A \ B \ C \ D \ E \ F \ G \ H \ I \ J \ K \ L \ M \ N \ O \ P \ R \ S \ T \ U \ V \ W \Z

The Life and Work of Susan B. Anthony (Volume 1 of 2) by Ida Husted Harper

I >> Ida Husted Harper >> The Life and Work of Susan B. Anthony (Volume 1 of 2)




The New York Herald, under the elder Bennett, which from the beginning
of the demand had been the inveterate foe of equal rights for women,
contained the following editorial, September 12, 1852:

The farce at Syracuse has been played out. We publish today the
last act, in which it will be seen that the authority of the Bible,
as a perfect rule of faith and practice for human beings, was voted
down, and what are called the laws of nature set up instead of the
Christian code. We have also a practical exhibition of the
consequences that flow from woman leaving her true sphere, where
she wields all her influence, and coming into public to discuss
morals and politics with men. The scene in which Rev. Mr. Hatch
violated the decorum of his cloth and was coarsely offensive to
such ladies present as had not lost that modest "feminine element"
on which he dwelt so forcibly, is the natural result of the conduct
of the women themselves who, in the first place, invited discussion
about sexes, and, in the second place, so broadly defined the
difference between the male and the female as to be suggestive of
anything but purity to the audience. The women of the convention
have no right to complain, but for the sake of his clerical
character, if no other motive influenced him, he ought not have
followed so bad an example. His speech was sound and his argument
conclusive, but his form of words was not in the best taste. The
female orators were the aggressors, but to use his own language he
ought not to have measured swords with a woman, especially when he
regarded her ideas and expressions as bordering upon the obscene.
But all this is the natural result of woman placing herself in a
false position. As Rev. Mr. Hatch observed, if she ran with horses
she must expect to be betted upon. The whole tendency of these
conventions is by no means to increase the influence of woman, to
elevate her condition or to command the respect of the other
sex....

How did woman first become subject to man, as she now is all over
the world? By her nature, her sex, just as the negro is and always
will be to the end of time, inferior to the white race and,
therefore, doomed to subjection; but she is happier than she would
be in any other condition, just because it is the law of her
nature....

What do the leaders of the woman's rights convention want? They
want to vote and to hustle with the rowdies at the polls. They want
to be members of Congress, and in the heat of debate subject
themselves to coarse jests and indecent language like that of Rev.
Mr. Hatch. They want to fill all other posts which men are
ambitious to occupy, to be lawyers, doctors, captains of vessels
and generals in the field. How funny it would sound in the
newspapers that Lucy Stone, pleading a cause, took suddenly ill in
the pains of parturition and perhaps gave birth to a fine bouncing
boy in court! Or that Rev. Antoinette Brown was arrested in the
pulpit in the middle of her sermon from the same cause, and
presented a "pledge" to her husband and the congregation; or that
Dr. Harriot K. Hunt, while attending a gentleman patient for a fit
of the gout or fistula in ano found it necessary to send for a
doctor, there and then, and to be delivered of a man or woman
child--perhaps twins.[16] A similar event might happen on the floor
of Congress, in a storm at sea or in the raging tempest of battle,
and then what is to become of the woman legislator?

For months after this convention the discussions and controversies were
kept up through press and pulpit. The clergymen in Syracuse and
surrounding towns rang the changes on the cry of "infidel" as the
surest way of neutralizing its influence. Rev. Byron Sunderland, a
Congregational minister of Syracuse and afterwards chaplain of the
United States Senate, preached a sermon on the "Bloomer Convention."
Rev. Ashley, of St. Paul's Episcopal Church, Syracuse, also preached a
sermon against equality for woman, which was put into pamphlet form and
scattered throughout the State. It called forth many protests, some
from the women of his own church. The clergymen selected the Star, the
most disreputable paper in the city, for the publication of their
articles. Rev. Sunderland was ably answered by Matilda Joslyn Gage over
the signature of "M." and replied in the Star: "If the author should
turn out to be a man, I should have no objection to point out his
inaccuracies through your columns, but if the writer is a lady, why,
really, I don't know what I shall do. If I thought she would consent to
a personal interview, I should like to see her." Some man, signing
himself "A Reader," having criticised him in a perfectly respectful
manner for making the above distinction, the reverend gentleman replied
to him through the Star: "His impertinence is quite characteristic. He
probably knows as much about the Bible as a wild ass' colt, and is
requested at this time to keep a proper distance. When a body is trying
to find out and pay attention to a lady, it is not good manners for 'A
Reader' to be thrust in between us." In all the speeches and articles
in favor of woman's rights there was not one which was not modest,
temperate and dignified. Almost without exception those in opposition
were vulgar, intemperate and abusive.

