair play 

 for women declined to take any part or 

 interest, because Concord Bridge and 

 Lexington Green, they contended, are 

 famous for the defense of a great princi- 

 ple, which, these protestants insisted, 

 those who managed the celebrations reso- 

 lutely opposed.^ This principle was one 

 of which we shall hear very much in this 

 Centennial year — that there should be 

 no taxation without representation. 



Sundry ladies have recently been urg- 

 ing this rather familiar American princ- 

 iple upon a perplexed committee of the 

 New York Legislature. The Chamber 

 was crowded, as it always is upon such 

 occasions, and the ladies had it all their 

 own way. Tlio Easy Chair docs not say 

 this "gallantly," but sincerely, for there 

 is no adverse argument. When we, 

 either consciously or ignorantly, permit- 

 ted women to become owners of taxed 

 property iu fee, we surrendered the case. 

 If a stupid and druuken man, owning 

 a handsome estate in the country, may 

 have a voice iu the selection of the rep- 

 resentative who ts to lay taxes upon it, 

 why should not his next neighbor, an 

 intelligent aud sagacious woman, owning 

 a larger estate and paying taxes upon it, 

 have an equal voice iu the selection of 

 the imjioser of the taxes? Does the fact 

 of sex destroy the ijrinciple? But is the 

 Centennial year famous for the vindica- 

 tion of the political doctrine that male 

 taxation and representation should go 

 together, or simply that taxation and 

 representation should be so united? Did 

 Sam Adams, or James Otis, or Patrick 

 Henry, or John Jay, or any of the heroes 

 of '76 qualify the assertion of their prin- 

 ciple by any word denoting sex? Or, 

 when they declared on a certain famous 

 day that all men were created equal, did 

 they mean, as was gravely contended by 

 so "ijractical" a isolitician as Mr. Doug- 

 las, that white men only were so created, 

 and therefore — ! 



But certainly they meant white men, 

 interposes the objector, for at that very 

 time they held black men iu slavery; and 

 certainly, he says, they meant male tax- 

 ation, because nobody ever thought of a 

 woman's voting. The Easy Chair once 

 heard the ladies arguing for this claim in 

 the same Assembly Chamber in which 

 the perplexed committae lately sat, and 

 the committee of that earlier day were 

 equally perplexed. The members smiled 

 good humoredly at the absurd claim, aud 

 they responded "gallantly" to every 

 question, and were quite willing that the 

 "good ladies should have their say." In 

 the Speaker's pulpit stood Mrs. Stanton 

 in the summer evening, tranquilly fan- 

 ning herself, and with candor and force 

 and good nature asking the terrible ques- 

 tions, to which no member of the com- 

 mittee had any other distinct reply than 

 that the suggestion, if m.ade in earnest, 

 was simply preposterous. When anj' one 

 of them remarked that the actual cir- 

 cumstances and practice of the men of 

 the Revolution showed that they had no 

 thought of such an application of their 

 princijjle, Mrs. Stanton asked, with an 

 amused smile, whether, as philosophers 

 and logicians, they ought not to have 

 thought of it, ,and whether their blind- 

 ness was a reason that we should refuse 

 to see? If men proclaim a principle of 

 action which by its very nature is gradu- 

 ally seen to be more and more embracing 

 is its oijeration always to be limited by 

 the narrow vision and selfish aim of 

 those who promulgate it? If, she asked, 

 gently waving her fau, as if to scatter 

 mosquitoes — if, gentlemen, representa- 

 tion should go with taxation, ought not 



I all intelligent and moral native tax-pay- 

 I ers to have a voice in the choice of the 

 representative? One of the committee, 

 who declined to go into the corner, mur- 

 mured, "Not if they are women." "And 

 why not if they are women?" "Because 

 God did not intend that women should 

 vote." "And where does He say that 

 He intends that men should vote?" 



There was one woman a hundred years 

 ago who is perhaps the most famous 

 woman of the Revolution, admirable in 

 every capacity of woman's peculiar 

 sphere, and equally fitted for the com- 

 mon sphere of men and women in hu- 

 man society. This was Abigail Adams, 

 the wife of one President and the mother 

 of another. She at least was reasonable 

 and logical, whoever is not. Writing to 

 her husband, who was iu his seat in the 

 Continental Congress, on the 31st of 

 March, 177G, this typical American mat- 

 ron says: 



" I long to hear that you have declared 

 an iudepeudeuey. And, by-the-way, in 

 the new code of laws which I suppose it 

 will bo necessary for you to make, I de- 

 sire you to remember the ladies, and be 

 more generous and favorable to them 

 than your ancestors. Do not put such 

 unlimited power into the hands of the 

 husbands. Remember, all men would 

 bo tyrants if they could. If particular 

 care and attention is not paid to the 

 ladies, wo are determined to foment a 

 rebellion, and will not hold ourselves 

 bound by any laws in which we have no 

 voice or representation. That your 

 sex are naturally tyrannical is a truth so 

 thoroughly established as to admit of no 

 dispute; but such of you as wish to be 

 happy, willingly give up the harsh title 

 of master for the more tender and endear- 

 ing one of friend. Why, then, jot put 

 it out of the power of the vicious and the 

 lawless to use us with crueltj' and indig- 

 nity with impunitj'?" 



Again, in the following May, she says: 

 "I cannot say that I think you are 

 very generous to the ladies, for while you 

 are proclaiming peace aud good will tj 

 men, emancipating all nations, you in- 

 sist upon retaining an absolute power 

 over wives." 



The tone of affectionate gayety and 

 feminine dependence does not affect the 

 deep and sweet seriousness of passages 

 that show how penetrating was the glance 

 of this admirable womau. Indeed, she 

 but expresses the instinctive feeling of 

 most of the noblest minds and hearts of 

 her sex. But Mrs. Abigail Adams would 

 have pleaded in vain before a committee 

 of the Congress in which her husband 

 sat. The smiling and aft'able chairman 

 would have heard her courteously, and 

 would then hf.ve replied: "Dear and re- 

 spected madame, when women show that 

 they feel the dei)rivation of the ballot to 

 be a grievance, this Congress will take 

 the subject into serious consideration. 

 You must excuse us if we cannot regard 

 your individual views and wishes as 

 "those of your sex. We are inclined to 

 believe that most of them would consider 

 the ballot to be an oppressive burden im- 

 posed upon them, not a desirable privi- 

 lege. Home, not Congi'ess, is the sphere 

 of woman, dear madame^at least that is 

 our opinion, and that seems to have been 

 the universal opinion aud practice of 

 mankind. You and your fellow-petition- 

 ers, dear Mrs. Adams, have leave to 

 withdraw." 



This is very much the speech that the 

 afl'abfe chairman contrives to make, if he 

 makes any. Its argument really is that 

 no political reform shoidd be made until 

 the wrong to be corrected has become so 

 intolorable that is a general cry and pr 

 test. Nothing must be done iu regard to 

 the relations of capital and labor until 



^ B 



