New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1851-07-18

| America nave therefore done wisely and night
In refusing TO entertain the question Of the pc
culiar ap,I,udeS either OF women or Of men. OF
the limits within which either this or that occu.
patton may be supposed 20 be more adapted {,
the one or 10 the other They Justly MAINTAIN.
that these questions can only be satisfactorily
answered by pcfcct freedom. Let every occu.
patton b. open 10 all, without favor or discour.
asement 10 any, ard emp'oynents Will fll into
tic hands % those men or women who are found
D., experience TO he uaoS, capable Of worthily ex.
orciSing Them There need be no fear that
women VIII take cut o. the hands of men any
occupation which men perform better than
they. Each individual viii prove has or he,
capacities III the only way IN which ca.
pacltieS can be proyed-by trial and the
world VIII have the benefit OF the best
faculties II all its inhabitants. But to interfere
beforehand by an arbitrary limit. and declare tina,
whatever be the genius. talent, energy, or ioscc
OF mind Of ~ individual of q certain sex or class.
those faculties shall Ne; be exeIted, or shall BE-
eNeTtod only IN some few OF the many modes IN
which others are permitted 10 USe theirs, Is not
only an injustice 10 the individual. ana detn
men' 10 society which loses what II can III spare
but Is also the most efieciuai mode Of providing
that, m the sex or class 50 cticrod. the qualities
which are not permitted to be exercised shall not
exist
We shall follow the very proper example u
the Convention. m not entering INTO the question
Of the alleged differences in physical or men
tai qualities between the sexes, not because
We have nothing TO say, but because we have too
much to discuss tins enc point tolerably would
need all the space we have 10 hcstow on the en-
the subject But II those who assert that the
proper sphere" for women Is the domestic,
mean by this tha, they have not shown them.
selves qualified for any other. the assertion
evInceS brea, ignorance of life and of history
Women have shown fitness for the highest social
IL. 81. .f.xrn t.,.
admitted 10 them By a curious anomaly, though
ineligible to even the lowest offices Of state they
are IN some countries admitted 10 the highest of
all. the regal; and II there Is any one function
for which they have shown decided vocation, 1t
is that OF Telgnmg Not 10 90 back 10 ancient his
tory we look IN VAIN Tor ADLER or Irmcr rulers than
Elizabeth. than Isabella of CASTLE than Maria
Teresa than Catherine OF Russia than Blanche.
mother of Louis N offrance than Jeanne d'Al
lrct, mother of Henri Quatre There are few
kings on record who c0n,eudcd with more difficult
circumstances, or Overcame them more triumph
anty, than these Even IN semlbarbarous Asia.
Processes who have never been seen by men. other
than those OF their own family, or even spoken
with them unless from behind a curtain, have a.
regents, during the minority OF their sons, ex-
hlh,cd many of the most brilliant examples OF
ust and vigorous administration. In the middle
ages. when the distance between the upper and
lower ranks was greater than even between wo
men and mon, and the women OF the privileged
class, however subject 10 tyranny from the men
of the same class, were at a less distance below
them than any one else was, and often IN their
absence represented them IN their functions and
authority of heroic chatelanes, like
Jeanne dc Montiort, or the great Countess OF
Derby as late even as the time OF Charles l., dts.
tlnguished themselves not only by their political
but their military capacity. In the centuries I'M
medlately before and after the Reformation. Ia
dies OF royal houses. as diplomatists. as Tower
nors of Provinces, or as the confidential advisers
of kings, equalcd the first statesmen OF their
time; and the treaty OF Cambray, which gave
peace TO Europe. was negotiated IN conferences
where no other person was present, 10y the aunt
of the Emperor Charles the Fifth and the mother
of Francis the First
Concerning the fitness, then, OF women Tor po-
htics there can be no question but this dispute
is more likely To turn upon the fitness of politics
for women. When the reasons alleged tor ex-
GLIDING women from active life IN all it, higher
departments, are stripped OF their gorb OF decla
matoR phrases, and reduced TO the simple ex-
preston of n meaning, they seem to be mainly
three the ncompatibillty OF active life with
maternity, and with the cares OF household
secondly. It's alleged hardening effects on the
character and thirdly the lnexpedency OF max
ing an addition to the already excessive pressure
Of competition IN every Kind OF professional or
lucrative employment.
OBJECTION FROM MATERNITY.
Tie first, the maternity argument. Is usually
laid most stress upon although Ut needs hardly
be sad) this reason, II It be one, can apply only
TO mothers. II is neither necessary nor Just to
make imperative on women that they shall be
either mothers or nothing or that # they have
been mothers once. they shall be nothing else
during the whole remainder of their lives
Neither women nor men need any law toexclude
them from an occupation, they have undertaken
another which II incompatible with II. NO one
proposes to exclude the male sex from Parlia-
ment because a man may be soldier or sailor IN
active service, or a merchant whose business re.
quires all his time and energies Nlnetenths OF
the occupations OF men exclude them de faofS
from public life, eiectually II they were ex-
cluded by law but that Is no reason for making
laws 10 exclude even the nine tenihs, much less
the remaining tenth. The reason oi the case Ii
Tie same for women as for men. There Is no
need to make provision by law that woman
shall not carry on the active details OF house
hold. or of the education Of children. and at the
same time practice profession or be elected
TO Parliament Where incompatibilty Is real, II
viii take care Oi itself Dut there Is gross IN
mstlce IN making the lncompatlbllity pretense
Tor the exclusion OF those IN whose case u docs
not exist And these, II they were Tree To choose,
would be a very large proportion. The maternity
argument deserts its supporters III the case Oh
single women, a large and increasing class oil the
population, fact which, 1t IS not irrclevent u
remark, by tending to diminish the excessive
competition OF numbers, IL calculated to ASSIST
greatly the prosperity Of all. There Is no inher,
ent reason or necessity that all women should
voluntarily choose 10 devote their lives 10 one
animal function and It's consequences. NUM-
hers Of women are wives and mothers only be
cause there IS no other career open to them, no
other occupation for their feelings or their sctN'
tiles. Every Improvement IN their educaiion.
aud enlargement Of their facultles--e'erytnns
which renders them more qualified for any other
mode Of life. increases the number OF those 10
whom il is an INJURY and an oppression 10 De de-
MED the choice To say that women must De
crcluded from active life because maternity dis
oialiGes them Tor It, Is in fact to say that
every Other career should be forbidden them IN
,,fe, that maternity may be their only resource.