{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_45580/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_45580","id":"gutenberg_45580","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/45580","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Gender & Sexuality Studies","Category: History - Other","Category: History - Religious","Women -- History","Women and religion","Women's rights","Women's rights -- Religious aspects","Women's rights -- United States"],"text":"+WOMAN,\n    CHURCH\n    & STATE+\n\n    The\n    Original Expos\u00e9\n    of Male\n    Collaboration\n    Against\n    the Female Sex\n\n    by Matilda Joslyn Gage\n\n\nOriginal publication date 1893\n\n\n\n\nContents\n\n\n    Preface                                                             5\n\n\n    _Chapter One_\u2014+The Matriarchate+\n\n    Tendency of Christianity from the first to restrict woman\u2019s\n    liberty. Woman had great freedom under the old civilizations.\n    The Matriarchate; its traces among many nations; it preceded\n    the Patriarchate. The Iroquois or Six Nations under\n    reminiscences of the Matriarchate. Government of the United\n    States borrowed from the Six Nations. To the Matriarchate or\n    Mother-rule, is the world indebted for its first conception\n    of \u201cinherent rights,\u201d and a government established on this\n    basis. Malabar under the Matriarchate when discovered by the\n    Portuguese. The most ancient Aryans under the Matriarchate.\n    Ancient Egypt a reminiscence of the Matriarchal period.\n    Authority of the wife among the most polished nations of\n    antiquity. As Vestal Virgin in Rome, woman\u2019s authority great\n    both in civil and religious affairs. Monogamy the rule of the\n    Matriarchate. Polygamy, infanticide and prostitution the rule\n    of the Patriarchate.                                                7\n\n\n    _Chapter Two_\u2014+Celibacy+\n\n    Original sin. Woman not regarded as a human being by the\n    church. Marriage looked upon as vile. Celibacy of the clergy;\n    their degrading sensuality. A double Code of Morals. Celibacy\n    confirmed as a dogma of the church. Many notable consequences\n    followed. Wives sold as slaves. Women driven to suicide.\n    Influence of the church unfavorable to virtue. Women of wealth\n    drawn into monastic life. The church in Mexico. President\n    Diaz. Protestant Orders.                                           24\n\n\n    _Chapter Three_\u2014+Canon Law+\n\n    The church makes the legitimacy of marriage depend upon its\n    control of the ceremony. Change from ancient civilization\n    to renewed barbarism at an early age of the Christian era,\n    noted by historians, but its cause unperceived. The clergy\n    a distinct body from the laity; their rights not the same.\n    A holy sex and an unholy one. Rapid growth of Canon law in\n    England. Alteration in the laws through the separation of\n    Ecclesiastical courts from the Civil, recognized by Blackstone\n    as among the remarkable legal events of Great Britain.\n    Learning prohibited to women. The oath of seven persons\n    required to convict a priest. Husbands prohibited by Canon law\n    from leaving more than one-third of their property to wives;\n    might leave them less. Daughters could be disinherited; sons\n    could not be. The Reformation effected no change. Governments\n    catering to Pope Leo XIII, at time of his Jubilee; the\n    President of the United States sends a gift.                       50\n\n\n    _Chapter Four_\u2014+Marquette+\n\n    Feudalism; its degradation of woman. _Jus primae noctis._\n    Rights of the Lords Spiritual. Peasants decide not to marry.\n    Immorality of the heads of the Greek and the Protestant\n    churches. Breton Ballad of the Fourteenth Century. St.\n    Margaret of Scotland. Pall Mall Gazette\u2019s disclosures. Foreign\n    traffic in young English girls. West End. Eton. Prostitution\n    chiefly supported by \u201cHeads of Families.\u201d Northwestern\n    Pineries. Governmental crime-makers. Rapid increase of child\n    criminals. The White Cross society. Baptism of nude women in\n    the early Christian Church.                                        66\n\n\n    _Chapter Five_\u2014+Witchcraft+\n\n    The possession of a pet of any kind dangerous to woman. Black\n    cats and witches. The fact of a woman\u2019s possessing knowledge,\n    brought her under suspicion of the church. The three most\n    distinguishing features of witchcraft. Opposition of the\n    church to the growth of human will. Persecution for witchcraft\n    a continuance of church policy for obtaining universal\n    dominion over mankind. The Sabbat. The Black Mass. Women\n    physicians and surgeons of the middle ages; they discover\n    anaesthetics. Their learning; their persecution by the church.\n    The most eminent legal minds incapable of forming correct\n    judgment. Three notable points in regard to witchcraft.\n    Persecution introduced into America by the \u201cPilgrim Fathers.\u201d\n    First Synod in America convened to try a woman for heresy.\n    Whipping half nude women for their religious opinions. Famine\n    caused by persecution of women.                                    94\n\n\n    _Chapter Six_\u2014+Wives+\n\n    \u201cUsus.\u201d Disruption of the Roman Empire unfavorable to\n    the personal and proprietary rights of woman. Sale of\n    daughters practiced in England seven hundred years after\n    the introduction of Christianity. The Mundium. The practice\n    of buying wives with cattle or money regulated by law. Evil\n    fame of Christendom. \u201cThe Worthier of Blood.\u201d Murder of a\n    husband termed petit treason; punished by burning alive.\n    Mrs. Sanio decapitated in Finland, 1892, for crime of petit\n    treason. Husbands control wives\u2019 religion. The \u201cLucy Walker\n    case;\u201d Judge Dodge decides a husband has a property interest\n    in a wife. Davenport\u2019s Rules for his wife. Assaulting wives\n    protected by law. The Ducking Stool; its use in England;\n    brought to America by the \u201cPilgrim Fathers.\u201d Salic law.\n    Gavelkind. Women not permitted to read the Bible. \u201cMasterless\n    women.\u201d Women not admitted as a surety or witness. The Code\n    Napoleon. Morganatic marriage. Ibsen\u2019s \u201cGhosts.\u201d Strindberg\u2019s\n    \u201cGiftas.\u201d Ancient Slavs. Russia under Greek Christianity.\n    The Domstroii Marriage forms. Burying wives alive. \u201cDarkest\n    England.\u201d Advertising wives. An English clergyman offers \u00a3100\n    reward for the capture and return of his wife. Civil marriage\n    is opposed by the church. Action of the Chilian Republic.         129\n\n\n    _Chapter Seven_\u2014+Polygamy+\n\n    Polygamy sustained by the Christian Church and the Christian\n    State. The first Synod of the Reformation convened to sanction\n    polygamy. Favoring views of Luther and the other \u201cprincipal\n    reformers.\u201d Favoring action of the American Board of Foreign\n    Missions. Favoring action of a Missionary Conference in India.\n    Mormons compared to the Puritans. Mormon theocracy similar to\n    that of other Christian sects.                                    175\n\n\n    _Chapter Eight_\u2014+Woman and Work+\n\n    God\u2019s \u201ccurse\u201d upon Adam. Opposition of the church to\n    amelioration of woman\u2019s suffering as an interference with her\n    \u201ccurse.\u201d Man\u2019s escape from his own \u201ccurse.\u201d The sufferings\n    of helpless infants and children because of woman\u2019s labor.\n    Innutrition and the hard labor of expectant mothers the\n    two great factors in physical degeneration and infantile\n    mortality. Woman\u2019s work in Europe and the United States. Woman\n    degraded under Christian civilization to labors unfit for\n    slaves.                                                           191\n\n\n    _Chapter Nine_\u2014+The Church of Today+\n\n    Sin killed by sin. Woman\u2019s inferiority taught from the pulpit\n    today. A Pastoral letter. The See trial. Modern sermons on\n    women. Lenten lectures of Rev. Morgan A. Dix. The Methodist\n    General Conference of 1880, reject Miss Oliver\u2019s petition\n    for ordination on the plea that woman already has all the\n    rights that are good for her. Resolves itself into a political\n    convention. The General Conference of 1888, rejects women\n    delegates. The Catholic Plenary Council of 1884. Mazzini\u2019s\n    prophecy. The opposition of the church to woman\u2019s education\n    has killed off the inhabitants of the world with greater\n    rapidity than war, famine or pestilence. The present forms of\n    religion and governments essentially masculine.                   208\n\n\n    _Chapter Ten_\u2014+Past, Present, Future+\n\n    The most important struggle in the history of the church. Not\n    self-sacrifice, but self-development woman\u2019s first duty in\n    life. The protective spirit; its injury to woman. Christianity\n    of little value to civilization. Looking backward through\n    history; looking forward.                                         237\n\n\n    +Notes+                                                           249\n\n\n    +Index+                                                           289\n\n\n[Illustration: Matilda Joslyn Gage, 1880]\n\n\n\n\n    WOMAN, CHURCH & STATE\n\n    The\n    Original Expos\u00e9\n    of Male\n    Collaboration\n    Against\n    the Female Sex\n\n    by Matilda Joslyn Gage\n\n    Copyright 1893\n\n    By Matilda Joslyn Gage\n\nThis Book is _Inscribed_ to the Memory of my Mother, who was at once\nmother, sister, friend:\n\n_Dedicated_ to all Christian women and men, of whatever creed or name\nwho, bound by Church or State, have not dared to Think for Themselves:\n\n_Addressed_ to all Persons, who, breaking away from custom and the\nusage of ages, dare seek Truth for the sake of Truth. To all such it\nwill be welcome; to all others aggressive and educational.\n\n\n\n\nPreface\n\n\nThis work explains itself and is given to the world because it is\nneeded. Tired of the obtuseness of Church and State; indignant at\nthe injustice of both towards woman; at the wrongs inflicted upon\none-half of humanity by the other half in the name of religion; finding\nappeal and argument alike met by the assertion that God designed the\nsubjection of woman, and yet that her position had been higher under\nChristianity than ever before: Continually hearing these statements,\nand knowing them to be false, I refuted them in a slight _resum\u00e9_\nthe subject at the annual convention of the National Woman Suffrage\nAssociation, Washington, D.C., 1878.\n\nA wish to see that speech in print, having been expressed, it was\nallowed to appear in _The National Citizen_, a woman suffrage paper I\nthen edited, and shortly afterwards in \u201cThe History of Woman Suffrage,\u201d\nof which I was also an editor. The kindly reception given both in\nthe United States and Europe to that meager chapter of forty pages\nconfirmed my purpose of a fuller presentation of the subject in book\nform, and it now appears, the result of twenty years investigation, in\na volume of over five hundred and fifty pages.\n\nRead it; examine for yourselves; accept or reject from the proof\noffered, but do not allow the Church or the State to govern your\nthought or dictate your judgment.\n\n\n\n\n_Chapter One_\n\n+The Matriarchate+\n\n\nWoman is told that her present position in society is entirely due to\nChristianity; that it is superior to that of her sex at any prior age\nof the world, Church and State both maintaining that she has ever been\ninferior and dependent, man superior and ruler. These assertions are\nmade the basis of opposition to her demands for exact equality with\nman in all the relations of life, although they are not true either\nof the family, the church, or the state. Such assertions are due to\nnon-acquaintance with the existing phase of historical knowledge, whose\nrecords the majority of mankind have neither time nor opportunity of\ninvestigating.\n\nChristianity tended somewhat from its foundation to restrict the\nliberty woman enjoyed under the old civilizations. Knowing that\nthe position of every human being keeps pace with the religion and\ncivilization of his country, and that in many ancient nations woman\npossessed a much greater degree of respect and power than she has at\nthe present age, this subject will be presented from a historical\nstandpoint. If in so doing it helps to show man\u2019s unwarranted\nusurpation over woman\u2019s religious and civil rights, and the very great\ndifference between true religion and theology, this book will not have\nbeen written in vain, as it will prove that the most grievous wrong\never inflicted upon woman has been in the Christian teaching that\nshe was not created equal with man, and the consequent denial of her\nrightful place in Church and State.\n\nThe last half century has shown great advance in historical knowledge;\nlibraries and manuscripts long inaccessible have been opened to\nscholars, and the spirit of investigation has made known many secrets\nof the past, brought many hidden things to light. Buried cities have\nbeen explored and forced to reveal their secrets; lost modes of writing\nhave been deciphered, and olden myths placed upon historic foundations.\nIndia is opening her stores of ancient literature; Egypt, so wise and\nso famous, of which it was anciently said: \u201cIf it does not find a man\nmad it leaves him mad,\u201d has revealed her secrets; hieroglyph-inscribed\ntemples, obelisks and tombs have been interpreted; papyri buried\n4,000 and more years in the folds of bandage-enveloped mummies have\ngiven their secrets to the world. The brick libraries of Assyria have\nbeen unearthed, and the lost civilization of Babylonia and Chaldea\nimparted to mankind. The strange Zunis have found an interpreter; the\nancient Aztec language its Champollion, and the mysteries of even our\nwestern continent are becoming unveiled. Darkest Africa has opened to\nthe light; the colossal images of Easter Island hint at their origin;\nwhile the new science of philology unfolds to us the history of peoples\nso completely lost that no other monument of their past remains. We\nare now informed as to the condition of early peoples, their laws,\ncustoms, habits, religion, comprising order and rank in the state, the\nrules of descent, name, property, the circumstances of family life,\nthe position of mother, father, children, their temples and priestly\norders; all these have been investigated and a new historic basis has\nbeen discovered. Never has research been so thorough or long-lost\nknowledge so fully given to the world.\n\nThese records prove that woman had acquired great liberty under the\nold civilizations. A form of society existed at an early age known\nas the Matriarchate or Mother-rule. Under the Matriarchate, except\nas son and inferior, man was not recognized in either of these great\ninstitutions, family, state or church. A father and husband as such,\nhad no place either in the social, political or religious scheme;\nwoman was ruler in each. The primal priest on earth, she was also\nsupreme as goddess in heaven. The earliest semblance of the family\nis traceable to the relationship of mother and child alone. Here the\nprimal idea of the family had birth.[1] The child bore its mother\u2019s\nname, tracing its descent from her; her authority over it was regarded\nas in accord with nature; the father having no part in the family\nremained a wanderer. Long years elapsed before man, as husband and\nfather, was held in esteem. The son, as child of his mother, ranked\nthe father, the mother taking precedence over both the father and\nthe son.[2] Blood relationship through a common mother preceded that\nof descent through the father in the development of society.[3] This\npriority of the mother touched not alone the family, but controlled\nthe state and indicated the form of religion. Thus we see that during\nthe Matriarchate, woman ruled; she was first in the family, the state,\nreligion, the most ancient records showing that man\u2019s subjection to\nwoman preceded by long ages that of woman to man. The tribe was united\nthrough the mother; social, political and religious life were all in\nharmony with the idea of woman as the first and highest power. The\nearliest phase of life being dependent upon her, she was recognized as\nthe primal factor in every relation,[4] man holding no place but that\nof dependent.\n\nEvery part of the world today gives evidence of the system;\nreminiscences of the Matriarchate everywhere abound. Livingstone found\nAfrican tribes swearing by the mother and tracing descent through her.\nMarco Polo discovered similar customs in his Asiatic voyages, and\nthe same customs are extant among the Indians of our own continent.\nBachofen[5] and numerous investigators[6] agree in the statement that\nin the earliest forms of society, the family, government, and religion,\nwere all under woman\u2019s control; that in fact society started under\nwoman\u2019s absolute authority and power.\n\nThe second step in family life took place when the father, dropping\nhis own name, took that of his child. This old and wide-spread custom\nis still extant in many portions of the globe; the primitive peoples\nof Java, Australia and Madagascar are among those still continuing its\npractice.[7] By this step the father allied himself to both mother\nand child, although still holding an inferior position to both. The\nMatriarchal family was now fully established, descent still running\nin the female line. Thus, as has been expressed, we find that woman\u2019s\nliberty did not begin today nor under modern religions or forms or\ngovernment, but that she was in reality the founder of civilization,\nand that in the most remote times woman enjoyed superiority of rights\nin all the institutions of life.[8] And yet so difficult is it to\nbreak away from educated thought, so slight a hold have historical\nfacts upon the mind when contrary to preconceived ideas, that we\nfind people still expressing the opinion that man\u2019s place has always\nbeen first in government. Even under those forms of society where\nwoman was undisputed head of the family, its very existence due to\nher, descent entirely in the female line, we still hear assertion that\nhis must have been the controlling political power. But at that early\nperiod to which we trace the formation of the family, it was also the\npolitical unit. And when peoples became aggregated into communities,\nwhen tribal relations were ultimately recognized, woman still held\nsuperior position, and was the controlling power in government, and\nnever was justice more perfect, never civilization higher than under\nthe Matriarchate. Historians agree as to the high civilization even\ntoday of those nations or tribes still preserving traces of Matriarchal\ncustoms. Even under its most degenerate form, the family, governmental\nand religious rights of women are more fully recognized than under any\nphase of Christian civilization. In all the oldest religions, equally\nwith the Semitic cults, the feminine was recognized as a component and\nsuperior part of divinity, goddesses holding the supreme place. Even\nat much later periods woman shared equally with man in the highest\npriestly offices, and was deified after death. In Egypt, Neith the\nVictorious, was worshiped as mother of the gods, and in the yearly\nfestival held in her honor, every family took part for the time holding\na priestly office. To neglect this duty was deemed an omission of great\nirreverence.[9] The most ancient occultism recognized the creative\npower as feminine and preceding both gods and men.\n\nUnder the Matriarchate, monogamy was the rule; neither polyandry or\npromiscuity existed.[10]\n\nFor long years after the decline of the Matriarchate we still discover\nthat among many of the most refined nations, woman still possessed\nmuch of the power that belonged exclusively to her during that early\nperiod. Ancient Egypt, recognized as the wisest nation since the direct\nhistoric period, traced descent even to the throne in the female\nline. To this reminiscence of the Matriarchate are we indebted for\nthe story of Moses and his preservation by an Egyptian princess in\ndirect contravention of the Pharaoh\u2019s orders, as told by the Bible and\nJosephus. She not alone preserved the child\u2019s life but carried him to\nthe king as her son given to her by the bounty of the river and heir\nto his throne. As showing woman\u2019s power in that kingdom, the story\nis worthy of being farther traced. Josephus says that to please his\ndaughter, the king took the child in his arms, placing his crown on\nthe baby head, but the chief priest at that moment entering the room,\nin a spirit of prophecy cried aloud, \u201cOh King; this is the child of\nwhom I foretold danger; kill him and save the nation,\u201d at the same time\nstriving to take the babe from the king. But the princess caught him\naway, thus setting both kingly and priestly power at defiance, taking\nthis step by virtue of her greater authority, protecting him until he\nreached manhood and causing him to be educated in all the wisdom of\nthe Egyptians, in a college under her own control. Nor in the supreme\nhour of the nation\u2019s peril, when the king, too old to lead his armies\nto battle, demanded Moses as heir to the throne in his place, would she\ngive him up until she had exacted an oath from her father, the potent\nPharaoh, that he meant the youth no harm.\n\nThe famous Iroquois Indians, or Six Nations, which at the discovery of\nAmerica held sway from the great lakes to the Tombigbee river, from the\nHudson to the Ohio, and of whom it has been said that another century\nwould have found them master of all tribes to the Gulf of Mexico on\nthe south, and the Mississippi on the west, showed alike in form of\ngovernment, and in social life, reminiscences of the Matriarchate.\nThe line of descent, feminine, was especially notable in all tribal\nrelations such as the election of Chiefs, and the Council of Matrons,\nto which all disputed questions were referred for final adjudication.\nNo sale of lands was valid without consent of the squaws and among the\nState Archives at Albany, New York, treaties are preserved signed by\nthe \u201cSachems and Principal Women of the Six Nations.\u201d[11] The women\nalso possessed the veto power on questions of war. Sir William Johnston\nmentions an instance of Mohawk squaws forbidding the war-path to young\nbraves. The family relation among the Iroquois demonstrated woman\u2019s\nsuperiority in power. When an Indian husband brought the products of\nthe chase to the wigwam, his control over it ceased. In the home, the\nwife was absolute; the sale of the skins was regulated by her, the\nprice was paid to her. If for any cause the Iroquois husband and wife\nseparated, the wife took with her all the property she had brought\ninto the wigwam; the children also accompanied the mother, whose right\nto them was recognized as supreme. So fully to this day is descent\nreckoned through the mother, that blue-eyed, fair-haired children of\nwhite fathers are numbered in the tribe and receive both from state\nand nation their portion of the yearly dole paid to Indian tribes. The\nveriest pagan among the Iroquois, the renowned and important Keeper\nof the Wampum, and present sole interpreter of the Belts which give\nthe most ancient and secret history of this confederation, is Ephraim\nWebster, descended from a white man, who, a hundred or more years\nsince, became affiliated through marriage with an Indian woman, as a\nmember of the principal nation of the Iroquois, the Onondagas. As of\nyore, so now, the greater and lesser Council Houses of the Iroquois are\nupon the \u201cmountain\u201d of the Onondaga reservation a few miles from the\ncity of Syracuse, New York. Not alone the Iroquois but most Indians of\nNorth America trace descent in the female line; among some tribes woman\nenjoys almost the whole legislative authority and in others a prominent\nshare.[12] Lafitte and other Jesuit missionary writers are corroborated\nin this statement by Schoolcraft, Catlin, Clark, Hubert Bancroft of the\nPacific coast, and many students of Indian life and customs. But the\nmost notable fact connected with woman\u2019s participation in governmental\naffairs among the Iroquois is the statement of Hon. George Bancroft\nthat the form of government of the United States, was borrowed from\nthat of the Six Nations.[13] Thus to the Matriarchate or Mother-rule\nis the modern world indebted for its first conception of inherent\nrights, natural equality of condition, and the establishment of a\ncivilized government upon this basis. Although the reputation of the\nIroquois as warriors appears most prominent in history, we nevertheless\nfind their real principles to have been the true Matriarchal one\nof peace and industry. Driven from the northern portion of America\nby vindictive foes, compelled to take up arms in self-protection,\nyet the more peaceful occupations of hunting and agriculture were\ncontinually followed. Their history was preserved by means of wampum,\nwhile under their women the science of government reached the highest\nform known to the world. Among the Zunis of New Mexico, woman still\npreserves supreme religious and political authority; the Paramount\nCouncil consisting of six priests under control of a supreme priestess\nwho is the most important functionary of the tribe.[14] This form of\ngovernment is traceable to their earliest civilization at which period\ntheir cities were grouped in sevens, six of them constructed upon a\nuniform plan; the supreme seventh containing six temples clustered\nabout a supreme central seventh temple. While male priests ruled over\nthe six primal cities the central and superior seventh was presided\nover by a priestess who not alone officiated at the central temple, but\nto whom the male priests of the six cities and six inferior temples\nwere subservient. The ancient Lycians, the Sclavs, the Basques of\nSpain,[15] the Veddas of Ceylon,[16] the inhabitants of Malabar, the\naborigines of widely separated lands, all show convincing proof of\nwoman\u2019s early superiority in religion, in the state, and in the family.\nMonogamy was a marked feature of the Matriarchate. Bachofen, who has\nwritten voluminously upon the Matriarchate, recognizes it as peculiarly\ncharacteristic of woman\u2019s government. He also says the people who\npossessed the Mother-rule together with Gynaikokraty (girls\u2019 rule)\nexcelled in their love of peace and justice. Under the Matriarchal\nfamily and tribal system even long after its partial supersedence by\nthe incoming Patriarchate, the marriage relation was less oppressive to\nwoman than it has been under most centuries of christian civilization.\nDaughters were free in their choice of husbands, no form of a force or\nsale existing.[17]\n\nOne of the most brilliant modern examples of the Matriarchate was\nfound in Malabar at the time of its discovery by the Portuguese in\nthe XV century. The Nairs were found to possess a fine civilization,\nentirely under the control of women, at a period when woman\u2019s position\nin England and on the Continent of Europe, was that of a household and\npolitical slave. Of Malabar it has been said, that when the Portuguese\nbecame acquainted with the country and the people, they were not so\nmuch surprised by the opulence of their cities, the splendor of all\ntheir habits of living, the great perfection of their navy, the high\nstate of the arts, as they were to find all this under the entire\ncontrol and government of women. The difference in civilization between\nchristian Europe and pagan Malabar at the time of its discovery was\nindeed great. While Europe with its new art of printing, was struggling\nagainst the church for permission to use type, its institutions of\nlearning few, its opportunities for education meagre; its terrible\ninquisition crushing free thought and sending thousands each year to\na most painful death, the uncleanliness of its cities and the country\nsuch as to bring frequent visits of the plague; its armies and its\nnavies with but one exception, imperfect; its women forbidden the right\nof inheritance, religious, political, or household authority;\u2014the\nfeminine principle entirely eliminated from the divinity\u2014a purely\nmasculine God the universal object of worship, all was directly the\nopposite in Malabar. Cleanliness, peace, the arts, a just form of\ngovernment, the recognition of the feminine both in humanity and in the\ndivinity were found in Malabar. To the question of a Danish missionary\nconcerning their opinion of a Supreme Being, this beautiful answer was\ngiven.\n\n    The Supreme Being has a Form and yet has no Form; he can be\n    likened to nothing; we cannot define him and say that he is\n    this or that; he is neither Man or Woman; neither Heaven\n    or Earth, and yet he is all; subject to no corruption, no\n    mortality and with neither sleep nor rest, he is Almighty and\n    Omnipotent without Beginning and without End.[18]\n\nUnder the Missionaries sent by England to introduce her own barbaric\nideas of God and man, this beautiful Matriarchal civilization of\nMalabar soon retrograded and was lost.\n\nThe ancient Mound Builders of America, of whom history is silent and\nscience profoundly ignorant, are proven by means of symbolism to\nhave been under Matriarchal rule, and Motherhood religion. Anciently\nmotherhood was represented by a sphere or circle. The circle, like the\nmundane egg, which is but an elongated circle, contains everything in\nitself and is the true microcosm. It is eternity, it is feminine, the\ncreative force, representing spirit. Through its union with matter in\nthe form of the nine digits it is likewise capable of representing\nall natural things.[19] The perfect circle of Giotto was an emblem of\ndivine motherhood in its completeness. It is a remarkable fact\u2014its\nsignificance not recognized,\u2014that the roughly sketched diameter within\nthe circle, found wherever boys congregate, is an ancient mystic\nsign[20] signifying the male and female, or the double-sexed deity. It\nis the union of all numbers, the one within the zero mark comprising\nten, and as part of the ancient mysteries signifying God, the creative\npower, and eternal life; it was an emblem of The All.\n\nIn many old religions, the generative principle was regarded as\nthe mother of both gods and men. In the Christian religion we find\ntendency to a similar recognition in Catholic worship of the Virgin\nMary. The most ancient Aryans were under the Matriarchate, the\nfeminine recognized as the creative power. The word _ma_ from which\nall descendants of those peoples derive their names for mother, was\nsynonymous with _Creator_. Renouf, the great antiquarian authority\nupon the Aryan\u2019s,[21] gives the songs and ceremonies of the wedding.\nIn these, the woman is represented as having descended to man from\nassociation with divine beings in whose custody and care she has been,\nand who give her up with reluctance. In Sanscrit mythology,[22] the\nfeminine is represented by Swrya, the Sun, the source of life, while\nthe masculine is described as Soma, a body. Soma, a beverage of the\ngods especially sacred to Indra, was the price paid by him for the\nassistance of Vayu, the swiftest of the gods, in his battle against the\ndemon Vritra. A curious line of thought is suggested. The marriage of\nthe man to the woman was symbolized as his union with the gods. Soma, a\ndrink devoted to Indra, the highest god, signified his use of a body,\nor the union of spirit and body. In the same manner, woman representing\nspirit, by her marriage to man became united with a body. As during\nthe present dark age, the body has been regarded more highly than the\nspirit, we find a non-recognition of the woman, although the union of\nspirit and body is symbolized in the Christian church by the sacrament\nof bread and wine. During the purest period of Aryan history marriage\nwas entirely optional with woman and when entered into, frequently\nmeant no more than spiritual companionship. Woman equally with man was\nentitled to the Brahminical thread; she also possessed the right to\nstudy and preach the Vedas, which was in itself a proof of her high\nposition in this race. The Vedas, believed to be the oldest literature\nextant, were for many ages taught orally requiring years of close\napplication upon part of both teacher and student.\n\nThe word _Veda_ signifies \u201cto-know\u201d; the latter from _Vidya_ meaning\n\u201cwise.\u201d The English term widow is traceable to both forms of the word,\nmeaning a wise woman\u2014one who knows man. Many ages passed before the\nVedas were committed to writing.[23] At that early day the ancestral\nworship of women\u2014departed mothers\u2014was as frequent as that of departed\nfathers, women conducting such services which took place three times a\nday. In the old Aryan Scriptures the right of woman to hold property,\nand to her children, was much more fully recognized than under the\nChristian codes of today. Many of the olden rights of women are still\nextant in India. The learned Keshub Chunder Sen vigorously protested\nagainst the introduction of English law into India, upon the ground\nthat it would destroy the ancient rights of the women of that country.\nIt was primal Indian law that upon the death of the husband the wife\nshould heir all his property. Marriage was regarded as an eternal\nunion, the two, by this act, having so fully become one, that upon the\nhusband\u2019s death, one half of his body was still living. The property\nand the children were held as equally belonging to the husband or the\nwife.\n\nColebrook\u2019s _Digest of Hindoo Law_, compiled from the writings of the\nBengal Pundit Jergunnat, \u2019Na Tercapanchama, from those of Vasist ha,\nCatayana, and other Indian authorities says:\n\n    In the Veda, in Codes of Law, in sacred ordinances, the wife\n    is held as one person with the husband; both are considered\n    one. When the wife is not dead, half the body remains; how\n    shall another take the property when half the body of the\n    owner lives? After the death of the husband the widow shall\n    take his wealth; this is primeval law.\n\n    Though a woman be dependent, the alienation of female\n    property, or of the mother\u2019s right over her son by the gift of\n    a husband alone[24] is not valid in law or reason;\n\n    The female property of wives like the property of a stranger,\n    may not be given, for there is want of ownership.\n\n    Neither the husband, nor the son, nor the father, nor the\n    brother, have power to use or alien the legal property of a\n    woman.\n\n    We hold it proper that the wife\u2019s co-operation shall be\n    required in civil contracts and in religious acts under the\n    text.\n\n    A gift to a wife is irrevocable.\n\nThe collection of East Indian laws made under authority of the\ncelebrated Warren Hastings, 1776, is of similar character. The kinds of\nproperty a wife can hold separate from her husband at her own disposal\nby will, are specified.\n\nDuring long centuries while under Christian law the Christian wife\nwas not allowed even the control of property her own at the time of\nmarriage, or of that which might afterwards be given her, and her\nright of the disposition of property at the time of her death was\nnot recognized in Christian lands, the Hindoo wife under immemorial\ncustom could receive property by gift alike from her parents, or from\nstrangers, or acquire it by her own industry, and property thus gained\nwas at her own disposal in case of her death. Another remarkable\nfeature of Indian law contrasting with that of Christian lands was\npreference of woman over man in heirship. In case of a daughter\u2019s\ndeath, the mother heired in preference to father, son, or even husband.\n\n    That is called a woman\u2019s property; First. Whatever she owns\n    during the Agamini Shadee, i. e. Days of Marriage;...\n\n    Whatever she may receive from any person as she is going to\n    her husband\u2019s home or coming from thence.\n\n    Whatever her husband may at any time have given her; whatever\n    she has received at any time from a brother; and whatever her\n    father and mother may have given her.\n\n    Whatever her husband on contracting a second marriage may give\n    her to pacify her.\n\n    Whatever a person may have given a woman for food or clothing.\n\n    Whatever jewelry or wearing apparel she may have received from\n    any person; also whatever a woman may receive from any person\n    as an acknowledgment or payment for any work performed by her.\n    Whatever she may by accident have found anywhere.\n\n    Whatever she may gain by painting, spinning, needle-work or\n    any employment of this kind.\n\n    Except from one of the family of her father, one of the family\n    of her mother, or one of the family of her husband, whatever\n    she may receive from any other person. Also if the father or\n    mother of a girl give anything to their son-in-law, saying\n    at the same time: \u201cThis shall go to our daughter,\u201d and even\n    without any words to this purpose at the time of making the\n    gift, if they merely have it in their intention that the thing\n    thus given should revert to their daughter, all and every one\n    of these articles are called a woman\u2019s property.\n\nHer right of final disposal by will is also specified. Her effects\nacquired during marriage go to her daughters in preference to her sons,\nand possessing no daughters, to her mother.\n\n    When a woman dies, then whatever effects she acquired during\n    the Agamini Shadee, even though she hath a son living, shall\n    go first to her unmarried daughter; if there is but one\n    unmarried daughter she shall obtain the whole; if there are\n    several unmarried daughters, they all shall have equal share.\n\n    Property under the three forms of marriage, if no unmarried\n    daughters and others mentioned here, goes to her mother\n    before to her father; and if neither, to her husband, and if\n    no husband to husband\u2019s younger brother, or several younger\n    brothers, (if several).\n\nThe specification of gifts of intention is remarkable in securing\nproperty to the wife that was seemingly given by the parents to the\nhusband alone. An equally remarkable fact is the father\u2019s heirship in\npreference to the husband\u2019s, and the heirship of the daughters and\nmother in preference to any male relative however near, and is in\nstriking contrast to Christian law in reference to woman\u2019s property. If\na husband neglect to provide his wife necessary food and clothing, the\nEast Indian wife is allowed to procure them by any means in her power.\nMaine has not failed to recognize the superior authority of the eastern\nwife in relation to property over that of the Christian wife. He says:\n\n    \u201cThe settled property of a married woman incapable of\n    alienation by her husband, is well known to the Hindoos under\n    the name of Stridham.\u201d\n\n    It is certainly a remarkable fact that the institution seems\n    to have developed among the Hindoos at a period relatively\n    much earlier than among the Romans. The _Mitakshara_, one of\n    the oldest and most revered authorities of the Hindoo judicial\n    treatises, defines Stridham, or woman\u2019s property, as that\n    which is given to the wife by the father, the mother, or a\n    brother at the time of the wedding, before the nuptial fire.\n\nBut adds Maine:\n\n    The compiler of Mitakshara adds a proportion not found\n    elsewhere; also property which she may have acquired by\n    inheritance, purchase, partition, seizure or finding, is\n    denominated woman\u2019s property.... If all this be Stridham, it\n    follows that the ancient Hindoo law secured to married women\n    an even greater degree of proprietary independence than that\n    given to them by the modern English Married Woman\u2019s Property\n    Act.\n\nProperty is common to the husband and the wife. The ample support of\nthose who are entitled to maintenance is rewarded with bliss in heaven;\nbut hell is the portion of that man whose family is afflicted with pain\nby his neglect. Therefore the Hindoo husband is taught to maintain his\nfamily with the utmost care. Maxims from the sacred books show the\nregard in which the Hindoo woman is held:\n\n    \u201cHe who despises woman despises his mother.\u201d\n\n    \u201cWho is cursed by woman is cursed by God.\u201d\n\n    \u201cThe tears of a woman call down the fire of heaven on those\n    who make them flow.\u201d\n\n    \u201cEvil to him who laughs at woman\u2019s sufferings; God shall laugh\n    at his prayers.\u201d\n\n    \u201cIt was at the prayer of a woman that the Creator pardoned\n    man; cursed be he who forgets it.\u201d\n\n    \u201cWho shall forget the sufferings of his mother at his birth\n    shall be reborn in the body of an owl during three successive\n    transmigrations.\u201d\n\n    \u201cThere is no crime more odious than to persecute woman.\u201d\n\n    \u201cWhen women are honored the divinities are content; but when\n    they are not honored all undertakings fail.\u201d\n\n    \u201cThe households cursed by women to whom they have not rendered\n    the homage due them, find themselves weighed down with ruin\n    and destroyed as if they had been struck by some secret power.\u201d\n\n    \u201cWe will not admit the people of today are incapable of\n    comprehending woman, who alone can regenerate them.\u201d\n\nThe marriage ceremony is of the slightest kind and under three forms:\n\n    1. Of mutual consent by the interchange of necklaces or\n    strings of flowers in some secret place.\n\n    2. A woman says, \u201cI am become your wife,\u201d and the man says, \u201cI\n    acknowledge it.\u201d\n\n    3. When the parents of a girl on her marriage day say to the\n    bridegroom: \u201cWhatever act of religion you perform, perform it\n    with our daughter,\u201d and the bridegroom assents to this speech.\n\nThe comparatively modern custom of suttee originated with the priests,\nwhose avaricious desires created this system in order thereby to secure\nthe property of the widow. The Vedas do not countenance either suttee\nor the widow\u2019s relinquishment of her property, the law specifically\ndeclaring, \u201cIf a widow should give all her property and estate to the\nBrahmins for religious purposes, the gift indeed is valid, but the act\nis improper and the woman blamable.\u201d An ancient scripture declares that\n\u201cAll the wisdom of the Vedas, and all that has been written in books,\nis to be found concealed in the heart of a woman.\u201d It is a Hindoo maxim\nthat one mother is worth a thousand fathers, because the mother carries\nand nourishes the infant from her own body, therefore the mother is\nmost reverenced. A Hindoo proverb declares that \u201cWho leaves his family\nnaked and unfed may taste honey at first, but shall afterwards find it\npoison.\u201d Another says, \u201cA wife is a friend in the house of the good.\u201d\n\nAncient Egypt worshiped two classes of gods; one purely spiritual and\neternal, the other secondary but best beloved, were believed to have\nbeen human beings who from the services they had rendered to humanity\nwere upon death admitted to the assembly of the gods. Such deification\ncommon in ancient times, is still customary in some parts of the earth.\nWithin the past few years a countryman of our own was thus apotheosized\nby the Chinese to whom he had rendered valuable service at the time of\nthe Tae-ping rebellion.[25] Ancient Egyptians recognized a masculine\nand feminine principle entering in all things both material and\nspiritual. Isis, the best beloved and most worshiped of the secondary\ngods, was believed by them to have been a woman who at an early period\nof Egyptian history had rendered that people invaluable service. She\nwas acknowledged as their earliest law-maker, through whose teaching\nthe people had risen from barbarism to civilization. She taught them\nthe art of making bread[26] from the cereals theretofore growing wild\nand unused, the inhabitants at an early day living upon roots and\nherbs. Egypt soon became the grain growing portion of the globe, her\nenormous crops of wheat not alone aiding herself, but rendering the\nlong stability of the Roman Empire possible. The science of medicine\nwas believed to have originated with Isis; she was also said to have\ninvented the art of embalming, established their literature, founded\ntheir religion. The whole Egyptian civilization was ascribed to the\nwoman-goddess, Isis, whose name primarily Ish-Ish, signified Light,\nLife.[27] Isis, and Nepthys\u2014the Lady of the House\u2014were worshiped as\nthe Beginning and the End. They were the Alpha and Omega of the most\nancient Egyptian religion. The statues of Isis bore this inscription:\n\n    I am all that has been, all that shall be, and none among\n    mortals has hitherto taken off my veil.\n\nIsis was believed to contain germs within herself for the reproduction\nof all living things. The most universal of her 10,000 names was,\n\u201cPotent Mother Goddess.\u201d[28] This Egyptian regard for Isis is an\nextremely curious and interesting reminiscence of the Matriarchal\nperiod. Her worship was universal throughout Egypt. Her temples were\nmagnificent. Her priests, consecrated to purity, were required to\nbathe daily, to wear linen garments unmixed with animal fibre, to\nabstain from animal food, and also from those vegetables regarded as\nimpure.[29] Two magnificent festivals were yearly celebrated in her\nhonor, the whole people taking part. During one of these festivals her\npriests bore a golden ship in the procession. The ship, or ark,[30]\nis peculiarly significative of the feminine principle, and wherever\nfound is a reminiscence of the Matriarchate. The most sacred mysteries\nof the Egyptian religion, whose secrets even Pythagoras could not\npenetrate, to which Herodotus alluded with awe, and that were unknown\nto any person except the highest order of priests, owed their\ninstitution to Isis, and were based upon moral responsibility and a\nbelief in a future life. The immortality of the soul was the underlying\nprinciple of the Egyptian religion.\n\nIsis seems to have been one of those extraordinary individuals, such\nas occasionally in the history of the world have created a literature,\nfounded a religion, established a nationality. She was a person of\nsuperior mentality, with power to diffuse intelligence.\n\nMoses, \u201clearned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians,\u201d borrowed much\nfrom Isis. The forms and ceremonies used in her worship were largely\ncopied by him, yet lacked the great moral element\u2014immortal life\u2014so\nconspicuously taught as a part of Egyptian religion. The Sacred Songs\nof Isis were an important part of the literature of Egypt. Plato, who\nburned his own poems after reading Homer, declared them worthy of the\ndivinity, believing them to be literally 10,000 years old.[31] All\norders of the priesthood were open to women in Egypt; sacred colleges\nexisted for them, within whose walls dwelt an order of priestesses\nknown as \u201cGod\u2019s Hand,\u201d \u201cGod\u2019s Star.\u201d Its ranks were recruited from\nwomen of the principal families, whose only employment was the service\nof the gods. \u201cDaughter of the Deity,\u201d signified a priestess.\n\nWomen performed the most holy offices of religion, carrying the Sacred\nSistrum and offering sacrifices of milk, both ceremonies of great\ndignity and importance, being regarded as the most sacred service\nof the divinity. Such sacrificial rites were confined to queens and\nprincesses of the royal household. Ames-Nofri-Ari, a queen who received\ngreat honor from Egyptians, spoken of as the \u201cgoddess-wife of Amun,\u201d\nthe supreme god of Thebes, for whose worship the wonderful temple of\nKarnak was founded by a Pharaoh of the XII dynasty, is depicted on the\nmonuments as the Chief High Priest\u2014the Sem, whose specific duty was\noffering sacrifices and pouring out libations in that temple. By virtue\nof her high office she preceded her husband, the powerful and renowned\nRameses II. The high offices of the church were as habitually held by\nwomen as by men; Princess Neferhotep, of the fifth dynasty, was both\na priestess and a prophetess of the goddesses Hathor and Neith, the\nrepresentatives of celestial space, in which things were both created\nand preserved.\n\nA priestess and priest in time of the XIII Pharaoh represented on a\nslab of limestone, in possession of the Ashmolean Library of Oxford,\nEngland, is believed to be the oldest monument of its kind in the\nworld, dating to 3,500, B.C.\n\nQueen Hatasu, the light of the brilliant XVIII dynasty, is depicted\nupon the monuments as preceding in acts of worship the great Thotmes\nIII, her brother, whom she had associated with herself upon the throne,\nbut who did not acquire supreme power until after her death.[32] The\nreign of Hatasu was pre-eminent as the great architectural period of\nEgypt, the engraving upon monuments during her reign closely resembling\nthe finest Greek intaglio. Egypt, so famous for her gardens and her art\nof forcing blossoms out of season, was indebted to this great queen for\nthe first acclimatizing of plants. Upon one of her voyages she brought\nwith her in baskets filled with earth several of those Balsam trees\nfrom Arabia, which were numbered among the precious gifts of the Queen\nof Sheba to King Solomon. The red granite obelisks erected by Hatasu\nbefore the gates of Karnak, the most magnificent and loftiest ever\nerected in Egypt, were ninety-seven feet in height and surmounted by a\npyramid of gold.\n\nAs early as the XI Pharaoh, II dynasty, the royal succession became\nfixed in the female line. A princess was endowed with privileges\nsuperior to a prince, her brother, her children reigning by royal\nprerogative even when her husband was a commoner; the children of\na prince of the Pharaonic house making such marriage were declared\nillegitimate.\n\nFrom the highest to the most humble priestly office, women officiated\nin Egypt. A class of sacred women were doorkeepers of temples, another\norder known as \u201cSacred Scribes\u201d were paid great deference. The Pellices\nor Pellucidae of Amun were a remarkable body of priestesses whose\nburial place has but recently been discovered. They were especially\ndevoted to the services of Amun-Ra, the Theban Jove. Egypt was indebted\nto priestesses for some of its most important literature. To Penthelia,\na priestess of Phtha[33] the God of Fire, in Memphis, Bryant ascribes\nthe authorship of the Iliad and the Odyssey, Homer[34] in his travels\nthrough that country, by aid of a suborned priest, having stolen these\npoems from the archives of the temples of Phtha where they had been\ndeposited for safe keeping.\n\nThe priestly class of prophetesses was large in Egypt, their\npredictions not infrequently changing the course of that country\u2019s\nhistory. To his daughter, the prophet-priestess Athryte, was the great\nRameses II indebted for the prophecy which led him into his conquering\nand victorious career. Known as one of the four great conquerors of\nantiquity,[35] reigning sixty years, he greatly added to the wealth and\nrenown of Egypt.\n\nThe class of priestesses called Sibyls were early known in Egypt,\nIndia, and other portions of the ancient world. They were regarded\nas the most holy order of the priesthood and held to be in direct\ncommunion with the gods, who through them revealed secrets to the lower\norder of priests; the word Sibyl originating from Syros, i. e. God. The\nlearned Beale defines Sibyl as thought, therefore a woman in possession\nof God\u2019s thought. The names of ten renowned Sibyls have come down to\nour day. The Sibyline Books for many years governed the destinies of\nRome. Oracles were rendered from the lips of a priestess known as the\nPythia; the famous Delphian Shrine for ages ruling the course of kings\nand nations.\n\nUpon the monuments of Egypt, those indisputable historic records,\nqueens alone are found wearing the triple crown, significant of\necclesiastical, judicial and civil power, thus confirming the statement\nof Diodorus that queens were shown greater respect and possessed\nmore power than kings: the pope alone in modern times claiming the\nemblematic triple crown. A comparison between the men and women of the\ncommon people of this country, shows no less favorably for the latter.\nWomen were traders, buying and selling in the markets while the men\nengaged in the more laborious work of weaving at home. Woman\u2019s medical\nand hygienic knowledge is proven by the small number of infantile\ndeaths.[36] At the marriage ceremony the husband promised obedience to\nthe wife in all things, took her name, and his property passed into her\ncontrol; according to Wilkinson great harmony existed in the marriage\nrelation, the husband and wife sitting upon the same double chair in\nlife and resting at death in the same tomb.\n\nMontesquieu says:\n\n    It must be admitted although it shocks our present customs,\n    that among the most polished peoples, wives have always had\n    authority over their husbands. The Egyptians established it by\n    law in honor of Isis, and the Babylonians did the same in time\n    of Semiramis. It has been said of the Romans that they ruled\n    all nations but obeyed their wives.\n\nCrimes against women were rare in Egypt and when occurring were most\nseverely punished.[37] Rameses III caused this inscription to be\nengraved upon his monuments:\n\n    To unprotected woman there is freedom to wander through the\n    whole country wheresoever she list without apprehending\n    danger.\n\nA woman was one of the founders of the ancient Parsee religion, which\ntaught the existence of but a single god, thus introducing monotheism\ninto that rare old kingdom. Until the introduction of Christianity\nwoman largely preserved the liberty belonging to her in the old\ncivilizations. Of her position under Roman law before this period Maine\n(Gaius) says:\n\n    The jurisconsults had evidently at this time assumed the\n    equality of the sexes as a principle of the law of equity.\n    The situation of the Roman woman whether married or single\n    became one of great personal and proprietary independence; but\n    Christianity tended somewhat from the commencement to narrow\n    this remarkable liberty. The prevailing state of religious\n    sentiment may explain why modern jurisprudence has adopted\n    these rules concerning the position of women which belong to\n    an imperfect civilization. No society which preserves any\n    tincture of Christian institutions is likely to restore to\n    married women the personal liberty conferred on them by middle\n    Roman law. Canon law has deeply injured civilization.\n\nRome not only secured remarkable personal and proprietary rights to\nwoman, but as Vestal Virgin, she held the highest priestly office. No\nshrine equalled that of the Vestals in sanctity; none was so honored\nby the state. To their care the sacred Fire was entrusted, and also\nthe Palladium; those unknown articles upon whose preservation not\nalone the welfare but the very existence of Rome was held to depend.\nThe most important secrets of state were entrusted to them and their\ninfluence in civil affairs was scarcely secondary to their religious\nauthority. In troubled times, in civil wars, in extreme emergencies\nof the commonwealth they acted as ambassadors, or were chosen umpires\nto restore peace between the parties. In state ceremonies, in the\nmost solemn, civil or religious meetings they performed important\nduties. They were superior to the common law or the authority of the\nconsul. The most important secrets were entrusted to them, wills of\nthe emperors and documents of state confided to their care; offenses\nagainst them were punished with death. If meeting a criminal on his way\nto execution, he was pardoned as a direct intervention of heaven in\nhis behalf. Among their important privileges was exemption from public\ntaxes, the right to make a will, internment within the city walls, the\nright to drive in the city where no other carriage was allowed; even\nthe consuls were obliged to make room for them to pass. Chosen from\nnoble families when between the ages of six and ten, their terms of\nservice was thirty years.\n\nThe order of Vestal Virgins flourished eleven hundred years, having\nbeen founded seven hundred years before the Christian era and\ncontinuing four hundred years afterwards. But those women all young,\nall between the ages of six years and forty, so closely guarded the\nsecrets of the Penetralia that to this day they still remain as\nunknown as when in their charge. The order was destroyed in the fourth\ncentury, but the ruins of their temple recently discovered prove that\nwhen obliged to flee from the sacred enclosure they first demolished\nthe most holy portion where the secrets of Rome were hidden.[38]\nRecent important archaeological discoveries at the Atrium Vertae in\nthe Forum, corroborate history in regard to the high position and\nextraordinary privileges of the Vestals. Several statues have been\nfound representing the sacred maiden with the historic fillet about her\nhead and the cord beneath her breast. Medallions worn upon the breast\nof their horses have also been unearthed. The wealth of the order was\nextremely great, both its public and private property being exempt from\nthat conscription which in times of war reached all but a few favored\nindividuals.\n\nThe names by which Imperial Rome was known were all feminine; Roma,\nFlora, Valentia; nearly its first and greatest goddess was Vesta.[39]\n\nSacred and secret were originally synonymous terms. All learning was\nsacred, consequently secret, and as only those possessed of learning\nwere eligible to the priestly office it is readily seen that knowledge\nwas a common heritage of primitive women. Letters, numbers, astrology,\ngeography and all branches of science were secrets known only to\ninitiates. The origin of the most celebrated mysteries, the Eleusinian,\nand those of Isis, were attributed to woman, the most perfect temple of\nancient or modern times, the Parthenon, or Temple of the Virgins, was\ndedicated to the goddess Minerva.\n\nChryseis was priestess of Juno in Argo. This office was of great civil\nas well as religious importance regulating their dates and chronology.\nTo the present day in China woman assists at the altar in ancestral\nworship, the prevailing form of religious adoration. The mother of a\nfamily is treated with the greatest respect[40] and the combined male\nand female principle is represented in god under the name Fou-Fou,\nthat is, Father-Mother.[41] When the Emperor acting as high priest\nperforms certain rites he is called Father-Mother of the people. Woman\nis endowed with the same political powers as man.[42] The wife presides\nlike her husband at family councils, trials, etc. As Regent, she\ngoverns the Empire with wisdom, dignity, power, as was shown during the\nco-regency of the Empresses of the East and of the West, their power\ncontinuing even after the promotion of a boy-heir to the throne.\n\nA Thibetan woman empire extant between the VI and VII centuries A.D.\nis spoken of by Chinese writers. An English author, Cooper, seems\nto have visited this region, meeting with an amusing venture while\nthere.[43]\n\nUnder the law of the Twelve Tables, founded A.U.C. 300, woman\npossessed the right of repudiation in marriage. The code itself was\nascribed to a woman of that primitive Athens founded and governed by\nwomen long years previous to the date of modern Athens. The change in\nwoman\u2019s condition for the worse under Christianity is very remarkable\nand everywhere it is noticed. Among the Finns, before their conversion,\nthe mother of a family took precedence of the father in the rites of\ndomestic worship. Under the Angles, a wound inflicted upon a virgin was\npunished with double the penalty of the same injury inflicted upon a\nman, remarkable as showing the high esteem and reverence in which women\nwere held. Before the introduction of Christianity, the Germans bound\nthemselves to chastity in the marriage relation; under Catholicism the\nwife is required to promise the devotion of her body to the marital\nrite. German women served as priestesses of Hertha, and during the\ntime of Rome\u2019s greatest power, Wala or Valleda,\u2014this title being\nsignificative of a supremely wise woman, a prophetess,\u2014was virtual\nruler of the Germanic forces; Druses when about invading Germany was\nrepelled by her simple command to \u201cGo Back.\u201d But under Christianity\nthe German woman no longer takes part in public affairs, education is\ndenied, the most severe and degrading labor of field, streets and mine\nfalls upon her, while in the family she is serf to father, brother,\nhusband.\n\nThe women of ancient Scandinavia were treated with infinite respect;\nbreach of marriage promise was classed with perjury; its penalty was\noutlawry. Marriage was regarded as sacred and in many instances the\nhusband was obliged to submit to the wife.[44] Those old Berserkers\nreverenced their Alruna, or Holy Women, on earth and worshiped\ngoddesses in heaven, where, according to Scandinavian belief, gods and\ngoddesses sat together in a hall without distinction of sex.\n\nThe whole ancient world recognized a female priesthood, some\npeoples, like the Roman, making national safety dependent upon their\nministration; others as in Egypt, according them pre-eminence in the\npriestly office, reverencing goddesses as superior to gods; still\nothers as the Scandinavians, making no distinction in equality between\ngods and goddesses; others governing the nation\u2019s course through\noracles which fell from feminine lips, still others looking to the\nSibylline Books for like decision.[45] Those historians anxious to\ngive most credit to the humanizing effect of Christianity upon woman\nare compelled to admit her superiority among pagan nations before the\nadvent of this religion.[46]\n\nThe Patriarchate under which Biblical history and Judaism commenced,\nwas a rule of men whose lives and religion were based upon passions\nof the grossest kind, showing but few indications of softness or\nrefinement. Monogamous family life did not exist, but a polygamy whose\nprimal object was the formation of a clan possessing hereditary chiefs\nruling aristocratically. To this end the dominion of man over woman\nand the birth of many children was requisite. To this end polygamy\nwas instituted, becoming as marked a feature of the Patriarchate as\nmonogamy was of the Matriarchate. Not until the Patriarchate were\nwives regarded as property, the sale of daughters as a legitimate\nmeans of family income, or their destruction at birth looked upon as\na justifiable act. Under the Patriarchate, society became morally\nrevolutionized, the family, the state, the form of religion entirely\nchanged. The theory of a male supreme God in the interests of force and\nauthority, wars, family discord, the sacrifice of children to appease\nthe wrath of an offended (male) deity are all due to the Patriarchate.\nThese were practices entirely out of consonance with woman\u2019s thought\nand life. Biblical Abraham binding Isaac for sacrifice to Jehovah,\ncarefully kept his intentions from the mother Sarah. Jephtha offering\nup his daughter in accordance with his vow, allowing her a month\u2019s life\nfor the bewailment of her virginity, are but typical of the low regard\nof woman under the Patriarchate. During this period the destruction of\ngirl children became a widely extended practice, and infantile girl\nmurder the custom of many nations. During the Matriarchate all life\nwas regarded as holy; even the sacrifice of animals was unknown.[47]\nThe most ancient and purest religions taught sacrifice of the animal\npassions as the great necessity in self-purification. But the\nPatriarchate subverted this sublime teaching, materializing spiritual\ntruths, and substituting the sacrifice of animals, whose blood was\ndeclared a sweet smelling savor to the Lord of Hosts.\n\nBoth infanticide and prostitution with all their attendant horrors\nare traceable with polygamy,\u2014their origin\u2014to the Patriarchate or\nFather-rule, under which Judaism and Christianity rose as forms of\nreligious belief. Under the Patriarchate woman has ever been regarded\nas a slave to be disposed of as father, husband or brother chose.\nEven in the most Christian lands, daughters have been esteemed\nvaluable only in proportion to the political or pecuniary advantage\nthey brought to the father, in the legal prostitution of an enforced\nmarriage. The sacrifice of woman to man\u2019s baser passions has ever been\nthe distinguishing characteristic of the Patriarchate. But woman\u2019s\ndegradation is not the normal condition of humanity, neither did it\narise from a settled principle of evolution, but is a retrogression,\ndue to the grossly material state of the world for centuries past, in\nwhich it has lost the interior meaning or spiritual significance of its\nown most holy words.\n\nJehovah signifies not alone the masculine and the feminine principles\nbut also the spirit or vivifying intelligence. It is a compound word\nindicative of the three divine principles.[48] Holy Ghost, although\nin Hebrew a noun of either gender, masculine, feminine, neuter,\nis invariably rendered masculine by Christian translators of the\nBible.[49] In the Greek, from whence we obtain the New Testament,\nspirit is of the feminine gender, although invariably translated\nmasculine. The double-sexed word, Jehovah, too sacred to be spoken by\nthe Jews, signified the masculine-feminine God.[50] The proof of the\ndouble meaning of Jehovah, the masculine and feminine signification,\nFather-Mother, is undeniable. Lanci, one of the great orientalists,\nsays:\n\n    Jehovah should be read from left to right, and pronounced\n    Ho-Hi; that is to say He-She (Hi pronounced He,) Ho in Hebrew\n    being the masculine pronoun and Hi the feminine. Ho-Hi\n    therefore denotes the male and female principles, the vis\n    genatrix.[51]\n\nKingsford says:\n\n    The arbitrary and harsh aspect under which Jehovah is chiefly\n    presented in the Hebrew Scriptures is due not to any lack of\n    the feminine element either in His name or in His nature, or\n    to any failure on the part of the inspired leaders of Israel\n    to recognize their equality, but to the rudimentary condition\n    of the people at large, and their consequent amenability\n    to the delineation of the stern side only of the Divine\n    Character.[52]\n\nThe Hebrew word _El Shaddai_, translated, \u201cThe Almighty\u201d is still more\ndistinctively feminine than _Iah_, as it means \u201cThe Breasted God,\u201d and\nis made use of in the Old Testament whenever the especially feminine\ncharacteristics of God are meant to be indicated.[53]\n\nThe story of the building of the tower of Babel and the subsequent\nconfusion of language possesses deep interior significance; the word\n(Babel) meaning \u201cGod the Father\u201d as distinct and separate from the\nfeminine principle. The confusion which has come upon humanity because\nof this separation has been far more lamentable in its results than\na mere confounding of tongues.[54] In the earliest religions the\nrecognition of the feminine principle in the divinity is everywhere\nfound. \u201cI am the Father and Mother of the Universe\u201d said Krishna in the\nBhagavad Gita.\n\nAn Orphic hymn says: \u201cZeus is the first and the last, the head and the\nextremities; from him have proceeded all things.\u201d He is a man and an\nimmortal nymph i.e. the male and female element. The Sohar declares\n\u201cthe ancient of the ancient has a form and has no form.\u201d\n\nThe Holy Spirit, symbolized by a dove, is a distinctively feminine\nprinciple\u2014the Comforter\u2014and yet has ever been treated by the Christian\nChurch as masculine, alike in dogmas propounded from the pulpit, and\nin translations of the Scriptures. A few notable exceptions however\nappear at an early date. Origen expressly referred to the Holy Ghost as\nfeminine, saying: \u201cThe soul is maiden to her mistress the Holy Ghost.\u201d\nAn article upon the \u201cEsoteric character of the Gospels\u201d in Madam\nBlavatsky\u2019s _Lucifer_ (November 1887) says:\n\n    Spirit or the Holy Ghost was feminine with the Jews as most\n    ancient peoples and it was so with the early Christians;\n    Sophia of the Gnostics and the third Sephiroth, Binah (the\n    female Jehovah of the Cabalists,) are feminine principles\n    \u201cDivine Spirit\u201d or Ruach, \u201cOne is She the spirit of the Elohim\n    of Life,\u201d is said in Sepher Yetzirah.[55]\n\nAn early canonical book of the New Testament known as \u201cThe Everlasting\nGospel\u201d also as \u201cThe Gospel of the Holy Ghost\u201d represents Jesus as\nsaying, \u201cMy mother the Holy Ghost, took me by the hair of my head up\ninto a mountain.\u201d\n\nThe word _sacred_ simply meaning secret, having its origin as shown at\nthe time when knowledge was kept hidden from the bulk of mankind, only\nto be acquired by initiation in the mysteries, so also the word _holy_\nsimply means whole, that is, undivided. In its ignorance, unwisdom,\nand fear of investigation, mankind has allowed a division of the two\ndivine principles, male and female, to obtain firm hold in their\nminds. Prejudice, which simply means prejudgment, a judgment without\nproof, has long ruled mankind, owing chiefly to that bondage of the\nwill inflicted by a tyrannous self-seeking priesthood. But we have now\nreached a period in history when investigation is again taking the\nplace of blind belief and the truth, capable of making man free, is\nonce more offered. It is through a recognition of the divine element of\nmotherhood as not alone inhering in the great primal source of life but\nas extending throughout all creation, that it will become possible for\nthe world, so buried in darkness, folly and superstition, to practice\njustice toward woman. Not legislation but education will bring about\nthe change; not external acts but internal thought. It is but a few\nyears since the acknowledgment of a feminine element even in plants was\nregarded by the church as heretical. Yet though still perceiving but\npartial truth, science now declares the feminine principle to inhere\nin plants, rocks, gems, and even in the minutest atoms; thus in some\ndegree recognizing the occult axiom \u201cAs it is above, so it is below.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n_Chapter Two_\n\n+Celibacy+\n\n\nWhile the inferior and secondary position of woman early became an\nintegral portion of Christianity, its fullest efforts are seen in\nChurch teachings regarding marriage. Inasmuch as it was a cardinal\ndoctrine that the fall of Adam took place through his temptation\ninto marriage by Eve, this relation was regarded with holy horror as\na continuance of the evil which first brought sin into the world,\ndepriving man of his immortality.[1] It is a notable fact that the\nexpected millennium of a thousand years upon earth with its material\njoys has ever had more attraction for Christians than the eternal\nspiritual rapture of heaven. Many of the old Fathers taught that \u201cthe\nworld is a state of matrimony, but paradise of virginity.\u201d[2] To such\nextent was this doctrine carried it was declared that had it not have\nbeen for the fall, God would have found some way outside of this\nrelation for populating the world, consequently marriage was regarded\nas a condition of peculiar temptation and trial; celibacy as one of\nespecial holiness.\n\nThe androgynous theory of primal man found many supporters, the\nseparation into two beings having been brought about by sensual desire.\nJacob Boehme and earlier mystics of that class recognized the double\nsexuality of God in whose image man was made. One of the most revered\nancient Scriptures, \u201cThe Gospel according to the Hebrews,\u201d which was\nin use as late as the second century of the Christian era, taught the\nequality of the feminine in the Godhead; also that daughters should\ninherit with sons. Thirty-three fragments of this Gospel have recently\nbeen discovered. The fact remains undeniable that at the advent of\nChrist, a recognition of the feminine element in the divinity had not\nentirely died out from general belief, the earliest and lost books\nof the New Testament teaching this doctrine, the whole confirmed by\nthe account of the birth and baptism of Jesus, the Holy Spirit,[3]\nthe feminine creative force, playing the most important part. It\nwas however but a short period before the church through Canons\nand Decrees, as well as apostolic and private teaching, denied the\nfemininity of the Divine equally with the divinity of the feminine.\nThere is however abundant proof that even under but partial recognition\nof the feminine principle as entering in the divinity, woman was\nofficially recognized in the early services of the church, being\nordained to the ministry, officiating as deacons, administering the\nact of baptism, dispensing the sacrament, interpreting doctrines and\nfounding sects which received their names.[4]\n\nThe more mystical among priests taught that before woman was separated\nfrom man, the Elementals[5] were accepted by man as his children\nand endowed by him with immortality, but at the separation of the\nandrogynous body into the two beings Adam and Eve, the woman through\naccident was also endowed with immortality which theretofore had\nsolely inhered in the masculine portion of the double-sexed being.\nThese mystics also taught that this endowment of woman with immortality\ntogether with her capability of bringing new beings into existence also\nendowed with immortal life, was the cause of intense enmity toward\nher on the part of the Elementals, especially shown by their bringing\nsuffering and danger upon her at this period.\n\nStill another class recognizing marriage as a necessity for the\ncontinuance of the species, looked upon it with more favor, attributing\nthe fall to another cause, yet throwing odium upon the relation by\nmaintaining that the marriage of Adam and Eve did not take place until\nafter they had been driven from Paradise. This doctrine was taught by\nthe Father Hieronymus.[6] Thus with strange inconsistency the church\nsupported two entirely opposing views of marriage. Yet even those who\nupheld its necessity still taught woman\u2019s complete subordination to man\nin that relation; also that this condition was one of great tribulation\nto man, it was even declared that God caused sleep to fall upon Adam\nat the creation of Eve in order to prevent his opposition.[7] Lecky\nspeaking of the noxious influences of ascetics upon marriage, says it\nwould be difficult to conceive anything more coarse and repulsive than\nthe manner in which the church regarded it; it was invariably treated\nas a consequence of the fall of Adam and regarded from its lowest\naspect.[8] But having determined that evil was necessary in order to\nfuture good, the church decided to compel a belief that its control of\nthis contract lessened the evil, to this end declaring marriage illegal\nwithout priestly sanction; thus creating a conviction of and belief\nin its sacramental nature in the minds of the people. Despite the\nfavoring views of a class regarding marriage, celibacy was taught as\nthe highest condition for both man and woman, and as early as the third\ncentury many of the latter entered upon a celibate life, Jerome using\nhis influence in its favor. Augustine, while admitting the possibility\nof salvation to the married, yet speaking of a mother and daughter in\nheaven, compared the former to a star of the second magnitude, but the\nlatter as shining with great brilliancy. The superior respect paid to\nthe celibates even among women is attributed to direct instruction of\nthe apostles. The \u201cApostolic Constitutions\u201d held even by the Episcopal\nchurch as regulations established by the apostles themselves, and\nbelieved to be among the earliest christian records, give elaborate\ndirections for the places of all who attend church, the unmarried being\nthe most honored. The virgins and widows and elder women stood or sat\nfirst of all.\n\nThe chief respect shown by the early fathers towards marriage was that\nit gave virgins to the church, while the possibility of salvation to\nthe married, at first recognized, was denied at later date even to\npersons otherwise living holy lives. The Emperor Jovinian banished\na man who asserted the possibility of salvation to married persons\nprovided they obeyed all the ordinances of the church and lived good\nlives.[9] As part of this doctrine, the church taught that woman\nwas under an especial curse and man a divinely appointed agent for\nthe enforcement of that curse. It inculcated the belief that all\nrestrictions placed upon her were but parts of her just punishment for\nhaving caused the fall of man. Under such teaching a belief in the\nsupreme virtue of celibacy\u2014first declared by the apostle Paul,\u2014was\nfirmly established. To Augustine is the world indebted for full\ndevelopment of the theory of original sin, promulgated by Paul as a\ndoctrine of the Christian Church in the declaration that Adam, first\ncreated, was not first in sin. Paul, brought up in the strictest\nexternal principles of Judaism, did not lose his educational bias or\nprimal belief when changing from Judaism to Christianity.[10] Neither\nwas his character as persecutor changed when he united his fortunes\nwith the new religion. He gave to the Christian world a lever long\nenough to reach down through eighteen centuries, all that time moving\nit in opposition to a belief in woman\u2019s created and religious equality\nwith man, to her right of private judgment and to her personal freedom.\nHis teaching that Adam, first created, was not first in sin, divided\nthe unity of the human race in the assumption that woman was not part\nof the original creative idea but a secondary thought, an inferior\nbeing brought into existence as an appendage to man.\n\nAlthough based upon a false conception of the creative power, this\ntheory found ready acceptance in the minds of the men of the new\nchurch. Not illiterate, having received instruction at the feet\nof Gamaliel, Paul was yet intolerant and credulous, nay more,\nunscrupulous. He was the first Jesuit in the Christian church,\n\u201cBecoming all things to all men.\u201d The Reformed church with strange\nunanimity has chosen Paul as its leader and the accepted exponent\nof its views. He may justly be termed the Protestant Pope, and\nalthough even among Catholics rivalling Peter in possession of the\nheavenly keys, yet the Church of Rome has accepted his authority as\nin many respects to be more fully obeyed than even the teachings of\nSt. Peter.[11] Having been accepted by the Church as the apostolic\nexponent of its views upon marriage, it was but to be expected that\nhis teachings should be received as divine. That Paul was unmarried\nhas been assumed because of his bitterness against this relation, yet\nabundant proof of his having a wife exists. For the membership of the\nGreat Sanhedrim, marriage was a requisite. St. Clement of Alexandria\npositively declared that St. Paul had a wife. Until the time of\nCromwell, when it was burned, a MS. letter of St. Ignatius in Greek was\npreserved in the old Oxford Library; this letter spoke of \u201cSt. Peter\nand Paul and the apostles who were married.\u201d Another letter of St.\nIgnatius is still extant in the Vatican Library. Tussian and others\nwho have seen it declare that it also speaks of St. Paul as a married\nman.[12] But tenderness toward woman does not appear in his teachings;\nman is represented as the master, \u201cthe head\u201d of woman. In consonance\nwith his teaching, responsibility has been denied her through the ages;\nalthough the Church has practically held her amenable for the ruin of\nthe world, prescribing penance and hurling anathemas against her whom\nit has characterized as the \u201cdoor of hell.\u201d\n\nAt a synod in Winchester in the eighth century, St. Dunstan, famed for\nhis hatred of women, made strenuous effort to enforce celibate life. It\nwas asserted to be so highly immoral for a priest to marry, that even\na wooden cross had audibly declared against the horrid practice.[13]\nAlthough in the third century marriage was permitted to all orders\nof the clergy,[14] yet the very ancient \u201cGospel of the Egyptians,\u201d\nendorsed as canonical by Clement of Alexandria, taught celibacy. These\nold christian theologians found the nature of woman a prolific subject\nof discussion, a large party classing her among brutes without soul\nor reason. As early as the sixth century a council at Macon (585),\nfifty-nine bishops taking part, devoted its time to a discussion of\nthis question, \u201cDoes woman possess a soul?\u201d Upon one side it was argued\nthat woman should not be called \u201chomo\u201d; upon the opposite side that she\nshould, because, first, the Scriptures declared that God created man,\nmale and female; second, that Jesus Christ, son of a woman, is called\nthe son of man. Christian women were therefore allowed to remain human\nbeings in the eyes of the clergy, even though considered very weak and\nbad ones. But nearly a thousand years after this decision in favor of\nthe humanity of the women of Christian Europe, it was still contended\nthat the women of newly discovered America belonged to the brute\ncreation, possessing neither souls nor reason.[15] As late as the end\nof the sixteenth century an anonymous work appeared, arguing that women\nwere no part of mankind, but a species of intermediate animal between\nthe human and the brute creation. (Mulieres non est homines, etc.)\nMediaeval christian writings show many discussions upon this point, the\ninfluence of these old assertions still manifesting themselves.\n\nUntil the time of Peter the Great, women were not recognized as human\nbeings in that great division of Christendom known as the Greek church,\nthe census of that empire counting only males, or so many \u201csouls\u201d\u2014no\nwoman named. Traces of this old belief have not been found wanting\nin our own country within the century. As late as the Woman\u2019s Rights\nConvention in Philadelphia, 1854, an objector in the audience cried\nout: \u201cLet women first prove they have souls; both the Church and the\nState deny it.\u201d\n\nEverything connected with woman was held to be unclean. It is stated\nthat Agathro desired the Sophist Herodes to get ready for him the next\nmorning a vessel full of pure milk, that is to say which had not been\nmilked by the hand of a woman. But he perceived as soon as it was\noffered to him that it was not such as he desired, protesting that the\nscent of her hands who had milked it offended his nostrils. In the\noldest European churches great distinction was made between the purity\nof man and woman. At an early date woman was forbidden to receive the\nEucharist into her naked hand on account of her impurity,[16] or to\nsing in church on account of her inherent wickedness. To such an extent\nwas this opposition carried, that the church of the middle ages did not\nhesitate to provide itself with eunuchs in order to supply cathedral\nchoirs with the soprano tones inhering by nature in woman alone. One\nof the principal charges against the Huguenots was that they permitted\nwomen to sing in church, using their voices in praise of God contrary\nto the express command of St. Paul, Catherine de Medicis reproaching\nthem for this great sin.[17] The massacre at St. Bartholomew, when\n30,000 men, women and children lost their lives, and the entire\ndestruction of many families of purest character took place, with an\nadditional great loss to France from the self-imposed banishment of\nhundreds more, may be traced to the teaching of St. Paul that woman\nshould keep silence in the church. This doctrine also crossed the\nocean with the Puritan Fathers, and has appeared in America under many\nforms.[18]\n\nThe Christianity of the ages teaching the existence of a superior and\ninferior sex, possessing different rights under the law and in the\nchurch, it has been easy to bring man and woman under accountability to\na different code of morals. For this double code the church is largely\nindebted to the subtle and acute Paul, who saw in the new religion but\nan enlarged Judaism that should give prominence to Abraham and his seed\nfrom whom Christ claimed descent. His conversion did not remove his\nold Jewish contempt for woman, as shown in his temple service, the law\nforbidding her entrance beyond the outer court. Nor could he divest\nhimself of the spirit of the old morning prayer which daily led each\nJew to thank God that he was not born a heathen, a slave or a woman.\n\nHe brought into the new dispensation the influence of the old\nceremonial law, which regarded woman as unclean. The Jewish exclusion\nof forty days from even the outer court of the sanctuary to the woman\nwho had given birth to a son, and of twice that period, or eighty\ndays, if a daughter had been born, was terminated in both religions\nby a sin-offering in expiation of the mother\u2019s crime for having, at\nthe peril of her own, brought another human being into life.[19] This\nOld Testament teaching degraded the life-giving principle exemplified\nin motherhood, and in a two-fold way lessened the nation\u2019s regard for\nwomanhood. First, through the sin-offering and purification demanded\nof the mother; second, by its doubling the period of exclusion from\nthe temple in case a girl was given to the world.[20] The birth of\ngirls even under Christianity has everywhere been looked upon as an\ninfliction, and thousands have been immured in convents, there to die\nof despair or to linger through years,[21] the victim alike of father\nand of priest.\n\nThe influence of Judaism extended through Christendom. The custom of\npurification after maternity inherited by the church from Judaism\nbrought with it into Christianity the same double restriction and\nchastening of the mother in case her infant proved a girl, a gift as\npropitiation or expiation being required. Uncleanliness was attributed\nto woman in every function of her being; the purification of the Virgin\nMary, who was not exempt, when after the birth of a God, being used as\nan incontrovertible argument in proof. A festival of the purification\nof the Virgin Mary, adopted from paganism, was introduced into Rome\nat an early date, thus perpetuating a belief in the uncleanliness\nof motherhood. The Church in the Roman Empire soon united with\nthe State[22] in imposing new restrictions upon women. Since the\nReformation the mother\u2019s duty of expiation has been confirmed by the\nAnglican Church, and is known in England as \u201cchurching.\u201d Directions\nas to the woman\u2019s dress at this time was early made the subject of a\ncanon.[23] She was to be decently appareled. This term \u201cdecently,\u201d\nvariously interpreted, was at times the occasion of serious trouble. In\n1661, during the reign of James I, the Chancellor of Norwich ordered\nthat every woman who came to be churched should be covered with a white\nveil. A woman who refused to conform to this order was excommunicated\nfor contempt. She prayed a prohibition, alleging that such order was\nnot warranted by any custom or Canon of the Church of England. The\njudges of the civil court, finding themselves incompetent to decide\nupon such a momentous question, requested the opinion of the archbishop\nof Canterbury. Not willing to trust his own judgment, that dignitary\nconvened several bishops for consultation. Their decision was against\nthe woman, this Protestant Council upon woman\u2019s dress declaring that it\nwas the ancient usage of the Church of England for women who were to be\nchurched to come veiled, and a prohibition was denied.\n\nThe doctrine that woman must remain covered when in the sacred church\nbuilding shows itself in the United States.[24] In many instances under\nChristianity, woman has been entirely excluded from religious houses\nand church buildings. When Pope Boniface[25] founded the abbey of Fulda\nhe prohibited the entrance of women into any of the buildings, even\nincluding the church. This rule remained unbroken during the tenth and\neleventh centuries, and even when in 1131 the Emperor Lothair went to\nFulda to celebrate Pentecost, his empress was not permitted to witness\nthe ceremonies. When Frederick Barbarossa, 1135, proposed to spend\nhis Easter there, he was not even allowed to enter the house because\nof having his wife with him. In 1138 Boniface IX, at the request of\nthe abbot, John Merlow, relaxed the rule and permitted women to\nattend the services of the church. Shortly afterwards the building was\ndestroyed by lightning, which was looked upon as evidence of the divine\ndispleasure at the desecration. The monastery of Athos under the Greek\nchurch, situated upon an island, does not permit the entrance of a\nfemale animal upon its confines. Even in America woman has met similar\nexperience.[26]\n\nAt certain periods during the middle ages, conversation with women was\nforbidden. During the Black Death, the Flaggellants, or Brotherhood of\nthe Cross, were under such interdict.[27] In this last decade of the\nXIX century, the Catholic church still imposes similar restrictions\nupon certain religious houses. Early in 1892 the queen-regent of\nSpain visited the monastery of Mirzaflores; its rules not allowing\na monk to speak to a woman, the queen was received in silence. Her\nmajesty immediately telegraphed to the pope asking indulgence, which\nwas granted, and during four hours the monks were permitted the sin\nof speaking to a woman. It is curious to note that the first sentence\nuttered by one of the monks was a compliment upon the simplicity of her\nmajesty\u2019s attire. But the most impressive evidence of the contempt of\nthe church towards all things feminine was shown in a remark by Tetzel\nthe great middle-age dealer in indulgences. Offering one for sale he\ndeclared it would insure eternal salvation even if the purchaser had\ncommitted rape upon the mother of God.[28]\n\nA knowledge of facts like these is necessary in order to a just\nunderstanding of our present civilization, especially as to the origin\nof restrictive legislation concerning woman. The civilization of today\nis built upon the religious theories of the middle ages supplemented by\nadvancing freedom of thought. Lea, declares thus:\n\n    The Latin church is the great fact which dominates the history\n    of modern civilization. All other agencies which molded the\n    destinies of Europe were comparatively isolated or sporadic in\n    their manifestations.\n\nThe influence of church teaching is most strikingly manifested in the\nthought of today. Without predetermined intention of wrong doing, man\nhas been so molded by the Church doctrine of ages and the coordinate\nlaws of State as to have become blind to the justice of woman\u2019s demand\nfor freedom such as he possesses. Nor is woman herself scarcely less\nbound, although now torn by the spirit of rebellion which burned in the\nhearts of her fore-mothers, so cruelly persecuted, so falsely judged,\nduring past ages, when the most devout Christian woman possessed no\nrights in the church, the government or the family. The learning which\nhad been hers in former periods, was then interdicted as an especial\nelement of evil. Her property rights recognized in former periods then\ndenied; as a being subordinate to man she was not allowed a separate\nestate or control over the earnings of her own hands. Her children were\nnot her own but those of a master for whose interest or pleasure she\nhad given them birth. Without freedom of thought or action, trained\nto consider herself secondary to a man, a being who came into the\nworld not as part of the great original plan of creation but as an\nafterthought of her Creator, and this doctrine taught as one of the\nmost sacred mysteries of religion which to doubt was to insure her\neternal damnation, it is not strange that the great body of women are\nnot now more outspoken in demanding equal religious and governmental\nrights with man. But another phase of heredity shows itself in the\neagerness with which women enter all phases of public life which does\nnot place them in open antagonism with Church or State. Education,\nindustries, club life and even those great modern and religious\norganizations which bring them before the public, throwing active work\nand responsibility upon them, would be entirely unexplainable were it\nnot for the tendency of inherited thought to ultimately manifest itself.\n\nThe long continued and powerfully repressing influence of church\nteaching in regard to the created inferiority of women, imposed upon\nmillions of men and women a bondage of thought and action which even\nthe growing civilization of the nineteenth century has not yet been\nable to cast off. To this doctrine we can trace all the irregularities\nwhich for many centuries filled the church with shame; practices\nmore obscene than those of Babylon or Corinth dragged Christendom to\na darkness blacker than the night of heathendom in the most pagan\ncountries\u2014a darkness so intense that the most searching efforts of the\nhistorian but now and then cast a ray of light upon it;\u2014a darkness so\nprofound that in Europe from the seventh to the eleventh centuries no\nindividual thought can be traced, no opinion was formed, no heresy\narose. All Christendom was sunk in superstition. Lange[29] says \u201cThe\ndisappearance of ancient civilization in the early centuries of the\nChristian era is an event the serious problems of which are in great\npart still unexplained.\u201d Had Lange not been influenced by the subtle\ncurrent of heredity which unwittingly influenced nations and systems\nequally with individuals, he could easily have discovered the cause\nof this disappearance of olden civilization, to be in the degradation\nof the feminine element under Christianity. While this darkness of\nChristian Europe was so great that history knows less of it a thousand\nyears since than it does of Egypt 5,000 years ago, one corner of that\ncontinent was kept luminous by the brilliance of Mohammedan learning.\nThe Arabs alone had books from the eighth to the thirteenth centuries\nof the Christian era. The Moors of Spain kept that portion of Europe\nbright, while all else was sunk in darkness. Universities existed,\nlearning was fostered and women authors were numerous. For many\nhundred years Rome possessed no books but missals and a few Bibles in\nthe hands of priests. Men were bound by church dogmas looking only\nfor aggrandisement through her. The arts ceased to flourish, science\ndecayed, learning was looked upon as a disgrace to a warrior,[30] the\nonly occupation deemed worthy of the noble.\n\nThe priesthood who alone possessed a knowledge of letters, prostituted\ntheir learning to the basest uses; the nobility when not engaged\nagainst a common foe, spent their time battling against each other;\nthe peasantry were by turns the sport and victim of priest and noble,\nwhile woman was the prey of all. Her person and her rights possessed\nno consideration except as she could be made to advance the interest\nor serve the pleasure of priest, noble, father, husband; some man-god\nto whose lightest desire all her wishes were made to bend. The most\npronounced doctrine of the church at this period was that through\nwoman sin had entered the world; that woman\u2019s whole tendency was\ntowards evil, and had it not been for the unfortunate oversight of her\ncreation, man would then be dwelling in the paradisal innocence and\nhappiness of Eden, with death entirely unknown. When the feminine was\nthus wholly proscribed, the night of moral and spiritual degradation\nreached its greatest depth, and that condition ensued which has alike\nbeen the wonder and the despair of the modern historians, whose\ngreatest fault, as Buckle shows, has been the reading of history from\na few isolated facts rather than building up its philosophy from an\naggregation of events upon many different planes.\n\nUnder all restrictions woman did not fail to show her innate power\neven within the fold of the church. She founded devout orders,[31]\nestablished and endowed religious institutions, and issued her\ncommands to the pope himself, in more than one instance seating that\nholy personage in the papal chair.[32] From St. Paulina, whose life\nwas written by St. Jerome, to the promulgation of the dogma of the\nImmaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary by the Ecumenical Council\nunder Pius IX, and the later canonization of Joan of Arc, woman has\nnot failed to impress even the Christian world with a sense of her\nintellectual and spiritual power. Yet despite the very great influence\nexerted by so many women in the affairs of the church\u2014notwithstanding\nthe canonization of so many women, she has only been able to show her\ncapacity at an immense expenditure of vital force against constant\npriestly opposition and the powerful decrees of councils. Subtle and\ncomplex as are the influences that mould thought and character, we\ncannot comprehend the great injustice of the church towards woman in\nits teaching of her mental and spiritual inferiority without a slight\nexamination of the great religious institutions that have been under\nher charge. Of these none possess more remarkable history than the\nAbbey of Fontervault,[33] founded in 1099, for both monks and nuns.\nIt belonged in the general rank of Benedictines, and was known as the\nOrder of Fontervault. It was ruled by an abbess under title of General\nof the Order, who was responsible to no authority but that of the\npope himself. Forming a long succession of able women in thirty-two\nabbesses from the most eminent families of France, woman\u2019s capacity\nfor the management of both ecclesiastical and civil affairs was there\nshown for six hundred years. It was the abbess who alone decided the\nreligious fitness of either monk or nun seeking admission to the\norder. It was the abbess who decreed all ecclesiastical and civil\npenalties; who selected the confessors for the different houses of the\norder throughout France and Spain; who managed and controlled the vast\nwealth belonging to this institution; it was the abbess who drew up\nthe rules for the government of the order, and who also successfully\ndefended these privileges when attacked. For neither the protection of\nthe pope, the wealth of the order, or the family influence connected\nwith it, prevented priestly attack,[34] and no argument in favor of\nwoman\u2019s governing ability is stronger than the fact that its abbesses\never successfully resisted these priestly assaults upon the privileges\nof their order. The abbey of Fontervault, with its grounds of forty or\nfifty acres, was surrounded by high walls; its soil was tilled by the\nmonks of the abbey, who received even their food as alms from the nuns,\nreturning all fragments for distribution to the poor.[35]\n\nThe authority of women was supreme in all monasteries of the order.\nThe ecclesiastical power maintained by these abbesses is the more\nremarkable, as it was in direct contravention of the dictates of the\nearly councils, that of Aix-la-Chapelle, 816, forbidding abbesses to\ngive the veil or take upon themselves any priestly function; the later\ncouncil of Paris A.D. 824, bitterly complained that women served at the\naltar, and even gave to people the body and blood of Jesus Christ.\n\nAmong the convents controlled by women, which have largely influenced\nreligious thought, was that of the Paraclete in the 12th century under\nHeloise. Its teachings that belief was dependent upon knowledge,\nattacked the primal church tenet, that belief depends upon faith alone.\nThe convent of Port Royal des Champs during the 17th century exerted\nmuch influence. Its abbess, the celebrated Mother Angelique Arnault,\nwas inducted into this office in her eleventh year upon death of her\nabbess-aunt whose co-adjutrix she had been. This convent, both in\nperson of the nuns as well as the monks connected with it, became a\nprotest against the jesuitical doctrine of the seventeenth century, and\nlike the Paraclete is intimately connected with reform questions in the\nCatholic Church. Notwithstanding such evidences of woman\u2019s organizing\nmind and governing qualities under the most favorable conditions, as\nwell as of piety so unquestioned as to have produced a long calendar of\nfemale saints, the real policy of the church remained unchanged; nor\ncould it be otherwise from its basis of woman\u2019s created inferiority and\noriginal sin. The denial to women of the right of private judgment and\nthe control of her own actions, the constant teaching of her greater\nsinfulness and natural impurity, had a very depressing effect upon the\nmajority of women whose lowly station in life was such as to deprive\nthem of that independence of thought and action possible to women of\nrank and wealth. Then, as now, the church catered to the possessors\nof money and power; then, as now, seeking to unite their great forces\nwith its own purpose of aggrandizement, and thus the church has\never obstructed the progress of humanity, delaying civilization and\ncondemning the world to a moral barbarism from which there is no escape\nexcept through repudiation of its teaching. To the theory of \u201cGod the\nFather,\u201d shorn of the divine attribute of motherhood, is the world\nbeholden for its most degrading beliefs, its most infamous practices.\nDependent upon the identified with lost motherhood is the \u201cLost Name\u201d\nof ancient writers and occultists. When the femininity of the divine\nis once again acknowledged, the \u201cLost Name\u201d will be discovered and the\nholiness (wholeness) of divinity be manifested.[36]\n\nAs the theory of woman\u2019s wickedness gathered force, her representative\nplace in the church lessened. From century to century restrictive\ncanons multiplied, and the clergy constantly grew more corrupt,\nalthough bearing bad reputation at an early date.[37] Tertullian, whose\nheavy diatribes are to be found in large libraries, was bitter in\nhis opposition to marriage.[38] While it took many hundreds of years\nfor the total exclusion of woman from the christian priesthood, the\ncelibacy of the clergy during this period was the constant effort of\nthe Church. Even during the ages that priestly marriage was permitted,\ncelibates obtained a higher reputation for sanctity and virtue than\nmarried priests, who infinitely more than celibates were believed\nsubject to infestation by demons.[39]\n\nThe restriction upon clerical marriages proceeded gradually. First\nthe superior holiness of the unmarried was taught together with their\ngreater freedom from infestation by demons. A single marriage only\nwas next allowed, and that with a woman who had never before entered\nthe relation.[40] The Council of A.D. 347, consisting of twenty-one\nbishops, forbade the ordination of those priests who had been twice\nmarried or whose wife had been a widow.[41] A council of A.D. 395 ruled\nthat a bishop who had children after ordination should be excluded from\nthe major orders. The Council of A.D. 444, deposed Chelidonius, bishop\nof Besancon, for having married a widow. The Council of Orleans, A.D.\n511, consisting of thirty-two bishops, decided that monks who married\nshould be expelled from the ecclesiastical order. The Church was termed\nthe spouse of the priest. It was declared that Peter possessed a wife\nbefore his conversion, but that he forsook her and all worldly things\nafter he became Christ\u2019s, who established chastity; priests were\ntermed holy in proportion as they opposed marriage.[42] The unmarried\namong the laity who had never entered that relation, and the married\nwho forsook it, were regarded as saintly. So great was the opposition\nto marriage that a layman who married a second time was refused\nbenediction and penance imposed.[43] A wife was termed \u201cAn Unhallowed\nThing.\u201d\n\nSo far from celibacy producing chastity or purity of life, church\nrestrictions upon marriage led to the most debasing crimes, the most\nrevolting vices, the grossest immorality. As early as the fourth\ncentury (370) the state attempted purification through a statute\nenacted by the emperors Valentinian, Valerius and Gratian, prohibiting\necclesiastics and monks from entering the houses of widows, single\nwomen living alone, or girls who had lost their parents.[44] The\nnearest ties of relationship proved ineffectual in protecting woman\nfrom priestly assault, and incest became so common it was found\nnecessary to prohibit the residence of a priest\u2019s mother or sister\nin his house.[45] This restriction was renewed at various times\nthrough the ages. The condemnation of the Council of Rome, Easter,\n1051, under the pontificate of Pope Leo IX, was not directed against\nmarried priests, but against those who held incestuous relations. Yet\nalthough the Church thus externally set her seal of disapprobation\nupon this vice, her general teaching sustained it. Gregory, bishop of\nVenelli, convicted of this crime by the Council of Rome, was punished\nby excommunication, but in a short time was restored to his former\nimportant position. The highest legates were equally guilty with the\ninferior priests. Cardinal John of Cremona, the pope\u2019s legate to the\nCouncil of Westminister 1125, sent by Pope Honorius for the express\npurpose of enforcing celibacy, became publicly notorious and disgraced,\nand was obliged to hastily leave England in consequence of his teaching\nand his practice being diametrically opposed.[46]\n\nThrough this clerical contempt of marriage, the conditions of celibacy\nand virginity were regarded as of the highest virtue. Jerome respected\nmarriage as chiefly valuable in that it gave virgins to the church,\nwhile Augustine in acknowledging that marriage perpetuated the species,\nalso contended that it also perpetuated original sin.\n\nThese diverse views in regard to marriage created the most opposite\nteaching from the church. By one class the demand to increase and\nmultiply was constantly brought up, and women were taught that the\nrearing of children was their highest duty. The strangest sermons were\nsometimes preached toward the enforcement of this command. Others\ntaught an entirely different duty for both men and women, and a large\ncelibate class was created under especial authority of the church.\nWomen, especially those of wealth, were constantly urged to take upon\nthemselves the vow of virginity, their property passing into possession\nof the church, thus helping to build up priestly power. Another class\nheld the touch of a woman to be a contamination, and to avoid it holy\nmen secluded themselves in caves and forests.[47] Through numerous\ndecretals confirmation was given to the theory that woman was defiled\nthrough the physical peculiarities of her being. Even her beauty was\ncounted as an especial snare and temptation of the devil for which in\nshame she ought to do continual penance.[48] St. Chrysostom, whose\nprayer is repeated at every Sunday morning service of the Episcopal\nchurch, described women as a \u201cnecessary evil, a natural temptation,\na desirable calamity, a domestic peril, a deadly fascination, and a\npainted ill.\u201d But to escape her influence was impossible and celibacy\nled to the most direful results. Monks and hermits acknowledged\nthemselves tormented in their solitary lives by visions of beautiful\nwomen. Monasteries were visited by an illness to which celibacy\nimparted a name,[49] and impurity of body and soul spread throughout\nChristendom. The general tone of the church in regard to marriage; its\ncreation of a double code of morality; its teaching of woman\u2019s greater\nsinfulness, together with that of her absolute subordination to man,\nsubverted the moral character of the Christian world within whose\nborders the vilest systems of immorality arose which the world has ever\nknown; its extent being a subject of historical record.[50]\n\nAccording to the teaching of men who for many hundreds of years were\nmolders of human thought, priests, philosophers and physicians alike,\nnature never designed to procreate woman, her intention being always\nto produce men. These authorities asserted that nature never formed\nthe feminine except when she lost her true function and so produced\nthe female sex by chance or accident. Aristotle[51] whose philosophy\nwas accepted by the church and all teaching of a contrary character\ndeclared heretical, maintained that nature did not form woman except\nwhen by reason of imperfection of matter she could not obtain the\nsex which is perfect.[52] Cajetan enunciated the same doctrine many\nhundred years later.[53] Aristotle also denied creative power to the\nmother.[54] While throughout its history the course of the Christian\nChurch against marriage is constantly seen, no less noticeable are the\ngrossly immoral practices resulting from celibacy. Scarcely a crime\nor a vice to which it did not give birth. Celibacy was fostered in\nthe interests of power, and in order to its more strict enforcement\nbarons were permitted to enslave the wives and children of married\npriests.[55] Those of Rome were bestowed upon the Cathedral church of\nthe Lateran, and bishops throughout Christendom were ordered to enforce\nthis law in their own dioceses and to seize the wives of priests for\nthe benefit of their churches. At no point of history do we more\nclearly note the influence of the Church upon the State than in the\nunion of the temporal power with the ecclesiastical for purposes of\nconstraining priestly celibacy.\n\nUnder reign of Philip I of France, a council was held at Troyes which\ncondemned the marriage of priests.[56] In 1108, the following year,\nKing Henry I of England[57] summoned a council to assemble in London\nfor purpose of upholding priestly celibacy, urging its enforcement\nupon the bishops, and pledging his kingly honor in aid. A new series\nof canons was promulgated, strengthened by severe penalties and\nthe co-operation of the king. Finding it impossible either through\nspiritual or temporal power to compel absolute celibacy[58] the king\nfor the benefit of his exchequer established a license for concubinage\nupon the payment of a tax known as cullagium.[59]\n\nNotwithstanding all the powerful enginery of the church, priestly\ncelibacy, so contrary to nature, was not rendered absolutely imperative\nuntil the thirteenth century. The Fourth Lateran Council (Twelfth\nEcumenical), 1215, under pope Innocent III, is especially famous\nbecause of its final settlement of the policy of the church in regard\nto priestly marriage. This was a large council, 1300 prelates taking\npart in the adjudication of this question. While with St. Augustine\nacknowledging that marriage was requisite for the preservation of the\nrace, it strictly confined this relation to the laity.\n\nThe subject of celibacy as we see had agitated the church from its\nfoundation. A more renowned council even than the Twelfth Ecumenical,\nnamely, the First Nicene or Second Ecumenical, having seriously\ndiscussed it, although after prolonged debate pronouncing against\ncelibacy and in favor of priestly marriage. St. Paphinutius, the martyr\nbishop of Thebes, although himself a celibate advocated marriage which\nhe declared to be true chastity, the council adopting his opinion.\nAlthough the tendency of the church for so many hundred years had been\ntowards celibacy yet when adopted as a dogma, a belief in its propriety\nor its scriptural authority was by no means universal even among the\nmost eminent members, but in no instance has the control of the church\nover the consciences and will of its adherents been more forcibly\nillustrated. Many illustrious and learned theologians as Gratian the\nCanonist, St. Thomas Aquinas and Giraldus Cambrensis, Arch-Deacon of\nSt. Davids, while thereafter sustaining celibacy _as a law of the\nchurch_ declared it had neither scriptural nor apostolic warrant;\nSt. Thomas affirming it to be merely a law of human ecclesiastical\norigin.[60]\n\nAbsolute celibacy of the priesthood proved very difficult of\nenforcement. At the great council of London, 1237, twenty-three years\nafterwards, Cardinal Otto deplored the fact that married men still\nreceived holy orders and held office in the church, and in 1268 only\nfifty-three years after the great council confirming celibacy as a\ndoctrine of the church, another great council was convened in London,\nwhen Cardinal Legate Ottoborn, the direct representative of the Pope,\ndemanded the establishment of concubinage for priests. The institutions\nof Otto and Ottoborn long remained the law of the English church. Yet\nto their honor be it remembered that despite council and cardinal, pope\nand church, there were priests who still persistently refused either\nto part from their wives or to relinquish their priestly functions,\nand who when excommunicated for contumacy, laughed at the sentence and\ncontinued their priestly offices.[61] Others sufficiently conformed\nto the edicts to lock up their churches and suspend their priestly\nadministrations, yet refusing to part with their wives. The relatives\nof wives also exerted their influence against the action of the church.\n\nThe struggle was bitter and long. New canons were promulgated and\ncelibacy enforced under severe penalties, or rather marriage was\nprohibited under severe penalties. The holy robbery which made slaves\nof the wives and children of priests confiscating their property to the\nchurch, had more effect in compelling celibacy than all anathemas upon\nthe iniquity of marriage. Priests who retained their wives preferring\nthe chastity of this relation to the license allowed celibates, were\nprohibited from their offices and their wives denounced as harlots.\nIf this did not suffice, such priests were finally excommunicated.\nBut a way of return was left open. In case this measure coerced them\ninto abandoning wives and children, a short penance soon restored the\npriestly rank with all its attendant dignities. Nor was the reinstated\npriest compelled to live purely. So little was it expected that the tax\nupon concubinage soon became a component part of the celibate system.\nSo gross and broadspread became the immorality of all classes that even\nthe Head of the Church pandered to it in the erection by Pope Sixtus V\nof a magnificent building devoted to illicit pleasure.[62]\n\nThe example of Christ himself was pointed to in favor of celibacy, even\nupon the cross saying to his mother, \u201cWoman, what have I to do with\nthee?\u201d The saints of the Old Testament as well as the New, were quoted\nas having opposed marriage. Abel, Melchisedeck, Joshua, Elias, Jonah,\nDaniel, St. John the Baptist, St. John the Evangelist, St. Paul with\nhis disciples, and all saintly personages were declared to have been\ncelibates.\n\nA concubinage tax was exacted from all the clergy without exception,\nand rendered compulsory even upon those priests who still kept their\nwives, or who lived chastely outside of the marital relation. Protests\nwere of no avail. Those whom disinclination, age or ill-health kept\nchaste, were told the privilege of unchastity was open to them; the\nbishop must have the money and after payment they were at liberty to\nkeep concubines or not.[63] Under concubinage the priest was free from\nall family responsibility; his mistress possessed neither present nor\nfuture claim upon him; children, who according to church teaching\nfollowed the condition of the mother, were born to him, but for\ntheir education and maintenance neither ecclesiastical nor civil law\ncompelled him to provide.[64]\n\nFor many centuries this immoral tax brought enormous sums into the\ntreasuries of both Church and State. Although the laws against the\nmarriage of priests were enacted on pretense of the greater inherent\nwickedness of woman, history proves their chief object to have been\nthe keeping of all priestly possessions under church control. It was\nopenly asserted that the temporal possessions of the church were\nimperilled by sacerdotal marriage, and it has been declared with every\nproof of truthfulness that edicts against the marriage of priests were\npromulgated to prevent the alienation of property from the church.[65]\nThe saying of Paul was quoted; \u201cHe that is married careth for his\nwife, but he that is unmarried for the Lord.\u201d Married bishops were\noccasionally confirmed in their sees upon condition that their wives\nand children should not inherit their property, which upon their death\nshould fall to the church.[66]\n\nThe struggle against the absolute celibacy of the priesthood was\nbitter. A few priests still kept their benefices while retaining their\nwives and acknowledging their children as legitimate. The sons of such\ncontumacious priests were declared forever incapable of taking holy\norders, unless by a special dispensation. The church showed almost\nequal determination in the establishment of concubinage as in the\nenforcement of priestly celibacy, each of these systems tending to its\nenrichment.\n\nOpposition proved of no permanent avail. Holding control over the\nconscience of men, asserting the power to unlock the doors of heaven\nand hell, a strongly organized body working to one end, it is not a\nsubject of astonishment that the church, its chief object the crushing\nof body and soul, should in the end prove conqueror, and the foulest\ncrimes against woman receive approval of the entire christian world.\nMany notable consequences followed the final establishment of celibacy\nas a dogma of the church.\n\nFirst: The doctrine of woman\u2019s inherent wickedness and close fellowship\nwith Satan took on new strength.\n\nSecond: Canon Law gained full control of civil law.\n\nThird: An organized system of debauchery arose under mask of priestly\ninfallibility.\n\nFourth: Auricular confession was confirmed as a dogma of the church.\n\nFifth: Prohibition of the Scriptures to the laity was enforced.\n\nSixth: Crime was more openly protected, the system of indulgences\ngained new strength, becoming the means of great revenue to the church.\n\nSeventh: Heresy was more broadly defined and more severely punished.\n\nEighth: The Inquisition was established.\n\nWhen Innocent III completed the final destruction of sacerdotal\nmarriage, it was not upon disobedient priests the most severe\npunishment fell, but innocent women and children.[67] Effort was made\nto force wives to desert their husbands. Those who proved contumacious\nwere denied christian burial in an age when such denial was looked\nupon as equivalent to eternal damnation; property left such wives was\nconfiscated to the church; they were forbidden the eucharist; churching\nafter childbirth was denied them; they were termed harlots and their\nchildren bastards, while to their sons all office in the church was\nforbidden. If still contumacious they were handed over to the secular\npower for condign punishment, or sold as slaves for the benefit of\nthe church. They were regarded as under the direct control of Satan\nhimself, as beings who iniquitously stood between their husbands and\nheaven.\n\nAt numerous times in the history of the church women have been brought\nto despair by its teachings, and large numbers driven to suicide.\nA similar period was inaugurated by the confirmation of priestly\ncelibacy. The wives of such men, suddenly rendered homeless and with\ntheir children classed among the vilest of earth, powerless and\ndespairing, hundreds shortened their agonies by death at their own\nhands. For all these crimes the church alone is responsible.\n\nUnder celibacy, auricular confession, and extended belief in\nwitchcraft, a new era of wrong toward woman was inaugurated. From\nthenceforth her condition was more degraded than even during the early\ncenturies of Christianity. Accusations of heresy, which included\nwitchcraft as well as other sins against the church were constantly\nmade against that being who was believed to have brought sin into the\nworld. Whosoever dared question the infallibility of the church by use\nof their own judgment, even upon the most trivial subjects, immediately\nfell into condemnation.\n\nCanon Law gaining full control over civil law, the absolute sinfulness\nof divorce, which maintained by the church has yet been allowed by\ncivil law, was fully established. Woman was entirely at the mercy of\nman, the Canon Law maintaining that the confession of a guilty woman\ncould not be received in evidence against her accomplice, although it\nheld good against herself[68] and the punishment due to both was made\nto fall on the woman alone.[69] The best authorities prove that while\nthe clergy were acquainted with the civil codes that had governed the\nRoman Empire, they made but little use of them.[70] Upon coming to the\nthrone, Justinian[71] had repealed the law of the Patriarchate which\ngave the father sole right and title to, and interest in the children\nof legal marriage, but this was soon again subverted by ecclesiasticism\nand under Canon Law a mother was prohibited all authority over her\nchild, its relationship to her even being denied. While under Common\nLaw children followed the condition of their fathers, who if free\ntransmitted freedom to their children, yet in the interests of priestly\ncelibacy, under church legislation, an entire reversal took place and\nchildren were held to follow the condition of their mothers. Thus\nserf-mothers bore serf-children to free-born fathers; slave mothers\nbore slave children to their masters; while unmarried mothers bore\nbastard children to both priestly and lay fathers, thus throwing the\ntaint of illegitimacy upon the innocent child, and the sole burden\nof its maintenance upon the mother. This portion of Canon Law also\nbecame the law of the State in all Christian countries,[72] and is\nin existence at the present time, both civil codes and statue laws\nenforcing this great wrong of the Church.[73] The relations of men\nand women to each other, the sinfulness of marriage and the license\nof illicit relations for the priesthood, employed the thought of the\nchurch. The duty of woman to obey, not alone her male relatives, but\nall men by virtue of their sex, was sedulously inculcated. She was\ntrained to hold her own desires and even thoughts in abeyance to those\nof man, as to one who was rightfully her master. Every holy principle\nof her nature was subverted by this degrading assumption.\n\nWhen auricular confession became confirmed as a dogma of the church, it\nthrew immense power over the family into the hands of the priesthood,\na power capable of being converted to many ends, but was specially\nnotable in its influence upon morals.[74] Although auricular confession\nwas not established as a dogma until the Council of 1215, it had\nbeen occasionally practiced at early date, carrying with it the same\nimmorality in lesser form as that which afterwards became so great a\nreproach to the church.[75] Through its means the priesthood gained\npossession of all family, social and political secrets, thus acquiring\ninformation whose power for evil was unlimited. The spirit of evil\nnever found a more subtle method of undermining and destroying human\nwill, its most debasing influences falling upon woman, who through\nfear of eternal damnation made known her most secret thoughts to the\nconfessor, an unmarried and frequently a youthful man. It soon became a\nsource of very great corruption to both priest and woman.\n\nAnother effect of this council was the formal prohibition of the\nscriptures to the laity, and thenceforth the Bible was confined to the\npriest who explained its teachings in the interests of his own order,\nadding to, or taking from, to suit his own interests; the recent new\nversion showing many such interpolations.[76] Nothing was held sacred\nby these men, who sacrificed everything to their own advancement and\nthat of their order.\n\nThe insolence of the priesthood was that of all periods; claiming\ndirect inspiration from God, they taught their own infallibility and\nin name of Him, whom they professed to serve, the grossest crimes were\nperpetrated, and this profession became a protecting sanctuary to\nmen whose villainous lives would otherwise have brought them to the\ngallows.[77]\n\nWith conviction of woman\u2019s supreme wickedness, increased through the\nformal recognition of celibacy as a dogma of the church, with the\nestablishment of auricular confession, and the denial of the Bible\nto the laity, the persecution of woman for witchcraft took on new\nphase. The belief that it was the ordinary method through which the\ndevil won souls, together with the persuasion that woman through her\ngreater wickedness fell more readily than men into such practices,\nacquired a firmer seat in theology. Heresy, of which witchcraft was one\nphase, became a greater sin; the inquisition arose, and the general\ncharacteristics of the christian world rapidly grew more inimical to\nhumanity, and especially to woman\u2019s freedom, happiness and security.\n\nThe influence of the church daily grew more unfavorable to all virtue;\nvice was sustained, immorality dignified. The concubines of priests\ncalled \u201cwives,\u201d in bitter mockery of that relation in which the legal\nwife was termed concubine, were known as \u201cThe Hallowed Ones,\u201d \u201cThe\nHonored Ones.\u201d No stigma attached to such a life; these women formed\nquite a class in mediaeval society, themselves and their children\nout-ranking the wives of ordinary laymen;[78] the touch of a priest had\nsanctified them. In the estimation of the church an immoral life led\nwith a priest was more honorable than marriage with a layman, and all\nthe obligations such a relation implied. Priests assumed immunity from\nwrong doing. So far from celibacy causing purity of life, through\nit the priesthood grew to look upon themselves as especially set\napart for indulgence in vice. Did not history so faithfully portray\nthis condition, it would seem impossible that it had existed among\npeople asserting the highest morality, and is proof of the danger\nof irresponsible power to possessor and victim alike, and the ease\nwith which the true meaning of right and wrong is lost under such\ncircumstances.\n\nThe theory of the church that as the fall and sin really existed,\npriestly immorality became a necessity in order to perpetuate the\nworld even through a continuance of the original sin, was a species of\nfine casuistry for which the church in all ages has been remarkable.\nThe general tenor of the church against marriage, together with its\nteaching of woman\u2019s greater sinfulness, were the chief causes which\nundermined the morality of the christian world for fifteen hundred\nyears. With these doctrines were also taught the duty of woman to\nsacrifice herself in every way for man, a theory of which the present\ncentury is not unfamiliar. The loss of chastity in woman was held as\nlight sin in comparison to the degradation that marriage would bring\nto a priest, and young girls ruined by some candidate or priest,\nconsidered themselves doing God service in refusing a marriage that\nwould cause the expulsion of the priestly lover from the ecclesiastical\norder. With woman\u2019s so-called \u201cdivine,\u201d but rather demoniac\nself-sacrifice, Heloise chose to be deemed the mistress of Abelard\nrather than by acknowledging their marriage destroy his prospects of\nadvancement in the church.[79]\n\nThe State sustained the Church in its opposition to marriage, and we\nfind the anomaly of marriage for political reasons where the parties\nforever separated at the altar. St. Jerome, and at a later date St.\nDunstan, sustained the policy of such marriages. The history of Britain\ngives instances of early queens thus separating from their newly made\nhusbands at the close of the ceremony, dedicating their lives to\ncelibacy and their fortunes to the church.\n\nNor did this institution neglect that large class of women to whom\nmarriage was made impossible because of the numbers of men to whom\nit was forbidden. After the Lateran Council had permanently settled\nthe action of the church in favor of priestly celibacy, great effort\nwas made to draw women of wealth into a monastic life. Religion was\nthe chief method of acquiring power, and as an abbess of a religious\ninstitution it opened opportunity for power to women scarcely possible\noutside the church. The two highest womanly virtues inculcated by the\nchurch were a celibate life and liberality to religious houses. It was\ntaught if anything could possibly mitigate women\u2019s sin through Eve\u2019s\ntransgression, it was the observance of these two conditions.\n\nTo the student this is the most remarkable period in the history of\nthe church, not merely as a culmination of the effort of centuries in\nfinally deciding the questions of celibacy, so long agitated with such\nvarying results, but in the immediate change and permanent settlement\nit brought about in regard to other church dogmas, as well as its\npronounced influence in causing the Lutheran Reformation.\n\nIt was asserted that the spiritual office of the priest sanctified\nsin; it became a maxim that whatever a priest might do was holy; by\ntheir taking part in lasciviousness it became consecration. To disobey\na priest was to endanger salvation; it was libellous and treasonable\nto question the purity of a priest\u2019s motives, hence religion became a\nscreen for all vice and a source of moral degradation to all woman. To\nsuch extent was belief carried in the superior purity of a celibate\nlife that but little more than 300 years since a man was burned at the\nstake in England for asserting the lawfulness of priestly marriage.[80]\nThe action of the council of 1215, so powerfully sustaining the olden\nclaims of the superior holiness of celibacy soon created a belief in\nthe inability of a priest to commit sin. During the middle ages his\ninfallibility was constantly maintained, his superior sanctity in\nconsequence of his celibacy universally asserted. It was impossible\nnot to connect the idea of great wickedness with those incapable of\nentering this holy office, and as woman by virtue of sex was prohibited\npriestly functions, and as her marriage had been declared a necessity\nfor the world, these conditions were used as arguments against her. The\nconscience and morality of tens of thousands were destroyed by these\nteachings, enforced as they were by all the dread authority of the\nchurch. The christian world was under entire control of a class whose\naim was chiefly that of personal aggrandizement, and that hesitated at\nno means for securing wealth and power.\n\nThe Inquisition was firmly established; under its reign six hundred\nmethods of torture were known, and it was conducted with such secrecy\nthat not until dragged before it were many of its victims aware they\nwere under suspicion. Even when imprisoned in its torture chambers,\nthe charges against them were kept secret in hopes thereby to compel\nself-accusation upon other points. The inferiority of woman, her\nproneness to evil and readiness to listen to all suggestions of Satan,\nwas taught with renewed vigor and power for evil.\n\nThe priest regarded himself as the direct representative of divinity;\nthe theory of infallibility was not confined to the pope, but all\ndignitaries of the church made the same claim. Asserting themselves\nincapable of wrong doing, maintaining an especial sanctification by\nreason of their celibacy, priests nevertheless made their holy office\na cover for the most degrading sensuality. Methods were taken to\ndebauch the souls as well as the bodies of women. Having first taught\ntheir special impurity, it was not maintained that immorality with a\npriest was not sin, but on the contrary hallowed the woman, giving\nher particular claim upon heaven. It was taught that sin could only\nbe killed through sin.[81] The very incarnation was used as a means\nof weakening woman\u2019s virtue. That Christ did not enter the world\nthrough the marriage relation, stamped with christian honor a system\nof concubinage in the church, for whose warrant woman was pointed to\nthe Virgin Mary. As an enforcement of her duty of absolute surrender\nof soul and body to the will of the priest the course of the Virgin\nwas adduced, \u201cwho obeyed the angel Gabriel and conceived without fear\nof evil, for impurity could not come of a spirit.\u201d[82] The chastity of\nconcubinage and the unchasteness of marriage was constantly asserted\nby the church, and thus the mysteries upon which its foundations were\nlaid were used by it for the degradation of woman, who was at all times\ndepicted as a being of no self-individuality, but one who had been\ncreated solely for man\u2019s pleasure. As late as the seventeenth century,\nit was taught that a priest could commit no sin. This old doctrine took\nnew strength from the Illumes, who claimed an inner divine light.[83]\nWe find reference to priestly immorality and claim of infallibility\namong old writers, Boccaccio in many of his stories putting arguments\nof this kind in the mouth of his priestly characters.[84]\n\nIt was asserted too that sin was of the body alone, the soul knowing\nnothing, partaking nothing of it. As an argument in favor of woman\u2019s\nthrowing herself entirely in the hands of priests for immoral purposes,\nit was declared that, \u201cThe devout having offered up and annihilated\ntheir own selves exist no longer but in God; thenceforth they can do\nno wrong. The better part of them is so divine that it no longer knows\nwhat the other is doing.\u201d\n\nIn confirmation of this doctrine it was said that Jesus threw off his\nclothing and was scourged naked before the people. The result of this\nteaching was the almost universal immorality of christendom. Under\nsuch religious doctrine it could but be expected that the laity would\nclosely imitate the priesthood. Europe became a continent of moral\ncorruption, of which proof is overwhelming. Could we but relegate\nchristian immorality to the dark ages we might somewhat palliate it\nunder plea of ignorance. But unfortunately for such claim ample proof\nis found to show that the enlightenment of modern civilization has not\nyet been able to overthrow the basic idea upon which this immorality\nrests. Amid the material and intellectual advancement of the last\nhundred years we find spiritual darkness still profound in the church\nand the true foundation of immorality almost unrecognized.\n\nAs long as the church maintains the doctrine that woman was created\ninferior to man, and brought sin into the world rendering the sacrilige\nof the Son of God a necessity, just so long will the foundation of vice\nand crime of every character remain. Not until the exact and permanent\nequality of woman with man is recognized by the church, aye, even more,\nthe greater power and capacity of woman in the creative function,\ntogether with the accountability of man to woman in everything relating\nto the birth of a new being, is fully accepted as a law of nature, will\nvice and crime disappear from the world. Until that time has fully\ncome, prostitution in its varied forms will continue to exist, together\nwith alms-houses, reformatories, jails, prisons, hospitals and asylums\nfor the punishment, reformation or care of the wretched beings who have\ncome into existence with an inheritance of disease and crime because of\nchurch theory and church teaching.\n\nThe system of celibacy produced its same effects wherever preached. So\nconstant was the system of debauchery practiced in England during the\nreign of Henry VII that the gentlemen and farmers of Carnarvonshire\nlaid complaint against the clergy of systematically seducing their\nwives and daughters.[85] Women were everywhere looked upon as slaves\nand toys, to obey, to furnish pleasure and amusement, and to be cast\naside at will. Under the religious teaching of christendom it could not\nbut be expected that the laity would closely imitate the priesthood,\nand to victimize women became the custom of all men.[86] When a priest\nfailed to take a concubine his parishoners compelled him to do so\nin order to preserve the chastity of their own wives and daughters.\nDraper[87] tells us that in England alone 100,000 women became victims\nof the priests. Houses of vile character were maintained for especial\nuse of the priesthood. The marriage of a priest was called a deception\nof the devil who thus led him into an adulterous relation[88] for sake\nof alienating property from the church.\n\nThis mediaeval doctrine that sin can only be killed through sin, finds\nexpression today not alone in religion[89] but in society novels;[90]\nits origin, like many other religious wrongs, being directly traceable\nto the teaching of St. Paul.[91]\n\nThe incontinence of these celibate priests ultimately became so great\na source of scandal to the church that it was obliged to take action.\nEdicts and bulls were fulminated from the papal chair, although the\nfacts of history prove Rome itself, its popes and its cardinals, to\nhave been sunk in the grossest immorality. Spain, the seat of the\nInquisition, and at that period the very heart of Christendom, was\nthe first country toward which investigation was turned, Pope Paul IV\nissuing a bull against those confessors who solicited women, provoking\nthem to dissolute action. When this bull of investigation first\nappeared in Spain, it was accompanied by an edict commanding all those\nwho knew of monks or priests that had thus abused the confessional to\nmake it known within thirty days under grievous penalty. The terrible\npower of the church intimidated those who otherwise for very shame\nwould surely have buried the guilt of their priests in oblivion,\nand so great was the number of women who thronged the palace of the\nInquisition in the city of Seville alone, that twenty secretaries\nwith as many Inquisitors were not sufficient to take the deposition\nof the witnesses. A second, a third and a fourth thirty days were\nappointed for investigation, so great were the number of women making\ncomplaint.