No more brilliant galaxy of men and women ever assembled than at this
Syracuse convention, and the great question of the rights of woman was
discussed from every conceivable standpoint. Hundreds equally able have
been held during the last half century, and these extensive quotations
have been made simply to show that fifty years ago the whole broad
platform of human rights was as clearly defined by the leading
thinkers, and in as logical, comprehensive and dignified a manner, as
it is today. There was as much opposition among the masses of both men
and women against _all_ that they advocated as exists today against
their demand for the ballot, perhaps more; yet the close of the century
finds practically all granted except the ballot; the full right to
speak in public; nearly the same educational and industrial
opportunities; in many States almost equal legal rights, and not one
State now wholly under the English common law, which everywhere
prevailed at that time. The prejudice against all these innovations is
rapidly disappearing but it still lingers in regard to the yielding of
the suffrage, except in the four States where this also has been given.
In not one instance have these concessions been made in response to the
"voice of the people," but only because of the continued agitation and
unceasing efforts of a few of the more advanced and progressive
thinkers of each generation.

[Footnote 11: The Tribune, at this time, was the only paper in New
York, and, with few exceptions, the only large newspaper in the
country, which treated the question of woman's rights in any but a
contemptuous, abusive manner.]

[Footnote 12: They may have been preceded by the Moral Reform Societies
for the Rescue of Fallen Women, which originated in New York City, and
by a few Female Anti-Slavery Societies.]

[Footnote 13: At the first Woman's Rights Convention in 1848, Mrs. Mott
and Mrs. Stanton were so opposed to having a woman for chairman that
they came near leaving the hall. Four years later Mrs. Mott is herself
the presiding officer.]

[Footnote 14: Several of the speakers had weak, piping voices which did
not reach beyond a few of the front seats and, after one of these had
finished, Miss Anthony said: "Mrs. President, I move that hereafter the
papers shall be given to some one to read who can be heard. It is an
imposition on an audience to have to sit quietly through a long speech
of which they can not hear a word. We do not stand up here to be seen,
but to be heard." Then there was a protest. Mrs. Davis said she wished
it understood that "ladies did not come there to screech; they came to
behave like ladies and to speak like ladies." Miss Anthony held her
ground, declaring that the question of being ladylike had nothing to do
with it; the business of any one who read a paper was to be heard. Mr.
May, always the peacemaker, said Miss Anthony was right; there was not
a woman that had spoken in the convention who if she had been in her
own home would not have adjusted her voice to the occasion. "If your
boy were across the street you would not go to the door, put your head
down and say in a little, weak voice, 'Jim, come home;' but you would
fix your eye on him and shout, 'Jim, come home!' If the ladies, instead
of looking down and talking to those on the front seats, would address
their remarks to the farthermost persons in the house, all between
would hear."]

[Footnote 15: Mrs. Mott was the mother of six and Mrs. Stanton of seven
children. Both were devoted mothers and noteworthy housekeepers.]

[Footnote 16: No one of these ladies was married.]




CHAPTER VI.

TEMPERANCE AND TEACHERS' CONVENTIONS.

1852--1853.


Miss Anthony came away from the Syracuse convention thoroughly
convinced that the right which woman needed above every other, the one
indeed which would secure to her all others, was the right of suffrage.
She saw that it was by the ballot men emphasized their opinions and
enforced their demands; she realized that without it women exercised
small influence upon law-makers and had no power to reward friends or
punish enemies. A sense of the terrible helplessness of being utterly
without representation came upon her with crushing force. The first
great cause of the injustice which pressed upon women from every point
was clearly revealed to her and she understood, as never before, that
any class which is compelled to be legislated for by another class
always must be at a disadvantage. She went home with these thoughts
burning in her soul, and again took up her work for temperance, but
much of her enthusiasm was gone. She felt that she was dealing with
effects only and was shut out from all influence over causes. She still
was loyal to her State society but the desire was growing strong for a
larger field.

