Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1869-04-09
WoMAN's RIGHTS.

u hs Editor of ne ~ 'cihhdn G"t'He /:
ga QrssrioS. Mrs. Stanton seems to have
stirred the very f'mntlius Of the great deep with
her demand that woman have the right to
choose the father or her child. Is il impert-
ncm to ask. Whu shall choose for her, IL she
may not Y ..
Tls above is tiken from the Revolution, nr
March Is, 1869 n pap'r owned by Susan u.
Anthony, aud under the editorial Charge of EliE-
nbuth Cady stanton. Just exactly what is
meant, the writer hereof is in s,nIc doubt. A
| m ,rria-e ceremony is perinrmed, and the com
monty received opinion is that the l,dy, In Con.
senting. has thereby expressed her fright Ia
choose the father " her child"
Now, under the supposition that the woman
from any cause, No matter what, becomes dis
satin6ed with her choice, anl no longer wishes
her husband IN DO "the father of her child"
are we to understand that the right is claimed
for her Ia select A. b., who Is MT her huSband,
&, staud toward her In that rel ,tinn Or ar,
wo IN understand that dissatisfaction frum any
cause, M matter what, should bc grounl inr di-
vnrce, thus giving her u new chancr3 Again,
is there To bc amy limit to this m 'de " selecting
fathers, and what is that limit for surely the
| right continues, even IL exercised twenty times
| Again. would Il bc considered u piece Of brutal
tyranny for man IN exercise the right to choose
| the mother Of his childS Light upon these
questions Is earnestly desired. x,
| REMARKS ~ ruK GAZETTE,
The writer ol the above makes query which
has occurred to many. We are unable to an-
| swcr it, some of the female advocates of te-
male suffrage are mdulgng in declarat ons stint
liar tn this. which are liable to mScnnStruction,
and thus to prejudice their cause. II the dec
. | larati,n Ia vague sn as Ia adm; of a c1nstruc-
tion hath favorable aud unfavordble to fidelity
and purity in the marriage relation, Il is to \,
presumed that the Erst is the right construction
We seS declarations by these female advocates
that the onlranchisement ct womea means the
: abolition 0f legal marriage. We suppose u
! means tho ab0lhin nf the legal power at th,
. husband over the person AMI pruperty Of th'
! wife and their entire equality before the law
In Ohio tho husbands legal control over III,
wite's property has been pretty nearly abolished
but not his contrnl of her person. hut this 10
form will work bhth ways, ani while Il make
!, the woman independent of her husband. Il vii
: alsn loosen her legal hold on him, viii this h
an improvement in tie condition uf women W
suppose they arr most capable OF judging. Bn
they must face the fact that they can not play
fast aud lmse game with marriage, aud ths
: when they shall have emancipatrd thcmS Sclvo
It from its legal bonds, they will also have m ld
j. their husbands tree. Is il safe To trust hu 5
u bands with frcedamf Perhaps the women az
C moSl capable Of Judging.
y IL is rather a blum. way nt putting things hu
~ We suppose that when woman accepts au OIL
Is or NJ urragc, she does, in hmtVd sense, excr
else the right &, choose tbs father ut her child
| Z
m society 20 take the initiative aud tn pr0pos
n wherever her iaacy may range. Und,Mb,cdl
~ this is a great disadvantage. We see il cont
ne IDENTITY affirmed that with the ballot woman wi
y So reform society that they shall have the SAN
priviledge ofpurSuing and proposing AS mel
~ Whether this is matter governed by the Su
ne fVage, or by social custnm, nr whether wonS
~ will be 10 any betor situation With this priv
o. edge " selection, are things we dORoI prcSuw
We "a have any opinion on, tor We suppose that ~
D. men are ma5e capable of judgiug. The decll
as aiiun maY mean this privirgr of taking the IN
sr tiatcdin coupling. aud hcrc,ore W. are bnu'
IT. ~ suppose that this is Nhat IL means. Dcc'ar
81 tonS ~ a is sort arr made with such iooSvne
Ne as to lead many tn snfpose that they mean th
r' tue woman may exercise this clU'lce every ur
ot she takes the hunlor to put herself Ia the way
exercising the function ot msteralty but
at think this AN erpr, tor il would imply the saI
er- freedom To man, which Is that marriage sh
The nM be binding either In law ~ IN the Rith
'ed the Iauics. Muull this be an improyem,
rty 10 the condition of wumtn, We snplosc u'
" are most capable of Judging. Aud u must
lge remembered that Il these sexual cunj Uneti ms
md sume no obligation to each other, they do cIe
iSe obligations To- the children, aud Il is this VIII
AZ gives s'ciety the r'ghI Tegnla1s the marr''
pa ublig gatinn.
Aswe said, We do not eomprehend the Sc
ow of this frequent declaration. but 81 long a. I
the vague Il would be unwarranlable 60 put upo'
leh any construction unfayorable 10 the advocates
'On the ameliorsIion of the female sex,