The Manitowoc tribune. [volume] (Manitowoc, Wis.) 1866-1878, 1871-06-29

| soho' nave aHeaay SHOWN that they
would not from the nature of the case.
There Is another proof Mrs. Woodruff is
a protested free lover, she has a suspi-
clous character and has lived miserably
with two husbands. And yet Mrs.
Woodruff edits the leading organ of fe-
male suffragists, and is looked upon as
bright star by many of the women who
advocate female suffrage. Why is this ?
1t is as they say because she speaks ''the
word for the hour or in male parlance
because she is Sound on the goose :"
This is human nature, and statesman
must recognize it and act upon it in his
conclusions in order to avoid making him
| self an ass.
My opponent thinks that woman S
suffrage must be right because there is a
growing sentiment in that direction
Does he not know that evil things have
their growth as we'll as good? Did not
treason grow in this country to the
multitude of many millions. Has not
| drunkenness increased in this country
since the rebellion. Was that treason
good because it crew.. Is drunkenness
good because it grows ? Our own Adams,
| the most scholarly statesman of his time
said that man may be deep philoso-
| pher and still be no statesman. Hume.
the historian, Milton the poet, and
Locke the philosopher advanced political
doctrines that time have proved to be
impracticable and which statesmen now
agree are very absurd. And yet my
opponents persistency in this kind of
argument shows him to be sophist or
an ignoramus.
The female suffrage idea has tenden-
cy to loosen the marriage tie from the
very nature Of the case. There is an
fragists as class go in for easier dlvor-
ces than any other class of people Mrs.
Woodruff, star among female suffra-
gists, is professed free lover" Indeed,
it is becoming a recognized fact that free
love and female suffrage are coupled
together in this country. IF this potent
fact is of no account then is argum snt
of no account. The fellow can coo
and sing before the public, but he
cannot answer this fact or any other
fact which I have set up. IF he does
answer any fact nor set up one substantive
argument of his own, he will do what he
has hitherto shown himself unable to
do.
He accuses me of being fractional in
my argument. Now that is impossible,
for drew my conclusions from an entire
class, to-wit, genus coarse, and therefore
my conclusions were logical. And yet
this is only one of the many miserable
shifts which my opponent makes to show
himself an ignoramus Of the first water.
My opponents whole effort has been to
make bubbles upon words and to show
himself holy before the people. l defy
him to point out single argument he has
made that would have the weight of a
straw with sound reasoner. Statesmen
demand facts; but poets and my oppo-
nent deal with dreams. 1t must be that
he eats hasheesh, as we'll as tobacco, I'm
order to work his soul up to high de-
gree of dream power. Whatever he has
advanced that has the appearance of
decency, he first stole from Mr. Mill, Miss.
Lander, Gail Hamilton, Daniel Webster
or Junius. To this stolen property he
first gives his own dropsical impress and
then bursts. All his productions afford
a fine example of sophomore theft and
conceit. The fellow told us in one pro-
duction that he should indulge in no
more retorts in his very next produc-
ton he cont nued his retorts. This
shows how much his word is worth.