[92] So large a number of priests were implicated that after\na four months\u2019 examination, the Holy Tribunal of the Inquisition put\na stop to the proceedings, commanding that all those immoralities\nand crimes against womanhood only rendered possible in the name of\nreligion, and which has been proven by legal evidence, should be buried\nin eternal oblivion. The deposition of thousands of women seduced by\ntheir confessors, was not deemed sufficient evidence for removal of the\nguilty priests from their holy offices. Occasionally a single priest\nwas suspended for a short time but in a few months restored again to\nhis priestly position.[93]\n\nIt was not uncommon for women to be openly carried off by priests,\ntheir husbands and fathers threatened with vengeance in cases of their\nattempted recovery.[94] During the height of the Inquisitorial power\nit was not rare for a family to be aroused in the night by an ominous\nknock and the cry \u201cThe Holy Fathers, open the door!\u201d\n\nTo this dread mandate there could be but one reply, as both temporal\nand spiritual power lay in their hands. A husband, father or son might\nthus be seized by veiled figures; or as frequently a loved wife or\nyoung daughter was dragged from her bed, her fate ever to remain a\nmystery. When young and beautiful these women were taken to replenish\nthe Inquisitional harem; the \u201cdry pan,\u201d \u201cboiling in oil,\u201d and similar\nmethods of torture, threatened, in order to produce compliance upon\npart of wretched victims. No Turkish seraglio with bow-string and sack\never exhibited as great an amount of diabolical wickedness as the\nprison-harems of the Inquisition. As late as the seventeenth century\nPope Gregory XV commanded strict enforcement of the bull against\npriestly lechery not alone in Spain, but in all other parts of the\nChristian world. In England after the reformation, the same condition\nwas found to exist.[95] But edicts against lasciviousness were vainly\nissued by a church whose foundation is a belief in the supremacy of one\nsex over the other, and that woman brought sin into the world through\nhaving seduced man into the marriage relation. Despite the advance of\nknowledge and civilization the effects of such teachings are the same\nnow as during the middle ages, as fully proven at time of separation\nbetween the temporal and spiritual power in Italy;[96] and these\nproofs are taken from Catholic sources. In 1849 when the Roman people\nopened the palace of the Inquisition there was found in the library\na department entitled \u201cSummary of Solicitations,\u201d being a record of\ncases in which women had been solicited to acts of criminality by\ntheir confessors in the pontifical state.[97] The testimony of Luther\nas to the moral degradation of the church at time of the Reformation\nhas never been invalidated,[98] and is entirely in accord with its\ncharacter throughout history.\n\nThat the same iniquities are connected with the confessional today, we\nlearn from the testimony of those priests who have withdrawn from the\ncommunion of the Catholic Church; Father Hyacinthe publicly declaring\nthat ninety-nine out of one hundred priests live in sin with the women\nthey have destroyed. Another priest following the example of Father\nHyacinthe in marrying, asserted that he took this step in order to get\nout of the ultramontane slough and remain an honest man.[99] That the\nCatholic Church of the present day bears the same general character\nit did during the middle ages is proven from much testimony. Among\nthe latest and most important witnesses, for minuteness and fullness\nof detail, is Rev. Charles Chiniquy in his works \u201cThe Priest, The\nWoman and the Confessional,\u201d \u201cFifty Years of Rome,\u201d etc. Now over\neighty years of age, Rev. Mr. Chiniquy was for more than fifty years\na Catholic priest of influence and high reputation, known in Canada,\nwhere thousands of drunkards reformed under his teaching, as the\n\u201cApostle of Temperance.\u201d Becoming convinced of the immorality of the\nRomish Church, he left it in 1856, taking with him five thousand French\nCanadians with whom he settled at St. Anne, Kankakee County, Illinois.\nHaving united with a branch of the Protestant church, he was invited\nto Scotland to take part in the Tercentenary of the Reformation, and\nlater to England, where he lectured on invitation of ministers of every\nevangelical denomination.[100] His \u201cFifty Years of Rome\u201d indissolubly\nlinks his name with that of Abraham Lincoln, through the information\nthere made known regarding the Catholic plot for President Lincoln\u2019s\nassassination.\n\nIt is as fully a law of moral as of material nature that from the same\ncauses the same effects follow. In his work upon the confessional[101]\nRev. Mr. Chiniquy relates incidents coming under his own personal\nknowledge while he was still a catholic priest regarding its present\nabuses. The character of the questions made a duty of the priest\nto ask during confession, are debasing in the extreme, their whole\ntendency towards the undermining of morality. Too broadly indelicate\nfor translation these priestly instructions are hidden in Latin, but\nare no less made the duty of a priest to understand and use. In 1877, a\nnumber of prominent women of Montreal, Canada, addressed a declaration\nand protest to the bishop of that diocese against the abuses of the\nconfessional of which their own experience had made them cognizant.\n\n\n    DECLARATION\n\n    To His Lordship Bourget, Bishop of Montreal\n\n    _Sir_:\u2014Since God in his infinite mercy has been pleased to\n    show us the errors of Rome, and has given us strength to\n    abandon them to follow Christ, we deem it our duty to say\n    a word on the abominations of the confessional. You well\n    know that these abominations are of such a nature that it\n    is impossible for a woman to speak of them without a blush.\n    How is it that among civilized christian men one has so far\n    forgotten the rule of common decency as to force women to\n    reveal to unmarried men, under the pains of eternal damnation,\n    their most secret thoughts, their most sinful desires and\n    their most private actions?\n\n    How unless there be a brazen mask on your priest\u2019s face dare\n    they go out into the world having heard the tales of misery\n    which cannot but defile the hearing, and which the women\n    cannot relate without having laid aside modesty and all sense\n    of shame. The harm would not be so great should the Church\n    allow no one but the woman to accuse herself. But what shall\n    we say of the abominable questions that are put to them and\n    which they must answer?\n\n    Here, the laws of common decency strictly forbid us to enter\n    into details. Suffice it to say, were husbands cognizant of\n    one-tenth of what is going on between the confessor and their\n    wives, they would rather see them dead than degraded to such a\n    degree.\n\n    As for us, daughters and wives from Montreal who have known\n    by experience the filth of the confessional, we cannot\n    sufficiently bless God for having shown us the error of our\n    ways in teaching us that it was not at the feet of a man as\n    weak and as sinful as ourselves, but at the feet of Christ\n    alone that we must seek salvation.\n\n    Julia Herbert,\n    Marie Rogers,\n    J. Rocham,\n    Louise Picard,\n    Francoise Dirringer,\n    Eugenie Martin, and\n    forty-three others.[102]\n\nIn reply to a letter of inquiry addressed by myself to Rev. Mr.\nChiniquy, the following answer was received.\n\n    St. Anne, Kankakee County, Illinois\n    January 4, 1887\n\nMrs. Matilda Joslyn Gage,\nMadam\n\n    In answer to your honored letter of the 29th Dec. I hasten to\n    say: _First._ The women of Montreal signed the declaration\n    you see in \u2018The Priest, the Woman and the Confessional,\u2019 in\n    the fall of 1877. I do not remember the day. _Second._ As it\n    is ten years since I left Montreal to come to my Missionary\n    field of Illinois, I could not say if these women are still in\n    Montreal or not. Great, supreme efforts were secretly made by\n    the Bishop of Montreal to show that these names were forged\n    in order to answer and confound me, but the poor Bishop found\n    that the document was too correct, authentic and public to be\n    answered and attacked, and he remained mute and confounded,\n    for many of these women were well known in the city.\n\n    _Third._ You will find the answer to your other questions,\n    in the volume \u2018Fifty Years in the Church of Rome,\u2019 which I\n    addressed you by today\u2019s mail.\n\n    Respectfully yours in Christ,\n    C. Chiniquy\n\nThe same assertion of priestly infallibility is made today as it\nwas centuries ago, the same declaration of change of nature through\npriestly celibacy. Upon this question Mr. Chiniquy says:\n\n    If any one wants to hear an eloquent oration let him go\n    where the Roman Catholic priest is preaching on the divine\n    institution of auricular confession. They make the people\n    believe that the vow of perpetual chastity changes their\n    nature, turns them into angels and puts them above the common\n    faults of the fallen children of Adam. With a brazen face when\n    they are interrogated on that subject, they say that they have\n    special graces to remain pure and undefiled in the midst of\n    the greatest dangers; that the Virgin Mary to whom they are\n    consecrated is their powerful advocate to obtain from her son\n    that superhuman virtue of Chastity; that what would be a cause\n    of sin and perdition to common men is without peril and danger\n    for a true son of Mary.[103]\n\nA work entitled \u201cMysteries of the Neapolitan Convents,\u201d its author\nHenrietta Carracciola, a woman of the purest blood of the princes of\nItaly, daughter of the Marshal Carracciola, Governor of the Province of\nPasi in Italy, is quoted from, by Rev. Mr. Chiniquy, in confirmation of\nhis statements as to the continued impurity of the confessional.\n\n    Finally another priest, the most annoying of all for his\n    obstinate assiduity, sought to secure my affections at all\n    cost. There was not an image profane poetry could afford\n    him, nor a sophism he could borrow from rhetoric, no wily\n    interpretation he could give to the word of God, which he did\n    not employ to convert me to his wishes. Here is an example of\n    his logic:\u2014\n\n    \u201cDear daughter,\u201d said he to me one day, \u201cknowest thou who thy\n    God truly is?\u201d\n\n    \u201cHe is the Creator of the Universe,\u201d I answered dryly.\n\n    \u201cNo-no-no-no! that is not enough,\u201d he replied laughing at\n    my ignorance; \u201cGod is Love, but love in the abstract which\n    receives its incarnation in the mutual affection of two\n    hearts which idolize each other. You must then not only love\n    God in the abstract existence, but must also love him in his\n    incarnation, that is, in the exclusive love of a man who\n    adores you. _Quod Deus est amor nec colitus nisi amando._\u201d\n\n    \u201cThen,\u201d I replied, \u201ca woman who adores her own lover would\n    adore Divinity itself?\u201d \u201cAssuredly,\u201d reiterated the priest\n    over and over again, taking courage from my remark and\n    chuckling with what seemed to him the effect of his catechism.\n\n    \u201cIn that case,\u201d said I hastily, \u201cI should select for my lover\n    rather a man of the world than a priest.\u201d\n\n    \u201cGod preserve you, my daughter! God preserve you from that\n    sin. To love a man of the world, a sinner, a wretch, an\n    unbeliever, an infidel! Why, you would go immediately to hell.\n    The love of a priest is a sacred love, while that of a profane\n    man is infamy. The priest purifies his affections daily in\n    communion with the Holy Spirit.... If you cannot love me\n    because I am your confessor, I will find means to assist you\n    to get rid of your scruples. We will place the name of Jesus\n    Christ before all our affectionate demonstrations and thus our\n    love will be a grateful offering to the Lord and will ascend\n    fragrant with perfume to Heaven like the smoke of the incense\n    of the Sanctuary. Say to me for example \u2018I love you in Jesus\n    Christ, last night I dreamed of you in Jesus Christ,\u2019 and you\n    will have tranquil conscience, because in doing this God will\n    sanctify every transport of your love.\u201d\n\nRev. Mr. Chiniquy who in his fifty years of Romish priesthood possessed\nevery opportunity for knowing the truth, does not hesitate to affirm\nthat the popes are today of the same general immoral character they\nwere in the earlier centuries of the Church. He says:\n\n    Let not my readers be deceived by the idea that the popes of\n    Rome in our days are much better than those of the ninth,\n    tenth, eleventh and twelfth centuries. They are absolutely the\n    same\u2014the only difference is that today they take a little more\n    care to conceal their secret orgies. Go to Italy and there the\n    Roman Catholics themselves will show you the two beautiful\n    daughters whom the late Pope Pius IX had from two of his\n    mistresses. Inquire from those who have personally known Pope\n    Gregory XVI the predecessor of Pius IX; after they will have\n    given you the history of his mistresses, one of whom was the\n    wife of his barber, they will tell you that he was one of the\n    greatest drunkards in Italy.[104]\n\nThe views of the Catholic Church in regard to marriage of the\npriesthood was recently demonstrated in the United States, 1885, by\nthe persecution of a priest of the Uniate Greek Church sent as a\nmissionary from Austria to Pennsylvania. The Greek Church, it must be\nremembered, permits a single marriage to a priest. The Uniate while in\nthis respect following the discipline of the Greek Church, yet admits\nthe supremacy of the Pope which the regular Greek Church does not. The\nUniate Greek Church accepts, as binding, all the decisions of Rome\nsubsequent to the division between the eastern and the western parts of\nchristendom. Endowed with authority from both branches, Father Wolonski\ncame to this country accompanied by his wife, in full expectation of\nfellowship with his catholic brethren. His first contrary experience\noccurred in Philadelphia when Archbishop Ryan of the Cathedral refused\nall intercourse with him because of his marriage. Reaching Shenandoah\nwhere commissioned by his own Austrian Bishop, he discovered himself\nstill under ban; the resident priest of the catholic church having\nwarned his congregation under pain of excommunication to shun both\nhimself and his church, upon the ground that the Roman Church under no\ncircumstances tolerated a married priest. Eventually the subject grew\nto such proportions that Father Wolonski was recalled, and an unmarried\npriest sent in his stead.[105]\n\nFrom the experience of Father Wolonski less than a decade since, with\nthe bitter hostility shown by the church towards Father Hyacinthe,\nwe find that a belief in the special holiness of celibacy is as\ndominant in the Catholic church today as at any period of its history;\nconcurrent testimony teaching us that its greatest evils remain the\nsame as of old. It is less than twenty years since the whole christian\nworld was interested in a suit brought against the heirs of the\ndeceased Cardinal Antonelli in order to secure recognition of his\ndaughter\u2019s claim to inheritance. This girl was everywhere spoken of by\nthe Catholic Church as \u201ca sacrilegious child,\u201d that is, a being who had\nviolated sacred things by coming into existence. The destruction of her\nmother\u2019s life, her own illegitimacy, the wrong done to her mother\u2019s\nfamily and to society were held as of no moment beside the fact that\nher claims, if allowed, would take property from the church. The love\nof the Great Cardinal for this girl\u2019s mother was fully proven, but\nthe church having established celibacy in order that it might control\nthe property of its priests, was not inclined to permit any portion\nto be diverted from that source. Honesty, justice, and the ties of\nnatural affection, now as of yore are not part of the Church system. In\nconsequence, this suit of the illegitimate child of the Great Cardinal\nSecretary, filled not alone Italy, but the whole Catholic world with\ndisgrace.\n\nAmong the countries now striving to free themselves from Church\ndominion is Mexico. A letter to the New York Herald, winter of 1892,\nregarding the revolution there in progress, said of Diaz:\n\n    Instead of his being assisted by the Church it has been his\n    bitterest and most relentless enemy and opponent. The Church\n    in Mexico is opposed to all enlightenment of the people. The\n    clergy, if they can be honored with that name, fight all\n    improvements. They want no railways or telegraphs and when\n    he adopted a system of compulsory education the war began in\n    earnest. Diaz was determined, however, and he retaliated by\n    closing up the convents and prohibiting the establishment of\n    monasteries. Being further opposed in his efforts at reform\n    and defied by the priests he put hundreds of them in Pueblo\n    in jail and prohibited the ringing of Church bells in certain\n    localities. He forcibly impressed on them the fact that he was\n    running Mexico, not they. He gave them to understand that his\n    idea of Christianity was, that priests should preach Christ\n    crucified and not revolution and infraction of the laws.\n\n    In Mexico, priests can keep mistresses with impunity. From\n    a church to a gambling-table is but a step, and the priests\n    gamble with the rest. The rentals of houses of ill-fame, of\n    gambling-houses, of bull-pens all go to a church which is\n    supposed to teach religion. Because Diaz, a catholic himself,\n    will not tolerate such crimes under the guise of religion\n    he is fought by the church and is the recipient of their\n    anathemas.\n\n    Take the leading church in Monterey outside of the cathedral.\n    You step from the church-door to a plaza owned by the church\n    and in which stand fifty tents in which are conducted monte,\n    roulette and other games of chance. Behind this stand the\n    bull-pen, and the profits and rentals go to the Church.\n\n    With all these lights the most plausible inference or theory\n    is that the clerical party, as they see all these privileges\n    being swept away, will cheerfully contribute the sinews of war\n    with which to carry on a revolution against Diaz. They have\n    agents in Europe and the money can come through that source\n    without detection.\n\nThe agent of the Clerical Party in Europe is the Church itself. As a\nbody, it has ever opposed advancement and reform. It anathematized the\nprinting press as an invention of the devil and has steadily opposed\neducation of the people. Its work is best done in the darkness of\nignorance and superstition. For this cause it has opposed all new\ndiscoveries in science, all reforms of whatever character.[106] Not\nby the Catholic Church alone, but under the \u201cReformation,\u201d as we have\nseen, the same prohibition of the Bible to common people, has existed\nthe same resistance to education of the masses, the same opposition\nto anti-slavery, to temperance, to woman\u2019s demand for equality of\nopportunity with man. The general nature of the church does not change\nwith change of name. Looking backward through history we even find the\nsame characteristics under the patriarchate; love of power, greed for\nmoney, and intense selfishness combined in a general disregard for the\nrights of others.\n\nM. Renan\u2019s drama, \u201cL\u2019Abbesse de Jouarre,\u201d was written because he\nwished to prove the worthlessness of those vows imposed on catholic\npriests and nuns, as well as show the bondage under which they held the\nfeminine conscience, while the masculine conscience throws them aside.\nIt is not alone the nuns whose conscience is bound, but all feminine\nmembers of the catholic church are more closely held in a spiritual\nbondage, than the male members of that church. In 1885, a letter from\nChili to the _New York Sun_ graphically pictured certain Chilian\nwomen penitents who are known by a peculiar dress they are required to\nwear.[107] Others whose sins are so great that they cannot be purged by\na penitential dress, retire for a season to the \u201cConvent of Penitents,\u201d\nwhere by mortification of the body they hope to gain absolution for\nthe soul. Still more severe than this retreat are other convents known\nas \u201cHouses of Detention,\u201d where wayward daughters are sent, and young\nmothers without husbands are cared for. But the whole country of Chili\nfails to show a similar dress, or house of penitence, or correction for\nmen. Shame and penance, equally with sin, have been relegated by the\nchurch to women alone.\n\nThe confessional is not frequented by men, and mass is but seldom\nattended by them. For this laxity a double reason exists: First,\nimmorality in men is not looked upon as contrary to its discipline.\nSecond, through woman having been trained to a more sensitive\nconscience than man, the confessional wrests secrets from her lips,\nwhich gives the church knowledge of all it wishes to learn in regard\nto the family. No more certain system could have been devised for the\ndestruction of woman\u2019s self-respect than the one requiring penance from\nher for sins the church passes lightly over in man. Nor would penance\nof this character be demanded from women were the offices of the church\nopen to her the same as to man. No greater crime against humanity has\never been known than the division of morality into two codes, the\nstrict for woman, the lax for man. Nor has woman been the sole sufferer\nfrom this creation of Two Moral Codes within the Christian Church.\nThrough it man has lost fine discrimination between good and evil, and\nthe Church itself as the originator of this distinction in sin upon\nthe trend of sex, has become the creator and sustainer of injustice,\nfalsehood and the crimes into which its priests have most deeply sunk.\nNor is this condition of the past. As late as the fall of 1892 a number\nof articles appeared in Canadian papers openly accusing the catholic\npriesthood of that province of the grossest immorality.[108] That\npriestly celibacy yet continues in the Romish Church is not a subject\nof surprise, when we realize the immense power and wealth it has been\nenabled to secure through its means; but it is one of astonishment,\ncarrying with it a premonition of danger, that we now see a similar\ntendency in the ritualistic portion of the Episcopal Church, both in\nEngland and the United States. The evils of monasticism, although less\npotent than during the middle ages, are still great, and in finding\nentrance into Protestant denominations are a fresh warning of their\ndangerous tendency. The experience of the past should not appeal to\nus in vain. We have noticed the perils to society arising from those\nclasses of persons who, under plea of religion, evade the duties of\nfamily and social life. No crime against the world can be greater than\nthe deliberate divestment of responsibility by one\u2019s self, because\ntired of the warfare of life, that struggle which comes to every human\nbeing; the becoming \u201cfascinated with the conceptions of an existence\u201d\noutside of ordinary cares; and the entrance into an order in which\none\u2019s own personal responsibility is largely surrendered to others\nis not alone a crime against the state, but a sin against one\u2019s own\nself and against humanity. An order which thereafter assumes the task\nof directing the thoughts and lives of its members into a channel\nof \u201crepose and contentment\u201d as certain protestant orders do, is one\nof the dangerous religious elements of the present day. No crime\nagainst one\u2019s self or against society can be greater than this. In the\nRitualistic Episcopal Church are to be found monks and sisterhoods\nupon the celibate plan, confessors and penance, all of them primal\nelements in moral and spiritual degradation. If religion has a lesson\nto teach mankind, it is that of personal responsibility; it is that\nof the worth and duty of the individual; it is that each human being\nis alone accountable for his or her course in life; it is the lesson\nof the absolute equality of each human being with every other human\nbeing in relation to these cardinal points. The lesson should have been\nlearned ere this, that ecclesiastical pretense of divinely appointed\npower has ever made the priesthood arrogant, coarse and tyrannical;\nthe male laity dependent and dissimulating; woman, self-distrustful\nand timorous, believing in the duty of humiliation and self-sacrifice;\nthat her life is not to be lived primarily for herself alone, but that\nher very right to existence is dependent upon the benefit thereby to\naccrue to some other person. Today, as of old, the underlying idea of\nmonasticism, of \u201cbrotherhoods,\u201d \u201csisterhoods,\u201d and their ilk even in\nProtestant denominations, is the divine authority of some priestly\nsuperior, and that the power of remitting sins inheres in some system\nunder control of some priest. The Ritualistic party of the Episcopal\nChurch, equally with the Roman Catholic Church, makes frequent\nreference to these words of Christ\u2014St. John XX, XXIII\u2014\u201cWhatever sins\nyou remit they are remitted unto them, and whatsoever sins you retain\nare retained,\u201d thus premising the divine power of the priesthood.\n\n\n\n\n_Chapter Three_\n\n+Canon Law+\n\n\nThe earliest Saxon laws were almost entirely ecclesiastical,[1] their\nbasis seeming to have been payment of tithes to the Church and support\nof the pope through what was known as the \u201chearth penny\u201d to St. Peter.\nMarriage was by no means allowed to escape general ecclesiastical\ncontrol, its legitimacy being made to depend upon the sanction and\nservices of a priest.[2] This we learn from Reeves, whose authority is\nindisputable,[3] therefore we discover that even long before marriage\nwas constituted one of the sacraments, celibacy or the confessional\nestablished, the Church had perceived the great increase in its\nauthority to be brought about by gaining control of the marriage\nceremony and making its legitimacy depend upon the services of a\npriest. This was a material step towards the subjugation of mankind;\none whose dire consequences have not yet received due consideration.\nWhen Rome became a Christian State, and the phallic cross triumphed\nover the gods and goddesses of old, the condition of woman under the\ncivil law became more degraded. The change from ancient civilization\nto that renewed barbarism at an early age of the Christian era, which\nso many writers note without perceiving its cause, is to be found in\nthe low conception of womanhood inculcated by the Church. Ignorance,\nsuperstition, falsehood and forgery united in creating new codes of\nlaw, new customs of society, new habits of thought, which, having for\ncenturies been imposed upon mankind by the united force of the Church\nand the State, still continue their impress upon modern life and law.\n\nAmong general canons we find that \u201cNo woman may approach the altar.\u201d\n\u201cA woman may not baptize without extreme necessity.\u201d \u201cWoman may not\nreceive the Eucharist under a black veil.\u201d \u201cWoman may not receive the\nEucharist in _morbo suo menstrule_.\u201d\n\nAt the Synod or Council of Elvira,[4] 305 or 306, several restrictive\ncanons were formulated against woman. Under Canon 81, she was forbidden\nto write in her own name to lay christians, but only in the name of her\nhusband. Women were not to receive letters of friendship from any one\naddressed only to themselves.\n\nFrom the commencement of the fifth century, the Christian clergy\nacquired a powerful influence in Rome. Bishops and priests were the\nmunicipal magistrates of the Roman Empire, of which little now remained\nexcept its municipal government; thus the Church in reality became\nRome, and Rome the Church. It has been declared difficult to fix with\nprecision the period at which ecclesiastics first began to claim\nexemption from civil jurisdiction. The Synod of Paris, 615, seems to\nhave secured to the clergy the privilege of being brought before mixed\ntribunals in all cases which had theretofore belonged to the civil\njudge alone. Bishops acquired greater power from having an oversight\nover the whole administration of justice committed to them, while\ntheir spiritual judgments were rendered more effective by the addition\nof excommunication to civil punishments. The State, at first holding\nrepression over the Church, added to its powers by relieving the clergy\nfrom all civil duties,[5] thus tending to make of them a body exterior\nto the civil government. This division was farther increased through\nthe emperors giving confirmation to the decisions pronounced by bishops\nin ecclesiastical affairs, and also when they were chosen umpires in\ncivil suits; the tendency of this action was towards the creation of\nan ecclesiastical law with separate powers from the civil law. Another\nstep towards the separation of civil from ecclesiastical law and the\nsupremacy of the latter, was made when in cases of discipline the\nclergy were allowed to come under the authority and supervision of the\nSpiritual Courts.[6]\n\nAs soon as Christianity became the religion of the State, this power\nwas still farther increased by the permission accorded ecclesiastics to\naccept gifts, inherit and hold property; the purity of clerical motives\nbeing thereby greatly lessened, as covetous and unscrupulous persons\nwere forthwith attracted to this profession. The law of tithes was\nintroduced by Charlemagne, and his edicts largely increased clerical\npower. The compilation of a Code of Canon Law was begun as early as\nthe ninth century,[7] by which period the olden acknowledged rights of\nthe clergy, those of superintending morals and interference on behalf\nof the unfortunate, had largely been lost sight of, or diverted from\ntheir proper course by a system of ecclesiastical tyranny which created\nan order of morals, whose sole design was that of building up priestly\npower.\n\nThe complete inferiority and subordination of the female sex was\nmaintained both by civil and common law. It was a principle of common\nlaw that sons should be admitted to an inheritance before daughters.[8]\nThis distinction created by the Church in the interests of the class\nwhich was alone admitted to the priesthood, thus placing the possession\nof wealth in the hands of man, did much towards keeping woman in a\nsubordinate condition. In accordance with natural law, the person not\nowning property is less interested in the welfare of the State than\nthe one possessing it, a denial of the rights of ownership acting\nprejudicially upon the individual.\n\nEcclesiastical or Canon Law[9] made its greatest encroachments at the\nperiod when Chivalry[10] was at its height; the outward show of respect\nand honor to woman under chivalry keeping pace in its false pretence\nwith the destruction of her legal rights. The general conception in\nregard to woman was so degraded at this period that a \u201cCommunity of\nWomen\u201d was proposed, to whom all men should act in the relation of\nhusbands.[11] This plan was advocated by Jean de Meung, the \u201cPoet of\nChivalry,\u201d in his famous _Roman de la Rose_. Christine of Pisa, a woman\nof learning and remarkable force of character, the first strictly\nliterary woman of western Europe, wrote a work in defense of her sex\nagainst the general libidinous character of the age.[12] Her opposition\nto the debasing theories of the \u201cRomance\u201d marks the later period of\nwoman\u2019s entrance into literature, and is an era from which dates the\nmodern intellectual development of Europe.[13] Efforts to utterly\ncrush the moral rectitude of women through the adoption of those base\nideas of phallic origin, having been the systematic course of the\nChurch, the State and society through many hundred years, it is a most\nnotable proof of her innate disbelief in this teaching, that woman\u2019s\nfirst literary work of modern times was written in opposition to such\na powerfully sustained theory as to her innate depravity. Christine\nasserted the common humanity of woman, entirely repudiating the sensual\nideas of the times.\n\nTo the credit of mankind it must be recorded that the laity did not\nunresistingly yield to priestly power, but made many attempts to\ntake their temporal concerns from under priestly control. But under\nthe general paucity of education, and the abnegation of the will so\nsedulously inculcated by the Church as the supreme duty of the laity,\nits dread power brought to bear in the enforcement of its teaching by\nterrifying threats of excommunication and future eternal torment, the\nrights of even the male portion of the people were gradually lost. The\ncontrol of the priesthood over all things of a temporal as well as\nof a spiritual nature, tended to make them a distinct body from the\nlaity. In pursuance of its aims for universal dominion, the Church saw\nthe necessity of assuming control of temporal affairs. Rights were\ndivided into those pertaining to persons and things; the rights of\npersons belonged to the priesthood alone, but inasmuch as every man,\nwhatever his condition, could become a priest, and no woman however\nlearned or pious or high in station could be admitted to its ranks,\nthe whole tendency of ecclesiastical law was to divide mankind into\na holy or divine sex, and an unholy or impious one.[14] Thus Canon\nLaw still farther separated those whose interests were the same,\ncreating an antagonism in the minds of all men against all women, which\nbearing upon all business of ordinary life between men and women, fell\nwith its greatest weight upon women. It corrupted the Common Law of\nEngland, and perverted the civil codes of other nations. Under Canon\nLaw wives were deprived of the control of both person and property,\nwhile sisters were not allowed to inherit with brothers; property,\naccording to old ecclesiastical language, going \u201cto the worthiest of\nblood.\u201d Blackstone acknowledges that this distinction between brothers\nand sisters reflects shame upon England, and was no part of the old\nRoman law, under which the children of a family inherited equally\nwithout distinction of sex.[15] It was as late as 1879 before the Canon\nLaw in regard to the sole inheritance of sons was repealed in one of\nthe Swiss Cantons. The influence of this law in creating selfishness\nwas manifested by the opposition it met, brothers piteously asserting\nruin to themselves by this act of justice to their sisters. Whenever\nthe Canon Law is analyzed it is found destructive to the higher moral\nsentiments of humanity. A woman was prohibited the priesthood, and as\nthe property of men entering orders became forfeited to the Church, the\nreal intent of this law\u2014that of obtaining control of property\u2014which\notherwise might have escaped the grasping hand of the church, is easily\ndiscernible. From its first theory of woman\u2019s inferiority to its last\nstruggle for power at the present day, the influence and action of the\nPatriarchate is clearly seen. The touch of the Church upon family life,\ninheritance and education, increased the power of the Patriarchate.\n\nAs celibacy proved a lucrative method of bringing wealth into its\ncoffers, so marriage was early made a source of revenue to the Church,\nCanon Law creating it a sacrament to be performed at the church door.\nOwing, however, to the innate sinfulness of marriage, this sacrament\nwas not for many years allowed to take place within the sacred building\ndedicated to God, and deemed too holy to permit the entrance of a woman\nwithin its sacred walls at certain periods of her life. In order to\nsecure full control of this relation marriage unblessed by a priest\nwas declared to be concubinage, and carried with it deprivation of\nchurch privileges, which the ignorance of the people held to be of\nvital importance. In entering this relation the wife was compelled to\nrelinquish her name, her property, the control of her person, her own\nsacred individuality, and to promise obedience to her husband in all\nthings. Certain hours of the day to suit the convenience of priests\nwere set aside as canonical, after which time no marriage could be\ncelebrated.\n\nNor has this priestly control of marriage been confined to the\nCatholics alone. Similar laws were extant after the Reformation. In\nEngland 1603, Canon 62 instituted that under penalty of suspension\npeople could not marry except between the hours of eight and twelve\nin the forenoon, nor was marriage then allowed in any private place\nbut must be performed at the church door.[16] The rapid growth of the\nCanon Law in England must be ascribed to avarice; the denial to wives\nof any right of property in the marital union being an example. At\nthis period Canon Law began to take cognizance of crimes, establishing\nan equivalent in money for every species of wrong doing. The Church\nnot only remitted penalty for crimes already committed, but sold\nindulgences for the commission of new ones. Its touch soon extended\nto all relations of life. Marriages within the seventh degree were\nforbidden by the Church as incestuous,[17] but to those able to pay\nfor such indulgences a dispensation for such \u201cincestuous\u201d marriage\nwas readily granted. No crime so great it could not be condoned for\nmoney. Thus through Canon Law was seen the anomaly of legal marriage\nbetween the laity pronounced concubinage, while the concubines of\npriests were termed \u201cwives.\u201d As soon as the legality of marriage was\nmade dependent upon priestly sanction the door of gross immorality was\nwidely opened.[18] All restrictions connected with this relation were\nmade to fall with heaviest weight upon woman. Husbands were secured the\nright of separation for causes not freeing wives; even the adultery\nof the husband was not deemed sufficient cause unless he brought his\nmistress into the same house with his wife.[19] Church and State\nsustained each other. Conviction of the husband for a capital crime\ngave the wife no release from the marriage bond, yet in case of the\nhusband\u2019s treason, his innocent wife and children were robbed of all\nshare in the estate of the criminal husband and father and were reduced\nto beggary, his estate escheating to the State. As under civil law\nso under ecclesiastical, the Church recognized but slight difference\nin the guilt of a contumacious husband and that of his pious wife\nand children.[20] It was a principle of the Church that the innocent\nmust suffer for the guilty, especially when the innocent were women\nand children powerless to aid themselves. At its every step Canon Law\ninjured woman. The clergy assuming to be an order of spiritual beings,\nclaimed immunity from civil law and allowed for themselves an \u201carrest\nof judgment\u201d ultimately enlarged so as to include all male persons who\ncould read and write. This arrest known as \u201cbenefit of clergy\u201d was\ndenied to all women, who were liable to sentence of death for the first\ncrime of simple larceny, bigamy, etc.[21] Men who by virtue of sex\ncould become priests if able to read, were for the same crimes punished\nby simple branding in the hand, or a few months imprisonment, while a\nwoman was drawn and burned alive. Did not history furnish much proof\nof this character it would be impossible to believe that such barbaric\ninjustice was part of English law down to the end of the eighteenth\ncentury. Woman first rendered ineligible to the priesthood, was then\npunished for this ineligibility.\n\nBlackstone recognizes as among the remarkable legal events of the\nkingdom, the great alteration in the laws through the separation\nof ecclesiastical courts from the civil. Matrimonial causes, or\ninjuries respecting the rights of marriage are recognized by him as\nquite an undisturbed branch of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, from the\nChurch having so early converted this contract into a sacramental\nordinance.[22] During many centuries education was denied to woman in\nChristian countries for reasons connected with her ineligibility to the\npriesthood. The art of reading is by scholars believed to have been one\nof the ancient mysteries taught at Eleusis and other olden temples;\nlearning, then, as at later periods, was in the hands of priests;\ntherefore the fact of being able to read was synonymous with the right\nof entering the priesthood. This right appertained to women in many\nancient nations even under the Patriarchate. Higgins shows that the\nword _Liber_ from which our words liberty, freedom, are derived, is\none and the same as _liber_, a book, and had close connection with the\nintellectual, literary, and priestly class. As under Christian doctrine\nthe priesthood was denied to woman, so under the same rule learning was\nprohibited to her.[23] To permit woman\u2019s education under Christianity\nwould have been a virtual concession of her right to the priesthood. In\nnot allowing her \u201cbenefit of clergy\u201d the priests were but consistent\nwith themselves and their pretensions as to the superior holiness of\nthe male sex. That a woman should be burned alive for a crime whose\nonly punishment for a man was a few months imprisonment, was in unison\nwith the whole teaching of the Christian Church regarding woman. Under\nCanon Law many of the shields theretofore thrown about women were\nremoved. Punishment for crimes against them lessened, while crimes\ncommitted by them were more severely punished. Rape, which in early\nEnglish history was termed felony, its penalty, death, was regarded in\na less heinous light under clerical rule.\n\nUnder the political constitutions of the Saxons, bishops had seats in\nthe national council and all laws were prefaced by a formal declaration\nof their consent. By their influence it became a general law that a\nwoman could never take of an inheritance with a man, unless perhaps\nby the particular and ancient customs of some cities or towns; while\ndaughters at a father\u2019s death could be left totally unprovided for. A\nlaw was enacted in the reign of Edward VI that no son should be passed\nover in his father\u2019s will unless disinherited in plain terms and a\njust cause given. In case of daughters, sex was deemed \u201ca just cause\u201d\nfor leaving them in poverty. The earlier laws of the Danish Knut, or\nCanute, show that the estate was then divided among all the children.\nUnder Canon Law, the testimony of a woman was not received in a court\nof justice. She was depicted by the Church as the source of all evil,\nthe mother of every ill.[24] Legislation had the apparent aim of\nfreeing the clergy from all responsibility to the civil or moral law,\nand placing the weight of every sin or crime upon woman.\n\nA council at Tivoli in the Soisonnais, A.D. 909, presided over\nby twelve bishops, promulgated a Canon requiring the oath of seven\npersons to convict a priest with having lived with a woman; if their\noath failed of clearing him he was allowed to justify himself upon\nhis sole oath. Under Canon Law a woman could not bring an accusation\nunless prosecuted for an injury done to herself. It is less than\nthirty years since this law was extant in Scotland; and as late as\n1878, that through the influence of Signor Morelli, the Italian\nParliament repealed the old restriction existant in that country\nregarding woman\u2019s testimony. Under Canon Law a woman could not be\nwitness in ecclesiastical or criminal suits, nor attest a will.[25]\nTo cast doubts upon a person\u2019s word is indicative of the most supreme\ncontempt, importing discredit to the whole character. That a woman was\nnot allowed to attest a will, nor become a witness in ecclesiastical\nsuits, implied great degradation and is a very strong proof of the\nlow esteem in which woman was held both by State and Church. That a\npriest could clear himself upon his own unsubstantiated oath is equally\nsignificative of the respect in which this office was held, as well as\nshowing the degree in which all law was made to shield man and degrade\nwoman. When we find the oath of seven women required to nullify that\nof one layman, we need no stronger testimony as to woman\u2019s inequality\nbefore the law. Canonists laid down the law for all matters of a\ntemporal nature whether civil or criminal. The buying and selling of\nlands; leasing, mortgaging, contracts; the descent of inheritance; the\nprosecution and punishment of murder; theft; detection of thieves;\nfrauds; those and many other objects of temporal jurisdiction were\nprovided for by Canon Law. It was intended that the clergy should come\nentirely under its action, governed as a distinct people from the\nlaity. The principal efforts of the Canon Law towards which all its\nenactments tended, was the subordination of woman[26] and the elevation\nof the hierarchy. To secure these two ends the church did not hesitate\nat forgery. For many hundred years a collection of Decretals, or what\nwere claimed as decrees of the early popes, carried great authority,\nalthough later investigation has proven them forgeries.[27] Civil\nas well as ecclesiastical laws were forged in the interest of the\npriesthood; a noted instance, was the once famous law of Constantine\nwhich endowed bishops with unlimited power, giving them jurisdiction in\nall kinds of causes. This law declared that whatever is determined by\nthe judgment of bishops shall always be held as sacred and venerable,\nand that in all kinds of causes whether they are tried according to the\npastoral or civil law that it is law to be forever observed by all.\n\nThe famous Seldon known as the \u201cLight of England,\u201d declares it to\nhave been \u201ca prodigious and monstrous jurisdiction\u201d assumed by the\npriestly order, by means of falsehood and forgery.[28] The two classes\nof temporal affairs that Spiritual Courts especially endeavored to\nappropriate, were marriages, and wills, with everything bearing upon\nthem. In these the greatest oppression fell upon women.[29] Canon Law\ngradually acquired enormous power through the control it gained over\nwills, the guardianship of orphans, marriage, and divorce.[30] As soon\nas ecclesiastical courts were divided from the temporal in England,[31]\na new set of principles and maxims began to prevail. This was one of\nthe first effects of the Conquest, but in 1272, Robert Kilmandy, Dean\nof Canterbury, gave directions for the restoration and observation of\nthe ancient and neglected laws of Ecclesiastical Courts; of these the\nCourt of Arches was one of the most ancient. It is almost impossible to\nfix the date of ecclesiastical rule, unless indeed we go back to the\nvery foundation of the church. As noted, the early Saxons were largely\ngoverned by their priests. In 615, at the Paris synod, the clergy were\ngiven authority in matters theretofore under civil power, while in\nEngland we find priestly power to have been great during the fourth and\nfifth centuries. Bracton sets the one hundred and fifty years between\nthe middle of the twelfth and end of the thirteenth centuries as the\nperiod when this power took its greatest strides. At this time it\ntouched upon wills, inheritance, bequests, the legitimacy of children,\nthe marriage relation, and all family concerns, having broken over many\nsecurities of the common law. This period covers the establishment of\ncelibacy with the trains of evils noted in the preceding chapter, when\nthe marriage of priests was declared invalid, their wives branded as\nimmoral persons, and stain of illegitimacy thrown upon their children.\nDespite the guarantees of the Runnymede Charter, and the religious\nrebellion of the Eighth Henry, despite the vigor of Elizabeth who bent\nboth priest and prelate to her fiery will, the influence of this period\nmoved down in line with the Reformation, and to the injury of woman,\nsuccessfully incorporated its worst features into the common law; the\nnew church, social and family life all partaking of this injustice.\nA great number of canons were enacted after the reformation. These,\ntogether with the foreign canons which had been adopted, were held\nas part of the law of England.[32] The Episcopal church appropriated\nnumerous canons extant at the time of the reformation, several of these\nhaving been created for the purpose of sustaining the church at a\nperiod when the temporal power threatened encroachment. The archdeacon\nof Surrey prepared a voluminous work upon this subject known as the\nJurus,[33] proving that these canons, decrees, etc., when falling into\ndisuse had been established by act of Parliament, as part of the law\nof England. The preface of his work declared that it had been prepared\npurely for the service of the clergy, and in support of the rights and\nprivileges of the Church. Thus we have direct proof of the adoption of\npapal decrees as part of the government of the Protestant Episcopal\nchurch,\u2014the Anglican\u2014and also as part of English law.\n\nAn act of Parliament at this age was regarded as synonymous with a law\nof God. The Bible and the English government were upon the same plane,\neach to be implicitly obeyed.[34] Canon Law thus firmly established\nby act of Parliament, the union of Church and State complete, England\nlost much of that civil freedom whose origin can be traced to the wise\nlegislation and love of freedom inhering in two British queens, Martia\nand Boadicea. Suffering from cruel wrong, the latter rose in revolt\nagainst the Romans. Riding among the squadrons of her army she thus\naddressed them:\n\n    It will not be the first time, Britons, that you have been\n    victorious under the conduct of your queen. I come not here\n    as one of royal blood, to fight for empire or riches, but as\n    one of the common people to avenge the loss of their liberty,\n    the wrongs of myself and my children. If you Britons will but\n    consider the motives of our war, you will resolve to conquer\n    or die. Is it not much better to fall in the defense of\n    liberty than to be exposed to the outrages of the Romans? Such\n    at least is my resolution, you may if you please live and be\n    slaves.\n\nBut many historians date the entire subordination of the common law\nto ecclesiasticism, to the reign of Stephen, who ascended to the\nthrone 1135, the fourth of the Anglo-Norman kings. In order to keep\nthe ranks of the church full, the bearing of children was enforced\nupon women as a religious duty. No condition of health or distaste\nfor motherhood was admitted as exemption. Alike from the altar, the\nconfessional, and at the marital ceremony,[35] was this duty taught,\nnor has such instruction even under the light of physiology and new\nregard for personal rights, yet ceased.[36] No less is the unresisting\nsubjection of women in this relation indirectly or directly enforced by\nthe Protestant and the Greek churches as the law of the Bible and God.\n\u201cIncrease and multiply\u201d[37] has been the first commandment for woman,\nheld as far more binding upon her than the \u201cTen Words\u201d of Mount Sinai.\nProof exists in abundance of a character impossible to present in this\nwork.\n\nUnder the general absence of learning and the equally general reverence\nfor whatever emanated from the church, minor ecclesiastics found\nit in their power to promulgate doctrines to suit every new set of\ncircumstances; thus many laws aside from regularly promulgated canons,\ncame from time to time into force. When once applied they assumed all\nthe power of custom and soon bore all the force of common law. The\nevils of ecclesiastical law were soon increased through the unsparing\nuse of forgery and falsehood. Lea says:\n\n    In the remodeling of European Institutions, so necessary to\n    the interests of Christianity and civilization, one of the\n    most efficient agencies was the collection of Canons known as\n    the False Decretals. Forgery was by no means a novel expedient\n    to the church. From the earliest times orthodox and heretics\n    had rivalled each other in the manufacture of whatever\n    documents were necessary to substantiate their respective\n    positions whether in faith or discipline. An examination\n    of these Decretals tends to the conclusion that they were\n    not the result of one effort or the work of one man. Their\n    constant repetitions and their frequent contradiction would\n    seem to prove this, and to show that they were manufactured\n    from time to time to meet the exigencies of the moment or to\n    gratify the feelings of the writers. Interpolated into codes\n    of law, adopted and amplified in the canons of councils and\n    the decretals of popes, they speedily became part of the\n    civil and ecclesiastical policy of Europe, leaving traces\n    on the constitutions which they afflicted for centuries....\n    The pretenses and privileges which they conferred on the\n    hierarchy became the most dearly prized and frequently quoted\n    portions of the Canon Law. In each struggle with the temporal\n    authority, it was the arsenal from which were drawn the most\n    effective weapons, and after each struggle the sacerdotal\n    combatants had higher vantage ground for the ensuing conflict\n    ... theories of ecclesiastical superiority which left so\n    profound an impress on the middle ages and which have in no\n    slight degree molded our modern civilization.\n\nEven Magna Charta strengthened Canon Law, confirming many liberties of\nthe Church, and injuring women by prohibiting appeal to them unless\nfor the death of their husbands. While the general tenor of the church\nwas against marriage, an unmarried woman unless dedicating her life\nto the church was regarded with more contempt than the married. To be\nunder control of a husband was looked upon as the normal condition of\nwomen not living celibate lives. Consequently women were driven into\nmarriage or monastic houses,[38] and no reproach so great as the term\n\u201cold maid.\u201d The influence of custom is nowhere more discernible than\nin Blackstone himself. The great commentator while fully admitting\nthe blending of Canon with Common law, also acknowledging its most\nprejudicial effects to have fallen upon woman, yet attempts to prove\nthat the liberties of the English people were not infringed through\necclesiasticism. He is so entirely permeated with the church doctrine\nof woman\u2019s created inferiority as not to be willing to acknowledge\nthe infringement of her natural liberty through it, although at the\nsame time he declares that \u201cwhosoever would fully understand the Canon\nLaw must study Common Law in respect to woman.\u201d Such benumbing of the\nmoral faculties through her doctrines is among the greatest wrongs\nperpetrated by the church upon mankind. Nor is it alone in regard to\nwoman. During the Franco-Prussian war a writer declared the great and\nabsolute need of the French people to be education; that of moral\ncharacter there was absolutely none, either in the higher or lower\nclasses. Even the sons of aristocratic families educated in Jesuit\nschools, being at most taught that wrong can only be measured by a\nformal religious standard, and that every wrong can be wiped out by\nconfession to the priest. French education, this writer declared to\nbe that of two centuries ago, when might was looked upon as identical\nwith justice. Nor can morality be taught while its basis in the church\nremains the same.\n\nThe priestly profession held the most brilliant promises of gratified\nambition to every man that entered it. Not alone did he possess the\nkeys of heaven and hell, but also those of temporal power. The laity\nwere his obedient servants upon which he could impose penance and\nfrom whose coffers wealth could be made to flow into his own. Through\nlong continued false teaching the people believed their fate in both\nworlds more fully depended upon the priesthood than upon their own\ncourse in life, God having deputed a share of his power to every\npriest and monk, no matter how debased; and that when he spoke it was\nnot himself, but God, through his lips, as asserted by the priesthood\nthemselves. This impious assertion so capable as shown of being used\nfor the most tyrannous purposes, came also into the Reformation, and\nis even heard from the lips of Protestant clergymen today.[39] Denied\nrecognition of a right to decide for themselves whether the priest\nspoke from God, or from his own ambitious and iniquitous purposes,\ndeprived of education as well as of free thought\u2014the latter a crime\nto be punished with death after the most diabolical torture\u2014it is not\na subject of surprise that the majority of the christian world was a\nprey to the vilest superstition. The claim of infallibility, which may\nbe unsuccessfully combated when urged by a single individual, became\nall-potent when advanced by a large powerfully organized and widely\ndistributed class under guise of religion, into which the element\nof fear largely entered. No salvation outside of the church was a\nfundamental doctrine of that body. Hell was declared not to be peopled\nalone by the heathen, but by christian heretics, and the excommunicated\nwho had died without obtaining forgiveness from the Church. These were\ndepicted as in eternal torments of a more terrible character than\neven those whom birth had left ignorant of the plan of salvation. The\nstrength of the church lay in its control of the conscience and the\nwill. Upon the State it fastened double bonds; first, by its control\nof each individual member; second, in its capacity of secular ruler.\nLong before the days of Torquemada and Ximenes, the Inquisition had\npractically been brought to every man\u2019s door. The imagination, that\nfaculty that in its perfection constitutes the happiness of mankind,\nwas made the implement of excessive mental torture.\n\nCommon Law as it exists today is the outgrowth of Ecclesiastical or\nCanon Law touching upon all the relations of life but falling with\nheaviest weight upon woman, as Blackstone so frankly admits.[40] From\nthe X to the XVI centuries is the period when the features of the\nCanon Law most derogatory to woman became thoroughly incorporated into\nEnglish common law, since which period the complete inferiority and\nsubordination of woman has been as fully maintained by the State as by\nthe Church.\n\nCommon Law is not alone English law, it is the basic law of the\nUnited States. Chancellor Kent said of it, \u201cCommon Law is part of the\nfundamental law of the United States.\u201d It has been recognized and\nadopted as one entire system by the constitutions of Massachusetts,\nNew York, New Jersey and Maryland. It has been assumed by courts of\njustice, or declared by statute, as the law of the land in every State,\nalthough its influence upon the criminal codes of England and the\nUnited States has but recently attracted the attention of legal minds.\nWharton whose _Criminal Law_ has been for years a standard work, did\nnot examine this relation until its seventh edition. In the preface to\nthis edition he gave a copious array of authors in English, German,\nLatin, in proof that the criminal codes of those two countries are\npermanently based upon Ecclesiastical Law.\n\nAn early council of Carthage thus ordained: \u201cLet not a woman however\nlearned or holy presume to teach a man in a public assembly.\u201d To this\nCanon may be ascribed the obstacles thrown in the way of women even\nduring the present century, who have come before the world as public\nteachers in the pulpit, at the bar, in medicine, or the more customary\nbranches of instruction. Advancing civilization of the present century\nis still hampered by the laws of an imperfect church, enacted many\nhundred years since. The trial of Mistress Anne Hutchinson in New\nEngland, during the XVII century, was chiefly for the sin of having\ntaught men.\n\nAll modern legislation can be referred to the church for its origin\nalthough most especially noticeable in reference to women legislated\nfor as a class, distinct and separate from men. Under Church laws,\nthe humble, the ignorant, the helpless have been the most oppressed,\nbecause of their powerlessness, but upon no part of humanity has this\noppression so heavily fallen as upon her whom the church has declared\nto be the author of all the misery of human life.[41] The laws of\nbastardy and illegitimacy still extant in Christian countries which\ndecree that a child born outside of marriage shall be known by its\nmother\u2019s name and she alone responsible for its support, and which\ndo not allow it to inherit its putative father\u2019s property even when\nhe acknowledges the child as his own, are of ecclesiastical origin.\nEnacted by the Church in its most powerful days, as protection to a\ncelibate priesthood against all claim by mother or child, they are\nstill a reminder of the Matriarchate when the sole right of the mother\nto the child was unquestioned. But under Church ruling this law that\nthe child should follow the condition of the mother, herself but a\nslave, was the source of great injustice both to women and to thousands\nof innocent children. Under feudalism and during slavery the child of\nthe feudal lord or powerful master by a serf woman, became at birth\nsubject to all the restrictions of the mother while the father was\nfreed from accountability of any nature. The Antonelli case referred\nto in the second chapter, in which the Countess Lambertini claimed\nheirship of Cardinal Antonelli\u2019s property as his daughter, was decided\nagainst her not upon denial of her paternity which was most fully\nproven, but because under church law this daughter had no claim upon\nher priestly father. Under Canon Law she was no more to be regarded as\nhis child than as the child of any other man. She was \u201cfatherless.\u201d She\nwas \u201ca sacrilegious child\u201d having violated sacred things by coming into\nexistence. Her \u201choly\u201d father under Canon Law was entirely irresponsible\nfor her birth.[42]\n\nThe reformation proved itself in many ways as restrictive towards\nwoman as Catholicism. The commencement of modern law dates to the\nreign of Elizabeth, who established the reformation upon a firm basis.\nThe oppression of her reign exceeded all that had been experienced\nunder Catholicism. No cottager in England was permitted to shelter\nhis homeless mother or sister under penalty[43] because she was\n\u201cmasterless.\u201d The greatest amount of legislation both religious and\nsecular under the Patriarchate has had woman for its object, and this\nis especially noticeable in all countries where Christianity has been\nthe dominant power, because she has not been regarded by the church\nas a component part of humanity, but as an offshoot whose rights and\nresponsibility were entirely different from those of man. Although\namong the Anglo-Saxons the priesthood possessed great influence yet\nafter the Norman Conquest ecclesiasticism gained much greater control\nin England, and Canon Law began to influence legislation, as has been\nshown, exercising its chief restrictive force upon woman. While under\nold Common Law,[44] a husband was compelled to leave his wife one-third\nof his property and could leave her as much more as he pleased, by\nCanon Law he was prohibited from leaving her more than one-third and\ncould leave her as much less as he pleased. Thus ecclesiasticism\npresumed to control a husband\u2019s affections and placing its slimy\nfingers upon common law, allowed the husband to leave his wife in\nabsolute poverty, notwithstanding that her property upon marriage, and\nher services under marriage, belonged exclusively to him. As early as\nthe twelfth century, Glanville laid it down as a law of the British\nKingdom that no one was compelled to leave another person any portion\nof his property, and that the part usually devised to wives was left\nthem at the dictate of affection and not of law. Thus early did the\nChurch in England override Common Law to the detriment of woman. While\nthus legislating in opposition to family rights, the church continually\nfavored its own increase of its own property.[45] The world has\nproduced no system so thoroughly calculated to extend its own power and\nwealth, as this vast celibate organization which, under the guise of\nreligion, appealed to man\u2019s superstition, and ruled his will under the\nassumption of divine authority, the family being its chief objective\npoint of attack.\n\nWhile under feudalism his lord was to receive the best gift at the\nvillein\u2019s death, the church the second best, in time the demands of the\nchurch overpowered those of the lord, as well as those of the family.\nSo rapacious did the church at last become in its demand for valuable\ngifts and its claim of one third of a man\u2019s property upon his decease,\nthat the civil law ultimately interfered, not however in the interests\nof wives, but of creditors. Canon Law nearly everywhere prevailed,\nhaving its largest growth through the pious fiction of woman\u2019s created\ninferiority. Wherever it became the basis of legislation, the laws of\nsuccession and inheritance, and those in regard to children, constantly\nsacrificed the interests of wives and daughters to those of husbands\nand sons. Church legislation created numerous and stringent enactments\nwhich rendered it impossible for woman to succeed to any considerable\namount of property, forcing her to entire dependence upon man, either\nas a wife, or as a resident of a religious house; thus she entirely\nlost the freedom possessed by her in pagan Rome.[46]\n\nWhile under Canon Law the dower of the wife was forfeited by attainder\nof the husband, yet the husband did not lose his right to the wife\u2019s\nproperty in case she was attainted of treason. Under Canon Law if for\nrecognized just cause of the husband\u2019s cruelty the wife separated from\nhim, she was returned upon his demand provided he gave security for\ntreating her well.\n\nCanon Law gave to the husband the power of compelling the wife\u2019s return\nif, for any cause, she left him. She was then at once in the position\nof an outlaw, branded as a runaway who had left her master\u2019s service,\na wife who had left \u201cbed and board\u201d without consent, and whom all\npersons were forbidden \u201cto harbor\u201d or shelter \u201cunder penalty of the\nlaw.\u201d The absconding wife was in the position of an excommunicate from\nthe Catholic Church, or of a woman condemned as a witch. Any person\nbefriending her was held accessory to the wife\u2019s theft of herself from\nher husband, and rendered liable to fine and other punishment for\nhaving helped to rob the husband (master) of his wife (slave). The\npresent formula of advertising a wife, which so frequently disgraces\nthe press, is due to this belief in wife-ownership.\n\n    Whereas my wife ... has left my bed and board without just\n    cause or provocation, I hereby forbid all persons from\n    harboring or trusting her on my account.\n\nBy old English law, in case the wife was in danger of perishing in a\nstorm, it was allowable \u201cto harbor\u201d and shelter her. It is less than\nfifty years since the dockets of a court in New York city, the great\nmetropolis of the United States, were sullied by the suit of a husband\nagainst parties who had received, \u201charbored\u201d and sheltered his wife\nafter she left him, the husband recovering $10,000 damages.\n\nIn losing control, upon marriage, of her person and her property,\nwoman\u2019s condition became that of an infant. No act of hers was of legal\nvalue. If she made a bargain her husband could repudiate it and the\nperson with whom she had contracted was held to have taken part in a\nfraud. The denial under Common Law of her right to make a contract grew\nout of the denial of her right of ownership. Not possessing control of\nher inheritance or of her future actions, she was consequently held\nunable to make a binding contract.[47] Forbidden the right of acting\nfor herself; deprived of the ownership and control of her own property\nor earnings, woman had little opportunity to prove her business\ncapacity. Since the time of Aristotle the control of property has been\nrecognized as the basis of social and responsible conditions. The\ngreat school of German jurists[48] teach that ownership increases both\nphysical and moral capacity, and that as owner, actual, or possible,\nman is a more capable and worthy being than he would otherwise be.\n\nInasmuch as through both the ecclesiastical and civil laws of\nChristendom, woman was debarred from giving testimony in courts of\nlaw; sisters prohibited from sharing a patrimony with brothers; wives\ndeprived of property rights both of inheritance and earnings, it is\nentirely justifiable to say that even the boasted Common Law, that\npride of English speaking peoples, has greatly injured civilization\nthrough its destruction of woman\u2019s property rights. Canon or Church\nlaws were enacted upon the principle of protection for men alone\nand upon these civil laws gradually became wholly based. Herbert\nSpencer[49] has not failed to recognize this fact in England. No less\nin law than in religion is woman dealt with as a secondary being, for\nwhom equal religious rights or equal civil rights are not designed.\nWhile under the Matriarchate justice and purity prevailed, and the\ninherent rights of man were preserved, we find an entirely contrary\ncondition under the Patriarchate, that system enacting laws solely\nwith intent to man\u2019s interest regardless alike of mother, sister, wife\nor daughter. The entire destruction under Canon and civil law, of\nwoman\u2019s property rights, has not alone lessened her responsibility,\nbut has also diminished her self-respect. As in common with a child,\nor a slave, her business agreements were held as of no binding force,\nshe ultimately came to regard herself as incapable of business\ntransactions. In England until a very recent date, and in the United\nStates until when in 1839, Mississippi first placed the control of her\nown property in a married woman\u2019s hands (to be followed in 1848, by\nPennsylvania, New York, and about the same period by Rhode Island),\nit was in the husband\u2019s power in every part of christian Europe and\nAmerica, to repudiate any bargain, sale or gift made by the wife as\nof no binding legal force, and this, even though she had brought the\nentire property into the marital firm.[50] Therefore under Christian\nlaws the person with whom the wife made a contract, or to whom she\nmade a gift was held as a criminal, or participant in a fraud. The\nwife under Canon Law belonged to the husband, and as a sequence to\nnot owning herself she could not own property, and in her condition\nof servitude could possess no control over either her present or her\nfuture actions. Such is Common Law warped and changed by Canon Law.[51]\n\nProperty is a delicate test of the condition of a nation. It is\na remarkable fact in history that the rights of property have\neverywhere been recognized before the rights of person. The American\nRevolution arose from an attack upon property rights and although\nthe Declaration of Independence assumed the rights of person to be\nprimal, this unique foundation for a system of government has not\nyet fully been admitted in practice, and woman is still denied its\nadvantages and responsibilities. While the property owner unwittingly\nbecomes a hostage for the security of the state itself, it needs\ngovernmental recognition of the rights of person, in order to create\nfirm self-reliance and a feeling of strength and freedom. A proper\nself-respect cannot inhere in any person under governmental control of\nothers. Unless the person so governed constantly maintains a system\nof rebellion in thought or deed, the soul gradually becomes debased,\nand the finest principles of human nature suffer a rapid process of\ndisintegration. The integrity of elementary principles disappears,\nbad citizenship results, the general rights of humanity are ignored,\nselfish, personal, or family interests taking their place. Good\ncitizenship requires individual personal responsibility in affairs of\nthe state.\n\nThat property rather than person still receives recognition in\ngovernmental matters, owes its origin to the period when the rights\nof the common people in both property and person were ignored. The\neffort of the peasant was chiefly directed to securing property. To\nhis clouded vision, the wealth of the lord created his power, and to\na great extent such was the fact. Intuitively he felt that property\nrights were the basis of the rights of persons. The Church possessed\nenormous wealth, as did all his oppressors, and the peasant could but\nsee that control of rights of property was a dangerous assault upon\ntheir rights of person. The foremost element of all slavery is the\ndenial to the slave of right to the proceeds of his own labor. As soon\nas a colored slave in the United States, was permitted to hire his\ntime, the door of freedom began to open for him. Thus when Canon Law so\ninfluenced Civil and Common Law that it forbade woman\u2019s inheritance and\nownership of property, it placed its final touch upon her degradation;\nshe virtually became a slave to her husband. Sir Henry Maine is\noutspoken in declaring that Christianity has thus deeply injured\ncivilization, an injury from which he asserts there can be no recovery\nas long as society remains christian. As a man of profound thought he\ndoes not fail to see that the prevailing religious sentiment created\nby the teachings of the church as to woman\u2019s created inferiority and\nsubjection to man, was the cause of that destruction of her property\nrights. The priests of pagan Rome held juster view regarding woman than\ndid the Christian Church. Before the establishment of Christianity they\nhad conferred the rights of woman to property; daughters inherited\nequally with sons. To such extent was woman\u2019s rights of property\ncarried that at one period, as has been heretofore stated, the greater\npart of the real-estate of the empire was in woman\u2019s possession.[52]\nThe slavish condition of woman greatly increased through denial of\nher rights of inheritance, was more fully established through denial\nto her of the fruits of her own labor in the marriage relation. Under\nchurch law the wife was the husband\u2019s personal slave, all her time was\nabsolutely his. Civil and ecclesiastical law held her as completely\nunder his authority. Her property, her person, her time and services\nwere all at the husband\u2019s disposal. Nor did the Reformation effect\na change in this respect. Luther\u2019s ninety Theses nailed against the\nchurch door in Wittemberg did not assert woman\u2019s natural or religious\nequality with man. It was a maxim of his that \u201cno gown or garment\nworse became a woman than that she will be wise.\u201d The home under the\nreformation was governed by the laws in force before that period.\n\nFirst: She was to be under obedience to the masculine head of the\nhousehold.\n\nSecond: She was to be constantly employed for his benefit.\n\nThird: Her society was strictly chosen for her by her master and\nresponsible head.\n\nFourth: This masculine family head was regarded as a general\nfather-confessor to whom she was held as responsible in word and deed.\n\nFifth: Neither genius nor talent could free women from such control\nwithout his consent.\n\nThe Cromwellian period while exhibiting an increase of piety brought\nno amelioration to woman. The old Church doctrine of her having\ncaused the expulsion of men from Paradise was still proclaimed from\nthe pulpit, and warnings against her extreme sinfulness lost none of\ntheir invective strength from the lips of the new gospel. All kinds\nof learning and accomplishments for her fell under new reprobation\nand the old teaching as to her iniquities and the necessity for her\nto feel shame from the fact of her existence took new force after the\nrise of Melancthon, Huss, and Luther.[53] About this period it was\nsaid \u201cshe that knoweth how to compound a pudding is more desirable\nthan she who skilfully compoundeth a poem.\u201d[54] Men thought it no\nshame to devote themselves to the pleasure of the table. Epicures and\ngluttons abounded, but to women was forbidden a seat at the world\u2019s\nintellectual board; she who secured learning did so at the peril of her\nsocial and religious position. Under no other system of religion has\nthere been such absolute denial of woman\u2019s right to directly approach\nthe divinity; under no other religious system has her debasement been\ngreater.[55]\n\nIt cannot be asserted that the religious system teaching restrictive\nmoral and civil laws regarding woman, is of the past. Its still great\nliving influence is shown by the thousands of pilgrims who visited\nItaly during the Pope\u2019s Jubilee and the presents of incalculable\nvalue that by tens of thousands poured into the papal treasury in\ncommemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of the entrance of Pope\nLeo XIII into the priesthood. These were received from almost every\ncivilized nation, Christian, Mohammedan, Catholic, Protestant. Even\nthe President of the United States, head of a form of government\nwhich recognizes religion as entirely disconnected with the State,\nso far catered to superstition, so far conceded the assumptions of\nthis system, as to send an elegant copy of the Federal Constitution\nto the Pope, through Cardinal Gibbons.[56] No stronger proof is\nrequired of the still powerful influence of that system based upon\nthe degradation of woman, than the fact that the President of the\nUnited States, temporary head of a nation professedly based upon\na recognition of equal civil, political and religious rights; the\nQueen of England head of the Anglican Church; the Sultan of Turkey\nrepresentative of Mohammedanism; Sadogara, the celebrated Rabbi of\nVienna, known as the \u201cPope of the Hebrews,\u201d were all found among the\nnumber of persons outside of Catholicism who by gifts recognized this\noccasion. It was but ten years previously that Pope Pius IX celebrated\nhis jubilee entrance into the Episcopal office with great pomp and\nceremony, but the jubilee of Leo XIII exceeded in splendor and popular\ninterest anything of the kind ever before known as the history of the\nchurch. With a religious clientele of 200,000,000 behind him, and\nthe ten thousand magnificent testimonials as to the justice of his\nclaim as vicar of Jesus Christ, the world cannot fail to be impressed\nby the danger to human liberty still connected with this powerful\norganization; an organization that in its control of human thought and\nhuman will has ever been of incalculable injury to mankind. Portions of\nthe daily press saw the continuing danger, declaring that:\n\n    These facts are truly impressive indicating as they do the\n    tremendous hold which the Roman ecclesiastical system has\n    gained over the hearts and minds of men. Very striking, too,\n    is the contrast between all this magnificence and pomp and\n    manifest aspiration for temporal power on the part of one who\n    claims to be the representative on earth of the \u201cmeek and\n    lowly Jesus,\u201d and the poverty, unostentation and self-denial\n    of the \u201cSon of Man,\u201d who had not where to lay his head.\n\nThis jubilee is an event of great moment to the XIX century, at once\na warning and a proof of the life and strength of that scheme which\nhas for its real end, not alone the spiritual but also the temporal\nsubjugation of the entire human race. Since Italy under King Humbert\nsecured its release from the temporal power, thus severing the last\nauthoritative grasp of the pope upon temporal kingdoms, the attempt has\nbeen sedulously made to create a fictitious sympathy for the pope under\nclaim of his imprisonment in the Vatican. Nor at the least supreme\nmoment of his pride and glorification did the pope forget to call\nattention of the world to his temporal claims, by a refusal to receive\nthe offered gifts of the king and queen who occupy the worldly throne\nhe maintains to be especially his own.[57]\n\nThe doctrine of original sin and woman as the original sinner,\ntransplanted from Judaism into Christianity by Paul in the statement\nthat \u201cAdam, first created, was not first in sin,\u201d was developed to\nits present evil proportions by the early Christian Fathers. To St.\nAugustine, whose youth was spent in company with the most degraded\nof womankind, is the world indebted for the full development of the\ndoctrine of original sin. Taught as one of the most sacred mysteries\nof religion, which to doubt or to question was to hazard eternal\ndamnation, it at once exerted a most powerful and repressing influence\nupon woman, fastening upon her a bondage which the civilization of the\nnineteenth century has not been able to cast off.\n\nReverence for the ancient in customs, habits of life, law, religion, is\nthe strongest and most pernicious obstacle to advancing civilization.\nTo this doctrine of woman\u2019s created inferiority[58] and original sin\nwe can trace those irregularities which for many centuries filled\nthe Church with shame, for practices more obscene than the orgies of\nBabylon or Corinth, and which dragged Christendom to a darkness blacker\nthan the night of heathendom in pagan countries\u2014a darkness upon which\nthe most searching efforts of historians cast scarcely one ray of\nlight\u2014a darkness so profound that from the seventh to the eleventh\ncentury no individual thought can be traced.\n\nRev. Charles Kingsley, a canon of the English Church, declared that from\nthe third to the fifteenth centuries, Christianity had been swamped\nby hysteria in the practice of all those nameless orgies which made a\nby-word of Corinth during the first century. Every evil was traced to\nwoman. A curious old black letter volume published in London, 1632,\ndeclares that \u201cthe reason why women have no control in Parliament, why\nthey make no laws, consent to none, abrogate none, is their original\nsin.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n_Chapter Four_\n\n+Marquette+\n\n\nThe minds of people having been corrupted through centuries by the\ndoctrines of the Church in regard to woman, it became an easy step for\nthe State to aid in her degradation. The system of feudalism arising\nfrom the theory that warfare was the normal condition of man, still\noppressed woman by bringing into power a class of men accustomed to\ndeeds of violence, who found their chief pleasure in the sufferings\nof others. To be a woman appealed to no instinct of tenderness in\nthis class. To be a woman was not to be protected unless such woman\nheld power in her own right, or acted in place of some feudal lord.\nThe whole body of villeins and serfs were under absolute dominion\nof the feudal lords. They were regarded as possessing no rights of\ntheir own; the priests had control of their souls, the lord, of their\nbodies. But it was not upon the male serfs that the greatest oppression\nfell. Although the tillage of the soil, the care of swine and cattle\nwas theirs, the masters claiming half or more of everything, even to\none-half of the wool shorn from the flock,[1] and all exactions upon\nthem were great while their sense of security was slight, it was upon\ntheir wives and daughters that the greatest outrages were inflicted. It\nwas a pastime of the castle retainers to fall upon peaceful villages,\nto the consternation of the women, who were struck, tortured, and made\nthe sport of ribald soldiers.[2] \u201cSerfs of the body,\u201d they had no\nprotection. The vilest outrages were perpetrated by the feudal lords\nunder the name of \u201crights.\u201d Women were taught by church and state\nalike that the feudal lord or seigneur had a right to them not only as\nagainst themselves, but as against any claim of husband or father. The\ncustom known by a variety of names, but more modernly as \u201cmarchetta,\u201d\nor \u201cmarquette,\u201d compelled newly married women to a most dishonorable\nservitude. They were regarded as the rightful prey of the feudal lord\nfor from one to three days after their marriage,[3] and from this\ncustom, the oldest son of the serf was held as the son of the lord, \u201cas\nperchance it was he who begot him.\u201d\n\nFrom this nefarious degradation of woman the custom of Borough-English\narose, the youngest son becoming the heir.[4] The original\nsignification of the word _borough_, being to make secure, the peasant\nthrough Borough-English made secure the right of his own son to what\ninheritance he might leave, thus cutting off his property from the\npossible son of his hated lord. France, Germany, Prussia, England,\nScotland, and all christian countries in which feudalism existed,\nheld to the enforcement of marquette. The lord deemed this right his,\nas fully as he did his claim to half the crops of the land, or half\nthe wool shorn from the sheep. More than one reign of terror arose\nin France from the enforcement of this law, and the uprisings of\nthe peasants over Europe during the twelfth century and the fierce\nJacquerie, or Peasants War, of the fourteenth century in France, owed\ntheir origin among other causes to the enforcement of these claims by\nthe lords upon the newly married wife. The Edicts of Marley securing\nthe seigneural tenure in Lower Canada transplanted that claim to\nAmerica when Canada was under the control of France.[5]\n\nDuring the feudal period when chivalry held highest rank in the duties\nof the knight, women of the lower classes were absolutely unprotected.\nBoth Church and State were their most bitter enemies; the lords even\nin holy orders did not lessen their claims upon the bride. Most of\nthe bishops and _chanonies_ were also temporal lords. The Bishop of\nAmiens possessed this right against the women of his vassals and the\npeasants of his fiefs, of which he was dispossessed at the commencement\nof the fifteenth century, by an _arreet_, rendered at the solicitation\nof husbands.[6] Although the clergy, largely drawn from the nobility,\nwhose portionless younger sons were thus easily provided for, sustained\nthe corruptions of the lords temporal yet having connected themselves\nwith the church, they did not fail to preserve their own power even\nover the nobility.\n\nThe canons of the Cathedral of Lyons, bore title of Counts of Lyons;\nsixteen quarters of nobility, eight on side of the father; eight on\nside of the mother. The marchetta or cuissage was still practiced by\nthem in the fourteenth century at the time Lyons was reunited to the\ncrown of France. It was but slowly, after a great number of complaints\nand arrests of judgment that the canons of Lyons consented to forego\nthis custom. In several cantons of Piccardy, the cur\u00e9s imitated the\nbishops and anciently took the right of cuissage, but ultimately the\npeasants of this region refused to marry, and the priests gave up\nthis practice which they had usurped when the bishop had become too\nold to take his right.[7] The resolution not to marry, surprised and\nconfounded the lord \u201csuzerains,\u201d who perceived it would cause the\ndepopulation of their fiefs. During the feudal period, bearing children\nwas the duty pre-eminently taught women. Serf children increased\nthe power and possessions of the lord, they also added to the power\nof the church, and the strangest sermons in regard to woman\u2019s duty\nin this respect fell from the lips of celibate monks and priests.\nShe was taught that sensual submission to man, and the bearing of\nchildren, were the two reasons for her having been created, and that\nthe woman who failed in either had no excuse for longer encumbering\nthe earth. The language used from the pulpit for the enforcement of\nthese duties, will not bear reproduction.[8] The villeins were not\nentirely submissive under such great wrongs, frequently protesting\nagainst this right of their suzerains. At one time a number of Piedmont\nvillages rose in united powers. Although[9] the concessions gained were\nbut small, not putting an end to the lord\u2019s claim to the bride but\nmerely lessening the time of his spoliation, the results were great in\nestablishing the principle of serf rights.\n\nMarquette began to be abolished in France towards the end of the\nsixteenth century.[10] But an authority upon this question says\nthat without doubt the usage still continued in certain countries,\nfarther asserting that even in this century it existed in the county\nof Auvergne, and several vassals plead to their lords against the\ncontinuance of this custom because of the great unhappiness it caused\nthem. The lower orders of the clergy were very unwilling to relinquish\nthis usage, vigorously protesting to their archbishops against the\ndeprivation of the right, declaring they could not be dispossessed.[11]\nBoems states that he was present at a spiritual council of the\nmetropolitane of Bourges, and heard a priest claim the right upon\nground of immemorial usage.[12]\n\nAlthough feudalism is generally considered the parent of this most\ninfamous custom, some writers attribute its origin to an evangelical\ncouncil, or to precepts directly inculcated by the church,[13] whose\nvery highest dignitaries did not hesitate to avail themselves of\nthe usage. In 1471, quite the latter part of the fifteenth century,\nPope Sixtus IV[14] sought admission to the very illustrious Piedmont\nfamily, Della Rovere, which possessed the right of cuissage, allowing\nthe lord absolute control of his vassals\u2019 newly wedded bride for three\ndays and nights; a cardinal of the family having secured the patent\nby which this outrageous and abominable right was granted them. The\nrights of the Lords spiritual in the _jus primae noctis_, at first,\nperchance, confined to those temporal lords who holding this right\nentered the church, at last extended to the common priesthood, and the\nconfessional became the great fount of debauchery. Woman herself was\npowerless; the church, the state, the family, all possessed authority\nover her as against herself. Although eventually redemption through the\npayment of money, or property, was possible, yet a husband too poor\nor penurious to save her, aided in this debasement of his wife.[15]\nThis inexpressible abuse and degradation of woman went under the name\nof pastime, nor were the courts to be depended upon for defense.[16]\nTheir sympathies and decisions were with the lord. Few except manorial\ncourts existed. Even when freedom had been purchased for the bride, all\nfeudal customs rendered it imperative upon her to bear the \u201cwedding\ndish\u201d to the castle. Accompanied by her husband, this ceremony ever\ndrew upon the newly married couple a profusion of jeers and ribald\njests from which they were powerless to protect themselves. While in\nancient Babylon woman secured immunity by one service and payment to\nthe temple, the claim of the lord to the peasant wife was not always\nconfined to the marriage day, and refusal of the loan of his wife at\nlater date brought most severe punishment upon the husband.[17]\n\nBlessing the nuptial bed by the priest, often late at night, was also\ncommon, and accompanied by many abuses, until advancing civilization\noverpowered the darkness of the church and brought it to an end. When\ntoo poor to purchase the freedom of his bride, the husband was in one\nbreath assailed by the most opprobrious names,[18] and in the next he\nwas congratulated upon the honor to be done him in that perchance his\noldest child would be the son of a baron.[19] So great finally became\nthe reproach and infamy connected with the _droit de cuissage_, as this\nright was generally called in France,[20] and so recalcitrant became\nthe peasants over its nefarious exactions, that ultimately both lords\nspiritual and lords temporal fearing for their own safety, commenced to\nlessen their demands.[21] This custom had its origin at the time the\ngreat body of the people were slaves bound either to the person or land\nof some lord. At this period personal rights no more existed for the\nlower classes than for the blacks of our own country during the time of\nslavery. Under feudalism, the property, family ties, and even the lives\nof the serfs were under control of the suzerain. It was a system of\nslavery without the name; the right of the lord to all first fruits was\nuniversally admitted;[22] the best in possession of the serf, by feudal\ncustom belonged to the lord. The feudal period was especially notable\nfor the wrongs of women. War, the pastime of nobles and kings, brought\nan immense number of men into enforced idleness. Its rapine and carnage\nwere regarded as occupations superior to the tillage of the soil or the\narts of peace. Large numbers of men, retainers of every kind, hung\nabout the castle dependent upon its lord, obedient to his commands.[23]\nAt an age when books were few and reading an accomplishment of still\ngreater rarity, these men, apart from their families, or totally\nunbound by marriage, were in readiness for the grossest amusement.\nAt an age when human life was valueless, and suffering of every kind\nwas disregarded, we can readily surmise the fate likely to overtake\nunprotected peasant women. They were constantly ridiculed and insulted;\ndeeds of violence were common and passed unreproved. For a woman\nof this class to be self-respecting was to become a target for the\nvilest abuse. Morality was scoffed at; to drag the wives and daughters\nof villeins and serfs into the mire of lechery was deemed a proper\nretribution for their attempted pure lives; they possessed no rights of\nperson or morality against the feudal lord and his wild retainers. All\nchristian Europe was plunged into the grossest morality.[24] A mistress\nwas looked upon as a necessary part of a monarch\u2019s state.[25] Popes,\ncardinals, and priests of lesser degrees, down to the present century,\nstill continued the unsavory reputation of their predecessors;[26]\n\u201cnephews,\u201d \u201cnieces,\u201d and \u201csacrilegious\u201d children are yet supported by\nthe revenues of the Church, or left to poverty, starvation and crime.\nIt was long the custom of christian municipalities to welcome visiting\nkings by deputations of naked women,[27] and as late as the eighteenth\ncentury, a mistress whose support was drawn from the revenues of the\nkingdom, was recognized as part of the pageantry of the kingdom.\n\nThe heads of the Greek and Protestant Churches, no less than of the\nCatholic, appear before the world as men of scandalous lives. The\nhistory of the popes is familiar to all students. No less is that\nof the English Eighth Henry, the real father of the Reformation, in\nEngland, and founder of the Anglican Church, whose adulteries and\nmurders make him a historic Blue Beard. The heads of the Greek Church\nfigure in a double sense as fathers of their people. The renowned Peter\nthe Great amused himself by numberless liaisons, filling Russia with\ndescendants whose inherited tendencies are those of discontent and\nturmoil. When he visited the Court of Prussia, 1717, he was accompanied\nby his czarina, son, daughter, and four hundred ladies in waiting,\nwomen of low condition, each of whom carried an elegantly dressed\ninfant upon her arms. If asked in regard to the paternity of the child\nthey invariably replied \u201cmy lord has done me the honor to make me its\nmother.\u201d[28]\n\nIn no country has a temporal monarch under guise of a spiritual ruler\nbeen more revered than in Russia. Even amidst nihilism a belief\nthat the czar can do no wrong is the prevailing conviction among\nthe Slavic peoples. This is both a great cause of, and a result of\nRussian degradation. If we except the proportionately few liberal\nthinkers, that conviction is as strong as it was in the time of Ivan\nthe Terrible. In no civilized or half-civilized nation is ignorance as\ndense as among the peasantry of that vast empire embracing one-sixth\nof the habitable globe. Nor to the czar alone was such disregard of\nwoman\u2019s right of person confined. The system of serfdom which existed\nuntil within the last half of the present century, was a system of\nfeudalism in its oppression of women, although if possible even more\ngross. The sale of young peasant girls regularly took place, and the\nblood of the nobility of that country runs in the veins of its most\ndegraded and ignorant population.[29] Although Italy the seat of the\npapal power is noted for the ignorance, squalor, and superstition of\nits people, we no less find such a condition of affairs existing\nin Russia. Amid the starvation of its people, accompanied by\n\u201chunger-typhus,\u201d that form of disease which in the Irish famine of 1848\nwas known as \u201cship-fever,\u201d the peasants will not accept aid from Count\nTolstoi, whom they have been taught to regard as Anti-Christ, fearing\nthat by so doing they will condemn themselves to eternal torment.[30]\nWhile the peasantry are thus suffering wrongs of every nature, the\npriesthood and churches are as thriving as before.\n\nHaving shown the results of power in the hands of a controlling class,\nupon women of low degree in both the Catholic and Greek divisions\nof christendom, we have but to look at our own country to find like\ncondition under Protestantism. The state of the slave women of the\nSouth was that of serfs of the body under feudalism, or of the serf\npeasant women of Russia. Nor is other proof of this statement required\nthan the hue of this race, no longer spoken of as the blacks, but as\ncolored people. Let the condition of woman as to her rights of person,\nunder the three great divisions of Christianity, be answer to all who\nwithout examination of history, or the customs of ancient and modern\ntimes, and with eyes closed to these most patent facts, so falsely\nassert that woman has been elevated by christianity, and is now holding\na position never before in the world accorded her. But what has already\nbeen shown of her degradation under christian teachings and laws is but\na small portion of the wrongs woman has suffered during the christian\ncenturies.\n\nUnder theory of the divine rights of man, society has everywhere been\npermeated with disregard for woman\u2019s rights of person. Monarchs not\nposing as spiritual heads of their people have yet equally made use\nof their place and power for woman\u2019s degradation, and an indefinite\nfatherhood outside of marriage. Augustus of Saxony, King of Poland, is\nchiefly renowned in history as the father of three hundred illegitimate\nchildren.[31] Of Charles II not alone King of England, but also head of\nthe Anglican Church, one of his subjects declared him to be the father\nof many of his people in the literal as well as in the spiritual sense.\nFour English dukes of the present day trace their lineage to this\nmonarch, who left no legitimate descendants.[32]\n\nH.R.H. the present heir-apparent to the English throne bears an\nequally unsavory record.[33] To him and his aristocratic companions\nin guilt is due the support and protection of England\u2019s notorious and\ninfamous purchase and sale, outrage, and exploitation of helpless young\ngirls. An English clergyman writing the _New York Sun_, at the time of\nthe disclosures made by the _Pall Mall Gazette_, declared he had in his\npossession a list of the names of the royal princes, dukes, nobles, and\nleading men who had been the principal patrons and supporters of the\n\u201cgilded hells\u201d devoted to the ruin of the merest children, girls from\nthe ages of nine to thirteen.[34] The reputation of the male members of\nthe Hanoverian dynasty has ever been bad. Trace as you will the path of\neither ecclesiastical or temporal rulers claiming authority by \u201cdivine\nright,\u201d and you will find the way marked with the remains of women\nand children whose life has been wrecked by man under plea of created\nsuperiority. While Italy within the last forty years has escaped from\nthe temporal control of the pope, its kings have no less copied the\nimmorality of the \u201cVicar of God\u201d; the predecessor of the late king of\nItaly having left thirty-three illegitimate children. An instance of\nthe survival of the feudal idea as to the right of the lord to the\nperson of his vassal women occurred in Ireland within the past few\nyears, graphically described in a letter upon landlords, from Mr. D.\nR. Locke (Nasby), December, 1891, in which he says;\n\n    One was shot a few years ago and a great ado was made about\n    it. In this case as in most of the others it was not a\n    question of rent. My Lord had visited his estates to see how\n    much more money could be taken out of his tenants and his\n    lecherous eye happened to rest upon a very beautiful girl,\n    the eldest daughter of a widow with seven children. Now this\n    beautiful girl was betrothed to a nice sort of a boy, who,\n    having been in America, knew a thing or two. My Lord, through\n    his agent, who is always a pimp as well as a brigand, ordered\n    Kitty to come to the castle. Kitty knowing very well what that\n    meant, refused.\n\n    \u201cVery well,\u201d says the agent, \u201cyer mother is in arrears for\n    rent, and you had better see My Lord, or I shall be compelled\n    to evict her.\u201d\n\n    Kitty knew what that meant also. It meant that her gray haired\n    mother, her six helpless brothers and sisters would be pitched\n    out by the roadside to die of starvation and exposure, and so\n    Kitty without saying a word to her mother or any one else,\n    went to the castle and was kept there three days, till My Lord\n    was tired of her, when she was permitted to go.\n\n    She went to her lover, like an honest girl as she was, and\n    told him she would not marry him, but refused to give any\n    reason.\n\n    Finally the truth was wrenched out of her, and Mike went\n    and found a shot gun that had escaped the eye of the royal\n    constabulary, and he got powder and shot and old nails, and he\n    lay behind a hedge under a tree for several days. Finally one\n    day My Lord came riding by all so gay and that gun went off,\n    and \u2018subsequent proceedings interested him no more.\u2019 There was\n    a hole, a blessed hole, clear through him, and he never was so\n    good a man as before because there was less of him.\n\n    Then Mike went and told Kitty to be of good cheer and not\n    be cast down, that the little difference between him and My\n    Lord had been happily settled, and that they would be married\n    as soon as possible. And they were married, and I had the\n    pleasure of taking in my hand the very hand that fired the\n    blessed shot and of seeing the wife, to avenge whose cruel\n    wrongs the shot was fired.\n\nNor is this the only instance in modern Ireland. A certain lord\nLeitram was noted a few years since for his attempts to dishonor the\nwives and daughters of the peasantry upon his vast estate comprising\n90,000 acres. His character was that of the worst feudal barons, and\nlike those he used his power as magistrate and noble, in addition to\nthat of landlord, to accomplish his purpose. After an assault upon a\nbeautiful and intelligent girl, by a brutal retainer of his lordship,\nher character assailed, his tenantry finally declared it necessary\nto resort to the last means in their power to preserve the honor of\ntheir wives and daughters. Six men were chosen as the instruments of\ntheir rude justice, and among them the brother of this girl upon whom\nthe leadership fell. They took oath to be true to the end, in life or\ndeath, raised a sum of money, purchased arms, and seeking a convenient\nopportunity shot him to death. Nor were the perpetrators ever\ndiscovered; yet it is now known that two of them died in Australia, two\nin the Boer war in South Africa, and the leader who came to the United\nStates, changing his name, passed away in the summer of 1892 in the\nState of Pennsylvania.\n\nUnder head of \u201cA Story of To-day,\u201d another tale is related of woman\u2019s\noppression in Ireland aided by the Petty Sessions Bench in 1880.\n\n    Recently, a young girl named Catherine Cafferby, of Belmullet,\n    in County Mayo\u2014the pink of her father\u2019s family\u2014fled from the\n    \u201cdomestic service\u201d of a landlord as absolute as Lord Leitrim,\n    the moment the poor creature discovered what that \u201cservice\u201d\n    customarily involved. The great man had the audacity to\n    invoke the law to compel her to return, as she had not given\n    statutable notice of her flight. She clung to the door-post of\n    her father\u2019s cabin; she told aloud the story of her terror,\n    and called on God and man to save her. Her tears, her shrieks,\n    her piteous pleadings were all in vain. The Petty Sessions\n    Bench ordered her back to the landlord\u2019s \u201cservice,\u201d or else\n    to pay five pounds, or two weeks in jail. This is not a story\n    of Bulgaria under Murad IV but of Ireland in the reign of the\n    present sovereign. That peasant girl went to jail to save\n    her chastity. If she did not spend a fortnight in the cells,\n    it was only because friends of outraged virtue, justice, and\n    humanity paid the fine when the story reached the outer world.\n\nThese iniquities have taken place in christian lands[35] and these\nnefarious outrages upon women have been enforced by the christian\nlaws of both church and state. The degradation and unhappiness of the\nhusband at the infringement of the lord\u2019s spiritual and temporal upon\nhis marital rights, has been depicted by many writers but history has\nbeen quite silent upon the despair and shame of the wife.[36] No hope\nappeared for woman anywhere. The Church which should have been the\ngreat conserver of morals dragged her to the lowest depths through the\nvileness of its teachings and its priestly customs. The State which\nshould have defended her civil rights followed the example of the\nchurch in crushing her to the earth. Christian laws were detrimental to\nwoman in every relation of life.\n\nThe brilliant French author, Legouve,[37] gives from among the popular\nsongs of Brittany during the fourteenth century, a pathetic ballad,\n\u201cThe Baron of Jauioz,\u201d which vividly depicts the condition of the\npeasant women of France at that date. In the power of the male members\nof her family over her, we also find an exact parallel in the condition\nof English women of the same era. The moral disease thus represented\nbeing due to the same religious teaching, the change of country and\nlanguage but more fully serves to depict the condition of woman\neverywhere in christendom at this period.\n\n\nBRETON BALLAD OF THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. THE BARON OF JAUIOZ.\n\n    I.\n\n    As I was at the river washing,\n    I heard the sighing of the bird of death.\n    \u201cGood little Jina, you do not know it, but\n      you are sold to the Baron of Jauioz.\u201d\n    Is this true, my mother, that I have heard?\n    Is it true that I was sold to old Jauioz?\n    \u201cMy poor little darling, I know nothing about it;\n      ask your father.\u201d\n    \u201cMy nice good father, tell me now\u2014is it true\n      that I am sold to Loys de Jauioz?\u201d\n    \u201cMy beloved child, I know nothing about it;\n      ask your brother.\u201d\n    Lannik, my brother, tell me now\u2014is it true\n      that I am sold to that lord there?\n    \u201cYes you are sold to the Baron, and you must be\n      off at once. Your price is paid\u2014fifty crowns of the\n      white silver and as much of the yellow gold.\u201d\n\n\n    II.\n\n    She had not gone far from the hamlet\n      when she heard the ringing of the bells; whereat\n      she wept.\n    \u201cAdieu Saint Ann! Adieu, bells of my fatherland;\n    Bells of my village church, adieu!\u201d\n\n\n    III.\n\n    \u201cTake a seat and rest thee till the repast is ready.\u201d\n    The lord sat near the fire; his beard and hair all\n      white, and his eyes like living coals.\n    \u201cBehold the young maiden whom I have desired\n      this many a day!\u201d\n    \u201cCome my child, let me show thee, crown by crown,\n      how rich I am; come, count with me, my beauty,\n      my gold and my silver.\u201d\n    \u201cI should like better to be with my mother\n      counting the chips on the fire.\u201d\n    \u201cLet us descend into the cellar and\n      taste of the wine that is sweet as honey.\u201d\n    \u201cI should like better to taste the meadow stream\n      Whereof my father\u2019s horses drink.\u201d\n    \u201cCome with me from shop to shop to buy thee a\n      holiday cloak.\u201d\n    \u201cI should better like a linsey petticoat,\n      that my mother has woven for me.\u201d\n    \u201cAh, that my tongue had been blistered when\n      I was such a fool as to buy thee!\n      Since nothing will comfort thee.\u201d\n\n\n    IV.\n\n    \u201cDear little birds as you fly, I pray you\n      listen to me,\n    You are going to the village whither I cannot.\n    You are merry but I am sad.\u201d\n    \u201cRemember me to my playmates,\n    To the good mother who brought me to light,\n    And to the father who reared me; and tell my\n      brother\n    I forgive him.\u201d\n\n\n    V.\n\n    Two or three months have passed and gone\n      when as the family are sleeping,\n    A sweet voice is heard at the door.\n    \u201cMy father, my mother, for God\u2019s love pray for me;\n    your daughter lies on her bier.\u201d\n\n\nThis ballad founded upon historic facts represents the social life of\nchristendom during the fourteenth century. The authority of the son,\nthe licentiousness of the lord, the powerlessness of the mother, the\ndespair of the daughter, the indifference of society, are vividly\ndepicted in this pathetic ballad. It shows the young girl regarded as a\npiece of merchandise, to be bought and sold at the whim of her masters\nwho are the men of her own household and the lord of the manor. During\nthe feudal period the power of the son was nearly absolute. For his own\naggrandisement he did not hesitate to rob his sisters, or sell them\ninto lechery.[38] Hopelessly despairing in tone, this ballad gives us a\nclear picture of feudal times when chivalry was at its height, and the\nchurch had reached its ultimate of power. Woman\u2019s attitude today is the\necho of that despair. At this period the condition of a woman was not\neven tolerable unless she was an heiress, with fiefs in possession.[39]\nEven then she was deprived of her property in case of loss of chastity,\nof which it was the constant aim to deprive her. Guardians, next of\nkin, and if none such existed, the church threw constant temptations in\nher way. Ruffians were hired, or reckless profligates induced to betray\nher under plea of love and sympathy, well paid by the next heir for\ntheir treachery.\n\nAlthough Sir William Blackstone in his Commentaries said that he\ndiscovered no traces of marquette in England, a reminiscence of that\ncustom is to be found in the \u201cfine\u201d or \u201cpermit\u201d known in that country\nas Redemption of Blood, and designated as _Merchetum Sanguinis_, by\nFleta.[40] This was a customary payment made by a tenant to his lord\nfor license to give his daughter in marriage. Such redemption was\nconsidered a special mark of tenure in villeinage.[41] It was not\nexacted from a free man, which is corroborative proof of its origin\nin the _Jus Primae Noctis_, of the feudal lord. Of the free man this\nfine was not permissible, because of the privilege of free blood.\nRaepsaet, M. Hoffman, Dr. Karl Schmidt, and other authors writing\nin the interest of the church and finding it impossible to deny the\nexistence of some power over the bride, have questioned its character,\ndeclaring it not to be feudal, but a spiritual authority, to guard\nthe bride by enforcing a penitence of marital abstinence of one to\nthree days after the nuptials. It is not to be doubted that under the\npeculiar teachings of the church in regard to the uncleanliness of\nmarriage, such continence was a certain period part of church law.[42]\nNevertheless this does not invalidate the fact that a widespread\ncontrary custom existed in feudal times and at a still later period.\nThe present usages of society point back to an age when right to the\npeasant\u2019s bride was enforced by the lord. A reminiscence[43] of this\nperiod is to be found in charivari and the buying off of a party of\nthis character with refreshments from the house, or with money for\nthe purchase of cigars and liquor. Such occurrences constantly fall\nwithin our knowledge, personally or through the press.[44] The very\nfact of such persecution of the bridal pair is a symbol of that custom\nunder which the retainers of the feudal lord jeered and flouted the\nbridegroom, throwing him into foul water,[45] and other most unseemly\npractices. To others outside of the charivari party this practice still\naffords amusement, few persons inclining to interfere or prohibit such\npastimes. Society no longer as sharply defined as in the feudal period,\nyet has preserved in this practice a symbol of the times when even the\nhighborn dames in the castle equally as degraded as its lord, amused\nthemselves while the bride was in the company of the lord by ridiculing\nand torturing the husband who in anxiety for his wife ventured too near\nthe castle. The present nearly universal custom of a wedding journey\nmust be referred in its origin to the same period, arising from an\ninherited tendency in the bride and groom to escape the jeers and ill\ntreatment that in past ages invariably accompanied entrance into the\nmarried state.\n\nIn some European countries redemption was demanded from all women,\nnot alone the daughters of villeins and serfs, but also of those of\nnoble birth who were freed by payment of a ransom in silver known as\nthe \u201cMaiden Rents.\u201d Lands were even held under Maiden Redemption.[46]\nIn Scotland this ransom became known as \u201cMarquette\u201d; Margaret wife\nof Malcolm Canmore, generally spoken of for her goodness as Saint\nMargaret,[47] exercising her royal influence in 1057 against this\ndegradation of her sex. Numberless seditions having arisen from this\nclaim upon the bride, the king more willingly established a release\nupon the payment of a piece of silver, a _demi-marc_, called marquette\n(whence the name), and a certain number of cows. The piece of silver\nwent to the king, the cows to the queen, and from that period cuissage\nwas known as the droit de marquette. But this nefarious custom\npossessed such strength, appealing directly to man\u2019s basest passions,\nhis love of power, his profligacy\u2014the human beast within him\u2014that it\ncontinued in existence nearly seven hundred years after the royal edict\nin Scotland against its practice.[48] This vile power extended over all\nranks of women; the king holding it over the daughters of the grand\nseigneur, the suzerain over the daughters of his vassals; the seigneur\nover the daughters of his serfs, even the judge or bailie enforcing\nthis right upon all women who passed upon his road.[49]\n\nThe Church has ever been the bulwark of this base claim. Holding\nthe powers of penance and of excommunication, such custom could\nneither have originated nor been sustained without the sanction of\nthe church.[50] At this date the privileges of the lower clergy were\nextraordinary. Even in England they were not amenable to the common\nlaw; they ruled the laity with iron hand, but the laity possessed no\npower over the priesthood.[51] All appointments were in priestly hands,\nthe union of church and state complete.\n\nGod himself seemed to have forsaken woman, and the peasantry lost all\nbelief in the justice of earth or heaven. The customs of feudalism\nwhich were akin to the customs of power wherever existing throughout\nchristendom did more to create what the church terms \u201cinfidelity\u201d than\nall the reason of the philosophers. No human being is so degraded as\nnot to possess an innate sense of justice; a wrong is as keenly felt by\nthe most humble and ignorant as by the educated and refined, its effect\nmore lasting because of the impossibility of redress. The power of the\nseigneur was nearly equal to that of the king himself. Manorial courts\nentirely local aided the seigneur in the enforcement of his traditional\nprivileges[52] at the expense of the villeins. The crown possessed no\njurisdiction over these courts. The lord held the right to make laws,\nrender justice, lay imposts, declare war, coin money, dispose of the\ngoods and lives of his subjects, and other prerogatives still more\nclosely touching their personal rights, especially of the women living\nin his dominion.[53]\n\nTo persons not conversant with the history of feudalism and the church\nit will seem impossible that such foulness could ever have been part\nof christian civilization. That the vices they have been taught to\nconsider the outgrowth of paganism, and as the worst heathendom could\nhave existed in Christian Europe upheld many hundred years by both\nchurch and state will strike most people with incredulity. Such however\nis the truth; we are compelled to admit well attested facts of history,\nhowever severe a blow they strike our preconceived beliefs.\n\nThe seigneural tenure of the feudal period was a law of Christian\nEurope more dishonorable than the worship of Astarte at Babylon.[54]\nIn order to fully comprehend the vileness of marquette, we must\nremember that it did not originate in a pagan country, many thousand\nyears since; that it was not a heathen custom transplanted to Europe\nwith many others adopted by the church,[55] but that it arose in\nchristian countries a thousand years after the origin of that religion,\ncontinuing in existence until within the last century.\n\nThe attempt made by some modern authors to deny that the claim of\nthe feudal lord to the person of his female serf upon her marriage\never existed, on the ground that statutes sustaining such a right\nhave not been discovered, is extremely weak.[56] The authority of a\ncustom or \u201cunwritten law\u201d is still almost absolute. A second objection\nthat such customs are unchristian has been answered. The third plea\nin opposition, namely that those so outraged, so oppressed, left no\nrecord of resistance is false. Aside from the fact that education was\neverywhere limited, no peasant and but few of the nobility knowing how\nto read or write, and within the church learning very rare, we have\nindisputable evidence of strong character in the revolt of serfs at\ndifferent periods, through which concessions were gained; the final\nrefusal of the serfs to marry, and in the travesty upon religion known\nas the \u201cBlack Mass.\u201d\n\nWe can not measure the serf\u2019s power of resistance by the same standard\nas our own. The degradation of man with but a few exceptions was as\ngreat as that of woman. Civilly and educationally the peasant man was\non a par with the peasant woman. No more than she had he a voice in\nmaking the laws; the serf was virtually a slave under the absolute\ndominion of his lord. No power existed for him higher than that of\nhis feudal superior. It is nearly impossible to realize the hopeless\ndegraded condition of the peasant serf of the middle ages. It has\nhad no parallel in the present century, except in the slavery of the\nsouthern states. Free action, free speech, free thought was impossible.\nBut our respect for humanity is increased when we know that these\nvassals, although under the life and death power of their lords, did\nnot tamely submit to the indignities enforced upon their wives and\ndaughters.\n\nIt must also be remembered that the historians of that period were\ngenerally priests by whom the fact of such usage or custom would pass\nunmentioned, especially as the church taught that woman was created to\nmeet the special demands of man. Other important historical facts have\nbeen as lightly touched upon, or passed over entirely. The deification\nof Julius Caesar while Emperor of Rome, is scarcely referred to in the\nmore familiar literary sources of Roman history. And yet his worship\nwas almost universal in the provinces, where he was adored as a god.\nThe records of this worship are only to be found in scattered monuments\nand inscriptions but recently brought to light, and deciphered within\nthe last few years. Through these it is proven that there was an\norganized worship of this emperor, and an order of consecrated priests\ndevoted to him.[57] Higgins refers to this deification of Caesar.[58]\nIt is not alone proof of the low condition of morality at this period,\nbut also of the universal disbelief in woman\u2019s authority over, or right\nto herself, that so few writers upon feudal subjects have treated of\nthe libidinous powers of the lord over his female serfs. Even those\npresenting the evils of feudalism in other respects, have merely\nexpressed a mild surprise that christian people should have admitted\nthat right of the lord over his feminine vassals. The various names\nunder which this right was known as jus primae noctis,[59] droit de\nseigneur,[60] droit de jambage,[61] droit de cuissage,[62] droit\nd\u2019 afforage,[63] droit de marquette,[64] and many other terms too\nindelicate for repetition, indicating this right of the lord over all\nthe women in his domain, is still another incontestable proof of the\nuniversality of the custom.\n\nThe Mosaic teaching as to sacredness of \u201cfirst fruits,\u201d under Judaism,\ndedicated to the Lord of Heaven, doubtless was in part the origin of\nthe claim of the feudal lord. The law of primogeniture, or precedence\nof the first born son as the beginning of \u201chis father\u2019s strength\u201d is\nalso a translation from Judaism into the customs of many nations, but\nnowhere under the law of primogeniture at the present day does even a\nfirst born daughter receive as high consideration as a first born son.\nThis is especially noticeable in royal families. It is not therefore\nsingular that men who took the literal sense of the bible in science,\nwho believed that the world had been created in six days, this work\nhaving so greatly fatigued the Lord Almighty as to make rest of the\nseventh day necessary for him, should under example of that lord, claim\nthe first fruits in all their possessions. No Christians of the present\nday, except the Mormons, so fully base their lives upon the teachings\nof the bible as the Catholics of the middle ages. If we accord divine\nauthority to this book, accepting the literal word as infallible and\nsacred, we must admit that both Church and State were at this period in\nunison with its teachings, and even during the nineteenth century have\nnot freed themselves from the stigma of sustaining woman\u2019s degradation;\nthe theory of the feudal ages remains the same, although the practice\nis somewhat different. Legal bigamy or polygamy, non-marital unions,\nare common in every large city of christendom. Government license\nhas created a class in many European countries devoted to the most\ndegraded lives under government sanction, protection, and control; in\nEngland known as \u201cQueen\u2019s Women,\u201d \u201cGovernment Women.\u201d Thus the State\nplaces itself before the world as a trafficker in women\u2019s bodies for\nthe vilest purposes. The culmination of nearly two thousand years\nof christian teaching is the legalization of vice for women and the\ncreation of a new crime. Previous to the enactment of this law the\nrules of modern jurisprudence held an accused person as innocent until\nproven guilty. Under this legalization of vice all women within a\ncertain radius of recruiting, or other army stations, are \u201csuspects,\u201d\nlooked upon as immoral, and liable to arrest, examination, and\nregistration upon government books as government women. It required\nseventeen years of arduous work to repeal this law in England. This\nlegalization of prostitution in the nineteenth century by the State is\nits open approval of that doctrine of the Church that woman was created\nfor man. It is an acknowledgment by men that vice is an inherent\nquality of their natures. It is in accord with man\u2019s repeated assertion\nthat only through means of a class of women pursuing immorality as a\nbusiness, is any woman safe from violence.\n\nIn a letter to the National Woman Suffrage Convention at St. Louis,\nMay, 1879, Mrs. Josephine E. Butler, Honorable Secretary of the\nFederation and of the Ladies National Association for the Protection of\nWomen, wrote:\n\n    England holds a peculiar position in regard to the question.\n    She was the last to adopt this system of slavery, and she\n    adopted it in that thorough manner which characterizes the\n    actions of the Anglo-Saxon race. In no other country has\n    prostitution been registered by law. It has been understood\n    by the Latin race, even when morally enervated, that the\n    law could not without risk of losing its majesty and force\n    sanction illegality and violate justice. In England alone the\n    regulations are law.\n\n    This legalization of vice, which is the endorsement of the\n    \u201cnecessity\u201d of impurity of man and the institution of the\n    slavery of woman, is the most open denial which modern\n    times have seen of the principle of the sacredness of the\n    individual human being. An English high-class journal dared\n    to demand that women who are unchaste shall henceforth be\n    dealt with \u201cnot as human beings, but as foul sewers,\u201d or\n    some such \u201cmaterial nuisance\u201d without souls, without rights,\n    and without responsibility. When the leaders of public\n    opinion in a country have arrived at such a point of combined\n    skepticism and despotism as to recommend such a manner of\n    dealing with human beings, there is no crime which that\n    country may not presently legalize, there is no organization\n    of murder, no conspiracy of abominable things that it may\n    not, and in due time will not\u2014have been found to embrace in\n    its guilty methods. Were it possible to secure the absolute\n    physical health of a whole province or an entire continent\n    by the destruction of one, only one poor and sinful woman,\n    woe to that nation which should dare, by that single act of\n    destruction, to purchase this advantage to the many! It will\n    do it at its peril. God will take account of the deed not in\n    eternity only, but in time, it may be in the next or even in\n    the present generation.\n\nAlthough a long and active work through seventeen years eventually\nbrought about the repeal of this law in England, it still continues in\nthe British colonies, being forced upon the people in opposition to\ntheir own action. After the Cape Parliament of the Colony of Good Hope\nhad repealed the law, Sir Bartle Frere reintroduced it by means of an\nedict.[65] When in London, 1882, Sir John Pope Hennessey, Governor and\nCommander in Chief of British China, was waited upon by an influential\ndeputation of members of parliament and others to whom he made known\nthe practical workings of governmental regulation of prostitution\nintroduced by England into that colony. He did not hesitate to\ncharacterize it as a system of slavery for the registered women and\ngirls. He also declared that they detested the life they are thus\ncompelled to enter having both a dread and an abhorrence of foreigners,\nespecially foreign sailors and soldiers. He said such Chinese girls are\nthe real slaves of Hong Kong.\n\n    Now to that statement I adhere. I give it to you on the full\n    authority of the Governor of the colony. I have been five\n    years looking at the operation of this law in Hong Kong, and\n    that is the result to which I have arrived that, under the\n    flag of England there is slavery there, but it is slavery\n    created and protected by these ordinances.\n\nThe relation of Christianity to this treatment of Chinese women, and\nthe contempt with which this religion is regarded by these heathen, is\nmost fully shown by Sir John\u2019s conversation with the leading Chinese\nmerchant of Canton, as given by himself, upon the material progress of\nthe colony. To this merchant Sir Pope said: \u201cYour people are making\na large fortune here. Why not send down your second son to enter the\nhouse of the Chinese merchant and learn the business there?\u201d The\nmerchant replied, \u201cI can not for this reason; Hong Kong is a sink of\niniquity.\u201d Sir Pope Hennessey answered. \u201cThis is a Christian colony;\nwe have been here now for forty years, we are supposed to be doing the\nbest we can to spread civilization and christianity.\u201d The Chinaman\nrepeated: \u201cIt is a sink of iniquity in my mind. As Chinamen we think\nof domestic and family life\u2014we reverence such things\u2014but how do I see\nthe poor Chinese treated in this colony?\u201d And he related stories of the\nabuses to which his countrywomen were subjected.\n\nIn repeating this conversation to Her Majesty\u2019s government, Sir Pope\nHennessey declared the words that the merchant of Canton who called\nHong Kong a \u201csink of iniquity\u201d have a wide application, because the\nBritish colony at Hong Kong is geographically a part of a great Empire,\nan empire where you have missionaries of various churches. \u201cI have been\nasked to explain the curious and distressing fact that christianity is\ndeclining in China. I think it is declining mainly on account of the\ntreaties we have forced upon the Chinese; but I will frankly tell you,\nit is declining also because they see these girls registered in such\nhouses for \u2018Europeans\u2019 and made practically slaves under our flag.\u201d[66]\n\nNor are the Cape of Good Hope, and China, the sole foreign countries\nin which this system of the legalized moral degradation of women has\nbeen carried by England, nearly one hundred places in India showing the\nsame vice under license from the British Government, even to bearing\nthe same name.[67] Nor have innumerable petitions and protests from\nnative and foreign ladies, from zenana workers, from missionaries,\nand even from all ranks of the resident English civil service for\nimmediate repeal of this vilest of all laws, been of the least effect.\nSo thoroughly imbued are English legislators with contempt for\nwomanhood, as not only to maintain these outrageous laws but also to\ncause fear in the minds of those women who for twenty years wrought\nfor the repeal of these acts in Great Britain and Ireland, of their\nagain being introduced under more insidious and dangerous form.[68]\nA memorial signed by a number of native born and English ladies was\npresented to the Viceroy praying that the age of protection for young\ngirls be raised. While in India a man\u2019s dog, horse, elephant, and\neven the plants of his garden are under the protection of English\nlaw, his daughter of ten years is outside this protection.[69] The\npenal code punishes with imprisonment or a fine, or both, the man who\ninjures an animal valued at ten rupees; if the animal be worth fifty\nrupees his imprisonment may be for five years, while for dishonestly\ncoaxing his neighbor\u2019s dog to follow him, the punishment is three years\nimprisonment, or a fine or both; while the man who induces \u201cconsent\u201d\nfrom a girl-child of ten years escapes all punishment.\n\nIn deference to the bitter opposition these acts created, it was\ndeclared that legalized prostitution was abolished in British India,\nJune 5th, 1888. A statement was made in the House of Commons that\nthe contagious disease acts had been suspended in Bombay. But an\ninvestigation of these statements by the English Social Purity Society,\nproved them false, the _Sentinel_, its organ, stating, June 1890,\nthat upon inquiry it was found that the licensing of prostitution\nsystematically prevails in British India, and is always attended\nwith results most disastrous to health of body as well as morals of\nthe community. The most extraordinary course is taken towards the\naccomplishment of their ends, by the advocates of legalizing vice. In\n1888 having failed to secure an act of the legislature of the state\nof New York, in its favor, a society to this end was formed in the\ncity of New York, incorporated as a \u201cVoluntary Association\u201d; borrowing\nthe name used in England at the time its women were most degraded by\nthe state.[70] This society grants certificates to women presenting\nthemselves for examination. And thus step by step under many forms more\nextended than even under feudal law, is woman\u2019s moral degradation made\nthe effort of christian civilization of today.\n\nThe \u201cten thousand licensed women of the town\u201d of the City of Hamburg,\nare required by the State to show certificates that they regularly\nattended Church, and also partake of the sacrament. And even in\nProtestant Berlin, the capital of Protestant Prussia, the Church upon\ndemand of the State furnished certificates of their having partaken of\nholy communion to those women securing license to lead vicious lives;\nthe very symbol and body of him, whom the christian world worships as\nits saviour, thus becoming the key to unlock the doors of woman\u2019s moral\ndegradation.[71]\n\nThe fact of governments lending their official aid to demoralization\nof woman by the registration system, shows an utter debasement of\nlaw. This system is directly opposed to the fundamental principle of\nright, that of holding of the accused innocent until proven guilty,\nwhich until now has been recognized as a part of modern law. Under the\nregistration or license system, all women within the radius of its\naction are under suspicion; all women are held as morally guilty until\nthey prove themselves innocent. Where this law is in force, all women\nare under an irresponsible police surveillance, liable to accusation,\narrest, examination, imprisonment, and the entrance of their names upon\nthe list of the lewd women of the town. Upon this frightful infraction\nof justice, we have the sentiments of the late Sheldon Amos, when\nProfessor of Jurisprudence in the Law College of London University. In\n\u201cThe Science of Law,\u201d he says, in reference to this very wrong:\n\n    The loss of liberty to the extent to which it exists, implies\n    a degradation of the State, and, if persisted in, can only\n    lead to its dissolution. No person or class of persons must\n    be under the cringing fear of having imputed to them offenses\n    of which they are innocent, and of being taken into custody\n    in consequence of such imputation. They must not be liable\n    to be detained in custody without so much as a _prima facie_\n    case being made out, such as in the opinion of a responsible\n    judicial officer leaves a presumption of guilt. They must not\n    be liable to be detained for an indefinite time without having\n    the question of their guilt or innocence investigated by the\n    best attainable methods. When the fact comes to be inquired\n    into, the best attainable methods of eliciting the truth must\n    be used. In default of any one of these securities, _public\n    liberty_ must be said to be proportionately at a very low ebb.\n\nGreat effort has been made to introduce this system into the United\nStates, and a National Board of Health, created by Congress in\n1879, is carefully watched lest its irresponsible powers lead to\nits encroachment upon the liberties and personal rights of women.\nA resolution adopted March 5, 1881, at a meeting of the New York\ncommittee appointed to thwart the effort to license vice in this\ncountry, shows the need of its watchful care.\n\n    _Resolved_, That this committee has learned with much regret\n    and apprehension of the action of the American Public Health\n    Association, at its late annual meeting in New Orleans, in\n    adopting a sensational report commending European governmental\n    regulation of prostitution, and looking to the introduction in\n    this country, with modifications, through the medium of State\n    legislative enactments and municipal ordinances, of a kindred\n    immoral system of State-regulated social vice.\n\nEven the Latin races in their lowest degradation did not put the\nsanction of law upon the open sale of women to vice, says Mrs. Butler.\nThis remained for the Anglo-Saxon and Teutonic races, under the highest\nchristian civilization in a class of women licensed by the State, under\nprotection and name of the head of the Anglican Church, as \u201cQueen\u2019s\nWomen,\u201d \u201cGovernment Women,\u201d both Church and State here uniting in the\nnefarious business of making women, by law, the slaves of man\u2019s lowest\nnature. A system which openly declares \u201cthe necessity\u201d for woman\u2019s\nfoulest degradation, in order to protect man in his departure from the\nmoral law, a system that annually sends its tens of thousands down to\na death from which christian society grants no resurrection. Similar\nreligious beliefs beget similar results. Times change, and with them\nmethods, but as long as the foundation of the christian church of\nevery name, rests upon the belief in woman\u2019s created inferiority to\nman, and that she brought sin into the world, so long will similar\nsocial, industrial, and moral results follow. The Catholic, Greek, and\nProtestant divisions, all degrade women but under different forms. That\nthe woman of every christian land fears to meet a man in a secluded\nplace by day or by night, is of itself sufficient proof of the low\nstate of christian morality. Several states have at different times\nattempted the enactment of similar laws through bills introduced into\ntheir legislatures; requiring constant watchfulness on part of the\nfriends of social purity lest this great wrong be consummated, a\nwrong primarily against woman. In certain cities, as St. Louis, where\nsuch registration and license was for some time demanded, the foulest\ninjuries were perpetrated upon entirely innocent and reputable women,\ninjuries for which they had no redress.