by bringing suit
against the State of Illinois in the Supreme Court of the United
States. The case was argued for the plaintiff in the December term,
1871, by the Hon. Matt. H. Carpenter, of Wisconsin, an eminent
republican United States Senator. In addressing the Court Mr.
Carpenter said:

This is a writ of error to the Supreme Court of the State of
Illinois, to review the proceedings of that court, denying the
petition of the plaintiff in error to be admitted to practice as
an attorney and counselor of that court, which right was claimed
by the plaintiff in error in that court under the XIV. Amendment
of the Constitution of the United States. The plaintiff in error
is a married woman, of full age, a citizen of the United States
and of the State of Illinois; was ascertained and certified to be
duly qualified in respect of character and attainments, but was
denied admission to the bar for the sole reason that she was a
married woman. This is the error relied upon to reverse the
proceedings below.

By the rules of this court no person can be admitted to practice
at the bar without service for a fixed term in the highest court
of the State in which such person resides. Consequently a denial
of admission in the highest court of the State is an
insurmountable obstacle to admission to the bar of this court.
This record, therefore, presents the broad question, whether a
married woman, being a citizen of the United States and of a
State, and possessing the necessary qualifications, is entitled
by the Constitution of the United States to be admitted to
practice as an attorney and counselor-at-law in the courts of the
State in which she resides. This is a question not of taste,
propriety, or politeness, but of civil right. Before proceeding
to discuss this question, it may be well to distinguish it from
the question of the right of female citizens to participate in
the exercise of the elective franchise.

The great problem of female suffrage, the solution of which lies
in our immediate future, naturally enough, from its transcendent
importance, draws to itself, in prejudiced minds, every question
relating to the civil rights of women; and it seems to be feared
that doing justice to woman's rights in any particular would
probably be followed by the establishment o