ve made the institutions for men, and for men alone;
never consulted woman. We have said she was nobody, and nowhere,
or, if she was found anywhere she was out of her sphere,
(laughter) and must go back to nowhere immediately, and to
nobody. We have gravely assumed that we understood her nature and
character better than she did herself. It is one of the wondrous
elements of the sexes that they shall perpetually reveal
themselves to each other, and neither shall ever fully comprehend
the other. Let woman speak for herself. Give her a chance to
speak as man speaks, by precisely the same language, and in the
same manner, and then reverently incline your heads, and listen
to what she says.

I have said this great question is up for final argument. My
mission was simply to present to you this dry, but very
interesting question of woman's rights, under the XIV. Amendment.
To my mind, the argument is perfectly invincible. It never can be
met, and never will be, and it will, ultimately work out its own
end.

Thanking you for the kindness with which you have listened to me,
I leave this matter with you.

ADDRESS OF MRS. ISABELLA BEECHER HOOKER.

Mrs. HOOKER said: We are told by men themselves that there are
too many voters already; restriction is what we want, not
enlargement of the suffrage. Let us see how this is, my
friends--let us reason together on this point for a few moments.
The one great propelling power of this Government that moves the
great political engine, and that keeps us alive as a Nation on
the face of the earth, is God's own doctrine of personal liberty
and personal responsibility. That is all we have to go upon. It
is, in fact, fuel and steam. Liberty is the steam, responsibility
puts on the brakes, and then what is the safety-valve, I ask you?
Is it not our election day? Look at it in this way. Every honest
lawyer will tell you that the next best thing to settling a
quarrel between two belligerents is to bring the parties into
court. Because the court-room is a great cooling off place, a
perfect refrigerator. A man who has quarreled with his neighbor
comes into court, and, before the lawyers get through with him,
he wishes he hadn't quarreled. How is it that our courts act in
this way? What do we gain in this? Ever