[72] Under the legalized vice\nsystem, women are slaves, not possessing even the right of repudiating\nthis kind of life.\n\nA gentleman traveling in France, 1866, relates a most pathetic instance\nof the attempted escape and the forcible return to the house of\ninfamy, of a young girl whose person there was at the command of every\nbrute who chose to pay the price of her master. The tram car in which\nthis gentleman was riding, crowded with ladies and girls of refined\nappearance, was suddenly stopped on one of the principal streets of\nHavre, by a dense crowd swaying back and forth across the track. He\nsaid:\n\n    I then became aware that two men, tall powerful fellows, were\n    carrying or rather trying to carry, a young woman seemingly\n    between sixteen and eighteen years of age, who occupied\n    herself in violently clutching at everything and anything\n    from a lamp-post to a shop door handle, a railing, and the\n    pavement itself.\n\n    As a matter of course, her body swayed between the two men,\n    half dragging on the pavement, her clothing besmeared with mud\n    and blood. For the rough handling had superadded crimson to\n    other stains. This proved the case to be not one of accident,\n    although the screams, shrieks and cries of the poor girl might\n    well have led to the belief of her having been the victim of\n    a run over, and of being in convulsions of acute agony. Her\n    agonizing cries for \u201cpity,\u201d \u201cpolice,\u201d \u201cprotection,\u201d \u201chelp,\u201d\n    \u201cmurder,\u201d \u201cOh! oh! oh!\u201d were reiterated incessantly. At one\n    particular moment her contortions, and the violence of her\n    efforts to free herself, or even to bring her head into a more\n    convenient position than hanging face downward, while a yard\n    or so of long, bedraggled hair, all loose, was sweeping up the\n    dirt from the pavement, were so violent that her two carriers\n    had to let her slip from their grasp on to the flagstones.\n\n    All this time, unmoved by, and totally indifferent to her\n    piercing cries, stood by, or strolled calmly onward with the\n    crowd, a policeman in uniform and on duty. My enquiry of,\n    \u201cWhat is all this piece of work about? Is it an accident? Is\n    the woman drunk, or what?\u201d He smilingly answered: \u201cOh! not\n    drunk, sir, not at all, not at all. It\u2019s only one of those\n    young licensed girls, who has been trying to escape from her\n    house, and that\u2019s her master, who has just caught her again,\n    and is carrying her back to his place. That\u2019s all!\u201d\n\n\u201cI was powerless to help.\u201d In many christian countries a traffic in\ngirls exists under government protection and license.\n\nCriminal vice chiefly finds its feminine prey among the poorest\nand most helpless class who are the victims of this new commercial\nbusiness, its customers scattered in every christian land, and\naccepting their spoil only upon the certificate of some reputable\nphysician as to their innocence and previous uncontamination. Crime,\nvice, and cruelty, were never before so closely united in one\ninfamous system; the purchase of young innocence by old iniquity\nunder protection of law.[73] A bill was introduced into the English\nparliament to check this business of girl destruction, accompanied\nby proof so direct, and proof of the necessity of immediate action\nso great, that it was not doubted that the bill would pass at once.\nYet it encountered secret[74] and powerful opposition, was finally\nreferred to a committee already so overburdened with work and so far\nbehindhand that it was manifest that the bill could not be reached in\nyears. Gilded vice laughed at this result, and the iniquitous business\nproceeded as before. At that period the _Pall Mall Gazette_ entered\ninto an investigation whose results roused the whole civilized world.\nEven clergymen, ignoring the fact that christian teaching had brought\nthis vice into being, joined the press in scathing reproof of patrician\nLondon iniquity.[75] Societies were formed for the protection of young\ngirls from the vice of men who used the power of wealth and station to\ncorrupt the daughters of the poor.[76]\n\nUnder English christian law it has never been a crime to morally\ndestroy a girl of thirteen, because under that law she is held\nresponsible for her own undoing. Girls of this tender age, infants,\nin all that pertains to the control of property, incapable of making\na legal contract, because of immaturity of understanding, are yet\nheld by that law as of age to protect themselves from a seducer; held\nto possess sufficient judgment to thwart all the wiles of men old in\nyears and crime\u2014of men protected in their iniquities by laws of their\nown making\u2014men shielded by the legislation of their own sex\u2014men who\nescape all punishment because men alone enact the laws. It is not\nalone the waifs of society who fall a prey to the seducer, but the\nchildren of reputable parents and good homes are waylaid on their way\nto and from school and lured to ruin.[77] To the modern ghoul it is\nof no moment upon whom he preys, provided his victim be but young and\ninnocent. Lecky has portrayed the standard of morals of the present\nday as far higher than in pagan Rome, but we must be allowed to doubt\nthis. Immoral sentiment is more deftly hidden, and law more dependent\nupon public opinion. As soon as the general consensus of public opinion\nrises in opposition to girl destruction, the law will regulate itself\nin accordance with this standard.\n\nLord Shaftesbury, upon this point, said:\n\n    The _Pall Mall Gazette_ has published to the world disclosures\n    of a most horrible, and many would think of an incredible\n    character. Not even the questionings of peace or war or most\n    intricate foreign policy, ought to interfere with energetic\n    measures to suppress these evils. But before we can make any\n    great advance, there must be a considerable move of public\n    opinion. It must be vigorous and determined, and I will tell\n    you why. You may depend upon it that no government undertakes\n    a question of a really important and social character until\n    it has been forced upon it by the voice of public opinion.\n    Consequently it is our duty to bring the voice of that\n    public opinion to bear on this question. Law can be evaded\n    in every possible way. The only thing that defies evasion\n    is a wide spread and universally extended public opinion. I\n    hope that we shall be able to create such a public opinion\n    throughout the country that persons will be induced to come\n    forward voluntarily and give evidence. The plague spot is too\n    deep, too wide, and there are too many persons interested in\n    the continuance of it, to enable us easily to wipe it out.\n    Uncommon energy will be necessary; and I hope we shall raise\n    such an amount of popular indignation that the effect will be\n    irresistable.\n\nBut the public feeling, the public indignation against these enormities\ndid not rise to the height of restrictive legislation. The policy\nof a portion both of the English and the American press was that of\nsuppression, upon the plea that a knowledge of these crimes would be\ninjurious to the morals of society. Suppression was also the aim of the\n\u201croyal princes, dukes, nobles, and leading men,\u201d who were the principal\npatrons and supporters of this nefarious system. Suppression is the\nstrongest opposing weapon against reform. To compel change needs light\nand discussion. \u201cIt is only when wrongs find a tongue that they become\nrighted.\u201d Woman, legally powerless in the doing away with abuses, or\nthe punishment of crime, must depend upon publicity for the creation of\na public sentiment in her favor.\n\nOne of the most remarkable facts connected with disclosures of this\ncrime against womankind was the extent to which men of all ages and\ncharacter were found identified with it. The world of business and that\nof politics were equally as well known in the haunts of vice as in the\noutside world, but they were judged by a different standard and their\nrelative importance was altogether changed.[78] It was a literal day of\njudgment, in which evil character, deftly hidden during public life,\nwas there unveiled.\n\nThe most horribly striking fact connected with this investigation was\nthe extreme youth of these victims. The report of the committee of the\nHouse of Lords, 1882, declared the evidence proved beyond doubt that\njuvenile vice from an almost incredibly early age was increasing at an\nappalling extent in England, and especially in London; ten thousand\ngirls, thirteen, fourteen, and fifteen years of age, had been drawn\ninto this vice, an English paper declaring the ignorance of these girls\nto be almost incredible. The condition of these girl-children is far\nmore horrible than that of the victims of infant marriage in Syria,\nEgypt, India; the infant victims of christian lands are more fully\ndestroyed, soon becoming mental, physical and moral wrecks; alternate\nimbecility and wild screaming being common among these child victims of\nvice.[79]\n\nChristianity created the modern brothel, which as closely follows in\nthe wake of evangelical work of the Moody and Sankey style, as did\npublic women the ancient church councils.[80] While in the past the\nlegal wrongs of woman in the marriage relation, in which she is robbed\nof name, personality, earnings, children, had a tendency to drive her\nto live with man outside of the authority of church or state, the\noccupations recently opened to her whereby she can gain a reputable\nlivelihood by her own exertions, has greatly increased the ranks of\nsingle women.[81] No longer compelled to marry for a home or position,\nthe number of young girls who voluntarily refrain from marriage,\nby choice living single, increases each year. No longer driven to\nimmorality for bread, a great diminution has taken place in the ranks\nof \u201cpublic women.\u201d[82] No longer forced by want into this life, the\nlessening number of such women not meeting the requirements of patrons\nof vice, resulted in the organization of a regular system for the\nabduction, imprisonment, sale, and exportation of young girls; England\nand Germany most largely controlling this business, although Belgium,\nHolland and France, Switzerland, several countries of South America,\nCanada, and the United States are to some extent also engaged in this\nmost infamous traffic.[83]\n\nForeign traffic in young English girls was known to exist long before\nthe revelation of the _Pall Mall Gazette_ made English people aware of\nthe extent of the same system under the home government. It was this\nwidely extended and thoroughly organized commerce in girl-children\nwhich roused a few people to earnest effort against it, and secured the\nformation of a society called \u201cPrevention of Traffic in English Girls.\u201d\nTo the chairman of this society, Mr. Benjamin Scott, was the first\nofficial suggestion due that terminated in that investigation by Editor\nStead, which for a moment shook the civilized world, and held christian\nEngland to light as a center of the vilest, most odious, most criminal\nslave traffic the world ever knew.\n\nLondon, the great metropolis of christian England, the largest city\nof ancient or modern times, is acknowledged by statisticians and\nsociologists to be the point where crime, vice, despair, and misery are\nfound in their deepest depth and greatest diversity. Not Babylon of\nold, whose name is the synonym of all that is vile; not Rome, \u201cMother\nof Harlots,\u201d not Corinth, in whose temple a thousand women were kept\nfor prostitution in service of the god, not the most savage lands in\nall their barbarity have ever shown a thousandth part of the human\nwoe to be found in the city of London, that culmination of modern\nchristian civilization. The nameless crimes of Sodom and Gomorrah, the\nvileness of ancient Greece, which garnered its most heroic men, its\nmost profound philosophers, are but amusements among young men of the\nhighest rank in England; West End, the home of rank and wealth, of\nuniversity education, being the central hell of this extended radius\nof vice. The destruction of girl-children by old men is paralleled\nby the self-destruction of boys and youth through vices that society\nhesitates to name. Yet each is the result of that system of teaching\nwhich declares a woman a being divinely created for the use and sensual\ngratification of man.\n\nHaving for years tacitly consented to the destruction of the\ngirl-children of its poor, at the rate of twenty thousand annually,\nEngland was yet greatly shocked to find its boys of tender age and\naristocratic lineage sunken in a mire of immorality. Eton, the highest\ninstitution of its kind in Great Britain, having in charge the\neducation of boys connected with the most illustrious English families,\nrecently became the source of a scandal which involved a great number\nof students. An extensive secret inquiry resulted in the suspension\nof nearly three hundred boys after full confession. Supplied with\nunlimited pocket money, they had bribed parkkeepers and the police to\nsilence.\n\nBut a few years previous to these disclosures in reference to Eton,\nthe civilized world was horrified at the discovery of the vice which\ndestroyed Sodom, among some of the most wealthy, aristocratic young\nmen of London. And yet with knowledge of the depravity into which this\nmost christian city had sunk, the shocking character of the disclosures\nof the _Pall Mall Gazette_ in reference to the traffic in young girls,\ninvolved details of vice so atrocious as to exceed belief had not the\ntestimony been of the most convincing character. These mere children\nwere lured by the most diabolical vices into traps, where by drugs,\nforce, or cajoling, tens of thousands were brought to moral and\nphysical ruin, innocent victims of a religious theory which through the\nchristian ages has trained men into a belief that woman was but created\nas a plaything for their passions. That boys of the highest families,\nin the earliest years of their adolescence, should voluntarily\nassociate with those vicious women who form a class created by the\npublic sentiment of man as necessary to the safety of the feminine\nelement in households, is not surprising to a philosophic observer. It\nwas the direct result of an adequate cause. The wrong to woman passed\nso silently by, reached its culmination in the destruction of young\nboys. At Eton, suspension was tenderness, expulsion from that school\nruining a boy\u2019s future.\n\nSucceeding the revelation of London vice, came divulgence of similar\nshameless practices on the part of high government officials and men\nforemost in public life, in the Canadian Colonies. In Ottawa and other\nCanadian cities in which upon this side of the Atlantic the wholesale\ndespoliation of young girls but too closely paralleled London and other\ntrans-Atlantic cities. These were closely followed by the revelations\nin regard to the north-western pineries of the United States, to whose\ncamps women are decoyed, under pretense of good situations and high\nwages into a life whose horrors are not equaled in any other part of\nthe christian world; where the rawhide is used to compel drinking and\ndancing, and high stockades, bull-dogs and pistols prevent escape,\nuntil death\u2014happily of quick occurrence\u2014releases the victim. As\nelsewhere, men of wealth and high position, law-makers, are identified\nwith this infamy.[84]\n\nAmong the notable facts due to an investigation of prostitution is that\nits support largely comes from married men, the \u201cheads of families\u201d;\nmen of mature years, fathers of sons and daughters. To those seemingly\nleast exposed to temptation is the sustaining of this vice due. Men\nof influence and position no less in this country than in England\nfrequent disreputable houses. In 1878, the body of a woman buried in\nthe principal cemetery of Syracuse, N.Y. was exhumed on suspicion\nof poison. One of the prominent city dailies said, \u201cshe commenced\nleading an abandoned life and went to Saratoga where she ran a large\nestablishment of that character. Her place was the center for men of\ninfluence and position.\u201d A few years since the Rev. T. DeWitt Talmage\naccompanied by high police officials investigated such houses in\nperson. In a sermon based upon knowledge there obtained Mr. Talmage\ndeclared those dens of infamy to be supported by married men, chiefly\nof the better classes.\n\n    He found them to be judges of courts, distinguished lawyers,\n    officers in churches, political orators that talk on the\n    Republican, Democratic and Greenback platforms about God and\n    good morals till you might almost take them for evangelists\n    expecting a thousand converts in one night. On the night\n    of our exploration I saw their carriages leaving these\n    dignitaries at the shambles of death. Call the roll in the\n    house of dissipation, and if the inmates will answer you\n    will find stock-brokers from Wall street, large importers on\n    Broadway, iron merchants, leather merchants, wholesale grocers\n    and representatives from all the wealthy classes.\n\n    But I have something to tell you more astonishing than that\n    the houses of iniquity are supported by wealthy people\n    when I tell you that they are supported by the heads of\n    families\u2014fathers and husbands, with the awful perjury upon\n    them of broken marriage vows; and while many of them keep\n    their families on niggardly portions, with hardly enough to\n    sustain life, have their thousands for the diamonds and the\n    wardrobe and equipage of iniquity. In the name of high heaven\n    I cry out against this popular iniquity. Such men must be cast\n    out from social life and from business relations. If they\n    will not reform, overboard with them from all decent circles.\n    I lift one-half the burden of malediction from the un-pitied\n    head of woman and hurl it upon the blasted pate of offending\n    man. What society wants is a new division of its anathema.\n\n    Without the support of the heads of families, in one month\n    the most of the haunts of sin in New York, Philadelphia and\n    Boston, would crumble into ruin.\n\nThat one-half of the children born into the world die before maturity,\nis acknowledged. Physiologists and philanthropists seek for the cause\nexcept where most likely to be found. To that mysterious interchange\nof germs and life principles, whose chemistry is still not understood,\nmust we look for aid in solving this great problem. These questions\nwoman is forced to consider; their investigation belong to her by\nright, as she and her children are the chief victims. She can no longer\nclose her lips in silence, saying it does not concern me. No longer\ndoes the modern woman allow her husband to think for her; she is\nbreaking from church bonds, from the laws of men alone, from all the\nrestrictions the state has pressed upon her; she is no longer looking\nwithout, for guidance, but is heeding the commands of her own soul.\n\nWith such facts before us, we are not surprised that women are found\nwho prefer the freedom and private respect accorded to a mistress,\nrather than the restrictions and tyranny of the marital household. Mr.\nTalmage but followed in the footsteps of Anna Dickinson, who took upon\nherself an acquaintance with this class of women. Asking one woman\nliving as mistress why she did not marry, the girl contemptuously\nejaculated:\n\n    Marry! umph! I too well know what my mother suffered in the\n    married state. She was my father\u2019s slave, cruelly treated,\n    subject to all manner of abuse, neglected, halfstarved, all\n    her appeals and protests unheeded. How is it with me? I am\n    free. I have all the money I want to use, a thing my mother\n    never had. I come and go as I please, something my mother\n    could never do. I am well treated, my mother was not. Should I\n    be abused there is no law to hold me, no court to sit upon my\n    right to my own child as there was with my mother. No, no, no,\n    I am infinitely better off as a mistress than as a wife.\n\nAnd yet so pronounced in difference are the moral codes by which men\nand women are judged, that while living together in unlegalized marital\nrelations, the man is welcomed into society, is looked upon as fit for\nmarriage with the most innocent young girl, while should he partially\ncondone the wrong done the woman whose life under present condition\nof society he has ruined, by marriage with her, society for this one\nreputable act brands him as most unworthy. It is but a few years since\na cavalry officer in Washington was court-martialled, found guilty and\nsentenced to dismissal from the army on charge of conduct unbecoming an\nofficer and a gentleman, because of his legally marrying a woman with\nwhom he had been living un-married. What a commentary upon christian\ncivilization! While living an illicit relation with this woman, he\nwas regarded as an officer and a gentleman; when taking upon himself\na legal relation he was court-martialled. Lecky says: \u201cMuch of our\nown feeling on this subject is due to laws and moral systems which\nwere founded by men and were in the first instance designed for their\nown protection.\u201d As far as he has examined this question, Lecky is\ncorrect, but he has failed to touch the primal cause of such laws and\nsystems\u2014the church doctrine of woman\u2019s created inferiority to man.\nView these questions from any standpoint the cause remains the same.\nTo this cause we trace the crime and criminals of society today. To\nthis cause the darkness of an age which has not yet realized that\ncivilization means a recognition of the rights of others at every point\nof contact.\n\nTo the honor of the pulpit the sins of men are occasionally made the\nsubject of condemnation. Evangelist Davidson preaching in Syracuse, N.\nY. 1887, said:\n\n    I pray God to haste the day when vice in man will be marked by\n    society the same as in woman. I know all the popular theories.\n    You admit it is a fearful thing for a woman. There are poor\n    women who are driven to it and you are the ones who drive\n    them. You smile at the one thing in this sermon that ought to\n    make a thinking man cry; the world is so depraved that you\n    laugh at the very idea of a man\u2019s saying he is a pure man.\n\nLike Lecky, Mr. Davidson was correct as far as he went, but he, too,\nfailed to reach the cause of this double code of morals. He did not\ntouch it because in striking that, he would strike a blow at the very\nfoundations of the church.\n\nChristendom is percolated with immorality, large cities and small\ntowns alike giving daily proof. Legislative and police investigations\nsubstantiate this statement; woman\u2019s protective agencies and private\ninvestigations alike proclaim the same fact. As under the same organic\nteachings results must continue the same, we find the United States no\nmore free from immorality than European lands; Catholic countries no\nmore vile than Protestant; although feudal law no longer exists, men\nstill rule in church and state. Men\u2019s beliefs, their desires, their\npassions, create the laws under which the degradation of woman still\ncontinues. Evil consequences are not confined to the past, to days of\ncomparative ignorance and tyranny; and in no country has the effect\nof belief in woman as a mere instrument for men\u2019s pleasure produced\nmore horrible results than in our own. Not to speak of the effort\nmade in Congress a few years since to place all women of the country\nunder suspect law, many cities, among them Washington, Philadelphia,\nSyracuse,[85] have at different periods taken initial steps towards a\nprohibition of a woman\u2019s appearing in the street un-accompanied by male\nescort, during the evening, even its earliest hours. Such ordinances,\nprimarily directed against working girls whose chief time for out of\ndoor exercise and recreation is during evening hours, and to that other\nrapidly increasing class of business women, physicians and others,\nwhose vocation calls them out at all hours of day or night; places the\nliberty of woman at the option of every policeman, as though she were\na criminal or a slave.[86] There is also proof of regularly organized\nkidnapping schemes and deportation of girls for the vilest purposes\nnot only abroad, but to the pineries and lumber camps of Michigan and\nWisconsin.\n\nBloodhounds kept for this purpose, or hunting down the girls\nwith shotguns, prevents escape when attempted. In January, 1887,\nrepresentative Breen appeared before the House Judiciary Committee of\nthe Michigan legislature, confirming the charge that a regular trade in\nyoung girls existed between Milwaukee, Chicago and the mining regions\nof the upper peninsula of that state.[87] In case of conviction, the\npunishment is totally inadequate to the crime of those men; the law\ngiving only one year of imprisonment. The freedom, innocence and lives\nof such women are of less account in law than the commonest larceny\nof property. If these girls were robbed of fifty cents the law would\npunish the theft, but robbed of themselves, enduring such brutal\noutrages that life continues only from two to twelve months, there have\nyet no laws of adequate punishment been passed. So little attention\nhave legislators given, that policemen, judges and sheriffs are found\naiding and abetting the proprietors of these dens.[88] Their emissaries\nfind young girls between thirteen and sixteen the easiest to kidnap,\nand when once in power of these men, their hair is cut in order that\nthey may be known. A regular system of transfer of the girls exists\nbetween the many hundred such dens, where clubs, whips, and irons are\nthe instruments to hold them in subjection.[89] The _New York World_\nsent a representative disguised as a woodman in order to investigate\nthe truth of these statements. He found these houses surrounded by\nstockades thirty feet in height, the one door guarded night and day by\na man with a rifle, while within were a number of chained bull-dogs\nthat were let loose if a girl attempted escape. Certain men even in\nthese forest depths are especially noted for their cruelty to these\nvictims, who are compelled with club and whips to obey the master of\nthe den. Suicide the only door of escape is frequent among these girls,\nwho almost without exception were secured under promise of respectable\nemployment at Green Bay, Duluth, or other points. From forty to\nseventy-five girls are found at the largest of such pinery dens.\n\nThe _World_ reporter saw them strung up by the thumbs, beaten with\nclubs, kicked by drunken brutes and driven with switches over the snow.\nHe afterwards interviewed a rescued girl who had engaged to work in a\nlumberman\u2019s hotel, supposing it to be a respectable place, but instead\nshe was taken to a rough building, surrounded by a slab fence nearly\ntwenty feet in height, within which was a cordon of thirteen bull dogs\nchained to iron stakes driven in the ground. Many of the details given\nby this girl are too horrible for relation. Three times she tried to\nescape and three times she was caught and beaten. The visitors by whom\nshe tried to smuggle notes to the outer world would hand them to the\nproprietor, who liberally paid for such treason. Even county officers\nvisited the place to drink and dance with the girls, who were not\npermitted to refuse any request of the visitors. A complaint of any\nkind, even of sickness, meant a whipping, frequently with a rawhide\nupon the naked body; some times with the butt of a revolver. Many\nden-keepers wield a powerful influence in the local elections; one of\nthe worst of such after paying the constable twelve dollars for the\nreturn of a girl who had tried to escape, beat her with a revolver\nuntil tired and was then only prevented by a woodman from turning loose\na bull dog upon her; but such was his political influence that he was\nelected justice of the peace the following spring.\n\nUnder the head of \u201cWhite Slaves in Michigan\u201d the _New York World_ of\nJanuary 24, 1887, published a special dispatch from Detroit, Mich., in\nregard to the case of a rescued girl.\n\n    DETROIT, Jan. 23.\u2014One of the infamous resorts maintained\n    in the new iron region in the upper peninsulas, near the\n    Wisconsin state line, was raided last September by the\n    Sheriff\u2019s officers. Hers is the first word to reach the\n    world direct from one of those dens. Many of the details she\n    gave were too horrible to be even hinted. On the strength of\n    inducements now familiar, she went to work in a lumberman\u2019s\n    hotel in the North. She went, accompanied by another girl,\n    both believing the situation to be respectable. She and her\n    companion were taken to a rough two story building, four and\n    a half miles from Iron Mountain, in Wisconsin. The house was\n    surrounded by a slab fence nearly twenty feet high, within\n    which about the building was a cordon of bull dogs, thirteen\n    in number, chained to iron stakes driven into the ground.\n    She said, \u201cScarcely a day passed that I was not knocked down\n    and kicked. Several times when I was undressed for bed I was\n    beaten with a rawhide on my bare back. There were always from\n    eleven to thirty-two girls in the house and I did not fare\n    a bit worse than the rest. A complaint of any kind, even of\n    sickness, meant a whipping every time. When the log drives\n    were going on there would be hundreds of men there night and\n    day. They were not human beings, but fiends, and we were not\n    allowed to refuse any request of them. Oh, it was awful,\n    awful! I would rather stay in this prison until I die than\n    to go back there for one day. I tried to escape three times\n    and was caught. They unchained the dogs and let them get so\n    near me that I cried out in terror and begged them to take\n    the dogs away and I would go back. Then, of course, I was\n    beaten. I tried, too, to smuggle out notes to the Sheriff by\n    visitors, but they would take them to the proprietor instead\n    and he would pay them. Once I did get a note to the deputy\n    sheriff at Florence, Wis., and he came and inquired, but the\n    proprietor gave him $50 and he went away. I was awfully beaten\n    then. While I lived the life, from March until September, two\n    inmates died, both from brutal treatment. They were as good\n    as murdered. Nearly all the girls came without knowing the\n    character of the house at first implored to get away. The\n    county officers came to the places to drink and dance with the\n    girls. They are controlled by a rich man in Iron Mountain,\n    who owns the houses and rents them for $100 a month. I am\n    twenty-four years old and was a healthy woman when I went into\n    the first house, weighing 156 pounds. I was transferred to\n    the house from which I was released by the officers in August\n    last. When I left it I weighed 120. I now weigh less. When\n    I go home I will be a good woman, if I can only let liquor\n    alone. I was forced to drink that while there.\u201d\n\nThe traffic in girls from one part of the American continent to another\nis under a well organized plan that seldom meets discovery, although a\ntrader of this character is now serving a sentence in Sing Sing prison,\nN.Y., for sending girls to Panama. Three decoyed young girls found in\nJamaica, were happily returned uninjured, to their parents.[90] From\nCanada, girls are imported to the large cities of the United States.\nThe prices paid to agents depend upon a girl\u2019s youth and beauty,\nvarying from $20 to $200 each.[91] The traffic at Ottawa resembled that\nof London in that prominent citizens, leading politicians, and members\nof the government were implicated.[92]\n\nThe number of women and girls constantly reported \u201cmissing\u201d is\nstartling in its great extent. Stepping out on some household errand\nfor a moment they vanish as though swallowed by the earth. A few years\nago the _Chicago Herald_ sent one of its reporters into the pineries\nof Wisconsin, to trace a little girl living on State street of that\ncity who went one evening to get a pitcher of milk and did not return.\nNot a month, scarcely a week passes, that the disappearance of some\nwoman, girl, or child, is not chronicled through the press, besides\nthe infinitely greater numbers of whom the world never hears. As it\nwas abroad, so in our own country, no energetic steps are taken to put\nan end to these foul wrongs. Woman herself is needed in the seats of\njustice; woman must become a responsible factor in government in order\nto the enactment of laws which shall protect her own sex. The spring of\n1892, the _Chicago Herald_ called attention to the continuance of this\ncondition of things.\n\n    MARINETTE, Wis., April 17.\u2014Four years ago when the _Herald_\n    exposed the pinery dens of Wisconsin, Marinette was known\n    as the wickedest city in the country. It was the rendezvous\n    of every species of bad men. Thugs, thieves and gamblers\n    practically held possession of the town. Their influence\n    was felt in all municipal affairs. Certain officers of the\n    law seemed in active sympathy with them, and it was almost\n    impossible to secure the arrest and conviction of men guilty\n    of infamous crimes. Dives of the vilest character ran open\n    on the outskirts of the town. Their inmates, recruited from\n    all parts of the country by the subtle arts of well known\n    procurers, were kept in a state of abject slavery. Iron balls\n    and chains, suffocating cords and the whistling lash were used\n    on refractory girls and women. The dens were surrounded by\n    stockades, and savage dogs were kept unmuzzled to scare those\n    who might try to escape. Bodies of ill-starred victims were\n    sometimes found in the woods, but the discovery was rarely\n    followed by investigation. The dive keepers were wealthy and\n    knew how to ease the conscience of any over-zealous officer.\n\n    The outburst of indignation which followed the _Herald\u2019s_\n    exposure compelled certain reforms in the neighborhood.\n    Sporadic efforts were made to clean out the criminal element;\n    restrictions were placed on saloons and gambling houses;\n    stockades and bloodhounds were removed from the dives near the\n    woods, and gradually an air of semi-decency crept over the\n    district. But the snake was scotched, not killed. For a time\n    more attention was paid to the proprieties, vice and crime\n    were not so open as formerly. By degrees, however, the old\n    conditions assumed sway again. Games of every kind were run\n    openly night and day, dives and dance halls have been thronged\n    and the usual quota of men from the woods deliberately robbed\n    of their winter\u2019s savings.\n\nMan\u2019s assertion that he protects woman is false. Under laws solely\nenacted by men young girls in christian countries are held as\nassenting to their own degradation at an age so tender that their\nevidence would not be received in courts of law. Nor are these the\nlaws of a remote age come down to the present time. As late as 1889,\nthe Kansas State Senate voted 25 to 9 that a girl of twelve years was\nof sufficiently responsible age \u201cto consent\u201d to take the first step in\nimmorality; the same senate afterwards unanimously voting that a boy\nof sixteen years was not old enough to decide for himself in regard to\nsmoking cigarettes.[93] It should be remembered that youth is the most\nimpressible season of life as well as the most inexperienced. Young\ngirls from thirteen to sixteen, mere children, are most easily decoyed,\ntheir youth and innocence causing them to fall the readiest prey; and\nscarcely a large city but proves the existence of men of mature years\nwhose aim is the destruction of such young girls.[94] The state of\nDelaware yet more infamous, still retaining seven years as the \u201cage\nof consent.\u201d Seven short years of baby life in that state is legally\nheld to transform a girl-infant into a being with capacity to consent\nto an act of which she neither knows the name nor the consequences,\nher \u201cconsent\u201d freeing from responsibility or punishment, the villain,\nyouthful or aged, who chooses to assault such baby victim of man-made\nlaws.[95] While the doors of irresponsible vice are legally thrown open\nto men of all ages with girl victims as their prey, the restrictions\nagainst marriage with a minor without the parents\u2019 consent are in most\nstates very severe. That the girl-wife herself has consented to the\nmarriage ceremony is of no weight. Where a legitimate union is under\nconsideration she is held as possessing no power to form a contract\nand can be arrested under a writ of _habeas corpus_, and kept from her\nhusband at her father\u2019s pleasure. Instances have also occurred where\nthe wife has been punished by him for thus daring to marry.[96] Both\nthe husband and the officiating clergyman are also held amenable,\nthe former under charge of abduction, the latter as an accessory in\nperforming the marriage ceremony.\n\nA significant fact is the rapid increase of child criminals throughout\nchristendom; Germany, France and England showing one hundred per cent\nwithin ten years, while in the United States more than one-half the\ninmates of state prisons are under thirty years of age. From criminals\nit is necessary to look back to crime-making men sitting in earth\u2019s\nloftiest places, and note the fact that crime germs are not alone\ngenerated with the child, but that through the gestative period the\nmother, a religious and legal slave, struggles between a newly awakened\nsense of that responsibility which within the last four decades has\ncome to woman, and the crushing influence of religious, political and\nfamily despotism which still overshadows her. Moralists have long\nstriven for the suppression of immorality by efforts directed to the\nreformation of corrupt women alone; for two reasons they have been\nunsuccessful.\n\nFirst: the majority of women entering this life are found to have done\nso under the pressure of abject poverty, and as long as the conditions\nof society continue to foster poverty for woman it was impossible to\ncreate a marked change in morals.\n\nSecond: all efforts were directed towards the smallest and least\nculpable class, as it has been proven that ten men of immoral life are\nrequired for the support of one woman of like character. In London\nalone with its population of five millions, 100,000 women, one-fiftieth\nof its population are thus enumerated, requiring 1,000,000 men,\none-fifth of its population, for their support. Recognizing the fact\nthat men, not women, were most sunken in vice, the number leading\nvicious lives very much larger, the degradation of these men very\nmuch greater, an Italian lady, Madam Venturi, at the International\nConference of the British Continental and General Federation for the\nabolition of governmental regulation of prostitution, while making\na brief eloquent address upon the general subject of rescue work,\nreferred to the great importance of reclaiming men as the fundamental\nwork upon which others should be built up. Teach men, she said, to\nunderstand that he who degrades a fellow creature, commits a crime,\nthe crime of high treason against humanity. In quick response to those\nfitly-spoken words, the women of many countries combined in the work of\nman\u2019s reformation in an organization known as the \u201cWhite Cross Society\u201d\nfounded in 1886, by Miss Ellice Hopkins of England, and now possessing\nbranches in every part of the civilized world.[97] To this society,\nmen alone belong; its work is of a still broader character than mere\nreformation of the vicious; it seeks to train young men and boys to a\nproper respect for woman and for themselves.\n\nAs the world is indebted to Christine of Pisa for the first public\nprotest against the immorality of christendom, so to Mrs. Josephine\nButler,[98] Madam Venturi, and Miss Ellice Hopkins are due the\ninauguration of a new moral standard for man whose results must be\nof incalculable value to the world. The \u201cWhite Cross\u201d is a simply\norganized society without an admission fee, but requiring adherence\nto a five-fold obligation binding its members to purity of thought\nand action,[99] and maintaining that the law of chastity is equally\nbinding on men and women. The International Federation, a union\nexisting in several European countries, its chief object, work against\nstate protection of vice, roused public thought in this direction\nas never before. People began to comprehend that a large vicious\nclass was common to every community, a class whose reclamation had\nnever been systematically attempted, never thought necessary or even\ndeemed possible, because of the religious and social training that\ntaught indulgence in vice to be a necessity of man\u2019s nature; and the\ncoordinate statement, that protection to the majority of women was to\nbe secured only through the debasement and moral degradation of the\nminority. For many hundreds of years this has been man\u2019s treatment of\nthe question of vice in Christian lands.\n\nBut as soon as advancing civilization permitted woman\u2019s thought to be\npublicly heard, vice in man was declared to be upon the same basis\nas vice in woman. Had not man been trained by his religion into a\nbelief that woman was created for him, had not the church for 1800\nand more years preached woman\u2019s moral debasement, the long course of\nlegislation for them as slaves would never have taken place, nor the\nobstacles in way of change been so numerous and so persistent. For\nnine years the Criminal Reform Act was before Parliament. During that\nperiod, petitions, speeches and appeals of every kind in favor of its\npassage were made by those outside the halls of legislation aided by\na few honest men within. But the vicious and immoral fought the act\nwith energy, despite the fact that the women of their own families\nwere exposed to destruction through government protected iniquity. The\nbitter opposition by legislators to this act, is an additional proof\nthat woman cannot trust man in the state to any greater extent than in\nthe church.\n\nUntil woman holds political power in her own hands, her efforts for\nprotective legislation will be arduous and protracted. Among the\ncustoms of the early christian church, we are able to trace the\ninception of marquette, the mundium, the legalization of vice and\ncrimes of kindred character. With exception of among some savage races,\nthat woman should appear unclothed before man, has been regarded as\nevidence of the deepest sensuality, yet throughout the history of\nChristianity from its earliest years when women were required to\ndivest themselves of clothing before baptism down to the Endowment\nHouse ceremonies of the Mormon Church, we constantly find proof of\nlike sensual exactions by the \u201cFathers,\u201d priests and lay masculinity\nof the church. During the earliest days of christianity, women were\nbaptized quite nude, in the presence of men, by men, their bodies being\nafterwards anointed with oil by the priest who had baptized them. One\nof the earliest schisms in the church arose from the protest of women\nagainst this indignity, their demand to be allowed to baptize those of\ntheir own sex, and the opposition of men to this demand.[100]\n\nThe early bishops of the church strenuously used their influence\nagainst the baptism of nude women by elders of their own sex. Women\nwere sometimes brought entirely nude upon the stage at Rome, but it was\nin connection with religious representation, the theater at that period\nbeing an element of religious teaching. Lecky speaks of the undisguised\nsensuality of this practice.[101] What must be our conception of a\nchristian custom that placed nude maidens and wives in the very hands\nof men, not alone for baptism but also for anointing with oil? Nude\nbaptism is still practiced when converts are received into the Greek\nchurch, no position or station in life excusing from it, Catharine,\nthe first wife of Peter the Great being baptized in this primitive\nchristian manner.[102] As late as the seventeenth century a work upon\nthe \u201cSeven Sacraments\u201d set certain days in which female penitents were\nto appear entirely unclothed before the confessor in order that he\nmight discipline them on account of their sins.\n\n\n\n\n_Chapter Five_\n\n+Witchcraft+\n\n\nAlthough toward the beginning of the IV century, people began to\nspeak of the nocturnal meeting of witches and sorcerers, under the\nname of \u201cAssembly of Diana,\u201d or \u201cHerodia,\u201d it was not until canon or\nchurch law, had become quite engrafted upon the civil law, that the\nfull persecution for witchcraft arose. A witch was held to be a woman\nwho had deliberately sold herself to the evil one; who delighted in\ninjuring others, and who, for the purpose of enhancing the enormity of\nher evil acts, choose the Sabbath day for the performance of her most\nimpious rites, and to whom all black animals had special relationship;\nthe black cat in many countries being held as her principal familiar.\n\u201cTo go to the Sabbath\u201d signified taking part in witch orgies. The\npossession of a pet of any kind at this period was dangerous to woman.\nOne who had tamed a frog, was condemned to be burned in consequence,\nthe harmless amphibian being looked upon as a familiar of Satan. The\ndevil ever being depicted in sermon or story as black, all black\nanimals by an easy transition of ideas, became associated with evil and\nwitches.[1] Although I have referred to witchcraft as having taken on\na new phase soon after the confirmation of celibacy as a dogma of the\nchurch by the Lateran Council of 1215, it yet requires a chapter by\nitself, in order to show to what proportions this form of heresy arose,\nand the method of the church in its treatment. This period was the age\nof supreme despair for woman,[2] death by fire being the common form of\nwitch punishment. Black cats were frequently burned with a witch at the\nstake;[3] during the reign of Louis XV of France, sacks of condemned\ncats were burned upon the public square devoted to witch torture. Cats\nand witches are found depicted together in a curious cut on the title\npage of a book printed in 1621. The proverbial \u201cnine lives\u201d of a cat\nwere associated in the minds of people with the universally believed\npossible metamorphosis of a witch into a cat.[4] So firmly did the\ndiabolical nature of the black cat impress itself upon the people,\nthat its effects are felt in business to this day, the skin of black\ncats being less prized and of less value in the fur market than those\nof other colors. A curious exemplification of this inherited belief is\nfound in Great Britain. An English taxidermist who exports thousands\nof mounted kittens each year to the United States and other countries,\nfinds the prejudice against black cats still so great that he will\nnot purchase kittens of this obnoxious color.[5] In the minds of many\npeople, black seems ineradicably connected with sorcery.\n\nIn the _Folk Lore of Cats_, it is stated that as recently as 1867 a\nwoman was publicly accused of witchcraft in the state of Pennsylvania\non account of her administering three drops of a black cat\u2019s blood to\na child as a remedy for the croup. She admitted the fact but denied\nthat witchcraft had anything to do with it, and twenty witnesses\nwere called to prove its success as a remedy. From an early period\nthe belief in metamorphosis by means of magical power was common\nthroughout christendom. St. Augustine relates[6] that \u201chostesses or\ninnkeepers sometimes put confections into a kind of cheese made by\nthem, and travelers eating thereof, were presently metamorphosed into\nlaboring beasts, as horses, asses or oxen.\u201d It was also believed that\nthe power of changing into various animals was possessed by witches\nthemselves.[7] At the present day under certain forms of insanity\npersons imagine themselves to be animals, birds, and even inanimate\nthings, as glass; but usually those hallucinations occur in isolated\ninstances. But among the strange epidemics which have at various times\naffected christendom, none is more singular than that Lycanthropia, or\nwolf madness, which attacked such multitudes of inhabitants of the Jura\nin 1600, as to become a source of great public danger. The affected\npersons walked upon their feet and hands until their palms became hard\nand horny. They howled like wolves, and as wolves do they hunted in\npacks, murdering and devouring many children, nor could the most severe\npunishment put an end to this general madness. Six hundred persons\nwere executed upon their own confessions, which included admissions\nof compact with the devil, attendance upon the Sabbath and cannibal\nfeasting upon a mountain, the devil having used his power for their\ntransmutation into wolves.[8] Witches were believed to ride through the\nair upon animals or bits of wood. The fact of their possession of such\npowers is asserted by many writers, the usual method of transportation\nbeing a goat, night crow or enchanted staff.[9] The rhyming Mother\nGoose question:\n\nOld woman, old woman, oh whither, oh whither so high?\n\nAnd its rhyming answer:\n\nTo sweep the cobwebs from the sky,\nAnd I\u2019ll be back by and by,\n\ndoubtless owes its origin to the witchcraft period.\n\nA song said to be in use during witch dances ran:\n\nHar, Har, Diabole, Diabole; Sali huc, Sali illuc; Lude hic, Lude illic;\nSabaoth, Sabaoth.\n\nAlthough the confirmation by the church in the XIII century of the\nsupreme holiness of celibacy inaugurated a new era of persecution for\nwitchcraft, a belief in its existence had from the earliest times been\na doctrine of the church, Augustine, as shown, giving the weight of his\nauthority in favor. But to the Christian Emperor Charlemagne, in the\neighth century, the first use of torture in accusation of witchcraft is\ndue. This great emperor while defying the power of the pope, over whom\nhe even claimed jurisdiction, was himself a religious autocrat whose\nseverity exceeded even that of the papal throne. Torture was rapidly\nadopted over Europe, and soon became general in the church; the council\nof Salzburg, 799, publicly ordering its use in witch trials.\n\nA new era of persecution and increased priestly power dates to the\nreign of Charlemagne, who although holding himself superior to the\npope, as regarded independent action, greatly enlarged the dominion of\nthe church and power of the priesthood. He forced Christianity upon\nthe Saxons at immense sacrifice of life, added to the wealth and power\nof the clergy by tithe lands, recognized their judicial and canonical\nauthority, made marriage illegal without priestly sanction and still\nfurther degraded womanhood through his own polygamy. Although himself\nof such wanton life, he yet caused a woman of the town to be dragged\nnaked through the city streets, subject to all the cruel tortures of an\naccompanying mob.\n\nIn the ninth century the power of the pope was again greatly increased.\nUp to this period he had been elected by the clergy and people of Rome,\nand the approbation of the emperor was necessary to confirm it. But\nCharles the Bald, 875, relinquished all right of jurisdiction over\nRome, and thereafter the Roman Pontiff became an acknowledged if not\nsometimes a supreme power in the appointment of temporal princes. The\npower of bishops, clergy, and cardinals diminished as that of the pope\nincreased.\n\nNotwithstanding her claims of power through St. Peter, it has been by\ngradual steps that Rome has decided upon her policy and established\nher dogmas. It is but little over four decades, at the Ecumenical of\n1849, that the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary,\nwas first authoritatively promulgated, although her worship had long\nexisted, being traceable to the Egyptian doctrine of the trinity,\nwith the substitution of Mary in place of Isis. It was not until 1085\nthat Hildebrand, Pope Gregory VII, declared matrimony a sacrament of\nthe church; and not until 1415, at the Council of Trent, that extreme\nunction was instituted and defined as a sacrament. Each of these\ndogmas threw more power into the hands of the church, and greater\nwealth into her coffers. Thus we see the degeneration of Christianity\nhas had its epochs. One occurred when the Council of Nice allowed\nchance to dictate which would be considered the canonical books of\nthe New Testament, accepting some theretofore regarded as of doubtful\nauthenticity and rejecting others that had been universally conceded\ngenuine.[10] Another epoch of degeneration occurs when the State in\nthe person of the great emperor Charlemagne added to the power of the\nChurch by the establishment of torture, whose extremest use fell upon\nthat portion of humanity looked upon as the direct embodiment of evil.\nThe peculiar character attributed to woman by the church, led to the\nadoption of torture as a necessary method of forcing her to speak the\ntruth. The testimony of two, and in some countries, three women being\nheld as only equal to that of one man. At first, young children and\nwomen expecting motherhood, were exempted, but afterwards neither age\nor condition freed from accusation and torture, and women even in\nthe pangs of maternity were burned at the stake,[11] Christianity in\nthis respect showing much more barbarity than pagan nations. In pagan\nRome the expectant mother was held sacred; to vex or disturb her mind\nwas punishable, to strike her was death. She even possessed a right\npertaining to the Vestal Virgins; if meeting a condemned criminal on\nhis way to execution, her word sufficed for his pardon. It scarcely\nseems possible, yet in some christian countries the most prominent\nclass subjected to the torture, were women expecting motherhood.\nChristianity became the religion of Iceland A.D., 1000, and by the\nearliest extant law, the \u201cGragas,\u201d dating to 1119, we find that while\ntorture was prescribed in but few instances yet the class principally\nsubjected to it, were women about to become mothers. But generally\nthroughout Europe, until about the XIV century, when priestly celibacy\nhad become firmly established and the Inquisition connected with the\nstate, a class consisting of nobles, doctors of the law, pregnant\nwomen, and children under fourteen, were exempt from torture except in\ncase of high treason and a few other offenses. But at a later period\nwhen these institutions had greatly increased the irresponsible power\nof the church, we find neither sex, condition nor age, free from its\ninfliction, both state and church uniting in its use.\n\nIn Venetian Folk Lore, it is stated that Satan once became furious\nwith the Lord because paradise contained more souls than hell, and\nhe determined by fine promises to seduce human beings to his worship\nand thus fill his kingdom. He decided to always tempt women instead\nof men, because through ambition or a desire for revenge, they yield\nmore easily. This legend recalls the biblical story of Satan taunting\nthe Lord with the selfish nature of Job\u2019s goodness, and receiving from\nGod the permission to try him. Witchcraft was regarded as a sin almost\nconfined to women. The Witch Hammer declared the very word _femina_\nmeant one wanting in faith. A wizard was rare; one writer declaring\nthat to every hundred witches but one wizard was found. In time of\nLouis XV this difference was greatly increased; \u201cTo one wizard 10,000\nwitches\u201d; another writer asserted there were 100,000 witches in France\nalone. The great inquisitor Sprenger, author of the \u201cWitch Hammer\u201d and\nthrough whose instrumentality many countries were filled with victims,\nlargely promoted this belief. \u201cHeresy of witches, not of wizards[12]\nmust we call it, for these latter are of very small account.\u201d No\nclass or condition of women escaped him; we read of young children,\nold people, infants, witches of fifteen years, and two \u201cinfernally\nbeautiful\u201d of seventeen years. Although the ordeal of the red hot iron\nfell into disuse in the secular courts early in the fourteenth century,\n(1329),[13] ecclesiasticism preserved it in case of women accused of\nwitchcraft for one hundred and fifty years longer.[14] One of the\npeculiarities of witchcraft accusations, was that protestations of\ninnocence, and a submission to ordeals such as had always vindicated\nthose taking part in them if passing through unharmed, did not clear\na woman charged with witchcraft, who was then accused with having\nreceived direct help from Satan. The maxim of secular law that the\ntorture which did not produce confession entitled the accused to full\nacquittal was not in force under ecclesiastical indictments, and the\nperson accused of witchcraft was always liable to be tried again for\nthe same crime. Every safeguard of law was violated in case of woman,\neven Magna Charta forbidding appeal to her except in case of her\nhusband.\n\nBefore the introduction of Christianity, no capital punishment existed,\nin the modern acceptation of the term, except for witchcraft. But\npagans unlike christians, did not look upon women as more given to this\npractice than men; witches and wizards were alike stoned to death. But\nas soon as a system of religion was adopted which taught the greater\nsinfulness of women, over whom authority had been given to man by God\nhimself, the saying arose \u201cone wizard to 10,000 witches,\u201d and the\npersecution for witchcraft became chiefly directed against women. The\nchurch degraded woman by destroying her self-respect, and teaching her\nto feel consciousness of guilt in the very fact of her existence.[15]\nThe extreme wickedness of woman, taught as a cardinal doctrine of the\nchurch, created the belief that she was desirous of destroying all\nreligion, witchcraft being regarded as her strongest weapon,[16]\ntherefore no punishment for it was thought too severe. The teaching\nof the church, as to the creation of women and the origin of evil,\nembodied the ordinary belief of the christian peoples, and that woman\nrather than man practiced this sin, was attributed by the church to her\noriginal sinful nature, which led her to disobey God\u2019s first command in\nEden.[17]\n\nAlthough witchcraft was treated as a crime against the state, it was\nregarded as a greater sin against heaven, the bible having set its\nseal of disapproval in the injunction \u201cThou shalt not suffer a witch\nto live.\u201d The church therefore claimed its control. When coming under\necclesiastical jurisdiction, witchcraft was much more strenuously\ndealt with than when it fell under lay tribunals. It soon proved a\ngreat source of emolument to the church, which grew enormously rich\nby its confiscation to its own use of all property of the condemned.\nSprenger, whose work (\u201cThe Witch Hammer\u201d), was devoted to methods of\ndealing with this sin, was printed in size convenient for carrying in\nthe pocket.[18] It based its authority upon the bible, twenty-three\npages being devoted to proving that women were especially addicted\nto sorcery. This work was sanctioned by the pope, but after the\nreformation became equally authoritative in protestant as in catholic\ncountries, not losing its power for evil until the XVIII century. A\nbody of men known as \u201cTraveling Witch Inquisitors,\u201d of whom Sprenger\nwas chief, journeyed from country to country throughout christendom,\nin search of victims for torture and death. Their entrance into a\ncountry or city was regarded with more fear than famine or pestilence,\nespecially by women, against whom their malignity was chiefly directed,\nSprenger, the great authority, declaring that her name signified evil;\n\u201cthe very word _femina_, (woman), meaning one wanting in faith, for\n_fe_ means faith, and _minus_ less.\u201d[19] The reformation caused no\ndiminution in its use, the protestant clergy equally with the catholic\nconstantly appealing to its pages. Still another class known as \u201cWitch\nFinders,\u201d or \u201cWitch Persecutors\u201d confined their work to their own\nneighborhoods. Of these, Cardan, a famous Italian physician, said:\n\n\u201cIn order to obtain forfeit property, the same persons act as accusers\nand judges, and invent a thousand stories as proof.\u201d[20] The love of\npower, and the love of money formed a most hideous combination for evil\nin the church; not a christian country but was full of the horrors of\nwitch persecutions and violent deaths. During the reign of Francis I\nmore than 100,000 witches were put to death, mostly by burning, in\nFrance alone. Christ was invoked as authority, the square devoted to\nAuto da Fe, being known as, \u201cThe Burning Place of the Cross.\u201d\n\nThe Parliament of Toulouse burned 400 witches at one time. Four hundred\nwomen at one hour on the public square, dying the horrid death of\nfire for a crime which never existed save in the imagination of those\npersecutors and which grew in their imagination from a false belief\nin woman\u2019s extraordinary wickedness, based upon a false theory as to\noriginal sin. Remy, judge of Nancy, acknowledged to having burnt eight\nhundred in sixteen years; at the rate of half a hundred a year. Many\nwomen were driven to suicide in fear of the torture in store for them.\nIn 1595 sixteen of those accused by Remy, destroyed themselves rather\nthan fall into his terrible hands. Six hundred were burnt in one small\nbishopric in one year; nine hundred during the same period in another.\nSeven thousand lost their lives in Treves; a thousand in the province\nof Como, in Italy, in a single year; five hundred were executed at\nGeneva, in a single month.\n\nWhile written history does not fail to give abundant record in regard\nto the number of such victims of the church, largely women whose lives\nwere forfeited by accusation of witchcraft, hundreds at one time dying\nagonizingly by fire, a new and weird evidence as to the innumerable\nmultitude of these martyrs was of late most unexpectedly brought to\nlight in Spain. During a course of leveling and excavations for city\nimprovements in Madrid, recently, the workmen came upon the _Quemadero\nde la Cruz_.[21] The cutting of a new road through that part of the\ncity laid bare like geological strata, long black layers super-imposed\none above the other at distances of one or two feet, in the sandstone\nand clay. Some of these layers extended 150 feet in a horizontal\ndirection, and were at first supposed to be the actual discovery of\nnew geological strata, which they closely resembled. They proved to\nbe the remains of inquisitorial burnings, where thousands of human\nbeings of all ages had perished by the torture of fire.[22] The layers\nconsisted of coal coagulated with human fat, bones, the remains of\nsinged hair, and the shreds of burnt garments. This discovery created\ngreat excitement, people visiting the spot by thousands to satisfy\nthemselves of the fact, and to carry away some memento of that dark\nage of christian cruelty, a cruelty largely exercised against the most\nhelpless and innocent, a cruelty having no parallel in the annals of\npaganism. Imagination fails to conceive the condensed torture this spot\nof earth knew under the watchword of \u201cChrist and His Cross\u201d; and that\nwas but one of the hundreds, nay, thousands of similar \u201cBurning Places\nof the Cross,\u201d with which every christian country, city, and town was\nprovided for many hundreds of years. A most diabolical custom of the\nchurch made these burnings a holiday spectacle. People thus grew to\nlook unmoved upon the most atrocious tortures, and excited crowds hung\nabout witch burnings, eagerly listening as the priests exhorted to\nconfession, or tormented the dying victims with pictures of an unending\nfire soon to be their fate.\n\nAn accusation of witchcraft struck all relatives of the accused with\nterror, destroying the ordinary virtues of humanity in the hearts of\nnearest friends. As it was maintained that devils possessed more than\none in a family, each member sought safety by aiding the church in\naccumulating proof against the accused, in hopes thereby to escape\nsimilar charge. It is impossible for us at the present day to conceive\nthe awful horror falling upon a family into which an accusation of\nwitchcraft had come. Not alone the shame and disgrace of such a\ncharge; the terrors of a violent death under the most painful form;\nthe sudden hurling of the family from ease and affluence to the most\nabject poverty; but above all the belief that unending torment by fire\npursued the lost soul through eternity, made a combination of terrors\nappalling to the stoutest heart. A Scotch woman convicted as a witch\nand sentenced to be burned alive could not be persuaded by either\npriest or sheriff to admit her guilt. Suffering the intensest agonies\nof thirst during her torture she espied her only son in the surrounding\ncrowd. Imploring him in the name of her love for him she begged as her\nlast request, that he should bring her a drink. He shook his head,\nnot speaking; her fortitude her love, his own most certain conviction\nof her innocence not touching him; when she cried again, \u201cOh, my dear\nson, help me any drink, be it never so little, for I am most extremely\ndrie, oh drie, drie.\u201d His answer to her agonizing entreaties could not\nbe credited were it not a subject of history, and the date so recent.\n\u201cBy no means dear mother will I do you the wrong, for the drier you are\nno doubt you will burn the better.\u201d[23] Under Accadian law 3,000 years\nbefore christianity, the son who denied his father was sentenced to a\nsimple fine, but he who denied his mother was to be banished from the\nland and sea;[24] but in the sixteenth century of the christian era, we\nfind a son under christian laws denying his mother a drink of water in\nher death agony by fire.\n\nErskine says:\n\n    It was instituted in Scotland 1653, \u201cthat all who used\n    witchcraft, sorcery, necromancy, or pretended skill therein,\n    shall be punished capitally; upon which statute numberless\n    innocent persons were tried and burnt to death, upon evidence\n    which, in place of affording reasonable conviction to the\n    judge, was fraught with absurdity and superstition.\u201d[25]\n\nThirty thousand persons accused of witchcraft were burned to death in\nGermany and Italy alone, and although neither age nor sex was spared,\nyet women and girls were the chief victims. Uncommon beauty was as\ndangerous to a woman as the possession of great wealth, which brought\nfrequent accusations in order that the church might seize upon the\nwitches\u2019 property for its own use.\n\nChildren of the most tender years did not escape accusation and death.\nDuring the height of witchcraft persecution, hundreds of little ones\nwere condemned as witches. Little girls of ten, eight, and seven years\nare mentioned; blind girls, infants[26] and even young boys were among\nthe numbers who thus perished. Everywhere the most helpless classes\nwere the victims.\n\nIt was declared that witches looked no person steadily in the face, but\nallowed their eyes to wander from side to side, or kept them fixed upon\nthe earth. To this assertion that a witch could not look any one in the\nface, the present belief of a connection between guilt and a downcast\nlook, is due; although the church taught that a woman should preserve a\ndownward look in shame for the sin she had brought into the world, and\nto this day, an open, confident look upon a woman\u2019s face is deprecated\nas evil. Attendance upon Sabbats[27] and control of the weather were\namong the accusations brought against the witch. In Scotland a woman\naccused of raising a storm by taking off her stockings, was put to\ndeath. Sprenger tells of a Swiss farmer whose little daughter startled\nhim by saying she could bring rain, immediately raising a storm.[28]\n\nWhatever the pretext made for witchcraft persecution we have abundant\nproof that the so-called \u201cwitch\u201d was among the most profoundly\nscientific persons of the age. The church having forbidden its offices\nand all external methods of knowledge to woman, was profoundly stirred\nwith indignation at her having through her own wisdom, penetrated\ninto some of the most deeply subtle secrets of nature: and it was a\nsubject of debate during the middle ages if learning for woman was not\nan additional capacity for evil, as owing to her, knowledge had first\nbeen introduced in the world. In penetrating into these arcana, woman\ntrenched upon that mysterious hidden knowledge of the church which it\nregarded as among its most potential methods of controlling mankind.\nScholars have invariably attributed magical knowledge and practices\nto the church, popes and prelates of every degree having been thus\naccused. The word \u201cmagic\u201d or \u201cwisdom\u201d simply meaning superior science,\nwas attributed in the highest degree to King Solomon, who ruled even\nthe Elementals by means of his magic ring made in accord with certain\nnatural laws. He was said to have drawn his power directly from God.\nMagi were known as late as the X century of this era. Among their\npowers were casting out demons, the fearless use of poisons, control\nof spirits and an acquaintance with many natural laws unknown to the\nworld at large. During the present century, the Abb\u00e9 Constant (Eliphas\nLevi), declared the Pentegram to be the key of the two worlds, and if\nrightly understood, endowing man with infinite power. The empire of THE\nWILL over the astral light is symbolized in magic by the Pentegram, the\ngrowth of a personal will being the most important end to be attained\nin the history of man\u2019s evolution. The opposition of the church to this\ngrowth of the human will in mankind, has ever been the most marked\nfeature in its history. Under WILL, man decides for himself, escaping\nfrom all control that hinders his personal development.\n\n    It is only an innate and natural tendency of the soul to go\n    beyond its body to find material with which to clothe the life\n    that it desires to give expression to. The soul can and must\n    be trained to do this consciously. You can easily see that\n    this power possessed _consciously_ will give its possessor\n    power to work magic.\n\nIgnorance and the anathemas of the church against knowledge to be\ngained through an investigation of the more abstruse laws of nature,\nhave invested the word \u201cmagic\u201d with terror. But magic simply means\nknowledge of the effect of certain natural, but generally unknown laws;\nthe secret operation of natural causes, according to Bacon and other\nphilosophers; consequences resulting from control of the invisible\npowers of nature, such as are shown in the electrical appliances of the\nday, which a few centuries since would have been termed witchcraft.\nSeeking to compel the aid of spirits, was understood as magic at an\nearly day. Lenormant says the object of magic in Chaldea, was to\nconjure the spirits giving minute description of the ancient formula.\nScientific knowledge in the hands of the church alone, was a great\nelement of spiritual and temporal power, aiding it in more fully\nsubduing the human will. The testimony of the ages entirely destroys\nthe assertion sometimes made that witchcraft was merely a species of\nhysteria. Every discovery of science is a nearer step towards knowledge\nof the laws governing \u201cthe Accursed Sciences,\u201d as everything connected\nwith psychic power in possession of the laity was termed by the church.\n\u201cHer seven evidences for possession\u201d included nearly all forms of\nmesmerism. All modern investigations tend to prove what was called\nwitchcraft, to have been in most instances the action of psychic laws\nnot yet fully understood. An extremely suggestive article appeared\nin the January and February numbers of _The Path_ 1887, by C. H. A.\nBjerregaard entitled, \u201cThe Elementals and the Elementary Spirits.\u201d In\nit Mr. Bjerregaard referred to the Pacinian Corpuscles, the discovery\nof an Italian physician in 1830 and 1840. He said:\n\n    Pacini found in all the sensible nerves of the fingers many\n    elliptical whitish corpuscles. He compared them to the\n    electrical organs of the torpedo and described them as animal\n    magneto-motors, or organs of animal magnetism, and so did\n    Henle and Holliker, two German anatomists who have studied and\n    described these corpuscles very minutely.\n\n    In the human body they are found in great numbers in\n    connection with the nerves of the hand, also in those of\n    the foot.... The ecstatic dances of the enthusiasts and the\n    not-sinking of somnambulists in water, or their ability to\n    use the soles of their feet as organs of perception, and the\n    ancient art of healing by the soles of the feet\u2014all these\n    facts explain the mystery.\n\n    They are found sparingly on the spinal nerves, and on the\n    plexuses of the sympathetic, but never on the nerves of\n    motion.... Anatomists are interested in these Pacinian\n    corpuscles because of the novel aspect in which they present\n    the constituent parts of the nerve-tube, placed in the heart\n    of a system of concentric membranous capsules with intervening\n    fluid, and divested of that layer which they (the anatomists)\n    regard as an isolator and protector of the more potential\n    central axis within.\n\n    This apparatus\u2014almost formed like a voltaic pile, is the\n    instrument for that peculiar vital energy, known more or less\n    to all students as Animal Magnetism.\n\n    Since the cat is somewhat famous in all witchcraft, let me\n    state, that in the mesentery of the cat, they can be seen in\n    large numbers with the naked eye, as small oval-shaped grains\n    a little smaller than hemp-seeds. A few have been found in the\n    ox (symbol of the priestly office,) but they are wanting in\n    all birds, amphibia and fishes.\n\n\u201cMagic\u201d whether brought about by the aid of spirits or simply through\nan understanding of secret natural laws, is of two kinds, \u201cwhite\u201d and\n\u201cblack,\u201d according as its intent and consequences are evil or good, and\nin this respect does not differ from the use made of the well known\nlaws of nature, which are ever of good or evil character, in the hands\nof good or evil persons. To the church in its powerful control of the\nhuman will, must be attributed the use of \u201cblack magic,\u201d in its most\ninjurious form. Proof that knowledge of the mysterious laws governing\nordinary natural phenomena still exists even among civilized people, is\nindubitable. Our American Indians in various portions of the continent,\naccording to authorities, also possess power to produce storms of\nthunder, lightning and rain.[29]\n\nA vast amount of evidence exists, to show that the word \u201cwitch\u201d\nformerly signified a woman of superior knowledge. Many of the persons\ncalled witches doubtless possessed a super-abundance of the Pacinian\ncorpuscles in hands and feet, enabling them to swim when cast into\nwater bound, to rise in the air against the ordinary action of gravity,\nto heal by a touch, and in some instances to sink into a condition of\ncatalepsy, perfectly unconscious of torture when applied. Many were\ndoubtless psychic sensitives of high powers similar perhaps to the\n\u201cSeeress of Prevorst,\u201d whose peculiar characteristics were the subject\nof investigation by Dr. Kerner, about the end of the witch period,\nhis report forming one of the most mysteriously interesting portions\nof psychic literature. The \u201cSeeress\u201d was able to perceive the hidden\nprinciples of all vegetable or mineral substances, whether beneficial\nor injurious. Dr. Kerner stated that her magnetic condition might be\ndivided into four degrees.\n\n    First: that in which she ordinarily was when she appeared to\n    be awakened but on the contrary was the first stage of her\n    inner life, many persons of whom it was not expected and who\n    was not aware of it themselves, being in this state.\n\n    Second: the magnetic dream, which she believed to be the\n    condition of many persons who were regarded as insane.\n\n    Third: the half wakening state when she spoke and wrote the\n    inner language, her spirit then being in intimate conjunction\n    with her soul.\n\n    Fourth: her clairvoyant state.\n\nWith the investigation of Dr. Kerner, the discoveries of Galvani,\nPacini, and those more recently connected with electricity, notably of\nEdison and Nikolas Tesla, the world seems upon the eve of important\nknowledge which may throw full light upon the peculiar nerve action\nof the witch period, when a holocaust of women were sacrificed,\nvictims of the ignorance and barbarity of the church, which thus\nretarded civilization and delayed spiritual progress for many hundred\nyears. Besides the natural psychics who formed a large proportion\nof the victims of this period, other women with a natural spirit of\ninvestigation made scientific discoveries with equally baleful effect\nupon themselves; the one fact of a woman\u2019s possessing knowledge serving\nto bring her under the suspicion and accusation of the church. Henry\nMore, a learned Cambridge graduate of the seventeenth century wrote\na treatise on witchcraft explanatory of the term \u201cwitch\u201d which he\naffirmed simply signified a wise, or learned woman. It meant \u201cuncommon\u201d\nbut not unlawful knowledge or skill. It will assist in forming an\nopinion to know that the word \u201cwitch\u201d is from _wekken_, to prophesy, a\ndirect bearing upon the psychic powers of many such persons. The modern\nSlavonian or Russian name for witch, _vjedma_, is from the verb \u201cto\nknow\u201d signifying much the same as Veda.[30] Muller says _Veda_ means\nthe same as the wise, \u201cwisdom.\u201d The Sanskrit word _Vidma_ answers to\nthe German _wir wissen_, which literally means \u201cwe know.\u201d A Russian\nname for the witch _Zaharku_, is derived from the verb _Znat_, to\nknow.[31] A curious account of modern Russian belief in witchcraft\nis to be found in Madame Blavatsky\u2019s _Isis Unveiled_. The German\nword _Heke_, that is, witch, primarily signified priestess, a wise\nor superior woman who in a sylvan temple worshiped those gods and\ngoddesses that together governed earth and heaven. Not alone but with\nthousands of the people for whom she officiated she was found there\nespecially upon Walpurgis Night, the chief Hexen (witch) Sabbat of the\nnorth. A German scholar furnished this explanation.\n\n    The German word Heke, (witch) is a compound word from \u201chag\u201d\n    and \u201cidisan\u201d or \u201cdisan.\u201d Hag means a beautiful landscape,\n    woodland, meadow, field, altogether. Idisen means female\n    deities, wise-women. Hexen-Sabbat, or Walpurgis Night is\n    May twelfth. Perfume and avocation\u2014originally the old\n    gods\u2014perverted by the priests. It is a remnant of the great\n    gathering to worship the old deities, when Christianity had\n    overshadowed them. A monument of the wedding of Woden or Odin\n    with Freia\u2014Sun and Earth at spring time.\n\nThe Saxon festival \u201cEostre,\u201d the christian Easter, was celebrated in\nApril, each of these festivals at a time when winter having released\nits sway, smiling earth giving her life to healing herbs and leaves,\nonce more welcomed her worshipers. In the south of Europe, the month\nof October peculiarly belonged to the witches.[32] The first of May,\nMay-day, was especially devoted by those elementals known as fairies,\nwhose special rites were dances upon the green sward, leaving curious\nmementoes of their visits in the circles known as \u201cFairies Rings.\u201d In\nreality the original meaning of \u201cwitch\u201d was a wise woman. So also the\nword _Sab_ means sage or wise, and _Saba_ a host or congregation;[33]\nwhile _Bac_, _Boc_ and _Bacchus_[34] all originally signified\nbook.[35] _Sabs_ was the name of the day when the Celtic Druids gave\ninstruction and is the origin of our words Sabbath and Sunday. But\nthe degradation of learning, its almost total loss among christian\nnations, an entire change in the signification of words, owing to\nignorance and superstition led to the strangest and most infamous\nresults. The earliest doctors among the common people of christian\nEurope were women[36] who had learned the virtues and use of herbs.\nThe famous works of Paracelsus were but compilations of the knowledge\nof these \u201cwise women\u201d as he himself stated. During the feudal ages\nwomen were excellent surgeons, wounded warriors frequently falling\nunder their care and to the skill of these women were indebted for\nrecovery from dangerous wounds. Among the women of savage races to much\ngreater extent than among the men, a knowledge of the healing powers\nof plants and herbs is to this day found. But while for many hundred\nyears the knowledge of medicine, and its practice among the poorer\nclasses was almost entirely in the hands of women and many discoveries\nin science are due to them, yet an acquaintance of herbs soothing to\npain, or healing in their qualities, was then looked upon as having\nbeen acquired through diabolical agency. Even those persons cured\nthrough the instrumentality of some woman, were ready when the hour\ncame to assert their belief in her indebtedness to the devil for her\nknowledge. Not only were the common people themselves ignorant of all\nscience, but their brains were filled with superstitious fears, and the\nbelief that knowledge had been first introduced to the world through\nwoman\u2019s obedience to the devil. In the fourteenth century the church\ndecreed that any woman who healed others without having duly studied,\nwas a witch and should suffer death; yet in that same century, 1527,\nat Basle, Paracelsus threw all his medical works, including those of\nHippocrates and Galen into the fire, saying that he knew nothing except\nwhat he had learned from witches.[37] As late as 1736, the persecution\nof her male compeers cast Elizabeth Blackwell, an English woman\nphysician, into prison for debt. Devoting herself even behind the bars\nto her loved science, she prepared the first medical botany given to\nthe world. The modern discovery of anaesthetics by means of whose use\nhuman suffering can be so greatly ameliorated, is justly claimed as the\ngreatest boon that science has conferred upon mankind, yet it must not\nbe forgotten that this medical art of mitigating pain, is but an olden\none rediscovered. Methods of causing insensibility to pain were known\nto the ancient world. During the middle ages these secrets were only\nunderstood by the persecuted women doctors of that period, subjected\nunder church rule to torture, burning at the stake or drowning as\nwitches. The use of pain-destroying medicaments by women, can be\ntraced back from five hundred to a thousand years. At the time that\nwitchcraft became the great ogre against which the church expended all\nits terrific powers, women doctors employed anaesthetics to mitigate\nthe pains and perils of motherhood,[38] throwing the sufferer into a\ndeep sleep when the child entered the world. They made use of Solanae,\nespecially Belladonna. But that woman should find relief at this hour\nof intense suffering and peril when a new being entered the world,\nprovoked open hostility from the church. The use of mitigating herbs\nassailed that theory of the church which having placed the creation of\nsin upon woman, still further inculcated the doctrine that she must\nundergo continual penance, the greatest suffering being a punishment\nin nowise equal to her deserts. Its teachings that she had therefore\nbeen especially cursed by her Maker with suffering and sorrow at this\nperiod, rendered the use of mitigating remedies during childbirth,\ndangerous alike to the \u201cwise woman\u201d and the mother for whose relief\nthey were employed[39]. Although the present century has shown similar\nopposition by the church to the use of anaesthetics for women at\nthis time, it is almost impossible to depict the sentiment against\nsuch relief which made the witchcraft period one of especial terror\nto womankind\u2014an age that looked upon the slightest attempt at such\nalleviation as proof of collusion with the devil. So strong was the\npower of the church, so universal the belief in the guilt of all women,\nthat even those sufferers who had availed themselves of the knowledge\nof the \u201cwise woman\u201d did so in fear as calling in the aid of evil, and\nwere ready to testify against her to whom they had been indebted for\nalleviation of pain, whenever required by the dread mandate of the\nchurch. A strong natural bias toward the study of medicine, together\nwith deepest sympathy for suffering humanity, were required in order\nto sustain the \u201cwise woman\u201d amid the perils constantly surrounding\nher; many such women losing their lives as witches simply because of\ntheir superior medical and surgical knowledge. Death by torture was\nthe method of the church for the repression of woman\u2019s intellect,\nknowledge being held as evil and dangerous in her hands. Ignorance was\nregarded as an especial virtue in woman, and fear held her in this\ncondition. Few women dared be wise, after thousands of their sex had\ngone to death by drowning or burning because of their knowledge. The\nsuperior learning of witches was recognized in the widely extended\nbelief of their ability to work miracles. The witch was in reality the\nprofoundest thinker, the most advanced scientist of those ages. The\npersecution which for ages waged against witches was in reality an\nattack upon science at the hands of the church. As knowledge has ever\nbeen power, the church feared its use in woman\u2019s hands, and leveled its\ndeadliest blows at her. Although the church in its myth of the fall\nattributes knowledge to woman\u2019s having eaten of its tree, yet while not\nscrupling to make use of the results of her disobedience for its own\nbenefit, it has been most earnest in its endeavors to prevent her from\nlike use. No less today than during the darkest period of its history,\nis the church the great opponent of woman\u2019s education, every advance\nstep for her having found the church antagonistic.\n\nEvery kind of self-interest was brought into play in these accusations\nof witchcraft against women physicians: greed, malice, envy, hatred,\nfear, the desire of clearing one\u2019s self from suspicion, all became\nmotives. Male physicians not skillful enough to cure disease would\ndeliberately swear that there could be but one reason for their\nfailure\u2014the use of witchcraft against them. As the charge of witchcraft\nnot only brought disrepute but death upon the \u201cwise woman\u201d at the hands\nof the church, she was soon compelled to abandon both the practice\nof medicine and surgery, and for many hundred years but few women\ndoctors were to be found in christian countries. It is, however, a\nnoticeable fact that Madam La Chapelle, an eminent woman accoucher of\nFrance, during the present century, and M. Chaussure revived the use of\nBelladonna[40] during parturition, thus acknowledging the scientific\nacquirements of serf women and \u201cwitches.\u201d Since the re-entrance of\nwoman into the medical profession within the past few years, the world\nhas been indebted for a knowledge of the cause and cure of certain\nforms of disease peculiar to woman, to the skill of those physicians of\nher own sex whom the church so long banished from practice.\n\nThrough its opposition to the use of anaesthetics by the women\nphysicians of the witch period, the church again interposed the weight\nof her mighty arm to crush science, leaving the load of preventable\nsuffering of all kinds upon the world for many hundred years longer,\nor until the light of a scientific civilization threw discredit upon\nher authority. History proves that women were the earliest chemists.\nThe witch period also shows us the germs of a medical system, the\nHomeopathic, supposed to be of modern origin, in _similia similibus\ncurantur_. Among the strange epidemics of these ages, a dancing mania\nappeared; Belladonna among whose effects is the desire of dancing,\nwas employed as a cure of the \u201cDancing Mania,\u201d and thus the theory\nof Hahnemann was forestalled. During the witch period these sages or\nwise-women were believed to be endowed with a supernatural or magical\npower of curing diseases. They were also regarded as prophets to whom\nthe secrets of the future were known. The women of ancient Germany,\nof Gaul and among the Celts were especially famous for their healing\npowers,[41] possessing knowledge by which wounds and diseases that\nbaffled the most expert male physicians were cured. The women of\na still more ancient period, the fame of whose magical powers has\ndescended to the present time, Circe, Medea and Thracia, were evidently\nphysicians of the highest skill. The secret of compounding herbs and\ndrugs left by Circe to her descendants, gave them power over the most\npoisonous serpents. Chief among the many herbs, plants and roots whose\nvirtues were discovered by Medea, that of Aconite stands pre-eminent.\nThe Thracian nation took its name from the famous Thracia whose medical\nskill and knowledge of herbs was so great that the country deemed it an\nhonor to thus perpetuate her name.\n\nAside from women of superior intelligence who were almost invariably\naccused of witchcraft, the old, the insane, the bed-ridden, the\nidiotic,[42] also fell under condemnation. The first investigation by\nRev. Cotton Mather in America resulted in the hanging of a half-witted\nQuaker woman. Later still, an Indian woman, an insane man, and another\nwoman who was bed-ridden were also accused. Under the present theories\nregarding human rights, it seems scarcely possible that less than two\nhundred years ago such practices were not only common in England,\nbut had also been brought into America by the Puritan Fathers. The\nhumiliation and tortures of women increased in proportion to the\nspread of christianity,[43] and the broader area over which man\u2019s sole\nauthority in church and state was disseminated. As the supreme extent\nof spiritual wrong grew out of the bondage of the church over free\nthought, so the extreme of physical wrong rose from the growth of the\ninquisitional or paternal spirit, which assumed that one human being\npossessed divine authority over another human being. Paternalism,\na species of condensed patriarchism, runs through ecclesiastical,\ncivil, and common law. Down to the time of the American revolution,\nindividuality was an uncomprehended word; many hundred crimes were\npunishable by death. That of pressing to death, _peine-fort-et-dure_,\nthe strong and hard pain, was practiced upon both men and women in\nEngland for five hundred years and brought by the pilgrims to New\nEngland. The culprit was placed in the dark lower room of some prison,\nnaked, upon the bare ground without clothing or rushes underneath or\nto cover him. The legs and arms were extended toward the four corners\nof the room and as great a weight placed upon the body as could be\nsupported.\n\n\u201cThe first day he (or she) is to have three morsels of barley bread;\nupon the second day three draughts of water standing next to the door\nof the prison, without bread, and this to be his (or her) diet till he\n(or she) die.\u201d\n\nIt is computed from historical records that nine millions of persons\nwere put to death for witchcraft after 1484, or during a period of\nthree hundred years, and this estimate does not include the vast\nnumber who were sacrificed in the preceding centuries upon the same\naccusation. The greater number of this incredible multitude were\nwomen. Under catholicism, those condemned as sorcerers and witches,\nas \u201cheretics,\u201d were in reality the most advanced thinkers of the\nchristian ages. Under that protestant pope, the Eighth Henry, an Act\nof Parliament condemning witchcraft as felony was confirmed. Enacted\nunder Henry V, it had fallen into disuse, but numerous petitions\nsetting forth that witches and sorcerers were \u201cwonderful many,\u201d and\nhis majesty\u2019s subjects persecuted to death by their devices, led to\nits re-enactment. The methods used to extort confession without which\nit was impossible in many cases to convict for witchcraft, led to the\ngrossest outrages upon woman. Searching the body of the suspected witch\nfor the marks of Satan, and the practice of shaving the whole body\nbefore applying torture were occasions of atrocious indignities. It\nwas asserted that all who consorted with devils had some secret mark\nabout them, in some hidden place of their bodies; as the inside of the\nlip, the hair of the eyebrows, inside of the thigh, the hollow of the\narm or still more private parts, from whence Satan drew nourishment.\nThis originated a class of men known as \u201cWitch Prickers\u201d who divesting\nthe supposed witch, whether maid, matron, or child, of all clothing\nminutely examined all parts of her body for the devil\u2019s sign. Woe to\nthe woman possessing a mole or other blemish upon her person; it was\nimmediately pointed to as Satan\u2019s seal and as undeniable proof of\nhaving sold herself to the devil. Belief in this sign existed among the\nmost educated persons. Albertus Pictus, an advocate in the Parliament\nof Paris, declared he himself had seen a woman with the devil\u2019s mark\non her shoulders, carried off the next day by the devil. Many authors\naffirmed the trustworthiness of witch-marks. It was supposed that\nupon touching the place the witch would be unable to speak. If under\nthe torture of having every portion of her body punctured by a sharp\ninstrument, the victim became no longer able to cry out, her silence\nwas an accepted proof of finding the witch-mark and her condemnation\nwas equally certain. So great was the number of accused, that these\nmen found profitable employment. The depth of iniquity to which greed\nof money leads was never more forcibly shown than during witchcraft.\nOne Kincaid, a New England Witch Pricker, after stripping his victims\nof all clothing, bound them hand and foot, then thrust pins into\nevery part of their bodies until exhausted and rendered speechless by\nthe torture, they were unable to scream, when he would triumphantly\nproclaim that he had found the witch mark. Another confessed on the\ngallows, to which a just fate finally condemned him, that he had\nillegally caused the death of one hundred and twenty women whom he\nhad thus tortured. No means were considered too severe in order to\nsecure conviction. The Jesuit, Del Rio, said torture could scarcely be\nproperly administered without more or less dislocation of the joints,\nand persons escaping conviction were frequently crippled for life.[44]\nThe church declared the female sex had always been most concerned in\nthe crime of christian witchcraft and as it was its aim to separate\nwoman from all connection with its ordinances, it also asserted that\nthe priestesses of antiquity held their high places by means of\nwitchcraft.\n\nTrials for witchcraft filled the coffers of the church, as whenever\nconviction took place, the property of the witch and her family was\nconfiscated to that body. The clergy fattened upon the torture and\nburning of women. Books giving directions for the punishment to be\ninflicted upon them bore the significant titles of _Scourge_, _Hammer_,\n_Ant Hills_, _Floggings_, etc. During the middle ages the devil was a\npersonal being to the church with power about equal to that of God,\nhis kingdom maintaining its equilibrium with the Father, Son and Holy\nGhost of Heaven, by means of three persons in Hell; Lucifer, Beelzebub\nand Leviathan. In this era of christian devil-worship the three in hell\nequipoised the three in the Godhead. Marriage with devils was one of\nthe most ordinary accusations in witch trials. Such connections were\nsometimes regarded with pride; the celebrated marshall de Bassompierre\nboasting that the founder of his family was engendered from communion\nwith a spirit. It was reported of the mother of Luther that she was\nfamiliar with an Incubus. During this period many nuns and married\nwomen confessed to having been visited by Incubi of whose visits no\nspiritual efforts could rid them. Church history also proves that young\ngirls and boys, many under ten years of age were tried for intercourse\nwith such spirits. Those infesting men were known as Succubi. Lady\nFrances Howard, daughter of the Earl of Suffolk, obtained a divorce\nfrom her husband because of his connection with a Succubus.\n\nOne of the most notable things connected with such accusation was the\nfrequent confession of its truthfulness. In 1459, a great number of\nwitches and wizards were burned,[45] who publicly confessed to their\nuse of unguents, to their dances, feasts, and their consort with\ndevils. A Vicar General[46] among the Laodunenses, at his death left\nconfession of his witch-rides, his copulation with devils, etc. Nor\nis the present age free from similar confessions. Tales of marriage\nwith spirits; of dead lovers paying nightly visits to the living\nbetrothed\u2014of Incubi consorting with willing or unwilling victims;\u2014all\nthose mediaeval statements regarding the intercourse of spirits of the\ndead with the living, all the customs of witchcraft and sorcery are\nparalleled in our midst today; and such statements do not come from\nthe ignorant and superstitious, but are made by persons of intelligence\nas within their own personal experience. During the witchcraft period\nfamiliarity of this nature with Incubi or Succubi was punished with\ndeath. Occasionally a person was found of sufficient saintliness to\nexorcise them as Elementals are said to have been exorcised during the\nlast half of the present century.[47] Devils were said to be very fond\nof women with beautiful hair and the direction of St. Paul in regard to\nwoman\u2019s keeping her head covered, was not always regarded as a sign of\ninferiority, but sometimes believed to be a precautionary admonition\nintended for the safety of christian women.[48] To this day the people\nof some eastern countries, men and women alike, will not expose the\nhead uncovered, because of the danger of thus giving entrance to\ncertain invisible beings of an injurious character; the Persians in\nparticular, wearing a turban or cloth of peculiar appearance called\nMathoomba. Confessions of magical and witchcraft practices were by no\nmeans rare even among the highest church dignitaries who implicated\nthemselves by such avowals. It was customary to attribute the practice\nof magic to the most holy fathers of the church. The popes from\nSylvester II to Gregory VII were all believed to have been magicians.\nBenedict IX was also thus accused. The difference between the practices\nof men and of women existed only in name. What was termed magic, among\nmen, was called witchcraft in woman. The one was rarely, the other\ninvariably, punished.\n\nThe practice of magic by the holy fathers was in furtherance of private\nor ecclesiastical advancement and therefore legitimate in the eye\nof the church. Yet, death-bed repentance was by no means infrequent.\nOf Pope Sylvester, it is said, that convinced of his sinfulness in\nhaving practiced magic, upon his death-bed he ordered his tongue to\nbe torn out and his hands cut off because he had sacrificed to the\ndevil; having learned the art when Bishop of Rheims. The significant\nquestion as to whether magnetism or hypnotism was not a custom of the\nchurch during the middle ages, as part of the \u201cmagic\u201d practiced by\nillustrious ecclesiastical dignitaries, is one of importance in view\nof recent hypnotic experiments. The fact that by means of \u201csuggestion\u201d\nthe responsibility for crime and the perpetration of overt criminal\nacts, can be made to fall upon persons entirely innocent of criminal\nintention, who, at the time are in a condition of irresponsibility,\nwhile the actual felon, the person who incited the act remains unknown\nand unsuspected, exceeds in malign power all that christendom has\ntaught regarding the evil one. Science trembles on the verge of\nimportant discoveries which may open the door for a full understanding\nof mediaeval witchcraft. The Scotch woman who asked if a person could\nnot be a witch without knowing it, had intuitive perception that by\nthe action of one person upon another, consequences could be induced\nof which the perpetrator was entirely guiltless.[49] Doubtless the\nstrange power which certain persons are capable of wielding over\nothers, at present calling the attention of scientific investigators,\nwas very common during the witchcraft period. Of this power the church\nas self-constituted guardian of the esoteric sciences was fully aware,\nfrequently making it the method through which envy, greed and revenge,\nsatisfied themselves while throwing the external appearance of guilt\nupon others. The most complete protection against such powers,\u2014a strong\nwill,\u2014it has ever been the aim of the church to destroy. Freedom of the\nwill has ever held place in clerical denunciation by side of \u201coriginal\nsin,\u201d and punished as sorcery.[50]\n\nA reminiscence of olden magic\u2014far older than the witchcraft period\nis found in the Masonic lamentation over the \u201clost word.\u201d This \u201clost\nword,\u201d the \u201csupreme word,\u201d by whose use all things can be subdued,\nis still the quest of a certain portion of the world; and sorcerers\nare still mentioned, who cannot die until a certain mysterious word\nis passed from \u201cmouth to ear.\u201d One of the latest occult societies\nextant, its membership widely extended, claims its origin from a\nmysterious word similarly passed. The Lord\u2019s Prayer demands the making\nwhole (hallowed), of the Father\u2019s name, evidently in the esoteric\nsense referring to that loss which dwells in the minds of men through\ntradition, a species of unwritten history. With the restoration of the\nfeminine in all its attributes to its rightful place everywhere, in\nrealms seen and unseen, the lost power will have been restored, the\n\u201clost name\u201d have been found. Numbers are closely connected with names,\ntheir early knowledge not only having preceded letters, but having\nbeen of much greater value, although after a time, letters and numbers\nbecame interchangeable. Certain persons devoted to the consideration\nof occult subjects therefore claim the lost power to abide in a number\nrather than in a word; sounds possessing great and peculiar influence\nin all magical formulas, their power largely depending upon inflection\nand tone or vibration; color and light are also called in aid during\nmagical formulas.[51]\n\nThe three most distinguishing features of the history of witchcraft\nwere its use for the enrichment of the church; for the advancement of\npolitical schemes; and for the gratification of private malice. Among\nthese the most influential reason was the emolument it brought to\nthe church. Although inquisitors and the clergy were the principal\nprosecutors, this period gave opportunity for the gratification of\nprivate malice, and persons imbued with secret enmity towards others,\nor who coveted their property, found ready occasion for the indulgence\nof that malice of covetousness; while the church always claimed\none-half, it divided the remainder of the accused\u2019s possessions between\nthe judge and the prosecutor. Under these circumstances accusation\nand conviction became convertible terms. The pretense under which\nthe church confiscated to itself all property of the accused was in\nline with its other sophistical teaching. It declared that the taint\nof witchcraft hung to all that had belonged to the condemned, whose\nfriends were not safe with such property in their possession. To make\nthis claim more effective, it was also asserted that the very fact of\none member of a family having fallen into the practice of this sin was\nvirtual proof that all were likewise attainted. Under this allegation\nof the church, a protest against such robbery was held as proof of the\nwitchcraft in the person so protesting. For the purpose of getting\nthe property of the accused admission of the crime was strenuously\npressed. In some countries the property was not forfeited unless such\nconfession took place. Persecution for witchcraft was if possible more\nviolent in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries than at any previous\ndate. By this period it had been introduced into America through the\ninstrumentality of the Puritan Fathers. It was no less wide-spread\nin Calvinistic Scotland, while it re-appeared with renewed vigor in\nCatholic countries. In the State of Venice it caused open rebellion\nagainst church authority, the Council forbidding the sentence of the\nInquisition to be carried out.[52]\n\nWhile only Venice in the whole of Europe defied the church upon this\npoint, emphatically protesting against such robbery of her citizens,\nshe ultimately succeeded in establishing a treaty with the pope whereby\nthe inheritance of the condemned was retained in the family. The\nrebellion of Venice against the church upon the question of property\nbelonging to its subjects, a question upon which the state held itself\npre-eminent, soon effected a radical change and had remarkable effect\nin lessening the number of accusations in that state.[53] Theft by the\nchurch in that direction, no longer possible, accusations of witchcraft\nsoon ceased; being no longer recognized as sin, after ceasing to bring\nmoney into the coffers of the church.\n\nIt is a fact noted by very many authorities that when witchcraft fell\nunder control of the state, its penalties were greatly lessened while\naccusations grew fewer. Yet for a period, even the civil power aided\nin spreading this belief, offering rewards for conviction; and as the\nchurch had grown immensely rich by means of witch persecution, so the\nstate increased its own power and wealth through similar means. The\ntheory of Bishop Butler that whole communities at times become mad,\nseems proven by the experience of this period. Upon no other ground but\nthat of universal insanity can excusable explanation be offered. But\nfor the church no such exculpation is possible, her teachings and her\nacts having created this wholesale madness of communities. Experience\nof her course during preceding centuries shows us that the persecution\nof the witchcraft period was but a continuation of her policy from the\nmoment of her existence\u2014that of universal dominion over the lives, the\nproperty, and the thoughts of mankind. Neither rank, nor learning,\nage, nor goodness freed a woman from accusation.[54] The mother of\nthe great astronomer, Kepler, a woman of noble family, died in chains\nhaving been accused of witchcraft.[55] The council of Bourges tortured\na reputed witch who was only known for her good works. A determined\neffort for the destruction of every virtue among women seemed made at\nthis period. In the middle of the XIII century, the Emperor Theodore\nLascarius caused a noble lady of his court to be entirely stripped of\nher clothing, and placed thus nude in a sack with cats, but even this\ntorture failed to extort a confession from her innocent lips. Even in\nAmerica, women of the purest lives, all of whose years had been given\nto good works, met with death from like accusation.\n\nSoon after the confirmation of celibacy as a dogma of the church, at\nthe time when the persecution for witchcraft so rapidly increased,\nwhich was also the period of the greatest oppression under feudalism\u2014a\npeculiar and silent rebellion against both church and state took place\namong the peasantry of Europe, who assembled in the seclusion of night\nand the forest, their only place of safety in which to speak of their\nwrongs. Freedom for the peasant was found only at night. Known as\n\u201cBirds of the Night,\u201d \u201cFoxes,\u201d \u201cBirds of Prey,\u201d it was only at night\nassemblages that they enjoyed the least happiness or freedom. Here\nwith wives and daughters, they met to talk over the gross outrages\nperpetrated upon them. Out of their foul wrongs grew the sacrifice of\nthe \u201cBlack Mass\u201d with women as officiating priestess, in which the\nrites of the church were travestied in solemn mockery, and defiance\ncast at that heaven which permitted the priest and the lord alike\nto trample upon all the sacred rights of womanhood, in the name of\nreligion and law. During this mocking service a true sacrifice of\nwheat was offered to the \u201cSpirit of the Earth\u201d who made wheat to grow,\nand loosened birds bore aloft to the \u201cGod of Freedom\u201d the sighs and\nprayers of the serfs asking that their descendants might be free. We\ncan but regard this sacrifice as the most acceptable offering made in\nthat day of moral degradation; a sacrifice and a prayer more holy than\nall the ceremonials of the church. This service where woman by virtue\nof her greater despair acted both as altar and priest, opened with\nthe following address and prayer. \u201cI will come before Thine altar,\nbut save me, O, Lord, from the faithless and violent man!\u201d (from the\npriest and the baron).[56] From these assemblages known as \u201cSabbat\u201d or\n\u201cthe Sabbath\u201d from the old Pagan mid-summer-day sacrifice to \u201cBacchus\nSabiesa\u201d rose the belief in the \u201cWitches Sabbath,\u201d which for several\nhundred years formed a source of accusation against women, sending\ntens of thousands to most horrible deaths. The thirteenth century was\nabout the central period of this rebellion of the serfs against God and\nthe church when they drank each other\u2019s blood as a sacrament, while\nsecretly speaking of their oppression.[57] The officiating priestess\nwas usually about thirty years old, having experienced all the wrongs\nthat woman suffered under church and state. She was entitled \u201cThe\nElder\u201d yet in defiance of that God to whom the serfs under church\nteaching ascribed all their wrongs, she was also called \u201cThe Devil\u2019s\nbride.\u201d This period was especially that of woman\u2019s rebellion against\nthe existing order of religion and government in both church and\nstate. While man was connected with her in these ceremonies as father,\nhusband, brother, yet all accounts show that to woman as the most\ndeeply wronged, was accorded all authority. Without her, no man was\nadmitted to this celebration, which took place in the seclusion of the\nforest and under the utmost secrecy. Offerings were made to the latest\ndead and the most newly born of the district, and defiance hurled\nagainst that God to whose injustice the church had taught woman that\nall her wrongs were due.\n\nWomen\u2019s knowledge of herbs was made use of in a preparation of Solanae\nwhich mixed with mead, beer, cider, or farcy\u2014the strong drink of\nthe west\u2014disposed the oppressed serfs to joyous dancing and partial\nforgetfulness of their wrongs during these popular night gatherings of\nthe Sabbath.[58] It became \u201cthe comforter\u201d throwing the friendly mantle\nof partial oblivion over the mental suffering of \u201chim who had been so\nwronged\u201d as it had done for the mother\u2019s physical pain. \u201cThe Sabbath\u201d\nwas evidently the secret protest of men and women whom church and state\nin combination had utterly oppressed and degraded. For centuries there\nseemed no hope for this class of humanity\u2014for this degraded portion of\nchristendom\u2014yet, even then women held position of superiority in these\nnight assemblages. Among the \u201cPapers of the Bastile,\u201d a more extended\naccount of woman officiating as her own altar, is to be found.[59]\n\nThe injustice of man towards woman under the laws of both Church and\nState engrafted upon society, have resulted in many evils unsuspected\nby the world, which if known would strike it with amazement and terror.\nEven Louis Lingg, one of the condemned Chicago anarchists, young,\nhandsome, of vigorous intellect, who uncomplainingly accepted for\nhimself that death he had decreed to the representatives to law; even\nhe, who neither asked mercy nor accepted the death decreed him, was\nthe outgrowth of woman\u2019s wrongs. His mother with whom his fate was\nthrown, a woman of the people in Hungary, belonging to a powerless\nclass crushed for centuries, the plaything of those above them;\u2014his\nfather, a representative of the aristocracy descended from a long line\nof military ancestors, leaving him, as the church had taught him, to\nthe sole care of the mother he had betrayed, it was impossible for this\nboy not to find in his breast a turmoil of conflicting emotions, but\nabove all, ruling all, a hatred of entrenched oppression; nor did his\nfather\u2019s military blood fail to play its part, leading to the final\nresult which affrighted a city and closed his young life.\n\nIn looking at the history of witchcraft we see three striking points\nfor consideration:\n\nFirst: That women were chiefly accused.\n\nSecond: That men believing in woman\u2019s inherent wickedness, and\nunderstanding neither the mental nor the physical peculiarities of her\nbeing, ascribed all her idiosyncrasies to witchcraft.\n\nThird: That the clergy inculcated the idea that woman was in league\nwith the devil, and that strong intellect, remarkable beauty, or\nunusual sickness were in themselves proof of this league.\n\nCatholics and protestants yet agree in holding women as the chief\naccessory of the devil.[60]\n\nThe belief in witches indeed seemed intensified after the reformation.\nLuther said: \u201cI would have no compassion for a witch, I would burn them\nall.\u201d He looked upon those who were afflicted with blindness, lameness,\nor idiocy from birth,[61] as possessed of demons and there is record\nof his attempt to drown an afflicted child in whom he declared no soul\nexisted, its body being animated by the devil alone. But a magistrate\nmore enlightened or more humane than the great reformer, interfered\nto save the child\u2019s life. Were Luther on earth again today with the\nsentiments of his lifetime, he would regard the whole community as\nmad. Asylums for the blind, the dumb and idiots, curative treatment\nfor cripples and all persons naturally deformed, would be to him a\ndirect intervention with the ways of providence. The belief of this\ngreat reformer proves the folly of considering a man wise, because\nhe is pious. Religion and humanity were as far apart with him after\nthe reformation as while he was yet a monk. The fruits of monasticism\ncontinued their effects, and his latter life showed slight intellectual\nor spiritual advancement. As late as 1768 John Wesley declared the\ngiving up of witchcraft to be in effect giving up the Bible. Such\nwas his low estimate of woman that he regarded his own wife as too\nsinful to conduct family prayers, although to Susannah, equally with\nJohn, is Methodism indebted for its existence. In Great Britain, the\nrapid increase of belief in witchcraft after the reformation was\nespecially noticeable. The act of Parliament which declared witchcraft\nto be felony, confirmed under Henry VIII, was again confirmed under\nElizabeth. In England the reformation brought with it great increase\nof tyranny both civil and ecclesiastical. Under Henry VIII many new\ntreasons were created. This king who sent the largest proportion\nof his six wives to the headsman\u2019s block, who neither hesitated at\nincest or at casting the taint of illegitimacy upon the daughter who\nsucceeded him upon the throne, could not be expected to show justice\nor mercy to subject women. The penal laws of even celibate Elizabeth\nwere largely the result of the change in religion of the realm.[62] The\nqueen, absolute in Church as in State, who \u201cbent priest and prelate\nto her fiery will,\u201d caused the laws to bear with equal severity upon\nprotestant and catholic. Under her \u201cA Statute of Uniformity for\nAbolishing Diversity of Opinions,\u201d was enacted, and the clergy were\ncontinued in the enjoyment of secular power. Women received no favor.\nThe restrictions of the catholic church in regard to the residence\nof a priest\u2019s mother or sister in his house were now extended to the\nlaity. No man was permitted to give his widowed mother or orphan sister\na home in his house without permission from the authorities, and then\nbut for a limited time. Single women were allowed no control over their\nown actions. Twelve years was the legal marriageable age for a girl,\nafter which period if still unmarried she could be bound out at the\noption of the court.[63] Nor did the Cromwellian period lessen woman\u2019s\npersecution. The number of witches executed under the Presbyterian\ndomination of the Long Parliament according to a list[64] that has\nbeen preserved, amounted to between three and four thousand persons.\nThe legal profession no less than the clerical asserted its belief in\nwitchcraft, referring to the Bible in confirmation. Blackstone said:\n\n    To deny the possibility, nay the actual existence of\n    witchcraft and sorcery is at once flatly to contradict the\n    revealed word of God, in various passages of the Old and New\n    Testament and the thing itself is a truth to which every\n    nation in the world hath in its turn borne testimony, either\n    by examples seemingly well attested, or by prohibiting laws.\n\nThe protestant clergy equally with the catholic priesthood, were\ncharged with fostering a belief in witchcraft for the purpose of gain.\nAt no period of the world has a more diabolical system of robbery\nexisted. For the sake of a few pounds or pence, the most helpless\nof human beings, made helpless through church teaching as to their\nunworthiness, were by the church daily brought under accusation,\nexposing them to a cruel death at the hand of irresponsible tyranny.\nThe system of thuggery in India, shines white by side of this christian\nsystem of robbery, inaugurated by the church and sustained by the\nstate. In the name of religion, the worst crimes against humanity have\never been perpetrated. On the accession of James I he ordered the\nlearned work of Reginald Scott against witchcraft, to be burned.[65]\nThis was in accordance with the act of Parliament 1605-9 which ratified\na belief in witchcraft in the three kingdoms. At this date the tragedy\nof Macbeth appeared, deeply tinged with the belief of the times. A\nfew persons maintaining possession of their senses, recognized the\nfact that fear, apprehension and melancholy gave birth to the wildest\nself-delusions; medical experience recording many instances of this\ncharacter. In an age when ignorance and superstition prevailed among\nthe people at large, while vice, ignorance, and cupidity were in equal\nforce among those in power, the strangest beliefs became prevalent.\n\nSir George Mackenzie, the eminent king\u2019s advocate of Scotland,\nconducting many trials for witchcraft, became convinced it was largely\na subject of fear and delusion. He said:\n\n    Those poor persons who are ordinarily accused of this crime\n    are poor ignorant creatures, and ofttimes women who understood\n    not the nature of what they are accused of, and many mistake\n    their own fears and apprehensions for witchcraft, of which I\n    shall give you two instances; one of a poor man, who after he\n    had confessed witchcraft being asked how he saw the devil,\n    he answered \u201clike flies dancing about a candle.\u201d Another of\n    a woman who asked sincerely; when accused, \u201cif a woman might\n    be a witch and not know it?\u201d And it is dangerous then. Those\n    who of all others are the most simple should be tried for a\n    crime which of all others is the most mysterious. Those poor\n    creatures when defamed became so confused with fear and the\n    close prison in which they were kept, and so starved for want\n    of meals and sleep (either of which wants is enough to destroy\n    the strongest reason), when men are confounded with fear and\n    apprehension they will imagine things very ridiculous and\n    absurd. Melancholy often makes men imagine they are horses.\n    Most of these poor creatures are tortured by their keepers\n    who are persuaded they do God good service. Most of all that\n    were taken were tortured in this manner and this usage was the\n    ground of their complaints.\n\nTo such an extent was this persecution carried even in protestant\nScotland that accused women sometimes admitted their guilt that they\nmight die and thus escape from a world where even if cleared, they\nwould ever after be looked upon with suspicion. Sir George Mackenzie\nvisiting some women who had confessed, one of them told him \u201cunder\nsecrecie\u201d that:\n\n    She had not confessed because she was guilty but being a poor\n    creature who wrought for her meat and being defined for a\n    witch, she knew she would starve, for no person thereafter\n    would give her either meat or lodging, and that all men would\n    beat her and hound dogs at her and therefore she desired to\n    be out of the world, whereupon she wept bitterly and upon her\n    knees called upon God to witness what she said.\n\nEven under all the evidence of the persecution and cruel tortures that\ninnocent women endured during the witchcraft period, no effort of the\nimagination can portray the sufferings of an accused woman. The death\nthis poor woman chose, in voluntarily admitting a crime of which she\nwas innocent, rather than to accept a chance of life with the name\nof \u201cwitch\u201d clinging to her, was one of the most painful of which we\ncan conceive, although in the diversity of torture inflicted upon the\nwitch it is scarcely possible to say which one was the least agonizing.\nIn no country has the devil ever been more fully regarded as a real\npersonage, ever on the watch for souls, than in Christian Scotland. Sir\nGeorge says:\n\n    Another told me she was afraid the devil would challenge a\n    right to her soul as the minister said when he desired her to\n    confess; and therefore she desired to die.[66]\n\nThe following is an account of the material used and the expenses\nattending the execution of two witches in Scotland.\n\n    For 10 loads of coal to burn the witches     \u00a33 06.8\n     \u201c  A tar barrell                             0 14.0\n     \u201c  towes                                     0 06.0\n     \u201c  hurdles to be jumps for them              3 10.0\n     \u201c  making of them                            0 08.0\n     \u201c  one to go to Tinmouth for the lord to\n          sit upon the assize as judge            0 06.0\n     \u201c  the executioner for his pains             8 14.0\n     \u201c  his expenses there                        0 16.4\n\nWhat was the special office of the executioner does not appear; whether\nto drag the victims upon hurdles, to the places of burning, to light\nthe fire, to keep it well blazing, is not mentioned although his\noffice was important and a well paid one; eight pounds and fourteen\nshillings above his expenses, sixteen shillings and four pence more;\nin all nine pounds, ten shillings and four pence, a sum equal to one\nhundred and fifty or two hundred dollars of the present day. At these\nrates it was easy to find men for the purpose desired. It is worthy of\nnote that under the frequency of torture the payment lessened. Strange\nexperiences sometimes befell those who were tortured: a cataleptic or\nhypnotic state coming on amid their most cruel sufferings causing an\nentire insensibility to pain. To the church this condition was sure\nevidence of help from Satan and caused a renewal of torture as soon as\nsensibility returned.\n\n    In the year 1639 a poor widow called Lucken, who was accused\n    of being a witch and sentenced to the rack at Helmstadt\n    having been cruelly tortured by the screw, was seized with\n    convulsions, spoke high German and a strange language and\n    then fell asleep on the rack and appeared to be dead. The\n    circumstance related to the juricounsul at Helmstadt she was\n    ordered to be again submitted to the torture. Then protesting\n    she was a good Christian while the executioner stretched\n    her on the rack, whipt her with rods and sprinkled her with\n    burning brimstone, she fell again fast asleep and could not by\n    any means be awakened.[67]\n\nBoiling heretics and malefactors alive, commonly in oil but\noccasionally in water, was practiced throughout Europe until a\ncomparatively late period. In fact as a civil punishment in England it\ndates only to 1531 under Henry VII. The \u201cChronicle of the Gray Friars\u201d\nmentioned a man let down by a chain into a kettle of hot water until\ndead. We have expense items of this form of torture, in the boiling of\nFriar Stone of Canterbury.\n\n      Paid two men that sat by the kettle and boiled him         1s\n    To three men that carried his quarters to the gate and set\n      them up                                                    1s\n    For a woman that scoured the kettle                          2d\n\nBoiling was a form of torture frequently used for women. The official\nrecords of Paris show the price paid for torture in France was\nlarger than in England; boiling in oil in the former country costing\nforty eight francs as against one shilling in the latter. It must be\nremembered these official prices for torture, are not taken from the\nrecords of China or Persia, two thousand years ago, nor from among the\nsavages of Patagonia, Australia or Guinea, but two European countries\nof highest Christian civilization within the last three hundred years.\n\nThe following list of prices for dealing with criminals is taken from\nthe official records in Paris:\n\n      For boiling a criminal in oil, francs                 48\n    For tearing a living man in four quarters with horses   30\n    Execution with the sword                                20\n    Breaking on the wheel                                   10\n    Mounting the head on a pole                             10\n    Quartering a man                                        36\n    Hanging a man                                           29\n    Burying a man                                            2\n    Impaling a man alive                                    14\n    Burning a witch alive                                   28\n    Flaying a man alive                                     28\n    Drowning an infanticide in a sack                       24\n    Throwing a suicide\u2019s body among the offal               20\n    Putting to the torture                                   4\n    For applying the thumb-screw                             2\n    For applying the boot                                    4\n    Torture by fire                                         10\n    Putting a man in the pillory                             2\n    Whipping a man                                           4\n    Branding with a red-hot iron                            10\n    Cutting off the tongue, the ears and the nose           10\n\nBurning a witch, probably because of its greater frequency, cost\nbut little over one-half as much as boiling in oil. The battle of\ngladiators with wild beasts in the Coliseum at Rome in reign of Nero,\nhad in it an element of hope. Not the priesthood but the populace were\nthe arbiters of the gladiator\u2019s destiny, giving always a chance for\nlife in cases of great personal bravery. But in France and England the\necclesiastical code was so closely united with the civil as to be one\nwith it; compassion equally with justice was forgotten, despair taking\ntheir place. Implements of torture were of frequent invention, the\nthought of the age turning in the direction of human suffering, new\nmethods were continually devised. Many of these instruments are now on\nexhibition in foreign museums. One called \u201cThe Spider\u201d a diabolical\niron machine with curved claws, for tearing out a woman\u2019s breasts\nwas shown in the United States but a few years since. In Protestant\nCalvinistic Scotland, where hatred of \u201cpopery\u201d was most pronounced,\nthe persecution of witches raged with the greatest violence, and\nmultitudes of women died shrieking to heaven for that mercy denied them\nby Christian men upon earth. It was in Scotland after the reformation\nthat the most atrocious tortures for the witch were invented, one of\nthe most diabolical being known as \u201cthe Witches\u2019 Bridle.\u201d By means of\na loop passed about the head, this instrument of four iron prongs was\nfastened in the mouth. One of the prongs pressed down the tongue, one\ntouched the palate, the other two doing their barbarous work upon the\ninner side of the cheeks. As this instrument prevented speech thus\nallowing no complaint upon the part of the victim, it was preferred\nto many other methods of torture.[68] The woman upon whom it was used\nwas suspended against a wall by a loop at the back, barely touching\nthe floor with her toes. The iron band around her neck rendered her\npowerless to move, she was unable to speak or scarcely to breathe.\nEvery muscle was strained in order to sustain herself and prevent\nentire suffocation, the least movement causing cruel wounds by means of\nthe prongs in her mouth.\n\nThe victims were mostly aged women who having reared a family, spending\ntheir youth and beauty in this self-denying work, had lived until time\nthreading their hair with silver had also robbed cheek and lip of\ntheir rosy hue, dimmed the brilliancy of the eye and left wrinkles in\nplace of youthful dimples. Such victims were left for hours, until the\nmalignity of their persecutors was satisfied, or until death after long\ntorture released them from a world where under the laws of both Church\nand State they found their sex to be a crime. Old women for no other\nreason than that they were old, were held to be the most susceptible to\nthe assaults of the devil, and the persons most especially endowed with\nsupernatural powers for evil. Blackstone refers to this persecution of\naged women in his reference to a statute of the Eight Henry.[69] We\ndiscover a reason for this intense hatred of old women in the fact that\nwoman has chiefly been looked upon from a sensual view by christian\nmen, the church teaching that she was created solely for man\u2019s sensual\nuse. Thus when by reason of declining years she no longer attracted\nthe sensual admiration of man, he regarded her as having forfeited all\nright to life. England\u2019s most learned judge, Sir Mathew Hale, declared\nhis belief in the agency of the devil in producing diseases through the\naid of old women. The prosecution against this class raged with unusual\nviolence in Scotland under the covenanters.\n\nTo deny the existence of especially evil supernatural powers, in old\nwomen, was held as an evidence of skepticism exposing the doubting\nperson to like suspicion. Great numbers of women were put to death at\na time; so common indeed was the sight as to cause but little comment.\nA Scotch traveler casually mentioned having seen nine women burning\ntogether at Bath in 1664. Knox himself suffered a woman to be burned\nat St. Andrews whom one word from him would have saved. Father Tanner\nspeaks of \u201cthe multitude\u201d of witches who were daily brought under the\ntorture that was constantly practiced by the church.\n\nThe reformers were more cruel than those from whose superstitious\nteachings they professed to have escaped. All the tortures of the old\nchurch were repeated and an unusual number of new and diabolical\nones invented to induce confession. Nor were these tortures applied\nto the suspected witch alone; her young and tender children against\nwhom no accusation had been brought, were sometimes tortured in her\npresence in order to wring confession from the mother. Towards the end\nof the sixteenth century, a woman accused of witchcraft endured the\nmost intense torture, constantly asserting her innocence. Failing to\nsecure confession, her husband, her son, and finally her young daughter\nof seven short years were tortured in her presence, the latter being\nsubjected to a species of thumb-screw called \u201cthe pinniwinkies\u201d which\nbrought blood from under the finger nails with a pain terribly severe.\nWhen these were applied to the baby hands, to spare her innocent\nchild, the mother confessed herself a witch; but after enduring all\nthe agonies of torture upon herself and all she was made to suffer in\nthe persons of her innocent family, confession having been obtained\nthrough this diabolical means, she was still condemned to the flames,\nundergoing death at the stake a blazing torch of fire, and died calling\nupon God for that mercy she could not find at the hands of Christian\nmen.[70] In protestant Scotland as in catholic countries, witchcraft\nwas under control of the clergy. When a woman fell under suspicion of\nbeing a witch, the minister denounced her from the pulpit, forbade\nany one to harbor or shelter her and exhorted his parishioners to\ngive evidence against her.[71] She was under ban similar to the\nexcommunicate of the catholic church, a being outside of human help or\nsympathy. In protestant as in catholic countries the woman accused was\nvirtually dead. She was excommunicated from humanity; designated and\ndenounced as one whom all must shun, to whom no one must give food or\nlodging or speech or shelter; life was not worth the living. To afford\nsuch a one aid was to hazard accusation as a confederate. The first\ncomplaint was made to the clergy and Kirk Sessions.[72]\n\nNotwithstanding two hundred years of such experience, when by an\nact of parliament in 1784, the burning and hanging of witches was\nabolished, the General Assembly of the Calvinistic church of Scotland\n\u201cconfessed\u201d this act \u201cas a great national sin.\u201d Not only were the\ncourts and the church alert for the detection of alleged witches, but\nthe populace persecuted many to death.[73] Deserted by her friends, the\nsuspected witch was beaten, worried by dogs, denied food and prevented\nfrom sleeping.[74] Contrary to equity and the principles of modern\nlaw, the church sought in every way to entrap victims into giving\nevidence against themselves. Once a person was accused, no effort was\nspared to induce confession. Holding control over the soul as well\nas the body, enquiry into these crimes was pushed by every method\nthat human ingenuity could devise. The kirk became the stronghold of\nsuperstition; both rewards and punishments were used as inducements\ntowards ferreting out witches. All ties of natural affection were\nignored, the kirk preaching it to be a matter of greater duty to inform\nagainst one\u2019s nearest relatives than against strangers. Unlike the\ntheory of Roman civil law which held the accused innocent until proven\nguilty, ecclesiastical law everywhere produced a condition under which\nthe accused was held guilty from the moment of accusation. During\nthe witchcraft period the minds of people were trained in a single\ndirection. The chief lesson of the church that betrayal of friends was\nnecessary to one\u2019s own salvation, created an intense selfishness. All\nhumanitarian feeling was lost in the effort to secure heaven at the\nexpense of others, even those most closely bound by ties of nature\nand affection. Mercy, tenderness, compassion were all obliterated.\nTruthfulness escaped from the Christian world; fear, sorrow and cruelty\nreigned pre-eminent. All regard that existed for others grew up outside\nof church teaching and was shown at the hazard of life. Contempt and\nhatred of woman was inculcated with greater intensity; love of power\nand treachery were parts of the selfish lessons of the church. All\nreverence for length of years was lost. The sorrows and sufferings of a\nlong life appealed to no sympathetic cord in the heart. Instead of the\ntenderness and care due to aged women, they were so frequently accused\nof witchcraft that for years it was an unusual thing for an old woman\nin the north of Europe to die in her bed. Besides the thousands of\naccused who committed suicide in order to escape the horrors incident\nupon trial, many others tired of life amid so much humiliation and\nsuffering, falsely accused themselves, preferring a death by the\ntorture of fire to a life of endless isolation and persecution. An\nEnglish woman on her way to the stake, with a greatness of soul born\nof despair, freed her judges from responsibility, by saying to the\npeople, \u201cDo not blame my judges. I wished to put an end to my own\nself. My parents keep aloof from me; my own husband has denied me. I\ncould not live on without disgrace. I longed for death and so I told a\nlie.