In January, 1853, she arranged for a meeting to be held in Albany to
secure a hearing before the Legislature and present petitions for a
Maine Law. Lucy Stone, whom she urged to make an address, wrote: "I
can't in conscience speak in favor of the Maine Law. It does not seem
to me to be based upon sound philosophy. Such a law will not amount to
much so long as there is not a temperance public sentiment behind it.
God bless your earnest and faithful spirit, Susan. I am glad the
temperance cause has so devoted and judicious a friend." She then
invited Rev. Antoinette Brown, who gave several reasons why she did not
think best to deliver the address and concluded: "But there is a better
way; you yourself must come to the rescue. You will read the appeal,
you can fit the address to it and you will do it grandly. Don't
hesitate but, in the name of everything noble, go forward and you shall
have our warmest sympathy."

It was very hard to coax Miss Anthony into a speech in those days and
she finally persuaded the Reverend Antoinette to make the address.
There was a mass-meeting of all the temperance organizations in the
State at Albany, January 21, and as the women made no attempt to take
part in the men's meetings there was no disturbance. History is silent
as to what the men did at that time, but the women held crowded
sessions in the Baptist church, and in the Assembly chamber at night,
Miss Anthony presiding, and a number of fine addresses were made. The
rules were suspended one morning and the ladies invited to the
speaker's desk. Mrs. Vaughn read Mrs. Stanton's eloquent appeal praying
the Legislature to do one of two things: either give women a vote on
this great evil of intemperance, or else truly represent them by
enacting a Prohibitory Law. It was accompanied by the petition of
28,000 names which had been collected by a few women at immense labor
and expense during the past year.

This was the first time in the history of New York that a body of women
had appeared before the Legislature, and in their innocence they had
full confidence that their request would be granted in a very short
time.[17] While they were still in Albany their petition was discussed
and a young member made a long speech against it, declared that women
were "out of their sphere" circulating petitions and coming before the
Legislature, and closed by saying, "Who are these asking for a Maine
Law? Nobody but women and children!" Miss Anthony then and there made a
solemn resolve that it should be her life work to make a woman's name
on a petition worth as much as a man's.

S.P. Townsend, who had made a fortune in the manufacture of
sarsaparilla, happening to be at the Capitol, called upon the ladies
and invited them to come to New York and hold a meeting, offering to
advertise and entertain them. Miss Anthony, Mrs. Bloomer and Miss Brown
accepted his invitation and were entertained at his elegant home, and
also by Professor and Mrs. L.N. Fowler. He engaged Metropolitan Hall
(where Jenny Lind sang) for February 7, and the ladies spoke to an
audience of 3,000 at twenty-five cents admission. Mrs. Fowler presided,
and on the platform were Horace Greeley, who made a strong address,
Mrs. Greeley, Abby Hopper Gibbons and others. The Tribune and Post were
very complimentary, saying it was the first time a woman had spoken
within those walls and the meeting would compare favorably with any
ever held in the building. After it was over Mr. Townsend divided the
net proceeds among the three women. He also arranged for them to speak
in Broadway Tabernacle and in Brooklyn Academy of Music, each of which
was crowded to its capacity.

During March and April they made a successful tour of the principal
cities in the State, Miss Anthony assuming the management and financial
responsibility. They went to Sing Sing, Poughkeepsie, Hudson, Troy,
Utica, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo and other places, greeted
everywhere with large and attentive audiences attracted by the unusual
spectacle of women speaking in public. They lectured chiefly on
temperance, but asked incidentally for equal civil and political
rights. While they received from most of the papers respectful
treatment, they were sometimes viciously assailed. The Utica Evening
Telegraph gave the following false and malicious report:

