The Kansas herald of freedom., 1856-05-17

",0o u 'ue STATE 0lo not regard them
selves as the representatives and protee-
tors OF women and children, and had no
right to claim to be trusted as such.
How could / look over the legal provi-
sions for these unrepresented classes.
and feelotherwise? How could watch
the operation of laws depriving them OF
their rights to the means of life and lib
erty, and then follow them to the auction
block of pauperism, or the premature
grave. and not be Indignantly alive to
the agencies and causes involved?
would shrink from myself as less
than human, and an anon of woman
hood, if could have seen-all this, and
not resolve TO be, that might do.
God, it seems to me, has made no dis
tinction between man and woman in the
necessity or the duty to labor for their
bread. He has as effectually endowed
woman as man with the ability to win
it, and in thus endowing her for self-de-
pendence, has declared it to be His will
that woman, no less than man, should
possess and enjoy Independent means oil
life and self-culture. Neither by their
laws and customs, have men loosed wo-
men from their obligation to labor fol
their own support. By what right, then
have they legislated themselves into pos.
session and control of woman's inaliena-
BILE rights, until helplessness and degra'
dation have become SO general, that they
can unblushingly speak of the sex ss
"helpless and dependent ?''-uhtil they
have lost sight of the eternal truth thai
she is God-endowed with self-depen.
dence?
Her charter of right, of independent
action and thought, is as good and
broad as her brothers. You may see
it in the birthright gifts of her nature
you may feel it, if you will, in the sec.
ond and final charter Of human freedom
Whatsoever ye would that others should
do unto you, do ye even so unto them. u
Do my readers still contend that God
did not create woman self-dependent
Let them take note of the laboring class,
es, and they will find that under equal
ly favorable conditions, single women
support themselves with as m uch ease
as single men.
Do they still maintain that God de.
signed married women to be dependant,
and by their relations as mothers, in
volved them in helplesness I? / can only
reply, that if such be the fact, multi
tudes of women hays outwitted their
creator, and proved. in spite of mems
theories and laws to realize them, that
Gsd has signally failed in his design,
and is, no doubt. amazed to find his
handi-work prove SO much more efficient
than he intended For, look up and
down the land, aud 10 tens of thou
sands of these helpless women are net
only supporting themselves, but help
less children and invalid or drunken
husbands, sometimes even paying taxes
for the support of Government; and
this, too, with less than one-third the re-
muneration which. men receive for their
labor. Should men, by their laws or
customs, make women more helpless
than God has made them? Is it good
political economy TO depress the ener-
gies of any class of citizens :? Above
all, is it not suicidal to every social inter-
est, to rob the mothers of their God
given powers of self-support, extending,
as these abilities do, to the support OF
their children?
The laws which sequester the earn
ings of the wives and mothers, are fruit
full of pauperism above all other sources,
not excepting intemperanee. Good men
have wept with the paupered wife and
children of the drunkard, and ignorant
ly charged upon his drunkenness the
pauperism of his family. If they had
looked one remove further, they could
have seen that, in nine cases out of ten,
it should be charged upon the law, which
places the earnings of the wife and
children, even to their wearing apparel,
at the absolute disposal of the husband
and the father.
Will men assert that law is powerless
Ito protect the weak against the strong
the self-supporting against robbery, by
the idle and vicious? Our Legislators
claim to protect the poor man against the
ecfsdisors. creditors By laws e1empiing froia ''; si
tachment for debt, homestead, neces
sary household furniture, the tools o
his trade, q COW. pig. school books
Bible, DC. In Vermont, some $500
worth of personal property, and home
stead worth $500. are thus exempted
But in not one State of the Union is ther
, exempted TO the wife, so much IS be
{ own clothing! The husband has righ
: to mortgage or sell every article of per
sonal property exempted from attach
I msnt. even 70 her clothing, without tn
, consent of his wife, and when he die
J the exemption dies with him-proving
in fact. that exemption laws are for tn
benefit of the strong man, and not fa
. ..the weak and helpless members of tn
; family" as claimed by those who mad
and uphold them. They are for the al
!, lof the fathers-not for the mothers
) land yet many little brood of embry
citizens are dependent upea the mother
!, for all they enjoy of home; and shoul
: not their helpIessness and the possibil
!. ties of their future. appeal effectuall
; AGAINST ths legislatioa which.makes pss
ners of the mothers. only to hurthen th
!. s.ste with the support Of the ehildres
Isnd tyrantsof the fathers only to increa:
z IsIe demands for prisons and lunatic as,
8 lum''