\u201d The most eminent legal minds became incompetent to form correct\njudgment. Having received the church as of divine origin, and its\npriesthood as the representatives of the divinity, they were no longer\ncapable of justice. Old and ignorant women upon the most frivolous\ntestimony of young children were condemned to death. One of the most\nnotable examples of the power of superstitious belief to darken the\nunderstanding, is that of Sir Matthew Hale, living in the seventeenth\ncentury. He was spoken of by his contemporaries as one of the most\neminent jurists of the world, whose integrity, learning and knowledge\nof law were scarcely to be paralleled in any age, and yet he became so\nentirely convinced of the diabolism of two women as to condemn them to\ndeath while sitting at Bury St. Edmunds, without even summing up the\nevidence. The learned and famous Sir Thomas Browne, who was present,\ncoincided in the justice of this decision, although but a short time\npreviously he had published a work against superstition. The testimony\nupon which these women were condemned was of the most petty and\nworthless character, yet among all the persons present at the trial,\nbut one or two seemed inclined to doubt the sufficiency of the evidence.\n\nThe records of this remarkable trial were preserved to the world by\na gentleman who privately took a report for his own use, which was\npublished in pamphlet form a number of years afterwards. This extremely\nrare book is not to be found even in the Congressional Library at\nWashington, but the Supreme Court Library owns a copy from which this\nreport is taken:\n\n    Trial March 10, 1664 by Sir Matthew Hale, Knight, Lord Chief\n    Baron of his Majesty\u2019s Court of Exchequer held before a judge\n    who for his integrity, learning and wisdom hardly any age\n    before or since could parallel; he not only took a great deal\n    of pains and spent much time in this trial himself, but had\n    the assistance and opinion of several other very eminent and\n    learned persons; so that this was the most perfect narrative\n    of anything of this nature hitherto extant.\n\n    The persons tried were Ann Durant, or Drury, Susan Chandler,\n    Elizabeth Pacy. The celebrated Dr. Brown of Norwich who had\n    written a work against witchcraft, was present and after\n    hearing the evidence expressed himself as clearly of the\n    opinion the persons were bewitched, and said in Denmark lately\n    there had been a great discovery of witches who used the\n    same way of afflicting persons by the agency of pins. This\n    trial took place in the sixteenth year of Charles II. The\n    witnesses were two children of eleven and nine years who fell\n    into fits, vomiting pins and nails. Sargeant Keeling asserted\n    deception on part of the witnesses. The Court appointed Lord\n    Cornwallis, Sir Edmund Bacon and Sargeant Keeling as committee\n    to examine the girl alone, when they became fully satisfied\n    of her imposture but without convincing the learned judge who\n    contrary to all justice and law did not sum up the evidence,\n    but gave the great weight of his opinion in favor of their\n    guilt saying: \u201cThat there are such creatures as witches,\n    I have not doubt at all. For First, Scripture has offered\n    so much. Second, the wisdom of all nations has propounded\n    laws against such persons, which is an argument of their\n    confidence of such a crime. And such has been the judgment\n    of this kingdom as appears by that Act of Parliament which\n    hath provided punishments proportionate to the guilt of this\n    offense, and desired them strictly to observe the evidence;\n    and desired the great God of Heaven to direct their hearts\n    in the weighty things they had so heard. For to condemn\n    the innocent and to let the guilty go free, were both an\n    abomination to the Lord. Within half an hour the jury returned\n    a verdict of guilty on thirteen counts. The judge and all the\n    court were fully satisfied with the verdict and therefore gave\n    judgment against the witches that they should be hanged.\n\n    The evidence was of the most paltry character; as when out\n    of door a little thing like a bee flew upon the witness\n    face, putting a ten penny nail with a broad head into her\n    mouth. Lath nails and pins said to have been vomited by the\n    children were produced in court. When arraigned the accused\n    pleaded not guilty nor did they ever change this plea. Great\n    pressure was upon them to induce confession, but they could\n    not be prevailed upon to thus criminate themselves and were\n    executed the seventeenth of March, just one week after trial,\n    confessing nothing.\n\n    This trial is the more remarkable that confessions usually\n    deemed the best of evidence, were not obtained, these poor\n    illiterate, persecuted women braving all the learning of the\n    great judge and power of the kingdom in maintaining to the\n    last the assertion of their innocence. The minutes of this\n    trial were taken by a gentleman in attendance upon the court\n    and were not published until 1716 when the record fell into\n    the hands of a person who saw its value \u201cso that,\u201d he says,\n    \u201cbeing the most complete minutes of anything of this nature\n    hitherto extant, made me unwilling to deprive the world of it;\n    which is the sole motive that induced me to publish it.\u201d\n\nNot alone the clergy and the legal fraternity wrought in unison, but\nthe medical as well, gave the weight of their authority in favor of\nwitchcraft; and many persons needing the wisest medical appliance for\ntheir relief from disease were executed as witches. Half-witted and\ninsane persons met with the same persecution as old women. It was an\nera of the strong against the weak, the powerful against the helpless.\nEven Sir Thomas Browne, himself a physician, regarded the fainting\nfits to which one of the accused women had long been subject as fuller\nevidence of her guilt. In his character of medical examiner he asserted\nthat the devil had taken opportunity of her natural fits, to operate\nwith her malice.\n\nAn almost equally notable trial as that of Bury St. Edmunds before\nSir Matthew Hale, was known as the Sommers Trial, or that of the\n\u201cLancashire Witches,\u201d in 1612. Among the accused were two extremely\naged women decrepit and nearly blind, tottering into second childhood,\nincapable of understanding whereof they were accused, or the evidence\nagainst them which, as in the case argued before Sir Matthew Hale, was\nof the most worthless character. One needs but refer to the records in\norder to learn the extreme age, ignorance and many infirmities of these\nwomen. But as was the case in Scotland, these weaknesses were used as\nevidences of guilt. The feeble mental and physical condition of \u201cthe\nLancashire witches,\u201d their great age and failing power were used as\nevidence for their condemnation. From published accounts of this trial,\nwe learn that:\n\n    This Annie Whittle, alias Chattox, was a very old withered and\n    decrepit creature, her sight almost gone, a dangerous witch of\n    very long continuance, her lips ever chattering and walking\n    (talking)? but no one knew what. She was next in order to that\n    wicked, fierce bird of mischief, old Demdike.\n\nThis poor old creature \u201cconfessed\u201d that Robert Mutter had offered\ninsult to her married daughter; and the court decreed this was a fair\nproof of her having bewitched him to his death. No condemnation of the\nman who had thus insulted her daughter, but death for the aged mother\nwho had resented this insult. Designated as \u201cOld Demdike, a fierce\nbird of mischief\u201d this woman of four score years of age, had not only\nbrought up a large family of her own, but her grand children had fallen\nto her care. She had lived a blameless life of over eighty years, much\nof it devoted to the care of children and children\u2019s children. But when\ndecrepit and almost blind she fell under suspicion of a crime held\nby Church and State as of the most baleful character, her blameless\nand industrious life proved of no avail against this accusation. She\nseems to have originally been a woman of great force of character\nand executive ability, but frightened at an accusation she could not\nunderstand and overpowered by all the dread majesty of the law into\nwhose merciless power she had fallen, she \u201cconfessed\u201d to communion with\na demon spirit which appeared to her in the form of a brown dog.[75]\nFrom a work entitled The Sommers Trials, the form of indictment is\nlearned.[76]\n\n\n    INDICTMENT.\n\n    This Annie Whittle, alias Chattox, of the Forest of Pendle, in\n    the countie of Lancaster, widow, being indicted for that she\n    feloniously had practiced, used and exercised divers wicked\n    and divelish artes, called witchcraftes, inchantments, charms\n    and sorceries, in and upon one Robert Nutter of Greenhead, in\n    the Forest of Pendle, in the countie of Lanc; and by force of\n    the same witchcraft, feloniously the sayed Robert Nutter had\n    killed, contra pacem, etc. Being at the barre was arraigned.\n    To this indictment, upon her arraignment, she pleaded, not\n    guiltie; and for the tryall of her life put herself upon God\n    and her country.\n\nOne of the chief witnesses at this trial was a child of nine years.[77]\nUpon seeing her own daughter arraigned against her, the mother broke\ninto shrieks and lamentations pleading with the girl not to falsify the\ntruth and thus condemn her own mother to death. The judges instead of\nseeing in this agony a proof of the mother\u2019s innocence looked upon it\nas an attempt to thwart the ends of justice by demoniac influence, and\nthe child having declared that she could not confess in her mother\u2019s\npresence, the latter was removed from the room, and as under the\nInquisition, the testimony was given in the absence of the accused.\nThe child then said that her mother had been a witch for three or four\nyears, the devil appearing in the form of a brown dog, Bill. These\ntrials taking place in protestant England, two hundred years after the\nreformation, prove the worthless nature of witchcraft testimony, as\nwell as the superstition, ignorance and entire unfitness for the bench\nof those men called the highest judicial minds in England. The church\nhaving almost entirely destroyed freedom of will and the expression\nof individual thought, men came to look upon authority and right as\nsynonymous. Works bearing the stamp of the legal fraternity soon\nappeared. In 1618 a volume entitled, \u201cThe County Justice,\u201d by Michael\nDalton, Gentleman of Lincoln Inn, was published in London, its chief\nobject to give directions, based upon this trial, for the discovery of\nwitches.\n\n    Now against these witches the justice of the peace may not\n    always expect direct evidence, seeing all their works are\n    works of darkness and no witness permitted with them to accuse\n    them, and therefore for their better discovery I thought good\n    here to set down certain observations out of the methods of\n    discovery of the witches that were arraigned at Lancaster, A.\n    D. 1612 before Sir James Altham and Sir Edward Bromley, judges\n    of Assize there.\n\n    1. They have ordinarily a familiar or spirit which appeareth\n    to them.\n\n    2. The said familiar hath some bigg or place upon their body\n    where he sucketh them.\n\n    3. They have often pictures of clay or wax (like a man, etc.)\n    found in their house.\n\n    4. If the dead body bleed upon the witches touching it.\n\n    5. The testimony of the person hurt upon his death.\n\n    6. The examination and confession of the children or servants\n    of the witch.\n\n    7. Their own voluntary confession which exceeds all other\n    evidence.\n\nAt this period many persons either in hope of a reward[78] or\nbecause they believed they were thus aiding the cause of justice,\nkept private notebooks of instruction in the examination of witches,\nand new varieties were constantly discovered. When witchcraft by\nAct of Parliament was decreed felony this statute gave the legal\nfraternity double authority for a belief in its existence. Even Sir\nGeorge Mackenzie although convinced by his own experience that many\npersons were wrongfully accused of witchcraft, still declared that its\nexistence could not be doubted, \u201cseeing that our law ordains it to be\npunished with death.\u201d The most fatal record the world possesses of the\nplague is that of the fourteenth century, known as the \u201cBlack Death,\u201d\nwhen whole villages were depopulated and more than half the inhabitants\nof Europe were destroyed. It will aid in forming our judgment as to the\nextent of woman\u2019s persecution for witchcraft, to remember it has been\nestimated that the number of deaths from this cause equalled those of\nthe plague.\n\nThe American Colonies adopted all the unjust previsions of European\nchristianity as parts of their own religion and government. Fleeing\nfrom persecution, the Puritans yet brought with them the spirit of\npersecution in the belief of woman\u2019s inferiority and wickedness, as\ntaught by the church from whence they had fled. The \u201cDucking Stool\u201d\nfor women who too vigorously protested against their wrongs, and\nthe \u201cScarlet Letter\u201d of shame for the woman who had transgressed the\nmoral law, her companion in sin going free, or as in England, sitting\nas juror in the box, or judge upon the bench. With them also came a\nbelief in witchcraft, which soon caused Massachusetts Colony to enact\na law ordering suspected women to be stripped naked, their bodies to\nbe carefully examined by a male \u201cwitch pricker\u201d to see if there was\nnot the devil\u2019s mark upon them. The public whipping of half naked\nwomen at the cart\u2019s tail for the crime of religious free thought soon\nfollowed, a union of both religious and judicial punishment; together\nwith banishment of women from the Colony for daring to preach Christ\nas they understood his doctrines. These customs more barbarous than\nthose of the savages whose home they had invaded, were the pleasing\nwelcome given to the pioneer woman settlers of America by the husbands\nand fathers, judges and ministers of that period, with which the words\n\u201cPlymouth Rock,\u201d \u201cMay Flower\u201d and \u201cPilgrim Fathers\u201d are so intimately\nassociated. The same persecution of aged women took place in New\nEngland as in old England, while children of even more tender years\nwere used as witnesses against their mothers if accused of witchcraft,\nor were themselves imprisoned upon like suspicion. The village of\nSalem, Massachusetts, is indissolubly connected with witchcraft, for\nthere the persecution raged most fiercely, involving its best women in\nruin. One of the oldest buildings still extant in the United States is\n\u201cThe Witch House\u201d of that place, erected in 1631, although it was sixty\none years later before this persecution reached its height.\n\n    A terrible summer for Salem village and its vicinity was\n    that of 1692\u2014a year of worse than pestilence or famine.\n    Bridget Bishop was hanged in June; Sarah Good, Sarah Wilder,\n    Elizabeth Howe, Susanna Martin and Rebecca Nurse in July;\n    George Burroughs, John Proctor, George Jacobs, John Willard\n    and Martha Carrier in August; Martha Corey, Mary Easty, Alice\n    Parker, Ann Pudeator, Margaret Scott, Wilmit Reed, Samuel\n    Wordwell, and Mary Baker in September; in which last month\n    Giles Corey eighty-one years of age, was pressed to death\n    under a board loaded with heavy stones, not heavy enough\n    however to crush out life until a day or two of lingering\n    torture had intervened. Sarah Good\u2019s daughter Dorcas between\n    three and four years old, orphaned by her mother\u2019s execution,\n    was one of a number of children who with several hundred other\n    persons were imprisoned on suspicion of witchcraft; many\n    of these sufferers remained in a wretched condition, often\n    heavily ironed for months, some upwards of a year; and several\n    dying during this time. A child of seven, Sarah Carrier, was\n    called upon to testify as witness against her mother.\n\n    Some of the condemned, especially Rebecca Nurse, Martha Corey,\n    and Mary Easty, were aged women who had led unblemished lives\n    and were conspicuous for their prudence, their charities and\n    all domestic virtues.[79]\n\nSo extended became the persecution for witchcraft that the king was\nat last aroused to the necessity of putting a stop to such wholesale\nmassacre of his subjects, issued a mandate forbidding the putting of\nany more persons to death on account of witchcraft.[80] A remarkable\nfamily gathering took place at Salem, July 18, 1883, of two hundred\npersons who met to celebrate their descent from Mrs. Rebecca Nurse,\nwho was executed as a witch at that place in 1692. The character and\nlife of Mrs. Nurse were unimpeachable. She was a woman seventy years\nof age, the mother of eight children, a church member of unsullied\nreputation and devout habit; but all these considerations did not\nprevent her accusation, trial, conviction and death, although she\nsolemnly asserted her innocence to the last. A reprieve granted by\nthe governor was withdrawn through the influence of the church, and\nshe was hung by the neck till she was dead. In order to give her body\nburial, her sons were obliged to steal it away by night, depositing\nit in a secret place known but to the family. Forty persons at the\nhazard of their own lives testified to the goodness and piety of Mrs.\nNurse. Their names were inscribed upon the monument erected by her\ndescendants, in 1892, to her memory.[81] The Rev. Cotton Mather and\nthe Rev. Samuel Parrish are indissolubly connected with this period,\nas both were extremely active in fomenting a belief in witchcraft.\nRichard Baxter, known as the \u201cgreatest of the Puritans\u201d condemned\nthose who expressed a disbelief in witchcraft as \u201cwicked Sadducees.\u201d\nIncrease Mather, president of Harvard College, was one of the most\nbitter persecutors of witches in New England. The dangerous spirit\nof a religious autocracy like the priesthood, was forcibly shown by\na paper read by Rev. Dr. George E. Ellis, a few years since, before\nthe Massachusetts Historical Society, in which he excused the act\nof stripping women naked in order to search for a witch mark, upon\nthe ground of its being a judicial one by commissioned officers and\nuniversally practiced in christendom.\n\nBoston as \u201cThe Bloody Town\u201d rivalled Salem in its persecution of women\nwho dared express thoughts upon religious matters in contradiction\nto the Puritanic belief; women were whipped because of independent\nreligious belief, New England showing itself as strenuous for\n\u201cconformity\u201d of religious opinion as Old England under Queen Elizabeth.\nThe cruelties of this method of punishing free thought, culminated in\nthe Vagabond Law of Massachusetts Colony, passed May 1661.\n\nThe first ecclesiastical convocation in America was a synod especially\nconveyed to sit in judgment upon the religious views of Mistress\nAnne Hutchinson, who demanded that the same rights of individual\njudgment upon religious questions should be accorded to woman which\nthe reformation had already secured to man. Of the eighty-two\nerrors canvassed by the synod, twenty nine were charged to Mistress\nHutchinson, and retraction of them was ordered by the church. The State\nunited with the Church in opposition to Mistress Hutchinson, and the\nfirst real struggle for woman\u2019s religious liberty, (not yet at an end),\nbegan upon this side of the Atlantic. The principal charge brought\nagainst Mistress Hutchinson was that she had presumed to instruct men.\nPossessed of a fine intellect and strong religious fervor, she had\ninaugurated private meetings for the instruction of her own sex; from\nsixty to a hundred women regularly gathering at her house to hear her\ncriticism upon the Sunday sermon and Thursday lectures. These meetings\nproved so interesting that men were soon found also in attendance and\nfor these reasons she was arbitrarily tried in November 1637, before\nthe Massachusetts General Court upon a joint charge of sedition and\nheresy. In May of the same year a change had taken place in the civil\ngovernment of the colony. Sir Henry Vane, who like herself, believed in\nthe supreme authority of the in-dwelling spirit, having been superseded\nby John Winthrop as governor, the latter sustaining the power of the\nclergy and himself taking part against her. Two days were spent by him\nand prominent clergymen in her examination, resulting in a sentence of\nimprisonment and banishment from the colony for having \u201ctraduced the\nministers\u201d and taught men against the direct authority of the Apostle\nPaul, who declared \u201cI suffer not a woman to teach.\u201d\n\nThus the old world restrictions upon woman, and their persecutions,\nwere soon duplicated in the new world. Liberty of opinion became as\nserious a crime in America as in England, and here as in Europe, the\nmost saintly virtue and the purest life among women were not proof\nagainst priestly attack. While Mistress Hutchinson was the first woman\nthus to suffer, many others were also persecuted. When Mary Fisher\nand Anne Austin, two Quaker women who had become famous for their\npromulgation of this heretical doctrine in many parts of the world,\narrived in Boston harbor, July 1656, they were not at first permitted\nto land, but were ultimately transferred to the Boston jail, where they\nwere closely confined, and notwithstanding the heat of the weather\ntheir one window was boarded up. Their persons were also stripped and\nexamined for signs of witchcraft, but fortunately not a mole or a\nspot could be found. Boston\u2014\u201cThe Bloody Town\u201d\u2014was the center of this\npersecuting spirit and every species of wanton cruelty upon woman was\nenacted. Stripped nude to the waist they were tied to a whipping-post\non the south side of King Street and flogged on account of their\nreligious opinions; but it was upon the famous \u201cCommon\u201d that for the\ncrime of free speech, a half nude woman with a new born babe at her\nbreast was thus publicly whipped; and it was upon the \u201cCommon\u201d that\nMary Dyer, another Quaker woman, was hung in 1659. Both she and Anne\nHutchinson prophesied calamity to the colony for its unjust course,\nwhich was fulfilled, when in 1684, it lost its charter in punishment\nfor its intolerance. No Christian country offered a refuge for woman,\nas did Canada the colored slave. But the evils of woman\u2019s persecution\nby the church, did not end with the wrongs inflicted upon her; they\nwere widely extended, affecting the most common interests of the world.\nWhile famines were unknown among the ancient Romans in the first period\nof their history, yet Christendom was early and frequently afflicted\nwith them. While the operations of nature were sometimes the cause, the\nmajority of famines were the result of persecutions, or of christian\nwars, especially the crusades which took such immense numbers of men\nfrom the duties of agriculture at home, making them a prey upon the\nscanty resources of the countries through which these hordes passed.\nAs was seen in the Irish famine of 1847-8 and at the present moment as\nresult of a scanty food supply in Russia, pestilence of various kinds\nfollowed famine years. But the crusades in which the church attempted\nto wrest the holy sepulchre from Turkish hands, were scarcely more\nproductive of famines than its persecuting periods when mankind lost\nhope in themselves and the future. Our own country has shown the effect\nof fear and persecution upon both business and religion, as during the\nwitchcraft period of New England, scarcely two hundred years since,\nall business of whatever nature in country and in town was neglected,\nand even the meeting house was allowed to fall out of repair. Nor was\nthis ruin of a temporary nature, as many people left the Colony and\nits effects descended to those yet unborn. Both Bancroft\u2019s History\nof the United States, and Lapham\u2019s History of the Salem Witchcraft,\npaint vivid pictures of the effects following the different church\npersecutions of woman. Of the Hutchinson trial, Bancroft says:\n\n    This dispute infused its spirit into everything. It interfered\n    with the levy of troops for the Pequot war; it influenced the\n    respect shown to magistrates; the distribution of town lots;\n    the assessment of rates and at last the continued existence of\n    the two parties was considered inconsistent with public peace.\n\nOf the witchcraft period, Upham says:\n\n    It cast its shadows over a broad surface and they darkened\n    the condition of generations.... The fields were neglected;\n    fences, roads, barns, even the meeting house went into\n    disrepair.... A scarcity of provisions nearly amounting to\n    a famine continued for some time. Farms were brought under\n    mortgage, or sacrificed, and large numbers of people were\n    dispersed. The worst results were not confined to the village\n    but spread more or less over the country.\n\nMassachusetts was not the only colony that treated witchcraft as a\ncrime. Maryland, New Jersey and Virginia possessed similar enactments.\nWitchcraft was considered and treated as a capital offense by the laws\nof both Pennsylvania and New York, trials taking place in both colonies\nnot long before the Salem tragedy. The peaceful Quaker, William Penn,\npresided upon the bench in Pennsylvania at the trial of two Swedish\nwomen accused of witchcraft. The Grand Jury acting under instruction\ngiven in his charge, found true bills against these women, and Penn\u2019s\nskirts were only saved from the guilt of their blood by some technical\nirregularity in the indictment.\n\nVirginia, Delaware, Maryland, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, New Jersey,\nMassachusetts and New York, eight of the thirteen colonies recognized\nwitchcraft as a capital crime. Margaret M. was indicted for witchcraft\nin Pennsylvania in 1683, the law against it continuing in force until\nSeptember 23, 1794. By law of the Province of East New Jersey, 1668,\nany person found to be a witch, either male or female, was to suffer\ndeath. In that state the right of complaining against a child who\nshould smite or curse either parent, pertained to both father and\nmother; the penalty was death. As late as 1756, Connecticut recognized\nthe right of parents to dispose of children in marriage. In Maryland\n1666 the commission given to magistrates for Somerset county directed\nthem under oath to make enquiries in regard to witchcraft, sorcery, and\nmagic arts. In 1706 Grace Sherwood of Princess Anne County, Virginia,\nwas tried for witchcraft. The records of the trial show that the court\nafter a consideration of the charges, ordered the sheriff to take the\nsaid Grace into his custody and to commit her body to the common jail,\nthere to secure her with irons or otherwise, until brought to trial.[82]\n\nIn 1692, the Grand Jury brought a bill against Mary Osgood of the\nProvince of Massachusetts Bay, as follows:\n\n    The powers for our sovereign lord and lady, the king and\n    queen, present that Mary Osgood, wife of Captain John Osgood\n    in the county of Essex, about eleven years ago in the town\n    of Andover aforesaid, wickedly, maliciously and feloniously\n    a covenant with the devil did make and signed the devil\u2019s\n    book, and took the devil to be her God, and consented to serve\n    and worship him and was baptized by the devil and renounced\n    her former Christian baptism and promised to the devil both\n    body and soul, forever, and to serve him; by which diabolical\n    covenant by her made with the devil; she, the said Mary Osgood\n    is become a detestable witch against the peace of our\n    sovereign lord and lady, the king and queen, their crown and\n    dignity and the laws in that case made and provided. A true\n    bill.[83]\n\nWhen for \u201cwitches\u201d we read \u201cwomen,\u201d we gain fuller comprehension of\nthe cruelties inflicted by the church upon this portion of humanity.\nFriends were encouraged to cast accusation upon their nearest and\ndearest, rewards being offered for conviction. Husbands who had ceased\nto care for their wives or who by reason of their sickness or for any\ncause found them a burden, or for reasons of any nature desired to\nbreak the indissoluble bonds of the church, now found an easy method.\nThey had but to accuse the wife of witchcraft and the marriage was\ndissolved by her death at the stake. Church history is not silent upon\nsuch instances, and mention is made of a husband who by a rope about\nthe neck dragged his wife before that Arch Inquisitor, Sprenger, making\naccusation of witchcraft against her. No less from protestant than from\ncatholic pulpits were people exhorted to bring the witch, even if of\none\u2019s own family, to justice.\n\nIn 1736, the statute against witchcraft was repealed by the English\nParliament, yet a belief in witchcraft is still largely prevalent\neven among educated people. Dr. F. G. Lee the vicar of an English\nchurch, that of All Saints in Lambeth, a few years since publicly\ndeprecated the abolition of its penalties in a work entitled \u201cGlimpses\nof the Twilight,\u201d complaining that the laws against witchcraft had\nbeen \u201cfoolishly and short-sightedly repealed.\u201d A remarkable case\noccurred in Prussia 1883 when the father of a bed-ridden girl, having\nbecome persuaded that his daughter was bewitched by a woman who had\noccasionally given her apples and pears, was advised the child would\nbe cured if she drank some of the blood of the supposed witch. The\nwoman was therefore entrapped into a place where some of the chief\nmen of the commune had assembled to receive her. She was seized,\none of her fingers pricked with a needle and her blood given to the\nsick child. In 1885 a case of slander based upon alleged witchcraft\ncame before Justice Randolphs, District Court of Jersey City. The\njustice listened to the evidence for several hours before recalling\nthe fact that there was no law upon which he could base his decision,\nthe latest legislation being the law of 1668 repealed 1795 (twenty\nyears after our Declaration of Independence), the crime was no longer\nofficially recognized.[84] It is curious to note the close parallel\nbetween accusations during the witchcraft period and those against the\nNew Jersey suspect of 1885. It was said of her that during the night\nshe accomplished such feats by supernatural power as jumping from a\nthird story window, alighting upon a gate post as gently as a falling\nfeather. It was also asserted that people whom she was known to dislike\nbecame gradually ill, wasting away until they died. The accused woman\ndeclared it was her superior knowledge that was feared, and thus\nagain the middle ages are paralleled, as the witches of that period\nwere usually women of superior knowledge. In 1882, a Wisconsin farmer\nwas put under bonds to keep the peace, on account of his attempts\nto assault an old lady who he averred was a witch, who injured his\ncattle, and entered his house through the chimney or key hole, to his\ngreat terror and distress. The state of Indiana about sixty years ago\npossessed a neighborhood where the people believed in witchcraft. If\nthe butter failed to come, or the eggs to hatch, or a calf got choked,\nor even if the rail fences fell down when covered with sleet and snow,\nthe whole trouble was attributed to the witches, who were also believed\nto have the remarkable power of saddling and bridling a man and with\nsharp spurs riding him over the worst roads imaginable, to his great\nharm and fatigue. Even the great Empire State, as late as January 1892,\nhad within its borders a case of murder where an inoffensive old man\nlost his life because he was believed to be a wizard; and this occurred\nin the center of a prosperous farming country where money is liberally\nexpended for educational purposes, this being one of the rare instances\nwhere a man fell under suspicion.\n\nIt is but a few years since the great and enlightened city of Paris\ncaused the arrest, under police authority, of fourteen women upon\ncharge of sorcery; and it is but little more than twenty years since a\nwoman in the state of Puebla, Mexico, was hung and burned as a witch,\nbecause unable to reveal the whereabouts of a lost animal. She was\nseized, hung to a tree, shot at and then plunged into fire until she\nexpired.[85] The body at first buried in the cemetery, was exhumed the\nfollowing day by order of the priest, who refused to allow the remains\nof a witch to be buried in consecrated ground. The state, in person of\nthe mayor of the city, authorized the proceedings by taking part in\nthem as principal persecutor. In the same province another woman was\nseverely flogged as a witch, by four men, one of them her own son. Thus\nnow, as in its earlier ages, wherever the light of civilization has not\novercome the darkness of the church, we find woman still a sufferer\nfrom that ignorance and superstition which under Christianity, teaches\nthat she brought sin into the world.\n\n\n\n\n_Chapter Six_\n\n+Wives+\n\n\nUnder Roman law before Christianity had gained control of the empire, a\nform of marriage existed known as \u201cUsus,\u201d which secured much freedom to\nwives. It was entered into without the terrifying religious ceremonies\nwhich made \u201cConfarreatio,\u201d practically indissoluble and the wife the\nveritable slave of the husband, who held power even over her life.\nNeither did it possess the civil formality of \u201cCoemptio\u201d under which\nthe bride purchased entrance into the marriage duties and her husband\u2019s\nhousehold by the payment of three pieces of copper.[1] \u201cCoemptio\u201d\nlike \u201cConfarreatio\u201d gave the husband entire power over the person and\nproperty of the wife, while \u201cUsus,\u201d a form of simple consent left the\nwife practically free, keeping her own name and property. The real\norigin of this form of marriage is not fully known. Maine declared\nit to be as old as or even older than the Twelve Tables, under which\nwoman possessed the right to repudiation in marriage. These laws, a\ncompilation of still older ones, were afterwards incorporated into\nstatutes by a woman of Athens, and were received by the Romans as\nextremely pure natural laws.[2] Plato refers to an early Athens\nentirely ruled by women, its laws of pre-eminently just character.\nTradition, whose basis is half forgotten, half remembered history,\nattributes the origin of Athens to the ancient Atlantians. The former\nexistence of this submerged continent is daily becoming more fully\nrecognized. The explorations of the \u201cChallenger,\u201d the \u201cDolphin,\u201d the\n\u201cGazelle,\u201d and the discoveries of Le Plongeon in Yucatan, at later\ndate, confirming olden tradition. Maine thus ascribes a much older\norigin to \u201cUsus\u201d than Gibbon, who attributes it to the effect of the\nPunic triumphs.[3] In reality \u201cUsus\u201d seems to have been a reminiscence\nof the Matriarchate, incorporated into the law of the Twelve Tables,\nand accepted by Rome as a more just form of the marriage relation\nfor women than the religious \u201cConfarraetio\u201d or the civil form of\n\u201cCoemptio.\u201d But as Rome increased in wealth and luxurious modes of\nliving, the influence of the Patriarchate correspondingly extended,\nthe perception of justice at the same time diminishing. Pomp and\nceremony were associated with the marriage rite among patricians,\nwhile \u201cUsus\u201d was regarded as a plebeian form especially suited to the\npopulace. But at later date when Rome rebelling against the tyranny\nof her rulers, tended towards a republican form of government, \u201cUsus\u201d\nagain became general. It was impossible for patrician women not to see\nthe greater freedom of plebeian wives under \u201cUsus,\u201d a form that while\nequally binding in the essentials of the union did not make the wife\na marital slave,[4] and \u201cUsus\u201d eventually became the basis of Roman\nlegal conception of marriage, against which Christianity from the first\nwaged a warfare of ever increasing fierceness,[5] the very foundation\nof that religion being the subordination of woman in every relation\nof life. Under \u201cUsus\u201d the mere fact of two persons living together as\nhusband and wife was regarded as a marriage. If during each year the\nwife remained away from the home for three days, she kept herself from\nunder her husband\u2019s power. She remained a part of her father\u2019s family;\nher husband could not mortgage or in any way alienate her property.\nThis was absolutely contrary to the laws of the christian form of\nmarriage, under which the wife surrendered her person, her property,\nand her conscience, into the indisputable control of the husband.\nUnder \u201cUsus\u201d a large proportion of Roman property fell into woman\u2019s\nhands. She became the real estate holder of the Eternal City and its\nprovinces, and in consequence was treated with great respect; the\nholding of property, especially of real estate conducing to that end.\nUnder \u201cUsus\u201d the cruelties sanctioned by \u201cConfarraetio\u201d were rendered\nimpossible; a wife could no longer be put to death, as was formerly the\ncustom, for having tasted wine, a treacherous kiss from her husband\nupon his return home, betraying her, nor could her infant daughter be\nexposed or murdered at the pleasure of her husband who as inexorable\nmaster was frequently wont to refuse her pleadings for the life of her\nbabe, calling her prayers naught but the scruples of a foolish woman.[6]\n\nThus under \u201cUsus\u201d human life became more sacred, and woman endowed with\na greater sense of personal security. It affected an entire change for\nthe better, in the moral sentiments of the Roman empire.[7] A complete\nrevolution had thus passed over the constitution of the family. This\nmust have been the period, says Maine, when a juriconsulist of the\nempire defined marriage as a life long fellowship of all divine and\nhuman rights.\n\nNot alone Maine, but also Reeves, failed not to see that the\ndisruption of the Roman Empire was very unfavorable to the personal\nand proprietory rights of woman.[8] The practical effect of the common\nRoman form of marriage being the absolute legal independence of the\nwife, under which a large proportion of Roman property fell into\nthe hands of women, the wife retaining her family name and family\ninheritance. All this was changed as soon as Christianity obtained the\nrule. Under Christian forms of marriage a wife was taken from her own\nfamily and transferred into that of her husband the same as a piece of\nproperty. She assumed his name, the same as the slave took that of the\nnew master to whom he was transferred. That this idea of the wife as a\nslave did not belong alone to the earlier christian period, but is a\npart of christian doctrine of today is clearly shown by the continued\ncustom of a woman\u2019s dropping her family name upon marriage and assuming\nthat of the husband-master.\n\nFor this middle Roman period carried its blessings to wives no longer\nthan until the empire became christianized, when the tyranny of\necclesiastical marriage again fell to woman\u2019s lot. While under the\ninfluence of \u201cUsus,\u201d Roman jurists of the middle period had declared\nthe ownership of property by married women to be a principle of equity;\nthis drew forth opposing legislation from the christians, and under\nchristian law, the husband again became master of his wife\u2019s person,\nand property, her children also falling under his entire control, the\nmother possessing no authority over them. From that period down to the\ntwentieth century of christianity, under all changing civil laws, woman\nhas ever felt the oppressions of ecclesiasticism in this relation.[9]\n\nGuizot strangely declares that woman\u2019s present, and what he terms,\nsuperior, position in the household today, is due to feudalism.[10]\nThe isolation and strife under which the nobility lived during the\nfeudal period, warring against each other when not engaged in foreign\naggression, compelled to certain forms of social life within each\ncastle, thus creating the modern family, or the family under its\npresent social form. At that period the feudal wife with her retinue of\nhousehold serfs and a vast number of her husband\u2019s retainers in charge,\nheld a more responsible position than that of woman under primitive\nchristian habits of life. But the knights and lords of these feudal\ncastles were lecherous robbers, rather than men of kindly regard for\nwomankind. Their inclination was not towards justice or family life,\nbut the despoiling of all beneath them, and even of their equals with\nwhom they were not upon terms of amity. The ruins of such castles,\nlike the nest of the eagle, perched upon some inaccessible rock, add\ntoday an element of picturesque beauty to the Rhine and other rivers\nof Europe, but owe their elevated and isolated positions of the evil\ncharacter of their owners, the banditti of the middle ages.[11] When\nnot engaged with their king in warfare, they made the despoiling of\nserfs and the betrayal of wives and daughters their chief diversion,\nthe robbery of burghers and travelers their business; churchmen equally\nwith laymen living by the same means.\n\nDuring the year 1268, Rudolph of Germany, destroyed sixty-six castles\nof these christian robber nobility in Thuringia alone, and hung\ntwenty-nine of these \u201cfamily builders\u201d at one time in Erfurt. He\ncompared Rome to the lion\u2019s den in fable; the footsteps of many animals\nto be found going thither, but none coming back. At this period the\nsoldiers of Christian Europe found pleasure in torture for its own\nsake, chiefly selecting women as their victims. In mediaeval England\nthe condition of woman was one of deep degradation. Wives were bought\nand daughters sold for many hundred years after the introduction of\nChristianity.[12] Although England was christianized in the fourth\ncentury, it was not until the tenth that the christian wife of a\nchristian husband acquired the right of eating at table with him, nor\nuntil the same century did a daughter gain the right of rejecting the\nhusband her father might have selected for her. While the sale of\ndaughters was practiced in England for seven hundred years after the\nintroduction of Christianity, we note that by the ancient law of India,\na father was forbidden to sell his daughter in marriage, or receive the\nsmallest present therefor. In mediaeval England the daughter was held\nas a portion of the father\u2019s property to be sold to the highest bidder.\nThe Mundium[13] recognized the father\u2019s right to sell his daughter to\nthe husband he might select for her, usually the highest bidder in\npoint of wealth or political influence. While Marquette pertained to\nkings, feudal lords, and men of no family relationship to the victim,\nMundium inhered in the father himself. Through it he sacrificed his own\ndaughter for money or power.\n\nThe practice of buying wives with cattle or money was regulated both\nin the laws of King Aethelbert and King Ine. In event of the woman who\nhad been thus bought, becoming a widow, half of the sum paid for her\nseems to have been set aside for her support, provided her husband\nhad not died without issue. The other half remained absolutely the\nproperty of her father, brother, or guardian by whom she had been\nsold. At a somewhat later period the church doctrine of celibacy\ninfluenced all ranks of men, while at the same time an unmarried woman\nbecause of her maidenhood was regarded as disreputable. A bachelor\nheld honorable place, even though all celibate men were looked upon\nas libertines of especially impure life. Warnings against matrimony\nwere the ordinary topics of conversation, while virtue in women was\nheld so little sacred that no nearness of relationship was security\nfor either a married or a single woman.[14] Husbands trafficked in the\nhonor of their wives, fathers sold their daughters,[15] yet if under\ntemptation, a woman fell, outside of such sale, her punishment was most\nsevere. To a husband was accorded the power of life and death over his\nhousehold, and either personally or by means of a hired assassin he\nnot unfrequently assigned his wife to death or to a punishment more\natrocious and barbarous.[16] Disraeli says:\n\n    If in these ages of romance and romances the fair sex were\n    scarcely approached without the devotion of idolatry, whenever\n    \u201cthe course of true love\u201d altered; when the frail spirit\n    loved too late, and should not have loved, the punishment\n    became more criminal than the crime, for there was more\n    selfish revenge and terrific malignity than of justice when\n    autocratical man became the executioner of his own decree.\n\nThe English christian husband of that age is paralleled by certain\nNorth American Indians of the present day.[17] The horizon of woman\u2019s\nlife was bounded by the wishes of her father or husband. Single, she\nwas regarded as a more or less valuable piece of property[18] for whose\nsale the owner was entitled to make as good a bargain as possible. It\nwas as a bride that the greatest sum was secured.[19] Prominent among\nthe laws of the first Christian king of Kent, were provisions for the\ntransfer of money or cattle in exchange for the bride.[20] The theory\nof woman\u2019s ownership by man was everywhere carried into practice, and\nwith great severity in case the wife proved unfaithful to her enforced\nvows. The facts that her consent to the marriage had not been asked,\nthat mayhap the man she was forced to wed was utterly repugnant to her,\nthat her affections might already have been bestowed, that she was\ntransferred like a piece of goods with no voice upon the question, were\nnot taken into consideration, and did the husband not choose to kill\nhis derelict spouse, the question still remained one of property,[21]\nand a new bride was demanded of the lover in place of the wife whose\nlove he had gained.\n\nA husband, attracted by a new face, more wealth, greater political\ninfluence, or for any reason desiring to be rid of his wife, was\nregarded as justifiable in hiring an assassin to strangle her, or\nif walking by a river-brink, of himself pushing her into the water\nwhere her cries for help were disregarded. Those in whose hearts pity\nrose, were prevented from giving aid, but such remarks as, \u201cIt is\nnothing, only a woman being drowned.\u201d[22] A horse or other domestic\nanimal received more consideration than the women of a household.\nNotwithstanding this period, the early part of the fourteenth century,\nbefore the days of printing or rapid intercourse between nations, yet\nthe evil fame of christendom reached distant lands. Its hypocrisy and\nbaseness were known by those very Saracens from whom the Crusaders\nattempted to wrest the Holy Sepulchre. To Sir John Mandeville, the\nSultan of Egypt mercilessly criticized the christianity of England[23]\nand the christian method of serving God; the total disregard of\nchastity, the sale of daughters, sisters and wives. We cannot agree\nwith Disraeli in his doubts if there was a single christian in all\nchristendom at this period. To the contrary, it may be regarded as an\nepoch when the doctrines of christianity were most fully sustained, the\nchurch at that time carrying out the principles of both the Old and the\nNew Testament regarding women. From Moses to Paul, the Bible everywhere\nspeaks of her as a being made for man, secondary to man, and under his\nauthority by direct command of the Almighty; the state, as coadjutor\nand servant of the church, basing her codes of law[24] upon its\nteachings. Under these codes woman has not only been looked upon as\nnaturally unchaste, but also regarded as a liar, the state demanding\nthe testimony of two or three, and in some instances of seven women to\ninvalidate that of one man; the man even then in extreme cases clearing\nhimself by his single oath. Condemned as having brought evil into the\nworld, woman\u2019s every step was looked upon with suspicion, and the most\nbrutal treatment as far short of her just deserts. To speak well of\nher was to cause misgivings of one\u2019s self. The system of defamation\ninaugurated by the church in reference to women, was later recognized\nby the Jesuits as a most effective plan for the personal subjugation of\nmen. Busenbaum, an influential writer of this order, directing:\n\n    Whenever you would ruin a person you must begin by spreading\n    calumnies to defame them. Repetition and perseverance will at\n    length give the consistency of probability, and the calumnies\n    will stick to a distant day.\n\nThe astute Jesuits learned their lesson from church treatment of women.\nIts practical results were ever before their eyes in the contempt with\nwhich woman was regarded, and her own consequent loss of self respect.\nUnder early and mediaeval christian law, as in most states today, the\nfather alone had right to the disposal of his children. He possessed\nthe sole power of giving away his daughter in marriage; if he died,\nthis right devolved upon the eldest son; only in case there were no\nsons was the right of the mother in any way recognized. If neither\nfather or brother were living, the mother gave her daughter away in\nmarriage, and this was the only instance in which one woman possessed\ncontrol over another woman, the law allowing the mother no voice in\nthe marriage of her daughter unless she was a widow without sons. So\ngreatly enslaved were daughters, that non-consent of the victim in\nno way impaired the validity of the marriage.[25] A girl was simply\na piece of family property to be disposed of as the family thought\nbest. Although wives were simply the slaves of husbands, yet the\ncondition of an unmarried woman was even more deplorable. Deprived of\nthe society of young persons of her own sex, not allowed speech with\nany man outside of her own family, she was fortunate if she escaped\npersonal[26] ill-treatment in her father\u2019s house. Not permitted to sit\nin the presence of either her father or her mother, continually found\nfault with, the laws constraining her to marry while giving her no\npreference as to a husband, and marriage still more fully taking from\nher the control of her own person, yet it was anxiously looked forward\nto as at least a change of masters, and the constant hope that in the\nhusband she might find a lover who for dear love\u2019s sake would treat her\nwith common humanity.\n\nSuch was the condition of women during eighteen hundred years of\nchristianity. Legislated for as slaves, imprisoned for crimes that if\ncommitted by a man were only punished by branding the hand; buried\nalive for other crimes that committed by men were atoned for by the\npayment of a fine; denied a share in the government of the family or\nthe church, their very sex deemed a curse, the twentieth century is\nnow about to open showing no truly enlightened nation upon the face\nof the earth. From the barbarism of inhumanity the world is slowly\nawakening to the fact that every human being stands upon the plane\nof equal natural rights. The Church has not taught the world this\ngreat truth, the State has not conceded it; its acknowledgment thus\nfar, has been due to the teachings of individual men and women, that\nself-constituted authority over others a crime against humanity. Under\nchristian teaching regarding woman, the daughter was looked upon as a\nmore remote relative and heir than the son and this upon the ground of\nher inferiority. Blackstone, although admitting that such views did\nnot pertain in Rome, yet speaks of males as \u201cthe worthier of blood.\u201d\nSuch views were not held by pre-christian Britain. Under common law,\nbefore that country accepted christianity, property was equally divided\nbetween sisters, and only by special custom, between brothers.[27] But\nas early as Henry II it was the general rule that a woman could not\nshare an inheritance with a man. An exception sometimes existed in a\nparticular city where such custom had long prevailed.\n\nUntil quite recently, English women have not been permitted to express\nan opinion upon political questions, although the Primrose League and\nother similar organizations have effected a great change within a few\nyears. Yet it is but little more than two hundred years, in 1664, at\nHenley-upon-Thames, a woman having spoken against the taxation imposed\nby Parliament, was condemned for this freedom of political criticism,\nto have her tongue nailed to the body of a tree at the highway side\nupon a market day, and a paper fastened to her back detailing the\nheinousness of her offense. It was thus the state deterred similar\npolitically-minded women from the expression of their views, and in\nline with the church used its most stringent measures to retain woman\nin the \u201csphere\u201d to which both church and state assigned her. Many\nsavage tribes of Africa exhibit the same grade of civilization that was\nextant in christian England from the fourth to the eighteenth centuries.\n\n    A father will sell his daughter among Unyamwazi, Africa, for\n    one up to ten cows. A Lomali asks of a poor wooer from ten to\n    twenty horses, of a wealthy one from 100 upward, together with\n    fifty camels and 300 sheep. On the other hand, in Uganda, four\n    oxen are sufficient to buy the most perfectly formed village\n    belle, provided six needles and a box of cartridges are thrown\n    in.\n\nThe sale is the same, the payment alone of different character. An\nAfrican girl in case of a wealthy wooer, bringing even more than was\nordinarily received during the middle ages for an English christian\nmaiden. The patriarchal spirit wherever cropping out exhibiting the\nsame characteristics, whether among Jews, Christians, or African\nsavages. This is the more notable as among civilized or savage races\nyet governed by the principles of the Matriarchate, the position of\nwoman is very high. In Samoa, no woman is compelled to work, all labor\nof whatever character being performed by the men. The celebrated\ntraveler, Prof. Carl Lumholz, in his work \u201cAmong the Cannibals,\u201d makes\nsome interesting statements in regard to the course adopted by the\nnatives of Georgia River, Australia, to save women from giving birth to\nundesired children, and to prevent the needless suffering and infant\nmortality so common in christian lands.\n\nAmong the methods adopted in christian countries for a continuance of\nthe crimes common in the marriage relation, have been more or less\nstringent laws against divorce, ever falling with heaviest force upon\nher whom christian marriage laws have made a slave. The \u201cChristian\nUnion\u201d declares as a significant act of evil import, that \u201cin Wyoming,\nwhere the power of woman in affairs of government is greatest, one\ndivorce takes place in every six marriages, the proportion being\ngreater than in any other state.\u201d But if this assertion of the\n\u201cChristian Union\u201d is true, it is proof that a share in making the laws\nwhich govern her is wisely used by the women of that state; and it\nmarks a new era in civilization, when woman holding political power\nin her own hands, refuses longer to degrade herself by living in a\nrelation that has lost the binding power of love. The laws of church\nand of state during the christian ages originated with man, and it\nis a promising sign of woman\u2019s growth in self-reliance, independent\nthought, and purity of character, that she thus protests against the\nbondage of a relation which virtually holds the wife as slave of the\nhusband; for despite the changes of the last four and a half decades,\nwe still find the general tone of legislation in line with the church\nteaching of woman\u2019s created inferiority to man. We still find belief\nin the wife\u2019s duty of obedience to the husband; we still discover the\nchurch, the state, the world, all regarding the exercise of her own\njudgment even upon the questions most closely related to herself as\nwoman\u2019s greatest sin. As free as woman is called today, she has not yet\nas daughter secured perfect liberty of choice in marriage, the power of\nthe family too often compelling her into a hated relation. Money still\nleads parents to prefer one suitor above another, even in the United\nStates; while in many European countries, marriages are arranged by\nfriends, or through a broker, entirely without the girl\u2019s consent, who\nis frequently taken from a convent or school to be thus sold to some\nwealthy and perhaps octogenarian wooer, who covets the youth or beauty\nof the victim.[28]\n\nThe burning of twenty missionaries in a portion of savage Africa,\na few years since, filled the civilized world with horror. But for\nseveral hundred years after the introduction of christianity into\nGreat Britain, the penalty for simple theft by a woman slave was\nburning alive, and all the other women slaves were compelled to assist\nher _auto-de-fe_. Upon such an occasion mentioned by Pike, eighty\nother women each brought a log of wood for the burning.[29] By the\nold Roman Code, burning alive as a punishment was forbidden because\nof its barbarity, but christianity reintroduced it, and for long\ncenturies after the destruction of the Roman Empire, that other land\naspiring to control of the sea, which proudly boasts that the sun\nnever sets on her possessions, kept it in her criminal code for the\npunishment of helpless women.[30] So rigorous was woman\u2019s slavery that\nthe friendships of women with each other, or with men, were strictly\nprohibited; yet the deep affection of one man for another to whom he\nconsecrated his life and fortune, and of whom he spoke with that deep\ntenderness, was highly commended.[31] The despotic, irresponsible power\nof husbands in christian England at this period is shown by the diverse\nmanner in which the murder of a wife by a husband, or a husband by a\nwife, was regarded. For husband to murder a wife either by his own\nhands or those of a hired assassin, was of frequent occurrence, but as\nshe was his slave over whom he had power of life and death, this was\nlooked upon as a trivial affair. But under the laws of both church and\nstate, the murder of a husband by a wife was regarded as petty treason,\nto be punished with the utmost severity, burning alive being a not\nuncommon form.[32]\n\nUnder christian legislation not alone the wife\u2019s person but her\nproperty so fully became her husband\u2019s that her use of any portion of\nit thereafter without his consent was regarded as theft; and such is\nstill the law in the majority of christian countries; it is less than\nsixty years since a change in this respect took place in any part of\nthe christian world. While a wife may steal from her husband it is\nstill the law that a husband cannot steal from his wife. If she allows\nhim to transact business for her, or in any way obtain possession of\nher property even for a moment, he has acquired its legal ownership.\nSince the passage of the Married Woman\u2019s Property Act, the courts of\nEngland have decided that a husband cannot steal from his wife while\nshe is living with him. A case before Baron Huddleston, 1888, commented\nupon by the _Pall Mall Gazette_, under head of \u201cStealing from a Wife,\u201d\ncalled attention to the superior position of the mistress in respect to\nproperty rights over that of the wife.\n\n    Can a husband rob his wife? Baron Huddleston yesterday\n    answered this by saying he can not rob her at all under the\n    common law, which regards all the wife\u2019s property as the\n    husband\u2019s; and, theft is only robbery under the Married\n    Women\u2019s Property Act, when the wife is living apart from\n    her husband, or when he is preparing to desert her. It is\n    really quite amazing how many advantages a mistress has over\n    a wife in all matters relating to property and to person.\n    It almost seems as if the object of the law was to inflict\n    such disabilities on wives in order to induce the fair sex to\n    prefer concubinage to matrimony.\n\nThe separate moral codes for man and woman in all christian lands, show\ntheir evil aspect in many ways. Adultery, in all christian countries\nis held to be less sinful for men than for women. In England, while\nthe husband can easily obtain a divorce from the wife upon the ground\nof adultery, it is almost impossible for the wife to obtain a divorce\nfrom the husband upon the same ground. Nothing short of the husband\u2019s\nbringing another woman into the house to sustain wifely relations to\nhim, at all justifies her in proceedings for a separation; and even\nthen, the husband retains a right to all the wife\u2019s property of which\nhe was in possession, or which may have fallen into his hands. Less\nthan a dozen years since, an English husband willed his wife\u2019s property\nto his mistress and her children of whom he was the father. The wife,\n(in what is known as \u201cThe Birchall Case\u201d), contested the will, but the\ncourts not only decided in its favor, but added insult to that legal\nrobbery, by telling the wife that a part of her money was enough for\nher, and that she ought to be willing that her husband\u2019s mistress and\nillegitimate children should share it with her.\n\nWoman\u2019s disobedience to man is regarded by both the church and the\nstate as disobedience to God. As late as the first half of the present\ncentury it was held as constructive treason, in England, punishable by\nthe state, for a wife to refuse obedience to her husband\u2019s commands\nor in any way to question his authority. She was required to be under\nsubmission to him as the direct representative of the deity. For the\nwoman who protested against this annihilation of her individuality, a\nflogging was the customary form of punishment and so common was the use\nof the whip that its size was regulated by law.[33] The punishment of\npetit treason[34] was more severe for woman than for man because her\ncrime was regarded as of a more heinous character. She was dragged on\nthe ground or pavement to the place of execution then burned alive;\na man was drawn and hanged. It was long after the conquest before\neven a man convicted of treason secured the right of being carried to\nexecution on a sledge or hurdle. Blackstone comments upon the extreme\ntorment of being dragged on the ground or pavement. In case of a woman\nthe wounds and lacerations thus received must have greatly added to her\nintensity of suffering, yet so blinded was he through those laws, that\nhe calls her punishment of burning, a tribute to the \u201cdecency due to\nthe sex.\u201d[35]\n\nDuring a portion of the christian era the wife has not been looked\nupon as related to her husband. The residuum of this disbelief in the\nrelationship of husband and wife, occasionally shows itself to the\npresent day.[36] She was his slave under both religious and civil law,\nholding the same relations to him as the subject did to the king, and\nliable to punishments similar to those inflicted upon unruly slaves,\nor disloyal subjects. Rebellion against the husband\u2019s authority was\ntreason punishable by law, similarly as treason to the king. The\ndifference was but in name. Down to the end of the eighteenth century\nin England, the wife who had murdered her husband was burned alive; if\nthe husband murdered his wife he suffered simple decapitation, \u201cthe\nsame as if he had murdered any other stranger.\u201d For the wife\u2019s crime\nof petit treason the penalty was that of the slave who had killed her\nmaster. It is scarcely a hundred years since the punishment of burning\nthe wife alive for the murder of her husband, or the female slave for\nthe murder of her master, as petit treason, passed out of the English\npenal code; the last instance occurring in 1784, eight years after\nour declaration of independence. This same code was operative in the\ncolonies; the last woman thus punished in this country, being a slave\nin 1755, who had murdered her master, America having twenty-nine years\nprecedence in the abolition of this penalty.[37]\n\nA cablegram from Europe, September 1892, proves the continued existence\nin this last decade of the nineteenth century of the crime of petit\ntreason, and also the barbarous punishment still inflicted under\nchristian law, upon the wife who murders her husband. This case,\noccurring in Finland, was carried up to the Court of Appeals, which not\nonly affirmed the decision of the lower court but decreed additional\npunishment. Because the wife had also forged her husband\u2019s name for\nsmall sums of money, having under law, first been robbed by him of her\nearnings, the judgment of having her right hand cut off, was added to\nthe original sentence. She was then decapitated, her body fastened to a\nstake, covered with inflammable material and burned to ashes. Although\nthis wife was not burned alive, the barbarity of her punishment was\nmost atrocious, and took place under the christian laws of the church\nand the state, in a Protestant country in the \u201cyear of our Lord,\u201d 1892.\nThat the punishment was infinitely more severe than would have been\ninflicted upon the husband in case he had murdered his wife, was due\nto christian teaching of woman\u2019s inferiority and subordination to man;\nthus making the wife\u2019s crime that of petit treason, under law only a\ntrifle less heinous than murdering a king, or attempting destruction\nof the government. Had the husband murdered the wife it would have\nbeen, according to legal prevision, the same as if he had killed \u201c_any\nother stranger_.\u201d The marriage ceremony robbed her of her property\nand earnings, but in equity the money she was accused of stealing\nfrom him belonged to her. Under the laws of most christian states, a\nwoman is robbed of herself and all of her possessions by the simple\nfact of her marriage. Under christian laws the services of the wife in\nthe marital relation are all due to the husband,[38] her earnings all\nbelong to him; she is a slave owning nothing and with no rights in the\nproperty her husband calls his own. This wife\u2019s crime was provoked by\npre-existing criminal legislation of the christian church and state.\nPossessing no legal right to the control of her own person, property\nor conscience, the wife was held to have sinned against a divinely\nappointed master to whom she owed more than human allegiance: she was\na criminal so great that the punishment of severing her hand and head\nwere deemed entirely inadequate, and her body fastened to a stake was\ncovered with inflammable material and burned to ashes.[39]\n\nWhile the external government of Finland, as declarations of war,\npeace, treaties, etc., is under control of the Czar, or Grand Duke,\nyet in the internal administration of affairs this country is an\nIndependent State, under a Constitution dating 1772, and confirmed\nby three successive czars. It became christianized in the twelfth\ncentury but is not under the Greek church; its established religion\nis Evangelical and Lutheran, under control of the archbishop of Abo,\nand the bishops of Bogia and Knopo; an ecclesiastical assembly meeting\nevery ten years; and the Diet, composed of representatives of the\nclergy, nobility, citizens and peasants, every five years. Without\nconsent of these bodies no laws are enacted or repealed; but woman\npossesses no representation either in ecclesiastical or civil affairs.\n\nThe old law of marriage instituted by the church, which held the wife\nas belonging body and soul to the husband who not alone possessed\ncontrol over her actions but decided her religion, is still extant.\nIn but few countries do we see a tendency towards its abolition, even\nthose that have somewhat favorably legislated upon the question,\nstill retaining the general principle of a wife\u2019s subserviency to her\nhusband. A few years since an English lady desirous of uniting with\nthe Catholic church was refused consent by her husband, \u201ca staunch\nchurchman.\u201d Unknown to him she was received into that body, which\nproved occasion of an animated controversy between the husband and the\nlate Cardinal Manning, the former basing his opposition and his letter\nof remonstrance to the cardinal upon the ground of the admitted legal\nright of a husband, under English law, to ordain the form of his wife\u2019s\nreligion.[40] Nor do we find material difference in the United States.\nIn Virginia, in the winter of 1891, a wife, despite the opposition of\nher husband caused her infant to be baptized by an Episcopal clergyman\ninto that church, the husband openly expressing his disapproval while\nthe ceremony was in progress, and afterwards suing the clergyman for\nan interference with his vested rights over wife and child. This\nsupreme authority of the husband in christian countries is shown in\nmany strange ways. Among the Hindoos the naming of the child belongs\nto the mother. If the father expresses desire for a different name,\neach one is written upon a paper over which lighted lamps are set,\nthe one burning the longest deciding the choice of name. But in Rhode\nIsland as late as 1892, a controversy between the parents as to the\nnaming of a child was settled by law. The father and mother each filed\na certificate with the registrar; the father employing a lawyer who to\nthe satisfaction of the city solicitor proved his client\u2019s prior right,\nand an order was issued to the registrar in favor of the father\u2019s\nchoice of name.[41] The claim of the christian husband in each of\nthese instances was that of his supreme and prior right, on the church\ntheory incorporated into law, that both wife and child belong to the\nhusband. The celebrated Agar-Ellis case in England during the latter\npart of the seventies, was brought by a wife to compel the keeping by\na husband of his pledges in regard to the religious education of his\nchildren. The decision was against the wife, upon the general ground\nthat a wife had no rights in law as against a husband. A man\u2019s pledged\nword broken at the gaming table renders him infamous and subjects him\nto dishonor through life. But a husband\u2019s pledged word broken to his\nwife, under ruling of the highest court and the profoundest legal\ntalent of England, the Court of Appeals, and the Vice-Chancellor, is\njust, implying no dishonor, but rather entitling him to respect as a\nman who in a befitting manner has maintained his marital rights and\nauthority. The judge instructed the wife that she had no right to teach\nher children what her husband did not believe, even though she herself\nmost fully believed what she taught. He impressed upon her that she was\nnot rearing her children for herself, but as her husband\u2019s property,\nover which she possessed no control only in so far as the husband made\nher his agent. In affirming the order of the Vice-Chancellor, the court\nof appeals declared that the father had the legal right to bring up the\nchildren in his own faith, and in pledging his word to the contrary he\nhad in no way forfeited or abandoned his authority. This decision of\nthe English Court of Appeals, is in accord with the laws of the United\nStates. The Albany N.Y. _Law Journal_ in commenting upon this case\nunder the head of \u201cCurious Question,\u201d declared the decision to be in\nharmony with the general rule as to religious education; the child is\nto be educated in the religion of the father.\n\nThe _English Women\u2019s Suffrage Journal_ in its comments, declared\nEnglish law to be based upon the Koran, quoting, in proof, from a\nwriter in the \u201cContemporary Review\u201d:\n\n    The East has long been noted for the subordination of its\n    women, and this subjection is not only preached by Mussulmans\n    and Buddhists but even by Christian churches. Woman is not\n    regarded as a person but as a field, cultivable or not, as\n    the possessor desires. As a field can neither have faith, nor\n    intellect, nor a will of its own, it would be absurd for a\n    man to occupy himself about what a woman believes, thinks, or\n    wishes. She is absolutely nothing but her husband\u2019s domain. He\n    cultivates it and reaps the harvest, for the harvest belongs\n    to the proprietor.\n\nAccording to the _Women\u2019s Suffrage Journal_, this condition accurately\ndepicted the spirit of the injunction laid upon Mrs. Agar-Ellis, by\nLord Justice James.\n\n    To the wife and mother he declared that she had no right\n    to teach her children what she believed, but must, to the\n    contrary, teach them what her husband believed, whether she\n    believed it or not; the law not concerning itself with what a\n    woman believes, or wishes, as she is in law absolutely nothing\n    but her husband\u2019s domain.\n\nThe mistake of the _Journal_ lies in ascribing this law to the\nteachings of the Koran, instead of the teachings of the Bible, which in\ngeneral tone, and through particular instruction, places woman upon the\nsame level as a man\u2019s \u201cflocks and herds, oxen and cattle.\u201d We do not\nfind the personal rights of women in the United States differing from\nthose of the women of England. A famous suit was tried in Ohio, 1879,\nknown as the \u201cLucy Walker Case,\u201d a former wife suing the present wife\nfor alienating her husband\u2019s affections. Great attention was called to\nthis suit from the high position of the parties; Judge Seney, former\nhusband of one, and present husband[42] of the other wife, being widely\nknown as author of a \u201cCivil Code,\u201d bearing his name. The suit gained\nstill greater notoriety from the principle enunciated in his decision\nrendered against the plaintiff, by Judge Dodge, before whom the case\ncame to trial; he dismissed it upon the ground that a wife had no\nrights as against her husband. All testimony upon part of the injured\nfirst wife was excluded upon the same ground. He decided:\n\n    First: That the husband has a property interest in his wife\n    which the wife does not possess in the husband.\n\n    Second: That the law protects him in this right of property in\n    her.\n\n    Third: Upon the ground that he holds her and dares the world\n    to meddle with him in the holding.\n\n    Fourth: But on the contrary the wife looks alone to the\n    husband, the law compelling her to do so.\n\nThus less than fifteen years since the legal decision was rendered\nin the United States, that a wife is a husband\u2019s property; that the\nhusband has a pecuniary interest in the wife, the law protecting his\nright of property in her, while the wife possesses no reciprocal right\nof property in the husband.\n\nThe _Toledo Bee_ gave the full text of Judge Dodge\u2019s decision:\n\n    The question submitted in this: Has a wife such a property\n    in her husband, has she such a legal pecuniary interest in\n    him, that she can bring an action at law against one who\n    injures him, against one who imprisons him, and, finally, can\n    a wife recover damages at law against a woman who has carnal\n    intercourse with her husband without her consent? It will be\n    at once admitted that the question is a novel one. Our courts\n    adjudicate primarily upon property interests. A husband has a\n    pecuniary, a property interest in his wife. The law protects\n    this right of property.\n\n    A father can recover damages against a man who seduces his\n    daughter, but a mother can not recover for the seduction of\n    a daughter. Why not? Is she not as dear to the mother as the\n    father? Nay, dearer, by as much as a mother\u2019s love exceeds a\n    father\u2019s. But she has not property in her, is not entitled to\n    her wages; neither is a mother bound to support her children.\n    The father is the head of the family, not the mother. He, by\n    virtue of his headship, is legally entitled to the services of\n    his family. The husband is head of the wife; not the wife of\n    the husband.\n\n    But can a husband sue his wife if she refuses to support him\n    out of her property, to give him her earnings, or keep her\n    marriage contract? Not at all. Can a father sue his minor\n    child that refuses him obedience and service? Not at all.\n    And why is this? For the same reason that he cannot sue his\n    flocks or his herds, his oxen and his cattle\u2014they are his.\n    His to command. He is responsible for and to them. He cannot\n    sue his own. He can sue any one who takes them away; any one\n    who keeps or harbors them; any one who injures them; because\n    they are his own. But the wife does not own her husband; the\n    child does not own the father, and, therefore, I hold that the\n    child cannot sue for an injury to the father, nor the wife for\n    an injury to the husband. There is in her no property right\n    upon which to found the action. My conviction is that the wife\n    looks to her husband alone for the fulfillment of his marriage\n    vows. If he refuses her the support, protection and love which\n    he pledged her, she applies to a court to enforce the claim\n    against him. Every dollar he has, every penny of his earnings,\n    all his arm can gain or his intellect can attain are subject\n    to her right. But she looks to her husband alone, the law\n    compels her to do so. The husband enforces his claim to his\n    wife by striking down every one who interferes with his right\n    to her. He holds her and dares the world to meddle with her.\n    The law protects him in holding. The law gives courage to his\n    heart, strength to his arm in defending his position. But the\n    wife looks to the husband. She relies upon his pledge and his\n    promise, which the law will enforce, and she looks to that\n    alone. The law does not permit her to go forth to smite the\n    seducer of her husband, nor the man or woman who entices him\n    away.\n\nBut as showing the rapid growth of public opinion in favor of the\nwife\u2019s equality of right with the husband, through the persistent\nrebellion of woman against established laws and usages of Church and\nStates, thus forcing an advancing civilization upon the world, was a\ndecision rendered 1891, twelve years later, in the state of Indiana.\nThe case was that of Leah Haynes, plaintiff, against Flora Knowles,\ndefendant; a suit similar in character to the \u201cLucy Walker Case.\u201d Judge\nElliot in Supreme Court of that State, on appeal from the decision\nof the Circuit Court of Dearborn County, reversed the finding of the\nlower court, deciding in favor of the right of a wife to sue for the\nalienation of her husband\u2019s affections. This decision, so contrary to\ncommon law, and to ordinary christian legislation for woman, is proof\nof an advancing civilization which does not look to the church for\napproval. Court decisions of this character establishing a precedent,\nare of far greater value in demonstrating the growth of a purer public\nsentiment, than are simple legislative victories upon school or\nmunicipal questions. They speak even more clearly than do the host of\nnewly opened industries, freer opportunities for education, married\nwoman\u2019s property laws and similar legislation, of a growing recognition\nof woman\u2019s personal rights, and of a civilization founded upon the\ncommon rights of humanity, and no longer upon church authority.\n\nThe general spirit and letter of the christian laws of husband and wife\nwas most fully carried out by a husband of the state of Missouri a few\nyears since. Mrs. Olive Davenport of St. Louis, suing for a divorce,\nupon the ground that her husband required her to obey him in all\nthings. \u201cDavenport\u2019s rules for his Wife\u201d were offered in evidence.\n\n    Rules for the Government of my Wife\u2019s Conduct while away from\n    me, June 1, 1879:\n\n    First: Not to speak to any person or allow any person to speak\n    to her on the car except the conductor and porter in the\n    discharge of their duty.\n\n    Second: Go directly from depot in New York, to Mrs. Haight\u2019s\n    house, and occupy room with mother and sleep only in room.\n\n    Third: Speak kindly and politely to Mrs. Haight, but not in\n    a friendly or familiar manner. Say to her you do not wish to\n    meet any one in the house. Ask for a table to yourself, with\n    only your family or go somewhere else.\n\n    Fourth: Never sing in the parlor or sing in your room when any\n    person except your immediate family be present.\n\n    Fifth: Never leave mother day or night for five minutes at\n    a time for any reason whatsoever. Do not walk, ride, or go\n    anywhere without her, even with your own brother.\n\n    Sixth: Do not call on any person whatsoever, and allow no one\n    who may call on you to see you unless they be your brothers or\n    their wives. Do not speak to any person you may meet whom you\n    have not known in the past.\n\n    Seventh: Write every night to me a full, truthful and exact\n    account of everything you have done, where you have been, to\n    whom you have spoken, and whom you have seen. This must be\n    done every night.\n\n    Let nothing but sickness or death prevent your keeping these\n    rules, for I will excuse no breach on any account.\n\n    Do not leave New York even for one hour without my permission,\n    except to Brooklyn or Harlem.\n\n    If my wife cannot keep these rules in word and spirit, I\n    desire never to see her again.\n\n    Benjamin R. Davenport.\n\nThe divorce suit showed the married pair to have been separated once\nbefore, Mrs. Davenport, unable to bear her husband\u2019s tyranny, returning\nto her mother\u2019s house. At that time her husband required her to eat\nonly what he directed, and to wear only those clothes he bade her wear,\nselecting even the color of her ribbons. The only fault he had to find\nwith her was that she \u201ctalked back,\u201d which has always been deemed\nan unpardonable crime in woman; one for which the Ducking Stool and\nScold\u2019s Bridle were invented. After she left him, Mr. Davenport wrote\naffectionate letters to his wife, calling her the sweetest and best of\nwomen, imploring her to return. She relented and lived with him once\nmore, but her husband again put his rules in force. She then sued for a\ndivorce, which the court granted. Mr. Davenport\u2019s treatment of his wife\nis by no means exceptional. The following excerpt is from a letter in\nthe Terra Haute, Ind., _Mail_, 1884.\n\n    An individual who considers himself a representative man in\n    the city, and perhaps he is, said in the presence of several\n    persons. \u201cI went home at three o\u2019clock this morning and found\n    my wife sitting up. She burst into tears and asked me where\n    I had been and why I treated her in that manner? I just told\n    her if she said another word I would leave the house; that as\n    long as she had a comfortable home where she could spend her\n    evenings it was none of her business where I spent mine. Now,\n    if I did not provide for my family, it would be a different\n    thing but so long as my wife is well provided for, she has no\n    right to complain and I don\u2019t propose to allow it.\u201d These are\n    the man\u2019s own words, and there are a great many men who hold\n    the same opinions. If their wives protest because they drink,\n    gamble and spend their nights away, they say, \u201cYou have a good\n    home and enough to eat and wear; what more do you want?\u201d\n\nA lady of Richmond, Va., anxious to know from a legal source just what\nher rights as a wife were, consulted a lawyer of that city.\n\n    \u201cWell, Madam,\u201d he replied, head thrown back, thumbs in\n    armholes: \u201cWell, Madam, you have a right to comfortable food;\n    a fire to keep you warm, and two calico dresses a year. These\n    are your legal rights; all beyond these are the gifts of your\n    husband. Luxuries of food and clothing, journies and books,\n    these are not yours by law; it remains with your husband to\n    decide whether he will furnish them to you or not.\u201d\n\nAnd this is Christian civilization for woman at the close of the\nnineteenth century of this era.\n\nAlthough married women of the State of New York have enjoyed certain\nproperty rights since 1848, subsequent legislation in various ways\nincreasing that power, it was not until 1882, that the Court of\nAppeals decided them to be the rightful owners of articles of personal\nadornment and convenience coming from their husbands, possessing\npower to bequeath them at death to their heirs. The same year the\nSupreme Court of that state decided that a wife may sue her husband for\ndamages for assault and battery. The influence of these decisions in\nrecognizing woman\u2019s rights of person, especially that of the Supreme\nCourt in deciding the right of the wife to punish the husband through\nthe courts for brutal treatment, can scarcely be overestimated. It\nopened a new era for woman:\n\nFirst: A recognition of the wife\u2019s personality.\n\nSecond: Holding the husband responsible for his treatment of the wife.\n\nThird: An acknowledgement of the wife\u2019s right to protection as against\nthe husband. It destroyed, in this state the old _femme covert_\nteaching of Christianity, and recognized a wife as possessing the\ncommon rights of a human being.\n\nThe United States, making pretense of the greatest governmental freedom\nin the world, and in reality according it to men of every color and\ndegree of intelligence or property, still denies such liberty to woman.\nIn many of the states, the old restrictions of modern common law still\nprevail. There are states where the property of the wife upon marriage\nfalls into the control of the husband, to do with as he alone pleases,\nthe wife not retaining the right to its use or its management in any\nway whatsoever. There are other states where the separate property of\nthe husband and the wife is made communal, but in those states the\ncontrol of this communal property is in the husband\u2019s hands. In most\nstates the old restrictions still exist, and a woman cannot make a\nwill; cannot act as executrix or administratrix; can neither sue nor\nbe sued. In the largest proportion of the states in which the separate\nproperty of the wife is recognized, the husband still has the advantage\nin heirship. In less than one-fifth of the states has the wife the\nsame control over the children of the marriage as the husband. In the\nremaining four-fifths and over, the father is assumed to be sole owner\nof the children, who can be bound out, willed or given away without the\nconsent or even knowledge of the mother. Can barbarism go farther than\nthis?\n\nSo that even in this year 1892, within eight years of the Twentieth\nChristian century, we find the largest proportion of the United States\nstill giving to the husband custody of the wife\u2019s person; the exclusive\ncontrol of the children of the marriage; of the wife\u2019s personal and\nreal estate; the absolute right to her labor and all products of her\nindustry. In no state does the law recognize the legal existence\nof the wife, unless she relinquishes her own name, upon marriage,\ntaking that of her husband, thus sinking her identity in his; the old\n_femme covert_,\u2014or covered woman,\u2014idea of the law books under state\nand church. That woman is an individual with the right to her own\nseparate existence, has not yet permeated the thought of church, state\nor society. A letter to the American press from Rev. Robert Laird\nCollyer, while re-visiting his native country a few years since, gives\nthe unbiased views of a native-born English clergyman, as to woman\u2019s\nposition in that land of christian civilization, the husband being\nrepresented as king of the household, the wife as his dutiful subject.\nThe letter was headed:\n\n    MARRIAGE CUSTOMS IN ENGLAND\n\n    The Man King of the House, the Woman His Dutiful Subject.\n\n    The man is the king of the English household, and the wife is\n    only the prime minister. There is no confusion or overlapping\n    of authority. The will of the husband is law. He has not\n    only the place of honor but of ease. The arrangements of the\n    house, the company entertained, and the service employed,\n    all have respect to his wishes and to his convenience. The\n    wife conducts the affairs of state for the king. She has her\n    household and, more than likely, her personal allowance, and\n    she renders a strict account of stewardship either weekly or\n    monthly.\n\n    The wife\u2019s personal expenditures are less, much less than\n    the husband\u2019s. In many instances he will spend more on his\n    dress as a man than she does as a woman, for the rule is, the\n    Englishman is the best-dressed man and the English woman is\n    the worst dressed in the civilized world.\n\n\u201cThe will of the husband is law,\u201d the wife possessing no freedom,\nbut renders \u201ca strict account of her stewardship, either weekly or\nmonthly.\u201d Kicks, blows, wounds inflicted upon the wife under the\ncountenance of the civil law; the will of the husband as undisputed\nlaw; her person, her property, her children under his sole control;\nwhat is the condition of the wife in England today but one of degraded\nslavery? That every woman does not endure all these wrongs is simply\nbecause she has a lenient master. Like Adolph under St. Clair, in\n_Uncle Tom\u2019s Cabin_, she has freedom because a good master allows her\nto take it; under a bad master she suffers as Adolph when falling into\nthe hands of Legree. Personal rights are the basis of all other rights;\npersonal slavery is the root of all other wrongs. Neither freedom of\nthe intellect or conscience can exist without freedom of person. Thus\ncivilization has not yet existed, that which has borne the name having\nbeen but the thought of the few; the civilization of the present is\nnot enlightened, it belongs to the barbarous ages; authority and not\njustice is the rule. To the present time the lenient sentence imposed\nupon the English husband who beats his wife is such as to invite a\nrepetition of the offense; knocking a wife down, beating and bruising\nher with a poker are rights secured to the husband under present\nEnglish law.\n\n    A man named Hefferon, at Rotherham, finding his wife had gone\n    to some place of which he disapproved, knocked her down and\n    beat her violently with a poker. She bled from both ears, her\n    throat was scratched, and she was badly bruised on her back\n    and arms. Mr. Justice Day practically told the jury to acquit.\n    He said the case ought not to have come before them, and he\n    suggested that the prisoner had been merely exercising that\n    control over his wife which was still sanctioned by the law of\n    England.[43] The jury acquitted promptly, as directed.[44]\n\nTo such extent is this abuse of woman under law as to have called forth\na vigorous article in the _Westminister Review_,[45] under head of \u201cThe\nLaw in Relation to Woman.\u201d\n\n    There is another cruel injustice to woman, which is so\n    notorious as to have become a mere truism. It is referred to\n    almost daily, yet familiarity has bred such contempt, that it\n    goes on unchecked and unabated. We refer to the monstrously\n    lenient sentences passed upon husbands who assault and beat\n    their wives. In one of our criminals courts recently, two\n    men and a woman were sentenced to six years penal servitude\n    for stealing a watch by force, while a man who assaulted and\n    grievously wounded his wife and mother-in-law with a reaping\n    hook, got eighteen months\u2019 imprisonment. An instance occurred\n    the other day in a small municipal court. A man pleaded guilty\n    to assaulting and kicking his wife and another woman with\n    effusion of blood and injury to their persons. He was fined a\n    pound for each female. Shortly after two men were convicted\n    of injuring public seats belonging to the municipality, by\n    knocking them about, etc., they were fined two pounds each.\n    Clearly, therefore, in the eyes of this magistrate a municipal\n    seat is worth exactly twice the value of a woman. Parallel\n    sentences to these may be seen almost daily in the newspapers\n    in any part of the United Kingdom. In the police courts,\n    wife-beaters often get off with a few days imprisonment,\n    sometimes with an admonition. If it be argued that theft is\n    such a common offense that it is necessary that it should be\n    punished with greater severity than cruelty, we rejoice that\n    the argument applies quite as forcibly to wife-beating, which,\n    unfortunately is as common an offence as can be found among a\n    certain class of society.[46]\n\nThe comparison here shown between the penalty of criminally assaulting\nand wounding women, not alone the man\u2019s wife but also her aged mother,\nmost forcibly shows the entire disregard of Christian England in the\nlast half of the nineteenth century, for the personal rights of all\nwomen. No proof is needed other than such decisions; nor is the United\nStates far in advance. Within ten months from the formation of the\n\u201cProtective Agency for Women and Children,\u201d organized in Chicago, April\n1886, it had investigated nearly one hundred complaints. Although in a\nmajority of these cases the agency was successful in securing redress,\nit yet found there was not legal remedy where the husband and father\nfailed to provide for his family; and that in cases of crimes against\nwomen, its efforts were crippled by the disposition of police justices\nto regard such crimes as venial offenses, either dismissing such cases\nupon frivolous pretexts or imposing light sentences. Nothing could\nmore clearly demonstrate women\u2019s degraded condition in the nineteenth\ncentury of christian civilization, than the almost universal demand\nfor laws securing better protection to women and children. These two\nclasses, unrecognized by church or state, are still largely without\nthat pale of protection man has reared for himself. January 23, 1886,\nthe _Inter Ocean_, gave more than six columns to an account of the\ndreadful crimes committed against women and children in Chicago alone,\nwithin the short period of the preceding four months. It also showed\nthe ease with which criminals of that class escaped punishment, not\nalone from laxity of protective legislation for their victims but still\nmore from the tendency of magistrates to ignore crimes perpetrated\nby men against women; this condition being the natural result of the\nteaching of the church in regard to woman. In the city of Boston, 1884,\nthe Chief of Police, testified that there were at least fifteen cases\nof brutal wife-beating in that city every week, and this is but one\ntype of the injuries perpetrated upon women for which the teachings\nof christianity are directly responsible. So common this crime and so\nineffective all efforts to stop it, that the State of Delaware has\nre-established the long abolished whipping-post, for offenders of this\ncharacter, thus acknowledging christian civilization to be a failure,\nand resorting to the retributive punishment common among barbarians.\nBut the remedy for crimes against women, and for the indifference of\nmagistrates, does not lie in the punishment of the offenders, but in\ndifferent sentiments in regard to woman in both church and state. Their\nteachings are the real foundations of the evil. Within the past ten\nyears, the judge of an English Court decided that the flogging of a\nwife in the presence of her son did not constitute cruelty, sustaining\nhis decision by reference to Blackstone and other learned christian\njurists. It was during that same year (1884) that the chief of the\nBoston police testified to the many cases of brutal wife beating in\nthat \u201cAthens of America,\u201d every week. So common this form of assault\nthat a bill was introduced in the Massachusetts lower House for the\npunishment of wife beaters, by a public whipping of not less than ten\nor more than thirty lashes.[47] For those refractory wives of mediaeval\nchristian England, whom whippings failed to subdue, other punishments\nwere invented; such as the \u201cDucking Stool,\u201d the \u201cScold\u2019s Bridle,\u201d\netc.[48] The Scold\u2019s Bridle, also known as the Witches Bridle and the\nBrank, was an extremely painful method of torture, although not as\nabsolutely dangerous to life as the Ducking Stool, yet fastened in the\nmouth, its sharp edges pressing down upon the tongue, if the \u201cBrawling\nWoman\u201d attempted to speak her tongue was cut and the torture great.[49]\nAn American clergyman describing in a public lecture an \u201cancient\nmachine\u201d seen by him in christian England, \u201cfor curing a scolding\nwife,\u201d accompanied his description by the very clerical intimation\nthat it could now be made by an ordinary blacksmith. Two curved plates\nof bronze conformed to the shape of the head, were delicately hinged\nand provided with hooks to place in the corners of the mouth. When\nadjusted, the machine was buckled back of the head.[50]\n\nThe Ducking Stool[51] consisted of a chair securely fastened upon a\nlong plank balanced upon upright standards, and so arranged that the\nvictim could be launched sixteen or eighteen feet into the pond or\nstream, while the executioner of the sentence stood upon dry ground.\nThe back and arms of the chair were engraved with representations of\ndevils torturing scolds. The culprit securely fastened in this chair,\nso confined as to be entirely helpless, was sometimes drowned; the\nchair being plunged once, twice, or thrice in some muddy stream or\nslimy pond. The suggestive and usual place of storing the Ducking\nStool, when not in use, was the church-yard. Almost every English town\nof importance possessed one; their use was continued until the present\ncentury. The Leominster Ducking Stool, still preserved, was used in\n1809, by order of the magistrates, upon a woman named Jane Corran, who\nreceived her punishment near Kenwater Bridge. As late as 1817 Sarah\nLeeke was wheeled around town in this chair, although the lowness of\nthe stream prevented the ducking[52] she would otherwise have received.\nRailing and scolding or \u201canswering back,\u201d were deemed crimes on the\npart of the wife, who, \u201ccommanded to be under obedience,\u201d was expected\nsilently to submit to oppression of every kind. That she did not\u2014that\nshe dared revolt by words\u2014that women in sufficient number to cause\nthe invention of such an instrument, were rebellious in midst of the\nhorrid oppression created by the church, speaks well for the womanly\nnature and thrills the heart with admiration the same as when old\nMargaret Pole, Countess of Salisbury, refused to lay her head on the\nblock at the executioner\u2019s mandate, declaring that as she was innocent,\nshe would not voluntarily place herself in position for death. While\nEngland has the shame of originating the Ducking Stool, the \u201cPilgrim\nFathers,\u201d fleeing from religious persecution, failed not to take\nwith them the implements of cruelty used in the domestic oppression\nof woman. The Ducking Stool, and the \u201cStool of Penitence\u201d figure in\nthe early annals of New England. Upon the latter, the Scarlet Letter\nof shame affixed upon her breast, the unmarried mother was forcibly\nseated beneath the pulpit, under public gaze, while her companion in\nsin protected by church and state, perchance held his place among\nthe elders in the jury box, or upon the bench as the judge who had\ncondemned her. Old Colonial legislation makes us acquainted with the\nvarious methods in use for punishing the free speech of women in this\ncountry two hundred years since.\n\n    \u201cA Law to Punish Babbling Women\u201d enacted by the General\n    Assembly, of Virginia, 1662.\n\n    Whereas, many babbling women slander and scandalize their\n    neighbors, for which their poor husbands are often involved\n    in chargable and vexatious suits and cost in great damages.\n    Be it therefore enacted by the authority aforesaid, that in\n    actions of slander caused by the wife, after judgment passed\n    for damages, the wife shall be punished by ducking; and if\n    the slander be so enormous as to be judged at greater damages\n    than 500 lbs. of tobacco, then the wife to suffer ducking for\n    each 500 pounds of tobacco adjudged against the husband, if he\n    refuses to pay the tobacco.\n\nAs this was the state in which wives were bought in exchange for\ntobacco, it is not surprising to find the penalty of her free speech\nto be paid in tobacco, the wife to suffer ducking for each 500 pounds\npenalty in excess of the first. Massachusetts was not long in following\nthe example of Virginia, and in 1672 ten years later, passed\n\n    A Law for the Punishment of Scolds in Massachusetts.\n\n    Whereas, there is no express punishment (by law hitherto\n    established) affixed to the evil practice of sundry persons\n    by exhorbitancy of tongue in reviling and scolding; it is\n    therefore ordered that all such persons convicted before any\n    court or magistrate that hath proper cognizance of the case,\n    shall be gagged, set in a ducking stool and dipped over head\n    and ears three times, in some convenient place of fresh or\n    salt water, as the court or magistrate shall judge meet.[53]\n\nNor must we believe that the punishment of women for use of the\ntongue, is of past ages. Even in the United States, women are to this\nday sometimes arraigned for free speaking. Laws to punish \u201cbabbling\nwomen\u201d enacted in colonial days are still in force. It is but a few\nyears since a woman of St. Louis was arrested and brought before a\nmagistrate as a common scold.[54] In the State of New Jersey, 1884, a\nwoman was brought before the courts, convicted, on the old grounds of\nbeing a \u201ccommon scold\u201d and fined $25, and costs. Death not infrequently\naccompanied the use of the ducking stool, the poor gagged victim, her\nhands securely fastened, being utterly unable to help herself. But\nwe do not learn that either the magistrate or the husband was held\nresponsible to the law for such death. The sufferers, like those under\nthe catholic inquisition of the fourteenth century, were deemed outside\nof the pale of sympathy or human rights, and the devils depicted upon\nthe back of ducking stools as laying hold of their victims, were\nconceded to have but taken their rightful prey.\n\nSuch has been part of Christian legislation for women in America, and\nyet she is told to see how much Christianity has done for her. To such\nextent has this church doctrine of man\u2019s superiority to woman, and\nthe right of the husband to control of the wife proceeded, that many\nhusbands believe they possess the right to sell their wives. Since the\nreformation her sale in the market-place as an animal, held by a halter\nabout her waist, has been recognized by English law even as late as the\npresent century. Although now forbidden, the practice of wife-sale is\nstill occasionally found both in England and in America. But when the\nlaw takes cognizance of such a sale its penalty is visited upon the\ninnocent wife and not upon the guilty husband. The _English Women\u2019s\nSuffrage Journal_ of December 1st, 1883, reported such a case.\n\n    November 13th, 1883, Betsy Wardle, was indicted for having\n    on the 4th of September, 1882, married George Chusmall, her\n    former husband being alive. The prisoner pleaded guilty, but\n    said her former husband gave her no peace and sold her for a\n    quart of beer. She imagined this was a legal transaction, and\n    that she could marry again. The second husband was asked how\n    he came to marry the prisoner. He answered \u201cWell, I bout her.\u201d\n    The judge said, \u201cYou are not fool enough to suppose you can\n    buy another man\u2019s wife?\u201d on which he replied, \u201cI was.\u201d\n\n    Mr. Swift asked his lordship not to pass a severe sentence.\n    The prisoner imagined that because she had been sold for\n    sixpence there was nothing criminal in marrying again. His\n    lordship said it was absolutely necessary to pass some\n    punishment on _her_ to teach her that a _man_ had no more\n    right to sell his own wife than his neighbor\u2019s wife, or cow,\n    or ox, or ass, or anything that was his.\n\nThe reason given by the judge for punishing the woman, is extremely\nsuggestive of woman\u2019s condition under the law. The wife who had been\nsold, the innocent victim of this masculine transaction, was sentenced\nto a week\u2019s imprisonment with hard labor, while the man who sold her\nand the man who bought her escaped without punishment or censure. The\njudge in quoting the tenth commandment, graded the wife with the ox and\nthe ass in the belongings of a man; the decision thus ranking her with\nthe cattle of the stable.[55] To add to the infamy of the trial, it was\nthe occasion of much unseemly jesting and laughter. It took place at\nthe Liverpool Assizes before Justice Denham. His judgement paralleled\nthe decision of the \u201cSeney Trial\u201d in Ohio, 1879. The selling a wife as\na cow[56] in the market place was by no means uncommon during the early\npart of the century in England. Ashton[57] give numerous instances of\nsuch sales.\n\nThe laws of England are those of Christianity based upon the\ntheological teaching of man\u2019s superiority over woman; she is his\nservant, subordinate to him in all things, a condition except where\nremoved by special statute, existing today.[58] Returned missionaries\nwho refer to the wife as waiting upon the husband at table in heathen\ncountries not eating until he is satisfied, as proof of the different\ncustoms brought about by christianity, should inform themselves of the\ncondition of the christian wife for nearly a thousand years in what is\nregarded as the foremost christian country in the world. He will then\nhave learned that circumstances quite contradictory to ecclesiasticism\nfinally permitted the English wife to assume a seat at the table with\nher husband, a place she was not allowed to take for many hundred years\nafter the introduction of christianity into that island. In every\ncountry where christianity exists, women now are, and during all the\nyears of its civil power have been, legislated for as slaves. They have\nbeen imprisoned for crimes which if committed by a man were punished\nby simply branding on the hand; they have been condemned to be buried\nalive for other crimes which if committed by a man, were atoned for\nby the payment of a fine. Having first robbed woman of her property\nand denied her the control of her own earnings, the christian religion\nallowed her to suffer the most agonizing form of death, a living\nburial, for lack of that very money of which she had been civilly and\necclesiastically robbed. The law so far controlled family life that\nfor many hundred years it bound to servile labor, all unmarried women\nbetween the ages of eleven and forty. The father possessed absolute\ncontrol over the marital destiny of his daughter.\n\nInstances of wife sale are not uncommon in the United States, and\nalthough the price is usually higher than that given for English\nwives, reaching from three hundred to four thousand dollars, still,\nas low a sum as five cents has been recorded. A prosperous resident\nof Black Hills, Dakota, is said to have begun his business start in\nlife through sale of his wife. If a wife is a husband\u2019s property the\nsame as a cow, it is manifestly unjust that legal punishment of any\nkind should fall upon her because of her master\u2019s action. She is\nirresponsible. The right of sale logically goes with the right of\nbeating, of taking the wife\u2019s property and holding her earnings, of\nowning her children and she should be exempt from punishment for her\nown sale. In a much larger measure we find the same rule of punishing\nwives for the crimes of husbands, enforced in the United States, in the\npenalty of disfranchisement of the women of Utah for the polygamy of\nthe men of Utah. And this penalty was extended not alone to the wives\nof polygamous husbands\u2014themselves possessing but one husband\u2014victims\nalike of church and state, but the non-Mormon or \u201cGentile Women\u201d of\nthat territory, were also disfranchised by the XLIX Congress of the\nUnited States because of the polygamy of a portion of the Mormon men;\nall women of that territory were deprived of their vested rights,\nrights that had been in existence for seventeen years, because of the\ncrimes of men.[59] Against this injustice, the Woman Suffragists of the\ncountry protested through means of a committee in a\n\n    MEMORIAL.\n\n    _To the President of the United States_:\n\n    The National Woman Suffrage Association, through this\n    committee, respectfully present to you a protest against\n    that clause of the anti-polygamy measure passed by congress,\n    which, whether in the Edmunds bill of the senate or the Tucker\n    substitute of the house, disfranchises the non-polygamous\n    women of Utah.\n\n    The clause relating to the disfranchisement of women has no\n    bearing on the general merits of the end sought to be attained\n    by the measure, since Mormon men are the majority of the\n    voters of the territory.\n\n    The non-polygamous women of Utah have committed no crime.\n    Disfranchisement is reserved by the United States government\n    for arch traitors. Justice forbids that such a penalty should\n    be inflicted on innocent women.\n\n    Non-polygamous Mormon women and the Christian women of Utah\n    being thus disfranchised\u2014the former for their opinions and\n    the latter for the opinions of the former\u2014a precedent is\n    established subversive of the fundamental principles of our\n    government, and threatening the security of all citizens.\n\n    If congress deems it necessary to disfranchise citizens\n    because of injurious beliefs, discrimination between sexes is\n    manifestly unjust.\n\n    It has been held by the foremost statesmen of the nation that\n    the right of suffrage once exercised, becomes a vested right\n    which cannot be taken away. Gratz Brown once said, in the\n    senate of the United States, that if the idea that suffrage\n    could be taken away at pleasure once crystallized in the minds\n    of the people, it would \u201cring the death knell of American\n    liberty.\u201d Mr. Vest, of Missouri, on the 25th day of this\n    month, said, on the floor of the senate: \u201cSuffrage once given\n    can never be taken away. Legislatures and conventions may do\n    everything else; they never can do that. When any particular\n    class or fraction of the community is once invested with this\n    privilege it is fixed, accomplished and eternal.\u201d\n\n    Thus every argument for justice, equal legislation and the\n    safety of our republican form of government calls for the\n    defeat of this clause.\n\n    We, therefore, respectfully urge you, as guardian of the\n    rights of all American citizens, to veto any measure coming\n    before you which disfranchises the women of Utah.\n\n    Lillie Devereux Blake,\n    Matilda Joslyn Gage,\n    Caroline Gilkey Rogers,\n    Mary Seymour Howell,\n    Clara B. Colby,\n    Sarah Miller,\n    Elizabeth Boynton Harbert,\n    Harriette R. Shattuck,\n    Louisa Southworth,\n\n    Committee\n\nThis memorial, supplemented by personal argument from the committee\ndemonstrating the political dangers connected with such a denial of\nvested rights, together with the greater injustice of punishing women\nfor the crimes of men, was met by reply of the President that as great\nchanges were frequently made in bills before their final passage, he\nhad as yet not given the subject much thought; promising, however to\ngive it his fullest attention whenever brought before him. The method\ntaken by the president to avoid responsibility of decision, is notable\nas he neither signed nor vetoed the bill, but allowed it to become law\nthrough such non-action. Crimes of omission being parallel with those\nof commission, the women of the United States can but hold Grover\nCleveland equally guilty with the XLIX Congress in punishing women for\nthe crimes of men.\n\nThe Code of England, from which that of the United States is largely\nborrowed, was the outgrowth of Christianity, based upon a belief\nin man\u2019s superiority and woman\u2019s subordination to him as entering\nevery relation of life. All legislation was class; the line was\nsex. During the early and middle ages man exhibited an antagonism\ntowards woman,[60] which if not wholly created by religious belief\nwas strenuously fostered by the church. Man\u2019s basest passion, love\nof power, was appealed to and he was assured by what he had been\ntrained to regard as indisputable authority, that God had ordained\nhis rule over woman. A quick response met all such priestly teaching.\nChristianity has ever been a religion of the emotions rather than of\nthe reason. The former was cultivated; the latter bitterly condemned.\nThe church has ever found its most powerful enemy in reason, hence the\nexercise of reason has ever been a crime in her eyes.\n\nDuring the Christian ages the different code of morals for man and\nwoman has created infinite wrong. Open and notorious vice among both\nchurchmen and laymen passed unreproved, but an heiress forfeited her\npossessions by unchastity, and wily plans were laid to thus gain\npossession of her property, the betrayer receiving payment from the\nguardian, whose tool he was, for his perfidy.[61] To this moral code we\ntrace the present legal condition of girls, daughters having no status\nin the courts in case of betrayal. The father alone, as master and\nowner, can sue for loss of her services, while the injury to herself\nis passed by, even upon so momentous a question as the paternity of a\nchild born out of wedlock.\n\nMany of the most flagrant wrongs perpetrated against woman can be\ntraced to a denial of a right of ownership, beginning with the denial\nof her right to herself. Even the Salic law which in France was used\nto bar the succession of woman to the throne, was not specifically\nor primarily in favor of males; it was a property law growing out\nof the patriarchal idea of property in woman. Under Christian form\nof marriage, woman was transferred to another family whose name she\ntook. She not only became the property of her husband but all real or\npersonal estate which she possessed, also became his. Thus her property\nwent to the enrichment of another family. Her home was no longer with\nher own people, but where her husband chose to make it. Salic law\nderived its name from Sala, a house. Salic land, said Montesquieu, was\nthe land belonging to the house.[62] At time of its adoption the line\nof descent was male. Under it during the middle ages when a daughter\nmarried, she received merely a chaplet of roses. Thenceforth, her\ninterests were elsewhere, and her children became part of another\nfamily; she was entirely lost to the family of her birth. As she was\nno longer a part of it she did not receive inheritance. \u201cIt was not a\nsubject of affection but gens.\u201d\n\nGuizot with a fine sense of irony, termed Salic law essentially a penal\ncode. Its application to woman was incontestibly penal. In France its\naction has been most pronounced. Robertson speaks of the Salic law as\nthe most venerable monument of French jurisprudence, although the real\nperiod of its birth has never yet been fully acknowledged. While during\nthe struggle of Phillippa de Valours, and Edward III for the crown of\nFrance, this law was invoked to prevent the succession of Phillippa,\nyet we know that in Gaul during the time of Caesar, mothers had sole\nauthority over their children, even boys remaining in entire charge\nof the mother until old enough for instruction in arms. Wives also\npossessed property rights, upon marriage the husband adding the same\namount of property he had received with his wife. This was kept as a\nseparate fund, the survivor taking the whole. Hallum designated the\ncontest between Phillippa and Edward as in every way remarkable, but\nespecially on account of its result in the exclusion of woman from the\nsuccession,[63] then first suggested. It was the Latin races rather\nthan the Scandinavian or Teutonic that first essentially degraded\nwoman. The Riparian Franks, pre-eminent as lovers of liberty, were the\nfirst who broke away from the rule of this law. Both the Scandinavians\nand Teutons possessed prophetic women or priestesses to whom the\nhighest deference was shown. The Teutonic races were early noted for\nthe high respect in which they held women, a respect closely bordering\nupon veneration. The greatest deference was shown to their opinions\neven upon war, the chief business of men\u2019s lives. Victoria received the\ntitle of \u201cMother of Camps,\u201d and was an especially venerated person.\nVeleda by superior genius, directed the counsels of the nation and for\nnine years prevented the progress of the imperial armies of Rome. The\nmost momentous questions of state and of religion were submitted to\nwoman\u2019s divine judgment.\n\nThe relation between the wrongs of woman and her non-ownership of\nproperty, and of herself, are very complicated. The custom of Marquette\noriginated from the theory of property in woman; the Suzerain or lord\npossessing not only a certain property right in his male vassals, but\na double right to the woman who as a bride became the property of his\nvassal. Thus Marquette was the outgrowth of the husband\u2019s property\nright in his wife, and a secondary result of man\u2019s assumed right of\nproperty in woman. In France, where the Salic law possessed greatest\nstrength we find the custom of marquette most prevalent. Next to\nmarquette, the law known as \u201cMund\u201d or \u201cMundium\u201d offered the greatest\nindignity to woman, and in some respects may be called more vile. While\nthe baseness of marquette took its victims from a class beneath the\nlord in social standing, Mundium entered the family, the father selling\nhis daughter to such wooer as he chose, or from whom he received the\ngreatest payment, entirely regardless of the wishes of the daughter\nherself. The Salic law seemed to have been founded on the principle\nof the Mund, as under it a sum was paid by the husband to the family\nof the bride in consideration of the transference of the authority\nthey possessed over her, to the husband, and this payment was known\nas \u201cMundium\u201d and the bride as a \u201cMund\u201d bought woman. In Denmark, to\nwhich country the custom of mundium extended, her appellation was\n\u201cmundikeypt-krom,\u201d signifying a mund bought woman. At that period\ndescent was reckoned from the father, to whom alone the children were\nheld to be related, and his relinquishment of authority by sale of his\ndaughter, transferred her relationship from her father to her husband,\nand she thus became a component part of another family. She no longer\nbelonged to the family of her birth, but to that of her purchaser. The\nFranks were the first to break Salic customs and to permit a father to\nsettle an estate upon his daughter and her children.[64] Under the law\nof Gavelkind as it existed in Great Britain, daughters never inherited,\nalthough the rights of even an illegitimate son was recognized as equal\nto those of legitimate sons. By the laws of gavelkind, property could\nnot descend to women, but the County of Kent possessed more freedom\nthan in any other part of England. There was a custom of privilege\nannexed to all lands of this kind in Kent, among them, that the wife\nshould be endowed with a moiety; gavelkind land was devisable by will.\nOrdinarily in gavelkind, property was kept in male hands, descending\nfrom father to son. The very name gavelkind is said to bear this\nsignification, the word _Kynd_ is dutch signifying a male child, thus\n_gife eal cyn_, means give all to the son. Its modern signification is\nthe custom of partition of property among males alone, or the greatest\nshare to the oldest son.\n\nLord Coke looked upon the practice of gavelkind among the Irish as a\nmark of their descent from the ancient Britons. At this period wives\nwere not entitled to dower, thus in respect to property, all women\nof the family were equally disinherited. But it was the opinion of\nLord Holt that by the Common Law, both before and after the conquest,\nall the children, both male and female inherited both the real and\nthe personal estate, and in like proportion. But in the reign of\nHenry I daughters, in case there were sons, began to be excluded from\nthe real estate. These laws, so essentially Salic, it can readily\nbe seen, originated in the mundium. Passing as a mund woman, into\nanother family, the succession of property to her under this slave[65]\ncondition, was contrary to sound domestic policy. To bestow property\nupon a daughter was to enrich another family at the expense of the one\nfrom whom the slave-wife was purchased, and her disinheritance was but\na logical result of her legal condition. If we admit the premises we\nmust admit the wisdom of her exclusion from succession.\n\nIt is curious to note the difference in woman\u2019s position which\npossession of property has ever made. This difference especially\nnoticeable during Feudalism in case of an heiress with fiefs, is no\nless so at the present day. It is a mark of an unripe civilization that\nthe rights of property have ever been regarded before those of person.\nWalker[66] over sixty years since, recognized the power of property\nin ameliorating woman\u2019s condition, then declaring that the first step\ntoward an acknowledgment of her equality, must be a recognition of her\nrights of property; his broad knowledge of ancient law having taught\nhim the close connection of property rights and personal rights. During\nmany ages battle was done for possessions and the protection of what\na man owned. Even the war of the American Revolution was begun for\nproperty rights rather than for those of person. The Stamp Act and the\ntax on tea roused the Colonies to resistance. A woman first spoke the\nwords \u201cinherent rights,\u201d and by the time nationality was proclaimed\nthe colonists had learned far enough to say that \u201cgovernments derive\ntheir just powers from the consent of the governed.\u201d Consent is an\nimportant consideration in all questions affecting humanity, and is\none in which woman is most deeply concerned. At close of the civil war\nFrederick Douglass advised colored men to get property. He had not\nfailed to learn the connection between property and personal rights.\nSince Mississippi, in 1839,[67] Pennsylvania and New York in 1848, and\nRhode Island about the same period, secured property rights to married\nwomen, there has been a great and rapidly increasing change in woman\u2019s\nposition, and as she constantly enters new industries, earning and\ncontrolling money, we find her as constantly more free and respected.\nWhen the English \u201cMarried Women\u2019s Property Bill,\u201d based upon that of\nNew York, became a law a few years since, the _London Times_, with the\nperspicuity of our great thinker, Walker, said:\n\n    It probably portends indirect social effects much greater\n    than the disposition of property, and it may in the end\n    pulverize some ideas which have been at the basis of English\n    life. Measures which affect the family economy are apt to be\n    \u201cepoch making\u201d; and probably when the most talked of bills of\n    the session are clean forgotten this obscure measure may be\n    bearing fruit.\n\nThe exception of married women in the demand for political rights by\nthe women of England, owes its origin to the old monkish theory that\nmarriage is debasement, and celibate life in either man or woman a much\nhigher condition. After the passage of the Emancipation Proclamation,\nduring the civil war, John Stuart Mill declared that married women were\nthe only class of slaves remaining on earth. As long as a condition\nof religious or political subjection continues for her, a belief in\nthe sanctity of womanhood cannot exist and crimes against her will\nbe lightly punished. The most debased men of England and the United\nStates, if arrested for cruelty to wives, agree in the indignant\nquestioning protest: \u201cIs she not my own that I should punish her as I\nplease?\u201d\n\nSuch has been the power of the priesthood over the consciences and\nlives of men, that we find whatever is bad in the laws either directly\nor indirectly traceable to their influence.[68] Our Anglo Saxon\nforefathers were early amenable to religious authority and for a period\nof many hundred years clerical influence was exceedingly powerful\nover them.[69] The church is responsible for the severity with which\nthe simplest infraction of law was visited upon the most humble and\nhelpless classes, and the greater penalty awarded to those least\ncapable of resistance. It was for the free man of low estate, for the\nslave, and for woman that the greatest atrocities were reserved. If\na free woman stole she was to be thrown down a precipice or drowned,\nwhich Pike regards as the origin of dragging witches through a pond.\nIf the thief was a slave and stole from any but her own master, she\nwas condemned to be burnt alive, and her fellow slaves were compelled\nto assist at the incineration.[70] None dared to speak a good word for\nwomen in opposition to church teachings. All her instincts were held\nas evil. As the law and the father robbed the daughter, so the law and\nthe church alike robbed the family. By ancient English law, as before\nnoted, every person who made a will was bound to remember his lord with\nthe best thing he possessed, and afterwards the church with the next\nbest thing, but as the church gained power it took supreme place in\nthe testament.[71] The peasant was looked upon as but slightly above\nthe cattle he cared for. A certain degree of sameness in material and\nintellectual conditions everywhere existed. The masses over christendom\nwere alike under bondage of the thought and modes of action; social\nlife showed no marked change for many hundred years. Freedom was an\nunknown word, or if by chance spoken, found itself under the ban of\nthe church and the state. Justice was unthought of; the only question\nbeing, \u201chas the church ordered it?\u201d A complete system of espionage\nexisted under both church and state. As late as the time of Alfred,\nin England, every nine men were under charge of a tenth. No man could\nwork outside of his father\u2019s employment to which he was bound; at\nnine o\u2019clock curfew bell, all fires and lights were extinguished. A\nmechanic could not find work outside of his own village; monasteries\nand castles contained all there was of power and comfort. As late\nas the reformation we find the condition of English society lax and\nimmoral. Henry the VIII was a fair type of the nation; the court, the\ncamp, the church were all in line moulding the sentiment of community.\nAlthough Henry had declared the church to be an entire and perfect body\nwithin itself, possessing authority to regulate and decide all things\nwithout dependence upon any foreign power\u2014meaning the pope,\u2014he did not\nfail to generally define the supremacy of the church as united with and\ndependent upon the temporal government of the realm; the king, instead\nof the pope, becoming its spiritual head. Many new and restrictive\ncanons were promulgated. Under Henry the prohibitory laws regarding\nnearness of relationship in marriage exceeded those of the Catholic\nChurch. It is but a few decades since these prohibitions commencing\nwith \u201ca man shall not marry his grandmother;\u201d \u201ca woman shall not marry\nher grandfather;\u201d and extending down to remote cousinship,\u2014were to be\nfound printed upon the fly leaves of every New Testament.[72]\n\nFor a long period after the reformation, English women were not\npermitted to read the Bible, a statute of the Eighth Henry prohibiting\n\u201cwomen and others of low degree,\u201d from its use.[73] Apparently for the\npurpose of preventing conversation among women regarding the tyranny\nunder which they were kept, a law was passed forbidding the residence\nof more than one woman in a cottage, and this after the Protestant\nreligion had been confirmed as that of the realm. As late as Elizabeth,\n31-2, it was held a \u201cheinous offence\u201d for a cottager to give a home to\nhis own widowed mother or homeless sister. The especial criminality of\nthus \u201charboring\u201d one\u2019s female relatives lay in the fact of their being\n\u201cmasterless.\u201d As late as the XVI century the law still entered houses,\nand magistrates bound out to servile labor all women between eleven and\nforty years of age.[74] The degradation of women under the reformation\nwas still more gross than under catholicism. The worship of the Virgin\nMary, and the canonization of many women as saints in the Romish\nCalendar, threw a certain halo about womankind that is impossible to\ndiscover in the Protestant Church, or since the reformation.\n\nThe church of whatever name taught woman\u2019s innate depravity was so\ngreat that forcible restraint alone prevented her from plunging into\nvice. While Christian women outside the Levant were not confined in\na harem under watch and ward, yet various methods of restraint have\nbeen used in christian lands within the past few centuries. Among the\nmost noted of these, the \u201cChastity Belt,\u201d three are yet known to be in\nexistence. One is preserved in the museum at Cluny, France, another\nis in keeping of the Castle of Rosenburg, Copenhagen; the third was\nexhibited in the United States, 1884, by Dr. Heidmann\u2019s traveling\nmuseum. According to tradition the one persevered at Cluny was in use\nduring the XVI Century, in reign of Francis I, who ascended the throne\nJanuary 1, 1515; the remaining two in Denmark under Christian IV in the\nseventeenth century. At this period Denmark was greatly agitated by a\nreligious war, which however, did not include woman\u2019s freedom in its\ndemands. These belts are hideous proofs of the low estimate in which\nwoman\u2019s moral character was held, and equally striking evidence of\nman\u2019s freedom and immorality.\n\nThe disrespect shown by the clergy towards marriage as compared with\nthe celibate condition, has influenced thought in many singular\ndirections. England\u2019s married women under the combined influence of\nchurch and state deprecate the claim of suffrage for themselves,\nalthough asking it for single women and widows.[75]\n\nThe bill referred to in the Memorial, 49 Vic., extended Parliamentary\nfranchise to single women alone.\n\n    Second Sec. For all purposes of and incidental to the voting\n    for members to serve in Parliament, women shall have the same\n    rights as men, and all enactments relating to, or concerned\n    in such election shall be construed accordingly. Provided\n    that nothing in this Act contained shall enable women under\n    coverture to be registered or to vote at such elections.\n\nThe word \u201ccoverture\u201d expresses a married woman\u2019s subordinate condition,\nboth civilly and religiously.[76] It means, under the power of the\nhusband; controlled by the husband; possessing neither personal nor\nindividual rights; a being not allowed to use her own judgment unless\nsuch judgment is ratified by the husband. Under coverture, the wife can\nmake no contract without the husband\u2019s consent, the law holding her\nincompetent. A woman under coverture is an irresponsible being except\nin case of crime. When married women refuse to seek the same freedom\nfor themselves they ask for single women, they practically endorse\nthe judgment of church and state in favor of celibacy. When married\nwomen thus ignore their equality with single women, they practically\ncondemn that relation, practically affirm the superior purity of\na celibate condition.[77] The low estimate of women in England as\nlate as the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries is shown in its\nliterature, especially that emanating from its great universities. The\nbetrayal of women formed the basis of story and song; not content with\nportraying their own vices, these men did not hesitate to put a plea\nagainst chastity in the mouths of mere children. Of such character is\n\u201cA Ballad\u201d emanating from this source, but professing to have been\n\u201ccomposed by Miss Nelly Pentwenzle, a young lady of 15,\u201d to be sung to\nthe tune of \u201cScraps of Pudding.\u201d\n\nA periodical entitled _The Old Woman\u2019s Magazine_ printed in London,\nwithout date, but from internal evidence shown to belong to the\nlatter part of the eighteenth century, forcibly protests against the\ndestruction of innocence, which was the chief amusement of the men of\nthis period. It asks:\n\n    Why should it be less a crime to deceive an inexperienced girl\n    whose youth renders it impossible that she should know the\n    world, than it would be to lead a blind man to the brink of a\n    precipice?\n\nThus the laws and customs of family and social life, the literature\nof different periods, the habits of thought, the entire civilization\nof christian centuries, has tended to the debasement of woman and the\nconsequent destruction of moral life. The world stands where it does\ntoday upon all these great questions, biased by a non-recognition\nthrough the ages of the sanctity of womanhood, and a disbelief in her\nrights of person within the marriage relation, or without; taught, as\nthis lesson has been, by the church, and emphasized by the laws of the\nstate.\n\nThere have ever been many severities connected with dower in\nEngland. By old law if a widow married within a year from the death\nof her husband she forfeited her dower.[78] This law accounts for\nthe superstitious sentiment as to ill-luck following the woman who\nre-marries within a year and a day. Like the freedom of the Roman\n\u201cUsus\u201d kept up by a three days\u2019 absence in each year, this extra day\nof the widow\u2019s mourning seems to have been added as security for the\ndower; while under the most ancient law of christian Europe, the widow\nlost her dower if she married again, the Turks recognizing the greater\nfreedom of a widow, pay her who re-marries, a sum for parting with her\nliberty.\n\nThe general rule of dower[79] held that when arranged at time of\nmarriage, although the husband then possessed but a small portion of\nfreehold and afterwards made great acquisitions, if no mention of new\npurchases was made at time of such arrangement, the widow could not\nclaim more than the third part of the land possessed by the husband at\ntime of marriage. In like manner if a husband had no land and endowed\nhis wife with chattels, money, or other things, afterwards making great\nacquisitions in land, she could not claim dower in such acquisition.\nNeither could a woman dispose of her dower during her husband\u2019s life.\nThis was quite unlike the freedom enjoyed by a wife in ancient Wales\nwhere the dower became absolutely her own, to dispose of as she\npleased. Under English law the husband during the lifetime of his\nwife could give or sell or alien her dower in any way that it pleased\nhim to do, and the wife in this, as in all other things, was obliged\nto conform to the husband\u2019s will. The wife\u2019s dower right in personal\nproperty can be aliened by the husband in the United States. During\nthe wife\u2019s lifetime he may give, sell, or in any way dispose of the\nwhole of his personal property absolutely, and the wife has no redress;\nshe is not held as having any right, title or interest in it as long\nas her husband lives.[80] The husband can also alien his real estate,\nsubject only to his wife\u2019s dower right in case she survive him; should\nshe decease before him she has no power over it. The law in England as\nlaid down by Glanville was that in case the wife withheld her consent\nto the sale of property she might claim her dower after her husband\u2019s\ndeath, but this could only have had reference to real property, and is\nthe same in the United States. If the wife withholds her consent to\nthe sale of real estate, it still can be sold away from her and she\nthus be deprived of a home. It is merely subject to her dower right in\nthe value of the property at time of sale, and in case she survives\nher husband; should she die first, she has no redress. Sales of this\ncharacter are constantly made, at a small discount, upon chance of the\nwife\u2019s nonsurvival. As dower right in real estate does not invest the\nwife with its ownership in fee, but merely the use of one-third during\nher natural life, it will readily be seen how very small is the wife\u2019s\nprotection in dower-right even in this last half of the nineteenth\ncentury. Bracton gives two reasons why the English husband could sell\nthe dower assigned to the wife without her consent:\n\n    First, because a wife has no freehold in a dower previous to\n    its being assigned to her. Second, because she cannot gainsay\n    her husband.\n\nAs late as the last quarter of the present century, the learned\nProfessor of Jurisprudence of Cambridge University, attempted to\nprove that it was no reproach against woman\u2019s intellect that she was\nprohibited from making a contract during marriage; although failing\nin this attempt, he clearly succeeded in proving woman\u2019s condition of\npecuniary and personal slavery in the marriage relation. He said:\n\n    It is not an imputation on the wife\u2019s experience or strength\n    of mind, but is solely grounded on her not being assumed by\n    common law to have sufficient command of her purse or of her\n    future actions wherewith to procure materials for making a\n    contract. The legal presumption then is, that she did not\n    intend to make one, and therefore the allegation that she did\n    make a contract would imply on the face of it a fraud.