Miss SUSAN B. ANTHONY AND REV. A.L. BROWN ON THE STUMP.--Mechanics'
Hall was tolerably well filled last evening by persons wishing to
hear the above-named ladies "spout" about temperance. Seven-eighths
of the audience was composed of women, and there was noticeable an
absence of all rank, fashion and wealth. The _ladies_ proper of
Utica don't seem desirous of giving countenance to the silly
vagaries disseminated by these strong-minded women. We conceived a
very unfavorable opinion of this _Miss_ Anthony when she performed
in this city on a former occasion, but we confess that, after
listening attentively to her discourse last evening, we were
inexpressibly disgusted with the impudence and impiety evinced in
her lecture. Personally repulsive, she seems to be laboring under
feelings of strong hatred towards male men, the effect, we presume,
of jealousy and neglect. She spent some hour or so to show the
evils endured by the mothers, wives and daughters of drunkards. She
gravely announced that the evil is a great one, and that no remedy
might hopefully be asked from licentious statesmen nor from
ministers of the gospel, who are always well fed and clothed and
don't care for oppressed women. Prominent among the remedies which
she suggested for the evils which she alleges to exist, are
complete enfranchisement of women, allowing them the run of the
legislative halls, ballot-box, etc. With a degree of impiety which
was both startling and disgusting, this shrewish _maiden_ counseled
the numerous wives and mothers present to separate from their
husbands whenever they became intemperate, _and particularly not to
allow the said husbands to add another child to the family_
(probably no _married_ advocate of woman's rights would have made
this remark). Think of such advice given in public by one who
claims to be a _maiden_ lady!

Miss Anthony may be a very respectable lady, but such conversation
is certainly not calculated to enhance public regard for her....
She announced quite confidently that wives don't de facto love
their husbands if they are dissipated. Everyday observation proves
the utter falsity of this statement, and if there is one
characteristic of the sex which more than another elevates and
ennobles it, it is the _persistency_ and intensity of woman's love
for man. But what does Miss Anthony know of the thousand delights
of married life; of the sweet stream of affection, of the golden
ray of love which beams ever through life's ills? Bah! Of a like
disgusting character was her advice to mothers about not using
stimulants, even when prescribed by physicians, for the benefit of
the young. What in the name of crying babies does Miss Anthony know
about such matters?

In our humble judgment, it is by no means complimentary to wives
and mothers to be found present at such discourses, encouraging
such untruthful and pernicious advice. If Miss Anthony's ideas were
practically applied in the relations of life, women would sink from
the social elevation they now hold and become the mere _appendages_
of men. Miss Anthony concluded with a flourish of trumpets, that
the woman's rights question could not be put down, that women's
souls were beginning to expand, etc., after which she gathered her
short skirts about her tight pants, sat down and wiped her
spectacles.

A letter written to Miss Anthony by her father during this tour shows
that even thus early he recognized the utter inability of women to
effect great reforms without a vote: "I see notices of your meetings in
multitudes of papers, all, with a few exceptions, in a rejoicing mood
that woman at last has taken hold in earnest to aid in the reformation
of the mighty evils of the day. Yet with all this 'rejoicing' probably
not one of these papers would advocate placing the ballot in the hands
of woman as the easiest, quickest and most efficient way of enabling
her to secure not only this but other reforms. They are willing she
should talk and pray and 'flock by herself in conventions and tramp up
and down the State, footsore and weary, gathering petitions to be
spurned by legislatures, but not willing to invest her with the only
power that would do speedy and efficient work."

At this time interest in the study of phrenology was at its height and
while Miss Anthony was in New York she had an examination made of her
head by Nelson Sizer (with Fowler & Wells) who, blindfolded, gave the
following character sketch:

You have a finely organized constitution and a good degree of
compactness and power. There is such a balance between the brain
and the body that you are enabled to sustain mental effort with
less exhaustion than most persons. You have an intensity of emotion
and thought which makes your mind terse, sharp, spicy and clear.
You always work with a will, a purpose and a straightforwardness of
mental action. You seldom accomplish ends by indirect means or
circuitous routes, but unfurl your banner, take your position and
give fair warning of the course you intend to pursue. You are not
naturally fond of combat, but when once fairly enlisted in a cause
that has the sanction of your conscience and intellect, your
firmness and ambition are such, combined with thoroughness and
efficiency of disposition, that all you are in energy and talent is
enlisted and concentrated in the one end in view.

