Volume I Part 57 (1/2)
2. Let us pet.i.tion our State governments so to modify the laws affecting marriage, and the custody of children, that the drunkard shall have no claims on either wife or child.
3. Let us touch not, taste not, handle not, the unclean thing in any combination. Let us eschew it in all culinary purposes, and refuse it in all its most tempting and refined forms.
4. With an efficient organization, lectures, tracts, newspapers, and discussion, we shall accomplish much. I would give more for the agitation of any question on sound principles, thus enlightening and convincing the public mind, than for all the laws that could be written or pa.s.sed in a century. By the foolishness of preaching, must all moral revolutions be achieved; but remember the truth, the whole truth must be faithfully preached.
5. We must raise the standard of temperance in all things. The man who over-eats takes a little wine to aid digestion, and he who exhausts himself by licentious indulgence takes a little as a stimulus; thus one vice induces another, and all go hand in hand together.
6. Let us endeavor to make labor honorable in all. Work is wors.h.i.+p, says Emerson. Let us honor the hard hand and sun-burnt brow. Remember idleness is the parent of vice; and there is no surer way to banish vice from our land, than to see that the young just coming on the stage of life are wisely and fully employed.
And lastly, inasmuch as charity begins at home, let us withdraw our mite from all a.s.sociations for sending the Gospel to the heathen across the ocean, for the education of young men for the ministry, for the building up of a theological aristocracy and gorgeous temples, to the unknown G.o.d, and devote ourselves to the poor and suffering about us. Let us feed and clothe the hungry and naked, gather children into schools, and provide reading-rooms and decent homes for young men and women thrown alone upon the world. Good schools and homes where the young could ever be surrounded by an atmosphere of purity and virtue, would do much more to prevent immorality and crime in our cities than all the churches in the land could ever possibly do toward the regeneration of the mult.i.tude sunk in poverty, ignorance, and vice.
Susan B. Anthony, Chairman of the Central Committee, addressed the meeting in a clear, forcible manner, alluding to the indifference manifested by many women on the subject of temperance, and stated the object of calling the women of the State together at this time. She read letters[94] from Frances Dana Gage, Clarina Howard Nichols, Elizabeth Oakes Smith, Abby Kelly Foster, and Horace Greeley. In the discussion of the resolutions[95] during the different sessions, Giles B. Stebbins, Benjamin Fish, William Barnes, Amy Post, Mrs. Albro, Mrs.
Vaughan, William C. Bloss, George W. Clark, and the Rev. Mr. Goodwin, all took part. One resolution denouncing Mr. Gale, a State Senator, for his insulting epithets in regard to the women who had pet.i.tioned for a Maine law, called down on that gentleman some well-deserved reprimands. The Rev. Mr. Goodwin expressed his indignation and shame, that any man of education and position should use such language in speaking of women who were so faithfully laboring in all the great reforms of the day. Mrs. Bloomer in the course of her remarks also criticised Mr. Gale for saying in a sneering way ”that representatives were not accustomed to listen to the voice of woman in legislating upon great public questions; that the const.i.tution of the female mind was such as to render woman incapable of correctly deciding upon the points involved in the pa.s.sage of the proposed bill.” After rousing the attention of the people of the State by large and enthusiastic meetings in all the chief cities, and sending into the Legislature a mammoth pet.i.tion for a Maine law, this was woman's answer. On the Divorce resolution,
Mrs. BLOOMER said: We believe the teachings which have been given to the drunkard's wife touching her duty--the commendable examples of angelic wives which she has been exhorted to follow, have done much to continue and aggravate the vices and crimes of society growing out of intemperance. Drunkenness is good ground for divorce, and every woman who is tied to a confirmed drunkard should sunder the ties; and if she do it not otherwise the law should compel it--especially if she have children.
We are told that such sentiments are ”exceptional,” ”abhorrent,”
that the moral sense of society is shocked and outraged by their promulgation. Can it be possible that the moral sense of a people is more shocked at the idea of a pure-minded, gentle woman sundering the ties which bind her to a loathsome ma.s.s of corruption, than it is to see her dragging out her days in misery, tied to his besotted and filthy carca.s.s? Are the morals of society less endangered by the drunkard's wife continuing to live in companions.h.i.+p with him, giving birth to a large family of children who inherit naught but poverty and disgrace, and who will grow up criminal and vicious, filling our prisons and penitentiaries and corrupting and endangering the purity and peace of community, than they would be, should she separate from him and strive to win for herself and the children she may have, comfort and respectability? The statistics of our prisons, poor-houses, and lunatic asylums, teach us a fearful lesson on this subject of morals.
The idea of living with a drunkard is so abhorrent, so revolting to all the finer feelings of our nature, that a woman must fall very low before she can endure such companions.h.i.+p. Every pure-minded woman must look with loathing and disgust upon such a union of virtue and vice; and he who would compel her to it, or dissuade the drunkard's wife from separating herself from such wretchedness and degradation, is doing much to perpetuate drunkenness and crime, and is wanting in the n.o.blest feelings of human nature. Thanks to our Legislature, if they have not given us the Maine law, they are deliberating upon the propriety of giving to the wives of drunkards and tyrants a loop-hole of escape from the brutal cruelty of their self-styled lords and masters. A bill of this kind has pa.s.sed the House, but may be lost in the Senate. Should it not pa.s.s now, it will be brought up again, and pa.s.sed at no distant day. Then if women have any spirit, they will free themselves from much of the oppression and wrong which they have hitherto of necessity borne.
A brief address was read by Mrs. Robinson, of Darien. This woman had been for many years the wife of a drunkard; she had overcome many obstacles to attend this Convention for the purpose of relating her experience, and offering words of encouragement. Her narration of the trials and sufferings she had endured was very affecting. She fully endorsed the tenth resolution, ”That the woman who consents to live in the relation of wife with a confirmed drunkard, is, in so doing, recreant to the cause of humanity, and to the dignity of a true womanhood.”