[81]\n\nThe legal presumption that the wife has neither sufficient command of\nher purse or of her future actions to guarantee an intent of making\na contract, needs no further assertion to prove her enslavement. The\nperson neither possessing control of property or of their own actions\nis a slave, regardless of or under what verbiage of law or custom\nthat condition is represented. Attempts are constantly made both in\nthe United States and England to take from woman the dower right now\naccruing to them. During 1883, an Act was passed taking from English\nwives all dower right, giving the husband power to bar the wife in\nall cases; and scarcely a legislature convenes in the United States\nthat has not a similar bill introduced before it. As dower rights\nincrease the complication of land transfer, just as soon as the law\nwhich gave the husband the power to bar this right became operative in\nEngland, conveyancers began to insert a debaring clause in every deed\nof conveyance, thus systematically despoiling the wife even when the\nhusband might not otherwise have been so disposed.\n\nAs \u201cmasterless women,\u201d widows in England have received similar\ncontemptuous treatment as accorded single women, to whom that country\nlong showed such barbarity. It is curiously noted by Alexander[82]\nthat Moses placed widows in the same rank as harlots and profane\nwomen.[83] The law of tenancy by courtesy, which gives a husband rights\nin the separate property of a wife, is very unjust when compared with\nthe dower rights of a wife. In such case, provided she has borne a\nliving child, even should such child breathe but once, the husband in\ncase of the death of his wife, holds the entire real estate during\nhis life, as \u201ctenant by courtesy.\u201d He also takes the whole of her\npersonal property absolutely, to dispose of as he chooses. In a few\nof the United States, the wife can defeat this by will, but in the\nlarge majority of christian lands, the full rights \u201cof tenancy by the\ncourtesy,\u201d still prevail. Where right of dower still prevails, the wife\nif there are children, takes but one-third of the personal property\nabsolutely, one-half if there are no children, the rest passing to\ncollateral heirs, who may be the husband\u2019s most distant relatives. In\ncase no such relative can be found, the balance escheats to the state,\nalthough in the State of New York the widow, under such circumstances,\nreceives $2,000 over one half. Of the real property she has the use\nof but one-third, in contradistinction to the use of the whole of her\nreal property, which goes to the husband by \u201ctenancy of courtesy.\u201d In\ntenancy by courtesy the children are robbed of the mother\u2019s real estate\nduring the life of the father, and of her personal property, forever.\nIn enacting property laws, man, under tenancy by courtesy robs his own\nchildren. The law of inheritance in Spain, that country distinguished\namong European nations as \u201cMost Christian land,\u201d compels a man to\nleave four-fifths of his property to his children, but does not make\nit obligatory upon him to endow his wife with the remaining fifth.\nNeither has the wife a dower right in property owned by her husband at\ntime of the marriage. The suite of a Spanish widow for dower right, in\nan estate of several millions left by her deceased husband, was fully\nreported by the New York daily papers within the past five years.\nSuddenly reduced from affluence as the wife of this man, to the most\nabject poverty as his widow, this wife and mother brought suit against\nthe estate and her children, who receiving all the property by the\nhusband\u2019s will, left her absolutely beggared.\n\nIn ancient Ireland, the condition of woman was far superior to that\nof the christian women of England or Scotland. Two forms of marriage\nexisted. Under that of \u201cEqual Dignity,\u201d the rights of the contracting\nparties were the same, and took place when the man and woman possessed\nthe same amount of land, cattle, or household goods. No force or\nsale accompanied it, the woman giving free consent equally with the\nman. This marriage was looked upon as a contract between equals. The\nproperty of the wife did not revert to the husband. She retained its\ncontrol, loaning it and receiving interest entirely free from the\ninterference of her husband.[84] Ancient Irish law, also secured to\nthe mother equal authority with the father over the children of the\nmarriage. There is no trace of that arbitrary control over both wife\nand children with which Christianity endowed the father.[85] The\ndaughter was held to be more closely related to the father; a son to\nthe mother, this belief contributing an equality of right between the\nsexes. These laws were authoritative over the whole of Ireland until\nthe invasion of the Danes, in the eight century (A.D. 792).\n\nIt is remarkable what effect the ownership of property by woman has\never had in ameliorating her legal condition. Even in ancient Ireland\nthe wife without possessions became the slave of her husband. Although\nthe son was held as more nearly related to his mother, this ancient\ncode provided that in case his parents were poor and he had not wealth\nenough to support both father and mother, he was to leave the latter to\ndie in the ditch, but was to carry his father back to his own home.[86]\nTradition ascribes this code to St. Patrick in the fifth century. Under\nmodern christian law, the legal obligation of a son to support his\nfather is greater than it is to support his mother, quite in opposition\nto the old Scandinavian (pagan) law, which provided for the support of\nthe mother if but one parent could be cared for. Not the least among\nthe wrongs inflicted upon Ireland by English usurpation, has been the\ndestruction of the wife\u2019s rights of property. The right of the Irish\nwife to deal with her own property as she chose, irrespective of her\nhusband\u2019s consent, was expressly declared illegal by English judges at\nthe beginning of the seventeenth century.\n\nThere are traces of separate property rights for woman, early among\nAryan peoples. By the old laws of Wales, a wife became legal owner of\npart of her husband\u2019s effects immediately upon marrying him, and had\nthe sole disposal of this portion even during her husband\u2019s life. Debt\nowed by a husband to a wife was as binding on him and his heirs and\nexecutors as a debt to any other person. After the English laws were\nintroduced into Wales, innumerable disputes arose upon this ground. The\nWelsh woman being persistent in her determination to cling to her old\nrights, and for nearly two hundred years her will upon this subject\nwas stronger than the will of English legislators, as proven by legal\nrecords.[87] In other respects the ancient law of Wales favored woman.\nA husband\u2019s fetid breath was held as good cause for divorce on part of\nthe wife, who in such case took with her the whole of her property.\nWhile still living with her husband, the Welsh wife possessed the right\nto three kinds of property, cowyll, gowyn, and sarand, known as her\nthree peculiars.[88] Old Welsh law was unique in that it forbade both\nsatisfaction and vengeance for the same wrong. Even if detecting his\nwife in adultery, for which he should chastise her, the husband was\nforbidden any satisfaction besides that. In case of an illegitimate\nbirth the law provided that the man should wholly maintain the\nchild,[89] a species of justice not found under Christianity. The laws\nof \u201cHowell the Good,\u201d enacted at a later date under the supervision\nof the church[90] favored the man at the woman\u2019s expense. Under these\nlaws if a husband and wife separated, the father took two-thirds of\nthe children, the oldest and the youngest falling to his share, while\nthe middle one fell to the mother. A woman was not admitted as surety,\nor as a witness in matters concerning a man.[91] In the division of\nproperty the daughters received only one half the amount given to the\nsons.\n\nUnder the christian laws of England, by which the property of a married\nwoman passed entirely into the control of her husband, the abduction\nof heiresses in that country was very common for many hundred years,\nno punishment following such a theft, although the most compulsory\nmeasures were used, even to forcibly bending the bride\u2019s head in\naffirmative response during the marriage ceremony. She was a woman;\nthe law furnished her no redress. It regarded her as the legal wife of\nher abductor, to whom she thereafter under this christian law, owed\nservice and obedience. The sole right to her person, her property, her\nchildren then becoming legally invested in the robber husband. As noted\nin the opening chapter, the abduction of a woman, or even an immodest\nproposal to her, was punished in older un-christianized Scandinavia,\nby greater or lesser outlawry; rape being a capital crime, placing the\nculprit\u2019s life in the hands of any man. He was outside the pale of law.\n\nFrance under frequent changing names and forms of government, and with\na broader general recognition each year of human rights, is yet very\nclosely allied to the barbarism of the middle ages in its treatment of\nwoman, and its conception of her natural rights. This was shown even\nduring the revolution of 1787, of which Madame Roland and Charlotte\nCorday were such central heroic figures. Although this revolution\nestablished an equal succession between sons and daughters, yet it did\nnot tolerate the proposition of Sieyes and Condorcet that woman should\nbe endowed with the suffrage. One hundred years later, in 1887, a bill\nwas introduced during the legislative session, to secure to woman the\nsame political rights accorded man. This bill was lost; \u201cLe Gaulois,\u201d\ncommenting upon it, declared that in whatever manner the question was\ndiscussed, it appeared grotesque and ridiculous. In the Legislative\nAssembly of 1851, M. Chapot, proposed the prohibition of the right\nof petition to women upon all subjects of a political nature. During\nthe same session, Athenase Coquerel, the most distinguished member of\na Protestant family of clergymen, presented a bill to the Chambers\nexcluding women from political clubs. Woman\u2019s testimony is not accepted\nin regard to civil acts. They cannot attest to a birth or a death, nor\nis their testimony admitted in the identification of persons. Neither\ncan they become members of the family council, nor are they accepted\nas guardians of their own children. It is only since 1886 that their\ncondition has been in any way ameliorated. The re-marriage of widows is\nforbidden under ten months after the husband\u2019s death, and until within\nthe last decade, divorces were of great rarity. The oppressed condition\nof woman in the marriage relation, was notably shown by the vast number\nof applications for release from the hated bond upon the passage of the\nnew law; a number so great,\u2014eleven thousand,\u2014that two years scarcely\nsufficed to reach them all. No stronger argument against the evils of\nan indissoluble marriage is required, and as the greater number of\napplicants were women, it is farther evidence of woman\u2019s degradation\nunder christian marriage laws.\n\nAccording to the famous Code Napoleon, accepted by France as her modern\nsystem of jurisprudence and declared (by man) to be nearly perfect\nin its provisions, every child born outside of wedlock is deemed\nto be fatherless unless such father of his own free will formally\nacknowledges his offspring. While fifty per cent of all children born\nin Paris are illegitimate, statistics prove that such acknowledgement\ntakes place but once in fifty births. Thus forty-nine per cent of\nParisian children under the Code Napoleon, theoretically come into the\nworld without fathers\u2014they are born fatherless. A still more heinous\nprovision of this Code, forbids all research into paternity.[92]\nThe father of an illegitimate child\u2014rendered illegitimate by church\ncanons\u2014is held as both morally and legally irresponsible for his\nfatherhood. Under this Code, upon the mother falls all the contumely\nassociated with such birth, together with the care and expense of\nrearing the child. We cannot be surprised at the prevalence of\ninfanticide, a crime resulting from such unjust legislation, and\nfor which the church is directly responsible. In the whole history\nof French jurisprudence, not a single case can be found where the\nfather of an illegitimate child has been compelled to acknowledge his\noffspring.[93] Under French law, woman is a perpetual minor under the\nguardianship of her own, or that of her husband\u2019s family. Only in case\nof the birth of an illegitimate child is she treated as a responsible\nbeing, and then only that discomfort and punishment may fall upon her.\nThe same legal degradation of the unmarried mother, the same protection\naccorded the unmarried father, the same enticement of the law for man\nto assume a fatherhood freeing him from accountability, the same covert\ncontempt of womanhood and of motherhood, also exists in Italy, its\npenal code forbidding all research into paternity. And this is not the\nlegislation of the middle ages but of the nineteenth century.\n\nBut French disregard for the rights of woman, as already shown, far\npreceded the Code Napoleon; that system but legally emphasized the low\nestimate of the feminine we have traced through the Salic, Feudal,\nand Witchcraft periods. Louis VII referring to the number of girls\nborn in his dominions, requested his subjects to pray unto God that\nhe should accord them children of the better sex. Upon the birth of\nhis first child, Margaret, who afterwards married Henry Courtmantel of\nEngland, his anger was so great that he would not look at her; he even\nrefused to see his wife. He afterwards accorded an annual pension of\nthree livres to the woman who first announced to him the birth of\na son. Although five hundred years have passed since the graphic\nportrayal of woman\u2019s condition, in the ballad of the Baron of Jauioz,\nwe find the Breton farmer whose wife has given birth to a daughter,\nstill saying, \u201cmy wife has had a miscarriage.\u201d Question an ordinary\nFrench peasant in regard to his family and the father of girls alone,\nhe will reply, \u201cI have no children, sir, I have only daughters.\u201d[94]\n\nDuring the feudal period parents gave themselves up to merry-making\nand rejoicing upon the marriage of the last of their daughters.[95]\nEven yet, in some countries, the birth of a boy is announced by a\nservant wearing a white apron and carrying two bouquets in her hand;\nif a girl she carries but one; in some countries the father of a boy\nannually received the gift of two loads of wood from the state; but\na single one if the child was a girl. Even in the United States we\nyet see this contempt of the feminine variously manifested, although\nthe kindness and affection of girls to their parents, is usually more\nnotable, than that of boys.[96] Family regard is usually manifested in\nthe descending, rather than the ascending line, yet Herbert Spencer\ndeclares that full civilization is dependent upon the respect and\naffection shown to parents. France is not the only christian land that\ninvalidates a woman\u2019s testimony, receiving the assertion of the woman\nwith less authority than the denial of the man. In Scotland in case\nof an illegitimate birth, the accused man is allowed to clear himself\nupon oath, in opposition to that of the woman. Under Scottish law the\nchild born outside of marriage was formerly compelled to do penance\nin church for the sins of his parents. Such has been the justice of\nchristianity to women and children during the ages. These methods of\nchristianity were in great contrast to those of heathendom. The early\nAnglo-Saxon (pagan) laws contained provisions for the punishment of\nassaults upon women. Crimes against her were punished by greater or\nless outlawry according to the attendant circumstances. Old Scandinavia\npossessed many laws for the protection of woman. It has sometimes been\nasserted that these laws were a dead letter, so many instances of\nloose connections are recorded in the Iceland Sagas. It is, however,\na question of fact that these illegal relations, according to the same\nSagas were much more frequent after the introduction of christianity\nthan before.[97] Roman law presumed that no woman went astray without\nthe seduction and arts of the other sex, upon whom alone the punishment\nfell. Under old Saxon, Gothic and Scandinavian law, rape was punished\nby death. Under the Conqueror, its punishment was castration and loss\nof the eyes, which continued English law until after Bracton wrote in\ntime of Henry III. A lighter punishment then superseded it, but the\neffects of this leniency was so evil the old penalty was restored.\nWhile forbidding woman control of her own property, common law, under\none of those anomalous renderings which mark the constant injustice\nof Church and State towards woman, held twelve years as the age of\nfemale discretion or consent, rape after that age not being regarded as\ncriminal.\n\nGermany with sudden strides has coalesced from a number of independent\nprincipalities through the management of him of the iron hand, into\na magnificent empire, based upon the destruction of human life. In\nthis empire, where war underlies all, we find woman much more deeply\ndegraded than during the old pagan days, when as chieftain and\nprophetess her voice was heeded even upon the battlefield. Now, while\nmen are preparing to kill other men, the agriculture of the country and\nthe lowest forms of mechanical labor fall into her hands. But it is not\nas responsible owner we thus find her; she cultivates the fields as a\ndrudge, upon whom falls all the most severe portion of work. Equally\nin Germany as in other christian lands, is the wife looked upon as the\nservant of the husband, to whom she bears children that are his alone,\nand to whom greater deference is paid by the mother when a large number\nof little ones call him father.[98] It has been the custom to reward a\nhusband in proportion to the number of children borne him by his wife,\nand it is but a year since a Parisian journalist suggested that for\neach additional child borne by his wife, the husband should be allowed\nhalf a vote. In Germany as under the common law of England, the wife\nis subject to chastisement by her husband, its severity being left to\nhis discretion. But the height of barbaric absurdity and wickedness is\nfound in that provision of the Prussian common law which decrees that a\nhusband can determine the length of time his wife must nurse her child.\nAs might be expected, at his death the wife is not regarded capable\nof caring for the children, and must accept a guardian for them; the\nlaw going so far as to declare her under age similarly to that French\nlaw which makes woman a perpetual minor. It matters not if the family\nproperty all came through the wife, or was accumulated by her labor,\nshe is still held as not of sufficient judgment for its control. In\nPrussia, woman is still forbidden to take part in political or other\npublic meetings.[99]\n\nMorganatic or left-hand marriage still continues the custom in Germany.\nUnder its provisions the wife does not take the husband\u2019s rank, nor do\nthe children inherit the father\u2019s property, as they are not regarded as\nof full legitimacy. This form of marriage is recognized by the civil\nlaw of Germany, and is sustained by the church. The custom, at first\nconfined to princes, gradually extended to the higher aristocracy,\nand as the moral perceptions of a nation bends itself to unison with\ncivil law, the inferior gentry began to contract marriages of this\nkind. Under a morganatic union woman is still more debased than in\nthe ordinary marriage relation. Aside from the ceremony, the wife\nis scarcely other than a concubine. The children of the morganatic\nmarriage do not bear the father\u2019s name, nor inherit from him, under\nthe law of the state. Neither they nor the wife have more lasting\nclaim upon him in these respects than had the concubines known as\n\u201cthe Honored Ones\u201d upon the priestly destroyers of the thirteenth,\nfourteenth and fifteenth centuries.\n\nSeveral notable instances of morganatic marriages have occurred within\nthe present century. It is but a few years since the Grand Duke, Louis\nIV of Hesse-Darmstadt, son-in-law of Queen Victoria, made a morganatic\nmarriage with Madame de Kalamine, whose lover he was long known to have\nbeen, and with whom he had previously lived outside of this relation,\nshe having borne him several children. From the high position of the\nmorganatic husband, and because of the previous relationship of the\nparties, this marriage became the talk of all Europe, and to some\nextent of the United States. Queen Victoria herself did not escape\ncriticism, notwithstanding the prudery for which she is famed, because\nof her entertaining the Grand Duke at Windsor soon after this marriage\nunaccompanied by his wife,[100] for the purpose, it was intimated, of\nplacing him under the influence of Princess Beatrice. The very fact of\nsuch suggestion, whether true or not, as well as the fact that Queen\nVictoria, universally conceded a prude in reference to infractions of\nthe moral law by those of her own sex, received the Grand Duke at her\nespecial home of Windsor soon after his morganatic marriage, is a vivid\ncommentary upon the two codes of morals extant in christendom and their\ninfluence even upon woman herself. Morganatic marriage degrades the\nwife of the right hand ceremony equally with her of the left hand, as\nit is a recognition by the law of a christian country today of man\u2019s\nright to become a bigamist, provided he but gives his left hand instead\nof his right, to the bride during the marriage ceremony. It is a system\nof legalized concubinage under protestantism, which throws the shield\nof protection around man in illicit relations, and like all other forms\nof woman\u2019s degradation, it reaches back for authority to that religious\nteaching which proclaims woman to have been created inferior and\nsubordinate to man. Because of woman\u2019s former superior position there,\nno country but Germany can as fully show the degradation of woman\nunder Christianity. Not from pagan Greece can more vivid illustration\nof her moral degradation be shown, while pagan Rome shines clear and\nbright beside the Germanic races of today. While even left-handed\nmarriages among the higher classes are encouraged and protected, yet\namong the lower orders in Germany the ordinary marriage is cumbered\nwith so many restrictions, as to have become almost an impossibility,\nand no disgrace or loss of character falls upon the girl of this class\nwho becomes a mother outside of legal prevision, but such motherhood\nupon the contrary is looked upon as the means of a higher position and\ngreater wages as nurse. As _amme_ in a rich or noble family she becomes\na person of arrogance, part of the pomp and show of the house.[101]\n\nDespite these wrongs of the ages towards woman, of late so vividly\npresented, we still find both Church and State opposing a free\ndiscussion of the question. Within the last decade two northern\nEuropean countries have strangely exhibited such hostility, the\nopposition coming upon ground of woman\u2019s surpassing sinfulness.[102]\n\nBut the most notable opposition has been against the works of two\neminent literary men. \u201cThe Doll\u2019s House\u201d[103] by Ibsen, the dramatic\npoet of Norway, attacking the irresponsible position of the wife\nunder present marriage law, brought about the social ostracism of\nits author.[104] Sweden\u2019s supremely great thinker of the present\ncentury, August Strindberg, recently published a work entitled \u201cGiftas\u201d\n(to marry), which incidentally treated of the influence of religion\nupon this relation.[105] The State authorities at once ordered its\nconfiscation.[106] Instead of a Papal _Librorum Prohibitorum_, it fell\nunder the censure and prohibition of a Protestant State. But no more\nready method for increasing its circulation could have been devised;\nso rapidly was the first edition of four thousand sold that only four\nhundred fell into the grasp of the censorious government. In order to\nescape the farther penalty of imprisonment that had been pronounced\nagainst him, the author was compelled to temporarily leave the country.\nBut his work was not without effect upon the minds of his countrymen,\nand upon his return a few months later, a great demonstration in his\nhonor took place. Strindberg defined the rights of woman as those which\ncame to her by nature but of which, through a perverted social order\nshe had been deprived. He declared that woman\u2019s desire for deliverance\nwas the same as man\u2019s restless desire for deliverance. Let us, said\nhe, therefore emancipate man from his prejudice and then woman will\ncertainly be freed. To that end it is necessary to work together as\nfriends not as enemies.\n\nThat a work of this moderate character, should fall under the ban of\na protestant government, in the last half of the nineteenth century,\nshould be confiscated and its author banished, is a striking proof of\nthe degraded condition of woman in the marriage relation, and of the\npower still exerted for the continuance of this subjection. Opposition\nto discussion of this question in Sweden, is more strange in view of\nthe excess of women in the population, as they outnumber the men some\n40,000; while of single women over fifteen, there are 259,000. Despite\nthe fact of this excess, impossible to provide for by marriage even\nwere that condition one of equity and equality, all effort towards\nopening occupations to them, or the avenues of education, still meets\nwith resistance from the church. The only opponent of Mr. Berner\u2019s\nBill, 1882, for permitting women to take the first two degrees in the\nUniversity, those of Arts and Philosophy, was from a clergyman. The\nbill passed the Odelstling, one of the two Chambers of the Storthing,\nwith only his dissentient voice.[107] It received the unanimous vote of\nthe other house, the Sagthing, April 21, becoming a law June 15 of that\nyear.\n\nRussia, which we are accustomed to regard as less than a half civilized\ncountry, gives evidence of an early civilization which in the field\nof morals reached a high place. Samokversof, a Russian author, has\nmade a rich collection relating to pre-historic times, proving that\nas early as the first centuries of this era, the Slavonians lived\nin large societies, possessed fortified towns with treasurers of\ngold and silver, silk, embroidered tissues, iron weapons, ornaments\nof gold, silver, bronze and bone; while sickles, and the grasses of\nwheat, oats, and barley found in the graves of South Russia, show this\npeople even to have been devoted to agriculture. The early history\nof Russia proves that women then held influential positions in the\nfamily, in the church, in the state; as was the case under the ancient\ncommon law of England, so woman among the ancient Slavs possessed\nthe right of inheritance and the power of dividing such inheritance\nwith her brothers. In the State we find woman\u2019s wisdom at early date\nstill continuing to shape the policy of the Russian empire; to the\nwise statesmanship of the Czarina Olga is the unchanging plan of that\ncountry for the ultimate possession of Constantinople due. Visiting\nthe Patriarch of the East, during the tenth century, she at once\nperceived the vast importance of Constantinople to the power desiring\nuniversal domination; the possession of that city giving control of the\nDardanelles, of Asia Minor, and Europe itself. Thenceforth she sought\nits annexation or seizure and her policy became that of the Russian\nnation, which for more than eight hundred years has made the ultimate\npossession of Constantinople the great object of its ambition. Nor has\nOlga\u2019s statesmanship less influenced the entire European continent, the\nallied powers constantly struggling to defeat Russia\u2019s aggressive plan,\nthrough maintenance of the \u201csick man\u201d upon his throne.\n\nFrom the advent of christianity, forced upon the Slav peoples a\nthousand years since by Vladimir, their baptism taking place by tens\nof thousands as driven into the rivers and streams mid-deep, priests\nupon the banks recited the baptism formula, a change was noticeable. As\nsoon as the thorough establishment of the Byzantine church in Russia,\nwhich took no inconsiderable period, it being brought about by force\nrather than free will, its priests, like those of the Western Church,\ndirected their principal efforts towards control of the marriage\nrelation, and, through that, of the family. Nor are we to regard this\nas strange inasmuch as every form of christianity regards woman as an\ninferior being, the creator of original sin, rendering the sacrifice\nof a God necessary in order to re-establish the equilibrium overthrown\nby her.[108] Edmond Noble, in tracing the cause of the present social\nupheaval in that empire, says:[109]\n\n    Scarcely had the priests of the Greek Church begun their\n    teaching of the new faith when change began to unsettle the\n    position of woman and burden her relationship to the family\n    with a sense of inferiority ... her status falling with the\n    natural extension of the ecclesiastical policy. The Russian\n    woman at last became the slave of her Christian husband; as\n    much his chattel as if she had been purchased at market or\n    captured in war.\n\nAn examination of history proves that in Christian Russia as in\nChristian England the husband could release himself from the marriage\nbond by killing his wife, over whom under christian law he had power\nof life and death. Her children, as today in Christian England and\nAmerica, are not under her control; she is to bear children but not\nto educate them, for, as under Catholic and Protestant Christianity,\nwomen are looked upon as a lower order of beings, of an unclean nature.\nThe assertion of Agathes the Sophist that he detected the smell of\nher whose hands had milked the cow, is more than paralleled under\nGreek Christianity, woman not even being allowed to kill a fowl under\nassertion that should she so do the meat would become poisonous. Wife\nbeating enjoined as a religious duty became so common, says Noble,\nthat love was measured by it, \u201cThe more whippings the more love.\u201d\n\u201cThe Domstroii,\u201d a household guide, compiled by a dignitary of the\nGreek Church in time of Ivan the Terrible, counseled use of the rod\nto keep wives, children, and servants in subjection. By it husbands\nwere given almost unlimited power over wives, who were not even\npermitted to attend church without the husband\u2019s consent. The prominent\nideas regarding woman under Byzantine Christianity have been her\nuncleanliness, her sinfulness and the small value of her life.[110] She\nis regarded as a being of lower order than man, and as looked upon in a\ndifferent light by God.\n\nWhere marriage is wholly or partly under church control, its very form\ndegrades woman, her promise of obedience not yet having passed away.\nIn the old Covenanter period of Scotland the records give a still\nmore debased form, in which the man as head was declared united to an\nignoble part, represented by the woman. But in modern times, both in\nCatholic and Protestant countries a more decent veil is thrown over\nthis sacrifice of woman than in the Greek Church, where the wife is\nsometimes delivered to the husband under this formula, \u201cHere wolf, take\nthy lamb!\u201d and the bridegroom is presented with a whip by his bride\ngiving her a few blows as part of the ceremony, and bidding her draw\noff his boots as a sign of her subjection to him. With such an entrance\nceremony it may well be surmised that the marriage relation permits the\nmost revolting tyranny. And this condition can be directly traced to\nthe period since Christianity was adopted under Vladimir, a thousand\nyears since, as the religion of that nation. The old Slavs recognized\nthe equality of woman in household, political, and religious matters,\nand not until Byzantine Christianity became incorporated with, and a\npart of, the civil polity of its rulers, did Russia present such a\npicture of domestic degradation as it shows today. The chastisement of\nwives is directly taught as part of the husband\u2019s domestic duty. Until\nrecently, the wife who killed her husband while he was thus punishing\nher, was buried alive, her head only being left above ground. Many\nlingered for days before death reached them.\n\nIvan Panim, a Russian exile, while a student at Harvard College, 1881,\nmade the following statement at a Convention of the Massachusetts Woman\nSuffrage Society:\n\n    A short time ago the wife of a well-to-do peasant came to the\n    justice of one of the district courts in Russia and demanded\n    protection from the cruelty of her husband. She proved\n    conclusively by the aid of competent witnesses that he had\n    bound her naked to a stake during the cold weather on the\n    street, and asked the passers-by to strike her; and whenever\n    they refused he struck her himself. He fastened her moreover\n    to the ground, put many stones and weights on her and broke\n    one of her arms. The court declared the husband \u201cnot guilty.\u201d\n    \u201cIt cannot afford,\u201d it said, \u201cto teach woman to disobey the\n    commands of her husband.\u201d\n\nMr. Panim declared this to be by no means an extreme or isolated case,\nand that few became known to the public through the courts or the\npress. While the above incident illustrates the cruelty of the state\ntowards woman under the Greek form of christianity, others with equal\npertinence proved the cruelty of the church.\n\n    A peasant in the village of Zelovia Baltic, having reason to\n    doubt the fidelity of his spouse, deliberately harnessed her\n    to a cart in company with a mare\u2014a species of double harness\n    for which the lady was doubtless unprepared when she took\n    the nuptial vow\u2014He then got into the cart in company with a\n    friend, and drove the ill-assorted team some sixteen versts\n    (nearly eleven English miles,) without sparing the whip-cord.\n    When he returned from his excursion he sheared the unlucky\n    woman\u2019s head, tarred and feathered her and turned her out of\n    doors. She naturally sought refuge and consolation from her\n    parish priest; but he sent her back to her lord and master,\n    prescribing further flaggellations. An appeal to justice by\n    the poor woman and her relatives, resulted in a non-suit, and\n    recourse to a higher court will probably terminate in the same\n    manner.\n\nPopular Russian songs allude to woman\u2019s wrongs in the marriage\nrelation. The wife of a son living with his father, is looked upon as\nan additional animal to be urged to the utmost exertion. She is treated\nalmost like a slave and with less consideration than a horse or cow.\nLady Varney,[111] gives the chorus of a song in the \u201cLament of a Young\nRussian Bride,\u201d which portrays the father-in-law\u2019s part.\n\n\nCHORUS\n\n\n\u201cThumping, scolding, never lets his daughter sleep,\u201d\n\u201cUp you slattern! up you sloven sluggish slut!\u201d\n\nThe wife also entreats her husband for mercy.\n\n\u201cOh husband, only for good cause beat thou thy wife,\nNot for little things.\u201d \u201cFar away is my father dear,\nand farther still my mother.\u201d\n\nWhile demanding marital fidelity from wives, Russian husbands do not\nbind themselves to the same purity; and aside from wife-beating, the\nhusband\u2019s infidelities form the general subject of songs. Peter the\nGreat, head of the Greek Church, not only beat his Empress Catherine,\nbut while demanding marital fidelity from her, was notorious for his\nliaisons with women of low rank.[112] Women were not counted in the\ncensus of Russia until the reign of this monarch. So many \u201csouls\u201d no\nwoman named. So long continued has been this treatment of woman, that\nthe poet Nekrasof says:\n\n    Ages have rolled away, the whole face of the earth has\n    brightened; only the somber lot of the Mowguk\u2019s wife God\n    forgets to change.\n\nMan\u2019s opinion of woman is shown in the proverb, \u201cA hen is not a bird,\nneither is a woman a human being.\u201d Nekrasof makes one of his village\nheroines say: \u201cGod has forgotten the nook where he hid the keys of\nwoman\u2019s emancipation,\u201d which woman\u2019s despair has changed to the proverb\n\u201cGod remembers everything but the Slavonian woman; he has forgotten\nwhere he hid the keys of her emancipation.\u201d The system of indulgence is\nas marked in the Greek as in the Catholic Church, but under slightly\ndifferent aspects. The worship of saints is an important part of the\nByzantine religion. There are two saints, to whom if a person prays as\nhe goes out to commit a crime, however heinous, he takes his pardon\nwith him.[113] The present condition of Russian affairs is ascribed by\nEdmond Noble, to a long felt revolt in the minds of the people, against\nthe social, political and religious system of that country. While the\npeasant implicitly obeys the czar, regarding his position as divine and\nall his commands as just, there is an element that recalls the former\nperiod of freedom, with intensity of desire for its re-establishment.\nTo this class, permeated as it must be with the spirit of the age,\nthe efforts for constitutional change, and what the world knows as\nNihilism, are attributable. It is in reality a mighty protest against\nthat christianity which in destroying political freedom, instituted a\nmonstrous spiritual and material tyranny in its place. Nihilism is not\nwholly nor even chiefly a form of political change; it has a depth and\na power much beyond mere social or governmental change; it looks to an\nentire overthrow of that religious system which permeates and underlies\nall moral and political tyranny in Russia.\n\nClass legislation of extreme character is still constantly met in all\nchristian lands. The English Bill of 1887, for extending Parliamentary\nFranchise to woman, as shown, having as its last clause, \u201cProvided that\nnothing in this Act contained shall enable women under coverture to\nbe registered or to vote at such elections.\u201d In this Bill, the State\nrecognized the marital subordination of woman, held by law as under\nher husband\u2019s control not possessing freedom of thought, judgment, or\naction upon questions of vital importance to herself. Walter Besant\ndeclares:\n\n    That it is only by searching and poking among unknown\n    pamphlets and forgotten books that one finds out the actual\n    depth of the English savagery of the last century ... that for\n    drunkenness, brutality and ignorance the Englishmen of the\n    baser kind, reached the lowest depth ever reached by civilized\n    men ... a drunkard, a brawler, a torturer of dumb beasts, a\n    wife-beater, a profligate.\n\nIt is not necessary to search \u201cunknown pamphlets and forgotten books,\u201d\nin order to find out the depths of English or other christian savagery\nof the present century. Every newspaper report, every court decision,\nevery Act of Parliament or Legislature, every decree of king, or czar,\nor other potentate; every canon, decree or decision of the church,\nproclaims the ignorance, brutality and savagery of Christendom. Nor\nis it among men of the baser kind with their infliction of corporal\npunishment upon wives, but in the subtler and more refined methods\nof torture made use of by men of the highest position, that we most\ntruly find out the depths of the savagery of the nineteenth century.\nProfligacy among men of the highest position never flourished more\nluxuriantly than at the present time; drunkenness has by no means\npassed away; wife-beating is still a common amusement; the law still\nfails to extend a protecting arm around those most needing its defence;\nthe church yet fails to recognize a common humanity in all classes of\npeople. Old traditional customs of thought and action still prevail,\nand the men of a hundred years hence will look upon the present time\nwith the same criticising astonishment that the historian of today\nlooks upon the last century. Savagery instead of civilization is still\nthe predominant power in christendom. In comparison with the treatment\nmany wives receive in christian lands, that of women among the American\nIndians, or the most savage races of the old world, is far more humane\nthan shown in England, America and other christian lands, where even\nmaternity does not free woman from the coarsest brutality upon the part\nof husbands, nor the illness incident upon bringing a new being into\nthe world, from writs of \u201ccontempt,\u201d even though the death of mother\nor babe result. In 1890, the Press of New York City reported the case\nof Mrs. R. Bassman, who was summoned to appear before the Surrogate\nCourt, for a funeral debt. Being in confinement she was unable to\nappear. Thereupon an order for her arrest for Contempt of Court was\nissued, and while still unrecovered from her illness, she was arrested\nand incarcerated in Ludlow Street jail. Her newly born babe deprived\nof its mother\u2019s care sickened and died; and this is part of Christian\ncivilization for woman, in nearly the two thousandth year of its\nexistence.\n\nBooth\u2019s \u201cDarkest England\u201d[114] relates a somewhat parallel case,\nparallel in so far as it shows the enslaved condition of the English\nwife under present christian laws.\n\n    A woman who lived just opposite had been cruelly kicked and\n    cursed by her husband, who had finally bolted the door against\n    her, and she had turned to Barbie, as the only hope, Barbie\n    took her in with her rough and ready kindness, got her to\n    bed and was both nurse and doctor for the poor woman till\n    her child was born and laid in the mother\u2019s arms. Not daring\n    to be absent longer she got up as best she could and crawled\n    on hands and knees down the little steep steps, across the\n    street, and back to her own door; ... it might have cost the\n    woman her life to be absent from her home more than a couple\n    of hours.\n\nThat brutal men exist everywhere, that women and children are in all\nlands abused, that prize-fighting with its concomitants of broken jaws,\nnoses, heads, takes place in christian lands, are undeniable facts,\nusually although in defiance of law and subjecting their perpetrators\nto punishment. But the peculiarity of the cases noted and of ten\nthousand others, is that they are done under the authority of the\nlaw, to a being whom the law seems not bound to protect. No husbands\nin the world are more brutal than lower-class Englishmen into whose\nhands the wife is given by law, and he protected by the law in his\nill-usage of her. It is Christian law of which complaint is made; it\nis the effect of Christian civilization, in its treatment of woman, to\nwhich attention is called. \u201cDarkest England\u201d furnishes still fuller\nstatements of woman\u2019s degraded condition in that country. In the\nopening pages of that work it is said:\n\n    Hard it is, no doubt, to read in Stanley\u2019s pages of the\n    slave-traders coldly arranging for the surprise of a village,\n    the capture of the inhabitants, the massacre of those who\n    resist, and the violation of all the women; but the stony\n    streets of London, if they could but speak, would tell of\n    tragedies as awful, of ruin as complete, of ravishments as\n    horrible, as if we were in Central Africa; only the ghostly\n    devastation is covered, corpse-like, with the artificialities\n    of modern civilization.\n\n    The lot of a negress in the Equatorial Forest is not, perhaps,\n    a very happy one but is it so much worse than that of many a\n    pretty orphan girl\u2019s in our christian capital? We talk about\n    the brutalities of the dark ages and we profess to shudder as\n    we read in the books of the shameful exactions of the rights\n    of feudal superiors. And yet here, beneath our very eyes, in\n    our theaters, in our restaurants, and in many other places\n    unspeakable, it be enough but to name it, the same hideous\n    abuse flourishes unchecked. A young penniless girl, if she be\n    pretty, is often hunted from pillar to post by her employers,\n    confronted always by the alternative\u2014starve or sin. Darkest\n    England, like Darkest Africa, reeks with malaria.\n\nIt should be impressed upon the mind that difference between \u201cDarkest\nAfrica,\u201d and \u201cDarkest England,\u201d lies in the two facts, that one is\nthe darkness of ignorance and savage races who are in the very night\nof barbarism; while the other is the moral darkness of christian\ncivilization, in the very center of Christendom, after 2,000 years\nof church teaching and priestly influence. A few years since, in\nMassachusetts, an action for cruelty on part of a husband came before a\ncourt, the charge being that he came home one night in February, when\nthe thermometer was ten degrees below zero, and turned his wife and\nlittle child, with his wife\u2019s mother of eighty, out of the house.[115]\nWhile the wife was giving testimony, the judge interrupted, saying:\n\n    The husband had a right to do so, there was a quarrel between\n    the husband and wife, and he had a legal right to turn her out\n    and take possession of the house, that was not cruelty.\n\nFrom the newspapers of April, 1886, we learn that:\n\n    At Salem, W. Va., Thomas True drove his wife out of doors and\n    swore he would kill any one who would give her shelter. Robert\n    Miller took her into his house, and was killed by True.\n\nThe system of marriage recognized by the church has ever been that\nof ownership and power by the husband and father, over the wife and\nchildren, and during the Middle Ages the ban of the church fell with\nequal force upon the woman, who for any cause left her husband, as\nupon the witch. The two were under the same ban as the excommunicated,\ndenounced as one whom all others must shun, whom no one must succor\nor harbor, and with whom it was unlawful to hold any species of\nintercourse.\n\nThe \u201cboycott\u201d is not an invention of the present century, but was\nin use many hundred years since against a recalcitrant wife, under\nsanction of both church and state. The advertisements of absconding\nwives seen at the present day, whom the husband sets forth as having\nleft his bed and board and whom all persons are thereafter forbidden to\ntrust upon his account, are but a reminiscence of the wife-boycott of\nformer years, when all persons, were forbidden to \u201charbor her\u201d under\npenalty unless it could be proven that her life was in danger without\nsuch aid. The husband was held to possess vested rights in the wife,\nnot only as against herself, but as against the world, and it is not\nhalf a decade since the notice below, appeared in a Kansas paper,[116]\naccompanied by the cut of a fleeing woman.\n\n    A $50 CAPTURE.\n\n    A woman who ran away from her husband at Lawrence some time\n    ago, was found at Fort Leavenworth yesterday by a Lawrence\n    detective and taken back to her home. The officer received a\n    reward of $50 for her capture.\u2014_Leavenworth Standard_, Kas.,\n    Dec. 21, 1886.\n\nThis advertisement and others of a similar character to be seen in the\ndaily and weekly press of the country, are undeniable proofs of the\nlow condition under the law, of woman in the marriage relation, and\nread very much like the notices in regard to absconding slaves a few\nyears since. Kansas was one of the very first states which recognized\nthe right of a married mother to her own child, that provision having\nbeen incorporated in its constitution at early date as an enticement\nfor bringing women emigrants into that state, at a period when the\nanti-slavery and pro-slavery contests within its borders had made it\nbloody ground. Although the married woman\u2019s property law and the spirit\nof free thought has rendered such action less frequent than formerly,\nit is less than forty years, as before noted, since the New York Court\nof Common Pleas rendered a judgment of $10,000 in favor of a husband\nagainst the relatives of his wife, who at her own request \u201charbored and\nsheltered\u201d her. The Christian principle of man\u2019s ownership of woman,\nfor many hundred years under English law, rendered the party giving\nshelter to a fleeing wife liable to the husband in money damages, upon\nthe ground of having aided a runaway servant to the master\u2019s injury.\nUnder but one circumstance was such shelter admissible. In case the\nwife was in danger of perishing, she could be harbored until morning,\nwhen she must be returned to her master by the person who had thus\ntemporarily taken care of his perishable property. In England as late\nas 1876, the case of a Mrs. Cochrane, who had lived apart from her\nhusband for years, and showing another phase of property law in the\nwife, came up before Judge Coleridge. Her character was not at all\nimpeached, but she indulged in amusements which her husband considered\nreprehensible, and through stratagem she was brought to his lodgings\nand there kept a prisoner. A writ of _habeas corpus_ being sued out,\nthe husband was compelled to bring her before the court of the Queen\u2019s\nBench. The decision of the judge rendered in favor of the husband\u2019s\nright of forcible detention, was declared by him to be upon ground\nthat English law virtually considered the wife as being under the\nguardianship of the husband, not a person in her own right, and this\ndistinctly upon the ground of her perpetual infancy;[117] she must\nbe restored to her husband. As late as 1886, the _Personal Rights\nJournal_ of England called attention to the suit of a clergyman for the\n\u201crestitution of conjugal rights\u201d and custody of child. The wife not\nbeing able to live in agreement with the husband, had taken her child\nand left him. A decree for such restitution having been pronounced by\ncourt, the husband Rev. Joseph Wallis, advertised for his absconding\nwife, Caroline Wallis, offering one hundred pounds reward for such\ninformation as should lead to her discovery.\n\n    \u00a3100 REWARD.\n\n    Whereas, A Decree was pronounced in the Probate, Divorce,\n    and Admiralty Division of the High Court of Justice, on the\n    5th day of June, 1886, in the suit of Samuel Joseph Wallis\n    _versus_ Caroline Wallis, for restitution of conjugal rights,\n    and for custody of the child, May Wallis, to the petitioner,\n    the said Samuel Joseph Wallis. And Whereas it has been\n    ascertained that the said Caroline Wallis has lately been seen\n    at Whitstable and the Neighborhood,\n\n    NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN,\n\n    That the above Reward will be paid to any Person or Persons\n    who shall give such information as will lead to the discovery\n    of the whereabouts of the said Caroline Wallis, and the\n    recovery by the said S. J. Wallis of the custody of the said\n    Child.\n\n    Information to be sent to me, Richard Howe Brightman, of\n    Sheerness, Kent, Solicitor to the said Samuel Joseph Wallis.\n\nThis brutal advertisement in the dying hours of the nineteenth\ncentury had the effect of rousing public attention to woman\u2019s\nenslaved condition in the marital relation, and a rapid growth of\npublic sentiment in recognition of a wife\u2019s individual and distinct\npersonality, took place between 1886 and 1890, a period of four years.\nDuring the latter year another English husband, one Jackson, forcibly\nabducted his wife who lived apart from him, holding her prisoner with\ngun and bayonet, threatening her friends with death\u2014as was his legal\nright in case of her attempted rescue. When this was known, hundreds\nof letters poured into the press, upholding the right of a wife to\nthe control of her own person, and writ of _habeas corpus_ compelled\nher production in court. Under the pressure of a public sentiment he\nfound it wise to conciliate, the judge decided in favor of her right\nto live away from her husband, who was also restrained from farther\nmolesting her. The Supreme Court of Georgia recently rendered a\ndecision in regard to the rights of husbands as related to the wife\u2019s\nrights of property, in which the church theory of her subordination was\nmaintained.\n\n    The wife has been much advanced by the general tenor of\n    legislation of late years in respect to her property. She has\n    acquired a pretty independent position as to title, control\n    and disposition, but this relates to her own property, not\n    to his. The law has not yet raised her to the station of\n    superintendent of her husband\u2019s contracts and probably never\n    will. In taking a wife a man does not put himself under an\n    overseer. He is not a subordinate in his own family but the\n    head of it. A subjugated husband is a less energetic member of\n    society than one who keeps his true place, yet knows how to\n    temper authority with affection.\n\nDuring the famous Beecher trial, Hon. Wm. M. Evarts defined woman\u2019s\nlegal position as one of subordination to man, declaring \u201cthat\nnotwithstanding changing customs and the amenities of modern life,\nwomen were not free, but were held in the hollow of man\u2019s hand, to\nbe crushed at his will.\u201d In exemplification of this statement he\nreferred to a recent decision of the New York Court of Appeals, and to\nthe highest tribunals of England. He gave his own sanction to these\nprinciples of law, all of which owe their foundation to church teaching\nregarding woman, enforced by the peculiar forms of marriage ceremony it\nhas instituted.\n\nThe church everywhere strenuously opposes civil marriage. The Plenary\nCouncil of 1884, and the celebration of the hundredth anniversary\nof the Catholic hierarchy in the United States, each making church\nmarriage a prominent part of their discussions. Different parts of\nEurope and of South America have recently been shaken by church action\nin regard to it. Prussia, Belgium, Italy, France, have fallen under the\nodium of the church in consequence of the civil laws declaring marriage\nvalid without the aid of the church. The celebrated M. Godin, founder\nof the cooperative Familistere, at Guise, was married in 1886 under\ncivil form, to a lady member of the French League for the Rights of\nWomen, and thus announced the marriage to their friends:\n\n    M. Godin, manufacturer, founder of Familistere, and Madame\n    Marie Godin, nee Moret, his secretary and co-laborer in the\n    work of the Familistere, and in the propagation of social\n    reform, have the honor of announcing to you the purely civil\n    marriage which they contracted at Guise, the 14th day of July,\n    1886, that they might manifest to all their union, and the\n    common purpose of all the efforts of their lives.\n\nCivil marriage, where the church is supreme, is followed by\nexcommunication and odious insults. In 1885 a remarkable instance of\nthis kind occurred in the city of Concepcion, Chili. A young couple\nwere married with consent of their parents, according to the civil law.\nTheir social and political prominence made the occasion conspicuous,\nas it was the first wedding among the aristocracy in that country,\ndispensing with the aid of a priest. The church paper edited by a\nJesuit priest thus commented:\n\n    The \u201cLibertad\u201d calls this \u201ca happy union,\u201d but it should\n    remember that \u201chappy unions\u201d of this sort have hitherto\n    existed only in the animal kingdom.\n\nThe bride, groom, and all their families suffered excommunication from\nthe church. But it is not alone the Catholic church which desires\nto retain its hold upon marriage. Less than two years since certain\nclergymen of the Anglican church agreed to officiate at marriage\nwithout a fee, for the purpose of retaining control of this relation;\nand so strong has been the influence of the church during the ages,\nthat few people look upon a ceremony under the civil law with the\nsame respect as one performed by a priest, even of a Protestant\ndenomination. The control of marriage by the church while throwing\nwealth into its own coffers, has ever had a prejudicial effect upon\nmorals, as impediments to marriage of whatever character increase\nimmorality. In the city of Concepcion referred to, of 200,000\ninhabitants, there are two thousand children of unknown parentage.\nIn 1884, statistics showed sixty-two per cent of the children to\nbe illegitimate. The parents of those little ones were mostly\nknown, being persons too poor to pay the cost of a church marriage,\ntwenty-five dollars, its price, being quite beyond the means of the\nhumbler classes. The Liberal party, in establishing civil marriage as\nlegitimate, authorized any magistrate to perform the ceremony, and\nfurnish a certificate for twenty-five cents. This assault upon the\nancient prerogative of the church depriving priests of the largest\nsource of their revenue, at once made a religious-political issue\nof the question, the church taking strenuous action against all\nconnected with framing the law, and its repeal became the prominent\npolitical issue, to aid which all the faithful were called. Using\nits old weapons, the church through the Archbishop issued an edict\nexcommunicating the president of the republic, the members of his\ncabinet and the members of congress who voted for the statute;\ndirecting that a similar penalty should fall upon every communicant who\nobeyed it and neglected to recognize the church as the only authority\ncompetent to solemnize the marriage rite.\n\nA correspondent of the _New York Sun_, in Chili, wrote:\n\n    This brought matters to a crisis. On the one hand, the State\n    declared all marriages not under the civil law illegal,\n    and their issue illegitimate, refusing to recognize rites\n    performed by the priests. On the other, those who obey the law\n    are excommunicated from the church, and their cohabitation\n    forbidden by the highest ecclesiastical authority. Thus\n    matrimony is practically forbidden, and those who choose to\n    enter it have their choice between arrest and excommunication.\n    A young member of Congress, a man of gifts and influence,\n    who stands as one of the leaders of the Liberal party, and\n    who voted and argued for civil marriage, is engaged to\n    the daughter of a wealthy merchant with proud lineage and\n    aristocratic connections. He is willing to accept the civil\n    authority, which he helped to create, and she and her father\n    are also willing, but her mother is a devout church woman\n    and cannot regard marriage as sacred without the blessing\n    of a priest. She favors the alliance, but insists that the\n    Church shall be recognized. The bishop declines to permit the\n    ceremony unless the young man shall go to the confessional and\n    retract his political record, with a vow to hereafter remain\n    steadfast to the church. This he refuses to do. The couple\n    will go to Europe or the States and there have the ceremony\n    performed.\n\nThis action of the Chilian republic in substituting a civil for a\nreligious ceremony in marriage and declaring the latter to be illegal,\nis a most important step in civilization, of which freedom for woman\nis such an essential factor; and its results in that country must\nbe left in woman\u2019s every relation of life, promoting self-respect,\nself-reliance and security in place of the degradation, self-distrust\nand fear to which its church has so long condemned her.\n\n\n\n\n_Chapter Seven_\n\n+Polygamy+\n\n\nIt is of indisputed historic record that both the Christian Church\nand the Christian State in different centuries and under a number of\ndiffering circumstances gave their influence in favor of polygamy.\nThe Roman emperor, Valentinian I, in the fourth century, authorized\nchristians to take two wives; in the eighth century the great\nCharlemagne holding power over both church and state, in his own person\npracticed polygamy, having six, or according to some authorities, nine\nwives. With the Reformation this system entered Protestantism. As the\nfirst synod in North America was called for the purpose of trying a\nwoman for heresy, so the first synod of the reformation was assembled\nfor the purpose of sustaining polygamy, thus farther debasing woman\nin the marital relation. The great German reformer, Luther, although\nperhaps himself free from the lasciviousness of the old priesthood\nwas not strictly monogamic in principle. When applied to by Philip,\nLandgrave of Hesse Cassel, for permission to marry a second wife while\nhis first wife, Margaret of Savoy, was still living, he called together\na synod of six of the principal reformers\u2014Melancthon and Bucer among\nthem\u2014who in joint consultation decided \u201cthat as the Bible nowhere\ncondemns polygamy, and as it has been invariably practiced by the\nhighest dignitaries of the church,\u201d such marriage was legitimate, and\nthe required permission was given. Luther himself with both the Old and\nthe New Testaments in hand, saying, \u201cI confess for my part that if a\nman wishes to marry two or more wives, I cannot forbid him, nor is his\nconduct repugnant to the Holy Scriptures.\u201d Thus we have the degrading\nproof that the doctrine of polygamy was brought into reformation by its\nearliest promoters under assertion that it was not inconsistent with\nthe Bible or the principles of the Gospel. The whole course of Luther\nduring the reformation proved his disbelief in the equality of woman\nwith man; when he left the Catholic church he took with him the old\ntheory of her created subordination. It was his maxim that \u201cNo gown or\ngarment worse becomes a woman than that she will be wise,\u201d thus giving\nthe weight of his influence against woman\u2019s intellectual freedom and\nindependent thought. Although he opposed monastic life, the home for\nwoman under the reformation was governed by many of its rules.\n\nFirst: She was to be under obedience to man as head of the house.\n\nSecond: She was to be constantly employed for his benefit.\n\nThird: Her society was strictly chosen for her by this master and head.\n\nFourth: This \u201chead\u201d was a general-father confessor, to whom she was\nheld accountable in word and deed.\n\nFifth: Neither genius nor talent could free her from his control\nwithout his consent.\n\nLuther\u2019s views regarding polygamy have been endorsed and sanctioned\nsince that period by men eminent in church and state. Lord Seldon\nknown as \u201cThe Light of England\u201d in the seventeenth century, published\na work under title of \u201cUxor Haebraica\u201d for the purpose of proving that\npolygamy was permitted to the Hebrews. His arguments were accepted by\nthe church as indisputable. Bishop Burnet, who while holding the great\nProtestant Episcopal See of Salisbury, so successfully opposed the plan\ninaugurated by Queen Anne for the establishment of a woman\u2019s college\nin England, added to his infamy by writing a tract entitled \u201cIs a\nPlurality of Wives in any case Lawful under the Gospel?\u201d This question\nhe answered in the affirmative sustaining the rightfulness of polygamy\nunder the Christian dispensation. Quoting the words of Christ upon\ndivorce, he said:\n\n    We must not by a consequence condemn a plurality of wives\n    since it seems not to have fallen within the scope of what our\n    Lord does there disapprove. Therefore I see nothing so strong\n    against a plurality of wives as to balance the great and\n    visible imminent hazards that hang over so many thousands if\n    it be not allowed.\n\nThe famous Puritan Poet of England, John Milton, known in the\nUniversity as \u201cThe Lady of Christ College,\u201d writing upon \u201cThe Special\nGovernment of Man,\u201d says:\n\n    I have not said the marriage of one man with one woman lest I\n    should by implication charge the holy patriarchs and pillars\n    of our faith, Abraham and others who had more than one wife,\n    at the same time, with habitual sin; and lest I should be\n    forced to exclude from the sanctuary of God as spurious, the\n    whole offspring which sprang from them, yea, the whole of\n    the sons of Israel, for whom the sanctuary itself was made.\n    For it is said in Deuteronomy (xxii. 2,) \u201cA bastard shall\n    not enter into the congregation of Jehovah even to the tenth\n    generation.\u201d Either, therefore polygamy is a true marriage,\n    or all children born in that state are spurious, which would\n    include the whole race of Jacob, the twelve tribes chosen by\n    God. But as such an assertion would be absurd in the extreme,\n    not to say impious, and as it is the height of injustice as\n    well as an example of the most dangerous tendency in religion,\n    to account as sins what is not such in reality it appears to\n    me that so far from the question respecting the lawfulness of\n    polygamy being trivial, it is of the highest importance that\n    it should be decided. Not a trace appears of the interdiction\n    of polygamy throughout the whole law, not even in any of the\n    prophets.\n\nThe Paradise Lost of Milton is responsible among English speaking\npeople for many existing views that are inimical to woman, and while\nhis essays upon liberty have been of general beneficial influence upon\nthe world, his particular teachings in regard to woman have seriously\ninjured civilization. This man of polygamous beliefs, this tyrant\nover his own household who could not gain the love of either wives\u2014of\nwhom he had three\u2014or of daughters, did much to popularize the idea\nof woman\u2019s subordination to man. \u201cHe for God; she for God in him\u201d as\nexpressed by the lips of Eve and so often quoted as proclaiming the\ntrue relationship between husband and wife in the line, \u201cGod thy law;\nthou mine.\u201d\n\nWhile the record of Milton\u2019s life shows him to have been an\nintolerable domestic tyrant, yet for the wife who could not live\nwith him, the daughters whom social conditions and lack of education\ndeprived of the necessary means for their support, thus compelling\nthem to remain his victims looking forward to his death as their only\nmeans of release, the world has as yet exhibited but little sympathy.\nHis genius, undisputed as its record must be in many directions, has\nmade his views of overpowering influence upon the world since his day.\nBut above all, more than all that created and sustained this influence\nwere his views as to the polygamous rights of man, his depictment of\nEve as looking upward to Adam as her God, and his general maintenance\nof the teaching of the church in regard to woman. Although it has been\naffirmed that after his blindness he dictated his great epic to his\ndaughter and a Scotch artist has painted a scene (a picture owned by\nthe Lenox Library), yet this is one of the myths men call history and\namuse themselves in believing. Voltaire declared history to be only a\nparcel of tricks we play with the dead; and this tale of blind Milton\ndictating Paradise Lost to his daughters is a trick designed to play\nupon our sympathies. Old Dr. Johnson is authority for the statement\nthat Milton would not allow his daughters to learn to write and it is\nquite certain that he did not permit them a knowledge of any language\nexcept the English, saying \u201cone tongue is enough for a woman.\u201d Between\nMilton and his family it is known there was tyranny upon one side,\nhatred upon the other.[1]\n\nThe number of eminent Protestants both lay and clerical who have\nsanctioned polygamy has not been small. In the sixteenth century a\nformer Capuchin monk, a general of that order who had been converted\nto the Protestant faith, published a work entitled \u201cDialogues in favor\nof Polygamy.\u201d In the latter part of the seventeenth century, John\nLyser, another divine of the reformed church strongly defended it in\na work entitled \u201cPolygamia Triumphatrix\u201d or the triumphant defense\nof polygamy. Rev. Dr. Madden, still another Protestant divine, in a\ntreatise called \u201cThalypthora,\u201d maintained that Paul\u2019s injunction that\nbishops should be the husbands of one wife, signified that laymen\nwere permitted to marry more than one. The scholarly William Ellery\nChanning could find no prohibition of polygamy in the New Testament.\nIn his \u201cRemarks on the Character and Writings of John Milton\u201d he says,\n\u201cWe believe it to be an indisputable fact that although Christianity\nwas first preached in Asia which had been from the earliest days the\nseat of polygamy, the apostles never denounced it as a crime and never\nrequired their converts to put away all wives but one. No express\nprohibition of polygamy is found in the New Testament.\u201d That eminent\nAmerican divine, Henry Ward Beecher, the influence of whose opinions\nover all classes was for many years so great as to constitute him a\nveritable Protestant pope in the United States, a few years before his\ndeath was selected to reply at a New England dinner to a toast upon the\nMormon question, the subject of polygamy then being under discussion by\nCongress. He not only deprecated the use of force in its suppression,\nbut quoted Milton in seeming approval. We can therefore consistently\nrank Mr. Beecher as among the number of Protestant divines who believed\nthere was scriptural warrant for this degradation of woman.\n\nBut it is not alone to the action of Christian monarchs or the opinion\nof jurists and ministers that we must solely look, but also to the\naction of the church as a body during different periods of its history.\nIn the year 1846, the question of polygamy came up before the American\nBoard of Commissioners for Foreign Missions in the United States.\nThrough a committee, of which the eminent Chancellor Walworth, of New\nYork, was chairman, this body reported against instructing missionaries\nto exclude polygamists from the church. This report was adopted without\na dissenting voice.[2] This discussion brought out some interesting\nfacts having especial bearing upon the views of those churches which\nnumbered polygamists among their communicants. It was shown that the\nsecretaries of the board appeared to consider the existence of polygamy\nin the churches as so entirely a frivolous question that even after it\nwas especially brought to their notice they forbore to make inquiries\nand even when polygamists had actually been admitted into the Mission\nchurches, no taint of disapproval had been made by the Prudential\nCommittee.[3] The whole subject was left to the decision of the\nmissionaries themselves, one of whom published his views in the _Boston\nRecorder_. After prevising that the Bible was their rule of faith, he\nasks:\n\n    Is it not evident from Paul\u2019s instruction respecting the\n    qualifications of a bishop, viz., that he \u201cshould be the\n    husband of one wife\u201d that polygamy was permitted in the\n    primitive church under the apostles, and that too in\n    circumstances precisely similar to those in which churches\n    are gathered among the heathen at the present day. If so, why\n    should a different standard be set up than that set up by the\n    apostles?\n\nThat polygamy is not regarded as contrary to the principles of\nChristianity was again most forcibly shown in its endorsement by\nmissionaries located in those countries where this custom prevails.\nOne of the most notable instances of recent church action in\nrecognizing polygamy as sustained by Christianity, occurred a few\nyears since in Calcutta during a Conference upon the question.\nThis body was convened by the missionaries of England and America\nlocated in India. Its immediate cause was the application of Indian\nconverts, the husbands of several wives, for admission to the church.\nA missionary conference of the several Christian denominations was\ntherefore called for the purpose of deciding upon this grave request.\nIt included representatives of the Episcopal, Baptist, Presbyterian\nand Congregationalist churches. Taking the Bible as authority full\nconsideration was given to the subject. Quotations from that \u201choly\nbook\u201d proved to the satisfaction of the conference that not alone did\nthe Bible favor polygamy, but that God himself endorsed, regulated\nand sustained the institution. In addition it was declared that these\nconverted polygamists \u201chad given credible evidence of their personal\npiety.\u201d The conference therefore unanimously rendered favorable\ndecision for retention of the polygamous members within the respective\nchurches to which they belonged, upon the ground that as both the Jews\nand the early Christians had practiced polygamy, it was allowable to\nthe new converts.\n\n    If a convert before becoming a Christian, has married more\n    wives than one, in accordance with the practice of the Jewish\n    and primitive Christian churches, he shall be permitted to\n    keep them all.\n\nYet apparently as a concession to the somewhat altruistic civilization\nof the present age, which outside of the church does not look upon\npolygamous marriages with favor, such persons were declared ineligible\nto any office in the church. Rev. David O. Allen, D.D., missionary of\nthe American Board in India for twenty-five years and from whose report\nof the action of the missionary conference the above facts were gained,\nsaid:\n\n    If polygamy was unlawful, then Leah was the only wife of Jacob\n    and none but her children were legitimate. Rachel as well as\n    Bilhah and Zilpah were merely mistresses and their children,\n    six in number were bastards, the offspring of adulterous\n    connection. And yet there is no intimation of any such views\n    and feelings in Laban\u2019s family, or in Jacob\u2019s family or in\n    Jewish history. Bilhah and Zilpah are called Jacob\u2019s wives\n    (Genesis xxxvii: 2.). God honored the sons of Rachael, Bilhah\n    and Zilpah equally with the sons of Leah, made them patriarchs\n    of seven of the tribes of the nation and gave them equal\n    inheritances in Canaan.\n\nThus the endorsement of polygamy as not contrary to the Bible, or to\nChristianity, is shown by action of Christian churches both in the\nUnited States and India within the present century; and we can readily\nunderstand why a gentleman from the New England states traveling in\nUtah said: \u201cMormonism seems a very devout sect of the Christian church,\ndiffering but little from the great body of Christian people.\u201d[4] Nor\nis this judgment at all strange as we find polygamy endorsed by the\nmajority of Christian sects. Nor can we be surprised that the Mormons\nof Utah and the adjoining states should look upon the opposition of the\nUnited States to their practice of polygamy, as an unjust interference\nwith an established custom of the Christian church, recognized and\nindorsed through the ages, as not alone part of the Jewish and early\nchristian practice, but permitted as allowable at the present day.\nPresident Eliot of Harvard, speaking in Salt Lake City, compared the\nMormons to the Puritans, thus throwing the weight of his statement as\nto the harmony between Mormonism and other Christian sects.\n\nThe Rochester, N.Y., _Herald_, in forgetfulness of early puritan\nhistory, says \u201cIt would be interesting to know from what point of view\nPresident Eliot took his observation,\u201d and refers to \u201cMormon Contempt\nand debasement of Womanhood; Mormon discouragement of intelligence\nand education among its dupes and victims,\u201d etc. The _Herald_ has\napparently forgotten the trial of women for heresy by the Puritans;\ntheir imprisonment, heavily ironed in airless jails, for the crime of\nreligious free thought; the flogging of naked women on Boston Common\nby the Puritans for free speech and their being executed as witches,\nin the Puritan colony of Massachusetts. The _Herald_ has apparently\nforgotten that although the first money given for the foundation\nof Harvard itself was by a woman, her sex, \u201cdupe and victim,\u201d is\nstill denied the full advantage of education in that institution. It\nforgets that although the first plot of ground for a free school in\nthe Puritan colony of Massachusetts was given by a woman, girls were\ndenied education even in common schools until it became necessary to\npermit their attendance during the summer months while the boys were\nengaged in fishing, in order to retain possession of school moneys. The\n_Herald_ seems unaware of the vigorous letter of Mrs. Hannah Adams,\nwife of the second president of the United States, to her husband,\nJohn Adams, when he was a member of the first Congress, in reference\nto the need of education for women. Should the _Herald_ pursue its\ninvestigations still farther, it will find the Puritans connected with\nthe most serious \u201ccrimes\u201d against humanity; it will discover priestly\nand governmental \u201cusurpation,\u201d Puritan \u201cfanaticism and bigotry\u201d;\neven Puritan \u201cdisloyalty.\u201d When President Eliot favorably compared\nthe Christian Puritans and the Christian Mormons, he spoke both as\na close reader of Puritan history and a close observer of Mormon\nhistory; his declaration of their similarity to each other cannot\nbe denied by the candid historian. Building upon the same common\nfoundation, acknowledging the same common origin, the doctrines of\nthe two systems necessarily bear close resemblance to each other.[5]\nUnder the Christian theory regarding woman, her origin and her duties,\nit should not be regarded as at all strange that polygamy should find\ndefenders in the christian world. Nor is it to be looked upon as at all\nas surprising that the Mormons, the most recent Protestant sect, should\nteach polygamy as a divinely organized institution, nor that their\narguments in its favor should be drawn from the Bible and not from the\nbook of Mormon. That polygamy was not an original Mormon tenet is well\nknown; it was derived from a professed revelation to Joseph Smith,\nsustained by biblical authority. The polygamous Mahommedans regard\nChrist as a prophet, the same as the Mormons respect the authority of\nthe Bible. The Mormon marriage formula directs the man to look to God,\nbut enjoins the woman to look toward her husband as God, rendering\nhim the same unquestioning obedience that has been demanded from all\nChristian wives through the ages; the priest, as customary with the\nhierarchal class, declaring himself endowed with an authority from on\nhigh to bind or to loose on earth, seals the union of the pair for time\nand eternity. Although the marriage ceremony of the Mormon church is\nmore complex, in many respects it parallels that of the Presbyterians\nof Scotland during the early day of the Reformation, authority for\nwoman\u2019s degradation in each case being derived from the Bible, the\nlanguage in each instance being unfit for publication.[6]\n\nAn epistle of the First Presidency to the Church of Jesus Christ of\nLatter Day Saints, in General Conference, said:\n\n    \u201cThe Gospel of the Son of God, brings life and immortality to\n    light.\u201d We believe in Jerusalems, such as the one which John\n    saw when banished as a slave to the Isle of Patmos because\n    of his religion, where promises made to Abraham, Isaac and\n    Jacob are to be fulfilled; \u201cwhich had a wall great and high,\n    and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels\u201d\u2014and the\n    twelve gates were twelve pearls; every several gate was one\n    pearl.\u201d Its walls were of jasper, its streets and the city\n    were pure gold. The foundations of the wall were garnished\n    with all manner of precious stones, and the glory of God did\n    lighten it, \u201cand the Lamb is the light thereof.\u201d Its pearly\n    gates had written upon them the names of the twelve tribes\n    of the children of Israel and the foundations of its walls,\n    \u201cthe names of the Twelve Apostles of the Lamb.\u201d \u201cThe throne\n    of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and His servants shall\n    serve Him; and they shall see His face; and His name shall be\n    in their foreheads. The porters of its gates were angels and\n    its light the glory of God.\u201d What was written on those pearly\n    gates? The names of the twelve tribes of Israel. Who was\n    Israel? Jacob. From whom did the twelve tribes descend? From\n    Jacob. What were their names? The names of the sons of Jacob,\n    which he had by four wives. Jacob, then, was a polygamist?\n    Yes; he was one of those barbarians of which the Judge of the\n    Third Judicial District says: \u201cThese practices might have been\n    proper in a barbarous and primitive time\u2014in crude times\u2014but\n    they won\u2019t do now. Civilization has thrown them away. It won\u2019t\n    do to gather up these old customs and practices out of the\n    by-gone barbarism and by-gone ages, and attempt to palm them\n    upon a free and intelligent and civilized people in these\n    days.\u201d\n\n    How free the people are in Utah today needs no discussion. If\n    the judge cannot stand these things it would seem God and the\n    Lamb can, for He is the light of the city, on the gates of\n    which are written the names of twelve men, the sons of one man\n    by four women\u2014a polygamist. Had Jacob lived now, the judges\n    would have sent spies, spotters and deputy marshals after him,\n    and if caught would have sent him to the penitentiary.\n\nThis epistle boldly challenges christian belief in the New Jerusalem\nas based upon polygamy; upon its gates the names of twelve polygamous\nchildren are inscribed, sons of one man, children of four mothers,\ntwo wives and two concubines. Of Solomon, this epistle could likewise\nhave spoken, whom the Bible represents as the wisest man that lived;\nhis wives numbering three hundred, his concubines seven hundred. Nor\nare Jacob and Solomon two isolated instances of Jewish polygamy;\nMormons, in common with the lay and clerical authorities previously\nreferred to, find abundant proof for their sanction of polygamy both\nin the revelations of the Old and the New Testaments. But each human\nbeing entering the world is a revelation to himself, to herself, and\nthe revelation inherently abiding in all women, declares against such\ndegradation of herself and her sex.\n\nBrigham Young, the first Mormon president, husband of nineteen wives,\nfather of forty-two children, possessed great natural fascination; was\na man of wonderful magnetism. Of him a daughter said: \u201chis slightest\ntouch was a caress.\u201d His seventh wife, an elegant and fashionable\nwoman, was said by her daughter to worship the ground that he walked\nupon and never to have been herself since his death. From this favorite\ndaughter of Young who after his death apostatized from the Mormon\nreligion, much has been learned in regard to the real feeling of these\npolygamous wives toward each other, which she characterized as \u201can\noutward semblance of good will, but in reality a condition of deadly\nhatred.\u201d Such outward semblance of goodwill, such real condition of\ndeadly hatred is the result of all forms of religion which subjugate\nthe many to the caprice of the few, even though done under assumption\nof divine authority. That envy, jealousy and hatred should be among\nthe dire results of woman\u2019s religious degradation, cannot be a subject\nof surprise to the student of human nature; and it is supreme proof of\nthe bondage of the human will under fancied authority from God, that\nsuch minds as those of Luther, Milton, Seldon, Beecher, Walworth and\nothers like them should uphold a system so degrading in character alike\nto the men and the women who practice it. Young\u2019s daughter Dora with\nfive of her sisters, was expelled a few years since from the Mormon\nchurch for having gone to law with certain of the Mormon brethren who\nattempted to rob them of their patrimony. The elders realizing the\ninjury these women might do for the church, sent a couple of teachers\nto interview Dora, invoking her father\u2019s name to influence her dropping\nthe suit[7] and return to the church. Dora had been aroused by a sense\nof the iniquity of the church, through hearing its elders declare upon\noath that they knew nothing of polygamous marriage ceremonies being\nperformed, while the same day of this denial no less than fourteen such\nmarriages had taken place at the Endowment House. Referring to the\nconscientious belief held by many women of the necessity of polygamous\nmarriage in order to secure the sanctification requisite for their\nsalvation, Dora said:\n\n    Since my eyes have been opened I sometimes ask myself how I\n    could ever possibly have regarded the horrible and licentious\n    practices of which I was aware, and the terrible things I have\n    witnessed with anything but horror? And yet I was brought\n    up to consider these things right and I thought nothing\n    about them\u2014just as I suppose children brought up where human\n    sacrifices are offered, learn to regard such sacrifice as\n    right and to look upon them with indifference.\n\nExperience taught Dora that the natural character of the human mind\nsoon accommodates itself to circumstances, becomes in accord with\nits environment, and regards as right whatever law or custom teaches\nis right. This, called the conservative tendency of the human mind,\nis merely the result of habitude of thought induced by authoritative\nteaching. Both church and state have availed themselves of the\ninfluence of authoritative custom for the perpetuation of power.\nIn this way despotism has gained its chief victories. The beliefs\nto which persons have been habituated from childhood, are, without\ninvestigation, deemed truths by the majority of the world. No step\nso great in its far-reaching results as that of independent thought;\nnone so greatly feared by priestly and civil power; and among women\nduring the Christian ages, none has met with such swift rebuke, no sin\nhas been characterized as its equal in malignancy. Therefore while\nthe world has possessed full knowledge of man\u2019s opinions regarding\npolygamy, not until the present century and in the United States have\nthe views of women been attainable. Until the present age there has\nbeen no escape from bondage for the polygamous wife, no opportunity\nfor learning its effects upon her own inner self. From the daughter of\nits chief prophet, the man whose fame in connection with polygamy has\ngone throughout the world, we have learned something of its evils as\nseen and felt by woman. Yet other and still stronger testimony is not\nlacking. A private letter written in Salt Lake City a few years since,\npublished in the _Boston Transcript_ under head of \u201cThe Silent Woes of\nMormonism\u201d depicts one phase in its influence upon the unborn.\n\n    A few years ago an educated young journalist came to Salt Lake\n    City from Europe with his young wife. Both became sincere\n    believers in Mormonism. Then strong pressure was brought to\n    bear by the priesthood upon the husband to force him into\n    polygamy. The wife finding opposition in vain, at last gave\n    her nominal consent. A second bride was brought into the\n    house. In a short time the first wife became a mother, but the\n    infant never cried aloud. It came voiceless into the world.\n    But it wept in secret all the time. Sleeping or waking the\n    tears flowed from its closed eyes, and in a few weeks it died.\n    The mother said that it died of a broken heart. Every day\n    of its life it shed the tears that its mother had repressed\n    before its birth.\n\nThe experience of Caroline Owens, whose suit for bigamy against her\npolygamous husband, John D. Miles, appealed from the Supreme Court\nof Utah to the Supreme Court of the United States\u2014a suit implicating\nDelegate Cannon, of the Congress of the United States, in its tale\nof wrong, presents another phase. Miss Owens was an English girl\nacquainted with Miles from her childhood. He had emigrated to Utah,\nbut in England on a visit he urged her to return with him, promising\nher marriage when they reached Salt Lake City. She questioned him as\nto polygamy. He replied that a few old men were allowed more than one\nwife, but that young men like himself had but one, although he spoke\nof one Emily Spencer who had expressed affection for him but whom he\nhad no intention of marrying. Upon reaching Salt Lake City, Miss Owens\nstaid at the house of United States Delegate George Q. Cannon, where\nbut one wife resided. When the day of the wedding arrived she went\nthrough the ceremonies of the Endowment House, lasting from ten o\u2019clock\nin the morning until three in the afternoon, and had been wedded to\nJohn D. Miles. She says:\n\n    I can never tell the horrors of the next few hours. Before\n    that day was over my love had turned to burning hatred. When\n    we started to go home, Miles told me that he had invited Emily\n    Spencer to our wedding reception. I said if she came to the\n    house I should leave. He replied he was now master. I went\n    to my room and dressed for the reception, which took place\n    at Cannon\u2019s other house, where he kept his three wives. When\n    I went down there was a crowd there, among the rest a plain\n    looking girl in a calico dress, to whom I was introduced. It\n    was Emily Spencer. I did not speak to her. After a while they\n    wanted to dance, and asked me to play. Emily Spencer sat on\n    a piano stool. I told her to get up. Miles came forward and\n    said, \u201cSit still, Emily Spencer, my wife.\u201d I felt as though I\n    had been shot. I said, \u201cYour wife! then what am I?\u201d He said,\n    \u201cYou are both my wives.\u201d All at once my shame flashed over\n    me. Here I was dishonored, the polygamous wife of a Mormon.\n    I ran out of the house, bent only on escape, I did not think\n    where; I could not do it, though, for Miles and young Cannon,\n    a son of the delegate, ran after me and dragged me back. We\n    had been intending to stay in the house all night, but I stole\n    away and returned to the other house, where I had been living\n    the three weeks since my arrival from England. I noticed there\n    was no key in the lock, but shot a little bolt and piled up\n    chairs against the door. I cried myself to sleep. The next\n    thing I knew I don\u2019t know what time it was, Miles stood in\n    the room and was locking the door on the inside. I screamed,\n    because Mrs. Cannon and Miles\u2019 step-mother had been living in\n    the house with me. Miles said I need not take on, for brother\n    Cannon had anticipated that I would make trouble and had had\n    the house cleared of every one else. I found out that it was\n    so. He told me that I might as well submit; there was no law\n    here to control the saints; there was no power on earth that\n    would save me.\n\nShe was subjected to great brutality, again and again beaten and\nexhorted to bear her condition patiently as a sister to be exalted;\nbecause of her rebellious spirit she was hectored and threatened,\nstoned, jeered at and abused in many ways, all under pretense of\nreligion, until after three weeks of such matrimonial life she escaped\nand among the \u201cGentiles\u201d found rest and help. She speaks of polygamous\nwives as half-clad, poorly fed, toiling like serfs without hope under\nthe chains of a religious despotism.[8] Mormon polygamy possesses\nthe peculiar feature of tracing the system of plural marriage to the\ngods; a father and mother god and goddess; a grandfather a grandmother\ngod and goddess, and thus in constantly ascending scale; from these\nthey claim the origin of their own polygamous system. Every Mormon\nman, however depraved, is taught that if he lives up to the plural\nmarriage system, upon his death he will become a god, holding power and\nprocreating children to all eternity. But should any Mormon, however\npure his life, die unmarried, he has forever lost his opportunity\nof becoming a god, but remains simply an angel, a servant of the\npolygamous gods.[9] The belief is inculcated in woman, that to her\nmarriage is even more necessary than to man. Without marriage there\nis no resurrection for her, and thus believing polygamy a requisite\nfor eternal salvation, thousands silently endure the woes of this\ncondition. This latest christian sect, this final outgrowth of\ncenturies of barbarous teaching, is the most determined effort against\nthe integrity of womanhood since the days of the Jewish patriarchs.\nThe duty of giving birth to numerous children in order to save waiting\nspirits and to swell the glory of the polygamous father in his after\ndeath godship, is as thoroughly taught as when in mediaeval days monk\nand priest preached woman\u2019s duty to constantly add numbers to the\nchurch. The late Helen H. Jackson who had thoroughly investigated the\nMormon question, writing of polygamy in the _Century_ said:\n\n    The doctrine, to be completely studied, must be considered\n    both from the man\u2019s point of view and the woman\u2019s, the two\n    being, for reasons, not identical. But it is the woman\u2019s view\n    of it, her belief and position in regard to it, which are most\n    misrepresented and misunderstood by the world. If the truth\n    were known, there would be few persons in whose minds would be\n    any sentiment except profound pity for the Mormon woman\u2014pity,\n    moreover, intensified by admiration. There has never been a\n    class or sect of women since the world began who have endured\n    for religion\u2019s sake a tithe of what has been, and is, and\n    forever must be, endured by the women of the Mormon church. It\n    has become customary to hold them as disreputable women, light\n    and loose, unfit to associate with the virtuous, undeserving\n    of any esteem. Never was greater injustice committed.\n\n    The two doctrines which most help the Mormon woman to endure\n    the suffering of living in plural marriage are the doctrines\n    of pre-existence and of the eternal continuance of the\n    patriarchal order. The mere revelation from Joseph Smith,\n    to the effect that polygamy was to be permitted and was\n    praiseworthy and desirable, would never, alone, have brought\n    the Mormon women to hearty acceptance of the institution.\n\n    They are taught and most unquestioningly believe that the\n    universe is full of spirits waiting, and waiting impatiently,\n    to be born on this earth. These spirits have already passed\n    through one stage of discipline and probation and are to enter\n    upon a second one here. The Rev. Edward Beecher once published\n    a book setting forth a similar doctrine. The Mormon doctrine\n    goes farther than Dr. Beecher\u2019s, inasmuch as it teaches that\n    these spirits may select of their own free will where and how\n    they will be born into their earthly probation; and that they\n    are, one and all, anxious to be born in the Mormon church,\n    as the one true Zion, where alone are to be found safety and\n    salvation. They also believe that the time is limited during\n    which these spirits can avail themselves of this privilege of\n    being born into Zion. They look for the return of Jesus Christ\n    to the earth before long and for the establishment then of the\n    millennial dispensation, after which no more of the spirits\n    can be reborn and reclaimed. Hence the obligation resting upon\n    every faithful Mormon woman to bring into the world, in the\n    course of her life, as many children as possible. Not only\n    does she thus contribute to the building up and strengthening\n    of the church but she rescues souls already existing and in\n    danger of eternal death. It is easy to sneer at this doctrine\n    as inconceivable rubbish; and, in truth, it must be admitted\n    that it is hard to conceive of an educated mind receiving\n    it; but it is no more absurd or unprovable than hundreds of\n    kindred speculations and notions which have been devised,\n    preached and passionately believed in times past. Neither\n    has the absurdity or non-absurdity, falsity or truth of the\n    belief, anything to do with our judgment of its believers.\n\nIn furtherance of its plan for temporal power, the astuteness of the\nMormon theocracy is shown in this doctrine of pre-existent spirits[10]\ncontinually waiting birth upon the earth. This together with its\nother theory of the superior power and godhood in a future life, of\nthe father of numerous children, imposes the condition of continual\nmotherhood upon Mormon wives.\n\nBut during the christian ages this theory of woman\u2019s duty to constantly\nbear children in order to the upholding of the church has ever been\ntaught. Even Philip Melancthon, the great associate of Luther in the\nReformation, saying: \u201cIf a woman becomes weary of bearing children,\nthat matters not. Let her only die from bearing, she is there to do\nit.\u201d So little does the church yet understand the right of woman to\nan existence for herself alone that not five years have passed since\na minister of the Methodist church in the state of New York publicly\ndeclared he saw no reason for woman\u2019s creation but the bearing of\nchildren. In a lecture upon Mormonism in Boston, Prof. Conyear, of the\nSalt Lake City Collegiate Institute, speaking of the sufferings endured\nby Mormon women in order thus to secure personal salvation, said:\n\n    Hate the system as you hate Satan, but have mercy on the\n    people who are there in such a bondage\u2014a bondage worse than\n    that in which the negro in the South was ever held.\n\nBut these doctrines accepted as truth by devout Mormon women are not\nmore degrading to them, not more injurious to civilization, than is the\nbelief of orthodox christian women in regard to the frailty and primal\nsin of her sex and the curse of her Creator upon her in consequence.\nTo this belief she has been trained from her childhood as her mother\nbefore her and her feminine relatives for innumerable centuries, and\nwithout investigation she has accepted these doctrines of the church as\ntrue. Yet all these theories so degrading to woman are of purely human\nmasculine origin, their object, power for man, and the subordination\nof woman to him in every relation of life. The eternal continuance\nof the patriarchal order, a doctrine of the Mormons, is paralleled\namong orthodox christians by the teaching of an eternal continuance\nof the male priestly order, woman forever excluded. The Mormon woman\nno more fully places herself in position of servant to her husband,\nwhom at the Endowment House marriage ceremony she promises to \u201cobey,\u201d\nthan has the orthodox christian woman through the ages, when she has\npromised obedience to her husband at the marriage altar. Nor is the\ngeneral religious training of the two very different. The Mormon woman\nis taught that her salvation depends upon polygamous marriage and her\nsubjection to her husband in all things; the orthodox christian woman\nis taught that her salvation depends upon her belief that woman brought\nsin into the world, in punishment whereof God placed her in subjection\nto man; and during the ages her promise of obedience to man has been\nheld as an integral part of the marriage ceremony. Nor did a change\nbegin to take place until after the inauguration of the woman suffrage\nreform. Not until woman herself rebelled against such annihilation\nof her own conscience and responsibility, did a few sects in some\ninstances omit this promise from their forms of marriage, although it\nstill remains a portion of the Greek, Catholic and Anglican ceremony\nas well as of other Protestant sects. The shock of finding educated\nwomen of New England birth, members of the Mormon church as polygamous\nwives, is lessened upon a careful analysis of the Mormon doctrine in\ncomparison with those of orthodox Christianity regarding women: all\nalike rest upon the same foundation; all teach that sin entered the\nworld through woman; all alike darken the understanding through such\nfalse teaching. The women of the Mormon church received their training\nunder orthodox Christianity, which laid the foundation of their self\ncontempt.[11] With the professed revelation of the Book of Mormon,\na class of priests arose who no less positively and authoritatively\nasserted its doctrines to be of God than the priesthood of other\ndivisions of christianity assert the Bible to be of God; and alike each\ndeclare themselves and their followers to be his chosen people. \u201cBy\nauthority of the priesthood of God,\u201d has carried weight in all ages,\nand no greater weight among the Mormons of the present day than among\nChristians of all ages. Under the christian theory regarding the origin\nand duties of woman it is not surprising that polygamy should ever have\nfound defenders in the christian world, nor is it at all singular that\nMormonism as \u201cthe latest founded christian sect\u201d should teach polygamy\nas a divinely organized institution, drawing its arguments from the\nBible. Bishop Lunt of that church, defending polygamy as of divine\norigin, said:\n\n    God revealed to Joseph Smith the polygamous system. It is\n    quite true that his widow declared that no such revelation was\n    ever made, but that was because she had lost the spirit. God\n    commanded the human race to multiply and replenish the earth.\n    Abraham had two wives, and the Almighty honored the second\n    one by a direct communication. Jacob had Leah and Zilpah.\n    David had a plurality of wives, and was a man after God\u2019s own\n    heart. God gave him Saul\u2019s two wives, and only condemned his\n    adulteries. Moses, Gideon and Joshua had each a plurality of\n    wives. Solomon had wives and concubines by hundreds, though\n    we do not believe in the concubine system. We leave that to\n    the Gentiles. Virtue and chastity wither beneath the monogamic\n    institution, which was borrowed from the pagan nations by the\n    early Christians. It was prophesied that in the latter days\n    seven women would lay hold of one man and demand to bear his\n    name, that they might not be held in dishonor. The Protestants\n    and Catholics assail us with very poor grace when it is\n    remembered that the first pillars of the religion they claim\n    to profess were men like the saints of Utah\u2014polygamists. The\n    fact cannot be denied. Polygamy is virtually encouraged and\n    taught by example by the Old Testament. It may appear shocking\n    and blasphemous to Gentiles for us to say so, but we hold that\n    Jesus Christ himself was a polygamist. He was surrounded by\n    women constantly, as the Scriptures attest, and those women\n    were his polygamous wives. The vast disparity between the\n    sexes in all settled communities is another argument in favor\n    of polygamy, to say nothing of the disinclination among young\n    male Gentiles to marrying. The monogamic system condemns\n    millions of women to celibacy. A large proportion of them\n    stray from the path of right, and these unfortunates induce\n    millions of men to forego marriage. As I have said, virtue and\n    chastity wither under the monogamic system.\n\n    There are no illegitimate children in Utah; there are no\n    libertines; there are no brothels, excepting where the\n    presence of Gentiles creates the demand for them. Even then\n    our people do what they can to root out such places. There\n    is a positive advantage in having more than one wife. It is\n    impossible to find a Gentile home, where comforts and plenty\n    prevail, in which there is only one woman. No one woman can\n    manage a household. She must have assistance. Hence we claim\n    that when a man marries a second wife, he actually benefits\n    the first one, and contributes to her ease, and relieves\n    her of a large burden of care. The duties of the household\n    are divided between the two women, and everything moves on\n    harmoniously and peacefully. The whole thing is a matter of\n    education. A girl reared under the monogamic system may look\n    with abhorrence on ours; our young women do not do so. They\n    expect, when they marry a man, that he will some day take\n    another wife, and they consider it quite natural that he\n    should do so. In wealthy Gentile communities the concubine\n    system largely takes the place of the polygamous system. Any\n    man of intelligence, observation and travel, knows that such\n    is the case. The fact is ignored by general consent, and\n    little is said about it and nothing is written about it. It\n    is not regarded as a proper subject of conversation or of\n    publication. How much better to give lonely women a home while\n    they are uncontaminated, and honor them with your name, and\n    perpetually provide for them, and before the world recognize\n    your own offspring! The polygamous system is the only natural\n    one, and the time rapidly approaches when it will be the most\n    conspicuous and beneficent of American institutions. It will\n    be the grand characteristic feature of American society. Our\n    women are contented with it\u2014more, they are the most ardent\n    defenders of it to be found in Utah. If the question were put\n    to a vote tomorrow, nine-tenths of the women of Utah would\n    vote to perpetuate polygamy.\n\nIn line with other Christian sects Mormons claim that polygamy is\ncountenanced by the New Testament as well as by the Old. They interpret\nPaul\u2019s teaching in regard to bishops, while commanding them to marry\none wife, as also not prohibiting them from marrying more than one;\ntheir interpretation of this passage but slightly varying from that\nof Rev. Mr. Madan. Rev. C. P. Lyford, of the Methodist church, long a\nresident of Utah, does not fail to see the degradation of the people as\nin proportion to the despotism of the hierarchy. He says:\n\n    It took the Methodist church forty years to get a membership\n    of 38,000. Mormonism in forty-four years counted 250,000.\n    It seems incredible, nevertheless it is a fact. In this\n    brief space of time it has also been able to nullify our\n    laws, oppose our institutions, openly perpetrate crimes, be\n    represented in Congress, boast of the helplessness of the\n    nation to prevent these things, and give the church supremacy\n    over the state and the people. Bills introduced in Congress\n    adequate to their overthrow have been year after year allowed\n    to fall to the ground without action upon them.\n\n    Our public men can only pronounce against the crime of\n    polygamy; the press can see only polygamy in Utah; the public\n    mind is impressed with only the heinousness of polygamy. Back\n    of polygamy is the tree that produces it and many kindred\n    evils more dear to the Mormon rulers. They do not care for all\n    the sentiment or law against this one fruit of the tree, if\n    the tree itself is left to stand. The tree\u2014the prolific cause\n    of so many and so great evils in Utah, the greatest curse of\n    the territory, the strength of Mormonism, and its impregnable\n    wall of defense against Christianity and civilization, is\n    that arbitrary, despotic, and absolute hierarchy known as the\n    Mormon Priesthood.\n\nMr. Lyford has partial insight into the truth when he says \u201cback of\npolygamy is the tree that produces it and many kindred evils;\u201d but in\ndefining that tree as the hierarchy\u2014the priesthood\u2014he has not reached\nthe entire truth. He does not touch the ground which supports the tree.\nPolygamy is but one development of the doctrine of woman\u2019s created\ninferiority, the constant tendency of which is to make her a mere slave\nunder every form of religion extant, and of which the complex marriage\nof the Christian sect of Perfectionists at Oneida Community was but\nanother logical result.\n\nWhen woman interprets the Bible for herself, it will be in the interest\nof a higher morality, a purer home. Monogamy is woman\u2019s doctrine, as\npolygamy is man\u2019s. Bachofen, the Swiss jurist, says that the regulation\nof marriage by which, in primitive times, it became possible for a\nwoman to belong only to one man, came about by a religious reformation,\nwherein the women in armed conflict, obtained a victory over men.\n\nWhile the greatest number of converts to the Mormon church are from\namong the ignorant peasantry of foreign countries, still no less than\nin orthodox christianity do we find people of culture and education\nupholding its doctrines, an irrefragable proof that the power of\nreligious despotism lies in two conditions; First, ignorance; Second,\nfear. To fear must ever be attributed the great victories of religious\ndespotism. Fear of punishment after death from which obedience to\npriestly teaching is believed to free. Such slavery of the human mind\nhas ever been the greatest obstacle to advancing civilization. Men and\nwomen of the Christian church not daring to use their own free thought\nupon such questions, are no less bound than the savage, who makes a\nhideous noise in order to frighten away the monster he thinks trying to\nswallow the sun during an eclipse.\n\nThe strength of the church has ever lain in its power of producing\nfear and impelling belief in its assertion that the priesthood alone\ncan define the will of God, and that as His chosen servants they but\nvoice His will in every word they utter. Unhesitating belief in this\nassertion has been required through the Christian ages as evidence\nof a true son or daughter of the church, while the cry of heresy, so\nfrightful in its significance, so terrible in its punishment under the\npriesthood, has most effectively prevented investigation and quenched\nthe fire of rebellious thought.\n\nThe Mormon priesthood look toward the establishment of a temporal\nkingdom in connection with their religion. They maintain that the\ncivil power inherently belongs to the theocracy and should supersede\nall other forms of government. Like the priesthood of other sects\nthey claim divine guidance in the promulgation of their laws as\nproceeding from above while those of the state emanate from man\nhimself and consequently are not binding upon the conscience, the\nchurch as a body ever claiming to hold the keys of heaven and of hell;\nand the implicit belief given to such assertion by tens and hundreds\nof thousands, has ever been a most powerful method for subduing the\nreason. Its anathemas, its excommunications, its denial of church rites\nin marriage, in burial, its control of both temporal and spiritual\npower, have ever made its weapons of the most formidable character.\nFear of what may be met in a future life over which the church assumes\nsuch knowledge and control, subjugation of the reason, the fostering\nof ignorance, the denial of education and the constant teaching that\nthought outside of the line formulated by the church is deepest sin,\nhas held the christian world in bondage during its centuries. Inasmuch\nas it is impossible for the candid thinker not to perceive that\nall forms of christianity are based upon the statement that woman\nhaving brought sin into the world rendered the sacrifice of a Saviour\nnecessary, the reason of such persistent effort upon the part of the\nchurch for woman\u2019s entire subjugation becomes apparent. It is assumed\nby all theocracies that the church is a temporal kingdom, with supreme\nright to the control of all civil affairs. Every theocracy is therefore\na political system seeking control of the civil government and however\ngreatly suppressed in action, every theocracy proposes such control\nas its ulterior design. Early in 1890, an encyclical letter by the\npope declared the supremacy of the church over the state, commanding\nresistance to the authority of the state in case of its conflicting\nwith the pretensions of the Supreme Pontiff of the Catholic church.\nThe Mormon theocracy and the Catholic here show their affinity. Nor\nare Protestants without similar pretensions as is proven by the action\nof the \u201cNational Reform Association\u201d of the United States; whose aim\nis the union of church and state through an amendment to the Federal\nconstitution, its ultimate purpose being that of theocratic control\nover the civil government of this country. These various bodies are\nparts of the \u201cChristian Party in Politics;\u201d nor is this party of\nrecent origin; as early as 1827-8 when composed almost entirely of\nProtestants, its designs upon the life of the republic were noted by\nthe eloquent Scotch reformer, Frances Wright, during her travels,\nlectures and residence in this country. Mormonism and Catholicism\ndo not more greatly threaten the civil and religious integrity of\nthis republic than does the \u201cNational Reform Association,\u201d the\ntheocracy of the Protestant church equally with that of the Catholic\nchurch constantly striving to incite congressional action in favor\nof obligatory religious teaching and seeking control of the common\nschools. Yet the history of the world proves that wherever tried,\necclesiastical schools have lowered the standard of education. Today\nthe schools under control of the Mormon church in no respect equal\nthose of adjacent territories. Under the plea of religious freedom\nthe greatest dangers arise. While the Mormons affirm in reference to\npolygamy that their church laws concern Mormons alone, no less do other\ntheocracies inculcate doctrines contrary to civil law; the catholic\nchurch, its spirit today[12] the same as during past ages, making\ncivil marriage and the public school system its present objective\npoints of opposition to the state;[13] while the general body of\nprotestant churches more openly than the catholic churches proclaim\ntheir intention not alone to control secular education, marriage\nand divorce, but to unite church and state through a change in the\nfundamental law of the United States. A somewhat wide-spread fear\nexists in regard to the encroachment of Catholicism upon civil liberty.\nThe most potent danger lies elsewhere, the most potent because the\nleast perceived; the most potent because arising from a body whom the\nmasses of native Americans, through heredity and training, look upon\nas supporters and defenders of both civil and religious liberty\u2014the\npriesthood of the orthodox Protestant churches. Mormonism does not\nso fully threaten civil and religious liberty; catholicism is not\nmaking greater encroachments upon them than are the great body of the\nprotestant clergy, under the name and the work of the \u201cNational Reform\nAssociation.\u201d\n\nThe people of the United States with careless security in the power of\nthe principles of freedom upon which the government is based, fail to\nnote the theocratic encroachment everywhere threatened.[14] The very\nnature of sacerdotalism professing as it every where does, to hold\nauthority of a supernatural character, unfailingly creates a claim of\nsupremacy over civil government. President John Taylor, of the Mormon\nchurch, a few years since openly asserted these claims, saying: \u201cWe\nare independent of newspapers, independent of kings, independent of\ngovernments.\u201d But it is not the Mormon priesthood alone that declares\nits independence of secular governments. This is the same spirit that\nseen through the ages of christianity has been so plainly shown by\nCatholicism since the temporal power in Italy has fallen into the hands\nof a secular monarch, and that is now so fully a part of Protestant\neffort. Under the overwhelming amount of biblical proof quoted in its\nfavor by the most eminent legal and clerical minds of the christian\nchurch we must admit the doctrine of polygamy to be a component part of\nchristianity. Although like the fagot and the stake, under the light of\nadvancing civilization it has somewhat fallen into disrepute with the\nmajority of men and women, yet its renewal as an underlying principle\nof a new christian sect need not be a subject of astonishment. The\npulpit, the bar, and legislative halls are still under the control\nof man and these institutions still express the form of civilization\nthat is due to his teachings. But as neither moral nor intellectual\neducation is of value unless founded upon a material basis, the world\nnow beginning to see that Wall Street, and the Bourse, with their\nfingers upon the business of the world, are fast becoming of greater\nimportance in determining the future character of civilization than\nSt. Peter\u2019s, the Kremlin, or Westminster Abbey. Wendell Phillips once\ndeclared that the advance of civilization was not dependent upon either\nthe pulpit or the press but upon commerce, and a careful study of the\ninventions and industries of the age, confirm this statement. Material\nneeds, underlying all others, direct the tenor of modern civilization.\nBut commerce of itself is not alone responsible. Within the past\nthirty years a new element has widely entered into the business of the\nworld, and even the most careless observer can but in many ways note\nthe changing customs and habits of business life, and that under this\nchange, a new form of civilization is dawning upon the world. Woman\nonce so carefully excluded is now everywhere seen. At the counter,\nbehind the cashier\u2019s desk, as buyer, as business manager, and in many\ninstances as employer, conducting business for herself. Every kind\nof industry is opening to her, from that of government employee at\nWashington with the financial interests of the nation in her grasp, to\nthat of electrical business, woman is everywhere found. The commerce of\nthe world is rapidly changing hands and the next quarter of a century\nwill find woman in its full control. But few persons foresee the\nultimate result of this change. With a new class at the helm, commerce\nwill give new ideas to the world. If christianity survive the shock\nof coming events, it will present a different aspect within the next\nfifty years and its teachings in regard to woman will be totally unlike\nthose of past ages. As woman comes into new relations with the great\ninstitutions of the world, she will cease to believe herself inferior\nand subordinate to man. Polygamy and all kindred degradations of her\nsex will become things of the past, and taking her rightful place in\nchurch and state she will open a new civilization to the world.\n\n\n\n\n_Chapter Eight_\n\n+Woman and Work+\n\n\n    And unto Adam the Lord said: \u201cCursed be the ground for thy\n    sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy\n    life; thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and\n    thou shalt eat the herbs of the field; in the sweat of thy\n    face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground,\n    for dust thou art and into dust thou shalt return. Gen. 3:\n    17-18-19.\n\nUpon man was pronounced the curse of the world\u2019s work. The Bible\ndeclares it was because of _his_ sinfulness that the earth was to be\ncursed; for _his_ punishment that he was to eat of it in sorrow all\nthe days of his life; because of _his_ wickedness that it was to bear\nthorns and thistles; and in consequence of _his_ disobedience that\nhe was to eat the herb of the field in the sweat of his face until\nhe returned unto the ground from whence he came. No curse of work\nwas pronounced upon woman; her \u201ccurse\u201d was of an entirely different\ncharacter. It was a positive command of the Lord God Almighty, that\nupon man alone the work of the world should fall and this work he was\nto perform in sorrow and the sweat of his brow.\n\nThus far this book has been devoted to a consideration of the doctrines\ntaught by christian men in regard to \u201cwoman\u2019s curse,\u201d and so earnestly\nhas this doctrine been proclaimed that man seems to have entirely\nforgotten the \u201ccurse,\u201d also pronounced upon himself or if he has not\nforgotten, he has neglected to see its full import, and in his anxiety\nto keep woman in subordination he has placed _his_ \u201ccurse\u201d also upon\nher thus thwarting the express command of God. It is therefore but just\nto now devote a few pages to the consideration of man\u2019s \u201ccurse\u201d and\nan investigation of the spirit in which he has accepted the penalty\nimposed upon him for his share in the transgression which cost him\nParadise. At the commencement of this investigation, it will be well to\nremember that Eve was not banished from the Garden of Eden. Adam alone\nwas cast out and to prohibit _his_ re-entrance, not hers, the angel\nwith the flaming sword was set as guardian at its gates.\n\nWe must also recall the opposition of the church through the ages\nto all attempts made towards the amelioration of woman\u2019s suffering\nat time of her bringing forth children, upon the plea that such\nmitigation was a direct interference with the mandate of the Almighty\nand an inexcusable sin. It will be recalled that in the chapter\nupon witchcraft, the bitter hostility of the church to the use of\nanaesthetics by the women physicians of that period was shown, and its\nopposing sermons, its charges of heresy, its burnings at the stake as\nmethods of enforcing that opposition. Man, ever unjust to woman, has\nbeen no less so in the field of work. He has not taken upon himself the\nentire work of the world, as commanded, but has ever imposed a large\nportion of it upon woman. Neither do all men labor; but thousands in\nidleness evade the \u201ccurse\u201d of work pronounced upon all men alike. The\nchurch in its teachings and through its non-preaching the duty of man\nin this respect, is guilty of that defiance of the Lord God it has ever\nbeen so ready to attribute to woman. The pulpit does not proclaim that\nthis curse of work rests upon any man; does not preach this command to\nthe idle, the profligate, the rich or the honored but on the contrary\nshows less sympathy and less respect for the laborer, than for the\nidle man. The influence of this neglect of its duty by the church has\npermeated the christian world, we everywhere find contempt for the\nman who amid thorns and thistles tills the ground, obeying his primal\n\u201ccurse\u201d of earning his bread by the sweat of his brow; and everywhere\nsee respect accorded to the man, who by whatever means of honest or of\ndishonest capacity evades his curse, taking no share in the labors of\nthe field, nor earning his bread in the sweat of his brow.\n\nAnaesthetics have justly been called the greatest boon ever conferred\nby science upon mankind. But after the persecution of the witchcraft\nperiod a knowledge of their use was lost to the world for many hundred\nyears, but when rediscovered during the present century, their\nemployment in mitigating the sufferings of the expectant mother, again\nmet with the same opposition as during the middle ages upon the same\nground of its interference with \u201cthe curse\u201d pronounced by God upon\nwoman. The question of their use at such time was violently discussed\nat ministerial gatherings, and when Sir James Simpson, physician to\nQueen Victoria, employed them at the birth of the later princes and\nprincesses he was assailed by pulpit and press as having sacrilegiously\nthwarted \u201cthe curse.\u201d When the practice was introduced into the United\nStates, prominent New England clergymen preached against their use upon\nthe same ground, of its being an impious frustration of the curse of\nthe Almighty upon woman. But the history of christendom does not show\nan instance in which the church or the pulpit ever opposed labor by\nwoman, upon the ground of its being an interference with the \u201ccurse\u201d\npronounced upon man, but on the contrary her duty to labor has been\ntaught by church and state alike, having met no opposition, unless,\nperchance she has entered upon some remunerative employment theretofore\nmonopolized by man, with the purpose of applying its proceeds to her\nown individual use. Nor has objection then arisen because of the work,\nbut solely because of its money-earning qualities. An investigation of\nthe laws concerning woman, their origin, growth, and by whom chiefly\nsustained, will enable us to judge how far they are founded upon the\neternal principles of justice and how far emanating from ignorance,\nsuperstition and love of power which is the basis of all despotism.\nViewing her through the Christian Ages, we find woman has chiefly been\nregarded as an element of wealth; the labor of wife[1] and daughters,\nthe sale of the latter in the prostitution of a loveless marriage,\nhaving been an universally extended form of domestic slavery, one which\nthe latest court decisions recognize as still extant. It is the boast\nof America and Europe that woman holds a higher position in the world\nof work under christianity than under pagandom. Heathen treatment of\nwomen in this respect often forms the subject of returned missionary\nsermons from men apparently forgetful that servile labor of the\nseverest and most degrading character is performed by christian women,\nis demanded from them in every christian country, Catholic, Greek, and\nProtestant alike, many savage and barbarous races showing superiority\nover christian lands in their general treatment of women.\n\nEngland claiming to represent the highest result of christian\ncivilization shows girls of the most tender years and married women\nwith infants at the breast working in the depths of coal mines nearly\nnaked, where harnessed to trucks they drag loads of coal on their\nhands and knees through long low galleries to the pit mouth. Among\nthe pit-women in England are those to whom Christianity is not even a\nname; one to whom the word Christ was spoken, asking \u201cwho\u2019s him; be he\na hodman or a pitman?\u201d It has been truthfully declared that England\nprotects its hunting dogs kept for their master\u2019s pleasure, far better\nthan it protects the women and children of its working classes. It\ntakes about $2,500,000 annually to pay the maintenance of the 20,000\nhounds owned in Great Britain, while women and children are left to\nslowly die at starvation wages. A few years since a commission was\ninstituted by Parliament to inquire into the condition of women working\nin the coal mines and the wages paid them. The facts ascertained were\nof the most horrible character, no improvement being shown in the past\nfifty years, men and women, boys and girls, still working together in\nan almost naked condition.\n\n    In the Lancashire coal-fields lying to the north and west of\n    Manchester, females are regularly employed in underground\n    labor, and the brutal conduct of the men and the debasement of\n    the women are well described by some of the witnesses examined\n    by them. Betty Harris, (one of numerous persons examined),\n    aged thirty-seven, drawer in a coal pit, said: \u201cI have a belt\n    around my waist and a chain between my legs to the truck, and\n    I go on my hands and feet; the road is very steep and we have\n    to hold by a rope, and when there is no rope, by anything we\n    can catch hold of. There are six women and about six boys or\n    girls in the pit I work in; it is very wet, and the water\n    comes over our clog-tops always, and I have seen it up to my\n    thighs; my clothes are always wet.\u201d Patience Keershaw aged\n    seventeen, another examined, said: \u201cI work in the clothes I\n    now have on (trousers and ragged jacket); the bald place upon\n    my head is made by thrusting the cones; the getters I work for\n    are naked, except their caps; they pull off their clothes;\n    all the men are naked.\u201d Margaret Hibbs, aged eighteen, said:\n    \u201cMy employment after reaching the wall-face is to fill my\n    bagie or stype with two and a half or three hundred weight of\n    coal; I then hook it on to my chain and drag it through the\n    seam, which is from twenty-six to twenty-eight inches high,\n    till I get to the main road, a good distance, probably two\n    hundred to 400 yards; the pavement I drag over is wet, and I\n    am obliged at all times to crawl on my hands and feet with my\n    bagie hung to the chain and ropes. It is sad, sweating, sore\n    and fatiguing work, and frequently maims the women.\u201d Robert\n    Bald, the government coal-viewer, states, that \u201cIn surveying\n    the workings of an extensive colliery under ground, a married\n    woman came forward groaning under an excessive weight of\n    coals, trembling in every nerve, and almost unable to keep\n    her knees from sinking under her. On coming up she said, in a\n    plaintive and melancholy voice, \u2018Oh sir, this is sore, sore,\n    sore work\u2019.\u201d A sub-commissioner said: \u201cit is almost incredible\n    that human beings can submit to such employment\u2014crawling on\n    hands and knees harnessed like horses, over soft, slushy\n    floors, more difficult than dragging the same weight through\n    our lowest sewers.\u201d Hundreds of pages are filled with\n    testimony of the same revolting character. These miserable\n    human beings are paid less than twenty cents per day. The\n    evidence shows almost as terrible a condition of the employees\n    of the workshops and large manufacturing establishments.\n\nFor the same kind of work men are paid three times more wages than are\npaid to women.\n\n    Women in the iron trade of the Midlands are compelled,\n    according to a labor commission witness, to work in the sheds\n    scantily covered and in the summer have to divest themselves\n    of nearly all their clothing while hammering nuts and bolts.\n    They bring their children to the factories and cover them up\n    to prevent their being burnt by red-hot sparks. Often they\n    have to carry bundles of iron weighing half a hundred weight.\n    For such work they earn 4s. or 5s. a week, while the men make\n    about 14s.\n\nAs early as 1840 an inquiry into the mining affairs of Great Britain,\nwhile showing a pitiable condition of the male laborers, exhibited that\nof women and children in a much worse light. As the natural guardians\nof children, well aware of their immaturity of body and mind, no\nmother allows their employment in severe labor at a tender age unless\nherself compelled to such work and unable to save her children. But\nat this investigation, men, women and children were found working\ntogether in the pits all either nude or nearly so, and according to the\nReport, not seeing daylight for weeks at a time. Women soon to become\nmothers were found yoked to carts in the pits; girls carried baskets\nof coal on their backs up ladders; while mere children crawling like\ndogs, on hands and feet, hauled carts along narrow rails, the system\nin operation requiring these victims to remain underground for weeks\nat a time, breathing foul air and deprived of the light of day. The\nspirit of ambition is not dead among these wretched serfs, these women\nworking out man\u2019s \u201ccurse\u201d. The most degraded woman in the English\ncoal mine will fight for precedence. She has all the force of the man\nby her side whose religious equal she is not; whose political equal\nshe is not; he possessing those elements of power, entrance to the\npriesthood and use of the ballot, denied to her. Through the ballot\nhe receives higher wages for the same kind and amount of work, the\nchurch having taught his superior rights upon every point; through the\nballot he influences the action of government in his own favor to the\ninjury of his fellow work-woman. A few years since the male miners\npetitioned against the employment of women in the mines, when a clause\nto that effect was immediately introduced to the Coal Mine Bill, then\nbefore Parliament, although in the Lancashire districts where one\nhundred and sixty-four women were employed, all but twenty-six were\nwidows or single women entirely dependent upon their own earnings.\nAs severe as the work, the women were remarkable for their bright\nand healthful appearance as contrasted with the woman workers in the\nfactories of Great Britain. Man, hereditarily unjust to woman under\nthe principles of the Patriarchate and the lessons of Christianity, is\neven more unjust in the fields of work he has compelled her to enter,\nthan in those of education and the ballot which she is seeking for\nherself. Organizations, strikes, the eight hour law demand, are largely\nconducted by men for men. The grim humor originating the proverb \u201ca\nman\u2019s work is from sun to sun, a woman\u2019s work is never done,\u201d still\nclings with all its old force to women in most employments. To such\nsmall extent has man made the woman worker\u2019s cause his own, that\ninstances are to be found even in the United States, where men and\nwomen working together and together going out upon a strike, the men\nhave been reinstated at the increase demanded, the women forced to\nreturn at the old wages. Nor is our own country the chief sinner in\nthis respect. It was found imperative many years since, among the\nwomen of England to organize leagues of their own sex alone, if they\ndesired their own interest in labor to be protected; the male Trades\nUnions of that country excluding women from some of the best paid\nbranches of industry, as carpet making, cloth weaving, letter press\nprinting.[2] In self defense, the Woman\u2019s Protective and Provident\nLeague, and a _Woman\u2019s Union Labor Journal_ were founded. The principle\nof exclusion has not alone been shown against woman\u2019s entrance into\nwell paid branches of work, but in those they have been permitted to\nenter they have found themselves subjected to much petty annoyance.\nAmong the male painters of pottery a combination was formed to prevent\nthe use by woman of the arm-rests required in this work. Tram-way\ntrains carry London workmen at reduced rates, but a combination was\nentered into by male laborers to prevent women workers from using the\nlow-priced trains. Nor in many instances are employers less the enemies\nof women, unions having been found necessary for the purpose of moral\nprotection. A most deplorable evidence of the low respect in which\nwoman is held and the slavery that work and cheap wages mean for her,\nis the suggestion often made by employers that she shall supplement her\nwages by the sale of her body. The manager of an industrial league in\nNew York City a few years since found that no young girl escaped such\ntemptation. Neither extreme youth nor friendliness afforded security or\nprotection but were rather additional inducements for betrayal, most\nof the victims numbering but fourteen short years. The late Jennie\nCollins, of Boston, one of the earliest persons in the United States,\nto devote herself to this branch of the \u201cwoman question,\u201d said:\n\n    It is easy for a young girl to obtain employment but let her\n    go where she will, even in government positions at Washington,\n    she will find her innocence assailed if not made the price at\n    which she gets a chance to work. And that same government does\n    not pay its women employees the same amount of wages for the\n    same kind of work.\n\nIn the Scottish collieries women are compelled to work in mines filled\nwith gas and flooded with water,[3] little girls commencing work in\nthese collieries at four years of age, and at six carrying loads of\none hundred and fifty pounds upon their backs. Half clothed women work\nby the side of entirely nude men, dragging ponderous loads of 16,000\nyards a day by means of a chain fastened to a belt, the severe labor of\ndragging this coal up inclined places to the mouth of the pit, testing\nevery muscle and straining every nerve. It is a work so destructive to\nhealth that even the stoutest men shrink from it, women engaged in it\nseldom living to be over thirty or forty years of age.\n\nA gentleman traveling in Ireland blushed for his sex when he saw the\nemployments of women young and old. He described them as patient\ndrudges, staggering over the bogs with heavy creels of turf on their\nbacks or climbing the slopes from the sea-shore laden like beasts of\nburden, with heavy sand-dripping sea-weed, or undertaking long journeys\non foot into the market towns bearing heavy hampers of farm produce.\nMan in thrusting the enforcement of his \u201ccurse\u201d upon woman in Christian\nlands has made her the great unpaid laborer of the world. In European\ncountries and in the United States, we find her everywhere receiving\nless pay than man for the same kind and quality of work. A recent\nstatement regarding women workers in the foundries of Pittsburgh,\nPenn., where five hundred women are employed in putting heads on nails\nand bolts, declared they received less than one-half the sum formerly\npaid to men who did the same kind of work; women getting from but four\nto five dollars a week while the wages of men ranged from fourteen to\nsixteen dollars a week. But as evil as the experience of young women in\nthe world of work, that of old women is in some respects even greater.\nWhile the young girl is almost certain to obtain work even if at small\nwages, it is very difficult for the woman of mature years to obtain\nwork at all, either in households as seamstresses or in manufactories.