shallow reasonings. He would appeal to all if he had not
treated the gentleman with courtesy. He thought he had answered
the gentleman's inquiry, when in reply to the question whether he
founded this claim on nature or on revelation, he said that he
personally founded it on nature. If there was in the compass of
the English language any simpler way of answering the question
than that he did not know it. The gentleman, from the scope of
his remarks, evinced a considerable love for metaphysical
theology. His reasoning appeared to be a little dim; perhaps it
was for want of comprehension on his part. He liked to plant
himself on the fundamental principles of human nature, and work
out his opinions from them.

In reply to the gentleman's reasoning about the universality of a
thing being a test of its naturalness, he could say that there
were a good many races who did not know that two and two make
four. According to the gentleman's idea of natural laws,
therefore, it was not natural that two and two should make four.
But it had always been a question among metaphysicians, which was
really the most natural condition for man--the savage or the
civilized state? His own opinion was that the state of highest
cultivation was the most natural state of man. He tried to
develop his own nature in that way, and one of the consequences
of that development was the conviction that two and two made
four; while another was the conviction that his wife had as much
right to determine her sphere in life for herself as he had for
himself. And having come to that conviction, he should endeavor
to carry it out, and he hoped by the time the young gentleman
came to have a wife, he would be converted to that principle.

In reference to his attack on the editor of _The Daily Times_ for
the article on the Woman's Convention, which had appeared in the
edition of the previous day, he remarked that he had read that
article without any particular reverence for its author. He knew
the quarter from which it came. There was not a man in New York
who better understood on which side his bread is buttered than
the editor of _The Daily Times_. That gentleman always wished
people to understand that his journal was _The Times_, and was
not _The Tribune_, and never failed to avail hims