An organization was effected called ”The Woman's New York State Temperance Society”; large numbers of the members of the Convention signed the Const.i.tution, and elected Elizabeth Cady Stanton President[96]. A vote of thanks was pa.s.sed to Horace Greeley for the kind manner in which he had uniformly sustained the women in their temperance efforts in _The New York Tribune_, and after six long sessions, the Convention adjourned.
As President of ”The Woman's State Temperance Society,” Mrs. Stanton issued a plain, strong appeal to the women of the State in which it was said woman's rights predominated over temperance. The strong point she uniformly pressed on the temperance question was the right and duty of divorce for drunkenness. A letter of hers to the Convention in Albany on this point, was so radical, that the friends feared to read it; however, after much discussion, Susan B. Anthony took the responsibility. It was read to the Convention, and published in _The Lily_ and other papers, and called out many condemnatory notices by the press. _The Troy Journal_ was much excited at the idea of ”a virtuous woman severing the tie that bound her to a confirmed drunkard,” and spoke of such a union of virtue and vice as a ”divine inst.i.tution,” sacred in the eye of the ”divine author,” and declared Mrs. Stanton's teachings ”reviling Christianity.”
However, these bold utterances roused the consciences of many women to the sinfulness of such relations, and encouraged them in sundering such unholy ties.
At the Rochester Convention, Gerrit Smith, Susan B. Anthony, and Amelia Bloomer were appointed delegates to ”The Men's State Temperance Society,” to be held in June, at Syracuse. The call for the meeting contained these words, ”Temperance a.s.sociations of every name are invited to send delegates.” Hence the Woman's State Society being earnestly enlisted in the good work, responded to this invitation.
Miss Anthony and Mrs. Bloomer accepted the appointment, and on arriving at Syracuse, found many of the delegates already there, and everything indicating a large Convention. The next morning, while preparing to go to the hall, a gentleman was announced, who wished to see them in the parlor. On descending thither, they were happy to meet Samuel J. May. He came to inform them that their arrival had created great excitement among some of the clergy, who were shocked at the idea of women delegates to the Convention, and threatened if they were admitted, to withdraw. This had alarmed others who were not quite so conservative, but who feared to have anything occur to create disturbance. They had persuaded Mr. May to wait upon the ladies and urge them quietly to withdraw. Mr. May performed his part well, merely stating the facts of the case, and leaving them to act upon their own judgment. But when they decided to present their credentials and demand their rights as members of the Convention, his face beamed with joy, as he said to them, ”You are right.” At the appointed time they were seated with other ladies in attendance at the side of the platform. Presently Rev. Dr. Mandeville, of Albany, arose, turned his chair facing them, his back to the audience, and stared at them with all the impudence of a boor, as if to wither them with his piercing glance.
WILLIAM H. BURLEIGH, says _The Lily_,[97] read the annual report, which, among other things, ”hailed the formation of the Woman's State Society as a valuable auxiliary in the cause of temperance.” Rev. J. Marsh moved that the report be accepted and adopted.
Dr. MANDEVILLE objected in a speech of some length, characterized by more venom and vulgarity than it had ever before been our fortune to hear; and such as the most foul-mouthed politician or bar-room orator would have hesitated to utter before respectable audiences. He denounced the Woman's State Temperance Society, and all women who took an active public part in promoting the cause.
Spoke contemptuously of woman going from home to attend a temperance convention, and characterized such as a sort of ”hybrid species, half man and half woman, belonging to neither s.e.x.” The short dress and woman's rights questions were ”handled without gloves.” These movements must be put down; cut up root and branch, etc., etc., and finally his Reverence wound up with a threat that if the report was adopted without striking out the offensive sentence he would dissolve his connection with the Society. Having thus discharged his venom, and issued his commands, he took his hat and with a pompous air left the house and did not again show himself at the meetings.
A warm discussion followed the motion for striking out, which it would be impossible to describe. Mr. Havens, of New York, offered an amendment--subst.i.tuting a sort of unmeaning compliment to the ladies, and asking their influence in their proper sphere--the domestic circle. The discussion was kept up, but amid the confusion of ”Mr. President!” ”Mr. President!” ”Order!” ”Order!”
”I have the floor!” ”I will speak, right or wrong!” from at least half a dozen voices, until all lost sight of both motion and amendment.
Miss Anthony arose and addressed the Chair, but was at once called to order by Rev. Fowler, of Utica. He denied woman's right to speak in that meeting. Here the confusion again began. ”Mr.
President!” ”Mr. President!” ”Order!” ”Order!” ”Hear the lady!”
”Hear the lady!” ”Let her speak!” ”Let her speak!” ”Go on, go on!” ”Order! order!” in the midst of which the president left the chair, and said if there was any gentleman present who could keep order he would thank him to take the chair; he could hear nothing when so many were talking at once, and if order was not preserved he would not attempt to preside. A moment's quiet followed, and then all was confusion again. The conservatives were determined to have their way, and nearly every attempt on the part of the liberals to make themselves heard was frustrated.
A. N. COLE, of Belfast, succeeded in keeping the floor a few moments, and spoke ably in defence of woman and of her right to be heard. He declared that man had no more right to prescribe woman's sphere and mark out a course of action for her, than she had to prescribe man's sphere and dictate his course of action.
Woman had ever been untiring and earnest in her labors in this cause, and he was ready at all times and everywhere to acknowledge her aid, and hail her as a co-worker. He insisted that woman had a right to be heard on that floor; that she was there on the invitation of the Society, and they could not refuse her a voice in the proceedings.