\nSocieties in the City of New York, for the aid of the working women\nfind it impossible to secure employment for middle-aged women. The\nreport of one such society stated that some of these women managed to\nprocure commitment to the Island in order to obtain food and prevent\nabsolute starvation; others slowly died from want of sufficient food;\nstill others, like the poor hard working girls of Paris, sought the\nriver as an end to their sufferings. As in the witchcraft period when\nthe chief persecution for many years raged against old women, we still\nfind in our own country that the woman of middle life is the least\nregarded in her efforts for a livelihood. The reason remains the\nsame. Looked upon during the Christian ages from a sensual standard,\nthe church teaching that woman was made for man still exerts its\npoisonous influence, still destroys woman. Not alone employers and\nmale laborers oppress woman, but legislation is frequently invoked\nto prevent her entering certain occupations. The Coal Miner\u2019s Bill\nwas one of many instances in Great Britain. Women work there also at\nmaking nails, spikes and chains. Not long since legislation prohibiting\ntheir entering this branch of work was attempted, when a deputation of\nwomen iron-workers waited upon the home secretary to protest against\ngovernment interference with their right to earn a livelihood. One of\nthese representative women had entered the work at seven years of age,\nbeing then fifty-seven. Having spent nearly half a century in this\noccupation she was practically incapacitated for any other form of\nlabor.\n\nThe terrible condition of working women in Paris, has attracted the\nattention of the French government. In but three or four trades\nare they even fairly well paid, and these few require a peculiar\nadaptation, as well as an expensive training out of reach of most women\nlaborers. And even in these best paid kinds of work, a discrimination\nin favor of man exists; at the China manufactory at Sevres where the\nmen employed receive a retiring pension, the women do not. From fifteen\nto eighteen pence represents the daily earnings of the Parisian working\ngirl, upon which sum it is impossible for her to properly support\nlife. Many of these girls die of slow starvation, others are driven\ninto prostitution, still others seek relief in the Seine. French women\nperform the most repulsive labors of the docks; they work in the mines\ndragging or pushing heavy trucks of coal like their English sisters,\nthrough narrow tunnels that run from the seams to the shaft; eating\nfood of such poor quality that the lessening stature of the population\ndaily shows the result. This decreasing size of Frenchmen especially\namong the peasantry, the majority not coming up to the regulation army\nheight, has within the last fifteen or twenty years called attention of\nthe government during conscription, yet without seeming to teach its\ncause as lying in the poor food and hard labor of women, the mothers of\nthese men. The heaviest burdens of porters, the most offensive sanitary\nwork, the severest agricultural labor in that country falls upon woman.\n\u201cI pity the women, the donkeys, and the boys,\u201d wrote Mrs. Stanton\nwhen traveling in the south of France. It is the poor nourishment and\nexcessive labor of woman which makes France today a country of rapidly\ndecreasing birth-rate, seriously affecting its population and calling\nthe earnest attention of statistical bureaus and physicians to this\nvital question; a question which affects the standing of France among\nthe nations of the earth. According to the report of the chief of the\nstatistical bureau, 1890, there were fewer births than deaths that\nyear, the births amounting to 838,059, the deaths to 876,505, an excess\nof 38,446 deaths. Commenting upon these returns, \u201cDer Reichsbote\u201d\nof Berlin, attributed the cause to a wide-spread aversion to large\nfamilies; acknowledging, however, that the lower classes had become\nweakened and dwarfed by the tasks imposed upon them. What neither the\nstatistical bureau, the press, or the church yet comprehend is the fact\nthat the work imposed upon its Christian women, the \u201ccurse\u201d of man\nthrust upon her, is the chief cause of the lessening size and lessening\npopulation of that country. A French gentleman employing a large number\nof women in a flax factory was appalled at the great amount of infant\nmortality among the children of his employees. Believing the excessive\ndeath rate to be in consequence of the continued labor of women, he\nreleased expectant mothers for a month previous, and two months after\nthe birth of a child, with a marked diminution of the death rate. The\nordinary food of the peasantry is of poor quality and meager quantity.\nThose employed in the manufacture of silk largely subsist upon a\nspecies of black broth proverbial for its lack of nutritive qualities.\nThe absence of certain elements in food both creates specific diseases\nand inability to combat disease. Vital stamina is closely dependent\nupon the number of red corpuscles in the blood, the quality of food\npossessing direct connection with these corpuscles. Dr. Blackwell, of\nthe London Anthropological Society, examined the blood of different\nraces as related to the food eaten by them, finding the number and\nshape of the red corpuscles to be dependent upon the kind of food\neaten. Dr. Richardson, a Philadelphia microscopist, said: \u201cAny cause\nwhich interferes with perfect nutrition may diminish the red corpuscles\nin number.\u201d These corpuscles are recognized as \u201coxygen carriers,\u201d\ntherefore any cause which tends to diminish the number of red\ncorpuscles also deprives the system of a portion of the oxygen required\nfor sanitary needs. Blood not fully oxygenated is poisonous to the\nsystem. Among the causes recognized by physiologists as creating that\nalteration in the functions of the body which materially changes the\ncharacter of the red corpuscles, are poor food, bad air and overwork.\nThese specifically produce blood poisoning, creating new substances in\nthe body that are injurious to the organism.\n\nIt is not alone in France that such effects are to be noted, although\ngovernmental attention has not elsewhere been called to the condition\nproduced, yet twenty years since, _Frazer\u2019s Magazine_ in an article\non \u201cField Farming Women in England\u201d in reference to the poor food and\noverwork of women of this class, said of their children: \u201cThe boys\nare always very short for their age, those of fifteen being no larger\nthan town boys of ten; girls are thin and skinny, angular and bony.\u201d\nEight years ago, Dr. Rochad, who has given much time to this question,\nprophesied that the population of France would become stationary before\nthe end of the century. At that time his words carried no weight; he\nwas ridiculed as a vague theorizer, but this result has been reached in\none half the time he gave and the results are even of graver character\nthan Dr. Rochad assumed them to be. The balance has already fallen upon\nthe opposite side and in a single year the deaths have outnumbered the\nbirths nearly 40,000. Two hundred and fifty thousand infants annually\ndie in France because of the impoverished blood, hard work and general\ninnutrition of French mothers. \u201cThese lives are the more precious to\nFrance which can no longer afford to lose them, since in a single\nyear the death rate outnumbered the birth rate 40,000.\u201d Through the\neffort of Dr. Rochad, a society has been organized, rules for feeding\ninfants formulated with penalties attached, and like futile methods for\neffecting a change suggested; while the real cause of the lessening\npopulation is left untouched. Until the condition of the mother as\nlife-giver is held as sacred under Christianity as it was among the\nGreeks and Romans; until man taking his own \u201ccurse\u201d upon himself\nfrees woman from its penalties; until she and her young children are\nsupplied with nourishing food and woman secures pure air to breathe and\nfreedom from the hardships so supremely her lot under existing laws and\ncustoms, not until then will a change take place. Parker Pillsbury in\n_Popular Religion_, says:\n\n    Once I journeyed among the magnificent fields, villages and\n    vineyards in the south of France. Women tanned, browned,\n    almost bronzed by the sun, wind and much exposure, weary and\n    worn, many of them mothers, or soon to become such, spaded,\n    shoveled, plowed, harrowed, often drawing harrows themselves\n    across furrowed fields; they mowed, raked, pitched, loaded and\n    unloaded the hay of the meadows; they harvested the crops and\n    then hastened to haul manure and prepare the ground for other\n    crops, rising early and toiling late, doing almost all kinds\n    of work men do anywhere, and some kinds which neither man or\n    woman should ever do.\n\nGermany, whose women were revered in the centuries before Christianity,\nnow degrades them to the level of beasts. Women and dogs harnessed\ntogether are found drawing milk carts in the streets; women and cows\nyoked draw the plough in the fields; the German peasant wife works\non the roads or carries mortar to the top of the highest buildings,\nwhile her husband smokes his pipe at the foot of the ladder until she\ndescends for him to again fill the hod. To such extent is woman a\nlaborer that she comes in competition with the railroad and all public\nmethods of traffic. Eight-tenths of the agricultural laborers are\nwomen; they plow and sow, and reap the grain and carry immense loads\nof offal for fertilizing the land. As street cleaners they collect the\ngarbage of towns, work with brooms and shovels to cleanse roadways; and\nharnessed alone, or with cows or dogs, perform all the most repulsive\nlabors of the fields and streets. Nor for a knowledge of their work are\nwe dependent upon the statements of travelers, but official documents\ncorroborate the worst. An American consul says of a Circular Upon Labor\nrecently issued by the German government:\n\n    An important factor in the labor of Germany is not enquired\n    of in the circular, viz., the labor of dogs. I have heard\n    it estimated that women and dogs harnessed together do more\n    hauling than the railroads and all other modes of conveyance\n    of goods united. Hundreds of small wagons can be seen every\n    day on all the roads leading to and from Dresden, each having\n    a dog for the \u201cnear horse\u201d harnessed, while the \u201coff horse\u201d is\n    a woman with her left hand grasping the wagon tongue to give\n    it direction, and the right hand passed through a loop in the\n    rope which is attached to the axle, binding the shoulder;\n    the harnessed woman and dog trudge along together, pulling\n    miraculous loads in all sorts of weather.\n\nThe pay of woman for this strange, degrading labor is from ten to\ntwenty-five cents a day. Nor is that of sewing more remunerative. In\nMarch, 1892, a libel suit against an embroidery manufacturer brought\nto light the fact that women in his employ received but five cents a\nday. No burden in Germany is considered too heavy for woman until the\nfailing strength of old age necessitates a change of occupation, when\namid all varieties of weather they take the place of the newsboys of\nour own country, selling papers upon the streets. Munich, the capital\nof Bavarian Germany, is famed for its treasury of art; paintings,\nancient and modern sculptures, old manuscripts of inestimable value,\nlarge libraries and splendid architecture make it the seat of the\nfine arts. But its women are still victims of Christian civilization.\nDresden is another city whose art treasures and architectural beauty\nhas rendered it famous among European cities as the \u201cGerman Florence.\u201d\nYet both of these cities employ women in the same kinds of work under\nthe same repulsive conditions that are found in other portions of that\nempire.\n\nBavarian men wearing heavy wooden shoes drive their bare-footed wives\nand daughters before the plough in the field, or harnessed with dogs\nsend them as carriers of immense loads of merchandise through the\ncities. Says a writer:\n\n    Women become beasts of burden; still they do not grumble; they\n    do not smile either\u2014they simply exist. The only liberty they\n    have is liberty to work; the only rest they have is sleep. The\n    existence of a cow or a sheep is a perpetual heaven, while\n    theirs is a perpetual hell.\n\nIn addition to all this out-of-door labor performed by the German\nwomen, they have that of the house and the preparation of clothing\nfor the family. They industriously knit upon the street while doing\nerrands; they cook, they spin and make clothing which takes them afar\ninto the night, rearing their children amid labor so severe as forever\nto drive smiles from their faces, bringing the wrinkles of premature\nold age in their place. Switzerland, whose six hundredth anniversary\nwas celebrated in 1888, the oldest republic, sees its women carrying\nluggage and blacking boots as porters at inns; propelling heavily\nladen barges down its romantic lakes; swinging the scythe by the side\nof men in the fields; bringing great baskets of hay strapped to their\nshoulders down the mountain side; carrying litters containing travelers\nup the same steep mountain top; bringing heavy baskets of fagots from\nthe forests, and carrying in the more pleasant cutting of grapes at the\nvineyard harvest. From five o\u2019clock in the morning till eight in the\nevening is the peasant woman\u2019s day of work. A stolid expressionless\nface, eyes from which no soul seems to look, a magnificent body as\nstrong as that of the man by her side, is the result of the Swiss\nwoman\u2019s hardships and work. It is but a few years since the laws of\nSwitzerland compelled division of the paternal estate with sisters as\nwell as brothers, this change provoking intense opposition from the\nmen. On the Alps, husbands borrow and lend their wives, one neighbor\nnot scrupling to ask the loan of another\u2019s wife to complete some\nfarming task, which loan is readily granted with the understanding that\nthe favor is to be returned in kind. Says one writer:\n\n    The farmers in the Upper Alps, though by no means wealthy,\n    live like lords in their houses, while the heaviest portion of\n    agricultural labors devolves upon the wife. It is no uncommon\n    thing to see a woman yoked to a plough with an ass, while\n    her husband guides it. An Alpine farmer counts it an act of\n    politeness to lend his wife to a neighbor who has too much\n    work, and the neighbor in return lends his wife for a few days\n    labor whenever requested.\n\nIn Vienna, women lay the brick in building, while throughout Austria\nyoung girls carry mortar for such work. They also work in the fields,\nin the mines, pave and clean the streets, or like their German sisters,\nharnessed with dogs, drag sprinklers for the street or serve milk at\nthe customer\u2019s door. Prussian women are also to be found working the\nmines, in quarries in foundries, building railroads, acting as sailors\nand boatmen, or like those of Holland, dragging barges in place of\nhorses on the canals, or like those of other European countries,\nperforming the most severe and repulsive agricultural labors. A\ncorrespondent of the _Cincinnati Commercial_ traveling through\nBelgium, said: \u201cNo work seems to be done except by woman and dogs.\nWith few exceptions women do the harvesting, working like oxen.\u201d The\nphysiological fact that the kind of labor and the kind of food affect\nthe physical frame is noticeable in Belgium the same as in France\nand England. Women of all ages from fourteen to sixty, work in the\ncoal mines, married women sometimes carrying babies strapped to their\nbacks into the pit, laying the infants near them while digging coal,\nsome mine owners refusing to employ a miner unless he can bring one\nor more members of his family into the pit with him. Employers prefer\ngirls and women because of their lower wages and greater docility;\nfor twelve hours work a woman receives but thirty cents. Even in\nlittle Montenegro, husbands lend their wives to each other during\nthe harvest season, and an exceptionally strong or quick-moving wife\nfinds exceptional demand for her services. This little state degrades\nwoman to still greater extent than her sister countries, as they there\nform the beasts of burden in war, and are counted among the \u201canimals\u201d\nbelonging to the prince.\n\nThe Russian peasant woman under the Greek church, finds life equally\na burden, and is even to greater extent than in most countries the\nslave of her husband and the priest, no form of labor or torture being\nlooked upon as too severe to impose upon her. The woman are much more\nindustrious than the men and the hardest work is done by them. As\nRussia is primarily an agricultural country it possesses immense fields\nof hay, oats and wheat, the work largely performed by women. The wheat\nsown broadcast is either harvested with sickles or the old-fashioned\nscythe with a broad blade. Women do the entire work of gathering up,\nbinding and stacking the wheat, neighbors during harvest helping each\nother. Women of every age from the young girl to the aged grandmother,\ntake part, assembling at daybreak. Horses are also there in number for\ncarrying food, water, extra implements, and the men and boys of the\nconclave. The women however aged, walk; the day\u2019s work lasting over\neighteen hours or from daybreak until dark; in that northern land at\nharvest time it continues light from 3 a. m. to 9:30 p. m. Nor are\nmothers with young infants excused from this toil. Babies are carried\ninto the fields where they lie all day under trees, or partially\nsheltered by a bough over them, covered with insects from which the\nmother can find no time to relieve them. Under such circumstances of\nneglect, it is not surprising that infant mortality is excessive.\nNor do the children of a slightly larger growth receive the care\nrequisite for their tender years and it is estimated that eight out of\nevery ten children in Russia die under ten years of age. But no one\nform of Christianity monopolizes the wrong. Everywhere, under every\nname and sect, man has thrown the carrying out of his \u201ccurse\u201d on to\nwoman. Italy, the center of Catholicism, under a careful analysis of\nstatistics, showing that the wages of the Italian working woman do not\nexceed four pence a day. In Venice a traveler was recently shown some\nwonderfully beautiful articles of clothing; scarfs, shawls, mantles,\nhandkerchiefs, many of them requiring six months for the production;\nexpressing amazement at the astonishingly low price demanded for such\nexquisite fabrics he was told, \u201cwe pay our young girls but seven cents\na day.\u201d A correspondent of the _Philadelphia Press_, writing from\nabroad in 1885, declared the debasement of woman to be more thorough\nand complete in Protestant Stockholm than in any city of northern\nEurope, as there she supplanted the beasts of burden. He spoke of her\nas doing all the heavy work on buildings and paid only one kroner\n(equivalent to a trifle over twenty-six cents) for a hard day of this\ntoil. He found women sweeping the streets, hauling rubbish, dragging\nhand-carts up the hills and over the cobble-stones, unloading bricks at\nthe quays, attending to the parks, doing the gardening and rowing the\nnumerous ferries which abound in that city. The entire dairy business\nof the city is in their hands and here they have the help of neither\nhorses nor dogs but take the entire place of the beasts, carrying the\nheavy cans of milk on their shoulders from door to door; he said:\n\n    I am not altogether unfamiliar with woman\u2019s work in Europe;\n    I have seen her around the pit mouth, at the forge, and bare\n    foot in the brick yards of \u201cmerrie\u201d England; filling blast\n    furnaces and tending coke ovens in \u201csunny France.\u201d I have\n    sadly watched her bearing the heat and burden of the day in\n    the fields of the \u201cfatherland\u201d and in Austria-Hungary doing\n    the work of man and beast on the farm and in the mine. I have\n    seen women emerge from the coal pits of \u201cbusy Belgium\u201d where\n    little girls and young women were underground bearers of coal\n    and drawers of carts. Aged, bent and sunburned, I have seen\n    women with rope over shoulder toiling on the banks of canals\n    and over dykes in \u201cpicturesque Holland.\u201d Having witnessed all\n    this, I was yet surprised to find in a city so beautiful and\n    seemingly so rich as Stockholm, women even more debased.\n\nIn the Connellsville coke region of Pennsylvania, United States, the\nHungarian woman workers are found engaged in the severest labor under\nauthority of the husband or father, half nude women drawing the hot\ncoke from the chambers. Master Workman Powderly visiting the place\nearly one morning, said of it:\n\n    At one of the ovens I saw a woman half naked drawing the coke\n    from one of the chambers. She had no covering on her head and\n    very little on her person. Her appearance was that of one\n    whose spirit had been broken by hardship and hard work. Her\n    attire consisted of a chemise and a pair of cowhide boots. In\n    a freight car close by stood another woman forking the coke as\n    it came into the car. The woman stood in the doorway and was\n    dressed in a rough, loose-fitting outer garment and an apron.\n    Her person from the waist up was exposed. When she stooped\n    over to handle the coke, she caught her hair between her teeth\n    in order to keep it out of her way. Her babe which she\n    brought to the works with her, lay in front of the car with\n    scarcely any covering except the shadow of a wheel barrow\n    which was turned up in order to protect the child from the\n    rays of the sun.\n\nThe suffering of helpless infants and children from privation and\nneglect through enforced labor of the mother, is one of the most\nshocking things connected with this degradation of woman in labor. The\nownership by the husband of the wife\u2019s services; his power under the\nChristian law of church and state of compelling her to work for him;\nthe public sentiment of church and state which not alone recognizes\nabsolute authority over the wife as inhering in the husband, but which\nare the creators of such belief, are the causes of illness, death,\nmoral degradation, insanity, crime and vice of every kind. One year\neven, of civilized housekeeping with its routine of washing, starching,\nironing, scrubbing, cooking, baking, pickling, canning, sewing,\nsweeping, house-cleaning, etc., etc., with all their accompanying\noverheating and overlifting; the care of children both night and day,\nwhether sick or well, the constant demands upon her time and strength,\nthrown upon women of the Christian household, are labors more severe\nthan fell on the old-time savage woman of America during her whole\nlife. Until the customs of civilization reached the Indians, their\nwives, according to Catlin, Schoolcraft and others, were not called\nupon to work with half the severity of the women of today, nor had they\ntradition of children ever born deaf, dumb or blind. Those kinds of\nlabor pointed to as showing the hardships of an Indian woman\u2019s life,\nSchoolcraft dismisses very lightly. The lodge built by her is not made\nof heavy posts and carpentry, but of thin poles bent over at the top,\nsuch as a child can lift. When a family changed its residence these\npoles were not removed; only the thin sheets of birch bark covering,\nwere taken to the new rendezvous. The gathering of the fuel by the\nwomen, was cutting dry limbs of the forest not over eighteen inches\nin length, with a hatchet. The tillage of the fields shared alike by\nthe old men, women and the boys, was very light. No oxen to drive, no\nplough to hold, no wheat to plant or thresh. The same corn hills were\nused year after year, forming small mounds that were long a puzzle to\nthe antiquarian. The squash and the pumpkin grew luxuriantly, while the\nchildren made holidays of gathering nuts and acorns for winter use. And\ntoday Africa, \u201cThe Dark Continent\u201d is the children\u2019s paradise, says\nMrs. French Sheldon, the wonderful woman explorer, who carried peace\nwith her everywhere and whose investigations in that part of the world\nexceed in value those of Livingstone or Stanley. She says:\n\n    In all these months among the children every day, I never saw\n    a child struck and I heard a child cry but twice while on the\n    Dark Continent.\n\nHow different from the countries of Christian civilization where\nchildren, mere infants of three and four years, are put to the most\nsevere labor or because of the mother\u2019s enslaved condition, die from\nneglect. It will be said, but these instances, especially in the United\nStates, are exceptional. This is not so, although the work performed\nmay be of a different character. The wife even in this country is\nexpected to understand and perform many kinds of labor. She is cook\nand baker, laundress and seamstress, nurse for her children and the\nsick, besides a thousand and one cares which rise before her every\nhour. One such overworked mother acknowledged to placing the cradle\nwhere the sun would shine in the baby\u2019s eyes, thus compelling them to\nclose, when she would push all out of the way underneath the bed. Said\na German girl working \u201cas help\u201d in the modern kitchen of a well-to-do\nAmerican family. \u201cI plowed at home harnessed beside a cow, and the\nwork was not as hard as in your hot kitchen.\u201d The care of children\nand domestic labor are not compatible with each other. One must be\nneglected, and she of whom, \u201cmeals on time\u201d are demanded, can say where\nthe neglect necessarily falls. A consistent carrying out by man of his\n\u201ccurse\u201d would cause him to take upon himself the entire work of the\nworld; not alone tilling the soil, but all household labor; the baking\nand brewing, the cooking and cleaning and all the multitudinous forms\nof work which make such wearisomely incessant demands upon woman\u2019s\nstrength and time. From all sewing, knitting, crocheting, embroidering,\nshe should be freed, and even beyond this, under the principles of\n_his_ \u201ccurse,\u201d upon man should fall all the work of rearing children,\nas woman\u2019s \u201ccurse\u201d so often quoted does not refer to aught but bringing\nthem to life in sorrow and suffering. Custom, which has been defined\nas unwritten law, adds its force to legislative enactments and soon\nbecomes as binding upon thought as a moral command. People soon cease\nto question a custom, or a law, accepting both in that conservative\nspirit so utterly destructive to liberty. For that reason what has long\nbeen so, is regarded as right, and even while regretting the neglect\nof her children so unavoidable to the ordinarily situated mothers,\nfew women give thought to the cause bringing it about. Women are not\nsufficiently permeated with the meaning of personal liberty. They do\nnot sufficiently investigate the causes of their restricted condition,\nand the break made within the past twenty-five to forty years against\nconditions, has rather been in the nature of a blind instinctive\nrevolt, than brought about through philosophic thought except in the\nminds of a few, who by the protest of speech, opened the way that vast\nmultitudes are now entering upon. Open rebellion against law is ever\nconsidered by the majority as rebellion against morality. Speaking of\nthe moral influence of law, Sheldon Amos says:\n\n    As soon as a law is made and lifted out of the region of\n    controversy, it begins to exercise a moral influence which\n    is no less intense and wide-spreading for being almost\n    imperceptible. Though law can never attempt to forbid all that\n    is morally wrong, yet that gets to be held as morally wrong\n    which the law forbids.\n\nNo less does unwritten law come to be regarded as morally right. The\ncustoms of society build up through teachings of the church, and\nlaws of the state, have destroyed that sense of personal security\namong women which is the chief value of social life and of law. The\nvery foundation of religion tends to this end even with man, but the\ndivision of rights and duties promulgated by the church as between man\nand woman, the changing form of laws\u2014class legislation\u2014has rendered\nthe position of woman notably insecure. This usurpation is productive\nof immense loss to the state as France so clearly shows. Take the one\narticle of food alone, the delicacies and the substantials alike are\nclaimed by man. No proof of this statement other than the innumerable\nsaloons and restaurants chiefly supported by men, is required. While\nthe dairyman, the bird-fancier, the horse trainer, and even the\npugilist, recognize the value of food as far as a factor of life\nand strength, where his own immediate money interest is concerned,\nneither governments, religions nor scientists have to any extent noted\nthe influence of proper food for the mother upon the health and life\nof the unborn child. Victor Hugo, while upon the island of Guernsey,\nnoted the vastly beneficial effect that even one good meal a week had\nupon the peasant children. Food, building muscles, nerves, the brain,\nwhat can be expected but a deterioration of humanity when mothers eat\ninsufficient or improper food?\n\nThe effect of the kind of food eaten has recently been noted in the\nnew industry of ostrich farming, in California, of which it is said:\n\u201cOstriches yield the best feathers if the birds are well cared for.\nThe quality of the plumes depends upon the quality of the food. If the\nostriches are well fed, their plumes are soft and big. Bad feeding\nmakes the feathers hard and coarse.\u201d Nor are animals from whom the\nbest products are looked for, allowed to labor. Their lives are those\nof ease and comfort that best results may be obtained. Innutrition\nand the hard labor of expectant mothers are the two great factors in\nphysical degeneration and infantile mortality. The question is not one\nof sentiment or of law or of religion, but of physiology. It does not\nalone involve the destiny of mothers but of the race. There is not a\nnational problem, be it of war or population or finance that is not\nbased upon the condition of woman. Its neglect has depopulated the\nworld in times past, it has lessened intellectual development, it has\nalmost entirely obliterated certain kinds of morality and can no longer\nbe regarded from the standard of either of those great institutions,\nchurch or state.\n\nThe recent official report of the Factory Inspector of the state of\nNew York upon the condition of working women, showed a condition\nquite in line with the worst features of foreign lands. Overwork, bad\nventilation, low wages, poor food, all combining for their physical\nand moral destruction. _The Churchman_ under heading of \u201cIn Darkest\nNew York\u201d speaks of the condition of the poor in that city, both men\nand women; but while not forgetting the wrongs of the male laborer, we\nmust ever remember that the condition of woman is still lower, and the\nresults of her severe work and semi-starvation, much more injurious to\nthe world.\n\n    We must leave the tenements without attempting to reproduce\n    any of the shocking cases of crowded rooms in which almost\n    incredible numbers of poor wretches are huddled together\n    even in summer, when Mr. Riis has found the thermometer rise\n    to 115 degrees. In some of these places there is more than\n    struggle; there is often starvation. Every once in a while a\n    case of downright starvation gets into the papers and makes\n    a sensation. But this is the exception. Were the whole truth\n    known it would come home to the community with a shock that\n    would arouse it to a more serious effort than the spasmodic\n    undoing of its pursestrings. I am satisfied that hundreds of\n    men, women and children are every day slowly starving to death\n    with my medical friend\u2019s complaint of \u201cimproper nourishment.\u201d\n    Within a single week I have had this year three cases of\n    insanity provoked directly by poverty and want. Worse than\n    even that is the evil case of thousands of ill-fated working\n    girls. The average wages of 150,000 of them is 60 cents per\n    day; and that includes the incomes of the stylish \u201ccashiers\u201d\n    who earn $2 a day as well as the pittance of girls who earn\n    30 cents a day in east-side factories. The lot of the average\n    saleswoman who does not partly depend on her family is hard\n    indeed.\n\nThat the average wages of the 150,000 working girls in the city of\nNew York alone are but sixty cents a day, some receiving as little\nas thirty cents in the east side factories; that 30,000 young girls\nbetween the ages of twelve and fourteen employed as cash girls cannot\nsupply themselves with food unless having parents upon whom to\npartially depend, are no less moral than material questions. Nor are\nthey questions confined to that one city, or to any one portion of the\nUnited States, or of christendom, but belong to humanity itself. As all\nare parts of one great whole, the evil that afflicts one class touches\nall; all suffer because of the wrong done to even one human being. The\npopulation of the city of New York is more largely comprised of women\nthan of men and a great proportion of this class are dependent upon\ntheir own labor for a livelihood. Although many foreign-born women\nemigrate to this country, over two millions having landed upon our\nshores within the nine years from 1881 to 1890, it is not alone upon\nthem these conditions of severe labor fall, but native-born American\nwomen, both within and without the household, suffer from the same kind\nof oppression. Even upon the Pacific coast where few foreigners except\nChinese are found, little girls of five and six years are put to work\nin the jute mills and factories by side of their drudging mothers,\nwhose wages do not equal those of the men employed. In government\nclerkships at Washington, women receive but one-half the pay that men\nreceive for the same kind and quality of work. Although the sweating\nsystem in the manufactories of clothing has called the nation\u2019s\nattention to its abuses, yet in the District of Columbia, under\nsole power of Congress, a system of similar nature exists. Nor are\nstatistics of woman\u2019s severe work in the United States of immediately\nrecent date. The labor Commission report of the state of Connecticut\nfor 1876, declaring that the wives and daughters of the farmer engage\nin work which he can find no man to do, rising at four o\u2019clock in the\nmorning and working until nine in the evening. Analyzing the statistics\nof the Massachusetts Labor Bureau for 1891, the _Boston Globe_ showed\nthe greatly inferior payment of women laborers:\n\n    The figures simply show that in the employments in which the\n    very lowest wages are paid, women constitute over 70 per cent\n    of the workers, while in the employments where as high as\n    $20 a week are paid, they constitute hardly over 3 per cent.\n    In addition to all this is the humiliating fact that in some\n    occupations, standing side by side with men, the females are\n    paid less wages for the same work; or, what amounts to the\n    same thing, a woman of 20 years or upwards is made to work\n    side by side with a boy often at the same wages. Women are\n    compelled, then, to fill most of the cheap places, and paid\n    less wages for the same work at that.\n\nIn this report the shameful fact is proven through governmental\nstatistics that the wages paid to a girl of twenty years are no more\nthan those paid a boy of ten, women constituting over seventy per cent\nof the workers to whom the very lowest wages are paid. Underlying all\nother results are those upon woman herself. Before every question of\npopulation, is that of woman as an individual. Overwork and the under\nnourishment of muscle, nerve, brain, render her own proper evolution\neither as a physical or as a moral being impossible. To just the extent\nthat such pressure comes upon her, does she cease to be a morally\nresponsible being. Thousands to whom life and comforts are sweet,\nthrow aside all scruples, entering that one avenue of escape always\nopen to a young woman or a girl. For the statement that the majority\nof women entering upon immorality have been driven by actual want to\nthis mode of life, we are again indebted to rigorous investigation and\nstatistics for information, but the moral deterioration of the race\narising from these wrongs to women can not be estimated by figures. In\nteaching, the only absolute equality of wages between man and woman is\nfound in the Cherokee nation of Indians. The civilization of the Indian\ntribes is a question of woman\u2019s education and freedom. The world still\nholds a mistaken idea of force and power, those questions not so fully\npertaining to the physical as to the intellectual and spiritual parts\nof the being. The _New York Nation_ recently said, \u201cIt is absolutely\nessential to the preservation of the dignity and independence of\nwomen that they should be on a par with men as regards property and\neducation, the two things that in modern times have supplanted physical\nforce as elements of power.\u201d\n\nReal estate possesses more power as property than either money or\njewels. The real strength of American civilization lies in the fact\nthat almost every family owns its home. Permanent national strength\nlies in the division of realty. In England women are more rapidly\nbecoming part of the governing class than in the United States, and\nin that country one-seventh of the landed property owners are women.\nThese facts should be borne in mind in regard to the civilization of\nthe native races of America. It is through the Indian women that the\nproblem of their civilization must be answered; the title in fee simple\nto lands should be in the hands of the women.\n\nThe union of the state with the church in the enforcement of man\u2019s\n\u201ccurse\u201d upon woman is most forcibly shown by a decision of the New York\nCourt of Appeals rendered early in 1892 which held that the services of\na wife belong to the husband and that she cannot recover wages from him\neven if holding his written promise to pay. This decision like that of\nthe Agar-Ellis case in England, was upon the principle that the wife is\nso fully under subjection to her husband as to incapacitate her from\nmaking a contract even with that husband. In all the wife\u2019s relations\nto the husband she is regarded as a being without responsibility. The\ncase upon which this decision rested is this: A woman fell down a\ncoal-hole and sued for damages, recovering $500. The defendant asked\nfor a new trial upon the ground that the woman was working for her\nhusband and the court had taken into account her loss of wages. The\nservices of the wife belonging to the husband, her claim for lost\nwages was a fraud. But this decision of the Court of Appeals doubtless\nwill not interfere with the power of the husband to recover damages\nfor loss of her time by reason of this injury which deprived him of\nher services. The decision of the Court recognized the right of the\nhusband to compel the wife to perform household duties for him. When\nin England, 1880, the married woman\u2019s property rights bill was before\nparliament, a commission of inquiry was sent to New York to learn the\neffect of securing the control of their own property to married women.\nUnder various amendments since the first passage of this act in 1848,\nthe legislature of New York has farther secured to married women the\nright of making wills, of collecting wages for work, and of entering\nbusiness outside of the household, the proceeds belonging entirely to\nherself. But under this decision of the Court of Appeals, the ground\nwas taken that the wife cannot collect wages from the husband, and\nthat household work for him is compulsory upon her.[4] This decision\nas to compulsory housework controverts that other right recognized by\nlegislation, of entering into business, doing work outside of the home,\nthe proceeds to belong solely to herself. Under this decision of the\nCourt of Appeals, a wife can be compelled to work for the husband in\nthe house without wages, and is debarred from all outside business.\n\nSt. Augustine in his \u201cCity of God,\u201d taunts Rome with having caused her\nown downfall by her treatment of her slaves. He speaks of the slaves\nas miserable beings put to labor only fit for the beasts of the field\nand even degraded below them; their condition had brought Rome to its\nown destruction. But Roman wives were not forced to labor. The peace\nmade by the Sabines with the Romans after the forcible abduction of\nthe Sabine maidens, had for one of its provisions that no labor except\nspinning should be required from wives. Among both the ancient Greeks\nand Romans, the woman about to become a mother, as heretofore shown,\nwas held sacred; she was exempt from hard labor and no one was allowed\nunder penalty of punishment, to vex or disturb her mind.\n\nIf degrading their slaves below the beasts of the field led to the\ndestruction of Rome, as declared by Augustine, what may not be\npredicted of that Christian civilization which in the twentieth century\nof its existence degrades women and children to such labors as he\ndeclared unfit for the slaves of ancient Rome, suitable only for the\nbeasts of the field; which harnesses them by side of cows, asses and\ndogs to do the most menial work, which robs them in wages and stints\nthem in food in the name of \u201creligion\u201d?\n\n\n\n\n_Chapter Nine_\n\n+The Church of Today+\n\n\nWhile under advancing civilization, a recognition of the religious\nrights of woman is steadily progressing among people at large, it\nrequires but slight investigation to prove that olden church theories\nregarding her not only came into the reformation, but largely remain\nthe same today. The Christianity of the ages having taught the\nexistence of a superior and an inferior sex possessing different\nrights in the Christian Church, held accountable to different codes of\nmorals, it is not strange that we do not find morality to have been\nmore of a fundamental principle among the pastors of early Protestant\nchurches than in the Catholic priesthood. The doctrine of \u201cOnce in\ngrace, always in grace,\u201d carries with it a plea for vice, and the\nearly experience of strict Calvinistic Scotland was much that of\nmediaeval Catholic Europe. The Presbyterian Conventicles[1] early bore\nan extremely evil reputation. The fact that ministers of the reformed\nchurch were permitted marriage did not change priestly teaching that\nwoman was created solely for man, and they found apologies in the Bible\nfor illicit conduct. These Protestant clergymen taught, as had the\nCatholic, that a priest was incapable of sinning; and from the Sermon\non the Mount, \u201cTo the pure all things are pure,\u201d was quoted in proof\nof this assertion. Even when under circumstances of great personal\nperil and danger to life, the trust of parishioners in the morality\nof their shepherds was often abused; of this, Rev. David Williamson,\none of the most eminent Presbyterian ministers of Edinburgh, was a\nconspicuous example. In defense of his immorality Mr. Williamson said,\n\u201cVerily, I do not deny that with St. Paul I have a law in my members\nwarring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity unto\nthe love of sin which is in my members.\u201d The strangest sermons, most\ninsulting to woman and too indecorous for quotation, were constantly\npreached; while her inferiority and incapacity for understanding even\nthe gospel was also as constantly declared from the pulpit. An old\nPresbyterian preacher, Rev. David Douglas, discovering a woman weeping\nin the kirk, pointed toward her, crying, \u201cWife, what makes you weep?\nI am sure thou understandeth not what I am saying; my discourse is\ndirected to the brethren and not to the like of you.\u201d The present\ncentury, with all its enlightenment does not cease to give us glimpses\nof that favorite mediaeval doctrine that \u201csin can be killed with sin as\nthe best way of becoming innocent again,\u201d and its concomitant, that it\nis impossible for a person in grace to commit sin.[2] The doctrines of\nholiness and entire sanctification, taught by some sects today, and the\ntheory that all experience is necessary in order to a full development\nof character, are of the same nature. Eastern \u201cWisdom Religion\u201d\ndeclares that a person can become neither God nor deva without passing\nthrough all experience, returning again and again to earth for this\npurpose.\n\n    The departure of the soul-atom from the bosom of the Divinity\n    is a radiation from the life of the Great All, who expends\n    his strength in order that he may grow again and live by\n    its return. God thereby acquires new vital force, provided\n    by all the transformation that the soul-atom has undergone.\n    Its return is its final reward. Such is the secret of the\n    evolution of the Great Being and of the Supreme Soul.[3]\n\n    Directions for seeking out the way:\n\n    Seek it not by any one road, to each temperament there is one\n    road which seems the most desirable. But the way is not found\n    by devotion alone, by religious contemplation alone, by ardent\n    progress, by self-sacrificing labor, by studious observation\n    of life. None can take the disciple more than one step onward.\n    All steps are necessary to make up the ladder, one by one,\n    as they are surmounted. The virtues of men are steps indeed,\n    necessary\u2014not by any means to be dispensed with. Yet, though\n    they create a fine atmosphere and happy future, they are\n    useless if they stand alone. The whole nature of man must be\n    used wisely by the one who desires to enter the way. Each man\n    is to himself absolutely the way, the truth and the life.\n    Seek it by plunging into the mysterious and glorious depths\n    of your own inmost being. Seek it by testing all experience,\n    by utilizing the senses in order to understand the growth and\n    meaning of individuality and the beauty and obscurity of those\n    other divine fragments which are struggling side by side with\n    you, and form the race to which you belong.[4]\n\nThe Catholic and Calvinistic doctrines of woman\u2019s inferiority of\nposition and intellect taught from the pulpit, are by no means\nrelegated to past centuries, but continue to be publicly taught by the\nProtestant clergy of every sect, as fully as by their Catholic and\nGreek brethren. The first National Woman Suffrage Convention which\nassembled in Washington, 1869, having invited Rev. Chaplain Gray, of\nthe House, to open its proceedings with prayer, he referred in this\npetition to woman as an after-thought of the Creator, an inferior and\nsecondary being, called into existence for the special benefit of\nman. The noble old Quakeress, Lucretia Mott, sitting in an attitude\nof devout attention, suddenly raised her head, and at close of the\nprayer, Bible in hand, she read aloud the account of the creation,\nGenesis I. 27-28, woman and man equals, both having been given dominion\nover nature. The thirtieth anniversary of the first public demand of\nwoman for the recognition of her equality of right with man, held in\nRochester, N.Y., July 18, 1878, passed a series of resolutions[5]\nasserting woman\u2019s equality and religious rights with man. Three of\nthese proved especially obnoxious to the clergy of the country, in\ndeclaring the first duty of every individual to be self development;\nthe duty of every woman to be guided by her own reason rather than the\nauthority of another; and that it was owing to the perversion of the\nreligious element in woman that she had been so completely subjugated\nto priestcraft and superstition.\n\n    _Resolved_: That as the first duty of every individual is\n    self-development, the lessons of self-sacrifice and obedience\n    taught to woman by the Christian church have been fatal, not\n    only to her own vital interests, but through her, to those of\n    the race.\n\n    _Resolved_: That the great principle of the Protestant\n    Reformation, the right of individual conscience and judgment\n    heretofore exercised by men alone, should now be claimed by\n    woman; that, in the interpretation of Scripture, she should\n    be guided by her own reason, and not by the authority of the\n    church.\n\n    _Resolved_: That it is through the perversion of the religious\n    element in woman\u2014playing upon her hopes and fears of the\n    future, holding this life with all its high duties in abeyance\n    to that which is to come\u2014that she and the children she has\n    borne have been wrongfully subjugated by priestcraft and\n    superstition.\n\nThese resolutions immediately called forth a sermon in opposition from\nthe Rev. A. H. Strong, D.D., president of the Rochester Theological\nSeminary (Baptist) in which he said:\n\n    She is subordinate to man in office, she is to be helper,\n    not principal. Therefore man has precedence in the order of\n    creation, woman is made of man, and to supply the felt need\n    of man. The race, therefore, is called the race of man and\n    not the race of woman. For this office of subordination and\n    whether they assert it or not, women are fitted by their very\n    constitution, and in the very creation of mankind in the\n    garden of beauty undefiled by the slimy track of the serpent\n    as it was, God ordained the subordination of woman and the\n    differences of nature that makes her subordination inevitable.\n    The power of rule seems to me to have been invested in the\n    head of the family that he may act for them, or rather that\n    they may act through him.\n\nThe assertion of this theologian that \u201cthe race therefore is called\nthe race of man and not the race of woman,\u201d is of the same character\nas that of Inquisitor Sprenger in regard to the word _femina_,\nas applied to woman, showing the intellectual calibre of both\ninquisitor and theologian to be the same. But in their assertion of\nwoman\u2019s inferiority and subordination, neither Chaplain Gray nor\nPresident Strong proceeded quite as far as an opposing speaker at the\nPhiladelphia Woman Suffrage Convention of 1854, who said, \u201cLet woman\nfirst prove that she has a soul, both the Bible and the Church deny\nit.\u201d Here we are set back to the Macon Council of the sixth century,\nwhich debated the question of woman\u2019s humanity.\n\nThat the church of the nineteenth century possesses the same character\nas that of the fourteenth, the twelfth, and fifth, was forcibly\nillustrated during the early days of the anti-slavery struggle,\nespecially in its persecution of the women who took part in that\nreform. Lucretia Mott and Esther Moore were integral members of the\nAmerican Anti-slavery Society, having assisted in the convention which\norganized this society in 1833. Shortly afterward the Grimke sisters\nof South Carolina, Sarah and Angelina, convinced of the sinfulness\nof slavery, left their delightful home in Charleston, and coming\nNorth, spoke eloquently through Massachusetts against those wrongs\nof which they themselves had been witnesses. The church, becoming\nfrightened at woman\u2019s increasing power and influence, determined to\ncrush her work. Its action began with the Orthodox Congregational,\nat that time the largest and most influential ecclesiastical body of\nMassachusetts, and in 1837 the General Association of Massachusetts\nissued a pastoral letter calling upon all \u201cchurches under their care\u201d\nto defend themselves by closing their doors against the abolitionists,\nwho had set aside the laws of God by welcoming women to their platforms\nand allowing them to speak in public;[6] section third was the most\nsignificant portion of this pastoral letter.\n\n    III. We invite your attention to the dangers which at present\n    seem to threaten the female character with wide spread and\n    permanent injury.\n\n    The appropriate duties and influence of woman are clearly\n    stated in the New Testament. Those duties and that influence\n    are unobtrusive and private, but the source of mighty power.\n    When the mild, dependent, softening influence of woman under\n    the sternness of man\u2019s opinions is fully exercised, society\n    feels the effects of it in a thousand forms. The power of\n    woman is her dependence, flowing from the consciousness of\n    that weakness which God has given her for her protection, and\n    which keeps her in those departments of life that form the\n    character of individuals and of the nation. There are social\n    influences which females use in promoting piety and the great\n    objects of Christian benevolence which we cannot too highly\n    commend. We appreciate the unostentatious prayers and efforts\n    of woman in advancing the cause of religion at home and\n    abroad; in Sabbath schools; in leading religious inquirers to\n    the pastors for instruction; and in all such associated effort\n    as becomes the modesty of her sex; and earnestly hope that she\n    may abound more and more in these labors of piety and love.\n\n    But when she assumes the place and tone of man as a public\n    reformer, our care and protection of her seem unnecessary;\n    we put ourselves in self-defense against her; she yields the\n    power which God has given her for her protection, and her\n    character becomes unnatural. If the vine whose strength and\n    beauty is to lean upon the trellis work, and half conceal\n    its clusters, thinks to assume the independence and the\n    overshadowing nature of the elm, it will not only cease to\n    bear fruit, but fall in shame and dishonor into the dust. We\n    cannot, therefore, but regret the mistaken conduct of those\n    who encourage females to bear an obtrusive and ostentatious\n    part in measures of reform, and countenance any of that sex\n    who so far forget themselves as to itinerate in the character\n    of public lecturers and teachers. We especially deplore the\n    intimate acquaintance and promiscuous conversation of females\n    with regard to things which ought not to be named; by which\n    that modesty and delicacy which is the charm of domestic\n    life, and which constitutes the true influence of woman in\n    society is consumed, and the way opened, as we apprehend, for\n    degeneracy and ruin.\n\n    We say these things not to discourage proper influences\n    against sin, but to secure such reformation as we believe is\n    scriptural, and will be permanent.\n\nThat we may rightly judge the character of this pastoral letter, it\nmust be remembered, that no discussion upon what is known as \u201cthe woman\nquestion\u201d took place at those meetings, which were entirely devoted\nto the southern slave. This letter was written by men, emanating\nfrom a body of christian people that sustained colored slavery as an\ninstitution upon which God had as equally placed his sanction, as upon\nthe subordination of woman. To such extent have the conscience and\nwill been under the bondage of the priesthood, that the more timid\nmembers of the anti-slavery society became frightened, even some of\nthose who believed in woman\u2019s equality advising these speakers to yield\ntheir rights in the meetings, lest the ministers who had joined them\nshould withdraw, taking others with them. Thus priestly intolerance\nand the timidity of anti-slavery men, had the effect of silencing the\nphilanthropic and eloquent Grimke sisters,[7] in their efforts for the\nfreedom of the slave. After ten months work, their voices were heard\nno more. These sisters were not only persecuted in the North, under\nban of the church, but in the South the State united with the Church,\nand by a decree of the city of Charleston they were rendered permanent\nexiles from home, and informed that should they return despite this,\nthey would not be able to escape personal violence from a mob. With one\nnoble exception, this mandate of the church and clergy had effect for\na time in silencing woman\u2019s plea for the slave. For seven long years\nthe voice of but one woman, that of Abby Kelly,[8] was heard upon the\nanti-slavery platform, and the persecutions of the church made her life\none long martyrdom; her appeals for the slave were met by mob violence,\nfurious howls, cries, and the vilest language being supplemented by\nmore material efforts for silencing her voice. Were these proceedings\nnot so thoroughly substantiated, the time so shortly past, credence\ncould not be given as to the means used against this noble woman to\nprevent her pleading for those so greatly wronged.[9] Ministers of\nhigh standing assailed her from the pulpit, a favorite text being,\n\u201cRevelations\u201d 2-20. I \u201chave a few things against thee, because thou\nsuffereth that woman, Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to\nteach and seduce my servants to commit fornication.\u201d Not alone the\nCongregational body, but all Christian sects, were imbued with the same\npersecuting spirit, a Methodist presiding elder characterizing the\nGarrisonian societies, as no longer anti-slavery, but \u201cno-government,\nno-sabbath, no-church, no-bible, no-marriage, woman\u2019s rights societies.\u201d\n\nThat woman had assumed the right to speak in public for the oppressed\nwas the origin of all this vituperation. Its real cause was of the\nsame nature as that which laid 30,000 heads low, at St. Bartholomew,\nthat woman\u2019s voice had been heard in public contrary to the teaching\nof the church. It was perhaps foreseen that she might, as really at\na later period was done, draw a vivid illustration of the similitude\nbetween the condition of the white wife and the black slave.[10] The\nunity and peace of the World\u2019s Anti-slavery Convention, London, 1840,\nwas disturbed by the hostility of several clergymen, and a few bigoted\nlaymen of the same spirit, who objected to the recognition of the women\ndelegates sent by several American societies, among whom were Lucretia\nMott and Esther Moore, members of the parent organization. After a\nspirited discussion their admission was decided to be a violation of\nthe ordinances of Almighty God, and their credentials were rejected.[11]\n\nIn 1843, the Hopkinson Association of Congregational Divines, of\nNew Hampshire, unanimously enacted a statute in opposition to women\nopening their lips in church, even to \u201csigh\u201d or \u201cgroan\u201d in contrition;\ndoubtless agreeing with Minister Douglas, that they were incapable of\nunderstanding a discourse directed to the brethren, who alone were\nallowed to shout \u201cAmen,\u201d \u201cBless the Lord,\u201d and \u201cGlory.\u201d By a strange\ninconsistency women were still allowed to sing \u201cunder men as leaders.\u201d\nThis statute of restriction declared:\n\n    But, as to leading men, either in instruction or devotion, and\n    as to any interruption or disorder in religious meetings, \u201cLet\n    your women keep silence in the churches;\u201d not merely let them\n    be silent, but let them keep or preserve silence. Not that\n    they may not preach, or pray, or exhort merely, but they\n    may not open their lips to utter any sounds audibly. Let not\n    your women in promiscuous religious meetings preach or pray\n    audibly, or exhort audibly, or sigh, or groan, or say Amen, or\n    utter the precious words, \u201cBless the Lord,\u201d or the enchanting\n    sounds, \u201cGlory! Glory!\u201d\n\nIn 1888, forty-five years after this statute, Rev. Dr. Theodore L.\nCuyler in the _New York Evangelist_, gave his opinion in regard to\nwoman\u2019s action in reform work and her demand for a share in making the\nlaws which govern her, in this wise:\n\n    We can say frankly to our temperance brethren, that if they\n    attempt to lash the wise project of prohibition of saloons,\n    and the foolish project of female suffrage inseparably\n    together, they will encounter fatal opposition. They will\n    repel tenfold more sensible voters than they will win. Their\n    most eloquent and logical advocate, Dr. Herrick Johnson, is\n    intensely opposed to the Lucy Stone and Elizabeth Cady Stanton\n    doctrines of woman suffrage, as I am. Nineteen-twentieths\n    of our Presbyterian ministers will never cast a vote which\n    is nominally only for prohibition, and yet is really a vote\n    for burdening womanhood with civil government. What is true\n    of our church is true of the Episcopal, Reformed, Baptist,\n    Congregationalist, and the most influential portion of the\n    Methodist church.\n\nThe same year of President Strong\u2019s opposing sermon, 1878, the United\nPresbyterian Assembly passed a resolution to the effect that they\nfound no sufficient authority in Scripture to warrant the ordination\nof women as deacons, yet they might with profit to themselves, and\ngreat advantage to the cause of suffering humanity, and for Christ,\nbe _allowed to act as assistants to deacons_, thus emphasizing the\ndominant church teaching of woman\u2019s irresponsibility and secondary\nposition to man. The same year, however, an advance step was taken in\nEurope, the Synod of Born (Old Catholic), following the example of Pere\nHyacinth, adopted a resolution in favor of the marriage of the clergy\nby a vote of 76 to 22. At the same time the Old Catholics were taking\nthis advance step, the Protestant Episcopal Diocesan Convention of\nSouth Carolina forbade woman\u2019s voting upon church matters, although it\nwas proven during the discussion that in some parishes that were but\nfive male members. The Southern Baptist Convention, held in Savannah,\nGeorgia, 1885, appointed a committee with title of, and whose business\nwas to decide upon \u201cRepresentation by Women\u201d in church affairs. This\ncommittee reported in favor of the word \u201cbrethren\u201d instead of \u201cmembers\u201d\nbeing incorporated in the constitution, thus confirming the right of\nman alone to take part in church councils. Having thus effectively\nclosed the lips of women on discussion of church questions, the\nconvention introduced a resolution on divorce[12] followed by a speech\ndeclaring that but one cause could exist. The convention having shut\noff all chance for woman\u2019s opinion upon this question of equal and\neven of more vital interest to her, \u201capplaudingly and overwhelmingly\nadopted the resolution.\u201d At the annual election for officers of Christ\nChurch, New Haven, Connecticut, April 1886, a discussion arose upon\nthe right of women to become members of the society and consequently\nvoted it in. Several ladies having signified a desire to unite with\nthe society, Bishop Williams was consulted as to their admission; he\ndecided the Canon was clearly against them, and on motion of the clerk\ntheir application was rejected, only one member speaking in favor.\n\nThe title of the sermons still preached upon woman, illustrate priestly\nthought regarding her. Among those of recent date are found, \u201cBlighted\nWomen;\u201d \u201cSins of Women;\u201d \u201cWomen and Divorce;\u201d \u201cWomen and Skepticism;\u201d\n\u201cWoman\u2019s Place and Work;\u201d \u201cOur Common Mother;\u201d \u201cThe Relation of Husband\nand Wife;\u201d \u201cMarriage and Divorce;\u201d \u201cThe Sphere of Woman;\u201d \u201cHusband and\nWife;\u201d \u201cA Mission for Women;\u201d \u201cThe Church and the Family;\u201d \u201cThe Duties\nof Wives to Husbands;\u201d these sermons all subordinating woman to man\nin every relation of life; all designed to repress woman\u2019s growing\ntendency towards freedom, and her claim for the same opportunities\nin life conceded to man. That the clerical teaching of woman\u2019s\nsubordination to man was not alone a doctrine of the dark ages, is\nproven by the most abundant testimony of today. The famous See trial\nof 1876, which shook not only the Presbytery of Newark, but the whole\nSynod of New Jersey, and finally the General Presbyterian Assembly\nof the United States, was based upon the doctrine of the divinely\nappointed subordination of woman to man, and arose simply because\nRev. Dr. Isaac See admitted two ladies to his pulpit to speak upon\ntemperance; Rev. Dr. Craven, the prosecutor, declared this act to have\nbeen \u201can indecency in the sight of Jehovah.\u201d He expressed the general\nclinical and church view, when he said:\n\n    I believe the subject involves the honor of my God. I believe\n    the subject involves the headship and crown of Jesus. Woman\n    was made for man and became first in the transgression. My\n    argument is that subordination is natural, the subordination\n    of sex. Dr. See has admitted marital subordination, but\n    this is not enough; there exists a created subordination; a\n    divinely arranged and appointed subordination of woman as\n    woman to man as man. Woman was made for man and became first\n    in the transgression. The proper condition of the adult female\n    is marriage; the general rule for ladies is marriage. Women\n    without children, it might be said, could preach, but they are\n    under the general rule of subordination. It is not allowed\n    woman to speak in the church. Man\u2019s place is on the platform.\n    It is positively base for a woman to speak in the pulpit; it\n    is base in the sight of Jehovah. The whole question is one of\n    subordination.[13]\n\nThus before a vast audience largely composed of women, Dr. Craven\nstood and with denunciatory manner, frequently bringing his fists on\nhis Bible emphatically down, devoted a four hours speech to proving\nthat the Bible taught woman\u2019s subordination to man. His arguments\nwere the same as those of the church in the past and were based upon\nthe same theory, viz. that woman was created inferior _to_ man, _for_\nman, and was the first in sin. He referred to the fashions as aid in\nhis argument, saying, \u201cIn every country, under every clime, from the\npeasant woman of Naples, with a handkerchief over her hair, to the\nwomen before me with bonnets, every one wears something upon her head\nin token of subordination.\u201d Dr. Craven made this statement in direct\ncontradiction to historical facts which prove that the head covering\nis always removed in presence of a superior. To remain bareheaded is\nan act of deference to a higher authority. Even the Quaker custom of\nmen\u2019s wearing the hat in meeting, originated as an act of defiance\nto the Anglican Church. Dr. Craven also forgot to state that flowing\nhair has always been regarded as an emblem of superiority and freedom;\nclipped hair that of a slave or prisoner. Thus Dr. Craven\u2019s appeal to\nfashion reacted against him in the minds of all historically informed\npersons, yet together with his other statements it was fully endorsed\nby most of his brother clergymen present, some of whom enthusiastically\nshouted, \u201cAmen!\u201d At the close of his speech several other clergymen\ngave their views. Dr. Ballentine considered the subject too simple for\nan argument. Dr. Few Smith, although he \u201cadmired Miss Smiley, more than\nalmost any orator he had ever listened to, did not want her or any\nother woman to permanently occupy the Presbyterian pulpit.\u201d Dr. Wilson\nrejoiced to see so many women crowding in the lecture room; but Brother\nSee should not take all the glory to himself. He was glad to see the\nwomen take so deep an interest in the subject under discussion; but\nas he looked at them he asked himself: \u201cWhat will all the children do\nwhile these women are away from home?\u201d A decision of censure against\nDr. See, was agreed in by the Synod of New Jersey, and confirmed by the\nGeneral Assembly of the Presbyterian Church of the United States, in\nsession at Pittsburg.\n\nThus we find that the Christianity of today continues to teach the\nexistence of a superior and an inferior sex in the church, possessing\ndifferent rights and held accountable to a different code of morals.\nNot alone did Dr. Craven express the idea that woman\u2019s very dress was\ntypical of her inferiority, but the Right Rev. Dr. Coxe, Bishop of the\nWestern (Episcopal) Diocese of New York refused the sacrament in 1868\nto the lady patients of the Clifton Springs sanitarium whose heads were\nuncovered, although the chapel was under the same roof and on the same\nfloor with the patients\u2019 rooms. This same Right Rev. Dr. Coxe, in a\nspeech at his installation as first president of the Ingham Seminary\nfor young ladies, declared \u201cthe laws of God to be plainly Salic.\u201d Rev.\nW. W. Patten, D.D., president of Howard University, Washington, D.C.,\nin a sermon preached at the Congregational church, upon \u201cWoman and\nSkepticism,\u201d January, 1885, advanced the proposition that as soon as\nthey (women) depart from their natural sphere, they become atheistical\nand immoral.[14] In March, 1891, a half column editorial in the\n\u201cPresbyterian\u201d discussed the ethics and aesthetics of woman\u2019s dress\nat communions, not precisely in line with Dr. Coxe, yet of the same\ngeneral character as to regulating woman\u2019s dress, in, \u201cShould women\nreceive the elements at communion with gloved hands?\u201d Some authorities\nobjected to the practice upon the ground \u201cthat nothing might come\nbetween the recipient and the mystic power contained in the bread\nand wine after consecration by the priest.\u201d But while, as the editor\nremarks, \u201cIt is after all a very small matter,\u201d it is in a historical\naspect, a great one, showing such pronounced change from the church\nteaching of but a few centuries since, when women were forbidden to\ntake the eucharist in their naked hands because of their impurity. Rev.\nMr. Denhurst, member of the Connecticut Legislature (House), during a\nhearing before a committee upon that question March 10, 1886, while\nspeaking favorably of woman suffrage still betrayed his belief in the\nold theological idea that women brought sin into the world, through\nwhich her subordination to man ensued. But like Dr. See he limited this\nsubordination to married women, saying:\n\n    As a minister of the gospel, I deny that you can find anywhere\n    in the Bible, woman\u2019s subordination till she sent the curse of\n    sin upon the world, and that relates only to married women,\n    and marriage is a matter of choice.\n\nThe spiritual and temporal superiority of man over woman is affirmed by\nclergymen of the present day as strongly as by those of the dark ages,\nand sermons in opposition to her equality of rights are as frequently\npreached. The entrance of woman into remunerative industries is as\nenergetically opposed as is her demand for governmental and religious\nfreedom. Rev. Morgan Dix, rector of Trinity church, New York, in a\nseries of \u201cLenten Lectures\u201d[15] a few years since, made woman the\nsubject of violent attacks as an inferior and subordinate being, now\nattempting to pass beyond the bounds set by God for her restraint.\n\n    There is a more emphatic, a more hopeless degradation for her.\n    It is seen when she seeks to reverse the laws of her nature\n    and upset the economy of the universe, pushing her way out of\n    her own sphere into a rivalry with men in their sphere and\n    in their proper pursuits. On that must follow a degradation,\n    greatly to be feared. When the claim for rights seems to be\n    taking the form of a competition with man, on a field which\n    God has reserved for man only, in a work not suited to the\n    woman, and in professions already overstocked that must end,\n    not in enhancing the merit of woman in his eye but in making\n    her offensive and detestable. There is a point beyond which\n    patience will not hold out; and of this let the woman be sure:\n    that if she go too far the end will arise; and man having\n    long borne her manners and finding that she is becoming a\n    social nuisance and a general tormentor, will finally lose all\n    respect for her and thrust her away with loathing and disgust\n    and bid her behave herself and go back to her old inferiority.\n\nIn this series of lectures, Dr. Dix emphatically declared man\u2019s\nspiritual supremacy even in the household.\n\n    The father is by God's law, priest over his household; to him\n    should they look as a witness for that God who gave him his\n    rank and title.[16]\n\nThe sects agree in their teachings regarding woman; Rev. A. Sherman, at\none time president of Bacon College, Kentucky, declaring that woman was\nfirst in transgression, that she beguiled man and was therefore put in\nbondage under his authority, said:\n\n    The wide spreading contempt for this truth exhibited by the\n    political-religious fashion and infidelity of the age, is one\n    of the most alarming symptoms of approaching anarchy and the\n    overthrow of our liberties. The attempt which is being made in\n    these United States to elevate the wife to a perfect equality\n    with the husband, or to change in any respect the relation\n    between them, established by God himself, is rank infidelity,\n    no matter what specious disguise it may assume.\n\nIn a sermon of his Lenten series, entitled \u201cThe Calling of a Christian\nWoman, and her Training to Fulfill it,\u201d Dr. Dix said:\n\n    We, priests, who whatever our personal short comings, have a\n    commission from above and a message to man from God, and are\n    the mouth-piece of that church to which his hand-maidens\n    belong, may be and ought to be able to help occasionally,\n    by merely stating what the Bible and the church declare on\n    certain great matters, on which many lower ones depend....\n    What did Almighty God, the Creator, the wise Father of all,\n    make woman for? What did he intend her to do? What did he not\n    mean her to do or try to do?\n\nHe answered these questions in a lecture entitled, \u201cA Mission for\nWoman,\u201d of the same series.\n\n    Looking for a mission, for a work to do, this is the attitude\n    of many women today.... You hear of the education of women,\n    of co-education of the sexes, of emancipation of woman from\n    bonds\u2014what bonds the Lord only knows! Here is a mission worthy\n    of yourselves, it is of all works that could be rendered the\n    fittest for a church woman, because she was at the beginning\n    of all the trouble in the world.... We believe the old story\n    of the Bible re-affirmed by Christ and his apostles, that\n    Adam was not deceived by the devil, but that the woman being\n    deceived, was in the transgression. Now to her with whom the\n    wrong began, we look for the beginning of the right. Remember\n    that in the woman are the poles of the good and the evil in\n    human nature.\n\n    When she is good she is the best of all that exists; when bad,\n    the worst.\n\nAnother sermon of this Lenten series, expressed the views of the\nreverend gentleman upon the family relation, bearing of children and\ndivorce, in which he expressed his hatred of modern development saying:\n\n    I feel great solicitude about the subject of this evening\u2019s\n    lecture; I had rather not touch it at all. You may think that\n    its selection is an instance of that disrespect to which I\n    have referred. Not so, oh, not so. I hold the old ideas. I\n    abhor and detest the modern development; before any woman\n    who fears God, does her duty, and gives us in her life and\n    acts the picture of a true and beautiful womanliness, I rise\n    up and bless her and do her reverent homage. It is thus in\n    no spirit of assumption that I shall say what I have to say\n    tonight. It is rather in a tone of remonstrance, of wonder,\n    of expostulation. Why do women err as they do? Why lower\n    themselves to men\u2019s level? Why should the queens abdicate\n    their thrones and go down to the ring and act unseemly parts\n    and lay their honor in the dust? Let us think this evening of\n    some things done by women which one would have said that no\n    woman with a woman\u2019s heart and a woman\u2019s sense could, after\n    due reflection, justify. Sins fall naturally into groups or\n    classes, and if I speak this evening of only one class of sins\n    it is because the time does not permit us to take a larger\n    survey of the field. We shall limit ourselves, then, to these\n    topics:\n\n    The lack of serious views of life and the habit of turning\n    the thoughts exclusively to enjoyment. The degradation of the\n    idea of matrimony, as shown by entering into that estate for\n    low and unworthy motives. The deliberate determination of some\n    married women to defeat the objects for which marriage was\n    instituted; to have no real home; to avoid first the pains\n    and next the cares and duties of maternity. The habit, where\n    a home exists, of neglecting it by spending most of the time\n    away from it, running up and down in pursuit of excitement\n    and turning their children over to the care of servants. The\n    growing indifference to the chief of all social abominations,\n    divorce, and the toleration of lax notions about it.\n\nThese questions of most vital import to woman, to her material\ncondition, intellectual development and place in the church, Rev.\nDr. Dix and the great body of the church, deem themselves supremely\ncompetent to adjust without woman\u2019s voice upon them. Wherever she has\nshown her views upon the subject of education, industries, the family,\nthe church, to be in opposition to those of theologians, she has at\nonce been told to remain in her old position of \u201cinferiority\u201d looking\nup to man as her divinely appointed master and spiritual head; Dr. Dix,\nin his lectures, but gave the views of priests of all denominations at\nthe present day. Despite the advancing civilization of the age, and the\nfact that in so many avocations woman has shown her capacity for taking\nequal part with man, we find theology still unprogressive; a portion\nof the press, however, severely criticised these discourses.[17] The\n\u201cLenten Pastoral\u201d 1886, of Rev. A. Cleveland Coxe, bishop of Western\nNew York, to the laity of his diocese, contained a middle-age reminder\nto women of the impurity of motherhood, in the demand made for church\ncleansing subsequent to her bringing an immortal being into life:\n\n    6. Christian women, active as they often are, above all\n    comparison with men, are yet sometimes negligent of their\n    immediate duties as wives and mothers and fail to exert that\n    healthful influence over the family, which God has made it\n    the high privilege of woman to exercise in this sphere of her\n    duty and her glory. The office for \u201cthe Churching of Women\u201d\n    testifies against those who neglect it, as forgetting the\n    dignity of motherhood and that gratitude to God which every\n    woman owes to the Christian religion, for enthroning her in\n    the household, and making the example of the \u201cBlessed among\n    Women\u201d her peculiar lesson and incentive to piety.\n\nMany portions of this advice is an open insult to woman, and could the\ndivine but see it, is even from the Christian standard an imputation\nupon that being he professes to revere as the Creator of the universe.\n\nA work was recently written by an English bishop, bearing upon the\ngovernmental effort for repeal of the law forbidding marriage with\na deceased wife\u2019s sister or brother. This work was written for the\nexpress purpose of proving that, while it is eminently improper\nand sinful for a woman to marry her deceased husband\u2019s brother,\nit is eminently proper and right for a man to marry his deceased\nwife\u2019s sister, and this upon the same principle that governed the\ndisinheritance of woman under the Salic law; i.e., because by marriage\na woman becomes merged into her husband\u2019s family. He specifically\ndeclares that the sister of the wife is in no sense the sister of the\nhusband, therefore it is permissible for a man to marry his wife\u2019s\nsisters successively. But he affirms that to the contrary, the widow\ncannot marry her deceased husband\u2019s brother, as by the act of her\nmarriage she became a part of her husband\u2019s family; a second marriage\nto such husband\u2019s brother thereby becoming incestuous. This is the\nlaw of England, both religious and civil. A striking evidence of the\nincongruity of this law is found in the fact that the illegitimacy of\nsuch brother is held to destroy the relationship, as by law of both\nchurch and state an illegitimate child is not held as related to its\nfather; he is the son of nobody. A woman can marry two brothers in\nsuccession, one the child of marriage, the other a child of the same\nfather born outside of the marriage relation. The son of nobody, a\nbeing unfathered in the eye of the law, is the brother of nobody. A\nstriking instance of the effect of this law occurred in England within\nthe past few years, when a lady successively married two brothers,\nthe first a natural son of the Earl of Waldegrave, the second his\nlegitimate son. The father, although not recognized as such in law,\nleft the bulk of his property to his natural son; the title, over\nwhich he had no power of alienation, descending to the son born under\nauthority of the church. The first husband, dying, the lady afterward\nmarried the legitimate son, thus becoming first, \u201cMrs.\u201d Waldegrave,\nand afterwards, \u201cLady\u201d Waldegrave, securing both fortune and title\nby her marriage with the non-recognized and law-recognized sons of\nthe same father, and breaking neither the law of state or church in\nso doing. American clergymen of the Episcopal church have expressed\nviews in accordance with those of the English bishop. Rev. George\nZabriskie Gray, D.D., dean of the Episcopal Theological School of\nCambridge, Mass., published a work in 1885 entitled \u201cHusband and\nWife,\u201d also suggested by the constantly debated English question of\nState, concerning the lawfulness of marriage with a deceased wife\u2019s\nsister. Dr. Gray coincides with many of his reverend brethren in the\ndeclaration that with the wife no liberty of divorce is allowable, but\nhis reasons present somewhat the freshness of novelty. As previously\nstated, the non-relationship of husband and wife was at one time the\ngeneral Christian belief. While like the English bishop, Rev. Mr. Gray\nadmits the relationship of the wife to the husband to such extent\nthat becoming fully absorbed by him his relatives become hers; like\nthe English bishop he further declares that in consequence of this\nabsorption, the wife loses her former family relationship, her mother\nand father, her sister or brother no longer bearing relationship to\nher, but have become to her as strangers. He said:\n\n    The wife becomes a member of his family, while he does\n    not become one of her own. The equilateral idea is a\n    physiological[18] and psychological impossibility. The unity\n    is in the man. The woman by marriage becomes a member of the\n    man, therefore she cannot put him away; for a member cannot\n    put away the head; the impurity of the wife imperils the\n    family, renders pedigree and all concerned therein uncertain,\n    and so she may be put away. But the husband\u2019s unchastity,\n    while it may be as sinful, yet has no such effect. It does not\n    render it doubtful who are rightful children of his stock, who\n    are entitled to the name that he and his wife both bear, and\n    therefore does not call for the severance of the marriage tie,\n    that is, the dissolution of the family. That is, divorce so\n    far as Scripture goes seems to be a measure for the protection\n    of the family and of the rightful inheritance of whatever is\n    to be transmitted to the children, and so a remedy open only\n    to man. There seems to be no way of preventing the abuse of\n    divorce, if any principle is admitted that will extend it to\n    woman.\n\nUnder this form of reasoning, both Dr. Gray and the English bishop\ndispose with ease of the state obstacle to marriage with a deceased\nwife\u2019s sister. Inasmuch as by marriage the husband forms no ties of\nconsanguinity with the wife\u2019s family, she having become a member of his\nfamily without his having become a member of hers, marriage with his\ndeceased wife\u2019s sister would be the same as marriage with an entire\nstranger, saying:\n\n    As the husband enters into no connection with the wife\u2019s\n    family, her sisters are no more his sisters than they had been\n    before. Therefore he may marry one of them as freely as any\n    one else, as far as any real principle involved in matrimony\n    is concerned.\n\nThe _Christian Register_, of Boston, commenting upon Dr. Gray\u2019s work,\nalthough itself a recognized organ of the Unitarian church, yet in a\nspirit more in accord with modern thought, carefully corrected the size\nof type in the word \u201cwife\u201d upon the title-page and outside of the book,\nthus: HUSBAND AND wife:[19] also facetiously referring to the late\nArtemus Ward, who at time of the late civil war was ready to sacrifice\nall his wife\u2019s relations.[20] These two works of the English bishop and\nthe American dean are consistent with the teaching of the Christian\nages in reference to woman. Not held as belonging primarily to herself,\nbut ever to some man, her very relationship to the mother who brought\nher into life destroyed by law, she once again through the church\nis presented to the world as a being without a birthright, not even\nreceiving for it Esau\u2019s mess of pottage, or a father\u2019s shorn blessing,\nafter its loss. She is held up to view as without father, mother, or\nindividual existence. Rev. Knox-Little, a high church clergyman of\nEngland, traveled in the United States in the fall of 1880. During his\nstay in Philadelphia, he preached a \u201cSermon to Women,\u201d in the large\nchurch of St. Clements. As reported in the _Times_ of that city, its\nchief features were a representation of woman\u2019s inferior intellect, her\nduty of unqualified obedience to her husband, however evil his life,\nthe sinfulness of divorce and the blessedness of a large family of\nchildren. He said:\n\n    God made himself to be born of a woman to sanctify the virtue\n    of endurance; loving submission is an attribute of woman;\n    men are logical, but women lacking this quality, have an\n    intricacy of thought. There are those who think woman can\n    be taught logic; this is a mistake, they can never by any\n    power of education arrive at the same mental status as that\n    enjoyed by man, but they have a quickness of apprehension,\n    which is usually called leaping at conclusions, that is\n    astonishing. There, then, we have distinctive traits of a\n    woman, namely: endurance, loving submission and quickness\n    of apprehension. Wifehood is the crowning glory of a woman.\n    In it she is bound for all time. To her husband she owes\n    the duty of unqualified obedience. There is no crime which\n    a man can commit which justifies his wife in leaving him or\n    applying for that monstrous thing, divorce. It is her duty to\n    subject herself to him always, and no crime that he can commit\n    can justify her lack of obedience. If he be a bad or wicked\n    man, she may gently remonstrate with him, but refuse him,\n    never. Let divorce be anathema; curse it; curse this accursed\n    thing, divorce; curse it, curse it! Think of the blessedness\n    of having children. I am the father of many and there have\n    been those who have ventured to pity me; \u201ckeep your pity for\n    yourself,\u201d I have replied. \u201cThey never cost me a single pang.\u201d\n    In this matter let women exercise that endurance and loving\n    submission, which with intricacy of thought are their only\n    characteristics.\n\nSuch a sermon as the above preached to women under the full blaze of\nnineteenth century civilization, needs few comments. In it woman\u2019s\ninferiority and subordination are as openly asserted as at any time\nduring the dark ages. According to Rev. Knox-Little, woman possesses\nno responsibility; she is deprived of conscience, intelligent thought,\nself-respect, and is simply an appendage to man, a thing. As the clergy\nin the Middle Ages divided rights into those of persons and things,\nthemselves being the persons, the laity things, so the Rev. Knox-Little\nand his ilk of today, divide the world into persons and things, men\nbeing the persons, and woman the things. Rev. Dr. T. De Witt Talmage,\nof Brooklyn, New York, joins his brethren in preaching of \u201cthe first,\nfair, frail woman; her creation, her fall and her sorrow.\u201d Speaking of\nthe trials of housekeepers, he said:\n\n    Again, there is the trial of severe economy. Nine hundred and\n    ninety-nine households out of the thousand are subject to it,\n    some under more, and some under less stress of circumstances.\n    Especially if a man smokes very expensive cigars and takes\n    very costly dinners at the restaurants, he will be severe in\n    demanding domestic economics. This is what kills thousands\n    of women; attempting to make five dollars do the work of\n    seven. How the bills come in. The woman is the banker of the\n    household; she is the president, and cashier, and teller,\n    discount clerk, and there is a panic every four weeks. This\n    thirty years war against high prices; this perpetual study of\n    economics, this lifelong attempt to keep the outgoes less than\n    the income exhausts millions of housekeepers. O, my sister,\n    this is part of divine discipline.\n\nIt should require but little thought upon woman\u2019s part to see how\nclosely her disabilities are interwoven with present religious belief\nand teaching as to her inferiority and pre-ordained subordination. If\nshe needs aid to thought, the Cravens, the Knox-Littles, the Talmages,\nwill help her. The spirit of the priesthood, Protestant equally with\nCatholic, is that of the early and middle ages. The foundation being\nthe same, the teaching is of similar character. From the sermons\nreferred to, we can justly declare they express the opinions of the\npriesthood as a body; we meet no protest against them. Not a single\nchurch has denied these degrading theories; no clergyman has preached\nagainst the doctrines mentioned, blasphemous as they are against the\nprimal rights of the soul. These sermons stand as representatives, not\nonly of high church theology in regard to woman, but as expressing the\nbelief of all churches in her creation and existence as an inferior\nand appendage to man. All her suffering, material or spiritual, her\nrestrictions, her sorrows, her deprivation of the right of unrestricted\nconscience are depicted as parts of her divine discipline, which\nshe must accept with endurance and loving submission. Even from the\ncriminal, she is not to free herself, or refuse him obedience. Scarcely\na Protestant sect that has not within a few years, in some way, placed\nitself upon record as sustaining the doctrine of woman\u2019s subordination.\nThe Pan-Presbyterian Council that assembled in Edinburg a few years\nsince refused to admit a woman even as a listener to its proceedings\nalthough women constitute at least two-thirds of the membership of\nthat church. A solitary woman who persisted in remaining to listen\nto the discussions of this body was removed by force; \u201csix stalwart\nPresbyterians\u201d lending their ungentle aid to her ejection. The same\nPan-Presbyterian body in session in Philadelphia, the summer of 1880,\nlaughed to scorn the suggestion of a liberal member that the status to\nwoman in that church should receive some consideration; referring to\nthe work of the Sisters of Charity, in the Catholic church, and that of\nwomen among the Quakers. Although this question was twice introduced it\nwas as often \u201cmet with derisive laughter,\u201d and no action was taken upon\nit. But had this liberal member been wise enough to have brought before\nthis body the fact that the Presbyterian church is losing its political\ninfluence because of the great preponderance of its women members\nwithout the ballot, he would have received more consideration. As all\nchurches seek influence in politics, we may rest assured that when\nthe church as a whole, or any sect thereof, shall be found sustaining\nthe political rights of woman or her religious equality in the church,\nit will be from the worldly wisdom of a desire to retain fleeting\npolitical power. The life or the death of the church largely depends\nupon its political forethought.\n\nDiffering political rights have ever been productive of diverse moral\ncodes. What was considered right for the king and the nobility has\never been wrong for the peasant. The moral rights of the master and\nthe slave were ever dissimilar, while under Christianity two codes of\nmorals have ever been extant, the lax code for man, the strict for\nwoman. This diversity is shown by the different position that society\naccords to an immoral man and an immoral woman, but nowhere is the\nrecognition of differing codes of morals for man and woman as clearly\nshown as in the church, as presented in discourses of clergymen. To\nthem adultery in the husband is merely a pastime in which he can\nindulge without injury to his wife, who is powerless to put him away,\nnor has she been wronged. But to the contrary, under the same teaching,\nshould the wife prove thus unfaithful she should immediately be cast\nout. Colored pastors unite with their white brethren in denying\nwoman\u2019s moral, spiritual or personal equality with man. Rev. Alexander\nCrummel,[21] a colored clergyman of Washington, rector of St. Lukes\n(Episcopal) church, in 1881, preached a sermon upon the biblical\nposition of woman, which was published in tract form for circulation.\nHe referred to her as having been created inferior to man, with no\nright, natural or acquired by creation or revelation, to govern herself\nor hold opinions of her own. This sermon\u2014\u201cMarriage and Divorce\u201d\u2014laid\ndown the following principles:\n\n    Marriage is a divine institution. It came from God. It is\n    not, therefore, the creation of legislative action. It is not\n    merely a civil contract. It is not the invention of man. The\n    estate of matrimony is a sacred one; originated by the will\n    of God, and governed by his law. Marriage is indissoluble.\n    Adultery on part of the wife is ground for divorce. Thus\n    far we have considered the case with reference to the\n    unfaithfulness of the wife, and have shown that when a woman\n    violates the covenant of marriage by adultery, her husband\n    has the right to divorce her. But now the question comes, \u201cIs\n    not this a reciprocal right?\u201d When husbands are unfaithful,\n    have not wives the right to divorce them? My reply is that\n    no warrant for such divorce can be found in the Bible. Under\n    both covenants, the right of divorce is given exclusively to\n    husband. The right in all cases is guaranteed to the man only.\n    And so far forth we have the word of God for its specific\n    reservation to husbands. In no case is it even hinted that a\n    woman has the right of divorce, if even her husband be guilty\n    of unfaithfulness. There is a broad, general obligation laid\n    upon woman in the marriage relation. The sum of the matter\n    respecting the woman seems to be this; the woman is bound by\n    the ties of wedlock during the whole period of her husband\u2019s\n    life; and even under distressful circumstances has no right to\n    break them; i. e., by divorce.\n\nThe additional reasons presented by Rev. Mr. Crummel against woman\u2019s\nright of divorce, even for the infidelity of the husband, are \u201cThe\nhidden mystery of generation, the wondrous secret of propagated life\ncommitted to the trust of woman.\u201d In thus referring to those laws of\nnature whose conditions are not yet fully understood, Rev. Mr. Crummel\npresented the strongest reasons why the mother and not the father\nshould be regarded as the true head of the family. This \u201chidden mystery\nof generation, this wondrous secret of propagated life, committed to\nthe trust of woman, \u201cmost forcibly demonstrates that she should be\nthe one in whose power is placed the opportunity for escape from an\nadulterous husband, thus enabling her to keep her body a holy temple\nfor its divine-human uses, over which as priestess she alone should\npossess control. The assertion of Rev. Alexander Crummel, that an\nadulterous husband cannot do the same wrong to the wife that the wife\ndoes to the husband under similar circumstances, is absolutely false.\nBy reason of certain \u201cphysiological mysteries,\u201d to which he refers,\nbut to which he also shows absolute ignorance, the wrong done woman by\nreason of her potential motherhood is infinitely greater to her than\nsimilar infidelity upon her part can possibly be to the husband. And\nnot to her alone but to the children whom she may bring to life. His\nattempted justification of the husband\u2019s adultery upon the plea that\n\u201cwhen a man begets bastard children, he does so beyond the boundary of\nthe home,\u201d and so cannot \u201cfoist spurious children upon the household\nand kindred\u2014that the family is kept together,\u201d are most sophistical and\nfallacious methods of reasoning, entirely inimical to truth and purity.\nOf an absolutely selfish and libidinous character, they have been used\nby profligates in the church and in the state as pleas for a license\nthat has no regard to the rights of woman, or the duties of fatherhood,\nand are not only essentially immoral in themselves, but are equally\ndestructive of personal and social purity.\n\nThe individual and not the family is the social unit; the rights of\nindividuals are foremost. Immorality of man everywhere presents a\nmore serious and destructive aspect than that of woman. Aside from\nthe unmarried mother whom society does not recognize as longer a part\nof it, is the irreparable wrong done to those innocent human beings\nwhom Rev. Mr. Crummel designates as \u201cspurious children;\u201d whom the\nCatholics call \u201csacrilegious\u201d when the father is shown to be a priest,\nand upon whom society at large terms \u201cillegitimate.\u201d Closely connected\nwith injury to the innocent child itself, thrust into being without\nprovision for its future needs, is the detriment to society which thus\nfinds itself compelled to assume the duties belonging to the bastard\u2019s\nfather. Such children, for whom neither home nor fatherly care awaits,\nare allowed by him to grow up neglected street waifs, uneducated,\nuntrained, uncared for, filling alms-houses, reformatories, and prisons\nof the land, perhaps to die upon the gallows. The responsibility of\nsuch fathers is not a subject of church teaching; it is simply passed\ncarelessly by, regardless of the unspeakable wrongs connected with it.\nIf, as the Rev. Mr. Turnstall asserts, the Bible is not for woman,\nif his position is true, or if that of the Jews who claim that the\nTen Commandments were given to man alone, is true, it is to man alone\nthat adultery is forbidden. Luther asserted that the Ten Commandments\napplied to neither Gentiles nor Christians, but only to the Jews. It\nwas to man alone that Christ spoke against adultery saying: \u201cWhosoever\nlooketh upon a woman to lust after her hath already committed adultery\nwith her, in his heart.\u201d To man, Christ also said: \u201cOwing to the\nhardness of their hearts, Moses permitted a man to put away his wife,\nbut it was not so from the beginning.\u201d Man, and not woman, is commanded\nto leave father and mother; man is to cleave unto his wife, not woman\nunto her husband. It was the men of Corinth whom Paul addressed\nconcerning lewdness, \u201cSuch fornication was never known among the\nheathen as that a man should take his father\u2019s wife.\u201d[22]\n\nOne of the most remarkable facts connected with church teaching, is\nthe lightness with which such positive declarations of Christ as to\nthe relations of husband and wife are cast aside, or his teaching\nentirely reversed, in order that man may receive license for an\nimmorality forbidden to woman.\n\nIt must be noted that the chief reason given by the church for assuming\nwoman\u2019s greater guilt in committing adultery is not based upon the\ngreater immorality of the act, _per se_, but the injury to property\nrights, succession, etc. It must also be noted that the great objection\nof the church to divorce on part of woman lies in the fact that the\nwife thus escapes from a condition of bondage to one of comparative\nfreedom. In securing a divorce she repudiates the husband\u2019s \u201cheadship,\u201d\nshe thus subverts his authority; by this act she places herself upon\nan equality of moral and property rights with man, and the church not\nadmitting such equality between man and woman, is hostile to divorce\nupon her part. Every new security gained by woman for the protection\nof her civil rights in or out of the family, is a direct blow at the\nchurch theory of her inferiority and subordination. Her full freedom is\nto be looked for through her increased legal and political rights and\nnot through the church.\n\nDuring the same year of the remarkable sermon by Rev. Alexander\nCrummel, 1881, Rev. S. W. Dilke read a paper before the Social Science\nAssociation at Saratoga, entitled \u201cLax Divorce Legislation.\u201d He\nshowed the same disregard for the rights of the individual, when the\nindividual was a wife, as his brother clergymen, saying: \u201cOur lax\ndivorce system treats the wrongs of the wife chiefly as those of a\nmere individual.\u201d He was assiduous in his regard for the protection of\nthe womanly nature, recognizing sex, \u201cher sex\u201d as \u201ca profound fact in\nnature,\u201d but why the sex of woman should be a more \u201cprofound fact\u201d than\nthe sex of man, he did not show. That woman now claims a recognition\nof her individuality as a being possessed of personal rights, is the\nbasis of present attack upon divorce by the church; nor is the state\nmore ready to admit her individual representation and personal rights\nof self-government. In March, 1887, Rev. E. B. Hurlbert preached a\nsermon in the First Baptist church of San Francisco on \u201cThe Relation of\nHusband and Wife,\u201d afterward published, in which he said:\n\n    The principal objection to the Episcopal marriage service\n    raised by the self-willed woman of the period is that it\n    requires her to _obey_ her husband. But this objection is\n    leveled equally against the requirement of the word of\n    God, and, furthermore, the additional promise to honor and\n    love him can only be kept in the spirit of obedience. This\n    obligation is founded upon the fact that he is her husband,\n    and if she cannot reverence him for what he is in himself,\n    still she must reverence him for the position which he holds.\n    And, again, she must render this submissive reverence to\n    her husband\u2019s headship as unto the Lord, as is fit in the\n    Lord. She reverences him not simply as a man, but as her\n    own husband, behind whom stands the Lord himself. It is the\n    Lord who has made him husband, and the honor with which she\n    regards him, though himself personally not deserving it, is\n    in reality an honoring of the Lord. Many a Christian woman,\n    actuated by this motive, has been most tenderly submissive,\n    dutiful and patient, as towards the most unreasonable and\n    despotic of husbands\u2014inspired by the remembrance that it was\n    a service rendered unto Christ. Let the wife, then, reverence\n    her husband for what he is in himself, for his loving and\n    noble qualities; but if these qualities do not belong to him,\n    then let her reverence him for the sake of his office\u2014simply\n    because he is her husband\u2014and in either event let her\n    reverence him, because in doing so she is honoring the Lord\n    and Savior.\n\nIt is but a short time since the pastor of the Swedenborgian church,\nWashington, D.C., as reported by one of his flock, expressed to that\nbody his opinion that the church had better remain unrepresented rather\nthan have women represent it, and this, although nine-tenths of his\ncongregation are women. It is, however, pleasing to state that the\ncommittee for that purpose elected an equal number of women with men;\nthe efforts of the pastor against woman, securing but seven votes. The\nUnitarian and Universalist churches which ordain women to preach and\nadminister the ordinances, still make these women pastors feel that the\ninnovation is not a universally acceptable one. In a lengthy pastoral\nletter issued by the Episcopal convention held in Chicago a few years\nsince, it was asserted that the claim of the wife to an equal right\nwith her husband to the control of her person, her property and her\nearnings was \u201cdisparaging the Christian law of the household.\u201d The\nMethodist church still refuses to place woman upon an equality with\nman, either in the ministry or in lay representation, a few years since\ntaking from them their previous license to preach, and this despite\nthe fact that Mrs. Van Cott, a woman evangelist, did such severe work\nduring a period of fourteen years, as to seriously injure her health,\nand so successful were her ministrations that she brought more converts\nto the church than a dozen of its most influential bishops during the\nsame time. To such bitter lengths has opposition to woman\u2019s ordination\nbeen carried in that church that Rev. Mr. Buckley, editor of _The\nChristian Advocate_,[23] when debating the subject, declared that he\nwould oppose the admission of the mother of our Lord into the ministry,\nthe debate taking on most unseemly form.[24] Miss Oliver who had long\nbeen pastor of the Willoughby Street church, in Brooklyn, appealed\nto the General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church, at its\nsession in Cincinnati, May, 1880, for full installment and ordination,\nsaying:\n\n    \u201cI am sorry to trouble our dear mother church with any\n    perplexing question, but it presses me also, and the church\n    and myself must decide something. I am so thoroughly convinced\n    that the Lord has laid commands upon me in this direction\n    that it becomes with me really a question of my own soul\u2019s\n    salvation.\u201d She then gave the reasons that induce her to\n    believe that she is called to pastoral work, and concluded:\n    \u201cI have made almost every conceivable sacrifice to do what I\n    believe to be God\u2019s will. Brought up in a conservative circle\n    in New York City, that held it a disgrace for a woman to work,\n    surrounded with the comforts and advantages of ample means,\n    and trained in the Episcopal church, I gave up home, friends\n    and support, went counter to prejudices that had become second\n    nature to me, worked several years to constant exhaustion,\n    and suffered cold, hunger and loneliness; the things hardest\n    for me to bear were laid upon me. For two months my own\n    mother would not speak to me. When I entered the house she\n    turned and walked away, and when I sat at the table she did\n    not recognize me. I have passed through tortures to which the\n    flames of martyrdom would be nothing, for they would end in a\n    day; and through all this time and today I could turn off to\n    positions of comparative ease and profit. I ask you, fathers\n    and brethren, tell me what would you do in my place? Tell me\n    what would you wish the church to do toward you, were you\n    in my place? Please only apply the golden rule, and vote in\n    conference accordingly.\u201d\n\nIn answer to this powerful and noble appeal and in reply to all women\nseeking the ministry of that church, the General Conference passed this\nresolution:\n\n    Resolved: That women have already all the rights and\n    privileges in the Methodist church, that are good for them,\n    and that it is not expedient to make any change in the books\n    of discipline that would open the doors for their ordination\n    to the ministry.\n\nThe General Conference, after so summarily deciding what was for the\nspiritual good of women, in thus refusing to recognize their equality\nof rights to the offices of that church, resolved itself as a whole\ninto a political convention, adjourning in a body to Chicago before\nits religious business was finished, in order that its presence might\ninfluence the National Republican Convention there assembled, to\nnominate General Grant for a third term to the presidency of the United\nStates; General Grant being in affiliation with the Methodist church.\n\nThe Congregational church is placed upon record through laws, governing\ncertain of its bodies, which state that:\n\n    By the word \u201cchurch\u201d is meant the adult males duly admitted\n    and retained by the First Evangelical church of Cambridgeport,\n    present at any regular meeting of said church and voting by a\n    majority.\n\nThe New York _Independent_, of February 24, 1881, commenting upon this\nofficial declaration that only \u201cadult males\u201d are to be considered the\n\u201cchurch,\u201d says:\n\n    The above is Article XIV of the by-laws of the society\n    connected with the aforesaid church. It is a matter of\n    gratitude that the society, if it forbids females to vote in\n    the church, yet allows them to pray and to help the society\n    raise money.\n\nThe Rev. W. V. Turnstall, in the _Methodist Recorder_, a few years\nsince, gave his priestly views in regard to woman, and by implication\nthose of the Methodist church. He declared woman to be under the curse\nof subjection to man, a curse not removable until the resurrection. He\nsaid that under the Mosaic law woman had no voice in anything; that she\ncould hold no office, yet did so in a few instances when God wished to\nespecially humiliate the nation; that she was scheduled as a higher\npiece of property; that even the Bible was not addressed to her but to\nman alone; woman finding her salvation even under the new covenant, not\ndirectly through Jesus, but approaching him through man; his points\nwere:\n\n    First: That woman is under a curse which subjects her to man.\n\n    Second: This curse has never been removed, nor will it be\n    removed until the resurrection.\n\n    Third: That woman under the Mosaic law, God\u2019s civil law, had\n    no voice in anything. That she was not allowed her oath;\n    that she was no part of the congregation of Israel; that her\n    genealogy was not kept; that no notice was taken of her birth\n    or death, except as these events were connected with some man\n    of providence; that she was given no control of her children;\n    that she could hold no office; nor did she, except in a few\n    instances, when to reproach and humiliate the nation, God\n    suspended his own law, and made an instrument of women for\n    the time being. That she offered no sacrifices, no redemption\n    money was paid for her; that she received no religious rites;\n    that the mother\u2019s cleansing was forty days longer, and the\n    gift was smaller for a female child than for a male; and that\n    in the tenth commandment\u2014always in force\u2014she is scheduled as a\n    higher species of property; that her identity was completely\n    merged in that of her husband.\n\n    Fourth: That for seeking to hold office Miriam was smitten\n    with leprosy; and that under the new covenant she is only\n    permitted to pray or prophesy with her head covered, which\n    accounts for the fashion of wearing bonnets in public to this\n    day; that she is expressly prohibited from rule in the church\n    or usurpation of authority over the man.\n\n    Fifth: That to vote is to rule, voting carrying with it all\n    the collaterals of making, expounding, and executing law; that\n    God has withheld from woman the right to rule, either in the\n    church, the state or the family; that He did this because of\n    her having \u201cbrought sin and death into the world, and all our\n    woe.\u201d\n\n    Sixth: That the Bible is addressed to man and not to woman;\n    that man comes to God through Jesus, and woman comes to Jesus\n    through man; that every privilege the wife enjoys she but\n    receives through the husband, for God has declared that woman\n    shall not rule man, but be subject unto him.\n\nA more explicit statement of the opinion of the church regarding\nwoman is seldom found. Later action of the Methodist body proves its\nagreement with Rev. Mr. Turnstall. The General Conference of that\nchurch convened May 1, 1888, in the Metropolitan Opera House, New York,\nnumbering delegates from every part of the United States as well as\nmany from foreign lands. Among these delegates were sixteen women.\nThe question of their admission came up the first day. The senior\nbishop, Rev. Thomas Bowman, in his opening remarks, declared that\nbody to stand in the presence of new conditions, in that they found\nnames upon the roll of a class of persons whose eligibility had never\nbeen determined by the high tribunal of the church. A committee was\nappointed to report upon their admission. Bishop Merrill, occupying\nthe chair upon the second day, said that \u201cfor the first time in the\nhistory of the conference, women had been sent as delegates,\u201d but\nthe bishops did not think the women were eligible. The report of the\ncommittee was submitted, which declared that after a serious discussion\nthey had become convinced that, while the rule was passed relating to\nthe admission of lay delegates to the General Conference, the church\ncontemplated admission only to men as lay delegates and that under the\nconstitution and laws, women were not eligible. The committee agreed\nthat the protest against women should be sustained, and the conferences\nfrom which they were sent be notified that their seats were vacant.\nA long discussion ensued. Rev. John Wiley, president of the Drew\nTheological Seminary of the New York Conference, spoke against woman\u2019s\nadmission, saying:\n\n    That if the laws of the church were properly interpreted they\n    would prove that women are not eligible and then, besides, no\n    one wanted them in the General Conference.\n\nRev. J. R. Day, the New York Conference, argued against the admission\nof women, saying:\n\n    When the law was passed for the admission of lay delegates\n    it was never intended that women should be delegates to the\n    General Conference. It is proposed today to make one of the\n    most stupendous pieces of legislation that has been known to\n    Christendom. I am not opposed to woman doing the work that she\n    is capable of doing but I do not think that she should intrude\n    upon the General Conference. Woman has not the necessary\n    experience; this is a tremendous question.\n\nRev. Jacob Rothweiler, of the Central German Conference, asserted that:\n\n    The opponents of the report are trying to override the\n    constitution of the church, and are making an effort to strike\n    at the conscientiousness of 90 per cent of the Christian\n    church which has existed for the last 1,800 years. The history\n    of Christianity shows that women were never intended to vote.\n\nThe conference was seriously divided upon this question. Although\neventually lost, yet many clergymen permeated with the spirit of\nadvancing civilization, voted in its favor, among them Rev. Dr.\nHammond, of Syracuse, New York, a delegate for the episcopacy; while\narrayed in bitter opposition was Rev. Mr. Buckley, editor of _The\nChristian Advocate_, also a candidate for the bishopric, and the man\nthat when the question of the ordination of Miss Oliver came up a few\nyears since, declared he would oppose the admission of the Mother of\nthe Lord to the ministry. His remark recalls that of Tetzel, the great\nCatholic dealer in indulgences, given in another part of this work,\nand illustrates to what extent of blasphemy the opponents of women\u2019s\nequality proceed. It was not until the seventh day of the conference\nthat the question of woman\u2019s admission was decided in the negative, and\nthe great Methodist Episcopal church put itself upon record as opposed\nto the recognition of more than one half of its members. The women\ndelegates were not even allowed seats upon the floor during the debate.\nMrs. Nind, president of the Woman\u2019s Foreign Missionary Society, arose\nto vote, but was not counted, although the Woman\u2019s Foreign Missionary\nsocieties are making converts where men cannot reach\u2014in the zenanas.\nThe action of the Conference was foreshadowed by that of Baltimore\na few weeks previously, when it was decided that women missionaries\nshould not be permitted to administer communion in the zenanas as it\nwould open the door for their ordination to the ministry and this\ndespite the fact that women alone are admitted to the zenanas. At the\nMethodist minister\u2019s bi-monthly meeting, Syracuse, N.Y., near time of\nthe General Conference, Rev. Thomas Tinsey, of Clyde, read a paper\nentitled \u201cIs it advisable to make women of the church eligible to all\nthe ecclesiastical councils and the ministerial order of the church,\u201d\nquoting Paul in opposition to giving her a voice, saying:\n\n    What can our modern advocates of licensing and ordaining women\n    and electing them to annual conferences, do with the command\n    to the Corinthians, \u201cLet your women keep silence in the\n    church;\u201d or to Timothy: \u201cLet the women learn in silence and\n    all subjection,\u201d Paul certainly meant something by such\n    teaching. The position taken by the Fathers of Methodism\n    appears to me to be the only tenable one, viz: that the\n    prohibition applies to the legislation or official business\n    of the church\u2014precisely the kind of work contemplated in the\n    effort to make them eligible to the General Conference, and to\n    Methodist orders. Concerning these things, \u201cLet them learn of\n    their husbands at home.\u201d\n\nRev. Mr. Tinsey farther gave his opinion as to the comparative\nuselessness of woman. He was able to conceive of no good reason for\nher creation, aside from that of burden bearer in the process of\nreproduction, saying:\n\n    Woman is that part or side of humanity upon which the great\n    labor, care and burden of reproduction is placed. We can\n    conceive of no good reason for making women aside from this.\n    Man is certainly better suited to all other work.\n\nAfter discussion, the ministers present generally agreed that, because\nof motherhood, woman should be debarred from such official recognition.\n\nThe final ground of women\u2019s exclusion as delegates to the General\nConference, is most noticeable inasmuch as appeal was ultimately\nmade to the State. Upon the seventh day\u2019s session it was resolved to\nsuspend the rules and continue the debate on the admission of women as\nlay-delegates. So anxious were men to speak that forty-one delegates at\nonce sprung to their feet and claimed the floor. Judge Taylor, a lay\ndelegate from the St. Louis conference, walking down the aisle with a\nnumber of law books under his arm, proceeded to argue the question on\nconstitutional grounds, saying:\n\n    It would do much harm to admit women at the present time.\n    There are bishops to be elected and other important matters to\n    be voted on, and if women are admitted and allowed to vote,\n    and it should subsequently be decided that women should not be\n    entitled to seats, the acts of the present General Conference\n    would be illegal and unconstitutional.\n\nWhile claiming, personally, to favor women\u2019s admission, he quoted law\nto sustain their rejection, and wished the question to be submitted\nto a vote of the church. The \u201cvote of the church,\u201d as shown by the\nadoption of Rev. F. B. Neely\u2019s amendment, signifying the ministers\npresent at annual conferences.[25] The vote upon this amendment, which\nexcluded women from seats in the General Conference, submitting their\neligibility to the decision of ministers of the annual conferences, was\nadopted 237 to 198. It thus requires three-fourths vote of the members\npresent and voting at the annual conferences, this vote to be ratified\nby a two-thirds vote of the General Conference in order to woman\u2019s\nacceptance as lay delegate to such General Conference.[26] Aside from\nthe fact of an appeal to the civil law for the exclusion of woman, thus\nshowing the close union of church and state, one other important point\nmust be noticed. In the declaration that the church should be consulted\nin regard to such an important matter, that body was defined as the\nministers of the annual conference, laymen not here ranking as part of\nthe church. The lay delegates, unnarrowed by theological studies were,\nas a body, favorable to woman\u2019s admission. Nor did they refrain from\ncriticising the clergy, declaring that the episcopacy did not interpret\nthe law of the church, this power resting in the General Conference.\nBut one more favoring vote would have tied the question. Gen. Samuel H.\nHurst, dairy and food commissioner of Ohio, the first layman to gain\nthe floor, defended the right of women to admission. He alluded to the\nopponents of the women as \u201cold fogies.\u201d He criticized the bishop\u2019s\naddress.\n\n    The episcopacy does not interpret the law of the church, but\n    the General Conference does. Woman does not come here as a\n    strong-minded person demanding admittance, but she comes as\n    representative of the lay conference. The word \u201claymen\u201d was\n    interpreted to mean all members of the church not represented\n    in the ministry. That is the law, and if women are \u201claymen\u201d\n    they are entitled to admission.\n\nThe Southern Baptist Association, meeting in New Orleans in July of the\nsame year, refused to admit women by a vote of 42 to 40. The church as\nof old, is still strenuous in its efforts to influence legislation.\nAn amendment to the National Constitution is pressed by the National\nReform Association, recognizing the sectarian idea of God; another\nplacing marriage and divorce under control of the general government\nby uniform laws; while priestly views upon the political freedom\nof woman are thrust into the very faces of our law makers.[27] The\nfollowing portions of a sermon preached at the Cathedral of the Holy\nCross, Boston, February 21, 1886, by the Rev. Father J. P. Bodfish,\nwere printed and distributed among the members of the Massachusetts\nLegislature that spring by the opponents of woman suffrage:[28]\n\n    Not that I would have woman step out of her sphere; the man\n    is the natural protector, the father, the lawgiver, of his\n    family; not would I counsel wives to usurp the places of their\n    husbands at the polls. I believe this to be one of the errors\n    of modern times, to try to unsex woman, and take her from\n    the high place she occupies and drag her into the arena of\n    public life. What has she to do there? We might as well try\n    to drag down the angels to take part in the menial affairs of\n    this world as to take woman from the high place she occupies\n    in the family, where \u2019tis her privilege and duty to guide,\n    to counsel and to instruct\u2014to lead that family in the way of\n    righteousness. It is but offering her a degradation; Almighty\n    God never intended it. The charm, the influence of woman, is\n    in that purity that comes from living in a sphere apart from\n    us. God forbid that we should ever see the day that a man, a\n    husband or a father, is to find his will opposed and thwarted\n    at the polls by his daughter or his wife. Then farewell to\n    that reverence which belongs to the character of woman.\n\n    She puts herself on an equal footing with man when she\n    steps down from that place where every one regards her with\n    reverence, and becomes unsexed by striving to make laws which\n    she cannot enforce, and taking upon herself duties for which\n    she is altogether unfitted.\n\nDecrees of various characters presenting woman as a being of different\nnatural and spiritual rights from man, are constantly formulated by\nthe churches. The Plenary Council of Baltimore, 1884, busied itself in\nthe enactment of canons directly bearing upon marriage and divorce,\nre-affirming the sacramental character of marriage and declaring\nthat marriages under civil rites should be resented by the whole\nCatholic world. This council was preceded by an encyclical from the\nPope, laying out its plans by work yet leaving it within the power\nof the diocesan bishops to promulgate its canons according to their\nown wisdom. Consequently, not until three years later were those upon\nmarriage published on the Pacific Coast, at which time the archbishop\nof San Francisco, the bishops of Monterey, Los Angeles and Grass\nValley, addressed a pastoral letter to the Catholics of those regions,\ncondemning civil marriage as a sin and sacrilege, illegal, and a\n\u201chorrible concubinage.\u201d It was farther stated that marriage unblessed\nby a priest, subjected the parties to excommunication. At the still\nlater Catholic Congress, in honor of the hundredth anniversary of the\nCatholic Hierarchy in America, divorces were affirmed to be the plague\nof civilization, a discredit to the government, a degradation of the\nfemale sex, and a standing menace to the sanctity of the marriage bond.\nIn noting these canons of the Plenary Council and the resolutions of\nthe Catholic Congress, it should be borne in mind that the chief secret\nof the long-continued power of the Catholic church has been its hold\nupon marriage and the subordination of woman in this relation. To these\ncelibate priests, nothing connected with woman is sacred. Celibacy and\nthe sacramental nature of marriage are each of them based upon the\ntheory of woman\u2019s created inferiority and original sin. Priestly power\nover marriage, and the confessional, through which means it is able to\nwrest all family and state secrets to its own use, are powers that will\nnot be peaceably relinquished. Their destruction will come through the\ngrowing intelligence of people, and the responsibility of political\nself-government. These will insure confidence in the validity of civil\nmarriage and a belief in the personal rights of individuals. To woman,\nthe education of political responsibility is most essential in order to\nfree her from church bonds, and is therefore most energetically opposed\nby the church. In 1890, a number of Catholic ladies of Paris formed\na union for the emancipation of woman from different kinds of social\nthraldom.[29] Their first attack was upon the priesthood, whom they\ndeclared the mortal adversary of woman\u2019s advancement, affirming that\nevery woman \u201cwho abets the abb\u00e9s is an enemy of her sex.\u201d This open\nrebellion of Catholic ladies against the power of the hierarchy, is a\nsignificant sign of woman\u2019s advancing freedom.\n\nAll canons, decrees, resolutions and laws of the church, especially\nbearing upon the destinies of woman are promulgated without the hearing\nof her voice, either in confirmation or rejection. She is simply\nlegislated for as a slave. Two of the later triennial conclaves of\nthe Episcopal church of the United States, energetically debated the\nsubject of divorce, not, however, arriving at sufficient unanimity\nof opinion for the enactment of a canon. When Mazzini, the Italian\npatriot, was in this country, 1852, he declared the destruction of the\npriesthood to be our only surety for continued freedom, saying:\n\n    They will be found as in Italy, the foes of mankind, and\n    if the United States expects to retain even its political\n    liberties, it must get rid of the priesthood as Italy intends\n    to do.[30]\n\nFrances Wright, that clear-seeing, liberty-loving, Scotch free-thought\nwoman, noted the dangerous purpose and character of the Christian\nparty in politics, even as early as 1829; and the present effort of\nthis body, now organized as the \u201cNational Reform Association\u201d with\nits adjunct \u201cThe American Sabbath Union,\u201d officered by priests and\ninfluential members of the Woman\u2019s Christian Temperance Union, and\nkindred bodies, is a perpetual menace to the civil and religious\nliberties of the United States. Its effort for an amendment to the\nFederal Constitution which shall recognize the United States as a\nChristian nation, is a determined endeavor toward the union of church\nand state; and its success in such attempt will be the immediate\ndestruction of both civil and religious liberty. That such a party now\nopenly exists, its intentions no secret, is evidence that the warnings\nof Italian patriot and the Scotch free thinker were not without assured\nfoundation.\n\nAs a body, the church opposes education for woman, and all the\nliberalizing tendencies of the last thirty-five or forty years, which\nhave opened new and varied industries to women and secured to wives\nsome relief from their general serf condition. Bishop Littlejohn, of\nthe Episcopal church, at the Triennial Conclave of bishops, 1883,\npreached as his \u201ctriennial charge\u201d upon \u201cThe Church and the Family,\u201d\npresenting the general church idea as to woman\u2019s inferiority and\nsubordination. He made authoritative use of the words \u201csanctities of\nhome,\u201d a phrase invented by the clergy as a method of holding woman in\nbondage; directed the church to \u201cstrictly impose her doctrines as to\nmarriage and divorce, clash as they may with the spirit of the times\nand the laws of the state\u201d (thus emulating the Catholic doctrines of\nthe supremacy of the church). He declared that in any respect to change\nthe relation established by God himself between husband and wife, was\nrank infidelity, no matter what specious disguise such change might\nassume, explicitly declaring the authority of the church over marriage,\nas against the authority of the state; protesting against omission of\nthe word \u201cobey\u201d from the marriage service, and the control of the wife\nover her own earnings and expenditures, saying:\n\n    If it be outside the province of the states to treat marriage\n    as more than a contract between a man and a woman, the church\n    must make it understood, as it is not, that it is inside\n    her province to treat it as a thing instituted of God.\n    Practically, we have reached a point where the wife may cease\n    to have property interests in common with her husband, may\n    control absolutely her own means of living, and determine for\n    herself the scale of expenditures that will suit her tastes or\n    her caprices. The man is no longer the head of the household,\n    the husband. It has been made an open question whether the\n    man or his wife will fulfill that function, and \u201ca community\n    of interests, with the recognized authority of the husband to\n    rule the wife, and the recognized duty of the wife to obey\n    that authority, is no longer deemed expedient or necessary.\u201d\n    This rebellion against the old view of marriage is so strong\n    that in many cases the word \u201cobey\u201d is omitted from the\n    marriage service.\n\nEven among Christianized Indians we find different laws governing man\nand woman. In 1886, the governor of Maine paid a visit to the governor\nof the Passamaquody Indians, at a time when a large council was in\nprogress upon the St. Croix reservation. This council first assembled\nat the chapel, where the Revised Statutes\u2014the whole basis of government\nof the Passamaquodies\u2014are posted. These statutes having been approved\nby Bishop Healy, of Portland, are also looked upon as canons of the\nchurch.[31]\n\nThe statutes principally affecting women, are:\n\n    Third: No woman who is separated from her husband shall be\n    admitted to the sacrament, or to any place in the church\n    except the porch in summer and the back seat in winter, unless\n    by the consent of the bishop.\n\n    Fourth: Any woman who admits men into her house by night shall\n    be treated as a criminal and delivered to the courts.\n\n    Fifth: Any woman who is disobedient to her husband, any common\n    scold or drunkard, shall not be permitted to enter the church,\n    except by permission of the priest.\n\nIt will be noted that these statutes forbid the sacrament to the\nwoman who is separated from her husband, not even permitting her an\naccustomed seat in church. She must remain in the porch during the\nsummer and in a back seat during the winter, except \u201cthe bishop\u201d\notherwise permits. Also the woman not rendering obedience to her\nhusband, is denied permission to enter the church except under priestly\npermit. The Christian theory of woman\u2019s inferiority and subordination\nto man, is as fully endorsed by these statutes as in the mediaeval\npriestly instruction to husbands.[32]\n\nNo profession as constantly appeals to the lower nature as the\npriestly, the emotions rather than reason, are constantly invoked;\nambition, love of power, hope of reward, fear of punishment, are the\nincentives presented and in no instance are such incentives more fully\nmade use of than for purposes of sustaining the supremacy of man over\nwoman. The teaching of the church cannot fail to impress woman with\nthe feeling that if she expects education, or even opportunity of\nfull entrance into business, she must not heed the admonitions of the\npriesthood, when, as by Dr. Dix, she is contemptuously forbidden to\nenter the professions on the ground that God designed these offices\nalone for man. When women sought university honors at Oxford, a few\nyears since, many \u201cincredibly foolish\u201d letters, said _London Truth_,\nwere written by its opponents who were chiefly clergymen. Canon\nLiddon\u2019s influence was against the statute; the Dean of Norwich\nreferred to it as \u201can attempt to defeat divine Providence and Holy\nScripture.\u201d Dr. Gouldbourne thought it would \u201cunsex woman.\u201d[33]\n\n\u201cThere is no sin,\u201d said Buddha, \u201cbut ignorance,\u201d yet according to\nRector Dix, Rev. S. W. Turnstall, Dr. Craven and the priesthood of\nthe present day, in common with the earlier church, woman\u2019s normal\ncondition is that of ignorance, and education is the prerogative of\nman alone; and yet the dangers of ignorance have by no means been\nfathomed, although the latest investigations show the close relation\nbetween knowledge and life. That as intelligence is diffused, there is\na corresponding increase of longevity, is proven; the most uneducated\ncommunities showing the greatest proportion of deaths. Ignorance and\nthe death rate are parts of the same question; education and length of\nlife are proportionately synonymous. Statistics gathered in England,\nWales and Ireland a few years since showed the percentage of infantile\ndeaths to be much greater in those portions where the mother could not\nread and write, than where the mother had sufficient education to read\na newspaper and write her own name. In districts where there was no\nother appreciable difference except that of education, the mortality\nwas the largest in the most ignorant districts.\n\nIn deprecating education for women, no organized body in the world has\nso clearly proven its own tyrannous ignorance as has the priesthood,\nand no body has shown itself so fully the enemy of mankind. Church\nteaching and centuries of repression acting through the laws of\nheredity have lessened woman\u2019s physical size, depressed her mental\naction, subjugated her spirit, and crushed her belief in her right to\nherself and the proper training of her own children. The church, in\nits opposition to woman\u2019s education through the ages, has literally\nkilled off the inhabitants of the world with much greater rapidity\nthan war, pestilence, or famine; more than one-half the children born\ninto the world have soon died because of the tyranny and ignorance\nof the priesthood.[34] The potential physical energy of mankind thus\ndestroyed can in a measure be estimated, but no one can fathom the\ninfinitely greater loss of mental and moral force brought about through\ncondemnation of knowledge to woman; only by induction can it even be\nsurmised. Lecky points out the loss to the world because so many of\nits purest characters donned the garb of monk or nun. That injury was\nimmediately perceptible, but in the denial of education and freedom to\nwoman more than ninety per cent of the moral and physical energy of the\nworld has literally been suffocated, and owing to ignorance and lack of\nindependent thought this loss is as yet scarcely recognized. So dense\nthe pall of ignorance still overshadowing the world that even woman\nherself does not yet conjecture the injury that has been done her, or\nof what she and her children have been deprived. Nor has the world\nyet roused to a full consciousness of the mischief to mankind that\nhas been perpetrated through the falsehood and ignorant presumption\nof those claiming control over its dearest rights and interests.\nResistance to the wrong thus done the world has been less possible\nbecause perpetrated in the name of God and religion. It has caused tens\nof thousands of women to doubt their equality of right with man in\neducation, to disbelieve they possess the same authority to interpret\nthe Bible or present its doctrines as man; neither, having been\ndeprived of education, do they believe themselves to be man\u2019s political\nequal, or that they possess equal rights with him in the household.\nThis degradation of woman\u2019s moral nature is the most direful result of\nthe teaching of the church in regard to her. A loss of faith in one\u2019s\nown self, disbelief in one\u2019s own right to the fullest cultivation of\none\u2019s own powers, proceeds from a debasement of the moral sentiments.\nSelf-reliance, self-respect, self-confidence, are acquired through\nthat cultivation of the intellectual faculties which has been denied\nto woman. Rev. Dr. Charles Little, of the Syracuse University, says:\n\u201cIn the report of a sermon of a distinguished theologian which appeared\nnot long ago, this striking passage occurred: If I were to choose\nbetween Christianity as a life and Christianity as a dogma, I would\nchoose Christianity as a dogma.