Litchfield enquirer., 1869-06-03
gitek6ela Gnqnirtt
Litchfleld, Thursday, June 3, 1869,

Litchfleld, Thursday, June 3, 1868
 Fair Play.
 The New York Tribune is certainly any thing but modsl Of fairness if it's discus sions of Woman's Suffrage. The follow ing is sample:-
 The report made to the Massachusetts senat upon Female Suffrage has, in some respects tn merit oi being logical which is not an usual qual ity in discussions of this kind We deem the re port, however, singulariy unfortunate in the fol lowing historical illnstratiens .s4 When we find I woman with the military capacity of Joan of Ar with one with the executive ability of Zenobia o Queen Bess we shah elect her Governor or Presi dent, and not before I" There is no eyidenc whateverthatJoan of Arc possessed any militar. She wasa pEiestess, and not sa soldier. When tn army arrived before Orleans, she said to Dunoi indignantly: !" Was it, then, by your advice, tha we came by the way of ESologne 2" Such was tn, advice of our oldest and wsest captains, said Du nois. "MyLord,s replied Joan, the counsel o God is wiser than the, counsel of men,, You in tended todeceise me; ]; you have deceived yourself Fear no.hins.. Goalhas appdnted my path . Fan. of military approaches in that way The Maid ol Orleans awakened extraordinary enthusiasm she exhibited great personal courage; she was en- leader; but that she was gerierais in our sense of the word there is no reason for believing: and we are content that it should be SO. or Elizabeth it may be said that, shrewd ruler as she was, she called no women to her councils. And in many respectsg she was bad ruler indeed cruel oi heart, hard handed oppressor, constantly false personally the slave of her passions, and particu iarly of her vanity. We should be very sorry to have such woman, or one at all like her. Pres dent of the United States and the Massachusetts Committee may be sure that they would not relish such ruler, especially if she boxed their ears, ol commanded their heads to be cut off
 The less said of historical queens in this discus sion, the better. We assure the advocates of Fe- male Suffrage that there is very little to be made out Of such examples. tt<t. .,14
 What we might term first class " gene ralship'' wasNhardly possible in the Eff teenth Century. Many brilliant and suc- cessful soldiers. indeed, were produced by the interminable wars of that period; but of these, not one, all things considered, was so brilliant and successful as the Maid of Orleans. She found her country just on the verge of subjection by foreign in. vader, its armies beaten and dishearten ed, its Last hope resting on the defence of 8 city it had no means of successfully de lending. By raising the siege of Orleans, and by her subsequent victories over the English. tho Maid of Orleans turned the tide completely against them, and saved France. The Tribune itself is 'singularly unfortunate" in its historical quotation. There certainly was difference of opin- ion between Dunois and Joan concerning the best mode of relieving Orleans. The latter wished to make direct attack by way of the Beusse; the former ordered the approach by the other side of the riv- CT, whereupen the dialogue quoted by the Tribune occurred. The Tribune neglects to state that,3 a few days afterward, the Maid of Orleans did conduct a convoy right through the English lines by sOay of he Beassey Joan is only one of the many great fighters on record, who considered themselves thespecial instruments of God. The letters of Oliver Cromwell show him full of confdanca that .nnaasnras of his were the result of the direct $ counsel oi God" One thing, perhaps the Tribune vii admit regardipg the Maid of Orleans-that pluck and dash like hers, improved by a fair amount of training, would have taken our army con. to Richmond" during the first eighteen months of the war.
 Although we do not consider the Fri buae's criticism of Joan of Arc just, it is not unfair, We cannot say as much of its attac kTonsthe memory of Queen Bess. It starts owith a notable misrepresentation "of Elizabeth it.may be said that, shrewd ruler as she was she called no women to her councils."3 Now the gentlemen who edit the Tribune know very we'll that though the customs of England permitted Eliza beth to be aueens they did not permit wo. men to hold the great offices of state, or to sit in Parliament, That she was person ally the slave of her passions"1is not true She wasoften unddly influenced by them, but it was precisely because she was not their slare, that she never allowed courtiers like Leicester and Essex to drive states. men like Burleigh and Walsingham from her councils. The Tribune. turned con servative, ,forgets how much society has improved in three centuries, and judges the great Queen not by her times but by ours. Was she 2 very '' bad ruler indeed, cruel of heart, hard handed oppressor, and consistently false. compared with Hen ry the Eighth, with the Jameses and the Charleses?as If she boxed Essex's ears, there is no doubt tho puppy deserved it; and in the matter of cutting of heads, how does she stand by the side of that royal Biuebeard, her fatherp In short. of all the monarchs who governed England, William the Fourth possibly excepted, Elizabeth was the best Of.all the.4 monarchs who have reigned in England since they ceased to govern. Victoria is decidedly the best These are. facts the, opponents of woman s suffrage may perhaps explain, but which they cannot deny. .sso@-4 $ olli P raa sl
 s" A------lp~ s.- ..--4--- -----sll5- g.igf 8,
 Di s~Dsooraticn Day. a@ia4sqo-
 We are glad to see that this commemora