The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1870-03-22

ticle of your to-day's issue, would make
us believe, by some seight of hand
rhetoric, that an "Oneida Community"
is to be the immediate result of the
woman's ballot in Vermont And
pitched battle between husbands and
wives, besides What is the use of
dealing in such absurditics? None but
foolish people lrighten children with talk
of bears and dark closets nowadays.
/ Mary Wollstonecraft believed inwoman's
rights and in "free love-" and was a
very naughty woman indeed: ergo, all
who believe in woman,s rights believe in
free love, and will get to be, if they are
not already, very naughty women in
deed
Also there is community Of Free
Locers in New York who probably believe
in woman's rights
But Mr. "P." prelaccs his wonderful
logic by declaring that he never would
have dared to speak out the truth as
"man to man," if Mrs. Livermore had
not in the first place by some unfortunate
remarks, or by some article in her creed
that does not seem to he in visibility nm
sered herself
Now it is just this sort of talk that !
wish TO protest against. Let "P.' he
encouraged 70 speak out frankly on all
occasions, but let him not begin by throw
ing dirt at his opponents.
1t is too often assumed By certain
class of takers that woman who avows
sentiments differing from their own on
this woman question, is altogether "un-
womanly," "noisy," "immodest :" actua-
ted by no higher motives than "craying
for notoricty" or an "unscrupulous desire
for power"
H'oman say these things, and talk
about their own womanliness, purity, and
supreme angelhood, by way Of contrast,
in manner extremely unhccoming, to say
the least.
have been interested in the progrcss
of this d" So called reform - for several
years, and in my experience | have found
guitc as mary Il mi ight with truth say
more,) coarse, unwomanly, masculine wo-
man opposing as advocating it; and |
have seen that they can oppose it in
course, unwomanly ways without taking
the stage.
We are positively not all yioets ami
primroses on either side, and cannot help
that we are not, therefore let u drop this
sort of proftless recrimination,
J. Nor can | conceive that this change is
so radical as some of us argue.
Equality before the law" does not
mean at all, trow likeness Of natures, ,oi
sameness of conditions.
Men are coarse, unmanly, violent
, wicked, refined, noble, talented, iu,t
without reference to their common bal
lot.
The ballot is the governing power.
But how very few men govern. The
! man at work in my wood house rotes !;
p do not is he nevertheless not "subiect'
, to my orders while he is at work io
me?
One would think to rea.; some of th'
h arguments OPPOSING woman suffrage tha
the ballot had heen the grand badge t.
f sovereign, the particular, crowning glor.
CT manhood, ever since the world began
8. when the fact is that the United States !
}, about the only country in which univei'
!. sal manhood suffrage has ever existed
A and that it has existed here hut 2 f.,
c years.
II And | conceive that We may discu-
r this question-may accept the suffrag
q without doing any violence to our VT
q manhood, the family, unit theory,o eve
- to the so-called Bible doctrine ofthc wifi
i subsection to her husband.
! | would like to mention some of tn
+. proofs of this-indeed can hardly rc
frain from doing so, but have mercy .
the newspaper men
N Only why can we not bring our co."
r. mon sense to bear upon this as well Il
X other matters? Why must we call thos
who differ from US 'setters forth ofstrang
ts doctrines ?" This has been done beior'
m hut the world still stands
> Should we not rather search and 4
n whether or not these things are 80 :
At Respectfully,
,o ANOTHER WoMA>.