\u201d Judging from its treatment of woman\nand the many recent trials for heresy, dogma rather than life is the\ngeneral spirit of the churches everywhere. It is dogma that has wrecked\ntrue religion; it is dogma that has crushed humanity; it is dogma that\nhas created two codes of morals; that has inculcated the doctrine\nof original sin; that has degraded womanhood; that has represented\ndivinity as possessing every evil attribute.\n\nFrom all these incontrovertible facts in church and state, we see that\nboth religion and government are essentially masculine in their present\nforms and development. All the evils that have resulted from dignifying\none sex and degrading the other may be traced to one central error, a\nbelief in a trinity of masculine gods, in one from which the feminine\nelement is wholly eliminated; and yet in the scriptural account of the\nsimultaneous creation of man and woman, the text plainly recognizes\nthe feminine as well as the masculine element in the Godhead, and\ndeclares the equality of the sexes in goodness, wisdom and power.\nGenesis i, 26-27.\n\n    And God said, Let us make man in our own image, after our\n    likeness, and so God created man in his own image; in the\n    image of God created He him, male and female created He them,\n    and gave them dominion over the fish of the sea and over the\n    fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon\n    the earth.\n\nIn nothing has the ignorance and weakness of the church been more\nfully shown than in its controversies in regard to the creation. From\ntime of the \u201cFathers\u201d to the present hour, despite its assertion and\nits dogmas, the church has ever been engaged in discussions upon the\nGarden of Eden, the serpent, woman, man, and God as connected in one\ninseparable relation. Amid all the evils attributed to woman, her loss\nof Paradise, introduction of sin into the world and the consequent\ndegradation of mankind, yet Eve, and through her, all women have found\noccasional defenders. A book printed in Amsterdam, 1700, in a series of\neleven reasons, threw the greater culpability upon Adam, saying:\n\n    First: The serpent tempted her before she thought of the tree\n    of knowledge of good and evil, and suffered herself to be\n    persuaded that not well understood his meaning.\n\n    Second: That believing that God had not given such prohibition\n    she eat the fruit.\n\n    Third: Sinning through ignorance she committed a less heinous\n    crime than Adam.\n\n    Fourth: That Eve did not necessarily mean the penalty of\n    eternal death, for God\u2019s decree only imported that man should\n    die if he sinned against his conscience.\n\n    Fifth: That God might have inflicted death on Eve without\n    injustice, yet he resolved, so great is his mercy toward\n    his works, to let her live, in (that) she had not sinned\n    maliciously.\n\n    Sixth: That being exempted from the punishment contained in\n    God\u2019s decree, she might retain all the prerogatives of her sex\n    except those that were not incidental with the infirmities to\n    which God condemned her.\n\n    Seventh: That she retained in particulars the prerogative of\n    bringing forth children who had a right to eternal happiness\n    on condition of obeying the new Adam.\n\n    Eighth: That as mankind was to proceed from Adam and Eve,\n    Adam was preserved alive only because his preservation was\n    necessary for the procreation of children.\n\n    Ninth: That it was by accident therefore, that the sentence of\n    death was not executed on him, but that otherwise he was more\n    (justly) punished than his wife.\n\n    Tenth: That she was not driven out from Paradise as he was,\n    but was only obliged to leave it to find out Adam in the\n    earth; and that it was with full privilege of returning\n    thither again.\n\n    Eleventh: That the children of Adam and Eve were subject\n    to eternal damnation, not as proceeding from Eve, but as\n    proceeding from Adam.\n\nIn 1580, but three hundred years since, an inquiry set on foot as to\nthe language of Paradise, resulted in the statement that God spoke\nDanish; Adam, Swedish; and the serpent, French. Eve doubtless was\nconceded to have spoken all three languages, as she conversed with\nGod, with Adam, and with the serpent. Hieronymus, a Father of the\nChurch, credited Eve with possessing a much finer constitution than\nAdam, and in that respect as superior to him.[35] Thus, during the\nages, the church through its \u201cFathers\u201d and its priests has devoted\nitself to a discussion of the most trivial questions concerning woman,\nas well as to the formation of most oppressive canons against her,\nand although as shown she has found an occasional defender, and even\nclaimants for her superiority upon certain points, yet such discussions\nhave had no effect upon the general view in which the church has\npresented her, as one accursed of God and man.\n\n\n\n\n_Chapter Ten_\n\n+Past, Present, Future+\n\n\nThe most important struggle in the history of the church is that of\nwoman for liberty of thought and the right to give that thought to the\nworld. As a spiritual force the church appealed to barbaric conception\nwhen it declared woman to have been made for man, first in sin and\ncommanded to be under obedience. Holding as its chief tenet a belief\nin the inherent wickedness of woman, the originator of sin, as its\nsequence the sacrifice of a God becoming necessary, the church has\ntreated her as alone under a \u201ccurse\u201d for whose enforcement it declared\nitself the divine instrument. Woman\u2019s degradation under it dating back\nto its earliest history, while the nineteenth century still shows\nreligious despotism to have its stronghold in the theory of woman\u2019s\ninferiority to man. The church has ever invoked the \u201cold covenant\u201d as\nauthority, while it also asserts this covenant was done away with at\nthe advent of the new dispensation. Paul, whose character as persecutor\nwas not changed when he veered from Judaism to Christianity, gave to\nthe church a lever long enough to reach down through eighteen centuries\nin opposition to woman\u2019s equality with man. Through this lengthy\nperiod, his teaching has united the christian world in opposition to\nher right of private judgment and personal freedom.\n\nEach great division of christianity alike proclaims the supreme\nsinfulness of woman in working for the elevation of her sex. In this\nwork she has been left outside of religious sympathy, outside of\npolitical protection, yet in the interest of justice she claims the\nright to tear down the barriers of advancing civilization and to rend\nasunder all beliefs that men hold most sacred. Freedom for woman\nunderlies all the great questions of the age. She must no longer be\nthe scapegoat of humanity upon whose devoted head the sins of all\npeople are made to rest. Woman\u2019s increasing freedom within the last\nhundred years is not due to the church, but to the printing-press, to\neducation, to free-thought and other forms of advancing civilization.\nThe fashions of the christian world have changed but not its innermost\nbelief. The power of the pulpit, built up by a claim of divine\nauthority, with the priest as an immediate representative of God,\nhas been reacting upon the priesthood itself, and now while vainly\nstruggling for light this order finds itself bound by chains of its\nown creating. Today the priesthood is hampered by creeds and dogmas\ncenturies old, yet so fully outside of practical life that the church\nhas become the great materialistic force of the century; its ideas of\na God, its teachings of a future life all falling within the realm of\nthe physical senses; the incorporeal and spiritual are lost in the\ngrossest forms of matter.[1] Although a body professing to inculcate\npure spiritual truths, the church teaches the grossest form of\nmaterialism. It asserts principles contradictory to natural laws; it\npresents chaos as the normal condition of the infinite; it bids people\nlive under faith outside of evidence, and in thus doing is guilty of\nimmeasurable evils to mankind. A bark without compass, it steers upon a\nsea of night no star illumining the darkness; the control and guidance\nby humanity of the psychic part of being, generally spoken of as\n\u201csupernatural,\u201d although the truest to nature, has become nearly lost\nthrough the materialization of spiritual truth by the church, the worst\nform of idolatry. Christianity was a stern reality to the men of the\nearly and middle ages, who believing themselves to have been created\nnearer to God than woman also believed themselves to have lost earthly\nimmortality through her. Permeated with this idea, it is not strange\nthat men through many hundred years taught that woman was especially\nunder control of the Evil One. The devil was an objective form to the\nclergy and people alike. Nor under such belief, is it strange that\npriests should warn their flocks from the pulpit against the wiles of\nwoman, thus degrading her self-respect and teaching men to hold her\nin that contempt whose influence is felt today. The result of this\nteaching has been deplorable to humanity; men equally with women having\nsunk under this degradation of one-half of the race.\n\nThe most stupendous system of organized robbery known has been that\nof the church towards woman, a robbery that has not only taken her\nself-respect but all rights of person; the fruits of her own industry;\nher opportunities of education; the exercise of her own judgment,\nher own conscience, her own will. The unfortunate peculiarity of the\nhistory of man, according to Buckle, is that although its separate\nparts have been examined with considerable ability, hardly any one\nhas attempted to outline them into a whole and ascertain the way they\nare connected with each other. While this statement is virtually true\nas regards the general history of mankind, it is most particularly\nso in reference to the position of woman in its bearings upon race\ndevelopment. A thorough investigation of her connection with our\npresent form of civilization, or even with that of the past, as\ncompared with each other, or as influencing the whole, has never yet\nbeen authoritatively undertaken. This failure has not been so largely\ndue to willful neglect as to incapacity upon the part of man to judge\ntruly of this relation. Woman herself must judge of woman. The most\nremote feminine personality is not less incomprehensible to man than\nthe woman of today; he now as little understands the finer qualities\nof her soul or her high intuitive reasoning faculties as in the past.\nReason is divided into two parts, theoretical and practical; the former\nappertains to man; the latter, composed of those intuitive faculties\nwhich do not need a long process of ratiocination for their work,\ninhere in woman. Although the course of history has given many glimpses\nof her superiority, and the past few decades have shown in every land\na new awakening of woman to a recognition of her own powers, man as\nman is still as obtuse as of yore. He is yet under the darkness of\nthe Patriarchate, failing to recognize woman as a component part of\nhumanity, whose power of development and influence upon civilization\nare at least the equal of his own. He yet fails to see in her a factor\nof life whose influence for good or for evil has ever been in direct\nratio with her freedom. He does not yet discern her equal right with\nhimself to impress her own opinions upon the world. He still interprets\ngovernments and religions as requiring from her an unquestioning\nobedience to laws she has no share in making, and that place her as\nan inferior in every relation of life. Ralph Waldo Emerson with keen\ninsight into the fallibility of law-makers, declared that \u201cgood men\nmust not obey the laws too well.\u201d Woman is showing her innate wisdom\nin daring to question the infallibility of man, his laws, and his\ninterpretation of her place in creation. She is not obeying \u201ctoo\nwell,\u201d and yet man fails to analyze her motives in this defection.\nThe church and the state have long done man\u2019s thinking for him, the\nideas of the few, whose aim is power, have been impressed upon the\nmany; individualism is still characterized as the essence of evil;\nself-thought, self-control as heretical. The state condemns both as a\ncrime against itself, the church as a sin against heaven. Both church\nand state claiming to be of divine origin have assumed divine right of\nman over woman; while church and state have thought for man, man has\nassumed the right to think for woman.[2]\n\nAs man under fear of eternal damnation surrendered to the irresponsible\npower of church and state, so woman yielded to that power which\nclosed every external avenue of knowledge to her under pretext of her\nsinfulness. One-tenth of the human race, within the period covered\nby modern civilization, has compelled the other nine-tenths to think\ntheir thoughts and live lives according to their commands. This has\nbeen the chief effort of governments and religion. The most formidable\ngeneral evil under which woman has suffered during the Christian ages\nhas been that of protection; a non-recognition of her ability to care\nfor herself, rendering watchful guardianship over her a recognized part\nof man\u2019s law; not alone to prevent her sinking into depths of vice\nbut to also prevent her entire subversion of government and religion.\nBuckle and other writers have recognized the protective spirit as\nthe greatest enemy to civilization, its influence causing the few\nto establish themselves as guardians of the many in all affairs of\nlife. The American Revolution in proclaiming the rights of humanity\nstruck a blow at the protective system. This system has ever based\nitself upon a declaration of the supreme rights of a God, and certain\nrights as pertaining to certain classes of men by virtue of authority\nfrom that God. The defense of such authority has ever been the chief\nbusiness of church and state, and thus religions and governments have\nneither found time nor inclination to uphold the rights of humanity.\nUnder the christian system, woman as the most rebellious against\nGod in having eaten a forbidden fruit, has found herself condemned\nthrough the centuries to untold oppression in order that the rights\nof God might be maintained. Yet while constantly teaching that woman\nbrought sin into the world, the church ever forgets its own corollary;\nthat if she brought sin she also brought God into the world, thus\nthrowing ineffable splendor over mankind. The whole theory regarding\nwoman, under christianity, has been based upon the conception that\nshe had no right to live for herself alone. Her duty to others has\ncontinuously been placed before her and her training has ever been that\nof self-sacrifice. Taught from the pulpit and legislative halls that\nshe was created for another, that her position must always be secondary\neven to her children, her right to life, has been admitted only in so\nfar as its reacting effect upon another could be predicated. That she\nwas first created for herself, as an independent being to whom all\nthe opportunities of the world should be open because of herself, has\nnot entered the thought of the church; has not yet become one of the\nconceptions of law; is not yet the foundation of the family.\n\nBut woman is learning for herself that not self-sacrifice, but\nself-development, is her first duty in life; and this, not primarily\nfor the sake of others but that she may become fully herself; a\nperfectly rounded being from every point of view; her duty to others\nbeing a secondary consideration arising from those relations in life\nwhere she finds herself placed at birth, or those which later she\nvoluntarily assumes. But these duties are not different in point of\nobligation, no more imperative upon her, than are similar duties upon\nman. The political doctrine of the sovereignty of the individual,\nalthough but partially recognized even in the United States, has\nbeen most efficacious in destroying that protective spirit which has\nso greatly interfered with the progress of humanity. This spirit\nyet retains its greatest influence in the family, where it places a\nboundary between husband and wife. Of all circumstances biasing the\njudgment and restricting the sympathies, none have shown themselves\nmore powerful than physical differences, whether of race, color or\nsex. When those differences are not alone believed to be a mark of\ninferiority, but to have been especially created for the pleasure and\npeculiar service of another, the elements of irresponsible tyranny\nupon one side, and irremediable slavery upon the other, are already\norganized. If in addition, that inferior is regarded as under an\nespecial curse for extraordinary sin, as the church has ever inculcated\nin reference to women; and when as in the case of woman and man an\nentire separation of interests, hopes, feelings and passions is\nimpossible, we have reached the extreme of injustice and misery under\nthe protective system. Consequently no other form of \u201cprotection\u201d\nhas possessed so many elements of absolute injustice as that of man\nover woman. Swedenborg taught, and experience declares, that morality\ncannot exist except under conditions of freedom. Hence we find much\nthat has been called morality is the effect of dependence and lessened\nself-respect, and has really been immorality and degradation. While\nin every age, the virtues of self-sacrifice have been pointed to as\nevidence of the highest morality, we find those women in whom it has\nbeen most apparent, have been those doing least justice where justice\nfirst belongs\u2014to themselves. Justice as the foundation of the highest\nlaw, is a primal requirement of the individual to the self. It is\nnone the less a serious impeachment of the religious-moral idea, that\nthe doctrine of protection and the duty of woman\u2019s self-sacrifice,\nwere taught under the theory of divine authority. No faith was more\nprofound, none could be more logical if resting on a true foundation,\nthan the church theory regarding woman. Life assumed a sterner reality\nto men who believed themselves in point of purity and priority nearer\ntheir Creator than woman. Thereafter, she was to be protected from\nherself, the church and man cheerfully assuming this duty. Under the\nprotective spirit it is not so very long since men sold themselves and\ntheir families to some other man in power, either lay or religious,\nunder promise of protection, binding themselves to obey the mandates\nof such lord evermore. The church protected and directed the thought\nof the world. To think for one\u2019s self is not even now the tendency\nof mankind; the few who dare, do so at great peril. It will require\nanother hundred years of personal and political freedom for men to\nappreciate what liberty really is\u2014for them to possess confidence in\ntheir own judgment upon religious questions\u2014for the man of humble\nstation to fully believe in himself and in his own opinions when\nopposed to the authority of church or state.\n\nWomen of the present century whose struggle for equal opportunity of\neducation with men; for a chance to enter the liberal professions; for\na fair share of the world of work; for equal pay in that work; for all\ndemands of equality which make the present a noted age in the world\u2019s\nhistory, have met their greatest opposition from this protective\nspirit. No less than during the darkest period of its history does\nthe church still maintain the theory that education[3] and public\nlife are not fitting for woman\u2014indelicate for herself and injurious\nto the community. During the Christian ages, the church has not alone\nshown cruelty and contempt for woman, but has exhibited an impious and\ninsolent disregard of her most common rights of humanity. It has robbed\nher of responsibility, putting man in place of God. It has forbidden\nher the offices of the church and at times an entrance within its\ndoors. It has denied her independent thought, declaring her a secondary\ncreation for man\u2019s use to whom alone it has made her responsible.\nIt has anathematized her sex, teaching her to feel shame for the\nvery fact of her being. It has not been content with proclaiming a\ncurse upon her creative attributes, but has thrust the sorrows and\nexpiations of man\u2019s \u201ccurse\u201d upon her, and in doing these things the\nchurch has wrought her own ruin. A religious revolution of the most\nradical kind, has even now assumed such proportions as to nearly\ndestroy the basic creeds of various sects, and undermine the whole\nfabric of christendom. It everywhere exists although neither the world\nnor the church seem to realize the magnitude of its proportions. As a\nlegitimate result of two opposing forces, a crisis in the life of the\nchurch is at hand; nay, even upon it. While we see it making organized\neffort for extension of power and entire control of the state, we also\nfind great increase of radical thought, and development of individual\nconscience and individual judgment. With thought no longer bound by\nfear of everlasting punishment, mankind will cease to believe unproved\nassertions, simply because made by a class of men under assumed\nauthority from God. Reason will be used, mankind will seek for truth\ncome whence it may, lead where it will, and with our own Lucretia Mott,\nwill accept \u201ctruth for authority and not authority for truth.\u201d\n\nIn knocking at the door of political rights, woman is severing the\nlast link between church and state; the church must lose that power it\nhas wielded with changing force since the days of Constantine, ever\nto the injury of freedom and the world. The immeasurable injustice of\nwoman, and her sufferings under christianity, her intellectual, moral\nand spiritual servitude, will never be understood until life with its\nsorrows shall be opened to our vision in a sphere more defined than the\npresent one. The superstitions of the church, the miseries of woman,\nher woes, tortures, burnings, rackings and all the brutalities she\nhas endured in the church, the state, the family, under the sanction\nof christianity, would be incredible had we not the most undeniable\nevidence of their existence, not alone in the past but as shown by\nthe teachings, laws and customs of the present time.[4] \u201cShe has\nsuffered under a theology which extended its rule not only to her\ncivil and political relations, but to her most significant domestic\nand personal concerns, regulating the commerce of husband and wife,\nof parent and child, of master and servant, even prescribing her diet\nand dress, her education and her industries.\u201d Edmund Noble speaks in\nlike manner of the ancient Russians under the tyrannical provisions\nof the Greek church, saying, \u201cclearly, such a system of theocratic\nsupervision and direction as this, is compatible only with the lowest\npossible spiritual condition of the subject, or the lowest possible\nconception of God.\u201d Possessing no proof of its existence, the church\nhas ever fostered unintelligent belief. To doubt her \u201cunverified\u201d\nassertion has even been declared an unpardonable sin. The supreme\neffort of the church, being maintenance of power, it is but recently\nthat woman has been allowed to read history for herself, or having read\nit, dared to draw her own conclusion from its premises. Ignorance\nand falsehood created a sentiment in accord with themselves, crushing\nall her aspirations. In the family, man still decides the rights and\nduties of the wife, as of old. As legislator and judge, he still makes\nand executes class laws. In the church, he yet arrogates to himself\nthe interpretation of the bible; still claims to be an exponent of\nthe Divine will, that grandest lesson of the reformation, the right\nof private interpretation of the scriptures, not yet having been\nconceded to woman. The premises upon which the church is based being\nradically false, and this, most especially in everything related to\nwoman. Trained from infancy by the church to a belief in woman\u2019s\ninferiority and incapacity for self-government, men of the highest\nstation have not hesitated to organize societies in opposition to her\njust demands. As early as 1875, an anti-woman\u2019s franchise association\nwas formed in London, under the name of \u201cAssociation for Protecting the\nFranchise from the Encroachment of Women;\u201d Hon. Mr. Bouverie, a leading\nopponent of Woman Suffrage in the House of Commons, being its chairman.\nAmong the promoters of the movement were Sir Henry James, formerly\nattorney-general (for the Crown), Hon. Mr. Claflin and Mr. Leathers,\ncorrespondent of the _New York Tribune_.\n\nSince this period, a number of women distinguished as \u201cthe wives of\u201d\nhave petitioned legislative bodies for protection against freedom for\nthemselves, and all others of their sex, in asking that legislatures\nshall not recognize woman\u2019s self-governing right. The deepest depth of\ndegradation is reached when the slave not only declares against his\nown freedom, but strives to tighten the bonds of fellow slaves; and\nthe most cruel wrong resulting from such slavery is the destruction of\nself-respect in the enslaved, as shown by the course of these women\npetitioners. The protective theory reached its lowest depth for woman\nby an attack upon her already vested rights of the ballot, in the\nformer territory, now State of Washington, on the Pacific coast, in\ncase of Nevada M. Bloomer (a woman) against John Wood and others, to\nhave the women of that territory deprived of their already existing\nright of suffrage.[5] In line with the general opposition to the\nenfranchisement of woman, men of even the most liberal tendencies\ndeclare that her political freedom will be used to sustain the church,\napparently forgetting that man alone has placed the church in power\nand that man alone holds it in power. And proof of man\u2019s complicity\nis even greater than this. Despite what is said of the larger church\nmembership of women, the most noted modern evangelist, Moody, recently\ndeclared that he \u201cfound men tenfold, aye, an hundred-fold\u201d more\nreceptive of his preaching than women. While speaking in Farwell Hall,\nChicago, 1886, he said, \u201cFor fifteen years I have preached to women\nin the afternoon and very often as near as I could, have preached the\nsame sermon to men at night, and in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred\nhave had five times more result in preaching to men than to women.\u201d\nThis pseudo-argument, as to woman\u2019s susceptibility to church teaching,\nbrought up by the enemies of her freedom, possesses no more real value\nthan the pseudo-political argument sometimes presented in opposition\nto woman\u2019s admission into active politics; that is, her emotional\ntemperament. To one who has been present at four great presidential\nnominating conventions and several large state conventions, knowledge\nupon this point is practical. When one has seen a cordon of police\nenforced by the mayor upon the platform, protecting the officers of\nsuch convention, while its members, standing upon seats, stamped,\nshouted, gesticulated, threatened with revolvers, acting more like\nuncaged wild beasts than like men,[6] when one has witnessed the\nwildest enthusiasm at the mention of a name, the waving of flags,\nof hats, of handkerchiefs, the shaking of umbrellas, chairs, canes,\nwith violent stamping, amid a hubbub of indistinguishable voices, all\nshouting; screaming so loud that people for blocks away are roused from\nslumber[7] in affright of a fire, or the approach of an ungovernable\nmob, such objections to woman\u2019s freedom as her \u201cemotions\u201d fall to their\nlowest value.\n\nIn Church and in State, man has exhibited the wildest passions, the\nmost ungovernable frenzy\u2014has shown himself less controlled by reason\nthan possible for woman under the most adverse circumstances. Judaism,\nand its offspring, Christianity, show the results of the Patriarchate\nin some of its most degenerate forms; industrial servitude, educational\nrestrictions, legal thraldom, political slavery, false religious\nteachings, are but a portion of the evils existing under its most\nenlightened forms, and equally with the more pronounced polygamy and\ninfanticide they show a total perversion of moral ideas. Woman dearly\npays for the rights she has secured. Labor opposes, in less pay for the\nsame work; literature, at first welcoming her only through the cook\nbook, next compelled her to conceal her sex under a male pseudonym,\nin order that her writings might be received with the same respect as\nthose of man; art has given her similar experiences, and while today\nadmitting her to the same advantage of study with man, yet compels her\nto pay twice the price for the same instructions.\n\nThe careful student of history will discover that christianity has\nbeen of very little value in advancing civilization, but has done a\ngreat deal toward retarding it.[8] \u201cCivilization, a recognition of the\nrights of others at every point of contact,\u201d has been carried forward\nby means of rebellion against church teaching and church authority. The\nexperience of science is familiar to all, even school children quoting\nGalileo and Dr. Faust. What are called reformations in religion, the\nwork of Huss, of Luther, of the Waldenses, the Huguenots, are equally\nfamiliar instances to the youngest student, of rebellion against the\nchurch. These and a myriad of others known to the historian, have all\nbeen brought about by refusal to accept the authority of the church as\nfinal. The Peasant War, in France, the struggles of Wat Tyler and of\nHampden in England, the French and the American revolutions looking\ntoward equality of rights; and a thousand minor forms of political\nprogress have all been opposed by the church as rebellions against its\nteachings, yet all have been marked steps in civilization. The church\nand civilization are antipodal; one means authority, the other freedom;\none means conservatism, the other progress; one means the rights of\nGod as interpreted by the priesthood, the other the rights of humanity\nas interpreted by humanity. Civilization advances by free-thought,\nfree speech, free men. The uprising of the women of all peoples in\nassertion of their common humanity with man, is exemplification of that\nfact recognized in the Declaration of Independence, that while patient\nendurance of wrongs to which persons are accustomed, always long borne\nrather than by change perhaps to meet evils they know not of, shows\nits absolutely certain ultimate effect, no matter how long delayed, in\nrebellion. A time comes in the history of souls, as of nations, when\nforbearance ceases to be a virtue, and self-respecting life is only\nto be retained through defiance of and rebellion against, existing\ncustoms. The soul must assert its own supremacy or die. It is not one\nwoman, or the women of one nation that have thus suddenly shown desire\nto rule themselves\u2014to act for themselves alone. A strange identity of\nthought pervades all parts of the world\u2014India, China, Japan, Russia\nand all of Europe, North and South America, the vast continents of the\nsouthern seas and the isles thereof, and even barbaric Africa, all\nevince proof of the wide psychic under-current which seething through\nwomen\u2019s souls, is overthrowing the civilizations built upon the force\nprinciples of the patriarchate, and will soon reinstate the reign of\ntruth and justice. During those long ages of priestly intolerance, of\ndomestic and governmental tyranny, in which woman seemed to accept\nthe authority of the priest as that of God, there still existed\na consciousness hardly perceptible to herself, that she was an\nindependent being to whom by virtue of her humanity all opportunities\nin life belonged. From century to century mothers transmitted this\nscarcely developed perception to daughters, until suddenly within the\npast fifty years, these dominant ideas woke to thought, and the women\nof all nations began to proclaim their same right to self-control as\nthat claimed by man.\n\nIt is impossible to write of the church without noticing its connection\nwith the great systems of the world, during its course of life. The\nhistory of christendom is the history of the myriad institutions which\nhave arisen through its teachings, or that have been sustained by its\napproval. The world has not grown wise under it, except with a wisdom\nthat is leading the purest humanitarian thought in a direction contrary\nto its footsteps. Slavery and prostitution, persecutions for heresy,\nthe inquisition with its six hundred modes of torture, the destruction\nof learning, the oppression of science, the systematized betrayal of\nconfiding innocence, the recognized and unrecognized polygamy of man,\nthe denial to woman of a right to herself, her thought, her wages, her\nchildren, to a share in the government which rules her; to an equal\npart in religious institutions, all these and a myriad more, are parts\nof what is known as christian civilization. Nor has the church ever\nbeen the leader in great reforms. During the anti-slavery conflict,\nthe American Church was known as \u201cthe bulwark of American slavery.\u201d\nIts course continues the same in every great contest with wrong.\nA memorial history of the American Episcopal church, an extensive\nwork in two volumes of seven hundred pages each, published within\nthe past few years, devotes but seven pages to \u201cthe Attitude of the\nChurch during the Civil War,\u201d and the general refusal of the church\nto take part in the great struggle for national life, is referred to\nwith complacent satisfaction. Penitentiaries and prisons, asylums and\nreformatories, all institutions of a repressive character which the\nchurch prides herself as having built up, are no less evil than the\nconvents, monasteries and religious orders belonging to it. They have\nall risen through perversion of nature. Crimes and criminals are built\nup and born because of the great wrong first done to mothers; they\nare the offspring of church and state. Science now declares crime to\nbe a disease, but it has not yet discovered the primal cause of this\ndisease. It is an inheritance from centuries of legalized crime against\nwoman, of which the church in its teachings is prime factor.\n\nWoman will gain nothing by a compromising attitude toward the church,\nby attempt to excuse its great wrong toward her sex, or by palliation\nof its motives. On the contrary, a stern reference to facts, keeping\nthe face of the world turned toward its past teachings, its present\nattitude, is her duty. Wrongs of omission equal in magnitude those of\ncommission.\n\nAdvance for woman is too well established, woman has had too much\nexperience, has borne too much ridicule, misrepresentation and abuse\nto now hesitate in an attack upon the stronghold of her oppression\u2014the\nchurch. She possesses too full knowledge of its subtle touch upon\ncivil law to dare leave it alone; it has become one of woman\u2019s first\nduties, one of her greatest responsibilities, to call public attention\nto its false doctrines and false teachings in regard to the origin,\ncondition and subjection of woman. She has engaged in too many battles,\nweathered too many storms to longer hesitate in exposure of its\nstupendous crimes toward one-half of humanity. Let those who fear,\nhide themselves, if they will, until the storm is past. Let those who\ndare, defiantly rejoice that they are called upon to bear still more,\nin order that woman may be free. A brighter day is to come for the\nworld, a day when the intuitions of woman\u2019s soul shall be accepted as\npart of humanity\u2019s spiritual wealth; when force shall step backward,\nand love, in reality, rule the teachings of religion; and may woman\nbe strong in the ability and courage necessary to bring about this\nmillennial time. The world is full of signs of the near approach of\nthis period; as never before is there an arousing sense of something\ndeeper, holier in religion than the christian church has given. The\nworld has seemingly awaited the advent of heroic souls who once again\nshould dare all things for the truth. The woman who possesses love for\nher sex, for the world, for truth, justice and right, will not hesitate\nto place herself upon record as opposed to falsehood, no matter under\nwhat guise of age or holiness it appears. A generation has passed\nsince the great struggle began, but not until within ten years has\nwoman dared attack upon the veriest stronghold of her oppression, the\nChurch. The state, agent and slave of the church, has so long united\nwith it in suppression of woman\u2019s intelligence, has so long preached\nof power to man alone, that it has created an inherited tendency, an\ninborn line of thought toward repression. Bent in this line before\nhis birth, man still unwittingly thinks of woman as not quite his\nequal, and it requires a new creation of mind to change his thought. A\nsecond generation has arisen, in whom some slight inherited tendencies\ntoward recognition of a woman\u2019s right to herself are seen. In the next\ngeneration this line of inherited thought will have become stronger,\nboth Church and State more fully recognizing woman\u2019s inherent right to\nshare in all the opportunities of life; but at what cost to all who\nhave taken part in the great struggle.\n\nHas woman no wrongs to avenge upon the church? As I look backward\nthrough history I see the church everywhere stepping upon advancing\ncivilization, hurling woman from the plane of \u201cnatural rights\u201d where\nthe fact of her humanity had placed her, and through itself, and its\ncontrol over the state, in the doctrine of \u201crevealed rights\u201d everywhere\nteaching an inferiority of sex; a created subordination of woman to\nman; making her very existence a sin; holding her accountable to a\ndiverse code of morals from man; declaring her possessed of fewer\nrights in church and in state; her very entrance into heaven made\ndependent upon some man to come as mediator between her and the\nSaviour it has preached, thus crushing her personal, intellectual and\nspiritual freedom. Looking forward, I see evidence of a conflict more\nsevere than any yet fought by reformation or science; a conflict that\nwill shake the foundations of religious belief, tear into fragments\nand scatter to the winds the old dogmas upon which all forms of\nchristianity are based. It will not be the conflict of man with man\nupon rites and systems; it will not be the conflict of science upon\nchurch theories regarding creation and eternity; it will not be the\nlight of biology illuminating the hypothesis of the resurrection of the\nbody; but it will be the rebellion of one half of the church against\nthose theological dogmas upon which the very existence of the church\nis based. In no other country has the conflict between natural and\nrevealed rights been as pronounced as in the United States; and in this\ncountry where the conflict first began, we shall see its full and final\ndevelopment. During the ages, no rebellion has been of like importance\nwith that of Woman against the tyranny of Church and State; none has\nhad its far reaching effects. We note its beginning; its progress will\noverthrow every existing form of these institutions; its end will be a\nregenerated world.\n\n\n\n\nNotes\n\nCHAPTER ONE\n\n\n[1] The first state of primitive man must have been the mere\naggregation. The right of the mother was therefore most natural; upon\nthe relationship of mother and child the remotest conception of the\nfamily was based.\u2014_Wilkin_, p. 869.\n\n[2] Where a god and goddess are worshiped together they are not husband\nand wife, but mother and son. Neither does the god take pre-eminence,\nbut the mother or goddess. This condition dates from the earliest days\nof society, when marriage in our sense of the word was unknown, and\nwhen kinship and inheritance were in the female line. The Babylonian\nIshtur of the Izdobar legend is a deity of this type.\u2014_W. Robertson\nSmith_: _Kinship in Ancient Arabia_.\n\n[3] Dr. Th. Achelis.\u2014_Article on Ethnology_: (_The Open Court_).\n\n[4] In a country where she is the head of the family, where she decides\nthe descent and inheritance of her children, both in regard to property\nand place in society in such a community, she certainly cannot be the\nservant of her husband, but at least must be his equal if not in many\nrespects his superior.\u2014_Wilkin_.\n\n[5] _Motherright._\n\n[6] Lubbuck.\u2014_Pre-Historic Times and Origin of Civilization_. _Wilkin_.\n\n[7] Among many people the father at birth of a child, especially a son,\nloses his name and takes the one his child gets. Taylor\u2014_Primitive\nCulture_. Also see _Wilkin_.\n\n[8] \u201cThus we see that woman\u2019s liberty did not begin at the upper,\nbut at the lower end of civilization. Woman in those remote times,\nwas endowed with and enjoyed rights that are denied to her but too\ncompletely in the higher phase of civilization. This subject has a very\nimportant aspect, i.e. the position of woman to man, the place she\nholds in society, her condition in regard to her private and public\n(political) rights.\u201d\n\n[9] \u201cAmong the monogamous classic nations of antiquity, the maternal\ndeity was worshiped with religious ceremonies.\u201d\n\n[10] We find the mother\u2019s right exclusively together with a\nwell-established monogamy.\u2014_Bachofen_.\n\n[11] _Documentary History of New York_.\n\n[12] Alexander: _History of Women_.\n\n[13] _History of the United States, Vol. I._\n\n[14] _Cushing_.\n\n[15] \u201cWhat is most to be considered in this respect are the political\nrights which women in time of the Matriarchate shared with the men.\nThey had indeed the right to vote in public assemblies still exercised\nnot very long ago among the Basques in the Spanish provinces.\u201d\n\n[16] That the Veddas are the aborigines of Ceylon may be assumed from\nthe fact that the highly civilized Singalese admit them to be of noble\nrank. _Pre-Historic Times_.\u2014Lubbuck.\n\n[17] \u201cWe find in some instances this independence of the maiden in\nregard to disposing of her hand, or selecting a husband as a memento\nof the time of the Matriarchate.... The most remarkable instance of\nthe self-disposition of woman we find among the ancient Arabs and the\nHindoos; among the latter the virgin was permitted to select her own\nhusband if her father did not give her in marriage within three years\nafter her maturity.\u201d\n\n[18] _Account of the Religion, Manners, etc., of the People of Malabar,\netc._, translated by Mr. Phillips, 1718.\n\n[19] Among the illustrative types of interior realities and the\nelementary geometric forms, point, direct line and deflected line,\nthe last of which is a true arc produces the circle when carried to\nits ultimate, this circle representing the triune order of movement;\nthe point in the line, the line in the curve, and the curve in the\ncircle\u2014_The Path_.\n\n[20] The phallus and lingum (or lingum and yoni), the point within the\ncircle or diameter within the circle.\u2014_Volney\u2019s Ruins_.\n\n[21] _Chips from a German Work-Shop_.\u2014Max Muller.\n\n[22] All mythology has pertinently been characterized as ill-remembered\nhistory.\n\n[23] In the Rig-Veda, a work not committed to writing until after that\nmovement of the Aryans, which resulted in the establishment of Persia\nand India ... there is nothing more striking than the status of woman\nat that early age. Then the departed mothers were served as faithfully\nby the younger members of the family as departed fathers. The mother\nquite as often, if not more frequently than the father conducted the\nservices of the dead ancestry, which took place three times a day,\noften consisting of improvised poetry.\u2014_Elizabeth Peabody on the\nAryans_.\n\n[24] There are but few of the United States in which the authority of\nthe father to bind out a living child or to will away an unborn one, is\nnot recognized as valid without the mother\u2019s consent.\n\n[25] Ward, the American who rendered such service to the Chinese\nEmperor, has been deified. The Emperor, in a recent edict, has placed\nhim among the major gods of China, commanding shrines to be built and\nworship to be paid to the memory of this American. The people are\nworshiping him along with the most ancient and powerful deities of\ntheir religion as a great deliverer from war and famine\u2014as a powerful\ngod in the form of man. In every household, school and temple, his name\nwill be thus commemorated.\u2014_Newspaper Report_.\n\n[26] _Diodorus Siculus_.\n\n[27] \u201cI am nature, the parent of all things, the sovereign of the\nelements, the primary progeny of time, the most exalted of the deities,\nthe first of the heavenly gods and goddesses, the queen of the shades,\nthe uniform countenances who dispose with my rod the innumerable lights\nof heaven.\u201d\n\n[28] The salubrious breezes of the sea, and the mournful silence of the\ndead whose single deity the whole world venerates in _many forms_ with\nvarious rites and many names. The Egyptians, skilled in ancient lore,\nworship me with proper ceremonies and call me by my true name\u2014Queen\nIsis.\n\n[29] Leeks, garlic, onions and beans.\n\n[30] All the ancient nations appear to have had an ark or archa, in\nwhich to conceal something sacred.\u2014Godfrey Higgins, _Anacalypsis I_,\n347.\n\n[31] The Sacred Song of Moses and Miriam was an early part of Jewish\nliterature; the idea was borrowed like the ark from the religion of\nIsis.\n\n[32] The throne of this brilliant queen who reigned 1600 years B.C.\nhas recently been deposited in the British Museum. Her portrait, also\nbrought to light, shows Caucasian features with a dimpled chin.\n\n[33] Bryant was an English writer of the last century, a graduate of\nCambridge who looked into many abstruse questions relating to ancient\nhistory. In 1796, eight years before his death, he published \u201c_A\nDissertation Concerning the War of Troy_.\u201d\n\n[34] That Homer came into Egypt, amongst other arguments they endeavor\nto prove it especially by the potion Helen gave Telemachus\u2014in the\nstory of Menelaus\u2014to cause him to forget all his sorrows past, for the\npoet seems to have made an exact experiment of the potion Nepenthes,\nwhich he says Helen received from Polymnestes, the wife of Thonus, and\nbrought it from Thebes in Egypt, and indeed in that city, even at this\nday, the women use this medicine with good success, and they say that\nin ancient times the medicine for the cure of anger and sorrow was\nonly to be found among the Diospolitans, Thebes and Diospolis being\naffirmed by them to be one and the same city.\u2014_Diodorus Siculus_, Vol.\nI, Chap. VII.\n\n[35] The remaining three were Cyrus, Nebuchadnezzar and Alexander.\nCyrus met defeat and death at the hands of Tomyris, queen of the\nScythians, who caused him to be crucified, a punishment deemed so\nignominious by the Romans that it was not inflicted upon the most\ncriminal of their citizens. Because of his barbarity, Tomyris caused\nthe head of Cyrus to be plunged into a sack of blood \u201cthat he might\ndrink his fill.\u201d\n\n[36] Very few mummies of children have been found.\u2014Wilkinson, _Ancient\nEgyptians_.\n\n[37] In relation to women the laws were very severe; for one that\ncommitted a rape upon a free woman was condemned to have his privy\nmember cut off; for they judged that the three most heinous offenses\nwere included in that one vile act, that is wrong, defilement and\nbastardy.\u2014_Diodorus_, Vol. I, Chap. VII.\n\n[38] _Ancient Rome in the Light of Recent Discoveries._ Chapter on the\nVestals.\u2014Lanciani.\n\n[39] _The Anacalypsis_ II, 241.\n\n[40] According to Commissioner of Education, Chang Lai Sin, Chinese\nwomen can read and write, and when a husband wishes to do anything he\nconsults with his wife, and when the son comes home, although he may\nbe prime minister, he shows his respect to his mother by bending his\nknee. \u201cI claim that the Chinese institutions and system of education,\nboth with regard to men and women, are far superior to those of any of\nthe neighboring nations for a great many centuries, and that it is only\nwithin this century that China, after having been defeated by so many\nreverses in her arms, has turned to a foreign country\u2014to the United\nStates\u2014for example and instruction.\u201d\n\n[41] The Shakers hold that the revelation of God is progressive. That\nin the first or antediluvian period of human nature God was known only\nas a Great Spirit; that in the second or Jewish period he was revealed\nas the Jehovah. He, she or a dual being, male or female, the \u201cI am that\nI am;\u201d that Jesus in the third cycle made God known as a father; and\nthat in the last cycle commencing with 1770, A.D., \u201cGod is revealed in\nthe character of Mother, an eternal Mother, the bearing spirit of all\nthe creation of God.\u201d\u2014_W. A. Parcelle._\n\n[42] In China the family acting through its natural representative is\nthe political unit. This representative may be a woman. The only body\nin China that may be said to correspond with our law-making assemblies\nis the Academy of Science and Letters of Pekin, and women are not\nexcluded from that learned conclave. _La Cit\u00e9 Chinoise._\u2014G. Eugene\nSimon.\n\n[43] _Art Letters_, p. 322.\u2014Bachofen.\n\n[44] _Journal of Jurisprudence_, Vol. XVI, Edinburgh, 1872.\n\n[45] The divine element, according to the idea of the ancient world,\nwas composed of two sexes. There were _dei femma_, and hence temples\nsacred to goddesses; holy sanctuaries where were celebrated mysteries\nin which men could not be permitted to participate. The worship of\ngoddesses necessitated priestesses, so that women exercised the\nsacerdotal office in the ancient world. The wives of the Roman Consuls\neven offered public sacrifices at certain festivals. The more property\nthe wife had, the more rights she had.\u2014_M. Derraimes._\n\n[46] The superiority of woman\u2019s condition in Europe and America is\ngenerally attributed to Christianity. We are anxious to give some\ncredit to that influence, but it must not be forgotten that the nations\nof Northern Europe treated women with delicacy and devotion long\nbefore they were converted to the Christian faith. Long before the\nChristian era women were held in high estimation, and enjoyed as many\nprivileges as they generally have since the spread of Christianity.\nNichols.\u2014_Women of all Nations._\n\n[47] When I go back to the most remote periods of antiquity into which\nit is possible to penetrate, I find clear and positive evidence of\nseveral important facts: First, no animal food was eaten; no animals\nwere sacrificed. _Higgins._\u2014_Anacalypsis_ II, p. 147.\n\n[48] Observe that I.H.U. is Jod, male, father; \u201cHe\u201d is female, Binah,\nand U is male, Vau, Son.\u2014_Sepher Yetzirah._\n\n[49] _The Perfect Way._\u2014Kingsford.\n\n[50] I.A.H. according to the Kabbalists, is I. (Father) and A.H.\n(Mother); composed of I. the male, and H. the mother. Nork.\u2014_Bibl.\nMythol., I_, 164-65 (note to _Sod_ 166, 2, 354).\n\n[51] Nork says the \u201cWoman clothed with the sign of the Sun and the Moon\nis the bi-sexed or male-female deity; hence her name is Iah, composed\nof the masculine I and the feminine _Ah_. _Sod._\u2014Appendix 123.\n\n[52] _The Perfect Way_, p. 78.\n\n[53] That name of Deity, which occurring in the Old Testament is\ntranslated the Almighty, namely El Shaddai, signified the Breasted God,\nand is used when the mode of the divine nature implied is of a feminine\ncharacter. Kingsford.\u2014_The Perfect Way_, p. 68.\n\n[54] A chief signification of the word Babel among Orientals was \u201cGod\nthe Father.\u201d The Tower of Babel therefore signifies the Tower of God\nthe Father\u2014a remarkable indication of the confusion, not alone of\ntongues, but of religious ideas arising from man\u2019s attempt to worship\nthe father alone.\u2014_E. L. Mason._ Injustice to the sex reached its\nculmination in the enthronement of a personal God with a Son to share\nhis glory, but wifeless, motherless, daughterless.\u2014_Dr. William Henry\nChanning._\n\n[55] Those who have studied the ancient lore of Cabalistic books, know\nthat in the ineffable name Yod-he-vau (or Jehovah), the first letter\n_yod_ signifies the masculine, the second letter _hu_ or _ha_ the\nfeminine, while the last letter _van_ or _vaud_ is said by Cabalists to\nindicate the vital life which fills all the throbbing universe from the\nunion of eternal love with eternal wisdom. It is this ineffable holy\n(or whole) Mother and Father, which must be exalted and imaged forth in\nfamily and government with the woman-force more strongly emphasized,\nbefore even human society can be filled with that new creation with\nwhich the iridescent subtle mother-essence infuses and enwreathes all\nother realms of the pulsing universe. No man seems shaken at hearing\nof the fatherhood of Jehovah. Is motherhood less divine? Nothing but a\nmale-born theology evolved from the overheated fires of feeling would\nhave burned away all recognition of the fact that the presence of the\n\u201cEternal Womanly\u201d in Yod-he-vau\u2019s being is necessary to full-sphered\nperfection; none but those whose degraded estimate of woman has caused\nthem to desecrate her holy office of high priestess of life, will see\nanything more sacrilegious in a recognition of \u201cOur Mother in Heaven,\u201d\nand in offering her the prayer \u201challowed be thy name, they will be done\non earth as it is in heaven,\u201d than in saying the same things to the\nFather there. Those who chose to search will discover that the \u201cEternal\nFatherhood of God,\u201d in regard to which Protestant theologians talk so\nmuch, has been balanced in all ancient religions as well as in the\nnature of things by the eternal Motherhood in Jehovah\u2019s being, without\nwhich Fatherhood would be impossible. This Motherhood has always and\neverywhere been the preserver and creator of the omnipresent life of\nall kinds which fills the throbbing universe. Yod-he-vau\u2019s _Lost Name_\ncan never be hallowed (made whole) without the Mother is there. _E.L.\nMason.\u2014The Lost Name._\n\n\nCHAPTER TWO\n\n[1] It was a favorite doctrine of the Christian fathers that\nconcupiscence or the sensual passion was the original sin of human\nnature. Lecky\u2014_Hist. European Morals._ The tendency of the church\ntowards the enforcement of celibacy was early seen. At the four Synods\nwhich assembled to establish the true faith in respect to the Holy\nnature of Christ\u2019s Humanity, the first one at Nice, 318, the second at\nConstantinople with forty bishops present; the third at Ephesus with\ntwo hundred bishops present; the fourth at Chaledonia with many bishops\ntogether, they forever forbade all marriage to the minister at the\naltar. _Monumenta Ecclesiastica_, p. 347. To no minister at the altar\nis it allowed to marry, but it is forbidden to every one. _Ibid._\n\n[2] According to Christianity woman is the unclean one, the seducer who\nbrought sin into the world and caused the fall of man. Consequently\nall apostles and fathers of the church have regarded marriage as\nan inevitable evil just as prostitution is regarded today. August\nBebel.\u2014_Woman in the Past, Present and Future._\n\n[3] Spirit in the Hebrew, as shown in the first chapter, answers to\nall genders; in the Greek to the feminine alone. With Kabbalists the\n\u201cDivine Spirit\u201d was conceded to be the feminine Jehovah, that is, the\nfeminine principle of the Godhead.\n\n[4] From Marcellina, in the second century, a body of the church took\nits name. Her life was pure, and her memory has descended to us free\nfrom calumny and reproach.\n\n[5] Lowest in the scale of being are those invisible creatures called\nby Kabbalists the \u201celementary.\u201d... The second class is composed of the\ninvisible antitypes of the men _to be_ born. _Isis Unveiled_, I, 310.\n\n[6] Who maintained that Adam did not think of celebrating his nuptials\ntill he went out of Paradise.\n\n[7] It was the effect of God\u2019s goodness to man that suffered him to\nsleep when Eve was formed, as Adam being endowed with a spirit of\nprophecy might foresee the evils which the production of Eve would\ncause to all mankind, so that God perhaps cast him into that sleep lest\nhe should oppose the creation of his wife. _Life of Adam by Loredano._\nPub. at Amsterdam, 1696. See Bayle.\n\n[8] Lecky.\u2014_Hist. European Morals._\n\n[9] That marriage was evil was taught by Jerome.\n\n[10] So fully retaining it as to require the circumcision of Timothy,\nthe Gentile, before sending him as a missionary to the Jews.\n\n[11] The Council of Tours (813) recommended bishops to read, and if\npossible retain by heart, the epistles of St. Paul.\n\n[12] Although Paul \u201cled about\u201d other \u201cwomen\u201d saluting \u201csome with a holy\nkiss.\u201d\n\n[13] 964. Notion of uncleanliness attaching to sexual relations\nfostered by the church. Herbert Spencer.\u2014_Descriptive Sociology,\nEngland._\n\n[14] In the third century marriage was permitted to all orders and\nranks of the clergy. Those, however, who continued in a state of\ncelibacy, obtained by this abstinence a higher reputation of sanctity\nand virtue than others. This was owing to an almost general persuasion\nthat they who took wives were of all others the most subject to the\ninfluence of malignant demons.\u2014_Mosheim._\n\n[15] Old (Christian) theologians for a long time disputed upon the\nnature of females; a numerous party classed them among the brutes\nhaving neither soul nor reason. They called a council to arrest the\nprogress of this heresy. It was contended that the women of Peru and\nother countries of America were without soul and reason. The first\nChristians made a distinction between men and women. Catholics would\nnot permit them to sing in Church. _Dictionnaire Feodal_ Paris, 1819.\n\n[16] By a decree of the Council of Auxerre (A.D. 578), women on\naccount of their impurity were forbidden to receive the sacrament into\ntheir naked hands.\n\n[17] Catherine reproached the Protestants with this impious license as\nwith a great crime. \u201cLes femmes chantant aux _orgies_ des huguenots,\ndit Georges l\u2019apotre; apprenez donc, predicans, que saint Paul a dit;\n_Mulieres in_ ecclesiaetaccant; et que dans le chapitre de l\u2019apocolypse\nl\u2019evoque de Thyathire est manace de la damnation pour avoir permis a\nune femme de parles a l\u2019eglise. See _Redavances Seigneur_.\n\n[18] When part singing was first introduced into the United States,\ngreat objection was made to women taking the soprano or leading part,\nwhich by virtue of his superiority it was declared belonged to man.\nTherefore woman was relegated to the bass or tenor but nature proved\ntoo powerful, and man was eventually compelled to take bass or tenor as\nhis part, while woman carried the soprano, says the _History of Music_.\n\n[19] _Leviticus 12:15._ Dr. Smith characterizes a sin-offering as a\nsacrifice made with the idea of propitiation and atonement; its central\nidea, that of expiation, representing a broken covenant between God\nand the offender; that while death was deserved, the substitute was\naccepted in lieu of the criminal.\u2014_Dictionary of the Bible._\n\n[20] _The Talmud_ (Mishna), declared three cleansings were necessary\nfor leprosy and three for children, thus placing the bringing of an\nimmortal being into life upon the same plane of defilement with the\nmost hideous plague of antiquity.\n\n[21] The mean term of life for these wretched girls under religious\nconfinement in a nunnery was about ten years. From the fifteenth\ncentury a sickness was common, known as Disease of the Cloisters.\nIt was described by Carmen. Jewish contempt of the feminine was not\nalone exhibited in prohibiting her entrance into the holy places of\nthe temple, and in the ceremonies of her purification, but also in the\nespecial holiness of male animals which alone were used for sacrifice.\nUnder Jewish law the sons alone inherited, the elder receiving a\ndouble portion as the beginning of his father\u2019s strength. See Deut.\n21-15. If perchance the mother also possessed an inheritance that\nwas also divided among the sons to the exclusion of daughters. The\nmodern English law of primogeniture is traceable to Judaism. Even\nthe commandments were made subservient to masculine ideas, the tenth\nclassing a man\u2019s wife with his cattle and slaves, while the penalties\nof the seventh were usually visited upon her alone.\n\n[22] The reign of Constantine marks the epoch of the transformation\nof Christianity from a religious into a political system.\nDraper.\u2014_Conflict of Religion and Science._\n\n[23] \u201cThe woman that cometh to give thanks must offer accustomed\noffering in this kingdom; it is the law of the kingdom in such cases.\u201d\n\n[24] In the year 1867 the Right Rev. Bishop Coxe, of the Western\nDiocese of New York, refused the sacrament to those women patients of\nDr. Foster\u2019s Sanitarium at Clifton Springs, N.Y., whose heads were\nuncovered, although the rite was performed in the domestic chapel of\nthat institution and under the same roof as the patient\u2019s own rooms.\nDuring the famous See trial at Newark, N.J., 1876, the prosecutor, Rev.\nDr. Craven, declared that every woman before him wore her head covered\nin token of her subordination.\n\n[25] The Catholic Congress of July, 1892, telegraphing the pope it\nwould strive to obtain for the Holy See the recovery of its inalienable\nprerogative and territorial independence, was convened at Fulda.\n\n[26] \u201cIn the old days, no woman was allowed to put her foot within the\nwalls of the monastery at San Augustin, Mexico. A noble lady of Spain,\nwife of the reigning Viceroy, was bent on visiting it. Nothing could\nstop her, and in she came. But she found only empty cloisters, for\neach virtuous monk locked himself securely in his cell, and afterward\nevery stone in the floor which her sacrilegious feet had touched was\ncarefully replaced by a new one fresh from the mountain top. Times are\nsadly changed. The house has now been turned into a hotel.\u201d\n\n[27] _Sacerdotal Celibacy._\u2014Lea.\n\n[28] _Studies in Church History._\u2014Lea.\n\n[29] _History of Materialism._\n\n[30] Seals upon legal papers owe their origin to the custom of the\nuneducated noble warrior stamping the imprint of his clenched or mailed\nhand upon wax as his signature.\n\n[31] _St. Theresa_ founded the Barefoot Carmelites, and it is but a few\nyears since thousands of its members assembled to do honor to her name.\n\n[32] The annals of the Church of Rome give us the history of that\ncelebrated prostitute Marozia of the tenth century, who lived in public\nconcubinage with Pope Sergius III., whom she had raised to the papal\nthrone. Afterwards she and her sister Theodosia placed another of\ntheir lovers, under name of Anastatius III., and after him John X., in\nthe same position. Still later this same powerful Marozia placed the\ntiara upon the head of her son by Pope Sergius under name of John XI.,\nand this before he was sixteen years of age. The celebrated Countess\nMatilda exerted no less power over popedom, while within this century\nthe maid of Kent has issued orders to the pope himself.\n\n[33] The first abbess, Petrouville, becoming involved in a dispute\nwith the powerful bishop of Angers, summoned him before the council\nof Chateraroux and Poicters, where she pleaded the cause of her order\nand won her case. In 1349 the abbess Theophegenie denied the right of\nthe seneschal of Poitou to judge the monks of Fontevrault, and gained\nit for herself. In 1500, Mary of Brittany, in concert with the pope\u2019s\ndeputies, drew up with an unfaltering hand the new statutes of the\norder. Legouve.\u2014_Moral History of Women._\n\n[34] No community was richer or more influential, yet during six\nhundred years and under thirty-two abbesses, every one of its\nprivileges were attacked by masculine pride or violence, and every one\nmaintained by the vigor of the women.\u2014_Sketches of Fontervault._\n\n[35] What is more remarkable the monks of this convent were under\ncontrol of the abbess and nuns, receiving their food as alms.\u2014_Ibid._\n\n[36] \u201cThe Lord\u2019s Prayer,\u201d taught his disciples by Jesus, recognizes the\nloss, and demands restoration of the feminine in \u201cHallowed (whole) be\nThy Name.\u201d\n\n[37] Woman should always be clothed in mourning and rags, that the eye\nmay perceive in her only a penitent, drowned to tears, and so doing for\nthe sin of having ruined the whole human race. Woman is the gateway of\nsatan, who broke the seal of the forbidden tree and who first violated\nthe divine law.\n\n[38] Gildas, in the first half of the sixth century, declared the\nclergy were utterly corrupt. Lea.\u2014_Studies in Church History._\n\n[39] In the third century marriage was permitted to all ranks and\norders of the clergy. Those, however, who continued in a state of\ncelibacy, obtained by this abstinence a higher reputation of sanctity\nand virtue than others. This was owing to the almost general persuasion\nthat they who took wives were of all others the most subject to the\ninfluence of malignant demons.\u2014_Mosheim._ As early as the third\ncentury, says _Bayle_, were several maidens who resolved never to marry.\n\n[40] The priests of the Greek Church are still forbidden a second\nmarriage. In the beginning of the reign of Edward I, when men in orders\nwere prohibited from marriage in England, a statute was framed under\nwhich lay felons were deprived of the clergy in case they had committed\nbigamy in addition to their other offenses; bigamy in the clerical\nsense meaning marriage with a widow or with two maidens in succession.\n\n[41] Pelagius II., sixty-fifth pope in censuring those priests,\nwho after the death of their wives have become fathers by their\nservants, recommended that the culpable females should be immured in\nconvents to perform perpetual penance for the fault of the priest.\nCormenin.\u2014_History of the Popes_, p. 84.\n\n[42] A priest\u2019s wife is nothing but a snare of the devil, and he who\nis ensnared thereby on to his end will be seized fast by the devil,\nand he must afterwards pass into the hands of fiends and totally\nperish.\u2014_Institutes of Polity, Civil and Ecclesiastical_, pp. 438-42.\n_Canons of Aelfric and Aelfric\u2019s Pastoral Epistles_, p. 458.\n\n[43] _Momumenta Ecclesiastica. Institutes of Polity, Civil and\nEcclesiastical._\n\n[44] In order to understand the morals of the clergy of this period,\nit is important that we should make mention of a law which was passed\nby the emperors Valentinian, Valerius and Gratian toward the end of\nthe year 370. It prohibited ecclesiastics and monks from entering the\nhouses of widows and single women living alone or who had lost their\nparents. Dr. Cormenin.\u2014_History of the Popes_, p. 62.\n\n[45] _Lecky_ finds evidence of the most hideous immorality in these\nrestrictions, which forbade the presence even of a mother or sister in\na priest\u2019s house. _Lea_ says it is somewhat significant that when in\nFrance the rule of celibacy was completely enforced churchmen should\nfind it necessary to revive this hideously suggestive restriction which\ndenied the priest the society of his mother and sister.\u2014_Sacerdotal\nCelibacy_, p. 344.\n\n[46] He declared it to be the highest degree of wickedness to rise from\na woman\u2019s side to make the body of Christ. He was discovered the same\nnight with a woman to the great indignation of the people, and obliged\nto flee the country to escape condign punishment.\n\n[47] It is not difficult to conceive the order of ideas that\nproduced that passionate horror of the fair sex which is such a\nstriking characteristic of old Catholic theology. Celibacy was\nuniversally conceded as the highest form of virtue, and in order\nto make it acceptable theologians exhausted all the resources of\ntheir eloquence in describing the iniquity of those whose charm had\nrendered it so rare. Hence the long and fiery disquisitions on the\nunparalleled malignity, the unconceivable subtlety, the frivolity,\nthe unfaithfulness, the unconquerable evil propensities of woman.\nLecky.\u2014_Hist. European Morals._\n\n[48] The Fathers of the Church for the most part, vie with each other\nin their depreciation of woman and denouncing her with every vile\nepithet, held it a degradation for a saint to touch even his aged\nmother with his hand in order to sustain her feeble steps.... For it\ndeclared woman unworthy through inherent impurity even to set foot\nwithin the sanctuaries of its temples; suffered her to exercise the\nfunction of wife and mother only under the spell of a triple exorcism,\nand denied her when dead burial within its more sacred precincts even\nthough she was an abbess of undoubted sanctity. Anna Kingsford.\u2014_The\nPerfect Way_, p. 286.\n\n[49] _Disease of the Cloisters._\n\n[50] When the sailors of Columbus returned from the new world they\nbrought with them a disease of an unknown character, which speedily\nfound its way into every part of Europe. None were exempt; the king\non his throne, the beggar in his hovel, noble and peasant, priest and\nlayman alike succumbed to the dire influence which made Christendom one\nvast charnel house. Of it, _Montesquieu_ said: \u201cIt is now two centuries\nsince a disease unknown to our ancestors was first transplanted from\nthe new world to ours, and came to attack human nature in the very\nsource of life and pleasure. Most of the powerful families of the South\nof Europe were seen to perish by a distemper that was grown too common\nto be ignominious, and was considered in no other light than that of\nbeing fatal. _Works_, I, 265.\n\n[51] St. Ambrose and others believed not that they (women) were human\ncreatures like other people. Luther.\u2014_Familiar Discourses_, p. 383.\n\n[52] When a woman is born it is a deficit of nature and contrary to her\nintentions, as is the case when a person is born blind or lame or with\nany natural defect, and as we frequently see happens in fruit trees\nwhich never ripen. In like manner a woman may be called a fortuitous\nanimal and produced by accident.\n\n[53] Cajetan, living from 1496 to 1534, became General of the Dominican\nOrder and afterwards Cardinal.\n\n[54] \u201cThe Father alone is creator.\u201d\n\n[55] By decree of the Council of Lyons, 1042, barons were allowed to\nenslave the children of married clergy.\u2014_Younge._\n\n[56] In 1108 priests were again ordered to put away their wives.\nSuch as kept them and presumptuously celebrated mass were to be\nexcommunicated. Even the company of their wives was to be avoided.\nMonks and priests who for love of their wives left their orders\nsuffering excommunication, were again admitted after forty days penance\nif afterwards forsaking them.\n\n[57] Dulaure.\u2014_Histoire de Paris_, I, 387, note.\n\n[58] The abbot elect of St. Augustine, at Canterbury, in 1171, was\nfound on investigation to have seventeen illegitimate children in a\nsingle village. An abbot of St. Pelayo, in Spain, in 1130, was proved\nto have kept no less than seventy mistresses.\u2014_Hist. European Morals_,\np. 350.\n\n[59] A tax called \u201ccullagium,\u201d which was a license to clergymen to\nkeep concubines, was during several years systematically levied by\nprinces.\u2014_Ibid_ 2, 349.\n\n[60] _Supplement to Lumires, 50th question, Art, III._\n\n[61] St. Anselm, although very strict in the enforcement of the canons\nfavoring celibacy, found recalcitrant priests in his own diocese whose\ncourse he characterized as \u201cbestial insanity.\u201d\n\n[62] So says _Bayle_, author of the _Historical and Critical\nDictionary_, a magnificent work in many volumes. Bayle was a man of\nwhom it has justly been said his \u201cprofound and varied knowledge not\nonly did much to enlighten the age in which he lived by pointing out\nthe errors and supplying the deficiencies of contemporaneous writers\nof the seventeenth century, but down to the present time his work has\npreserved a repository of facts from which scholars continually draw.\u201d\n\n[63] Those who support celibacy would perhaps choose rather to allow\ncrimes than marriage, because they derive considerable revenue by\ngiving license to keep concubines. A certain prelate boasted openly\nat his table that he had in his diocese 1,000 priests who kept\nconcubines, and who paid him, each of them, a crown a year for their\nlicense.\u2014_Cornelius Aggrippa._\n\n[64] For years in Germany the word Pufferkind signified \u201cpriest\u2019s\nbastard.\u201d _Montesquieu_ declared celibacy to be libertinism.\n\n[65] _Amelot_ (Abraham Nicholas), born in Orleans 1134, declared the\ncelibacy of the clergy to have been established a law in order to\nprevent the alienation of the church estate.\n\n[66] Pope Pelagius was unwilling to establish the Bishop of Sagola in\nhis see because he had a wife and family, and only upon condition that\nwife and children should inherit nothing at his death except what he\nthen possessed, was he finally confirmed. All else was to go into the\ncoffers of the church.\n\n[67] Cardinal Otto decreed that wives and children of priests should\nhave no benefit from the estate of the husband and father; such estates\nshould be vested in the church.\n\n[68] In 1396 Charles VI forbade that the testimony of women should be\nreceived in any of the courts of his kingdom.\n\n[69] The council of Tivoli, in the Soisonnais, 909, in which twelve\nbishops took part, promulgated a Canon requiring the oath of seven\nwitnesses to convict a priest with having lived with a woman; if these\nfailed of clearing him he could do so by his own oath.\n\n[70] Though the clergy now and then made use both of the Justinian and\nTheodosian Codes, the former body of law, as such, was notwithstanding\nfrom the reign of the Emperor Justinian, or about the year of our Lord\n560, till the beginning of the 12th century, or the year of Christ,\n1230 or thereabouts, of no force in the west in matter of government.\nSeldon.\u2014_Dissertation on Fleta_, p. 112.\n\n[71] The codification of the laws under Justinian were largely due\nto his wife the Empress Theodosia, who having risen from the lowest\ncondition in the empire, that of a circus performer, to the throne of\nthe East, proved herself capable in every way of adorning that high\nposition.\n\n[72] By the Code Napoleon, all research into paternity is forbidden.\nThe Christian Church was swamped by hysteria from the third to the\nsixteenth century. Canon Charles Kingsley.\u2014_Life and Letters._\n\n[73] Although under law the entire property of the wife became that of\nthe husband upon marriage.\n\n[74] A treatise on Chastity, attributed to Pope Sixtus III., barely\nadmits that married people can secure eternal life, though stating that\nthe glory of heaven is not for them.\n\n[75] The Romish religion teaches that if you omit to name anything in\nconfession, however repugnant or revolting to purity which you even\ndoubt having committed, your subsequent confessions are thus rendered\nnull and sacrilegious. Chiniquy.\u2014_The Priest, the Woman and the\nConfessional_, p. 202. Study the pages of the past history of England,\nFrance, Italy, Spain, etc., and you will see that the gravest and most\nreliable historians have everywhere found instances of iniquity in the\nconfessional box which their order refused to trace. _Ibid_, p. 175.\nIt is a public fact which no learned Roman Catholic has ever denied\nthat auricular confession became a dogma and obligatory practice of\nthe church only at the Lateran Council, in the year 1215, under Pope\nInnocent III. Not a single trace of auricular confession as a dogma\ncan be found before that year. _Ibid_, p. 239. Auricular confession\noriginated with the early heretics, especially with Marcius. Bellarmin\nspeaks of it as something to be practiced. But let us hear what the\ncontemporary writers have to say on this question: \u201cCertain women were\nin the habit of going to the heretic Marcius to confess their sins to\nhim. But as he was smitten with their beauty, and they loved him also,\nthey abandoned themselves to sin with him.\u201d\u2014_Ibid_, p. 234.\n\n[76] Disraeli, who is most excellent authority, declared the early\nEnglish edition of the Bible contained 6,000 errors, which were\nconstantly introduced and passages interpolated for sectarian purposes\nor to sustain new creeds; sometimes, indeed, they were added for the\npurpose of destroying all scriptural authority by the use of texts.\n\nThe revisors of the New Testament found 150,000 errors, interpolations,\nadditions and false translations in the King James or common version.\n\n[77] Cardinal Wolsey complained to the Pope that both the secular and\nregular priests were in the habit of committing actions for which if\nnot in orders, they would have been promptly executed.\n\nThe claim of direct inspiration from God exists equally among\nProtestants as among Catholics, and even among the Unitarians, who deny\nChrist\u2019s divinity. A notable instance of this kind, both because of the\nhigh scientific and moral character of the clergyman, took place in the\npulpit of the May Memorial Church, Syracuse, N.Y., December 4th, 1887,\nas reported in the Morning Standard of the 5th.\n\nLuther declared that priests believed themselves to be as superior to\nthe laity in general as males were held superior to females.\n\n[78] The legal wife of a priest was termed \u201cAn Unhallowed Thing,\u201d while\nmistresses and concubines were known as \u201cThe Hallowed Ones,\u201d \u201cThe\nHonored Ones.\u201d In parts of France, especially in Paris, the latter\nepithet was common as applied to a priest\u2019s mistress.\u2014_Michelet._\n\n[79] Heloise sacrificed herself on account of the impediments the\nchurch threw in the way of the married clergy\u2019s career of advancement.\nAs his wife he would lose the ascending ladder of ecclesiastical\nhonors, priory, abbacy, bishopric, metropolitane, cardinalate, and even\nthat which was above and beyond all. Milman.\u2014_Latin Christianity._\n\n[80] In 1558 one Walter Mill was indicted, one article of his\naccusation being his assertion of the lawfulness of sacerdotal\nmarriage. He was condemned to the stake and burned. Taine.\u2014_English\nLiterature._\n\n[81] An old doctrine which often turns up again in the middle ages. In\nthe seventeenth century it prevailed among the convents of France and\nSpain. Michelet.\u2014_La Sorcerie_, p. 258.\n\n[82] They made the vilest use of the doctrine that Christ was born of a\nVirgin, using this as an example for woman to be followed.\u2014_Ibid_, p.\n259.\n\n[83] They must kill sin by being more humble and lost to all sense\nof pride through sin. This was the Quietist doctrine introduced by a\nSpanish priest, Molinos, who claimed it as the result of an inner light\nor illumination. He declared that \u201cOnly by dint of sinning can sin be\nquelled.\u201d\n\n[84] \u201cLet not this surprise you,\u201d replied the abbot, \u201cMy sanctity is\nnot the less on this account because that abides in the soul, and what\nI now ask of you is only a sin of the body. Do not refuse the grace\nheaven sends you.\u201d Boccaccio.\u2014_Decameron._\n\n[85] Taine\u2014_Eng. Lit._ I, 363.\n\n[86] The unmarried state of the clergy was in itself one of the\nchief causes of sexual excess. The enormously numerous clergy\nbecame a perilous plague for female morality in town and village.\nThe peasants endeavored to preserve their wives and daughters from\nclerical seduction by accepting no pastor who did not bind himself to\ntake a concubine. In all towns there were brothels belonging to the\nmunicipality, to the sovereign, to the church, the proceeds of which\nflowed into the treasury of proprietors.\n\n[87] Draper.\u2014_Intellectual Development of Europe_, 498.\n\n[88] Men in orders are sometimes deceived by the devil that they marry\nunrighteously and foredo themselves by the adulteries in which they\ncontinue. _Institutes of Polity, Civil and Ecclesiastical_, 437.\n\nThere is ground for the assumption that the Canon which bound all the\nactive members of the church to perpetual celibacy, and thus created\nan impenetrable barrier between them and the outer world, was one of\nthe efficient methods in creating and sustaining both the temporal and\nspiritual power on the Romish Church. Taine.\u2014_English Literature._\n\n[89] All steps are necessary to make up the ladder. The vices of men\nbecome steps in the ladder one by one as they are remounted. The\nvirtues of man are steps indeed, necessary not by any means to be\ndispensed with, yet though they create a fair atmosphere and a happy\nfuture, they are useless if they stand alone. The whole nature of man\nmust be used wisely by the one who desires to enter the way. Seek it by\nplunging into the mysterious and glorious depth of your inmost being.\nSeek it by testing all experience, by utilizing the senses in order to\nunderstand the growth of meaning of individuality and the beauty and\nobscurity of those other divine fragments which are struggling side\nby side with you and from the race to which you belong.\u2014_Light on the\nPath_, Rule XX.\n\n[90] \u201cWhat in the world makes you look so sullen?\u201d asked the young man\nas he took his arm and they walked towards the palace. \u201cI am tormented\nwith wicked thoughts,\u201d answered Eugene gloomily. \u201cWhat kind? They can\neasily be cured.\u201d \u201cHow?\u201d \u201cBy yielding to them.\u201d _Dialogue in Balzac\u2019s\nPere Goriot._\n\n[91] _1st Corinthians_ VII, 36.\n\n[92] Limbrock.\u2014_History of the Inquisition._\n\n[93] Carema reported that the parish priest of Naples was not convicted\nthough several women deposed that he had seduced them. He was, however,\ntortured, and suspended for a year, when he again entered his duties.\n\n[94] Lea.\u2014_Sacerdotal Celibacy_, p. 422.\n\nThe secrecy with which the Inquisition worked may be conjectured from\nthe fact that during the whole time its officers were busy gathering\nevidence upon which to condemn Galileo, his friends in Rome, none of\nwhom occupied high position in the church, not only did not suspect his\ndanger, but constantly wrote him in the most encouraging terms.\n\n[95] The acts of the Metropolital Visitation of the Archbishops of\nWareham states that in the Diocese of Bangor and St. Davids, in time\nof Henry VIII., more than eighty priests were actually presented for\nincontinence.\n\n[96] Against this separation the bitter animosity of Pope Leo XIII. was\nseen in his refusal of the gifts tendered him by the royal family of\nItaly at the time of his jubilee.\n\n[97] And the summary was not brief. Dwight.\u2014_Roman Republic in 1849_,\np. 115. Pope John XIII., having appeared before the council to give an\naccount of his conduct, he was proved by thirty-seven witnesses, the\ngreater part of whom were bishops and priests, of having been guilty of\nfornication, adultery, incest, sodomy, theft and murder. It was also\nproved by a legion of witnesses that he had seduced and violated 300\nnuns.\u2014_The Priest, Woman and Confessional_, p. 268.\n\nHenry III., bishop of Liege, was deposed in 1274 for having sixty-five\nillegitimate children. Lecky.\u2014_Hist. European Morals_, p. 350. This\nsame bishop boasted at a public banquet that in twenty-two months\nfourteen children had been born to him. _Ibid_, Vol. 2, p. 349. It was\nopenly asserted that 100,000 women in England were made dissolute by\nthe clergy. Draper.\u2014_Intellectual Development of Europe_, p. 498.\n\n[98] _Familiar Discourses_ and other works. In Rome are born such a\nmultitude of bastards that they are constrained to build particular\nmonasteries, where they are brought up and the pope is named their\nfather. When any great processions are held in Rome, then the said\nbastards go all before the pope.\u2014_Familiar Discourses_, 383.\n\nAfter Pope Gregory confirmed celibacy he found 6,000 heads of infants\nin a fish pond, which caused him to again favor the marriage of\npriests.\u2014_Ibid_. Bishop Metz, to my knowledge, hath lost the annual\nrevenue of 500 crowns, which he was wont to receive from the county for\npardoning of whoring and adultery.\u2014_Ibid_, 260.\n\n[99] In 1874, an old Catholic priest of Switzerland, about to follow\nPere Hyacinthe\u2019s example in abandoning celibacy, announced his\nbetrothal in the following manner: \u201cI marry because I wish to remain\nan honorable man. In the seventeenth century it was a proverbial\nexpression, \u2018As corrupt as a priest,\u2019 and this might be said today.\nI marry, therefore, because I wish to get out of the Ultramontane\nslough.\u201d\u2014_Galignani\u2019s Messenger_, September 19, 1874.\n\n[100] See _Biographical Sketch_. (Died January 16, 1899.)\n\n[101] pp. 86 to 140.\n\n[102] To be found in _The Priest, the Woman and the Confessional_.\n\n[103] _Ibid_, p. 77-8.\n\n[104] _Ibid_, p. 287.\n\n[105] A Shenandoah correspondent of the Pittsburgh Commercial\nAdvertiser, June 5, 1885, wrote:\n\nSHENANDOAH, PA., June 5.\u2014Father Wolonski, of this place, the only\npriest of the Uniate Greek Church in this country, has been recalled to\nEurope.\n\nThe Uniate Greek Church, it will be remembered, comprehends those\nChristians who, while they follow the Greek rite, observe the general\ndiscipline of the Greek Church and make use of the Greek liturgy, are\nyet united with the Church of Rome, admitting the double procession of\nthe Spirit and the supremacy of the Roman Pontiff, and accepting all\nthe doctrinal decisions subsequent to the Greek schism which have force\nas articles of faith in the Roman Church. The usage of the Church as to\nthe law of celibacy is, with the consent of the Roman Pontiff, the same\nas among the other Greeks, and Father Wolonski brought a wife with him\nto Shenandoah when he came here last December. This fact has made both\nthe priest and his religion, subjects of great importance here, and the\nattention they have received has resulted in his recall to Limberg,\nAustria, the see of the diocese from which he was transferred here.\n\nFATHER WOLONSKI AND THE ARCHBISHOP.\n\nWhen Father Wolonski arrived in Philadelphia he visited the Cathedral\nand sought an interview with Archbishop Ryan, but when that gentlemen\nthen came to Shenandoah, as directed by Bishop Sembratowicz, of\nLimberg, who sent him on his mission, Father O\u2019Reilly, of the\nIrish Catholic Church, warned his congregation, under pain of\nexcommunication, to shun the church and priest, at the same time\ntacitly denying that the Roman Church recognized the right of any\npriest to marry. The matter led to great controversy, during which\nFather Wolonski established his congregation, and arrangements have\nbeen made for the erection of a church. To avoid further trouble,\nhowever, the Bishop of Limberg has selected and sent an unmarried\npriest to succeed him, and Father Wolonski will return to Austria.\nFather Wolonski is an intelligent and highly-educated gentleman, and\nhas made a large number of friends during the few months he has been\nhere. He speaks several languages, and during his stay here acquired a\nremarkable knowledge of English. He has worked incessantly since his\narrival here for the temporal as well as the spiritual comfort of his\npeople, and has made a large circle of acquaintances, who will regret\nhis departure from the town.\n\n[106] And yet the world \u201cdoes move,\u201d and the experience of the church\nis much that of the big elephant Jumbo, who in opposing his vast form\nto a train of cars met his death at the engine.\n\n[107] The Chili mantas and skirts of white flannel are worn by\npenitentes, or women who have committed some heinous sin and thus\nadvertise their penitence; or those who have taken some holy vow to\nget a measure nearer heaven, and go about the street with downcast\neyes, looking at nothing and recognizing no one. They hover about the\nchurches, and sit for hours crouched before some saint or crucifix,\nsaying prayers and atoning for their sin. In the great Cathedral at\nSantiago, and in the smaller churches everywhere, these penitentes, in\ntheir snow-white garments, are always to be seen, on their knees, or\nposing in other uncomfortable postures, and looking for all the world\nlike statues carved in marble. In the Santiago Cathedral they cluster\nin large groups around the confessionals, waiting to receive absolution\nfrom some fat and burly father, that they may rid their bodies of the\nmark of penitence they carry and their souls of sin. Some of them\nmake vows, or are sentenced by their confessors to wear their white\nshrouds for a certain time, while others assume them voluntarily until\nthey have assurance from their priest that their sin is atoned for.\nLadies of the highest social position and great wealth are commonly\nfound among the penitentes, as well as young girls of beauty and\nwinning grace. Even the wives of merchants and bankers wander about\nthe streets with all but their eyes covered with this white mantle,\nwhich gives notice to the world that they have sinned. The women of\nChili are as pious as the men are proud, and this method of securing\nabsolution is quite fashionable. Those souls that cannot be purged by\nthis penitential dress retire to a convent in the outskirts of the city\ncalled the Convent of the Penitents, where they scourge themselves with\nwhips, mortify the flesh with sackcloth, sleep in ashes and upon stone\nfloors, and feed themselves on mouldy crusts. Some stay longer and some\na less time in these houses of correction, until the priests by whose\nadvice they go there, give them absolution; but it is seldom that the\ninmates are men. They are usually women who have been unfaithful to\ntheir marriage vows, or girls who have yielded to temptation. After\nthe society season, after the carnival, at the end of the summer when\npeople return from the fashionable resorts, and at the beginning of\nlent these places are full, and throngs of carriages surround them,\nwaiting to bear back to their homes the belles who are sent here and\ncan find no room to remain. For those whose sins have been too great to\nbe washed out by this process, for those whose shame has been published\nto the world and are unfitted under social laws to associate with the\npure, other convents are open, established purposely as a refuge or\nHouse of Detention. Young mothers without husbands are here cared for,\nand their babes are taken to an orphan asylum in the neighborhood to be\nreared by the nuns for the priesthood and other religious orders. It\nis the practice for parents to send wayward daughters to these homes,\nwhile society is given to understand that they are elsewhere visiting\nfriends or finishing their education. After a time they return to their\nfamilies and no questions are asked.\n\n[108] Too long have the people out of respect for the church,\nmaintained silence in the presence of gross abuses, while their\nfamilies have been ruined. I am a husband and a father, and I do not\nwish the honor of my name and my family to be at the mercy of a wolf\nwho may introduce himself with the viaticum in his hands. I am a\nfather, and I do not wish that the sacred candor of my child should\nbe exposed to the lecherous attempts of a wretch in a soutane. The\nreligious authorities are on the eve of witnessing honest men follow\ntheir wives, their daughters, and even their little boys to the\nconfessional, to assure themselves if the hand that holds there the\nbalance of divine justice is the hand of a respectable man or the hand\nof a blackguard who should receive the lash in public with his neck in\nthe pillory.\u2014_Letter from a gentleman._ A recent article in the Canada\n\u201cReview\u201d asks if after giving to the clergy riches, respect and the\nhighest positions, it is too much to ask that they should leave to the\npeople their wives? Our wives and daughters whom they steal from us\nby the aid of religion, and more especially of the confessional. An\nimmediate, firm and vigorous reform is needed. Our wives and daughters\nmust be left alone. Let the clergy keep away from the women, and\nreligion and the Catholics will be better off. This must be done and at\nonce.\u2014_Montreal Correspondence of the Toronto Mail_, September 15, 1892.\n\n\nCHAPTER THREE\n\n[1] Maine says the bodies of customary law which were built up over\nEurope were in all matters of first principles under ecclesiastical\ninfluence, but the particular application of a principle once accepted\nwere extremely various.\n\n[2] The Council held at Winchester in time of Archbishop Le Franc\ncontained a constitution that a marriage without the benediction of\na priest should not be deemed a legitimate marriage. Ecclesiastical\nlaw as allowed in this country (Great Britain), from earliest times\nthe presence of a priest was required to constitute a legal marriage.\nReeves.\u2014_History of English Law._\n\n[3] Reeves History of English Law is a full and comprehensive\nhistory of the English Law, accurate and judicious as well as full.\nLord Mansfield is said to have advised its author. In this work the\nstudent is presented with all that is necessary that he should know\nof the earliest law books. Bracton, Glanville and Fleta carefully\ncollected and presented. Reeves History of English Law, says Chancellor\nKent, contains the best account that we have of the progress of\nthe law from the time of the Saxons to the reign of Elizabeth.\nSherwood.\u2014_Professional Ethics._\n\n[4] Hefele\u2019s, _Acts of Councils_.\n\n[5] Church and priestly property is still untaxed in the United States.\nAt an early day the clergy were not required to sit on juries nor\npermitted to cast a vote.\n\n[6] Giessler, _Ecclesiastical History_.\n\n[7] Doctrines in the Canon Law most favorable to the power of the\nclergy are founded in ignorance, or supported by fraud and forgery,\nof which a full account is found in Gerard. See _Mem. de l\u2019Acad. des\nInscript._, Tom 18, p. 46. Also Voltaire\u2019s essay upon general history.\n\n[8] \u201cWhenever Canon Law has been the basis of legislation, we find the\nlaws of succession sacrificing the interests of daughters and wives.\u201d\n\u201cDu Cange, in his Glossary, _voc Casia Christianitatis_, has collected\nmost of the causes with respect to which the clergy arrogated an\nexclusive jurisdiction, and Giannone, in the _Civil History of Naples_,\nlib. 19, sec. 3, has arranged these under proper heads scrutinizing the\npretensions of the church.\u201d\n\n[9] \u201cCanons were made from time to time to supply the defects of the\ncommon law of the church; so were statutes added to enforce both\nCommon and Canon Law. The greater part of the statutes made before the\nReformation, which concerns the church and clergy, are directly leveled\nagainst violence committed against the possession of persons by the\nminister or the king, and against the encroachments of the Temporal\nCourts upon the spiritual jurisdiction.\u201d\n\n[10] \u201cPhantastic romanticists and calculating persons have endeavored\nto represent this period as the age of morality and sincere reverence\nfor woman.... The \u2018Service of Love\u2019 preached by French, German, and\nItalian knights, was supposed to prove the high respect paid to\nthe women of that day. On the contrary, this period succeeded in\ndestroying the little respect for the female sex which existed at its\ncommencement. The knights both in town and country were mostly coarse,\nlicentious men.... The chronicles of the times swarm with tales of\nrape and violence on the part of nobles in the country, and still\nmore in the towns where they were exclusive rulers up to the XIII.\nand XIV. centuries, while those subjected to this degraded treatment\nwere powerless to obtain redress. In the towns the nobles sat on the\nmagistrates bench, and in the country criminal jurisdiction was in the\nhands of the lord of the manor, squire or bishop.\u201d\n\n[11] The first article of the famous Code of Love was \u201cMarriage is not\na legitimate excuse against love.\u201d\n\n[12] This was Christine\u2019s first work. Her success was so great that she\nsupported a family of six persons by her pen.\n\n[13] Wright. _Womankind in Europe._\n\n[14] \u201cThe Fathers seem to have thought dissolution of marriage was not\nlawful on account of the adultery of the husband, but that it was not\nabsolutely unlawful for a husband whose wife had committed adultery to\nre-marry.\u201d\n\n[15] The preference of males over females in succession was totally\nunknown to the laws of Rome. Brothers and sisters were entitled to\nequal parts of the inheritance. Blackstone.\u2014_Commentaries._\n\n[16] No marriage could take place after 12 M., which is even now the\nrule of the English Established Church. The decrees of the Plenary\nCouncil, Baltimore 1884, tend to the establishment of similar\nregulations in our own country.\n\n[17] The New Testaments of sixty years since, contained a list of\nrelatives commencing with grandfather and grandmother, whom a man and\nwoman might not marry.\n\n[18] The policy of the church was to persuade mankind that the\ncohabitation of a man and woman was in itself unholy, and that nothing\nbut a religious bond or sacrament could render it inoffensive in the\neyes of God. Pike.\u2014_History of Crime in England_, I, 90.\n\n[19] This law held good in Protestant England until within the last\ndecade.\n\n[20] The church visited its penalties upon the innocent as well as\nguilty; when any man remained under excommunication two months, his\nwife and children were interdicted and deprived of all doctrines of the\nchurch but baptism and repentance. Lea.\u2014_Studies in Church History._\n\n[21] In England, until the reign of William and Mary, women were\nrefused the benefit of clergy.\n\n[22] In the hands of such able politicians it (marriage), soon became\nan engine of great importance to the papal scheme of an universal\nmonarchy over Christendom. The innumerable canonical impediments that\nwere invented and occasionally dispensed with by the Holy See, not\nonly enriched the coffers of the church, but give it a vast ascendant\nover persons of all denominations, whose marriages were sanctioned or\nrepudiated, their issue legitimated or bastardized ... according to the\nhumor or interest of the reigning pontiff.\u2014_Commentaries_ 3, 92.\n\n[23] The word Liber, free, the solar _Phre_ of Egypt, and Liber, a\nbook, being as has been shown, closely connected, the bookish men of\nBac, Boc, Bacchus, were comparatively free from the rule of the warrior\nclass, both in civil and military point of view, and thence arises our\n_benefit of clergy_. If the benefit of clergy depends upon a statute,\nit had probably been obtained by the priests to put their privilege out\nof doubt. It has been a declaratory statute, although, perhaps, every\nman who was initiated could not read and write, yet I believe every man\nwho could read and write was initiated, these arts being taught to the\ninitiated only in very early times. It has been said that the privilege\nof clergy was granted to encourage learning. I believe it was used as\na test, as a proof that a man was of, or immediately belonging to, the\nsacred tribe, and therefore exempt from the jurisdiction of the court\nin which he had been tried. If he were accused he said nothing; if\nfound guilty he pleaded his orders and his reading. I have little doubt\nthat the knowledge of reading and letters were a masonic secret for\nmany generations, and that it formed part of the mysterious knowledge\nof Eleusis and other temples.\u2014_Anacalypsis_, 2, 271-2.\n\n[24] Woman was represented as the door of hell, as the mother of all\nhuman ills. She should be ashamed of the very thought that she is a\nwoman. She should live in continual penance on account of the curses\nshe had brought upon the world. She should be ashamed of her dress, for\nit is the memorial of her fall. She should especially be ashamed of her\nbeauty, for it is the most potent instrument of the demon.... Women\nwere even forbidden by a provincial council, in the sixth century,\non account of their impurity, to receive the eucharist in their\nnaked hands. Their essentially subordinate position was continually\nmaintained. Lecky.\u2014_Hist. European Morals._\n\n[25] No woman can witness a will in the State of Louisiana today.\n\n[26] Blackstone says whosoever wishes to form a correct idea\nof Canon Law can do so by examining it in regard to married\nwomen.\u2014_Commentaries._\n\n[27] Blondell, a learned Protestant who died in 1659, fully proved\nIsidore\u2019s collection of the Decretal Epistles of the popes of the first\nthree centuries, to be all forged and a shameless imposture, _says\nCollier_.\n\n[28] The famous law of Constantine, attached to the Theodosian Code, by\nvirtue of which a prodigious and monstrous jurisdiction was formerly\nattributed to bishops, or to the hieratic order, though in reality that\nlaw was never a part of the aforesaid code, at the end of which it is\nfound. Seldon.\u2014_Dissertation on Fleta_, p. 101.\n\nAt time of Valentinian neither bishops nor the Consistories could,\nwithout the consent of the contracting lay parties, take cognizance of\ntheir causes.... Because, says that emperor, it is evident that bishops\nand priests have no court to determine the laws in, neither can they\naccording to the imperial constitutions of Arcadius and Honorius, as\nis manifest from the Theodosian body, judge of any other matters than\nthose relating to religion. Thus the aforesaid Emperor Valentinian.\nNeither do I think that the above sanction as extravagant, obtained\na place at the end of the Theodosian Code, or was under the title of\nEpiscopis, by any other manner posted into my manuscript, than by the\nfrauds and deceits, constantly, under various pretenses, made use of\nby the hieratical orders, who endeavored to shape right or wrong,\naccording to the custom of those ages, not to mention others, sovereign\nprinces and republics of their authority and legal power, by this means\nunder the cloak of religion, its constant pretext, most strenuously\nserving their own ends and ambition.\u2014_Ibid_, 107.\n\n[29] See Reeves.\u2014_History of English Law._\n\n[30] Draper.\u2014_Conflict of Science and Religion._\n\n[31] Reeves.\n\n[32] Declaration of judges in the famous case of Evans and Ascuith.\nVaughn said in a later case of the same kind, \u201cIf Canon Law be made\npart of the law of this land, then it is as much a law of the land and\nas well, and by the same authority as any other part of the law of the\nland.\u201d\n\n[33] Gibson was archdeacon of Surrey, Rector of Lambeth, and Chaplain\nof his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury (Primate of all\nEngland and Metropolitan) to whom the Jurus was dedicated. The work\nsaid: \u201cThe foreign is what we commonly call the body of Canon Law,\nconsisting of the Canons of Councils, Decrees of Popes and the like,\nwhich obtained in England by virtue of their own authority (in like\nmanner as they did in other parts of the Western Church), till the\ntime of the Reformation, and from that time have continued upon the\nfoot of consent, usage and custom. For which distinction we have no\nless warrant than an act of Parliament, made at the very time when\nthose foreign laws were declared to be no longer binding by their own\nauthority.... We have a plain declaration that foreign laws became part\nof the law of England by long use and consent.\u201d Gibson.\u2014_Codex Jurus\nEcclesiasticum Anglican._\n\n[34] English _Common Law Reports_, Hill vs. Gould, _Vaughn_, p. 327,\nsays: \u201cWhat ever is declared by an Act of Parliament to be against\nGod\u2019s law must be so admitted by us, because it is so declared by an\nAct of Parliament.\u201d\n\n[35] Under Catholic form the bride promises to consecrate her body to\nthe marital rite.\n\n[36] Chiniquy.\u2014_The Priest, the Woman and the Confessional._\n\n[37] \u201cThe clergy formerly, and to this very day, declare those women\nevil who desire to limit self-indulgence and procreation.\u201d\n\n[38] See Lecky.\u2014_Hist. European Morals._\n\n[39] In a sermon laudatory of the preacher\u2019s office, delivered in the\nMay Memorial Unitarian Church, in Syracuse, N.Y., Sunday, Nov. 27,\n1887, Rev. Mr. Calthrop, the pastor, said: \u201cNoble words are your chief\nweapons of offense and defense. But remember it is not you that speak\nwhen you utter them, but the Holy Ghost.\u201d From _Report of Sermon_,\npublished in the \u201cDaily Standard,\u201d November 28th.\n\n[40] Whoever wishes to gain insight into that great institution, Common\nLaw, can do so most efficiently by studying Canon Law in regard to\nmarried women. _Commentaries._\n\n[41] Distinction of class appears most prominently in all the criminal\nlaws for which the clergy are responsible. It was for the man of low\nestate, the slave, and for women, that the greatest atrocities were\nreserved. If the thief was a free woman she was to be thrown down a\nprecipice or drowned (a precedent without doubt for dragging a witch\nthrough a pond). If the thief was a female slave, and had stolen\nfrom any but her own lord, eighty female slaves were to attend, each\nbearing a log of wood to pile the fire and burn the offender to death.\nPike.\u2014_Hist. of Crime in England_, 49-51.\n\n[42] A correspondent of \u201cThe London Times\u201d writes from Rome that he\nhas not heard a single doubt expressed as to the paternity of the\nCountess Lambertini, and the line adopted by the Antonelli heirs\ntacitly confirms it. They strenuously oppose the production of any of\nthe evidence the plaintiff has offered. They object to the depositions\nof the witnesses being heard and tested, and they have declared their\nintention of impugning as forgeries the documentary proofs tendered.\nThese documents consist of some letters written by Antonietta Marconi\nto the Archpriest Vendetta, and particularly one dated April 1, 1857,\nwherein, asking him to prepare a draught of a letter to the Cardinal,\nshe says that \u201cGiacomo\u201d does not send her money, although he knows that\nhe has a daughter to support, and that Loretina is a cause of great\nexpense. \u201cWrite to him forcibly,\u201d she says, \u201cor I shall do something\ndisagreeable.\u201d The extent of the scandal in Rome does not consist so\nmuch in the fact of a Cardinal in Antonelli\u2019s position having had\none or more children, as in the law-suit which has brought all the\nintimate details connected with the affair before the public. Antonelli\nwas to all intents and purposes a layman, filling one of those civil\ndepartments of an ecclesiastical temporal Government to qualify for\nwhich it was indispensably requisite to assume the ecclesiastical\nhabit. He accepted early in life those obligations without which no\ncareer would have been open to him, and, like many others, he regarded\nthem as mere matters of form, for under the imperturbable mask of the\necclesiastical diplomat beat a heart filled with the warmest domestic\naffections and instincts; and how strong those feelings were in him was\nfully demonstrated in his will, and is clearly shown in every incident\nof the story now revealed.\n\nDame Gervasi has been subjected to a rigid cross-examination by the\ncounsel of the brothers Antonelli. The proceedings were conducted with\nclosed doors, but a Roman correspondent of \u201cThe Daily News\u201d seems in\nsome manner to have wormed out the essential facts. When the mysterious\n\u201cforeign young lady\u201d went to lodge at Dame Gervasi\u2019s, Cardinal\nAntonelli\u2014so the gossip runs\u2014paid several visits to his protege. \u201cI\nremember,\u201d says the Dame, \u201cthat when I went to open the door to them I\nheld in my hand a bowl of beef tea, which I was taking to the patient.\nDr. Lucchini was the first to enter, and I soon recognized the second\nvisitor to be Cardinal Antonelli, who wore a long redingote and a\ntall hat. He took the bowl, which I held in my hand. \u2018This is for the\npatient,\u2019 he said inquiringly, but before I had time to reply he had\nswallowed part of its contents.\u201d Dame Gervasi then proceeded to relate\nhow Dr. Lucchini left the Cardinal alone with the foreign young lady.\nThe witness put her ear to the keyhole, and heard distinctly the sound\nof kisses alternating, with sobs between the two. His Eminence, to\nconsole the patient, told her he had taken every precaution against\nthe matter becoming known. \u201cDon\u2019t be afraid,\u201d he said, \u201cnobody will be\na bit the wiser. You will be able to marry. As for the baby, that\u2019s\nmy affair. I will take care of her, and I swear to you that she will\nnever know the name of her mother.\u201d Dame Gervasi gave the names of the\npersons who had come to her on behalf of the brothers Antonelli, and\nthese emissaries, she said, tried to make her disclose all she knew,\nand promised her large sums of money to bind her to silence as to the\nclandestine part played by Signora Marconi, and as to the Cardinal\u2019s\nrelations with the \u201cforeign lady.\u201d\u2014_N.Y. Tribune, July 5, 1878._\n\n[43] See Reeves.\u2014_Early English Law._\n\n[44] _Hollingshed\u2019s Chronicles._\n\nThe foundation of old common law seems traceable to Martia, the widow\nof Guilliame, left regent of her husband\u2019s kingdom, comprising a part\nof Britain, two hundred years prior to the christian era. This queen\ndirected her attention to framing a system of laws which acquired for\nher the surname of \u201cProba,\u201d or \u201cThe Just.\u201d They were evidently one of\nthe three parts under which the common law is divided, although under\ncanon law the entire property of the wife became that of the husband\nupon marriage.\n\n[45] In England, in 1538, or even earlier, it was calculated that\nbesides the tithes, one-third of the kingdom was ecclesiastical\nproperty, and that these vast possessions were devoted to the support\nof a body of men who found their whole serious occupation in destroying\nthe virtue of women. Lea.\u2014_Sacerdotal Celibacy._\n\n[46] The pagan laws during the Empire had been continually repealing\nthe old disabilities of women; and the legislative movement in their\nfavor continued with unabated force from Constantine to Justinian,\nand appeared also in some of the early laws of the barbarians. But,\nin the whole feudal legislation, women were placed in a much lower\nlegal position than in the Pagan Empire. In addition to the personal\nrestrictions which grew necessarily out of the Catholic Christian\ndoctrines concerning divorce, and the subordination of the weaker sex,\nwe find numerous and stringent enactments, which rendered it impossible\nfor women to succeed to any considerable amount of property, and which\nalmost reduced them to the alternative of marriage or a nunnery. The\ncomplete inferiority of the sex was continually maintained by law; and\nthat generous public opinion which in Rome had frequently revolted\nagainst the injustice done to girls, in depriving them of the greater\npart of the inheritance of their fathers, totally disappeared. Wherever\nthe canon law has been the basis of legislation, we find laws of\nsuccession sacrificing the interests of daughters and of wives, and a\nstate of public opinion which has been formed and regulated by these\nlaws; nor was any serious attempt made to abolish them till the close\nof the last century. The French Revolutionists, though rejecting the\nproposal of Sieyes and Condorcet to accord political emancipation to\nwomen, established at least an equal succession of sons and daughters,\nand thus initiated a great reformation of both law and opinion, which\nsooner or later must traverse the world. Lecky.\u2014_Hist. Morals_, Vol.\nII, pp. 357-359.\n\n[47] Sheldon Amos.\u2014_Science of Law._\n\n[48] _Ibid._\n\n[49] Our laws are based on the all-sufficiency of man\u2019s rights. Society\nexists for man only; for women merely as they are represented by some\nman; are in the _mundt_ or keeping of some man.\u2014_Descriptive Sociology\nof England._\n\n[50] This slavish condition of the wife yet prevails in over one-half\nthe states of the union.\n\n[51] The relations in respect to property which exist between husband\nand wife in England, is solely grounded on her not being assumed at\ncommon law to have sufficient command of her purse or of her future\nactions wherewith to procure the materials for making a contract. The\nlegal presumption then is, that she did not intend to make one, and\ntherefore the allegation that she did make a contract would simply on\nthe face of it be a fraud. Amos.\u2014_Science of Law._\n\n[52] The jurisconsults had evidently at this time assumed the equality\nof the sexes as a principle to the code of equity. The situation of the\nRoman woman, whether married or single, became one of great personal\nand proprietary independence; but Christianity tended somewhat from the\nvery first to narrow this remarkable liberty. The prevailing state of\nreligious sentiment may explain why modern jurisprudence has adopted\nthose rules concerning the position of woman, which belong peculiarly\nto an imperfect civilization. No society which preserves any tincture\nof Christian institutions is likely to restore to married women the\npersonal liberty conferred on them by middle Roman law. Canon law has\ndeeply injured civilization.\u2014Sir Henry Maine.\n\n[53] Under the Commonwealth, society assumed a new and stern aspect.\nWomen were in disgrace; it was everywhere declared from the pulpit that\nwoman caused man\u2019s expulsion from Paradise, and ought to be shunned\nby Christians as one of the greatest temptations of Satan. \u201cMan,\u201d\nsaid they, \u201cis conceived in sin and brought forth in iniquity; it was\nhis complacency to woman that caused his first debasement; let man\nnot therefore glory in his shame; let him not worship the fountain of\nhis corruption.\u201d Learning and accomplishments were alike discouraged,\nand women confined to a knowledge of cooking, family medicines and\nthe unintelligible theological discussions of the day. Lydia Maria\nChild.\u2014_History of Woman._\n\n[54] Many women made their entrance into literature through the medium\nof a cook book, thus virtually apologizing for the use of a pen.\n\n[55] The slavish superstition under which church teaching still keeps\nthe minds of men was no less shown by the thousands who visited the\nSt. Anne relic in the United States. Nor are Protestants but little\nless under the same superstition, accepting the teaching of the church\nwithout investigation. An educated Protestant girl, upon her return\nfrom Europe, recently, gravely declared that during her absence she had\nseen the spear which pierced the Saviour\u2019s side.\n\n[56] The most interesting of all to Americans is the copy of the\nAmerican Constitution that President Cleveland sent to the Vatican by\nCardinal Gibbons. It is printed on vellum in richly illuminated English\ncharacters, and bound in white and red. It is enclosed in a case of\npurple plush with gold hinges, and bears this autographic inscription\nby President Cleveland:\n\n    \u201cPresented to his Holiness Pope Leo XIII., as an expression\n    of congratulation on the occasion of his sacerdotal jubilee,\n    with the profound regard of Grover Cleveland, President of the\n    United States, through the courtesy of his Eminence Cardinal\n    Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore.\u201d\n\n    Washington, D.C.\n\nUpon the next page, beneath an American eagle printed in gold, is this\ninscription:\n\n    \u201cThe Constitution of the United States. Adopted Sept. 17,\n    1787.\u201d\n\nThe page bearing this inscription and all the fly leaves were of\nexquisite watered silk.\n\n[57] \u201cOwing to the pope\u2019s refusal to accept the gifts of the king and\nqueen of Italy on the occasion of his jubilee, all the members of the\nHouse of Savoy, including the Duke d\u2019Aosta and the Princess Clotilde,\nhave omitted to send offerings. This is the fly in the jubilee ointment\nof Pope Leo XIII., and settles the question of concessions of temporal\npower. Nevertheless, the day is passed when the claim of \u2018imprisonment\nin the Vatican\u2019 will further avail the pope.\u201d\n\n[58] When Linnaeus published his sexual system of plants, in the\neighteenth century, he was ridiculed and shunned as one who had\ndegraded nature.\n\n\nCHAPTER FOUR\n\n[1] In the dominion of the Count de Foix, the lord had right once in\nhis lifetime to take, without payment, a certain quantity of goods from\nthe stores of each tenant. Cesar Cantu.\u2014_Histoire Universelle._\n\n[2] Two women seized by German soldiers were covered with tar, rolled\nin feathers, and exhibited in the camp as a new species of bird.\n\n[3] Among the privileges always claimed, and frequently enforced by\nthe feudalry, was the custom of the lord of the manor to lie the first\nnight with the bride of his tenant.\u2014_Sketches of Feudalism_, p. 109.\n\nBy the law of \u201cMarquette\u201d under the feudal system (which rested on\npersonal vassalage), to the \u201clord of the soil\u201d belonged the privilege\nof first entering the nuptial couch unless the husband had previously\npaid a small sum of money, or its equivalent, for the ransom of his\nbride; and we read that these feudal lords thought it was no worse thus\nto levy on a young bride than to demand half the wool of each flock of\nsheep. _Article on Relation of the Sexes_.\u2014Westminster Review.\n\n[4] The custom of Borough-English is said to have arisen out of the\nMarchetta or plebeian\u2019s first born son being considered his lord\u2019s\nprogeny.\u2014_Dr. Tusler._\n\n[5] \u201cIt is not very likely that Louis XIV thought the time would ever\ncome when the peasant\u2019s bride might not be claimed in the chamber of\nhis seigneur on her bridal night. Those base laws, their revocation has\nbeen written in the blood of successive generations.\u201d\n\n[6] See _Feudal Dictionary_.\n\n[7] The interests of ecclesiastics as feudal nobles were in some\nrespects identical with those of the barons, but the clergy also\nconstituted a party with interests of its own.\n\n[8] M. Gerun, as quoted by Grimm, gives curious information upon this\nsubject.\n\n[9] Par example, dans quelques seigneuries, o\u00f9 le seigneur passent\ntrois nuits avec les nouvelles marriees, il fut convenu qu\u2019il n\u2019en\npassant qu\u2019une. Dans d\u2019autres, ou le seigneur avant le premiere nuit\nseulment, on ne lui accordes plus qu\u2019une heure.\n\n[10] _Collins de Plancy._\n\n[11] _Feudal Dictionary_, p. 179.\n\n[12] Claiming the right of the first night with each new spouse.\u2014_Boems\nDecisions_ 297, I-17.\n\n[13] _Raepsaet_, p. 179.\n\n[14] The popes anciently had universal power over the pleasures of\nmarriage.\u2014_Feudal Dictionary_, 174.\n\n[15] In the transaction the alternative was with the husband; it was\nhe who might submit, or pay the fine, as he preferred or could afford.\n_Relation of the Sexes._\u2014Westminster Review.\n\n[16] These (courts) powerfully assisted the seigneur to enforce his\ntraditional privileges at the expense of the villeins.\u2014_H. S. Maine._\n\n    _The courts of Bearn openly maintained that this right grew up\n    naturally._\n\n[17] Sometimes the contumacious husband was harnessed by the side of\na horse or an ox, compelled to do a brute\u2019s work and to herd with the\ncattle.\n\n[18] He is followed by bursts of laughter, and the noisy rabble down to\nthe lowest scullion give chase to the \u201ccuckold.\u201d\u2014_Michelet._\n\n[19] The oldest born of the peasant is accounted the son of his lord,\nfor he, perchance it was, that begat him. When the guests have retired,\nthe newly wedded husband shall permit his lord to enter the bed of his\nwife, unless he shall have redeemed her for five shillings and four\npence.\u2014_Grimm._\n\n[20] Droit de cuissage c\u2019est le droit de mettre une cuisse dans le lit\nd\u2019une autre, ou de coucher avec le femme d\u2019une vassal ou d\u2019une serf.\n\nSo much scandal was caused that finally the archbishop of Bourges\nabolished this right in his diocese.\u2014_Feudal Dictionary._\n\n[21] A yoke of cattle and a measure of wheat was afterwards substituted\nfor a money ransom, but even this redemption was in most cases entirely\nbeyond the power of the serf.\n\nUnder the feudal system the lord of the manor held unlimited sway over\nhis serfs. He farther possessed the so-called _Jus Primae Noctis_\n(Right of the First Night), which he could, however, relinquish in\nvirtue of a certain payment, the name of which betrayed its nature. It\nhas been latterly asserted that this right never existed, an assertion\nwhich to me appears entirely unfounded. It is clear the right was not\na written one, that it was not summed up in paragraphs; it was the\nnatural consequence of the dependent relationship, and required no\nregistration in any book of law. If the female serf pleased the lord\nhe enjoyed her, if not he let her alone. In Hungary, Transylvania, and\nthe Danubian principalities, there was no written _Jus Primae Noctis_\neither, but one learns enough of this subject by inquiry of those who\nknow the country and its inhabitants, as to the manners which prevail\nbetween the land owners and the female population. That imposts of this\nnature existed cannot be denied, and the names speak for themselves.\nAugust Bebel.\u2014_Woman in the Past, Present and Future._\n\n[22] In a parish outside Bourges the parson as being a lord especially\nclaimed the first fruits of the bride, but was willing to sell his\nrights to the husband.\n\n[23] The infamous noble who accompanied a certain notorious actress to\nthis country in the fall of 1886, possessed forty livings in his gift.\n\n[24] No greater proof of this statement is needed than the rapidity\nwith which the disease brought by the sailors of Columbus spread over\nEurope; infecting the king on his throne, the peasant in the field, the\npriest at the altar, the monk and nun in the cloister.\n\n[25] In deference to that public sentiment which required the ruler to\npose before the world as a libertine, Friedrich Wilhelm I., of Prussia\n(1713-1740), although old and in feeble health, kept up the pretense of\na liason with the wife of one of his generals, the intimacy consisting\nof an hour\u2019s daily walk in the castle yard.\u2014_August Bebel._\n\n[26] Down to Pius IX. See _The Woman, the Priest and the Confessional_.\n\n[27] When the Emperor Charles II entered Bourges, he was saluted by a\ndeputation of perfectly naked women. At the entrance of King Ladislaus\ninto Vienna, 1452, the municipal government sent a deputation of public\nwomen to meet him the beauty of whose forms was rather enhanced than\nconcealed by their covering of gauze. Such cases were by no means\nunusual.\u2014_Woman in the Past, Present and Future._\n\n[28] _Memoirs of the Princess of Bareith_, a sister of Frederick the\nGreat.\n\n[29] In Russia the nobles have such rights by law over the women of\ntheir lands that the population scarcely resent the sale by auction\nof all the young peasants of their village. These nobles, a race once\nproud and mean, extravagant and covetous, full of vice and cunning,\nare said to be a class superior to the people. Yet they are working\nthe ruin of their influence by multiplying in the masses the number of\nindividuals, already very considerable, to whom they have transmitted\ntheir genius with their blood.\u2014_A. R. Craig, M.A._\n\n[30] London, February 1.\u2014The Odessa correspondent of \u201cThe Daily News\u201d\nsays: Hunger typhus is spreading alarmingly. In large towns in this\nregion all the hospitals are filled, and private buildings are being\nconverted into hospitals. This is the state of affairs in Moskovskia\nand Viedomosti. A correspondent writing from Russia declares that the\nmore fanatical and superstitious portion of the peasantry believe that\nCount Tolstoi is Antichrist, and decline to accept his bounty for fear\nthey will thus commit their souls to perdition.\n\n[31] Two celebrated women, Augusta, of Koningsmark, and Madame Dudevant\n(George Sand), traced their descent to this king.\u2014Letters to \u201cNew York\nTribune.\u201d\n\n[32] Adam Badeau.\u2014_Aristocracy in England._\n\n[33] The at one time famous \u201cAlexandra Limp,\u201d affecting the princess of\nWales, and copied in walk by ultra-fashionable women, was said to be\ndue to the effects of an infamous disease contracted by the princess\nfrom her husband.\n\n[34] Rev. Dr. Varley.\u2014\u201cNew York Sun,\u201d July, 1885.\n\n[35] At the beginning of the Christian era, Corinth possessed a\nthousand women who were devoted to the service of its idol, the\nCorinthian Venus. \u201cTo Corinthianize\u201d came to express the utmost\nlewdness, but Corinth, as sunken as she was in sensual pleasure, was\nnot under the pale of Christianity. She was a heathen city, outside of\nthat light which, coming into the world, is held to enlighten every man\nthat accepts it.\n\n[36] Les Cuisiniers et les marmitons de l\u2019archeveques de Vienne avaient\nimpose un tribut sur les mariages; on croit que certains feuditaires\nexigeaient un droit obscene de leur vassaux qui se mariaient, quel\nfut transforme ensuite en droit de _cuissage_ consistant, de la part\ndu seigneur, a mettre une jambe nue dans le lit des nouveaux epoux.\nDans d\u2019autres pays l\u2019homme ne pouvait coucher avec sa femme les trois\npremieres nuits sans le consentement de l\u2019eveque ou du seigneur du\nfief. Cesar Cantu.\u2014_Histoire Universelle_, Vol. IX. p. 202-3.\n\n[37] _Moral History of Women._\n\n[38] There are those who to enrich themselves would not only rob their\nsisters of their portion, but would sell for money the honor of those\nwho bear their name. The authority of the son during the feudal period\nwas so absolute that the father and mother themselves often winked at\nthis hideous traffic.\u2014_Ibid_, p. 46.\n\n[39] Unless an heiress, woman possessed no social importance; unless\nan inmate of a religious house no religious position. There are some\nrecords of her in this last position, showing what constant effort and\nstrength of intellect were demanded from her to thwart the machinations\nof abbots and monks.\u2014_Sketches of Fontervault._\n\n[40] See page 193.\u2014_Fleta._\n\n[41] _Bracton_, 26, 195, 208. _Littleton\u2019s Tenures_, 55, 174, 209.\n\n[42] Gratain, Canon for Spain in 633, says the nuptial robe was\ngarnished with white and purple ribbons as a sign of the continence to\nwhich young married people devoted themselves for a time.\n\n[43] Eight young men, living in the vicinity of North Rose, Wayne\nCounty, have been held to await the action of the grand jury for\nrioting. A young married couple named Garlic were about to retire\nfor the night when they were startled by the appearance of a party\nof men in the yard. The party immediately commenced beating on pans,\ndischarging guns and pistols, pounding with clubs, screaming and\nkicking at the doors of the house. The bride and groom were terrified,\nbut finally the groom mustered enough courage to demand what the men\nwanted there. Shouts of \u201cGive us lots of cider or we\u2019ll horn you to\ndeath,\u201d were the answers. An attempt was made to break in a rear door\nof the house. The bride and groom and John Wager, who was also present\nin the house, braced the doors from the inside to prevent a forcible\nentrance, and the inmates had to defend the property nearly all night.\nThe horning party, at last weary of calling for cider, left the\npremises giving an extra strong fusillade of firearms and a series of\nyells as they departed. The eight young men were arrested a few days\nlater on suspicion of being in the horning party.\u2014_Press Report_, Jan.\n14, 1887.\n\n[44] Whenever we discover symbolized forms, we are justified in\ninferring that in the past life of the people employing them there were\ncorresponding realities. McLennon.\u2014_Studies in Ancient History_, p. 6.\n\n[45] He was thrown into the moat to cool his ardor, pelted with stones,\nderided as a proud and envious wretch.\u2014_Michelet._\n\n[46] The maids redeeme their virginities with a certain piece of money,\nand by that Terme their lands are held to this day. Heywoode.\u2014_History\nof Women_, London, 1624; _Lib._ 7,339.\n\n[47] Margaret was canonized in 1251, and made the Patron Saint of\nScotland in 1673. Several of the Scotch feudalry, despite royal\nprotestation, kept up in the famous practice until a late date. One of\nthe earls of Crawford, a truculent and lustful anarch, popularly known\nand dreaded as \u201cEarl Brant,\u201d in the sixteenth century, was probably\namong the last who openly claimed leg-right, the literal translation of\n_droit de jambage_.\u2014_Sketches of Feudalism._\n\n[48] The feeling is common in the north that a laird, or chieftain,\ngetting a vassal\u2019s or clansmen\u2019s wife or daughter with child, is doing\nher a great honor. Burke.\u2014_Letters from an English Gentleman_, about\n1730.\n\n[49] _Pres de cet etang, et devant sa maison._\n\n[50] In days to come people will be slow to believe that the law among\nChristian nations went beyond anything decreed concerning the olden\nslavery; that it wrote down as an actual right the most grievous\noutrage that could ever wound man\u2019s heart. The Lord Spiritual had\nthis right no less than the Lord Temporal. The parson being a lord,\nexpressly claimed the first fruits of the bride, but was willing to\nsell his rights to the husband. The courts of Berne openly maintain\nthat this right grew up naturally. Michelet.\u2014_La Sorciere_, p. 62.\n\n[51] Among the rights asserted by the Protestant clergy in the\nmiddle ages, and which caused much dispute, was exemption from lay\njurisdiction even in cases of felony.\n\nFrom the throne downward every secular office was dependent upon the\nchurch. Froude.\u2014_Times of Erasmus and Luther._\n\n[52] Among these de coucher avec leur femmes, d\u2019enlever les premices de\nleurs filles.\n\n[53] _H. S. Maine_.\n\n[54] In Babylon every young woman was obliged once in her life to offer\nher person for sale, nor was she permitted to leave the temple, where\nshe sat with a cord about her waist, until some stranger taking it in\nhand led her away. The money thus obtained passed into the treasury of\nthe temple as her \u201cpurchase money, or redemption, releasing her from\nfarther prostitution, and permitting her marriage, which was forbidden\nuntil such sale had been consummated.\u201d\n\n[55] Although a similar custom is said to have prevailed in India under\nBrahaminical rule, it must be remembered that wherever found it is an\naccompaniment of the Patriarchate, and under some form of religion\nwhere the feminine is no longer considered a portion of the divinity,\nor woman allowed in the priesthood.\n\n[56] It has been too readily believed that the wrong was formal, not\nreal. But the price laid down in certain countries exceeded the means\nof almost every peasant. In Scotland, for instance, the demand was for\nseveral cows, a price immense, impossible.\n\n[57] _Christian History, First Period_, by Joseph Henry Allen.\n\n[58] In the history of Julius Caesar there is something peculiarly\ncurious and mythical. Caesar had all the honors paid to him as to a\ndivine person. At the end of five years a festival was instituted to\nhis honor, as to a person of divine extraction. A college of priests\nwas established to perform the rites instituted for the occasion. A day\nwas dedicated to him, and he had the title also of Julian Jove, and a\ntemple was erected to him.\u2014_Anacalypsis_, I, 611.\n\n[59] Law of the first night.\n\n[60] The lord\u2019s right.\n\n[61] Leg right\u2014the right to place a naked leg in bed with the bride.\n\n[62] Droit de cuissage, c\u2019ele droit de mettre une cuisse dans le lit\nd\u2019une autre, ou de coucher avec le femme d\u2019un vassal, ou d\u2019un serf.\n\n[63] Droit d\u2019afforge, the right to prey upon the bride.\n\n[64] Droit de marquette, took its name in Scotland from the redemption\npiece of money, a demi-mark, marquette, or little mark, a weight of\ngold or silver used in Great Britain and many other European countries.\n\n[65] _Mrs. Josephine Butler_, so stating.\n\n[66] A government license reads: \u201cChinese women for the use of\nEuropeans only.\u201d\n\n[67] _Contagious Disease Acts._\n\n[68] _The Emancipation of Women_, January, 1888.\n\n[69] \u201cThe penal code provides for the punishment of a man who commits\nmischief by injuring an animal of the value of ten rupees or upwards,\nwith imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with\nfine, or with both. If the animal be worth fifty rupees, the punishment\nmay be for five years. If a man induces his neighbor\u2019s dog, by bait\nor otherwise, to follow him with the intention of dishonestly taking\nthe dog out of his neighbor\u2019s possession, he may be punished with\nimprisonment for three years, or with fine, or with both. But while a\nman\u2019s dog, his horse, his elephant are taken care of by legislation;\nwhile the very plants in his garden are protected; his young daughter,\nthe light of his eyes and the joy of his home, may be ruined and her\nfair fame stolen with impunity, provided she has attained the age of\nten years and is unmarried, and proof is wanting that she has resisted\nher seducer.\u201d\n\n[70] The New York Society for the \u201cPrevention of Diseases.\u201d\n\n[71] Of Berlin, August Bebel says: \u201cNow things are neither better nor\nworse in Berlin than in any other large town. It would be difficult\nto decide which most resembled ancient Babylon; orthodox Greek St.\nPetersburg, Catholic Rome, Christian Germanic Berlin, heathen Paris,\npuritan London, or lively Vienna.\u2014_Woman in the Past, Present and\nFuture._\n\n[72] The latest attempt for licensing vice in the United States was\nmade in New Orleans, 1892, in the form of an ordinance proposing to\ngrant to Dr. Wm. Harnon the privilege of levying an inspection tax upon\nthose known as \u201cPublic Women\u201d of $1.50 a week for fifteen years.\n\nThe \u201cLouisiana Review\u201d said of it:\n\n\u201cA more revolting proposition than this has never come under our\nnotice, and we are amazed that the health committee failed to detect\nits character, however artfully it may have been screened by the\npretext that it was intended to lessen the harm of the social evil.\u201d\n\nThe \u201cNew Delta,\u201d in its issue of August 31, said: \u201cThe queer and\nill-favored monopoly which the ordinance for the regulation of houses\nof bad repute sought to establish has not been successful on the first\neffort. It goes back to a committee. Let us hope that it will remain\nburied there forever, and decent people be saved the infliction of a\npublic discussion of the miserable scheme. Such systems of \u2018regulation\u2019\nwould disgrace the devil, and the proposition for the city to share in\nthe plunder of these poor wretches would shame a Piute village.\u201d\n\nThe Woman\u2019s Journal, September 19, said:\n\n\u201cIt is well that this measure has failed on the first attempt; but to\nrefer a matter to a committee is not necessarily to kill it, and its\nfate in the committee should be closely watched. The laws establishing\nthe state regulation of vice in England were smuggled through\nParliament about 1 o\u2019clock in the morning, when half the members\nwere absent or asleep; but it took seventeen years of painful and\ndistasteful agitation to repeal them. Prevention of bad legislation is\nbetter than cure.\u201d\n\nThis attempt was finally defeated through the energetic opposition and\nwork of Mrs. Elizabeth Lyle Saxon.\n\n[73] The reporter, while the committee was still in session, went to\na procuress and ordered a _pretty girl_, 14 years of age, certified\nby a physician to be good, to be delivered to his order as \u201cagent for\n_gentlemen of 60_.\u201d The madame accepted the order, and in a short time\nproduced the girl certified. The reporter investigated the child\u2019s\nhistory, and ascertained that her father was dead and her mother was a\npoor working woman. The girl was dressed in an old black frock. Having\ncompleted the purchase of the girl, the reporter hastened to arrange\nfor her delivery anywhere and to any person designated by the committee.\n\n[74] A committee composed of Cardinal Manning, the Archbishop of\nCanterbury, Bishop of London and two laymen, examined the evidence\nrespecting criminal vice in London, becoming satisfied that the\nstatements made by the \u201cPall Mall Gazette\u201d were substantially true.\n\n[75] The Rev. Mr. Spurgeon preached a powerful sermon upon the\npatrician iniquity of London, comparing it to the worst sins of ancient\nnations, one sure, sooner or later, to bring destruction upon both\nindividual and nation.\n\n[76] When you see a girl on the street you can never say without\ninquiry whether she is one of the most-to-be-condemned or the\nmost-to-be-pitied of her sex. Many of them find themselves where\nthey are because of a too trusting disposition; others are as much\nthe innocent victims of crime as if they had been stabbed or maimed\nby the dagger of the assassin.... These women constituted a large\nstanding army, whose numbers no one can calculate. Gen. Booth.\u2014_Darkest\nEngland_, 51-56.\n\n[77] Children as they go to and from school are waited for and watched\nuntil the time has come for running them down.\u2014_Report of the Secret\nCommission._\n\n[78] It seemed a strange inverted world, that in which I lived those\nterrible weeks, the world of the streets and brothel. It was the\nsame, and yet not the same as the world of business and the world of\npolitics. I heard of much the same people in the house of ill-fame as\nthose of whom you hear in caucuses, in law courts and on \u2019change; but\nall were judged by a different standard, and their relative importance\nwas altogether changed. Mr. Stead.\u2014\u201cPall Mall Gazette.