New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-05-12
guilt, could hardly Lave been more direct and un-

her works; and yet regarded from strictly literary
standpoint it is not entirely satisfactory. Iconyinces
you if you need to be convinced that the position the
consideration, the education Of Woman are not what
they should be- it does not so clearly point out to the
general mind the practical reforms wher by these
to be reetfed No woman, man, ever read with
ont profit; but many have closed with bu vague and
dim dess Of what ought to be done. And this resulted
inevitably from TIE structure Of tho authors mind
She was philanthropist prominently eFltic,
RELENTLESS destroyer % sbams and outworn tri1sons
not a creator, legislator, builder. No book was
ever better calculated to ana quicken inteeet
nonc has more clearly demonstrated that something
should and mus. be done but just what should be Done
was left 10 be devised and indicated by Others whom
this living word should awaken TO consciousness cf
wrong Of necessity and Of daty Hence many abuses
have been ard IN be corrected, many wise and bu-
name notifications Of our laws affecting Woman have
been and will be enacted in consequence Of this book,
by persons who have scarcely heard the namc, and
know nothing of the works Of Margaret FHller.
Let IA here make room-for the instruction Of those
who s think or appear to THINK that the demand for
'Woman's Rights il an cutlery against the Heaven
declared distinction between the sexes-for her state
ment on this point:
IL is not the transient Dream OF pOttC n"Ht' 'hae
women want each can receive tina. from lover IL
is rot lifelong sway il needs but to become ooquee,
shrew, or good cook, to be cure OF that. IL rs not
money, notOriety, nor the badges OF auulorlty
which men have appropriated 10 Themselves. IL de-
mands made in their behalf lay stress any Of these
particulars those who make them have not searched
deeply into the need. The want is for that which ut
once Includes these and precludes them; which would
not BIO forbidden rover lest there be temptation TO
steal and misuse it, which would not have the mind
perverted by fatiery from worhiness OF esteem u
Is for that which is tie brthrght OF every one capable
of receiving 1.-THE freedom the religious, and the in
teigent freedom Of the universe, to Use its means, 10
learn it's secret far Nature has cnabed them, with
God alone for their guide and their Judge.
:" Ye cannot believe il, men; but the only reason
WHY women ever assume what is more appropriate to
YOU Is because You prevent them from finding out what
he fit for themselves. Were they fee, were they wIse,
fully to develop TIE strength and beauty OF Woman
thcy would never wish to be men, or man-llse. The
wci!-instruced moon flies not from her orbit 10 seize
on the eorics of her Partner No. FOR size knows that
ore law rules, heaven contains, one universe re-
plies to them alike
But this It will be said is vague and transcen-
dental-t is poetry, sentiment, moonshine-not the
statement Of "a real and tangible grievance wherewith
practical men ard legislators may deal Let US, then,
turn to her presentment of the legal disabilities and
burdens Of Woman, they almost universally existed
fifteen years ago, buw saeoice TO sayas they exist
universally no longer;
at may well be an Anti-Slayery party that pleads
for Woman if we consider merely that she does not
hold poperty on equal terms with men; 80 that, if
Husband dies without making will, the wife, instead
Of taking ut bis place head OF the family nher-
s Only part Of lis fortune, often brought him by her.
se az if she child or ward only, not an equal
partner.
ave will not speak of the innumerable instances in
which progate and idle live upon the earnings of
industrious wives if the wives leave theln aDdtake
with them the children to perform the double duty of
81 f.llc ftlnl ta Ms
threaten to rob them of TIE children if deprived of the
ric Is Of husband as they call them planting them
selves in their poor lodgings frightening them into pay
ing tribute by taking from them the children, running
TO debt nj the Of these otherwise oyeasked
hel&ts Such instances count up by within my
own memory. have seen the husband who had stained
himself by long Of low vice, till his wife
weared from her heroic forgiveness by finding that his
rcachery made useless and that if she would provide
bread for herself and her children che must 30 separate
from his i'll fame-I have known this man come 10 in
stall himself in tie chamber Of "a woman who loathed
him, and say she should never take food without his
company. have known these men steal their children
whom they knew they had no means TO maintain, take
them into dissolute company, expose them 10 bodily
danger to brighten the poor woman, to whom it seems,
he fact that she alone bad borne the pan2s of their
birh and nourished their infancy does not give AN
equal right them. do believe that thsmode OF kid
nappng-and it is frequent enough in al classes of
c;ey-wlll be by the neXtage viewed as by Heaven
now, and that the man who ayais hmselfof the shelter
Of mems laws 10 steal from mother her Children
arrogate any superior right in them that of
perior virtue, viii bear the stigma he deserves, in
mon with him who steals grown men from their mother
land their hopes, and their homes.
81 said, we will not speak of this now; yet / hare
poken, for the subject makes me feel too much. |
could give instances that would startle the vulgar
and caous; but will not, for the public opinion of
their eek is already against such men, and where
Of extreme tyranny made known, there is
private action in the wte's favor. But she ought not
TO need this, nor, think, can she long Men must
th,fe tlaip ,ft,I ~,
weaker party, she ought 10 have legal protection,
Which would make such oppression impossible. But
| would not deal with "atrocious instances" except
in the way OF iueraon, neither demand from men "A
partial redress in some matter but 90 10 the root
of the whole. II principles could be established par
tcuars would adjust themselves Alright. Ascertain the
true destiny of Woman gives her legitimate hopes,
and standard within herself marriage and all other
relations would by degrees be harmonzcd with
tbeEe.'
We have said that Margaret Fuller was prearni-
nently critic. Her originality and vigor of mind,
her ipe and wide culture, still more her perfect integ-
ity OF character and earlessness of utterance quail
fed her emphatcay for this. Bear witness, the fol-
lowing extract from her essay Goethe whose
genius and achievements she profoundly appreciated
ard admired yet of whom she did not hesitate 10 say:
"Of Goethe, as of other natures, where The intellect
ID too much developed in proportion TO the moral
nature ii is difficult TO speak without seeming narrow
blisd, and imrertinent. For such men see all that
others Ire and if you feel want OF faculty in them
it is hard to say they have ii not lest menent
they puzzle you by giving indication of it. Yet
they are not, nay, knor not; they only discern. The
difference that between sight and life pregcience and
being, wisdom and love. Thus with Goethe. Natu-
rally of deep mind and shallow heart, he felt the
sway OF the affections eough to appreciate their work.
lngs in other men, but never enough TO receive their
inmCEt regenera;ing influence.
" How this might have been had he ever once aban-
donod himself entirely to sentiment it is impossible
IN sav Ilut tho p4neotiou of hia youth a..npd,J