ch have risen through woman, or
as revelations to her, namely the Shaker and the Spiritual, do
give us equality of religious rights, for man and woman. But I
call your attention to the inconsistency of United States laws,
and their especial injustice to women by interference with those
rights secured them by State or Territorial laws, as in case of
the colored soldier's wife; as in case the assumption that the
United States had a right to prohibit the exercise of the
suffrage by a woman in New York, although New York itself did not
interfere; as in case of the virtual prohibition by the United
States of jury rights to the women of Wyoming; as in case of the
presumptuous suggestion of the Governor of Utah that its women
should be disfranchised; as in case of such bills so often
introduced in Congress.

I know something of the opinion of the women of the Nation, and I
know they intend to be recognized as citizens secured in the
exercise of all the powers and rights of citizens. If this
security has not come under the XIV. Amendment, it must come
under a XVI., for woman intends to possess "equal personal rights
and equal political privileges with all other citizens." She
asks for nothing outside the power of the United States, she asks
for nothing outside the duty of the United States to secure.
Politicians may as well look this fact squarely in the face and
become wise after the wisdom of the world, for in just so far as
they ignore and forget the women of the country, in just so far
will they themselves be ignored and forgotten by future
generations.

The following review of this important case is from the January
number, 1876, of the _Central Law Journal_, St. Louis, Missouri:

WOMAN SUFFRAGE IN ITS LEGAL ASPECT--A REVIEW OF THE CASE OF MINOR
_vs._ HAPPERSETT, 21 WALLACE, U. S. REPORTS.

As a rule, respect should undoubtedly be paid to judicial
decisions. When the court of last resort has considered and
passed upon a question of law, especially if it be one involving
a consideration of constitutional power, as well as of private
right, it is eminently proper that its conclusion should not be
disturbed, unless for reasons of the gravest import. But cases
present themselves at times, in which criticism is not only
justified, but is demanded