You are watchful but not timid, careful to have everything right
and safe before you embark; but when times of difficulty and danger
arrive, you meet them with coolness and intrepidity. You have more
of the spirit of acquisition than of economy; you would rather make
new things than patch the old. Your continuity is not large enough.
You find it at times difficult to bring the whole strength of your
mind to bear upon a subject and hold it there patiently in writing
or speaking. You are apt to seize upon fugitive thoughts and
wander, unless it be a subject on which you have so drilled your
intellect as to become master of it.

You have a full development of the social group. I judge that in
the main you have your father's character and talents and your
mother's temperament. You have the spirit of her nature, but the
framework in the main is like the father. You have large
benevolence, not only in the direction of sympathy but of
gratitude. You have frankness of character, even to sharpness, and
you are obliged to bridle your tongue lest you speak more than is
meet. You have mechanical ingenuity, the planning talent, and the
minds of others are apt to be used as instruments to accomplish
your objects. For instance, if you were a lawyer, you would arrange
the testimony and the mode of argument in such a way that the best
final result would be achieved. You judge correctly of the fitness
and propriety, as well as of the power, of the means you have to be
employed. You would plan a thing better than you could use the
tools to make it. Your reasoning organs are gaining upon your
perceptions. At fifteen your mind was devoted to facts and
phenomena; of late years you have been thinking of principles and
ideas. You are a keen critic, especially if you can put wit as a
cracker on your whip; you can make people feel little and mean if
they are so, and when you are vexed can say very sharp things.

You are a good judge of character. You have a full development of
language devoted rather to accuracy and definiteness of meaning
than volubility; and yet I doubt not you talk fast when
excited--that belongs to your temperament. Your intellect is active
and your mind more naturally runs in the channel of intellect than
of feeling. It seeks an intellectual development rather than to be
developed through the affections merely. You have fair veneration
and spirituality but are nothing remarkable in these respects. Your
chief religious elements are conscience and benevolence; these are
your working religious organs, and a religion that does not gratify
them is to you "as sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal."

Those who know Miss Anthony intimately will readily testify to the
accuracy of this analysis. It seems remarkable in view of the fact that
the examiner was in utter ignorance of the subject, and that, even if
he had known her name, she had not, at the age of thirty-three,
developed the characteristics which are now so familiar to the general
public.

[Illustration:

SUSAN B. ANTHONY.
AT THE AGE OF 32, FROM A DAGUERREOTYPE.]

On this trip Miss Anthony was invited to spend an evening with Mr. and
Mrs. Greeley and met for the first time Charles A. Dana, Alice and
Phoebe Gary, Elizabeth F. Ellet, with a number of other literary men
and women of New York. Mr. Greeley himself opened the door for them and
sent them hunting through the house for a place to lay their wraps.
After awhile Mrs. Greeley came down stairs with a baby in her arms. She
had put her apron over its face and would not let the visitors look at
it "because their magnetism might affect it unfavorably." During the
evening she rang a bell and a man-servant came in. After a few words
with her he retired and presently brought in a big dish of cake, one of
cheese and a pile of plates, set them on the table and went out. There
was a long pause and Mr. Greeley said, "Well, mother, shall I serve the
cake?" "Yes, if you want to." So he went over to the table, took a
piece of cake and one of cheese in his fingers, putting them on a plate
and carrying to each, until all were served. The guests nibbled at them
as best they could and after a long time the man brought in a pitcher
of lemonade and some glasses and left the room. Mr. Greeley again
asked, "Well, mother, shall I serve the lemonade?" "Yes, if you want
to," she replied, so he filled the glasses, carried to each separately,
and then gathered them up one at a time, instead of all together on a
waiter. Both Mr. and Mrs. Greeley were thoroughly cordial and
hospitable, both intellectually great, but utterly without social
graces. Yet the conversation at their receptions was so brilliant that
the most elegantly served refreshments would have been an unwelcome
interruption.

Copyright (c) 2007. bestextbooks.com. All rights reserved.

Ernest Poole - "His Family"

Various - "Continental Monthly Volume 1 Issue 3"

Samuel Johnson - "A Grammar of the English Tongue"

George W. Cable - "The Flower of the Chapdelaines"