The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1869-09-28
DAILY PRESS.
Tuesday MOrnins. September 28 1869.
Mill ON the subjcciion OF won- ;,
CORTLAND,

| already passed through several editions in
England. 1t has been translated into French
and German, and is eagerly sought for and
widely discussed in the various centres of
european thought and culture. In this coun-
W we observe with regret that it has not at
tracted the attention it deserves. II is be-
yond comparison the best book which has
| yet been written upon this much yexed ques-
ton concerning which almost everybody dog
matizes, but which almost nobody studies 1t
| is a small book-a model Of precision and
compactness there is scarcely superfiuous
word in it /; yet it contains whole magazine
of arguments with which the advocates OF
social reform may arm themselves. 1t is a
mastery and truly exhaustive treatise, in
spirit and manner closely allied with the au-
thor's noble essay on Liberty of which in
deed we may regard it as the complene~nt'
The ground taken by Mr. NiA, briefly sta
ted by himself is:
| That the nr;ncir.e which regulates the ex-
| ;stino social rais-ions between the two sexes
| the Ieoal spIdrdlnation of one sex to the 9TH
er-is r@ohg in itself, and now one of the
ebie.Snindrances to human improvement and
,pst it ought to be replaced by system of
e'erfect equality, admitting no power or prvi-
lege on the one side, or disability on the 9TH
er.
To establish this position may well be call
ed an arduous task, since custom, tradition,
prejudice, ignorance, selfishness and all the
other powers of inertia are arranged on the
other side. Mr Mill commences by mining
the very citadel of his adversaries. He de-:
nies the major premise on which all their
arguments and assumptions rest. He denies
that the existing civil inequality between men
and women has its foundation in any per-
manent fact in nature and he insists that the
onus of proof lies with those who declare that
it has. 1t will not do TO assert in general
terms that the experience of mankind has
pronounced in favor of the existing system.
Experience cannot possibly have decided be-
tween two courses. so long as there has been
trial only vfone. If it be said that the doc
trine of the equality OF the soxes rests only
on theory, he retorts that the contrary uoe-
trine also has only theory TO rest upon.
This is turning the tables ON his adversaiies
with vengeance, and gives him an immense
advantage over those who peddle out cheap
moraities about "woman as God made her.
''woman's sphere" and all that. DIR. Bush
nells sentimentalsms on the "Reform against
Nature" and the Reverend Fulton's "Serpent
in the Garden of Eden" theory, tumble to
pieces at once under Mr. Mills way of hand
ling. He rejects as pure assumptions, all
speculations founded on the supposed nature
of woman, since nobody knows what the ma
ture of woman would be under conditions ia
vorable to its development. He says:
In the second place the adoption of this
system of inequality never was the result of
deliberation, or forethought, or any social
ideas, or any notion whatever of what con-
duced to the benefit of humanity or the good
order of society. 1t arose simply from the
fact that from the earliest twilight OF human
society, every woman lowing to the value at
tached to her by men, combined with her in
feriority in muscular strength) was found in
bondage to some man. Laws and systems of
polity always begin by recognizing the rela-
tions they find existing between individual S.
They convert what was mere physical fact
into a legal right sanction and protect it. In
early times the majority of the male sex were
slaves, as well as the whole OF the female.
And many ages elapsed before any thinker
was bold enough to question the rightfulness,
the absolute social necessity, either of the one
slavery or the other. The present dependence
of woman is not an original institution TAX
ing a fresh start from considerations of JUS
tice and social expediency-it is the primitive
state of slaUery lasting on, through success
size mitigatiOns and notifications occasion
ed by the same causes tohich hare softened
the general manners, and brought all human
relations more under the control of justice
and the influence of humanity. But 10 has
not lost the taint of its brutal origin; and no
presumption in its favor can be drawn from
the fact of its existence.
Mr.. Mill declares that this subordination of
women is an isolated fact in modern social in
stitutions; solitary branch of what has be-
come their fundamental law, namely: that all
human beings have an equal right to employ
their faculties, and such favorable chances as
may offer, to achieve the lot which may ap-
pear to them most desirable. The disabili-
ties to which women are subject from the
mere fact of their birth, are the solitary ex-
amples of this. kind in modern legislation.
In no instance except this are the higher So
cial functions closed against any one by
fatality of birth which no exertions and no
change of circumstances can overcome. This
anomalous fact of the present is relic of the
barbarous past discordant with the future,
and must inevitably disappear.
Mr.. Mills book is full Of quotabe passages;
indeed. it is difficult to resist the desire to
ouole it ALL for there is not page OF 1t but
is to the point. For the present, however
no must content ourselves with one more ex-
,ct. Referring to that class of male wseacres
wo are so ready with their nice, stupid hon.
ilie. q, the sphere and nature of woman, he
says.
There's little chance of reasonable think
ing on tn matter while people fatter them
selves tina they perfectly understand sub
ject of whch most men know absolutely
nothing, an of which it is at present i'm
possible that any man, or all men taken to-
gether, should have knowledge that can quail
:. iy them to lay ,own the law to women as to
what is or what's not, their vocation, Hap
| PLY TO such knowledge is necessary; fol
| the question rests with women themselves
: to be deci ed By their own experience
| and the use OF. their own fsculties.-
One thing we may be certain of-that wha
| is contrary TO woman's nature to do they new
or will be made to do by simply giving thei
nature free play. The anxiety OF mahkin'
| TO interfere in behalf of nature, lest natrr
should not succeed in efiecting its purpose,
| an altogether unnecessary solitude. what VIC
| man by nature cannot do, IL Is quite superfu
Gus to forbid them from doing. What the
can do, but not so well as the men who ar
their competitors, competition suf1ices to eS
clude them from; since nobody asks for pre-
tective duties and bounties IN favor of We
men it is only asked that the present bour
. ties and protective duties in favor of me
should be reca led. Ii women have a create
natural fitness for some things than for otl
ers, there is no need OF laws or social incuci
ton to make the ms jority of them do the Io
mer in preference to the latter. Whatever the
services are most wanted for, the free play IL
competition will hold out the strongest il
ducements for them to undertake.
The general opinion is SUI
posed to be, that the natural vocation OF
! woman is that of wife and mother. / sa
is supposed to be, because, judging from ac
from the whole present constitution of S
ciety-one might infer that their opinion wi
the direct contrary. They might be suppo
ed to think that the alleged natura, vocatIC
of woman was OF all things repugna"t
their nature; insomuch that If tbey are lr
to do anything else-lf any other means
living or occupation Is open which has ar
chance OF appearing desirable to them-the
VIII not be enough of them willing TO acce
the condition said to be natural TO them.
THIS IS the real opinion of men in seneral,
S would be well that it should be spoken out.
should like to hear somebody openly emu
clating the doctrine lit is already implied
much that is written on the subject)-"
| necessary to society that women should ms