FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   421   422   423   424   425   426   427   428   429   430   431   432   433   434   435   436   437   438   439   440   441   442   443   444   445  
446   447   448   449   450   451   452   453   454   455   456   457   458   459   460   461   462   463   464   465   466   467   468   469   470   >>   >|  
r themselves what every nation has discovered--the truth that shakes England to-day, and brings Disraeli and the Tory party to their knees, and has already brought this country to blood--that there is no class of citizens, and no single citizen, who can safely be intrusted with the permanent and exclusive possession of political power. "There is no instance on record," says Buckle, in his history of civilization in England, "of any class possessing power without abusing it." It is as true of men as a class as it is of an hereditary nobility, or of a class of property-holders. Men are not wise enough, nor generous enough, nor pure enough, to legislate fairly for women. The laws of the most civilized nations depress and degrade women. The legislation is in favor of the legislating class. In the celebrated debate upon the Marriage Amendment Act in England, Mr. Gladstone said that "when the gospel came into the world woman was elevated to an equality with her stronger companion." Yet, at the very time he was speaking, the English law of divorce, made by men to regulate their domestic relations with women, was denounced by the law lords themselves as "disgusting and demoralizing" in its operation, "barbarous," "indecent," "a disgrace to the country," and "shocking to the sense of right." Now, if the equality of which Mr. Gladstone spoke had been political as well as sentimental, does he or any statesman suppose that the law of divorce would have been what it then was, or that the law of England to-day would give all the earnings of a married woman to her husband, or that of France forbid a woman to receive any gift without her husband's permission? We ask women to confide in us, as having the same interests with them. Did any despot ever say anything else? And, if it be safe or proper for any intelligent part of the people to relinquish exclusive political power to any class, I ask the Committee, who proposed that women should be compelled to do this? To what class, however rich, or intelligent, or honest, they would themselves surrender _their_ power? and what they would do if any class attempted to usurp that power? They know, as we all know, as our own experience has taught us, that the only security of natural right is the ballot. They k
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   421   422   423   424   425   426   427   428   429   430   431   432   433   434   435   436   437   438   439   440   441   442   443   444   445  
446   447   448   449   450   451   452   453   454   455   456   457   458   459   460   461   462   463   464   465   466   467   468   469   470   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

England

 

political

 
divorce
 

intelligent

 

Gladstone

 

husband

 

equality

 

country

 

exclusive

 

demoralizing


disgusting

 
sentimental
 
statesman
 

suppose

 
shocking
 
natural
 

disgrace

 

operation

 

security

 

indecent


experience

 

taught

 

ballot

 

barbarous

 

France

 

denounced

 

compelled

 

despot

 

proposed

 
relinquish

proper

 

Committee

 
attempted
 

surrender

 

receive

 
married
 

people

 
forbid
 

permission

 
interests

honest

 

confide

 

earnings

 
record
 

Buckle

 

instance

 
permanent
 

possession

 

history

 
civilization