\u201d\n\n[79] _Report of Secret Commission._\n\n[80] An immense number of public women congregated at Nice during the\ntime of its Historic Council, which settled the genuineness of the\nbooks of the Bible.\n\n[81] So fast has this class of pecuniarily independent single women\nincreased within the past two and a half decades, women who prefer a\nsingle life with its personal independence, to a married life with its\nlegal dependence and restrictions, as to call from the \u201cLondon Times\u201d\nthe designation of \u201cThird Sex.\u201d\n\n[82] The statistics of prostitution show that the great proportion of\nthose who have fallen into it have been impelled by the most extreme\npoverty, in many instances verging upon starvation.\u2014_Hist. European\nMorals_, 2, 203.\n\n[83] Belgium and Holland entered into an agreement a few years since\nfor its suppression.\n\n[84] When Hon. Henry Blair presented a petition, asking for the\nbetter protection of girls, he said: \u201cOur civilization seems to\nhave developed an almost unknown phase of crime in the annals of the\nrace, and today the traffic in girls and young women in this country,\nespecially in our large cities, has come to be more disgraceful and\nworse than ever was that in the girls of Circassia.\u201d\n\nThis Christianity of ours has much to answer for.\u2014_Woman\u2019s Tribune._\n\n[85] It was at one time proposed to arrest all women out alone in\nthe city of Syracuse, N.Y., after 9 o\u2019clock in the evening. Had the\nordinance been enacted, a lady of mature years and position was\nprepared to test its legality.\n\n[86] Eighteen women were arrested on Monday night in the fifteenth and\ntwenty-ninth police precincts, and after being held in confinement over\nnight, were taken before Justice Duffy at the Jefferson Market Police\nCourt Tuesday morning.\n\n\u201cWhat were these women doing?\u201d asked the justice.\n\n\u201cNothing,\u201d replied the officer.\n\n\u201cThen why did you arrest them?\u201d\n\n\u201cWe have to do it, sir. It is the order of the police superintendent\nwhen we find them loitering on the streets.\u201d\u2014New York \u201cSunday Sun,\u201d\nJune 28, 1885.\n\n[87] Mr. Breen said the horrors of the camps into which these girls\nare inveigled cannot be adequately described. There is no escape for\nthese poor creatures. In one case a girl escaped after being shot in\nthe leg, and took refuge in a swamp. Dogs were started on her trail,\nand she was hunted down and taken back to her den. In another case a\ngirl escaped while a dance was going on at the shanty into which she\nhad been lured. After several days and nights of privation she made her\nway to an island near the shore in Lake Michigan, where a man named\nStanley lived. But the dogs and human bloodhounds trailed her, Stanley\nwas overcome, and the girl was taken back. The law now provides for\nimprisonment of only one year in case of conviction of any connection\nwith this traffic, and it is proposed to amend it.\u2014_Telegraphic Report._\n\n[88] Tales of a horrible character reach us from Michigan and other\nnorthern lumber districts of the manner in which girls are enticed\nto these places on the promise of high wages, and then subjected to\nbrutal outrages past description. Some three hundred of these dens are\nlocated. These girls are sold by the keepers, passing from one den to\nanother, from one degree of hellish brutality to another (we beg pardon\nof all brutes), all escape guarded against by ferocious bloodhounds.\nThe maximum of life is two months.\u2014\u201cUnion Labor Journal.\u201d\n\n[89] Tony Harden used to keep dives in Norway and Quinnesic, and it is\nsaid of him that after paying a constable $12 to bring a girl back who\nhad tried to escape, he beat her with a revolver until he was tired,\nand was about to turn a bull-dog loose at her, when a woodsman appeared\nand stopped him. The next spring Harden was elected justice of the\npeace.\u2014\u201cWoman\u2019s Standard.\u201d\n\n[90] The Rev. Mr. Kerr, of the Protestant Church, Colon, recently\ndiscovered three young girls brought to the Isthmus for improper\npurposes. He took the children away, and with the assistance of others\nreturned them to their parents in Jamaica.\n\n[91] Quebec, April 11.\u2014Wholesale trading in young and innocent girls\nfor purposes of prostitution has come to the notice of the authorities.\nDisreputable houses in Chicago, New York, Boston and other cities in\nthe United States have agents here, who ingratiate themselves with\nyoung women and induce them to go to the states, where they are drawn\ninto a life of infamy. The trade has been carried on to an alarming\nextent, sometimes fifteen girls being shipped in a week. The prices\npaid to agents depend on the looks of the girls and vary from $20 to\n$200. It is stated that over fifty girls have been sent to one Chicago\nhouse within a year.\u2014\u201cDaily Press.\u201d\n\n[92] The startling revelations within the past few days as to the\ntraffic at Ottawa in young girls of from 12 to 14, in which a number\nof prominent citizens as well as several leading politicians are\nimplicated, have caused the greatest indignation. Tuesday night a\nmeeting was held under the auspices of the Society for the Prevention\nof Cruelty to Children, with a view to devising some means by which\nthe great stain on the capital\u2019s good name might be removed. It was\ndecided that the matter must become the subject of special legislation\nat the next session of Parliament, before the guilty scoundrels can be\npunished. Opposition is expected from the members of Parliament who are\nimplicated in the outrages.\u2014\u201cDaily Press.\u201d\n\n[93] \u201cTopeka Leader.\u201d\n\n[94] In Troy, N.Y., in the fall of 1891, discovery was made of an\norganized plan to ravish little girls. It numbered in its ranks married\nmen, members of the police force, and men well known in business and\nchurch circles. With this discovery came the statement from other\ncities that like offenders were common.\u2014\u201cThe Daily Press.\u201d\n\n[95] Persistent efforts have been made by women to stop these great\nwrongs, but having no power in legislation, her prayers and petitions\nhave met with but scant success.\n\n[96] Married at Thirteen Years.\u2014Maud Pearl Johnson, a thirteen-year-old\ngirl of Fulton, who was married to Franklin Foster of that place on\nMonday, has been placed in the State Industrial School in Rochester\nunder sentence by Police Justice Spencer of Fulton. Foster is a widower\nwith three children. The minister at Fairdale who performed the\nceremony is said to have been fined $3 for cruelty to children. The\npoor authorities arrested the young wife for vagrancy.\n\n[97] Africa, Australia, India, Canada, the United States among the\nnumber.\n\n[98] Who gave seventeen years of her life to work for the overthrow of\ngovernment legislation of vice in England.\n\n[99]\u20141. To treat all women with respect, and endeavor to protect them\nfrom wrong and degradation.\n\n2. To endeavor to put down all indecent language and coarse jests.\n\n3. To maintain the law of purity as equally binding upon men and women.\n\n4. To endeavor to spread these principles among my companions, and try\nto help my younger brothers.\n\n5. To use every possible means to fulfill the command: \u201cKeep Thyself\nPure.\u201d\n\n[100] The women claimed the right to baptize their own sex. But the\nbishops and presbyters did not care to be released from the pleasant\nduty of baptizing the female converts. Waite.\u2014_Hist. of Christian\nReligion to A.D. 200_, p. 23.\n\nThe Constitution of the Church of Alexandria, which is thought to\nhave been established about the year 200, required the applicant for\nbaptism to be divested of clothing, and after the ordinance had been\nadministered, to be anointed with oil.\u2014_Ibid_, p. 384-5.\n\nThe converts were first exorcised of the evil spirits that were\nsupposed to inhabit them; then, after undressing and being baptized,\nthey were anointed with oil.\u2014_Bunsen\u2019s Christianity of Mankind_, Vol.\nVII, p. 386-393; _3d Vol. Analecta_.\n\nWomen were baptized quite naked in the presence of these\nmen.\u2014_Philosophical Dictionary._\n\nSome learned men have enacted that in primitive churches the persons\nto be baptized, of whatever age or sex, should be quite naked.\nPike.\u2014_History of Crime in England._ See Joseph Vicecomes.\u2014_De Ritibus\nBaptismi._ Varrius.\u2014_Thesibus de Baptisme._\n\n[101] Undisguised sensuality reached a point we can scarcely conceive.\nWomen were sometimes brought naked upon the stage. By a curious\nassociation of ideas the theater was still intimately connected with\nreligious observance. _Rationalism in Europe_, 2-288.\n\n[102] Catharine, the first wife of Peter the Great, was received into\nthe Greek Church by a rite nearly approaching the primitive customs of\nthe Christian Church. New converts to that church are plunged three\ntimes naked in a river or into a large tub of cold water. Whatever is\nthe conditions, age or sex of the convert, this indecent ceremony is\nnever dispensed with. The effrontery of a pope (priests of the Greek\nChurch are thus called), sets at defiance all the reasons which decency\nand modesty never cease to use against the absurdity and impudence of\nthis shameful ceremony. Count Segur.\u2014_Woman\u2019s Condition and Influence\nin Society._\n\n\nCHAPTER FIVE\n\n[1] Black was hated as the colors of the devil. In the same manner red\nwas hated in Egypt as the color of Typhon.\n\n[2] At what date then did the witch appear? In the age of\ndespair, of that deep despair which the guilt of the church\nengendered. Unfalteringly I say, the witch is a crime of their own\nmaking.\u2014_Michelet._\n\n[3] \u201cIt is not a little remarkable, though perfectly natural, that the\nintroduction of the cat gave a new impulse to tales and fears of ghosts\nand enchantments. The sly, creeping, nocturnal grimalkin took rank at\nonce with owls and bats, and soon surpassed them both as an exponent\nof all that is weird and supernatural. Entirely new conceptions of\nwitchcraft were gained for the world when the black cat appeared\nupon the scene with her swollen tail, glistening eyes and unearthy\nyell.\u201d\u2014_Ex._\n\n[4] Steevens says it was permitted to a witch to take on a cattes body\nnine times.\u2014_Brand_, 3, 89-90.\n\n[5] Mr. E. F. Spicer, a taxidermist of Birmingham, whose great\nspecialty is the artistic preparation of kittens for sale, will not\npurchase black ones, as he finds the superstition against black cats\ninterferes with their sale.\u2014\u201cPall Mall Gazette,\u201d Nov. 13, 1886. But the\nUnited States, less superstitious, has recently witnessed the formation\nof a \u201cConsolidated Cat Company\u201d upon Puget Sound for the special\npropagation of black cats to be raised for their fur.\n\n[6] _City of God_, Lib. XVIII. Charles F. Lummis, in a recent work,\n_Some Strange Corners of Our Country, the Wonderland of the Southwest_,\nrefers to the power of the shamans to turn themselves at will into any\nanimal shape, as a wolf, bear or dog.\n\n[7] Italian women usually became cats. The Witch Hammer mentioned\na belief in Lycanthropy and Metamorphosis. It gave the story of a\ncountryman who was assaulted by three cats. He wounded them, after\nwhich three infamous witches were found wounded and bleeding.\n\n[8] For a full account of this madness, and other forms that sometimes\nattacked whole communities during the middle Christian ages, see\n\u201cHecker.\u2014_Epidemics of the Middle Ages._\u201d\n\n[9] The conventicle of witches was said to be held on Mt. Atlas, \u201cto\nwhich they rode upon a goat, a night crow, or an enchanted staff, or\nbestriding a broom staff. Sundry speeches belonged to these witches,\nthe words whereof were neither Hebrew, Greek, Latin, French, Spanish,\nItalian, nor indeed deriving their Etymology from any known language.\u201d\n\n[10] _St. Gregory of Nyassa_, a canonized saint, the only theologian\nto whom the church (except St. John) has ever allowed the title of \u201cThe\nDivine,\u201d was a member of that council, aiding in the preparation of the\nNicene Creed. It is a significant fact that a great number of public\nwomen, \u201can immense number,\u201d congregated at Nice during the sessions of\nthis council.\n\n[11] In Guernsey a mother and her two daughters were brought to the\nstake; one of the latter, a married woman with child, was delivered in\nthe midst of her torments, and the infant, just rescued, was tossed\nback into the flames by a priest with the cry, \u201cOne heretic the less.\u201d\n\n[12] \u201cOld writers declared that women have been more addicted to\nthese devilish arts than men, was manifest by \u2018many grave authors,\u2019\namong whom Diodorus, Sindas, Pliny and St. Augustine were mentioned.\nQuintillian declared theft more prevalent among men, but witchcraft\nespecially a sin of women.\u201d\n\n[13] Lea.\u2014_Superstition and Force._\n\n[14] Certain forms of ordeal, such as the ordinary ones of fire and\nwater, seem to have owed their origin to the trials passed by the\ncandidate for admission into the ancient mysteries, as Lea has also\nconjectured. During the mysteries of Isis, the candidate was compelled\nto descend into dark dungeons of unknown depth, to cross bars of\nred-hot iron, to plunge into a rapid stream at seeming hazard of life,\nto hang suspended in mid-air while the entrance into other mysteries\nconfronted the candidate with howling wild beasts and frightful\nserpents. All who passed the ancient ordeals in safety, were regarded\nas holy and acceptable to the Deity, but not so under Christian ordeal,\nits intention being conviction of the accused. Those who proved their\ninnocence by carrying red-hot iron uninjured for three paces and the\ncourt was thus forced to acquit, or who passed through other forms of\ntorture without confession were still regarded with suspicion as having\nbeen aided by Satan, and the sparing of their lives was to the scandal\nof the faithful.\n\n[15] Woman was represented as the door of hell, as the mother of all\nhuman ill. She should be ashamed at the very thought she is a woman.\nShe should live in continual penance on account of the curses she has\nbrought upon the world. She should be especially ashamed of her beauty,\nfor it is the most potent instrument of the demon.\u2014_Hist. European\nMorals_, Vol. 2, p. 358.\n\n[16] Witchcraft was supposed to have power of subverting\nreligion.\u2014_Montesquieu._\n\n[17] The question why the immense majority of those who were accused\nshould be women, early attracted attention; it was answered by\nthe inherent wickedness of the sex, which had its influence in\npre-disposing men to believe in witches, and also in producing the\nextreme callousness with which the sufferings of the victims were\ncontemplated.\u2014_Rationalism in Europe_ 1, 88.\n\n[18] 18 mo. An unusually small size for that period.\n\n[19] (_Witch Hammer._)\n\n[20] The Court of Rome was fully apprized that power cannot\nbe maintained without property, and thereupon its attention\nbegan very early to be riveted upon every method that promised\npecuniary advantage. All the wealth of Christendom was gradually\ndrawn by a thousand channels into the coffers of the Holy See.\nBlackstone.\u2014_Commentaries_ 4, 106. \u201cThe church forfeited the wizard\u2019s\nproperty to the judge and the prosecutor. Wherever the church law was\nenforced, the trials for witchcraft waxed numerous and brought much\nwealth to the clergy. Wherever the lay tribunal claimed the management\nof those trials, they grew scarce and disappeared.\u201d\n\n[21] Burning Place of the Cross.\n\n[22] A _MS._ upholding the burning of witches as heretics, written in\n1450 by the _Dominican Brother Hieronymes Visconti_, of Milan, is among\nthe treasures of the _White Library_, recently presented to Cornell\nUniversity.\n\n[23] It shall not be amiss to insert among these what I have heard\nconcerning a witch of Scotland: One of that countrie (as by report\nthere are too many) being for no goodness of the judges of Assize,\narrayed, convicted and condemned to be burnt, and the next day,\naccording to her judgment, brought and tied to the stake, the reeds\nand fagots placed around about her, and the executioner ready to give\nfire (for by no persuasion of her ghostly fathers, nor importunities\nof the sheriff, she could be wrought to confess anything) she now at\nthe last cast to take her farewell of the world, casting her eye at\none side upon her only sonne, and calls to him, desiring him verie\nearnestly as his last dutie to her to bring her any water, or the least\nquantity of licuor (be it never so small), to comfort her, for she was\nso extremely athirst, at which he, shaking his head, said nothing; she\nstill importuned him in these words: \u201cOh, my deere sonne help me to any\ndrinke, be it never so little, for I am most extremely drie, oh drie,\ndrie:\u201d to which the young fellow answered, \u201cby no means, deere mother\nwill I do you that wrong; _for the drier you are (no doubt) you will\nburne the better_.\u201d Heywoode\u2014_History of Women_, Lib. 9, p. 406.\n\n[24] Lenormant.\u2014_Chaldean Magic and Sorcery_, 385.\n\n[25] _Institutes of Scotland._\n\n[26] At _Bamburg, Germany_, an original record of twenty-nine\nburnings in nineteen months, 162 persons in all, mentions the infant\ndaughter of Dr. Schutz as a victim of the twenty-eighth burning.\nHauber.\u2014_Bibliotheca Magica._\n\n[27] In those terrible trials presided over by Pierre de Lancre, it was\nasserted that hundreds of girls and boys flocked to the indescribable\nSabbats of Labourd. The Venetians\u2019 record the story of a little girl of\nnine years who raised a great tempest, and who like her mother was a\nwitch. Signor Bernoni.\u2014_Folk Lore._\n\n[28] Some very strange stories of such power at the present time have\nbecome known to the author, one from the lips of a literary gentleman\nin New York City, this man of undoubted veracity declaring that he had\nseen his own father extend his hand under a cloudless sky and produce\nrain. A physician of prominence in a western city asserts that a most\ndestructive cyclone, known to the Signal Service Bureau as \u201cThe Great\nCyclone,\u201d was brought about by means of magical formulae, made use of\nby a school girl in a spirit of ignorant bravado.\n\n[29] These and similar powers known as magical, are given as pertaining\nto the Pueblo Indians, by Charles F. Lummis, in _Some Strange Corners\nof Our Country_, pub. 1892. A friend of the author witnessed rain thus\nproduced by a very aged Iowa Indian a few years since.\n\n[30] A _Hindoo Scripture_ whose name signifies knowledge.\u2014Max Muller.\n\n[31] _Isis Unveiled_, I, 354.\n\n[32] Of which the tricks of Halloween may be a memento.\n\n[33] _Anacalypsis_, Vol. I. p. 35.\n\n[34] Bacchus was not originally the god of wine, but signified books.\nInstruction of old, when learning was a secret science, was given by\nmeans of leaves. \u201cBacchus Sabiesa\u201d really signified \u201cbook wise\u201d or\nlearned, and the midsummer day festival was celebrated in honor of\nlearning. In the Anacalypsis Higgins says: \u201cFrom Celland I learn that\nin Celtic, Sab means wise, whence Saba and Sabasius, no doubt wise in\nthe stars. From this comes the Sabbath day, or day dedicated to wisdom,\nand the Sabbat, a species of French masonry, an account of which may be\nseen in _Dulare\u2019s History of Paris_. Sunday was the day of instruction\nof the Druids, whence it was called Sabs.\u2014_Ibid_, I. 716.\n\n[35] From the preachment of the Sabs, or Sages, or wise Segent\nSarcedos.\u2014_Ibid_, I, 716.\n\n[36] The only physician of the people for a thousand years was the\nwitch. The emperors, kings, popes and richer barons had indeed the\ndoctors of Salermo, then Moors and Jews, but the bulk of the people in\nevery state; the world, it might as well be called, consulted none but\nthe _Sages_ or wise women. Michelet\u2014_La Sorciere._\n\n[37] I make no doubt that his (Paracelsus) admirable and masterly work\non the Diseases of Women, the first written on this theme, so large, so\ndeep, so tender, came forth from his special experience of those women\nto whom others went for aid, the witches, who acted as midwives, for\nnever in those days was a male physician admitted to the women.\u2014_Ibid._\n\n[38] Within the past fifty years the death rate in childbirth was forty\nin a thousand, an enormous mortality, and although the advances in\nmedical knowledge have somewhat lessened the rate, more women still\nlose their lives during childbirth than soldiers in battle.\n\n[39] In childbirth a motherly hand instilled the gentle poison, casting\nthe mother herself into a sleep, and soothing the infant\u2019s passage,\nafter the manner of modern chloroform, into the world.\u2014_Michelet._\n\n[40] _Poruchet Solenases._\n\n[41] Alexander.\u2014_History of Women._\n\n[42] You will hardly believe it, but I saw a real witch\u2019s skull, the\nother evening, at a supper party I had the pleasure of attending. It\nwas at the house of Dr. Dow, a medical gentleman of culture and great\nskill in his profession here. You will admit that a skull is not a\npleasant thing to exhibit in a parlor, and some of the ladies did not\ncare about seeing it; but the majority did, and you know one cannot\nsee a witch\u2019s skull every day. So, after a little hesitation and\npersuasion on the part of the doctor, he produced the uncanny thing\nand gave us its history, or rather that of the witch. She lived at\nTerryburn, a little place near here. One day it came to the ears of the\nkirk session of the parish that she had had several interviews with\nhis Satanic Majesty. Strange enough, when the woman was brought before\nthat body\u2014which seems to have been all-powerful in the several parishes\nin those days\u2014and accused of it, she at once admitted the charge to be\ntrue. The poor soul, who could have been nothing else than an idiot,\nas the doctor pointed out from the very low forehead and small brain\ncavity, was sentenced to be prevented from going to sleep; or in other\nwords, tortured to death, and the desired end was attained in about\nfive days, her body being buried below high-water mark.\n\nHer name was Lilias Adie, and there is no doubt that she was only a\nharmless imbecile. The skull, and also a piece of the coffin, were\npresented to the doctor by a friend who had read in the kirk session\nrecords an account of the trial, and went to the spot stated as\nbeing the place of burial. The remains were found by him exactly as\nindicated, although there was nothing to mark their resting place. One\nwould have thought that after the lapse of so many years it would be\nexceedingly difficult to find them, but you know things do not undergo\nsuch radical changes in this country as they do in America.\u2014From a\ntraveler\u2019s letter in the \u201cSyracuse Journal,\u201d August 22, 1881.\n\nAlmost indistinguished from the belief in witchcraft was the belief\nthat persons subject to epilepsy, mania or any form of mental weakness,\nwere possessed of a devil who could be expelled by certain religious\nceremonies. Pike.\u2014_History of Crime in England_, Vol. pp. 7-8.\n\n[43] The mysteries of the human conscience and of human motives are\nwell nigh inscrutable, and it may be shocking to assert that these\ncustoms of unmitigated wrong are indirectly traceable to that religion\nof which the two great commandments were that man should love his\nneighbor as himself. Lea.\u2014_Superstition and Force_, 53.\n\n[44] Fox\u2019s _Book of Martyrs_, gives account of persons brought into\ncourt upon litters six months after having been subjected to the rack.\n\n[45] In this case both men and women says Johannus Mergerus, author of\na History of Flanders.\n\n[46] Adrianus Ferrens.\n\n[47] St. Bernard exorcised a demon Incubus, who for six years\nmaintained commerce with a woman, who could not get rid of him.\nLea.\u2014_Studies in Church History._\n\n[48] It was observed they (devils) had a peculiar attachment to women\nwith beautiful hair, and it was an old Catholic belief that St. Paul\nalluded to this in that somewhat obscure passage in which he exhorts\nwomen to cover their heads because of the angels.\u2014_Sprangler._\n\n[49] The attention of scientific men and governments has recently been\ndirected to what are now called \u201c_The Accursed Sciences_,\u201d under whose\naction certain crimes have been committed from \u201csuggestion,\u201d the hand\nwhich executed being only that of an irresponsible automaton, whose\nmemory preserves no traces of it. The French Academy has just been\ndebating the question\u2014how far a hypnotized subject from a mere victim\ncan become a regular tool of crime.\u2014_Lucifer_, October 1887.\n\n\u201cMerck\u2019s Bulletin,\u201d New York medical journal, in an editorial entitled\n_Modern Witchcraft_, December, 1892, relates some astonishing\nexperiments recently made at the _H\u00f4pital de la Charit\u00e9_, Paris, in\nwhich the power to \u201cexteriorize sensibility\u201d has been discovered,\nreproducible at will; suggestion through means of simulated pinching\nproducing suffering; photographs sensitive to their originals even\nhaving been produced. Thus modern science stamps with truthfulness the\npower asserted as pertaining to black magicians, of causing suffering\nor death through means of a waxen image of a person. \u201c_The Accursed\nSciences_,\u201d although brought to the bar of modern investigating\nknowledge, seem not yet to have yielded the secrets of the law under\nwhich they are rendered possible.\n\n[50] In 1609 six hundred sorcerers were convicted in the Province of\nBordeaux, France, most of whom were burned.\u2014_Dr. Priestly._ Within the\nlast year fourteen women have been tried in France for sorcery.\n\n[51] The supreme end of magic is to conjure the spirits. The\nhighest and most inscrutable of all the powers dwells in the divine\nand mysterious name, \u201cThe Supreme Name,\u201d with which Hea alone is\nacquainted. Before this name everything bows in heaven and earth, and\nin hades, and it alone can conquer the Maskim and stop their ravages.\nThe great name remained the secret of Hea; if any man succeeded in\ndivining it, that alone would invest him with a power superior to the\ngods.\u2014_Chaldean Magic and Sorcery._\n\n[52] Venetians concluded not unreasonably that the latter ran no more\nrisk from the taint of witchcraft attached to their inheritance than\ndid the clergy or the church. Where profits were all spiritual their\nardor soon cooled. Thus it happened as the inevitable result of the\npeople\u2019s attitude in religious matters, that while in Venice there\nwere representatives of the vast sisterhood, which extended from the\nBlockula of Sweden to the walnut tree of Benevenuto, sorcery there\nnever became the terrible scourge that it was in other lands where its\nvictims at times threatened to outnumber those of the Black Death.\u2014_The\nWitches of Venice._\n\n[53] One of the most powerful features of the belief in witchcraft was\nthe power that greed had in producing belief and causing persecution.\nThe church had grown rich from such trials, and the state was now to\ntake its turn. By the public offering of a reward for the finding of\nwitches, their numbers greatly increased.\n\n[54] The most exceptional conduct, the purest morals in constant\npractice of every day life, are not sufficient security against the\nsuspicion of errors like these\u2014_Montesquieu._\n\n[55] For a number of years her celebrated son struggled amid his\nscientific studies for the preservation of her life.\n\n[56] Michelet.\u2014_La Sorcerie_ 151. See _Papers on the Bastile_.\n\n[57] In its earliest phase the Black Mass seemed to betoken the\nredemption of Eve, so long accused by Christianity. The woman filled\nevery place in the Sabbath. Following its celebration was the denial\nof Jesus, by whose authority the priests and barons robbed the serf\nof human hope\u2014the paying of homage to the new master\u2014the feudal kiss.\nTo the closing ceremonies, \u201cThe Feast of Peace,\u201d no man was admitted\nunaccompanied by a woman.\u2014_La Sorcerie._\n\n[58] \u201cThis word at different times clearly meant quite different\nthings. In the 14th century, under the Avignon popes, during the great\nschism when the church with two heads seems no longer a church, the\nSabbath took the horrible form of the Black Mass.\u201d\n\n[59] This important part of the woman being her own altar, is known to\nus by the trial of La Voisin, which M. Revanna _Sen._ published with\nother _Papers of the Bastile_.\u2014_Ibid._\n\n[60] That women have been more addicted to this devilish art than man,\nis manifest by the approbation of many grave authority. Diodorus, in\nhis fifth book, speaks of Hecate. Heywood.\u2014_History of Women_, London,\n1624. St. Augustine, in his _City of God_, declared that women are\nmore prone to these unlawful acts, for so we read of Medea, Cyrce and\nothers. Suidas, speaking of witches, cites an old proverb, declaring\nwitchcraft peculiar to woman and not to man. Quintillian, referring to\nthis statement, says: Theft is more common with man, but witchcraft\nwith woman.\n\n[61] Idiots, the lame, the blind and the dumb, are men in whom devils\nhave established themselves, and all the physicians who heal these\ninfirmities as though they preceded from natural causes are ignorant\nblockheads, who know nothing about the power of demons.\u2014_Tishreden_, p.\n202.\n\n[62] See _Reeves_ and _Hume_.\n\n[63] _The Statute of Labourers_ (5 Eliz. C. 4) enacted that unmarried\nwomen between twelve and forty years old may be appointed by two\njustices to serve by the year, week, or day, for such wages and in such\nreasonable sort and manner as they shall think meet.\u2014_Reeves_ 3, 591-8.\n\n[64] Seen by _Dr. Gray_.\n\n[65] James believing in their (witches) influence, and Bacon partly\nsharing in the belief. Macbeth appeared in this year mixed up\nwith Bacon\u2019s inquiries into witchcraft. Ignatius Donnelly.\u2014_The\nCryptogram._ From the accession of James I., witchcraft became the\nmaster superstition of the age. The woman accused of witchcraft was\npractically beyond the pale of the law; the mere fact of accusation was\nequal to condemnation.\n\n[66] _Laws and Customs of Scotland_, 2; 56.\n\n[67] _The Seeress of Prevorst._\n\n[68] Iron collars, or Witches\u2019 Bridles, are still preserved in various\nparts of Scotland, which had been used for such iniquitous purposes.\nThese instruments were so constructed that by means of a loop which\npassed over the head, a piece of iron having four points or prongs,\nwas forcibly thrust into the mouth, two of these being directed to the\ntongue and palate, the others pointing outward to each cheek. This\ninfernal machine was secured by a padlock. At the back of the collar\nwas fixed a ring, by which to attach the witch to a staple in the\nwall of her cell. Thus equipped, and day and night waked and watched\nby some skillful person appointed by her inquisitors, the unhappy\ncreature, after a few days of such discipline, maddened by the misery\nof her forlorn and helpless state would be rendered fit for confessing\nanything in order to be rid of the dregs of her life. At intervals\nfresh examinations took place, and they were repeated from time to time\nuntil her \u201ccontumacy,\u201d as it was termed, was subdued. The clergy and\nKirk Sessions appear to have been the unwearied instruments of \u201cpurging\nthe land of witchcraft,\u201d and _to them, in the first instance, all the\ncomplaints and informations were made_.\u2014_Pitcairn_, Vol. I., Part 2, p.\n50.\n\n\u201cWho has not heard of the Langholm witches, and \u2018the branks\u2019 to subdue\nthem? This was a simple instrument formed so as to fit firmly on the\nhead, and to project into the mouth a sharp spike for subjugating the\ntongue. It was much preferred to the ducking-stool, \u2018which not only\nendangered the health of the patient, but also gave the tongue liberty\nbetwixt every dip!\u2019 Scores of these \u2018patients\u2019 were burned alongside\nLangholm castle; and the spot is fully as interesting as our own\nreminder of the gentle days, Gallows Hill, at Salem.\u201d\n\n[69] By statute 33 of Henry VIII., C. 8, all witchcraft and sorcery\nwas to be felony without benefit of clergy. This act continued\nin force till lately to the terror of all ancient females in the\nkingdom.\u2014_Commentaries._ As bad as the Georges are depicted, thanks\nare due to two of them from women. By statute of George II., C. 5,\nno future prosecution was to be carried on against any person for\nconjuration, witchcraft, sorcery or enchantment.\n\n[70] Towards the end of 1593 there was trouble in the family of the\nEarl of Orkney. His brother laid a plot to murder him, and was said to\nhave sought the help of a notorious witch called \u201cAllison Balfour.\u201d No\nevidence could be found connecting her with this particular offense or\nwith witchcraft in general, but it was enough in these matters to be a\nwoman and to be accused. She swore she was innocent, but she was looked\nupon as a pagan who thus aggravated her guilt. She was tortured again\nand again, but being innocent she constantly declared her innocence.\nHer legs were put into the Casctulars\u2014an iron which was gradually\nheated until it burned into the flesh, but no confession could be wrung\nfrom her. The Casctulars having utterly failed to make her tell a lie,\n\u201cthe powers that be,\u201d whom Paul tells us \u201care of God,\u201d tortured her\nhusband, her son and her daughter, a little child of only seven years.\nThe \u201cpowers\u201d knew the tenderness and love of a wife and mother, so\nthey first brought her husband into court and placed him by her side.\nHe was placed in the \u201clong irons,\u201d some accursed instrument. She did\nnot yield. Then her son was tortured; the poor boy\u2019s legs were set in\n\u201cthe boot,\u201d the iron boot, and wedges were driven in, which forced home\ncrushed the very bone and marrow. Fifty-seven mallet strokes were\ndelivered upon the wedges, yet this failed. This innocent tortured\nheroic woman would not confess to a lie. So last of all her baby\ndaughter was brought in, the fair child of seven short years. There was\na machine called the pinniwinkies, a kind of thumb screw which brought\nblood from under the finger nails with a pain terribly severe. These\ntortures were applied to the baby hands, and the mother\u2019s fortitude\nbroke down and she would admit any thing they wished. She confessed\nthe witchcraft. So tired she would have confessed the seven deadly\nsins, but this suffering did not save her to her family. She was burned\nalive, with her last suffering breath protesting her innocence. This\naccount is perfectly well authenticated and taken from the official\nreport of the proceedings. Froude.\u2014_Short Stories on Great Subjects._\n\n[71] The same dark superstition shared the civil councils of Scotland\nas late as the beginning of the 18th century, and the convictions\nwhich then took place are chiefly to be ascribed to the ignorance and\nfanaticism of the clergy.\n\n[72] Excommunication was both of temporal and spiritual effect, the\nperson under ban not only being deprived of absolution, extreme\nunction, consecrated burial, etc., but all persons were forbidden\nto deal with the recalcitrant. Under the strictest protestantism in\nScotland, the clergy held almost entire control. When a woman fell\nunder suspicion of being a witch, the minister denounced her from\nthe pulpit, forbade anyone harboring or sheltering her, and exhorted\nhis parishoners to give evidence against her. To the clergy and Kirk\nSessions were the first complaints made. It is scarcely more than 150\nyears since the last witch was burned in Scotland, having been accused\nof raising a thunder storm by pulling off her stockings.\u2014_Witchcraft\nUnder Protestantism._\n\n[73] Many witches lost their lives in every part of England, without\nbeing brought to trial at all, from injuries received at the hands of\nthe populace. Mackay.\u2014_Memoirs of Extraordinary Popular Delusions._\n\n[74] One of the most powerful incentives to confession was to\nsystematically deprive the suspected witch of her natural sleep. It was\nsaid who but witches can be present and so witness of the doings of\nwitches, since all their meetings and conspiracies are the habits of\ndarkness. \u201cThe voluntarie confession of a witch doth exceede all other\nevidence. How long she has been a witch the devil and she knows best.\u201d\n\n[75] Among the Lancashire witches was Old Demedike, four score years\nold, who had been a witch fifty years, and confessed to possessing\na demon which appeared to her in the form of a brown dog.\u2014_Summer\u2019s\nTrials._\n\n[76] _Ibid._\n\n[77] Which examination, although she was but very young, yet it was\nwonderful to the Court in so great a presence and audience.\u2014_Ibid._\nTies of the tenderest nature did not restrain the inquisitors. Young\ngirls were regarded as the best witnesses against their mothers, and\nthe oaths of children of irresponsible age were received as evidence\nagainst a parent.\u2014_Superstition and Force_, p. 93.\n\n[78] When a reward was publicly offered there seemed to be no end of\nfinding witches, and many kept with great care their note book of\n\u201cExamination of Witches,\u201d and were discovering \u201chellish kinds of them.\u201d\n\n[79] _Salem Witchcraft_ I, 393-4; 2, 373.\n\n[80] I seemed to have stepped back to Puritan time, when an old\ngentleman said to me. \u201cI am descended from that line of witches;\nmy grandmother and 120 others were under condemnation of death at\nNew Bedford, when an order came from the king prohibiting farther\nexecutions.\u201d\n\n[81] Salem, Mass., July 30, 1892.\u2014The 200th anniversary of the hanging\nof Rebecca Nurse of Salem village for witchcraft, was commemorated in\nDanvers Centre, old Salem village, by the Nurse Monument Association.\nThe distinct feature of the occasion was the dedication of a granite\ntablet to commemorate the courage of forty men and women, who at the\nrisk of their lives gave written testimony in favor of Rebecca Nurse in\n1692.\n\n[82] Howes.\u2014_Historical Collection of Virginia_, p. 438.\n\n[83] _Collection Massachusetts Historical Society_ for the year 1800,\np. 241.\n\n[84] No prosecution, suit or proceedings shall be commenced or carried\non in any court of this state against any person for conjuration or\nwitchcraft, sorcery or enchantment or for charging another with such\noffense.\n\n[85] Under the church theory that all members of the witch\u2019s family are\ntainted, the husband of this unfortunate woman hid himself, fearing the\nsame fate.\u2014_Telegram._\n\n\nCHAPTER SIX\n\n[1] He bought his bride of her parents according to the custom of\nantiquity, and she followed the coemption by purchasing with _three_\npieces of copper a just introduction to his treasury and household\nduties. Gibbon.\u2014_Rome_, 4; 395.\n\n[2] By the law of the _Twelve Tables_ woman possessed the right of\nrepudiation in marriage. These tables were a compilation of still older\nlaws or customs, a species of common law incorporated into statutes by\nLachis of Athens, daughter of one Majestes; and were so wise and of\nsuch benefit to the people of Attica that the Romans received them as\nnatural laws in which there was more of patriotism and purity than in\nall the volumes of Popinanus. H. S. Maine.\u2014_Ancient Law._\n\n[3] After the Punic triumphs the matrons of Rome aspired to the\ncommon benefits of a free and opulent republic.... They declined the\nsolemnities of the old nuptials; defeated the annual prescription by an\nabsence of three days, and without losing their name or independence\nsubscribed the liberal and definite terms of a marriage contract. Of\ntheir private fortunes they commuted the use and secured the property;\nthe estate of a wife could neither be alienated or mortgaged by a\nprodigal husband. Religious and civil rites were no longer essential,\nand between persons of similar rank, the apparent community of life was\nallowed as sufficient evidence of their nuptials.... When the Roman\nmatrons became the equal and voluntary companions of their lords, their\nmarriage like other partnerships might be dissolved. Gibbon.\u2014_Rome_,\n4; 347.\n\n[4] Uses or Usucapion, was a form of civil marriage securing the wife\nmore freedom than the form which held her \u201cunder his thumb\u201d as his\ndaughter. It was as old or even older than the Twelve Tables, and\nalthough for many centuries not considered quite as respectable a form\nof marriage as that in which the wife became the husband\u2019s slave with\ndivorce impossible, it eventually grew to be the customary form of\nRoman marriage. Maine.\u2014_Early History of Ancient Institutions_, p. 517.\n\n[5] It was with the state of conjugal relations thus produced that the\ngrowing Christianity of the Roman world waged a war ever increasing in\nfierceness, yet it remained to the last the basis of the Roman legal\nconception of marriage.\u2014_Ibid._\n\n[6] When the Chremes of Terence reproaches his wife for not obeying his\norders and exposing their infant, he speaks like a father and master,\nand silences the scruples of a foolish woman. Milman.\u2014_Note to Gibbons\nRome._\n\n[7] \u201c\u2018Usus\u2019 had the very important consequence that the woman so\nmarried remained in the eye of the law in the family of her father,\nand was under his guardianship and not that of her husband. A complete\nrevolution had thus passed over the constitution of the family. This\nmust have been the period when a jurisconsult of the empire defined\nmarriage as a lifelong fellowship of all divine and human rights.\u201d\n\n[8] Reeves.\u2014_Hist. Eng. Law_, p. 337.\n\n[9] Maine says: No society which preserves any tincture of Christian\nInstitutions is likely to restore to married women the personal liberty\nconferred on them by middle Roman laws.\u2014_Ancient Law._\n\n[10] Reeves says, while many great minds, as Lord Chief Justice Hale,\nLord John Somers, Henry Spellman, Dr. Brady and Sir Martin Wright\nthink feudalism came in with the conqueror, others, as Coke, Seldon,\nBacon and Sir Roger Owen are of opinion that tenures were common among\nthe Saxons. Blackstone, Dalrymple and Sullivan endeavor to compromise\nthe dispute by admitting an imperfect system of feuds to have been\ninstituted before the conquest.\u2014_History of English Law_, Vol. I., p.\n18-19.\n\n[11] A certain bishop, wishing a person to take charge of his castle\nduring his absence, the latter asked how he should support himself. For\nanswer _the bishop_ pointed to a procession of tradesmen with their\ngoods then crossing the valley at their feet.\n\n[12] Wives were bought in England from the fifth to the eleventh\ncentury. Herbert Spencer.\u2014_Descriptive Sociology of England._\n\n[13] There was another law even more odious than Marquette; the\nfather\u2019s right to the price of mundium, in other words, the price of\nhis daughter. Legouve.\u2014_Hist. Morales des Femmes_, p. 104.\n\n[14] Murder under the name of war, the ruin of women under the name of\ngallantry, were the chief occupations of the nobility. Pike.\u2014_Hist.\nof Crime in England._ The chief qualification for success at courts\nwas the power of making and appreciating mirth. The infidelities of\nwomen were commonly the narrator\u2019s theme, and an exhortation to avoid\nmatrimony was the most common form of advice given by a man to his\nfriend. War and intrigue were regarded as the principal amusements\nof life; the acquisition of wealth the only object worth serious\nconsideration. A consequence of this creed was that the husband\nfrequently set a price upon his wife\u2019s virtue, and made a profit out of\nhis own dishonor. Fathers were ready to sell their daughters.\u2014_Ibid._\n\n[15] Both married and single found their worst foes in their\nnearest friends. The traffic in women was none the less real in\nChristian England than it is now in the slave marts of Stamboul or\nConstantinople.\u2014_Ibid._ One of the most recent illustrations of the\ngeneral regard in which woman is held throughout Christendom, is the\nexperience of the young California heiress, Florence Blythe, who\nalthough but fifteen years old, was in constant receipt of proposals\nof marriage both at home and from abroad. Her attorney, General Hunt,\nsaid: \u201cI do not think there is a woman living who has had the number of\nwritten proposals that Florence has received, but in all the letters\nwoman is regarded as a chattel, a thing to be bought and sold. The\nconstant receipt of letters of this character, and the equally constant\nattempt of adventurers to gain a personal interview with the child,\nat last became unendurable, and to escape such insulting persecution,\nFlorence suddenly married a young man of her acquaintance living near\nher.\u201d These letters, among them, from sixty titled Europeans, lords,\ncounts, dukes, barons, viscounts, marquises and even one prince,\nconfirm the statement of August Bebel, that marriage sales of women\nare still as common as in the middle ages, and are expected in most\nChristian countries.\n\n[16] A husband upon his return from the Crusades, finding his wife had\nbeen untrue, imprisoned her in a room so small she could neither stand\nerect nor lie at full length; her only window looking out upon the dead\nbody of her lover swinging in chains.\n\n[17] The Shoshone Indian who hires his wife out as a harlot, inflicts\ncapital punishment on her if she goes with another without his\nknowledge. Bancroft.\u2014_Native Races_, I; 436.\n\n[18] Therefore a single woman for whom no bid was offered, an \u201cold\nmaid\u201d was looked upon with contempt as being of no value in the eyes of\nmen.\n\n[19] _Hist. of Crime in England_, Vol. I, p. 90.\n\n[20] By the laws of the king of Wessex, who lived at the end of the\nVIII century, the purchase of wives is deliberately sanctioned; in\nthe preface it is stated that the compilation was drawn up with the\nassistance of the Bishop of Winchester and a large assemblage of God\u2019s\nservants.\u2014_Ibid._\n\n[21] Nothing, says Pike, was considered but the market value of the\nwoman, and the adulterer was compelled to expend the equivalent of\nher original price on the purchase of a new bride, whom he formally\ndelivered to the injured husband. Nor were these laws merely secular,\nthey were enacted and enforced by all the dread power of the\nchurch.\u2014_Ibid._\n\n[22] In the 14th century either the female character was utterly\ndissolute, or the tyranny of husbands utterly reckless, when we find\nthat it was no uncommon circumstance that women were strangled by\nmasked assassins, or walking by the river side were plunged into it.\nThis drowning of women gave rise to a popular proverb: \u201cIt is nothing,\nonly a woman being drowned.\u201d And this condition constituted the\ndomestic life of England from the 12th century to the first civil war,\nwhen the taste of men for bloodshed found wider scope, and from the\nmurder of women they advanced to the practice of cutting one another\u2019s\nthroats. Disraeli.\u2014_Amenities of Literature_, Vol. I., p. 95.\n\n[23] \u201cAnd they were so covetous that for a little silver they sellen\n\u2019ein daughters, \u2019ein sisters and \u2019ein own wives, to putten \u2019ein to\nlechery.\u201d\n\n[24] The Church from the earliest period furnished its full portion\nto the codes of our simple forefathers, that of the first Christian\nking being that for the property of God and the Church (if stolen)\ntwelvefold compensation was to be made. Thorpe.\u2014_Ancient Laws and\nInstitutions of England._\n\n[25] _Journal of Jurisprudence_, Vol. XVI., Edinburg, 1872.\n\n[26] Until the maiden was wedded she was kept strictly under control,\nand the kind of discipline which was enforced is well illustrated by a\nletter written late in the reign of Henry VI. The writer was the widow\nof a landholder, and she was corresponding with the brother of the\nyoung lady whose case she describes and whom she is anxious to serve by\nfinding a husband. This young lady was under the care of her mother and\nthe following was her condition: She might not speak with any man, not\neven her mother\u2019s servants; and she had since Easter the most part been\nbeaten once in the week, or twice, and sometimes thrice in a day, and\nher hand was broken in two or three places. Pike.\u2014_History of Crime in\nEngland._\n\n[27] Britton.\u2014_Introduction_, p. 39. Glanville.\u2014_De Legibius Anglica_,\np. 158.\n\n[28] Doubtless in all ages marriages were by far oftener determined\nby pecuniary considerations than by love or affection, but proofs\nare wanting to show that marriage was formerly made an object of\nspeculation and exchange in the open market with anything like the same\neffrontery as today. In our time among the propertied classes\u2014the poor\nhave no need of it\u2014marriage barter is frequently carried on with a\nshamelessness which makes the phrases about the sacredness of marriage,\nthat some people never tire of repeating, the emptiest mockery. August\nBebel.\u2014_Woman in the Past, Present and Future._\n\n[29] To make women the special objects of this torture, to teach them\nhardness of heart in the office of executioners, was refinement of\natrocity.... It was for slaves and women that the greatest atrocities\nwere reserved.\u2014_Hist. of Crime in England._\n\n[30] Women in England had burned women to death in the 10th century;\nthey had been set on the stool of filth to be mocked as brewers of bad\nale in the 11th; on the stool of filth they had been jeered as common\nscolds from time immemorial; they were legally beaten by their husbands\ndown to a comparatively recent period. In the 14th century they were\nsuch as circumstances had made them; strong of muscle but hard of\nheart, more fit to be mothers of brigands than to rear gentle daughters\nor honest sons.\u2014_Ibid._\n\n[31] The elder Disraeli says: \u201cWarton, too, has observed that the\nstyle of friendship between males in the reign of Elizabeth would not\nbe tolerated at the present day.\u201d Disraeli himself declares that \u201ca\nmale friend, whose life and fortunes were consecrated to another male,\nwho looks upon him with adoration and talks of him with excessive\ntenderness, appears to us nothing less than a chimerical and monstrous\nlover.\u201d\u2014_Amenities of Literature_, Vol. II., p. 105.\n\n[32] Poisoning or otherwise murdering husbands was a crime visited with\npeculiar severity in almost all codes. Lea.\u2014_Superstition and Force._\n\n[33] Blackstone says it was to be no thicker than a man\u2019s thumb, thus\nan instrument of ever varying size. According to palmistry the thumb of\na self-willed or obstinate man, a cruel man, or of a murderer, is very\nlarge at the upper portion or ball.\n\n[34] Petit treason may happen in three ways: By a servant killing his\nmaster, a wife her husband, or an ecclesiastical person (either secular\nor regular) his superior, to whom he owes faith and obedience. The\npunishment of petit treason in a man is to be drawn and hanged, and in\na woman to be drawn and burnt.\u2014_Commentaries_, Vol. IV., p. 203-4.\n\n[35] But in treason of every kind the punishment of women is the same\nand different from men. For as the decency due to the sex forbids the\nexposing and publicly mangling their bodies, their sentence is to be\ndrawn (dragged) to the gallows and there be burnt alive.\u2014_Ibid_, IV.,\np. 92.\n\n[36] The daily press, in its minute record of events, all unwittingly\nfurnishes many a little item, whose primal reason only the student of\nhistory can read. The Syracuse, N.Y., \u201cDaily Standard,\u201d of February\n22, 1884, published from its exchanges the following incident: \u201cAn\neccentric old man in New Hampshire surprised his neighbors and friends\nthe other day by shouldering his gun and starting for the woods on the\nmorning of his wife\u2019s funeral. On being urged to come back, he refused\nsaying: \u201cShe warn\u2019t no blood relation of mine.\u201d\n\n[37] But now by the statute 30, George 3 c. 48, women convicted in all\ncases of treason shall receive judgment to be drawn to the place of\nexecution, and there to be hanged by the neck till dead. Before this\nhumane statute women were sentenced to be burnt alive for every species\nof treason.\u2014_Commentaries_, p. 92.\n\n[38] See decision _New York Court of Appeals_, January, 1892.\n\n[39] ST. PETERSBURG, September 22\u2014In April last Mrs. Aina Sainio,\nwife of a professor in the State College at Travasteheuse, Finland,\nwas found guilty of poisoning her husband, and in accordance with the\nmediaeval law, which is still in force there, she was sentenced to be\nbeheaded, and her body to be affixed to a beacon and burned. It was\ncharged that Mrs. Sainio had been unfaithful to her husband, carrying\non a liaison with one of the students at the college. She strenuously\ndenied this, and said her motive in killing her husband was to get the\ninsurance of $2,500 on his life as she was deeply in debt. The case\nwas carried to the Court of Appeals and today a decision was handed\ndown affirming the judgment of the trial court and adding to the\npunishment. It transpired during the trial that Mrs. Sainio had forged\nher husband\u2019s name to checks for small sums some time before his death,\nand for this offense the Court of Appeals ordered that her right hand\nbe cut off. Then she will be decapitated, her body fastened to a stake\ncovered with inflammable material and set on fire.\n\n[40] Reported in the _London Telegraph_.\n\n[41] _Telegraphic Report_ from Providence, R.I., September 24, 1892.\n\n[42] Mrs. Judge Seney\u2019s trouble.\u2014A deserted wife suing the woman who\nenticed her husband away from her. TIFFIN, O., February 14\u2014Judge Dodge\ngave his decision yesterday in the novel case of the former Mrs. George\nE. Seney against the present Mrs. George E. Seney. Judge Seney is one\nof the well known lawyers of Ohio, and author of a \u201cCivil Code\u201d that\nbears his name. He married his first wife, Mrs. Anna Seney, in 1858,\nand for fourteen years they lived happily together. At about that time\nMrs. Seney and Miss Walker became very intimate friends, and continued\nto be so until, as is alleged, Mrs. Seney ascertained that Miss Walker\nwas undermining the affections of her husband. A separation between Mr.\nand Mrs. Seney soon followed, and subsequently the Judge married Miss\nWalker. Mrs. Seney, therefore, instituted a suit against her successor,\nclaiming damages to the amount of $10,000 for the seduction of her\nhusband.\u2014_New York Sun._\n\n[43] James Howard, thirty-five years old, was taken from jail at\nTexarkana, Ark., on Wednesday night by a mob and lynched. He was under\narrest for horrible cruelty to his fourteen-year-old wife. The woman\nsays that he frequently tied her feet together while she was in a state\nof nudity, and hanging her up by the feet beat her unmercifully and\nthreatened to kill her if she told anyone of his cruelties. On the\nfirst of November, Howard took a common branding iron, used to brand\nlive stock, and heating it red hot branded a large letter \u201cH\u201d on his\nwife\u2019s person in two places while she was tied to a bed.\n\n[44] \u201cPall Mall Gazette,\u201d 1888.\n\n[45] \u201cWestminster Review,\u201d September, 1887.\n\n[46] Cato, the Roman (pagan), censor three centuries before the\nChristian era, said: \u201cThey who beat their wives or children lay\nsacrilegious hands on the most sacred things in the world. For myself,\nI prefer the character of a good husband to that of a great senator.\u201d\n\n[47] The bill failed of passing upon the ground that the lash belonged\nto the dark ages, degrading a man by its infliction.\n\n[48] An English lady, _Mrs. Margaret Bright Lucus_, in writing a\ndescription of this implement said: \u201cThis country has even now but\nlittle to boast in her laws regarding woman, and your country is\nburdened with similar evil laws; the Franchise is most important.\u201d\n\n[49] The Museum at Reading, England, contains among its curiosities a\nbridle formerly used to stop the mouths of scolding women in that town.\n\n[50] Sometimes called Timbrel, or Gum Stole.\n\n[51] \u201cIt would seem that almost every English town of any importance\nhad its ducking-stool for scolds. In 1741, old Rugby paid 2s 4d for a\nchair for the ducking stool. The parish of Southam, in Warwickshire,\ngot a beautiful stool built in 1718 at an expense of \u00a32 11s 4d. Ancient\nCoventry had two stools.\u201d\n\nThe most noteworthy of all the instruments designed for the correction\nof Eve\u2019s offending daughters was the ducking-stool, known as the\ntumbrel and the trebuchet. A post, across which was a transverse beam\nturning on a swivel and with a chair at one end, was set up on the\nedge of a pond. Into the chair the woman was chained, turned toward\nthe water\u2014a muddy or filthy pond was usually chosen for this purpose\nwhen available\u2014and ducked half a dozen times; or, if the water inflamed\nher instead of acting as a damper, she was let down times innumerable,\nuntil she was exhausted and well nigh drowned.\n\nFrom the frequency with which we find it mentioned in old local and\ncounty histories, in church wardens\u2019 and chamberlains\u2019 accounts, and\nby the poets, we shall probably not be wrong in concluding that at\none time this institution was kept up all over the country.\u2014\u201cLondon\nGraphic.\u201d\n\n[52] John Dillon.\u2014_Colonial Legislation of America._\n\n[53] _Ibid._\n\n[54] JERSEY CITY, N.J., July 23, 1887.\u2014Mrs. Mary Brody, convicted a few\ndays ago of being a common scold, was today sentenced to pay a fine of\n$25 and costs.\n\nOnly the other day a woman in this city, under some ancient unrepealed\nlaw of this state, was arrested and brought before a magistrate on\nthe charge of being a common scold. A too free use of the tongue was\nreckoned a public offense in all the American colonies, and in England\nthe lawful punishment of common scolds was continued until a recent\nday. It was for these that the \u201cducking-stool\u201d was invented, which\nusually consists of a heavy chair fastened to the end of a large piece\nof timber, which was hung by the middle to a post on the river side.\nThe offender was tied into the chair, and then soused into the water\nuntil it was judged that her shrewishness had departed from her.\nSometimes she was dipped so thoroughly that her breath departed for\ngood, as happened to a certain elderly lady at Ratcliffe Highway. The\nducking-stool was constantly hanging in its place, and on the back\nof it were engraved devils laying hold of scolds, etc.\u2014\u201cSt. Louis\nRepublican.\u201d\n\n[55] If it is a crime to buy and sell wives, let the men who do such\nthings be punished; if there is no crime in the transaction, why should\nthe wife who is sold be punished. Unfortunately this is not a solitary\ninstance of law made or administered to punish women in order to teach\nmen.\u2014_English Women\u2019s Suffrage Journal._\n\nBefore Mr. Justice Denman, at the Liverpool Assizes, Betsey Wardle was\ncharged with marrying George Chisnal at Eccleston, bigamously, her\nformer husband being alive. It was stated by the woman that, as her\nfirst husband had sold her for a quart of beer, she thought she was at\nliberty to marry again.\n\nGeorge Chisnal, the second husband, apparently just out of his teens\nwas called.\n\nHis Lordship\u2014\u201cHow did you come to marry this woman?\u201d\n\nWitness [in the Lancashire vernacular]\u2014\u201cHoo did a what?\u201d [Laughter.]\n\nQuestion repeated\u2014\u201cA bowt her.\u201d [Laughter.]\n\nHis Lordship\u2014\u201cYou are not fool enough to suppose you can buy another\nman\u2019s wife?\u201d Oi? [Laughter.]\n\nHis Lordship\u2014\u201cHow much did you give for her?\u201d Six pence. [Great\nlaughter.]\n\nHis Lordship asked him how long he had lived with the prisoner.\n\nWitness\u2014\u201cGoing on for three years.\u201d\n\nHis Lordship\u2014\u201cDo you want to take her back again?\u201d\n\n\u201cAwl keep her if you loike.\u201d [Laughter.]\n\nHis Lordship (addressing the prisoner)\u2014It is absolutely necessary\nthat I should pass some punishment upon you in order that people\nmay understand that men have no more right to sell their wives than\nthey have to sell other people\u2019s wives, or to sell other people\u2019s\nhorses or cows, or anything of the kind. You cannot make that a legal\ntransaction. So many of you seem to be ignorant of that, that it is\nnecessary to give you some punishment in order that you may understand\nit. It is not necessary it should be long, but you must be imprisoned\nand kept to hard labor for one week.\u2014\u201cNews of the World,\u201d 1883.\n\nA peculiar case came up in the mayor\u2019s office at Vincennes, Ind., in\n1887. A man named Bonn sold his wife to another man named Burch for\n$300, and held Burch\u2019s note therefor. The sale was a reality, but the\nnote was never paid, hence the difficulty.\n\n\u201cWe know a man in the Black Hills\u2014a man who is well-to-do and\nrespected\u2014the foundation of whose fortune was $4,000, the sum for\nwhich he sold his wife to a neighbor. The sale was purely a matter of\nbusiness all around, and the parties to it were highly satisfied.\u201d\n1889.\u2014\u201c_The Times_,\u201d Bismarck, N.D.\n\n[56] In \u201cThe Doncaster Gazette\u201d of March 25, 1803, a sale is thus\ndescribed: \u201cA fellow sold his wife, as a cow, in Sheffield market place\na few days ago. The lady was put into the hands of a butcher, who held\nher by a halter fastened around her waist. \u2018What do you ask for your\ncow?\u2019 said a bystander. \u2018A guinea\u2019 replied the husband. \u2018Done,\u2019 cried\nthe other, and immediately led away his bargain. We understand that\nthe purchaser and his \u2018cow\u2019 live very happily together.\u201d Ashton.\u2014_The\nProgress of Women._\n\n[57] \u201cMorning Herald,\u201d March 11, 1802.\u2014On the 11th of last month a\nperson sold, at the market cross, in Chapel en la Frith, a wife, a\nchild, and as much furniture as would set up a beggar, for eleven\nshillings.\n\n\u201cMorning Herald,\u201d April 16, 1802.\u2014A butcher sold his wife by auction at\nthe last market day at Hereford. The lot brought \u00a31 4s. and a bowl of\npunch.\n\n\u201cAnnual Register,\u201d February 14, 1806.\u2014A man named John Garsthorpe\nexposed his wife for sale in the market at Hall about 1 o\u2019clock, but\nowing to the crowd which such an extraordinary occurrence had brought\ntogether, he was obliged to defer the sale, and take her away, about\n4 o\u2019clock. However, he again brought her out, and she was sold for 20\nguineas, and delivered with a halter, to a person named Houseman, who\nhad lodged with them for four or five years.\n\n\u201cMorning Post,\u201d October 10, 1808.\u2014One of those disgraceful scenes\nwhich have of late become too common took place on Friday se\u2019nnight at\nKnaresborough. Owing to some jealousy, or other family difference, a\nman brought his wife, equipped in the usual style, and sold her at the\nmarket cross for 6d and a quid of tobacco.\u2014_Ibid._\n\n[58] Our laws are based on the all-sufficiency of man\u2019s rights;\nsociety exists for men only; for women, merely in so far as they are\nrepresented by some man, are in the _mundt_, or keeping of some man.\nHerbert Spencer.\u2014_Descriptive Sociology, England._\n\n[59] A committee appointed by the National Woman Suffrage Association,\nat that time in convention assembled in Washington, waited upon\nPresident Cleveland with the memorial.\n\n[60] Mediaeval Christian husbands imprisoned erring wives in cages so\nsmall they could neither stand upright nor lie down at full length.\nMediaeval Christian priests boiled living infants in osier baskets in\npresence of helpless heretical mothers. In mediaeval times the public\nscourging of women was one of the amusements of the carnival; even as\nlate as the eighteenth century English gentlemen, according to _Herbert\nSpencer_, made up parties of pleasure to see women whipped at Bridewell.\n\n[61] Seduction was connived at that the guardian might secure the\nestate of the ward.\u2014_Ibid._\n\n[62] The Salic law had not preference to one sex over the other\u2014purely\neconomical law which gave houses and lands to males who should dwell\nthere, and consequently to whom it would be of most service.\u2014_Spirit of\nthe Laws._\n\n[63] In order to give color to the usurpation (for it was nothing\nbetter), the lawyers cited an obscure article from the code of the\nbarbarous Salians, which, as they pretended had always been the\nacknowledged law of the French monarchy.... Since that time the Salic\nlaw, as it is called, has been regarded as an essential constitutional\nprinciple in France.\u2014_Student\u2019s History of France_, p. 19.\n\n[64] Montesquieu.\u2014_Spirit of the Laws._\n\n[65] Women in England were for more than a thousand years legislated\nfor as slaves. Crimes committed by men which could be atoned for by a\nfine, were by women punished with burning alive. The period is not very\ndistant when she was distinctly legislated for as a servant and but on\na level with chattel slaves.\u2014_Hist. Crime in England._\n\n[66] _American Law_, 1829.\n\n[67] Through the influence of Governor M. Nutt, who instituted many\nreforms.\n\n[68] There was no distinction between offenses against the church on\none hand, and offenses against the state or individual on the other.\nCases of theft and sorcery, like those of witchcraft, could be tried in\nthe church. From the position of the clergy as law-givers, it follows\nnot only that the secular laws had the sanction of religion, but that\nreligious observance were enforced by the secular arm.\n\n[69] From 499 to 1066. Herbert Spencer.\u2014_Descriptive Sociology._\n\n[70] To women were still applied those punishments, which had been\ninstituted by the men whose practice it was to buy their wives and sell\ntheir daughters. Pike.\u2014_Hist. Crime in England._\n\n[71] Bracton.\u2014_De Legibus Anglice I_, 479.\n\n[72] \u201cThe reformation altered, but did not better the condition of\nwoman. Socially it rescued her from the priest to make her the chattel\nof the husband, and doctrinally it expunged her altogether. Martin\nLuther declared that the two sacred books, which especially point to\nwoman as the agent of man\u2019s final redemption\u2014the books of Esther and\nRevelations\u2014that in \u2018so far as I esteem them, it would be no loss if\nthey were thrown into the river\u2019.\u201d\n\n[73] \u201cThe forefathers of _Benjamin Franklin_ used a Bible kept fastened\nunder the seat of a four-legged stool, the leaves held in place by\npack-threads. When the family assembled to hear it read, one of the\nnumber was posted as sentinel some distance from the house to give\nwarning of any stranger\u2019s approach, in which case the stool was\nhurriedly replaced upon its legs, and some one seated upon it for more\neffectual concealment of the book.\u201d\n\n[74] Herbert Spencer.\u2014_Descriptive Sociology, England._\n\n[75] The _English Women\u2019s Suffrage Journal_, November, 1886, reported:\n\u201cMrs. \u2014\u2014 rose to move a resolution. After reading a memorial, she said:\n\u2019Now, when I was asked to add a few words of support to the memorial\nI have just read, my first feeling was that I was very far from the\nright person to do so, inasmuch as being a married woman\u2014and therefore\ndisqualified\u2014and rightly disqualified,\u201d etc.\n\n[76] The coverture of a woman disables her from making contracts to\nthe prejudice of herself or her husband without his allowance or\nconfirmation.\n\n[77] I have arrived at conclusions which I keep to myself as yet, and\nonly utter as Greek _phogagta sunetotsi_, the principle of which is,\nthat there will never be a good world for women till the last monk, and\ntherewith the last remnant of the monastic idea of, and legislation\nfor, woman, i.e. the Canon Law is civilized off the face of the earth.\nMeanwhile all the most pure and high-minded women in England and Europe\nhave been brought up under the shadows of the Canon Law, and have\naccepted it with their usual divine self-sacrifice, as their destiny by\nlaw of God, and nature, and consider their own womanhood outraged when\nit, their tyrant, is meddled with. Canon Charles Kingsley.\u2014_Letter to\nJohn Stuart Mill_, June 17, 1849, in _Life and Letters_.\n\n[78] Dowers were first introduced into England by the Danish king,\nCnut or Canute, and into Denmark by Swein, father of Canute, who\nbestowed it upon Danish ladies in grateful acknowledgment of their\nhaving parted with their jewels to ransom him from the Vandals. For\naccount of Dowers, see _History of Dowers_; Grote.\u2014_History of Greece\n2_, 112-13; Alexander.\u2014_History of Women_; Lord Kames.\u2014_Sketch of the\nhistory of Man_; _Histoire des Morales des Femmes_. In Denmark, King\nSweinn Forkbeard was the first to give woman a share in her parents\u2019\nproperty. Saxo Grammaticus says, The king was taken prisoner by the\nVinds who demanded so large a sum of money for his ransom, the men\nof Denmark would not pay it, so their king remained a prisoner. The\nwomen of Denmark sold their ornaments and ransomed him. From gratitude\nthe king decreed that afterwards daughters should inherit one-third\nof their father\u2019s property. _Journal of Jurisprudence._ One especial\nright belonged to wives among the Northmen; this was the custody of her\nhusband\u2019s keys, and if he refused them the wife could compel him by law\nto give her their possession. These were the keys of the store-room,\nchest, and cupboard.\n\n[79] The law of dower was less favorable to the wife in the 13th\ncentury than it became later.\n\n[80] See _Reeves_ pp. 156-6.\n\n[81] Sheldon Amos.\u2014_Science of Law._\n\n[82] _History of Women_, 1779.\n\n[83] Higgins says the word widow comes from Vidya, to know.\n\n[84] _Ancient Laws of Ireland, Sanchus Mor._ pp. 347-51.\n\n[85] At a time when the English law of husband and wife, which now\nfor three centuries, has been substituted for the Irish law in this\ncountry, has been condemned by a committee of the House of Commons, as\nunjust towards the wife, and when the most advanced of modern thinkers\nare trying to devise some plan by which wives may be placed in a\nposition more nearly approaching to equality with the husband, it is\ninteresting to discover in the much despised laws of the ancient Irish,\nthe recognition of the principle on which efforts are being made to\nbase our legislation on this subject. Preface to _Sanchus Mor._ Vol. 2.\n\n[86] Vol. 3, p. 35.\u2014_Ibid._\n\n[87] _Rambles and Studies in Old South Wales._\u2014Wirt Sikes.\n\n[88] The three peculiars of a women, are her cowyll, her gowyn, and her\nsarand; the reason these three are called three peculiars, is because\nthey are the three properties of a woman and cannot be taken from her\nfor any cause; her cowyll is what she receives for her maidenhood; her\nsarand is for every beating given her by her husband, except for three\nthings; and those three for which she may be beaten are, for giving\nanything she ought not to give; for being detected with another man in\na covert; and for wishing drivel on her husband\u2019s beard; and if for\nbeing found with another man he chastises her, he is not to have any\nsatisfaction beside that, for there ought not to be both satisfaction\nand vengeance for the same crime; her gowyn is, if she detect her\nhusband with another woman, let him pay her six score pence for the\nfirst offense, for the second, one pound; if she detect him a third\ntime she can separate from him without leaving anything that belongs to\nher. _Aneurin Owen_, Professor of Welsh Law.\n\n[89] The law enacts that she ought not to suffer loss on account of the\nman, since she received no benefit from him, and therefore he is to\nrear the child. _Ancient Laws and Institutions of Wales._\n\n[90] The Welsh laws of Howell the Good were enacted by four laics\nand two clerks who were summoned lest the laws should ordain anything\ncontrary to scripture. _Ibid._\n\n[91] A woman cannot be admitted as surety or as a witness concerning\nman. _Ibid._\n\n[92] _Civil Code_, Art 340.\n\n[93] _The Woman Question in Europe._\u2014T. Stanton. This law of France\ndiffers greatly from the old Welsh pre-christian law, which threw the\nsupport of an illegitimate child upon the father. Notwithstanding\nthe responsibility thus thrown upon her, a French proverb declares\nthat \u201cthe most reasonable woman never attains the sense of a boy of\nfourteen.\u201d\n\n[94] It was no mere accident that the French language only possessed\none word, _l\u2019homme_, for man, and human being. French law only\nrecognizes man as a human being.\u2014_August Bebel._\n\n[95] Legouve\u2014_History of Morals of Women._\n\n[96] The baby was born in the next house, and of course I was\ninterested, how can one not be interested when one of these little\nangels becomes imprisoned in the earth form and begins a career that\nmakes one tremble to think of? Meeting the father a few hours later I\nask the customary question. \u201cAnother no account girl to be supported,\u201d\nhe said gloomily, and passed on.\u2014_Woman\u2019s World_. A father of experience\nspoke differently: \u201cMy gals never forget me. They married and went away\nto their own homes: and though they were none of them well-to-do, yet\nnot one of them ever saw the time she wouldn\u2019t steal a dollar from her\nhusband to give to father or mother; but it isn\u2019t so with the boys.\nThey never knew they owed me anything; they never put their hands in\ntheir pockets for me; they never laid awake o\u2019 nights thinking how to\nscrimp household expenses to get me or mother a present like the gals\ndid. And yet when I was araisin\u2019 \u2019em I thought one boy was worth a\ndozen gals.\u201d\n\n[97] See _Scandinavian Jurisprudence_.\n\n[98] A story is told by an American traveller, of a party met upon the\ncars, the mother a delicate little personage, the father stout and\nstrong. Upon leaving the train he walked off incommoded by a single\ntraveling impedimenta, while the wife was almost hidden under the pack\nshe was carrying. With indignation the American asked, \u201cwhy do you not\nlet the man take some of these things?\u201d \u2018What! and he the father of a\nfamily?\u2019 was the surprised answer.\n\n[99] It is unnecessary to let the whole many-colored map of German\ncommon law pass in review; a few specimens will suffice. According\nto German common law woman is everywhere in the position of a minor\nwith regard to man; her husband is her lord and master, to whom she\nowes obedience in marriage. If she be disobedient, Prussian law allows\na husband of \u201clow estate\u201d to inflict moderate bodily chastisement.\nAs no provision is made for the number or severity of the blows,\nthe amount of such chastisement is left to the sovereign discretion\nof the man. In the communal law of Hamburg the regulation runs as\nfollows: \u201cThe moderate chastisement of a wife by her husband is\njust and permissible.\u201d Similar enactments exist in many parts of\nGermany. The Prussian common law further decrees that the husband\ncan determine the length of time during which a woman must suckle\nher child. All decisions with regard to the children rest with the\nfather. When he dies the wife is everywhere under the obligation of\naccepting a guardian for the children; she is decided to be under age,\nand incapable of conducting the education of children alone, even\nwhen their means of support are derived entirely from her property\nor her labor. Her fortune is managed by her husband, and in cases\nof bankruptcy is regarded in most states as his and disposed of\naccordingly, unless a special contract has been made before marriage.\nWhen landed property is entailed on the eldest child, a daughter has no\nrights, as long as husband or brothers are alive; she cannot succeed\nunless she has no brothers or has lost them by death. She cannot\nexercise the political rights which are as a rule connected with landed\nproperty, unless in some exceptional cases, as for instance in Saxony,\nwhere communal regulations in the country allow her to vote, but deny\nher the right of being elected. But even this right is transferred to\nher husband if she marry. In most states she is not free to conclude\nagreements without the consent of her husband, unless she be engaged in\nbusiness on her own account, which recent legislation permits her to\ndo. She is excluded from every kind of public activity. The Prussian\nlaw concerning societies, forbids school-boys and apprentices under\neighteen, and women to take part in political associations and public\nmeetings. Until within the last few years women were forbidden by\nvarious German codes to attend the public law courts as listeners. If\na woman becomes pregnant of an illegitimate child she has no claim on\nsupport if she accepted any present from the father at the time of\ntheir intimacy. If a woman is divorced from her husband, she continues\nto bear his name in eternal memory of him, unless she happens to marry\nagain.\n\nAugust Bebel.\u2014_Woman in the Past, Present and Future._\n\n[100] Who, indeed, would not have been received by the queen.\n\n[101] A German girl continues to be a maid-of-all-work until\ncircumstances elevate her to a higher position. She becomes a mother,\nand this opens a fresh career to her as an _amme_ or wet nurse. Her\nlines thenceforward fall in pleasant places. An _amme_ is a person of\nconsideration. No disgrace or loss of character is attached to the\nirregularity of conduct which often is the origin of her promotion to\na higher sphere. Her wages are quadrupled; her fare by comparison is\nsumptuous; she can never be scolded; she is called upon to fulfill but\none duty. The occupation is so much more remunerative than ordinary\nservice, that one can scarcely be surprised if plenty of women are\nfound ready and willing to follow the trade. With them the child is\nonly a means to an end. Marriage among the lower orders in Germany is\ncumbered about with so many restrictions and conditions, that it has\ncome to be looked upon as almost an impossibility.\n\n[102] When _Miss Aarta Hansteen_, a Norwegian lady announced her\npurpose of lecturing on woman\u2019s natural equality with man, she met\nlittle or no support, the church strenuously opposing on ground of\nwoman\u2019s original curse.\n\n[103] Translated into English under title of \u201cNora,\u201d by _Miss Frances\nLord_.\n\n[104] So profound was its effect that visiting invitations were coupled\nwith the request not to speak of the work.\n\n[105] _Marian Brown Shipley_, an American lady, long a resident of\nSweden and thoroughly conversant with its literature and tone of\nthought, said of it, \u201cA more glorious thing has not been done in Sweden\nfor centuries, Strindberg has defied church and state, striking both to\ntheir foundations with his merciless satire, and rallied the Swedish\npeople at a single stroke.\u201d\n\n[106] Bjornsen said, \u201cThe confiscating of August Strindberg\u2019s book\n_Giftas_, is the greatest literary scandal in the North in my time. It\nis worse than when one wished to put me in the house of correction on\naccount of the King; or thrust out Ibsen from the society of honorable\npeople for gjengungerd (Ghosts).\u201d\n\n[107] March 30, 1882.\n\n[108] _Russian Revolt._\n\n[109] A Russian writer of the 17th century said: \u201cAs Eve did wrong, so\nthe whole race of women become sinful and the cause of evil.\u201d\n\n[110] She was spoken of as a \u201cVanity itself,\u201d \u201cA storm in the home,\u201d \u201cA\nflood that swells everything,\u201d \u201cA serpent nourished in the bosom,\u201d \u201cA\nspear penetrating the heart,\u201d \u201cA constantly flying arrow.\u201d\n\n[111] _Rural Life in Russia.\u2014The Nineteenth Century._\n\n[112] See Chap. 4. p. 161.\n\n[113] I myself am the happy possessor of a little rude wooden\nbas-relief, framed and glazed, of two saints, whose names I have\nungratefully forgotten, to whom if you pray as you go out to commit a\ncrime, however heinous, you take your pardon with you.\u2014_Rural Life in\nRussia._\n\n[114] See Chap. 4. p. 182.\n\n[115] Reported by _Mrs. Livermore_.\n\n[116] _Leavenworth Standard_, Dec. 21, 1886.\n\n[117] Under common law a woman is classified with lunatics, idiots,\ninfants and minors.\n\n\nCHAPTER SEVEN\n\n[1] Milton\u2019s oriental views of the function of women led him not only\nto neglect but to prevent the education of his daughters. They were\nsent to no school at all, but were handed over to a school mistress in\nthe house. He would not allow them to learn any language, saying with\na sneer that \u201cfor a woman one tongue is enough.\u201d The miseries however\nthat follow the selfish sacrifice of others is so sure to strike, that\nthere needs no future world of punishment to adjust the balance. The\ntime came when Milton would have given worlds that his daughters had\nlearned the tongues. He was blind and could only get at his precious\nbook\u2014could only give expression to his precious verses through the eyes\nand hands of others. Whose hands and whose eyes so proper for this as\nhis daughters? He proceeded to train them to read to him, parrot-like,\nin five or six languages which he (the schoolmaster) could at one time\nhave easily taught them; but of which they now could not understand a\nword. He turned his daughters into reading machines. It is appalling\nto think of such a task. That Mary should revolt and at last after\nrepeated contests with her taskmaster, learn to hate her father\u2014that\nshe should, when some one spoke in her presence of her father\u2019s\napproaching marriage, make the dreadful speech that it was no news\nto hear of his wedding, but if she could hear of his death, that was\nsomething\u2014is unutterably painful, but not surprising.\u2014_The Athenaeum._\n\n[2] _The Church as It Is._\u2014Parker Pillsbury, pp. 32-3-4-5-6.\n\n[3] Report of the _Proceedings of the Missionary Conference_.\u2014Mr.\nPerkins\u2019 speech.\n\n[4] The same hymns are sung, the same doctrine preached, the same\nnecessity for salvation emphasized, and justification by faith is made\nthe corner stone of redemption.\n\n[5] Historians have declared that \u201cNowhere did the spirit of Puritanism\nin its evil as well as its good, more thoroughly express itself than\nin Massachusetts and Rhode Island.\u201d Boston, for its atrocities was\nknown as \u201cThe Bloody Town.\u201d \u201cThe Emancipation of Massachusetts\u201d by\nBrooks Adams, gives a very correct account of the retarding influence\nof Puritan bigotry in the development of intellectual truth in the New\nEngland States.\n\n[6] _The true character of Presbyterian Pastors in Scotland in Time of\nCharles II._\n\n[7] When her father\u2019s name was mentioned, Dora said, \u201cDon\u2019t speak to\nme of my father, Mr. Morris, you and the whole church know that my\nfather, prophet though you call him, broke many a woman\u2019s heart. If it\nis required of me to break as many hearts and ruin as many women as\nmy father did, I should go to perdition before I would go back into\nthe church again, and\u2014\u201d \u201cOh, sister Dora!\u201d exclaimed the teacher in\nconsternation at her clearness of vision. \u201cIt is a fact and you know\nit,\u201d she continued, \u201cyou know that many of his wives died of broken\nhearts and how did he leave the rest? Look at my mother and look at all\nthe rest of them! A religion that breaks women\u2019s hearts and ruins them\nis of the devil. That\u2019s what Mormonism does. Don\u2019t talk to me of my\nfather.\u201d\u2014_Reported in the Chicago Inter Ocean._\n\n[8] A correspondent writing for an eastern paper from Salt Lake City,\na few years since, said: \u201cOf all the ill-conditioned, God-forsaken,\nhopeless looking people I ever saw, the women here beat them all.\nYesterday was supply day for the Mormons living outside the city.\nThey bring their wives into town in dead-axle wagons, and fill the\nvacant room with children who look fully as bad as their mothers, if\nnot worse. Many of them are lean and hump-backed and all look sickly\nand ill-clad. Two out of three women on the streets yesterday, had\nnursing infants in their arms. One of the saints had thirteen wives and\nninety-four children; another had nine wives and five nursling babies,\nwhich he exhibited with all the pride I should take in a lot of fine\nhorses. I never realized the infernal nature of the institution nor its\neffect upon society as I do now.\u201d\n\n[9] _Key to Theology_, by Parley Pratt.\n\n[10] _Ibid._\n\n[11] The following conversation took place between a mistress and\nan Irish servant girl: \u201cBridget, why are not women ever priests?\u201d\n\u201cOh! they couldn\u2019t be; they\u2019re too wicked.\u201d \u201cYou don\u2019t believe\nsuch nonsense, do you\u2014you don\u2019t believe women are more wicked than\nmen?\u201d \u201cYes, ma\u2019am,\u201d replied Bridget with emphasis; \u201cthey\u2019re a dale\nmore wicked; they can\u2019t iver be prastes, for they brought sin into\nthe world. Eve was the very first sinner; I learned it all in the\ncatechism.\u201d\n\n[12] In a recent Catholic Allocution, emanating from the dignitaries\nof that church on the Pacific Coast, it was said: \u201cThe church, like\nChrist, is the same yesterday, today and forever; it is the same here\nas in other parts of the world; its sacred laws, enacted under the\nguidance of the divine spirit, are as binding here as in any other\nplace.\u201d\n\n[13] We do not, indeed, prize as highly as some of our countrymen\nappear to do the ability to read, write and cipher. Some men are born\nto be leaders, and the rest are born to be led. The best ordered and\nadministered state is that in which the few are well educated and lead,\nand the many are trained to obedience.\u2014\u201c_Catholic Review._\u201d\n\n[14] The Mormon faith belts Idaho, Montana, Arizona, New Mexico,\nNevada, Utah and Wyoming, a portion of the country that is wealthier\nthan any other portion in its natural products. It is not simply in\nUtah that this power of Mormonism is found, but it is spreading in\nevery territory. Every railroad in that section is partially built\nby Mormon laborers. They are spreading all over that country. They\ncontrol, in three or four states there, the balance of power. They\ncontrol every election that is held in Utah, and every man is dictated\nto in relation to his vote. They also control the ballot-box in Idaho\nand Wyoming, and are thus liable in time to come, should the two\nMormon territories become states, to throw sixteen Senators into our\nCongress. They openly boast of their intention to take their plural\nsystem to your watering places here in the east, Saratoga, Newport and\nother resorts. I realize the struggle of the past when the manhood of\nour nation was put to the test, and I know there is another contest\napproaching. The leaders say they intend to fight this contest until\nMormonism prevails\u2014_Mormonism and treason to the United States\nGovernment._\n\n\nCHAPTER EIGHT\n\n[1] See _Decision of New York Court of Appeals_ 1892, page 463-4.\n\n[2] During the Parliament Commission inquiry, a witness, Peter Garkel,\ncollier, said that he preferred women to boys as drawers; they were\nbetter to manage and kept time better; they would fight and shriek and\neverything but let anybody pass them. The _London National Reformer_\nstates that \u201cThe first woman member (Mrs. Jane Pyne), of the London\nSociety of Compositors was admitted by the executive on August 30\n(1892). Two years ago Miss Clementine Black applied for permission to\njoin the society but the request had to be refused on the ground that\n\u201cit was not proposed that woman should be paid on the same scale as\nmen.\u201d\n\n[3] Lecture by Felix Adler, 1892, _The Position of Woman in the\nPresent_.\n\n[4] \u201cThe New York Court of Appeals has rendered an opinion which shows\nthat married women in that state are still in bondage. A woman fell\ndown a coal-hole and sued for damages, recovering $500. The defendant\nasked for a new trial on the ground that the woman was working for her\nhusband and the court had taken into account her loss of wages. The\nCourt of Appeals reversed the decision and sent the case back for a new\ntrial. It held that the services of a wife belonged to her husband, and\nshe can not recover any wages even if she holds his written promise to\npay.\u201d\u2014_Chicago Inter Ocean._ Jan. 1892.\n\n\nCHAPTER NINE\n\n[1] Generally these conventicles produced very many bastards, and the\nexcuse they (the ministers) made for that, was, \u201cwhere sin abounds the\nGrace of God super abounds; there is no condemnation in those that are\nin Christ.\u201d Sometimes this: \u201cThe lambs of God may sport together; to\nthe pure all things are pure.\u201d Nay, generally they are of opinion that\na man is never a true saint till he have a fall like that of David with\nBathsheba, _The true character of the Presbyterian Pastors and People\nof Scotland_. Reign of King Charles II\u2014and since the Revolution, p. 12.\n\n[2] Mr. Mott a member of the Salvation army in Syracuse, having led\nastray another member, a young girl of seventeen and being requested to\ndo her the justice of marrying her, replies that he has a great mission\nconverting the world and has no time for marrying. He took an active\npart in the salvation meeting the other night. He says he was doing as\nJesus did, and was free from sin. He carried the flag in the streets\nand prayed three times. There was great disorder and indignation at\nMott\u2019s impudence in praying and speaking.\u2014_Syracuse Daily Standard._\n1883.\n\n[3] _The Book of Pitris._\n\n[4] _Light on the Path._\n\n[5] Mrs. Gage, _Chairman of the Resolution Committee_.\n\n[6] Both Marie Weston Chapman, and Whittier, immortalized this letter\nin verse, Mrs. Chapman by a spirited poem entitled: \u201cThe Times that\ntry Men\u2019s souls,\u201d and Whittier in one called \u201cA Pastoral Letter.\u201d This\n\u201cClerical Bull\u201d was fulminated with special reference to those two\nnoble South Carolina women, Sarah M. and Angelina E. Grimke, who were\nat that time publicly pleading for those in bonds as bound with them,\nwhile on a visit to Massachusetts. It was written by the Rev. Dr.\nNehemiah Adams, of Boston, author of \u201cA South-side View of Slavery.\u201d\n\n[7] No man who remembers 1837 and its lowering clouds will deny that\nthere was hardly any contribution to the anti-slavery movement greater\nor more impressive than the crusade of these Grimke sisters from South\nCarolina through the New England States.\u2014_Wendell Phillips._\n\n[8] Who afterwards married Stephen Foster, one of the apostles of the\nanti-slavery cause.\n\n[9] Decomposed eggs, the contents of stables, and even of outhouses,\nwere hurled at the speaker and those assembled to listen.\n\n[10] Rev. Samuel J. May first had his attention called to the wrongs of\nwomen under Church and State by a striking comparison of the two from\nthe lips of a woman. Priestly opposition to new ideas, and to woman\u2019s\ntaking part in reform work, still continues to be manifest, as shown\nby the tour of General Weaver and Mrs. Lease, through the Southern\nStates in the fall of 1892. \u201cThe notorious Mrs. Lease,\u201d as she was\ntermed, was met by hooting, howling, egg-throwing mobs, and in Atlanta\n\u201can eminent minister of the strongest religious denomination (Baptist)\nin the South\u201d preached against the third party, September 18th, five\ndays before that on which General Weaver and Mrs. Lease were to speak\nin that city. This sermon, reported by the Constitution, as a \u201cred-hot\nroasting\u201d declared against the political party that would employ women\nas speakers, \u201cunsex American women,\u201d as an evidence of the skepticism\nof the age. Nor is this the only recent instance of pulpit opposition\nto woman. After the formation of the woman\u2019s National Liberal League,\nWashington, February 1890, clergymen in different portions of the\ncountry\u2014Washington, Iowa, Massachusetts, etc., hurled their anathemas\nagainst this association, as inimical to Bible morality, and especially\nagainst the women leading in this step. In addition to these sermons,\na Catholic Orphanage of seven hundred children, was instructed to pray\nagainst such demoralizing ideas; and beyond this, letters passing\nbetween influential women fell under United States supervision, and\nwere opened in transit.\n\n[11] Lucretia Mott foremost among these delegates, after this rejection\ndecided upon holding a Woman\u2019s Rights Convention, upon her return to\nAmerica, which should present the wrongs under which women suffered.\nThis was done, 1848, at Seneca Falls, N.Y.\n\n[12] Through _Senator Joseph E. Brown_.\n\n[13] Several ladies well known for their work in the enfranchisement\nof their sex, attended this trial, the _New York Sun_ facetiously\nreferring to the presence of \u201cthose eminent Presbyterians, Lillie\nDevereux Blake, Matilda Joslyn Gage and Susan A. King.\u201d\n\n[14] Report of the Washington D.C. \u201c_Republican_.\u201d\n\n[15] Ably reviewed each week as they appeared, by Mrs. Lillie Devereux\nBlake.\n\n[16] _Lenten Lectures_, p. 56-7-114.\n\n[17] WOMEN AND THEIR SPHERE! Rev. Dr. Dix, some weeks since, came to\nthe front with a series of sermons in which, by unsupported assertion,\nhe managed to demonstrate that women in the United States are no longer\nornamental. The trouble in the mind of the reverend D.D. seems to be\nthat women, having grown in the knowledge of the truth and of that\nliberty wherewith Christ maketh free, have concluded that their sphere\nis not to be man\u2019s slave\u2014his plaything, a human gewgaw, to be fondled,\ncaressed, or kicked as the masculine mind may elect. If it is important\nfor man to \u201cknow himself,\u201d brave women have concluded that it is quite\nas essential for a woman to know herself, and with a heroism born\nof rights conferred by God Himself, women have in these latter days\nresolved to map out their own sphere independent of man\u2019s dictation.\nThey have made commendable headway. They have succeeded in shaking\ndown a number of antiquated citadels where ignorance, superstition,\nprejudice, despotism and cruelty found refuge, and, as they tumbled,\nthe breath of popular indignation has blown the fragments away like\nchaff in the grasp of a tornado. These brave women, finding out that\u2014\n\n\u201cLife is real, life is earnest,\u201d\n\nset themselves about solving its problems for themselves and for their\nsex. Some of them asked for the ballot. Why? Because they wanted\nto obliterate from the statute books such laws as restricted their\nliberties and circumscribed their sphere. As wives they wanted to\nbe the equals of their husbands before the law. Why not? As mothers\nthey wanted to be the equal of their sons before the law. Why not? A\nthousand reasons have been assigned why not, but they do not answer the\ndemand. What is wanted as prudent guarantees that the ballot will be\nwisely wielded by those upon whom the great right has been conferred?\nThe answer is ready\u2014intellect, education, a fair comprehension of the\nobligations of citizenship, loyalty to the Government, to republican\ninstitutions and the welfare of society. It is not contended that\nwomen do not possess these qualifications, but the right is withheld\nfrom them nevertheless, and by withholding this right a hundred others\nare included, every one of which when justice bears sway will be\ngranted. This done woman\u2019s sphere will regulate itself as does man\u2019s\nsphere. _The Boston Herald_ in a recent issue takes Dr. Dix to task\nfor narrowness of vision and weakness of grasp in discussing \u201cthe\ncalling of a Christian woman,\u201d and then proceeds to outline its own\nviews on the \u201csphere of capable women,\u201d in which it is less robust than\nthe reverend D.D. To intimate that the Infinite Disposer of Events\nfavors the narrow, vulgar prejudices of Rev. Dr. Dix and his organ,\nthe _Boston Herald_, is to dwarf the Almighty to human proportions\nand bring discredit upon His attributes in the midst of which justice\nshines with resplendent glory, but the demand is that women themselves\nshall determine for themselves the boundaries of their sphere. It\nis not a question of mere sentiment, it is not a matter of fancy or\ncaprice. It is rugged question. It involves food, clothing, shelter. It\nmeans self-reliance. Women are not appealing to man\u2019s gallantry, not\nto any quality of less importance than his sense of justice for their\nrights. Man is not likely to regard his mother with less affection and\nreverence because she is his father\u2019s equal, and in the past, when\nwomen were more degraded than at present, the best men have found in\nwomen inspiration for their best work, good men will not find less\ninspiration for good work when women are emancipated from the thraldom\nof vicious laws, and crowned man\u2019s equal in all matters relating to\n\u201csphere,\u201d shall, by laws relating to physical and mental organism,\ntake their chances in the world\u2019s broad field of battle, demanding and\nreceiving for work done in any of the departments of human activities\nmen\u2019s pay when they perform men\u2019s work.\u2014_Indianapolis Sentinel_, May\n13, 1883.\n\n[18] It is not a physiological cause which produced our present family\nwith the father as ruler and owner of all property.\u2014_Kemptsky._\n\n[19] By a singular lack of oversight in making up the title-page and\nlettering the cover, the words \u201cHusband and Wife\u201d have been printed as\nthough they referred to objects of equal importance. Even the carefully\ntrained eye of a former editor of the \u201cChristian Register,\u201d the Rt.\nRev. F. D. Huntington, D.D., Bishop of Central New York, who furnishes\na brief and cautious introduction to the volume, did not detect this\nerror. It has been left to us to call attention to the incongruity\nof the title-page, and to give the sentiment of the book proper\ntypographical expression. The conventional sobriety and ecclesiasticism\nof the title-page do not prepare one for the novelty of the contents.\nIt is only by reading the book that we become aware of them. The\nsensation of the reader is somewhat the same as one would have on going\ninto a building which from the facade appeared to be a plain, dignified\nEpiscopal church, but which on entering he found to be a mediaeval\ncircus. Not that there is any anything intentionally hilarious in the\narena of this book or that it displays any athletic vigor of thought\nbut that it is essentially novel and revolutionary. Dr. Gray is not\nunconscious of the novelty of his doctrine. \u201cIt is believed,\u201d he says,\n\u201cthat the position of this essay is new to the discussion. It has not\nbeen urged or stated in print in England or America;\u201d and, later on, he\nexpresses a well-grounded belief that \u201csome will smile\u201d at his views as\n\u201cantiquated and fanciful.\u201d All of these claims may be readily granted.\nFirst, the doctrine is new. It is new at least in its present dress\u2014as\nnew as Adam would seem to be, if he put on a modern costume, dyed his\ngray hairs, and appeared in Boston as a social lecturer.\u2014_The Christian\nRegister_, Boston.\n\n[20] Who has forgotten the sublime magnanimity of Artemus Ward, when he\nproposed on a certain occasion to sacrifice all his wife\u2019s relatives?\nThis is exactly what Dean Gray theoretically achieves. He not only\nabolishes his own wife\u2019s relatives, but those of other men who have\nentered into the marriage relationship. He makes thorough work of\nit. Not only does he extinguish the wife\u2019s sister as a relative,\nbut also her cousins and her aunts. In fact, he even abolishes the\nmother-in-law. The luxury of a mother-in-law is granted to the wife,\nwho by virtue of marriage becomes related to her husband\u2019s mother, but\nis not granted to the husband, who has no relation whatever to the\nmother of his wife. As to the sisters, the cousins and the aunts, there\nmay be a reason why Sir Joseph Porter, K.C.B., would view with dismay\nan equal addition to their number through the offices of matrimony; but\nthe majority of men not blessed with a similar superfluity would hardly\nwish to forego this delightful form of conjugal perquisite.\u2014_Ibid._\n\n[21] \u201cOne of the most learned colored men in the country is Alexander\nCrummell, Rector of St. Luke\u2019s Protestant Episcopal Church, Washington,\nD.C. When he desired to study for holy orders he applied at Kenyon\nCollege, Gambier, O., but was refused admission. He made applications\nelsewhere, which were equally unsuccessful. He finally went to Oxford,\nEngland, and there took a full course. He is an eloquent preacher, and\nhis congregation embraces a large number of prominent colored citizens.\u201d\n\n[22] I. Corinthians, v: 1.\n\n[23] And one of the most bitter opponents to the admission of the women\nlay delegates to the Methodist General Conference.\n\n[24] As reported in Syracuse, New York \u201c_Sunday Morning Courier_\u201d,\nMarch 4th, 1877.\n\n[25] Rev. F. B. Neely, of Philadelphia, said that he was in favor of\nsubmitting the question to the annual conferences. He offered the\nfollowing amendment to the report of the committee: But since there\nis great interest in this question, and since the church generally\nshould be consulted in regard to such an important matter, therefore\n_Resolved_: That we submit to the annual conferences the proposition\nto amend the second restrictive rule by amending the words \u201cand said\ndelegates may be men or women\u201d after the words \u201ctwo lay delegates\u201d for\nan annual conference so that it would read, \u201cNor of more than two lay\ndelegates for an annual conference, and the said delegates may be men\nor women.\u201d The amendment was seconded by Dr. Paxton.\u2014_Telegram._ New\nYork, May 12.\u2014The debate on the admission of women delegates was one\nof the most lengthy in the history of the church. It occupied the time\nof the conference during the larger part of six sessions. It is the\ncommon remark, too, that never before was a subject contested in this\nbody with such obstinacy, not to say bitterness. The struggle to obtain\nrecognition from the chair was a revelation to those who did not know\npreviously how fond Methodists are of speaking in meeting. The instant\nthe chairman\u2019s gavel fell, announcing the termination of one speech,\nfifty delegates or more were on their feet, and from fifty stentorian\nvoices rang out the pitiful appeal, \u201cMr. Chairman!\u201d This was the order\nof affairs from the beginning of the debate to the close. One delegate\nwho was finally recognized proved to be so hoarse from his protracted\nefforts to get the floor that it was with difficulty he could be heard\nwhen he did get it.\u2014Correspondence, Syracuse, N.Y. _Sunday Herald_,\nMay 13.\n\n[26] The final vote, excluding women from this conference and\nsubmitting the question of their eligibility to the annual conferences,\nstood: To exclude and submit, 237; against, 198\u2014making a majority of\n39 only of the total vote, while the laymen were so evenly divided\nthat the change of one vote would have tied them. If now the annual\nconference shall decree by a three-fourths vote of all the ministers\npresent and voting, that women are eligible, and if four years hence\nthe general conference by a two-thirds vote shall ratify that decree,\nthe fair sisters will thereafter have free course in that body.\nOtherwise they will be tolerated only as mere lookers-on. From the\nfact, that many who voted to submit the matter to the annual conference\ndid so, not because they wish the women to come in, but merely as the\nbest method of getting rid of a troublesome question for the time\nbeing, it looks as though their chances of gaining admittance as\ndelegates four years hence were little better, if any, than in the\npresent instance.\u2014_Sunday Herald_ Syracuse, N.Y. May 13.\n\n[27]    THE PRIESTHOOD. Now, too oft the priesthood wait\n        At the threshold of the state\u2014\n        Waiting for the beck and nod\n        Of its power as law and God.\u2014\n\nFrom Whittier\u2019s _Curse of the Charter Breakers_.\n\n[28] From \u201c_The Woman\u2019s Journal_.\u201d Boston.\n\n[29] Headed by _Mme. Asti\u00e9 de Valsayre_.\n\n[30] When the temporal kingdom took possession of Italy, the rate of\nignorance was 90 per cent. It has now been reduced to 45 per cent.\n\n[31] The \u201c_Boston Herald_,\u201d Aug. 17, 1886, heading an article upon\nthese statutes, \u201c_Copper Colored Blue Laws_.\u201d\n\n[32] A husband is entitled to punish his wife when he sees fit. At\nfirst he is to use remonstrances; if these do not avail, he is to have\nrecourse to more severe punishment. The confessor is at first bound not\nto pay much heed to women complaining of their husbands, because women\nare habitually inclined to lie.\n\n[33] The scene in the convocation was animated, the public at large\nfavoring the women. The senior Proctor being slow in his figuring, one\nof the \u201cGods in the Gallery\u201d becoming impatient for the announcement\nof the numbers, shouted \u201cCall in one of the ladies to help you, sir.\u201d\n\n[34] In Egypt, where women received the same education as men, very few\nchildren died\u2014a fact noted in the absence of child mummies.\n\n[35] \u201cEve lived 940 years, giving birth to a boy and a girl every\nyear. Eve lived ten years longer than Adam. They must give this first\nwoman the best constitution in the world for while her husband lived\n930 years and communicated to his sons for several generations the\nprinciple of so long a life (which is no less applicable to Eve than\nto him), he must have been of very vigorous constitution; turn the\nthing as you will it will always be an argument from the greater to the\nless to show that Eve\u2019s body was better constituted than that of her\nhusband.\u201d\n\n\nCHAPTER TEN\n\n[1] _As the resurrection of a material body to dwell in a spiritual\nheaven._\n\n[2] When a quarter of the human race assume to tell me what I must\ndo, I may be too much disheartened by the circumstance to see clearly\nthe absurdity of this command. This is the condition of women, for\nwhom I have the same compassion that I would have for a prisoner so\nlong cramped in a narrow cage that he could not use his limbs. While\nmany women are thinking their own thoughts there are others without\nso potent a brain, who have as yet, failed to see the absurdity of\nallowing others to think for them. For this condition of mental and\nmoral blunders the church is responsible.\u2014_Ralph Waldo Emerson._\n\n[3] When reading was first taught women in America, said Dr. Clemence\nS. Lozier, it was opposed on the ground that she would forget her\nfather\u2019s or husband\u2019s name should she learn to read and write.\nGeography met with like opposition on the ground of its tendency to\nmake her dissatisfied with home and desirous to travel, while the\nrecords of history show that the first public examination of women in\nGeometry, 1829, raised a cry of disapproval over the whole country.\n\n[4] There are hard and ugly facts in this Christendom of ours, and its\nhistory includes the serfdom and nihilism of Russia, the drudgery of\nGerman women; the wrongs of the Irish peasant girl; the 20,000 little\nEnglish girls sold each year to gratify the lusts of the aristocracy;\nall the horrors of the Inquisition; all the burnings of the witches;\nthe slavery and polygamy of America and the thousand iniquities all\naround us; all these belong to the history of Christendom.\u2014_The Woman\u2019s\nTribune_, Clara Colby, editor.\n\n[5] This case decided adversely to woman\u2019s right of suffrage by the\nterritorial Supreme Court, was appealed to the Supreme Court of the\nUnited States, through the efforts of Mr. A. S. Austin, a young and\nenergetic attorney of Olympia, the state capital; the points raised\nby Mr. Austin were, _First_: that the Bloomer case is a collusive\none between the original plaintiff and defendants, and is a fraud\nupon all friends of equal suffrage in the state. _Second_: that the\ndecision of the Supreme Court of Washington Territory was erroneous in\ntwo respects, to-wit: that the statute of the territory conferring\nsuffrage was constitutional, and that women are citizens.\n\n[6] At a _Democratic State Convention_, Syracuse, N.Y.\n\n[7] This was the case at the Republican nominating convention, Chicago,\n1880.\n\n[8] The liberty and civilization of the present are nothing else than\nthe fragments of rights which the scaffold and stake have wrung from\nthe strong hands of the usurpers.\u2014_Wendell Phillips._\n\n\n\n\n  Index\n\n\n  Abduction of girls, 84\n\n  Abbey of Fontevrault, 31\n\n  Abbesse, L\u2019 de Jouarre, 47\n\n  Accursed Sciences, The, 101, 273\n\n  Act of Parliament for synonymous with Law of God, 56\n\n  Adam, 24, 25, 26, 177, 191, 235\n\n  Agamani Shadee, 13, 14\n\n  Agar-Ellis Case, 138, 139, 206\n\n  Age of Protection, 79, 82, 90, 91\n\n  \u201cAll, The,\u201d 12\n\n  Albany Law Journal\u2019s \u201cCurious Question\u201d, 139\n\n  Alruna or \u201cHoly Women,\u201d 21\n\n  Ames-Nofri-Ari, goddess wife of Amun, 17\n\n  American Colonies, laws against women, 122, 123, 124, 125, 147, 148\n\n  American Sabbath Union, 232\n\n  Amme, The, 282\n\n  Anaesthetics discovered by Women Doctors, 104, 105, 106, 191\n\n  Angelique Arnault, Mother, 32\n\n  \u201cAn Unhallowed Thing\u201d\u2014a wife, 33, 38\n\n  Arabs, Arabic, Arabian, 8, 17, 30\n\n  Ark, Archa, Argo, 16, 20\n\n  Aryans, the Ancient, 12, 159\n\n  Assembly of Diana, 94\n\n  Ashmolean Library of Oxford, 17\n\n  Athens, 20, 129, 146\n\n  Attack upon Science by the Church, 105\n\n  Athrytes, a princess-prophetess, 18\n\n  Atrium Vertae, discoveries in the, 19\n\n  Atlantis, 129\n\n  Auto da fe, 98, 135, 161\n\n  Aztec language, its Champollion, 7\n\n\n  Babel, its meaning, 22\n\n  Bac, Boc, Bacchus, Bacchus-Sabiesa, 54, 103, 111\n\n  Banditti of the Middle Ages, 131\n\n  Baptism of Nude Women, 93\n\n  Baron of Jauioz, The, 72\n\n  Berner\u2019s Mr. Bill, 164\n\n  Bhagavad Gita, 14\n\n  Birchall Case, The, 136\n\n  \u201cBirds of the Night,\u201d \u201cBirds of Prey,\u201d 111\n\n  Black Mass, The, 76, 111\n\n  Blessing the Nuptial Bed, 68\n\n  Blockulu of Sweden, 273\n\n  \u201cBloody Town, The\u201d, 124, 125\n\n  Blood hounds for hunting women, 89\n\n  Boehme, Jacob, 24\n\n  Borough-English, 66\n\n  Boys, destruction of, 85\n\n  Brank, The, 146\n\n  \u201cBreasted God, The\u201d, 22\n\n  Breton Ballad of Fourteenth Century, 72\n\n  Bull Against Priestly Lechery, 41, 42\n\n  \u201cBurning Place of the Cross, The,\u201d 98\n\n  Buying wives, 131, 132\n\n\n  Caesar, deification of, 76, 77\n\n  Canadian Review, 260\n\n  Canadian Colonies, vice in, 85\n\n  Canon Law, its injury to woman, 19, 37, 50, 51, 53, 54, 55, 57, 58, 60,\n    62, 213, 260\n\n  Canons of Cathedral of Lyons, 67\n\n  Cannon, George Q., 182\n\n  Cape of Good Hope, Colony of, 78\n\n  Cardinal Antonelli, 46, 59\n\n  Catayana, compilation of laws, 13\n\n  Cats, Black burned with witches, 94\n\n  Cats, mesentery of, 102\n\n  Catherine de Medicis, 27\n\n  Catherine, wife of Peter the Great, baptized nude, 93\n\n  Catholic Review, The, 284\n\n  Celibacy, its notable consequences, 33, 36\n\n  Chaldea, Ancient, 7, 101\n\n  Chang Lai Sin, on Chinese women, 20\n\n  Charlemagne, his influence on the Church, 51;\n    his Polygamy, 175\n\n  Chastity Belt, The, 155\n\n  Chastity of Concubinage, unchastity of marriage taught, 33, 35, 36, 38,\n    40, 41, 42, 43, 45, 46, 47, 48\n\n  Chief High Priest, Egyptian, 17\n\n  Child took precedence of Father, 8\n\n  Chinese girl slaves to Europeans, 79\n\n  Chili, Chilian women penitents, 47, 48\n\n  Child criminals rapidly increasing, 91\n\n  Chiniquy, Rev. Charles, 43-45, 257\n\n  Chivalry injurious to women, 51\n\n  Christine of Pisa, 51, 92\n\n  Christian Party in Politics, The, 189\n\n  Christianity teaches the existence of a superior and an inferior sex,\n    208\n\n  Christianized Indians, laws for women of, 232\n\n  Christianity of little value to civilization, 239\n\n  Christendom dragged to darkness, 65\n\n  Christian Register, The (Boston), 220\n\n  Christian Union, The, 134, 225, 228\n\n  Church, the Priest\u2019s spouse, 32\n\n  Church, The, and civilization antipodal, 243\n\n  Churchman, The, 204\n\n  Churching of women, 21, 28, 218\n\n  Chrysies, Priestess of Juno;\n    importance of the office, 20\n\n  Circe, a renowned physician, 106\n\n  City of God, 207, 270, 274\n\n  Civilization not dependent upon the Pulpit or the Press, 190\n\n  Cleveland, Grover, as President, sends a gift to Pope Leo XIII, 64\n\n  Code of Canon Law, 51\n\n  Code of England, 150\n\n  Code Penal of Italy, 161\n\n  Code Penal of India, 79\n\n  Code of Love, 261\n\n  Code Napoleon, 160, 161, 255, 257\n\n  Codes, two, of Morals, 20, 34, 48, 136, 163, 208, 215, 222, 234, 245\n\n  Commercial Advertiser, The Pittsburgh, 46\n\n  Commercial, The Cincinnati, 200\n\n  Common Law Corrupted by Canon law, 52\n\n  Commandments, The, 28, 223\n\n  Common Law, 37, 58\n\n  Common Mother, 8\n\n  Common, Boston, The, 125\n\n  Comforter, The, 112\n\n  Community of women proposed, 51\n\n  Concubines, priests\u2019 known as \u201cThe Honored Ones,\u201d \u201cThe Hallowed Ones,\u201d\n    38, 163\n\n  Convent of Penitents, 48\n\n  Conversation with women forbidden, 29\n\n  Corpuscles, The, Pacinian, 101\n\n  Councils, Church, 27, 31, 32, 33, 34, 37, 39, 50, 54, 94, 95, 96, 210\n\n  Council Houses of the Six Nations, 10\n\n  Council of Matrons to whom all disputed questions were referred, 10\n\n  Court of Arches, 55\n\n  Courier, The Syracuse, 287\n\n  Cuissage, droit de, 68, 75, 85\n\n  Coverture, 143, 155, 168\n\n  Cowyll, The, 159\n\n\n  Dancing Mania cured by women doctors through _Similia Similibus\n    Curantur_, 106\n\n  Danes, Danish, Denmark, 11, 152, 155, 159\n\n  Darkest Africa, 7, 169\n\n  Darkest England, 169\n\n  Darkest New York, 204\n\n  Dark Continent, the children\u2019s paradise, 202\n\n  \u201cDaughter of the Deity,\u201d 17\n\n  Daughters, sale of, 131, 133, 134\n\n  Davenport\u2019s Rules for his wife, 141\n\n  Declaration of Montreal Women against the Confessional, 43\n\n  Decretals, 25, 55, 57\n\n  Delphian Shrine, The, 18\n\n  Detention Houses of, 48\n\n  \u201cDevil Bride, The\u201d, 111\n\n  Diaz, President, his brave course, 47\n\n  Digest of Hindoo Law, Colebrook\u2019s, 13\n\n  Disease of the Cloisters, 27, 34\n\n  Doctors, Women discover Anaesthetics, 104\n\n  Dodge\u2019s Judge, grounds of decision in the \u201cLucy Walker Case,\u201d\n    i.e. Seney trial, 139, 140, 141\n\n  Domstroii, The, 165\n\n  Dowers, 157, 158, 159, 281\n\n  Ducking Stool, 122, 142, 146, 147\n\n\n  Eastre, Eostre, 103\n\n  Egypt, Egyptians, 9, 16, 17, 18, 21, 30\n\n  England, 11, 78, 233\n\n  Endowment House, 93, 183, 185\n\n  Elementals, The, 24, 100, 101, 108\n\n  Eton, its depravity, 85\n\n  Evarts, Hon. Wm., on woman under the law, 20\n\n  Evangelist, The N.Y., 213\n\n  Eve, 24, 25, 39, 177, 235, 283\n\n\n  \u201cFathers\u201d, The Christian, 24, 33, 42, 52, 235, 236\n\n  Father takes name of child, 8\n\n  Father-rule, 21\n\n  Famines result from persecution of women, 125\n\n  Feudalism, 76\n\n  Feudal Lords, their claims, 66, 67, 68, 69, 80, 81\n\n  Feudal Period, The, 67, 74, 161\n\n  Finns, Finland before introduction of Christianity, 20\n\n  Finland in 1892, 137\n\n  Fontevrault, Order of, Woman the General of the Order, power of its\n      Abbesses, 31;\n    its monks under the control of the nuns, 31\n\n  Forum, recent discoveries in, 19\n\n  Fou Fou, i.e., Father-Mother God, 24\n\n  France, woman\u2019s condition in, 67, 72, 160, 161, 196\n\n  Frenchmen, cause of their decreasing size, 196, 197\n\n  Freidrich, William I, his concession to the lecherous demands of\n      the Gavelkind, 152;\n    State, 69\n\n\n  Georgia River, its natives protect women, 134\n\n  \u201cGhosts,\u201d Ibsen\u2019s, 163\n\n  \u201cGiftas,\u201d to marry; Strindberg\u2019s, 164\n\n  Gifts of Intention, remarkable, 14\n\n  Girl\u2019s birth, an infliction, 28, 161\n\n  Girl, a piece of property, 133, 134\n\n  Girls rule, Gynaikokraty, 11, 134, 135\n\n  Glanville, 60, 157\n\n  Globe, The Boston, 205\n\n  \u201cGo Back,\u201d Wala\u2019s command to the Roman Emperor Druses, 20\n\n  Goddesses superior to Gods, 8\n\n  \u201cGod\u2019s Hand,\u201d \u201cGod\u2019s Star,\u201d 17\n\n  Good Hope, Cape Colony; legalized vice there, 78\n\n  Governor of British China on legalized vice there, 78\n\n  \u201cGovernment Women,\u201d \u201cQueen\u2019s Women,\u201d 77\n\n  Government of the United States borrowed from that of the Six Nations,\n    10\n\n  \u201cGowan, The\u201d, 159\n\n  \u201cGragas, The\u201d earliest Iceland law, 96\n\n  Greek Church baptizes its converts nude, 93\n\n\n  \u201cHallowed Ones, The,\u201d \u201cHonored Ones, The,\u201d 38, 163\n\n  Hatasu, the light of the XVIII Egyptian dynasty, 17\n\n  Hatred of Old Women among Christian nations, 117, 196\n\n  \u201cHearth Penny\u201d of St. Peter, 50\n\n  Heads of the Church, their vice, 82\n\n  Heke, a witch, wise woman, female deity, 103\n\n  Herald, the Chicago, 90\n\n  Herald, the Boston, 286, 287\n\n  Herald, the New York, 47\n\n  Herald, the Rochester, 179\n\n  Herald, the Syracuse Sunday, 287\n\n  Hexen Sabbat, i.e. Walpurgis Night, 103\n\n  Hindoo Maxims regarding women, 13, 15\n\n  Holiness, superior of the unmarried, 32\n\n  Holiness, superior of male animals, 28\n\n  Holy women, 20\n\n  Homer stole the Iliad and the Odyssey, 18\n\n  Hopkinson Association of Congregational Divines, 212\n\n  Houses of Detention for women, 48\n\n  H.R.H., 70\n\n  Husband cannot steal from wife, 136;\n    orders wife\u2019s religion, 138;\n    has a property interest in wife, 140;\n    right to direct religious education of children, 139;\n    right to name child, 138;\n    will of, law, 144;\n    not related to wife\u2019s family, 219\n\n  HUSBAND and Wife, 220\n\n  Hutchinson, Mistress Ann, tried for sedition and heresy in teaching\n    men, 124, 125\n\n\n  Impurity of soul and body throughout Christendom, 33\n\n  Incubi, The, Incubus, 108\n\n  Incontinence, of celibate priests, 33-48\n\n  Independent, the N.Y., 226\n\n  Inquisition, 28, 36, 40, 42, 58\n\n  Inquisitors, Traveling, 98\n\n  Inter Ocean, The Chicago, 145, 283, 284\n\n  Ireland, its modern laws, 70\n\n  Irish women, ancient forms of marriage, 158, 159\n\n  Isis, Ish-Ish, Ishtar, Izdobar, 16, 18, 20, 250\n\n  Ivan, the Terrible, 82, 122\n\n\n  Jauioz, the Baron of, 72\n\n  Jehovah, a double-sexed word, 22\n\n  Jewish contempt of the feminine, 254\n\n  Johnson, Sir Wm., Power of Squaws, 10;\n    Dr. Samuel Johnson on Milton, 177\n\n  Journal, the Syracuse, 273\n\n  Jurus, The, 56\n\n  Jus Primae Noctis, 74, 77\n\n\n  Keeper of the Wampum, his Matriarchal descent, 10\n\n  Keshub Chunder Sen, declares English laws degrade women, 13\n\n\n  Lachis of Athens, her ancient laws, 276\n\n  Lady of the House, the Beginning and the End, 16\n\n  Lange, on disappearance of ancient civilization in early days\n    of Christian era, 30\n\n  Leader, The Topeka, 91\n\n  Legalized vice in Christendom, 80, 81, 82, 93\n\n  Libertad, The, of Chili, 173\n\n  Lords Spiritual, their claims, 68, 267\n\n  \u201cLost Name, The,\u201d \u201cThe Lost Word,\u201d 32, 109\n\n\n  Magic, \u201cWhite\u201d and \u201cBlack,\u201d 102\n\n  Magnetic condition, Four degrees of, 102\n\n  Maiden Rents, Maiden Redemption, 75, 76\n\n  Malabar, under the Matriarchate in XV Century, 11\n\n  Man, his \u201ccurse,\u201d 191, 192, 194, 195, 197, 198, 201, 203, 206, 241;\n    his injustice to women workers, 194, 195, 196;\n    his ownership of woman, 140;\n    ruled by his emotions, 243\n\n  Marco Polo, discovers Matriarchal customs, 8\n\n  Marchetta, Marquette, 66, 67, 75, 77, 92, 131, 134, 152\n\n  Margaret, St., 75\n\n  Marriage a sacrament, 96\n\n  Marriage, complex, 187\n\n  Marriage Customs of England, 143\n\n  Marriage of Equal Dignity, 158\n\n  Marriage in Ancient Rome, 129\n\n  Marriage in Russia, 166\n\n  Marozia, her power over the Papal Throne, 31\n\n  Martiagium, 8\n\n  Martia, \u201cThe Just,\u201d 56\n\n  \u201cMasterless Women,\u201d 59, 113, 155, 158\n\n  Matilda, Countess, her power over popedom, 255\n\n  Matriarchate, The, form of United States government due to, 10\n\n  Matriarchate, The, 8, 10, 11, 12, 21, 59, 129\n\n  Matriarchal, 8, 9, 11, 16\n\n  Mazzini, his prophecy, 231\n\n  Medicine, its origin, 16\n\n  Melancthon, 175, 185\n\n  Memorial to President Cleveland by the National Woman Suffrage\n      Association, 149;\n    Memorial, 49;\n    Vic, 155\n\n  Memorial History of the American Episcopal Church, 244\n\n  Merchetum Sanguinis, 74\n\n  Metamorphosis, 95\n\n  Mexico, the church in, 47\n\n  Minister, a Presbyterian finds apologies in the Bible for illicit\n    conduct, 208\n\n  Milton favors polygamy;\n    his domestic tyranny, 176, 177\n\n  Mitakshara, the Compiler of, 14\n\n  Monogamy woman\u2019s doctrine, 188\n\n  Morganatic marriage, 162, 163\n\n  Moses, 9, 17\n\n  Mother-rule, 8, 10, 13\n\n  Moors of Spain, 30;\n    Mohammedan learning keeps one corner of Europe bright, 30\n\n  Most pronounced doctrine of the Church, 30\n\n  Mormons, 77, 92, 93\n\n  Mormon, First Presidency of, 181;\n    polygamists become gods at death, 183;\n    theocracy, 185;\n    woman\u2019s salvation depends on polygamy, 185;\n    trained under orthodox Christianity, 186;\n    Priesthood, 188;\n    working for a temporal kingdom; President Elliott of Harvard\n      favorably compares Mormons and Puritans, 179\n\n  Mormonism, Bishop Lunt defends, 186;\n    Rev. P. C. Lyford on, 187;\n    claims of President John Taylor, 190;\n    Helen H. Jackson on, 184\n\n  Mortality among infants and children, 197, 198, 200\n\n  Mott, Lucretia, 209, 210, 212, 241\n\n  Mund, The Mundium, 93, 131, 152\n\n  Mysterious interchange of germs, 86\n\n\n  Nairs, The, under Matriarchal rule, 11\n\n  \u201cName, The Lost,\u201d 109\n\n  Nation, The N.Y., 206\n\n  National Reform Association, 189, 230, 232\n\n  National Reformer, (London), 284\n\n  National Woman Suffrage Memorial, 149\n\n  Neferhotep, Princess, a priestess, 17\n\n  Neith the Victorious, mother of gods and men, 9, 17\n\n  Nekrasof, a Russian poet, 167\n\n  New Delta, (N.O.), 268\n\n  News, Daily; The (London), 262, 263, 266\n\n  Nihilism, its cause, 82, 167\n\n  Non-consent, not impair validity of marriage, 133\n\n  Notable consequences follow the establishment of Celibacy as a dogma\n    of the church, 36\n\n\n  Odelstling, The, 283\n\n  Olga, Czarina, her policy of 800 years since, controls Europe today,\n    164\n\n  Old women, hatred of, 117, 196\n\n  \u201cOnly by sinning can sin be quelled,\u201d 208, 257\n\n  Open Court, The, 250\n\n  Opposite teachings on marriage by the church, 33\n\n  Oracles, ancient, from lips of a Priestess, 18\n\n  Original Sin, woman the original sinner, 64, 65\n\n  Otto, Cardinal, 35; Ottoborn, Cardinal Legate, Institutions of, 35, 36\n\n  Outlawry, Scandinavian, 20, 160\n\n  Owens, Caroline, her experience in polygamy, 182\n\n  Ownership of property;\n    its remarkable effects, 159\n\n  Oxford Library, 17, 26\n\n\n  Pacinian Corpuscles, The, 101, 102\n\n  Paraclete, Convent of the, 31, 32\n\n  Palladium, The, in woman\u2019s charge, 19\n\n  Pall Mall Gazette, 70, 83, 84, 268\n\n  Panim Ivan, on Russian wives, 166\n\n  Parthenon, the Temple of the Virgins, 19\n\n  Paramount Council of the Zunis, 10\n\n  Patriachate, The, 11, 21, 37, 54, 194, 237\n\n  Paul, St., the first Jesuit, 26;\n    a married man, 26;\n    as a persecutor, salutes woman with a \u201choly kiss,\u201d 26;\n    St. Paul, 25, 27, 35, 36, 41\n\n  Pastoral Letter of General Association Congregationalists\n    of Massachusetts, 210, 211\n\n  Pastoral Lenten of Rt. Rev. Cleveland A. Coxe, 218\n\n  Peculiars, Woman\u2019s Three, 159\n\n  Penetralia, The, its secrets still unknown, 19\n\n  Pentegram, The, key of the Two Worlds, 101\n\n  Personal Rights Journal (Eng), 171\n\n  Pestilence caused by Christian wars and persecutions, 125\n\n  Peter the Great, head of the Greek church, his liaisons, 27\n\n  Petit treason, the crime of, 136, 137, 154\n\n  Petrouville, The Abbess, 255\n\n  Pharaoh, 9, 17\n\n  Phtha, Temple of, 18\n\n  \u201cPilgrim Fathers, The,\u201d 102, 123\n\n  Polygamy, Christian, 175;\n    first synod of the Reformation to sustain, 175;\n    \u201cDialogues in favor of\u201d, 177;\n    American Board of Foreign Missions sustains, 177;\n    Missionary conference in Calcutta sustains, 178;\n    endorsed as not contrary to the Bible, 179;\n    of Charlemagne, 175;\n    Valentinian laws favoring, 175;\n    Luther sustains from the Bible, 175;\n    Melancthon, Bucer and other early \u201cReformers\u201d sustain, 175;\n    Milton sustains, 176;\n    Lord Seldon sustains, 176;\n    Bishop Burnet sustains, 176;\n    Rev. John Lyser sustains; Rev. Dr. Madden sustains, 177;\n    Wm. Ellery Channing saw no prohibition in the New Testament, 177;\n    Henry Ward Beecher quotes Milton, 177;\n    \u201cGod endorses\u201d \u201cBible favors\u201d, 178;\n    Rev. David O. Allen of American Board on, 179;\n    Dora Young on, 182;\n    Caroline Owen\u2019s experience, 182, 183;\n    Helen H. Jackson on, 184;\n    its silent woes, 182;\n    women slaves under; Mormons claim countenanced by the New Testament,\n      187;\n    claim Christ as sustaining, 186\n\n  Pope Anastatius III, 255;\n    Benedict IX, 108;\n    Boniface IX, 25;\n    Gregory XV, 42;\n    Gregory XVI, 46;\n    Honorius, 33;\n    Innocent III, 34, 36, 257;\n    John X, 255;\n    John XI, 255;\n    John XIII, 258;\n    Leo IX, 33;\n    Leo XIII, 64;\n    Paul IV, 42;\n    Pelagius II, 36, 255;\n    Pius IX, 31, 46, 64;\n    Sergius III, 255;\n    Sixtus III, 257;\n    Sixtus IV, 68;\n    Sixtus V, 35;\n    Sylvester II, 108;\n    Pope of the Hebrews, 64\n\n  \u201cPoet, The of Chivalry,\u201d 51\n\n  Potent Mother Goddess, 16\n\n  President Cleveland sends a gift to Pope Leo XIII, 280\n\n  President Cleveland, Memorial to, 149, 150\n\n  Press, The (Philadelphia), 201\n\n  Prices paid for torturing criminals, 115, 116\n\n  \u201cPrincipal Women of the Six Nations,\u201d 10\n\n  Property the test condition of a nation, 62\n\n  Protective Chicago Agency for women and children, 145\n\n  Puritans The, Puritan Fathers, 27, 106, 122\n\n\n  \u201cQueen\u2019s Women,\u201d 77, 81\n\n\n  Record, The (Boston), 178\n\n  Redemption of Blood, 74\n\n  Reformation;\n    its rules for women, 63\n\n  Refuge, no for woman, 125\n\n  \u201cReichbote Der\u201d Berlin, 197\n\n  Rameses II; Rameses III, 18\n\n  Recorder, the Methodist, 226\n\n  Republican, the St. Louis, 279\n\n  Republican, the Washington, 285\n\n  Rev. Nehemiah Adams, author of Pastoral Letter, 211;\n    Rev. Dr. Ballantine, See Trial, 215;\n    Henry Ward Beecher, 177;\n    Edw. Beecher, Father Bodfisch, 230;\n    Dr. Buckley, 225, 228;\n    Thos. Bowman, Rt. Rev. Cleveland A. Coxe, 215, 254;\n    Robert Laird Collyer, Wm. Ellery Channing, Athenase Coquerel,\n      Dr. Craven, 214, 215, 254;\n    Crummel Alexander, 222;\n    Cuyler Theodore L., 213;\n    Davidson (Evangelist) 87;\n    Day, J. R., 228;\n    Denhurst, Mr., 215;\n    Dilke, S. W., 500;\n    Dix, Dr. Lenten, Sermons against women, 216, 217, 233;\n    Douglas, David, \u201cWife, why dost thou weep?\u201d 208;\n    Gray (Chaplain) 209;\n    Dr. Gouldbourne, 233;\n    Gray, Geo. Zabriskie, D.D., 219;\n    Healy, Bishop, 235;\n    Huntington, Rev., 286;\n    Hurlburt, E. B., 224;\n    Kingsley, Charles (Canon), 65;\n    Little, Dr. Charles, 234;\n    Little-Knox, 220;\n    Liddon (Canon), 233;\n    Lyser, John, Littlejohn Dr., \u201cTriennial Charge,\u201d 233;\n    Merrell (Bishop), 227;\n    Moody, (Evangelist), 242;\n    Neeley, F. B., 229;\n    Patten, D. D., W. W., 215;\n    Rothmeiler, Jacob, 228;\n    See, Dr. Isaac, his trial, 254, 214;\n    Sherman A., 216;\n    Smith, Few, 215;\n    Strong, Dr., President Baptist Theological Sem. 210;\n    Tallmage, T. DeWitt, 86, 220;\n    Tinsey, Thomas, 229;\n    Turnstall, W. V., 223, 227, 233;\n    Upham, Charles W.;\n    Willis, Samuel Joseph, offers \u00a3100 reward for his wife\u2019s return\n      to him;\n    Wiley, John, President Drew University, 227;\n    Wilson, Mr., 215\n\n  Review, the Louisiana, 268\n\n  Rights divided, 52\n\n  Ritualistic Episcopal church, 48, 49\n\n  Rome, Romans, Roman Empire, 16, 18, 19, 28, 30, 37, 50, 60, 163\n\n  Russian Bride\u2019s Lament, The, 167\n\n\n  Sab, Saba, Sabasius, 103\n\n  Sabbat, 12, 103, 111\n\n  Sabbath, 12, 28;\n    to go to, 94, 96, 103, 112\n\n  Sacred songs of Isis, 17;\n    Sistrum, The Sacred, 17;\n    Sacred Scribes, 17\n\n  Sacrilegious child, 59, 64, 69, 223\n\n  Sacraments, The Seven, 93\n\n  Sacrifice of animal passions, 21\n\n  Sacrifice of milk, 17\n\n  Sadagora, \u201cPope of the Hebrews\u201d, 64\n\n  Sagas of Iceland, 161\n\n  Sages, 104\n\n  Sagthing, The, 164\n\n  Sainio, Mrs., her crime of petit treason;\n    hand cut off;\n    decapitated;\n    body burnt, September 1892, 278\n\n  Sala, a house, 151;\n    Salic law a penal code, 151, 218\n\n  Samokversof, 164\n\n  Scandinavians, 20, 151, 160, 161\n\n  Scarlet Letter of Shame, 146\n\n  Sclavs, 11\n\n  Scold\u2019s Bridle, The, 142, 146\n\n  Scold\u2019s, law for punishment of, 147\n\n  Seeress of Prevorst, 102, 274\n\n  See Trial, 214\n\n  Seigneural tenure in Canada, 76\n\n  Seldon, Lord, \u201cThe Light of England,\u201d 55, 176\n\n  Self-development the first duty of life, 239\n\n  Sermons on women, 214\n\n  Service of Love, 260, 261\n\n  Sentinel, Indianapolis, 285, 286\n\n  Seven Evidences of possession, 101\n\n  Shadee, Agamini, 13, 14\n\n  Shrine, Delphian, the Pythia its priestess, 18\n\n  Sibyls, Sibyline books, 18, 21\n\n  Sin killed by sin, 41, 208\n\n  Sin-offering demanded from mother, 28\n\n  Sister, wife\u2019s not related to husband, 218, 219\n\n  Slavs, Slavonians, 164, 165, 166, 167\n\n  Sod, 252\n\n  Soma, a body, representing man, 12\n\n  Songs, Witch, 95\n\n  Songs, Russian Bride\u2019s Lamentation, 167\n\n  Souls, women no; no reason, 27\n\n  Spencer, Herbert, 161, 280\n\n  Spirit, the Holy is feminine, 22, 23\n\n  Spiritual Courts, 51\n\n  Standard, Daily, Syracuse, 262\n\n  Standard, The Woman\u2019s, 269\n\n  Statute of Uniformity in religious opinions, 113\n\n  Stridham, a woman\u2019s property, 15\n\n  Stindberg\u2019s \u201cGiftas\u201d prohibited, 164;\n    escapes imprisonment by flight, 164;\n    ovation upon his return, 164\n\n  Stool, the Penitence for women, 146\n\n  St. Thomas Aquinas on celibacy, 35\n\n  St. Paphinutius, the martyr Bishop of Thebes, on celibacy, 35;\n    St. Dunstan, famed for his hatred of women, 26;\n    St. Theresa founded the Barefoot Carmelites, 251\n\n  Strothing, The, 164\n\n  Story, A of To-day, 71\n\n  Succubi, Succubus, 108\n\n  Suicide, women driven to, 98\n\n  Sultan of Egypt on Christianity, 132\n\n  Summary of Solicitations, 42\n\n  Sun, The New York, 47, 70, 173, 269\n\n  Swrya, the Sun the source of life: woman represented by among\n    the ancient Aryans, 12\n\n  Synod, American, the first to try a woman for heresy, 124;\n    of Elvira, 50;\n    Four, 253;\n    of New Jersey, to try Rev. Isaac See for admitting women to his\n      pulpit, 214, 215;\n    of Paris, 50;\n    first of Reformation to sustain polygamy, 175;\n    of Winchester, 26\n\n  Syros, i.e., God, 18\n\n  Syracuse, N.Y., 10, 85, 87, 88, 257\n\n\n  Talmud, the, on cleansings for women, 254\n\n  Terre Haute, (Ind.) Mail, 142\n\n  Telegraph, (London), 138\n\n  Tetzel the great seller of indulgences;\n    his remark, 29\n\n  Thotmes III, preceded by Hatasu, in worship, 17\n\n  Three Persons in Heaven balanced by Three Persons in Hell, 108\n\n  Times, The London, 262\n\n  Times, The Philadelphia, 220\n\n  Times, The Bismark, 279\n\n  Toledo Bee, the, 140\n\n  Traffic in young girls, 84, 85, 90\n\n  Transcript, The Boston, 182\n\n  Tribune, The New York, 242, 262, 263 266\n\n  Tribune, The Woman\u2019s, 241\n\n  Truth, London, 233\n\n  Twelve Tables, law of, 20, 98\n\n\n  Uncleanliness attributed to women, 28\n\n  Union Labor Journal, 269\n\n  Uniate Greek Church, 46\n\n  Usus, 97, 98, 99\n\n\n  Vasist ha, 13\n\n  Vayu, the swiftest of the gods, 12\n\n  Veda, Vidya, 12, 13, 15, 103\n\n  Vestal Virgins, the, 19, 20, 96\n\n  Venice defies the Inquisition, 110\n\n  Victoria, \u201cMother of Camps,\u201d 152\n\n  Victoria, Queen, 64\n\n  Victims of Priests, 41\n\n  Vidma, 103\n\n  Virgins, Temple of the, 20\n\n  Vjedma, 103\n\n  Vladimir, Cazar the, 166\n\n  Vritra, a demon, 12\n\n\n  Walker\u2019s American Law, 153\n\n  \u201cWalker, Lucy Case,\u201d the celebrated, 139, 141\n\n  Wales, Welch, 233\n\n  Walnut tree of Benevento, 273\n\n  Walpurgis Night, 103, 112\n\n  West End, its vices, 84\n\n  Westminster Review, 144\n\n  White Cross Society, 92\n\n  Widow, 12, 160, 275\n\n  Wife, \u201cAn unhallowed thing,\u201d 257;\n    beating, 162, 166;\n    dragged by rope about neck, 127;\n    driven in harness, 166;\n    holds power, 170, 171, 172;\n    loses relationship to own family, 222;\n    not name child, 138;\n    not a person but a field;\n    no right in law, 138;\n    no right to teach children what husband does not believe, 139;\n    no right as against husband, no freehold in dower, 157;\n    payment for;\n    religion ordered by husband, 138;\n    to rear children as husband\u2019s property, 139, 162;\n    sold as a cow, 132;\n    turning out of doors not cruelty, 170\n\n  Will, The, 101\n\n  Wir-Wissen, 103\n\n  Wives:\n    advertising, 61, 170, 171;\n    beating, burning alive, 135, 136, 137;\n    burying alive, 166;\n    buying, 131, 132;\n    can steal from husbands, 137;\n    decapitating wives, 137;\n    drowning wives, 132;\n    flogging, 136;\n    husbands cannot steal from, 136;\n    husbands property;\n    not related to husband, 137;\n    property willed to mistress by husband, 136;\n    petit treason of, 136, 139;\n    sale of, 132;\n    sold as slaves to the church, 34, 35;\n    services due to husband, 137;\n    strangling, 132;\n    driven to suicide, 37\n\n  Witch;\n    bridle, 101, 117;\n    conventicles, dances, doctors, 104, 105;\n    discover anaesthetics, 104;\n    principles of Homeopathy, 104, 106;\n    Finders, 98;\n    Hammer, 97;\n    House, 123;\n    Inquisitors, 98;\n    marriage with devils, 108;\n    not look person in the face, 100;\n    Persecutors, Prickers, 96, 107;\n    punishment of, 108;\n    the profoundest thinker, 105;\n    torture, 115, 116;\n    trials, 119, 120, 127;\n    rules searching for marks, 107;\n    songs, 95;\n    Sabbat, 111;\n    Scotch burned; 99;\n    her son\u2019s inhumanity; 99;\n    reputed flogged by son, 128;\n    a woman of superior knowledge, 102\n\n  Witches;\n    burnt, 112, 117, 118;\n    property forfeited, material used in burning, 115;\n    directions for discovery of, 122;\n    Witches, For, read \u201cWomen,\u201d 127\n\n  Witchcraft, children of most tender years not escape, 100, 123;\n    to give up is to \u201cgive up the Bible,\u201d 113;\n    indictment, form of, 126;\n    most distinguishing features of, 109;\n    most striking points, 112;\n    Three Notable things in regard to, 109;\n    in Mexico, 128;\n    New Jersey, 127;\n    New York, 127;\n    Indiana, 128;\n    Wisconsin, 127\n\n  Woman clothed with the Sun, 252;\n    counted among animals, 200;\n    degraded to the level of beasts, 198;\n    government interference in her work, 196;\n    her \u201ccurse\u201d, 191, 196, 226;\n    imprisoned for religious opinions in United States, 90;\n    in underground labors, and children, 193, 194;\n    less pay than man for same work, 196, 199; 201;\n    married, the only class of slaves left, 153;\n    naked baptized: rubbed in oil, 93;\n    primal priest on earth;\n    supreme as goddess, in heaven, 8;\n    performs the most repulsive labors;\n    pit of England, 21, 196;\n    punished for man\u2019s crimes, 149;\n    severing the last link, 241;\n    sinfulness of, 165;\n    small value on her life, 165;\n    speech with forbidden, 29;\n    supreme wickedness of, subordinate to men in office, 176;\n    testimony not received, 62;\n    too impure to enter church, 25, 50;\n    milk, to kill a fowl, 165;\n    \u201cThe Wise,\u201d 104;\n    whipped half nude with rawhide, 124;\n    with new-born babe at breast, 125;\n    Woman\u2019s Christian Temperance Union, 232;\n    Woman\u2019s Journal (Boston), 268, 230;\n    Woman\u2019s National Liberal League, 285;\n    Woman\u2019s World, 282\n\n  Woman\u2019s Work in Belgium, 200;\n    in England, 194;\n    France, 197;\n    Germany, 199;\n    Ireland, 195;\n    Indians among the, 202;\n    Montenegro, 200;\n    Rome, ancient, 207;\n    Russia, 200;\n    Samoa, 134;\n    Sweden, 201;\n    Switzerland, 199;\n    United States, the, 196, 197, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206;\n    Venice, 201\n\n  Women, abduction of, 159;\n    and girls reported missing, 90, 145;\n    babbling punishment of, 147;\n    baptized naked, 93;\n    burned alive for petit treason, 154;\n    as witches, buried alive, 154;\n    Bible, not to read, 154, 155;\n    the earliest doctors, 104, 192;\n    declared witches, 104;\n    drowned or burnt because of their knowledge, 105;\n    discovered anaesthetics, 104;\n    deputations of naked, 69;\n    driven to suicide, 98;\n    ducking, 147;\n    churching, 28, 218, 226;\n    classed among brutes without soul or reason, 27;\n    harnessed with asses, cows, dogs, 198, 199, 200;\n    hunted by bloodhounds, 88, 89;\n    impure, too to take the Sacrament, 25, 50;\n    in disgrace under the Commonwealth, 264;\n    legislated for as slaves, 153;\n    tongue nailed to tree for political opinion, 134;\n    \u201cmasterless,\u201d 155, 158\n\n  Women\u2019s English Suffrage Journal, 139, 148, 155\n\n\n  Zeus, 22\n\n  Znat, Anahara, 103\n\n  Zuni, 7, 10","title":"Woman, Church & State: The Original Expos\u00e9 of Male Collaboration Against the Female Sex","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":179860}