The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1871-08-15
GREELEY ON THE WOMAN QUESTION.

4
GREELEY ON THE W01EAN QUESTION.
| n. G.. the Preside ntial Candidate OF the
Faithful Husbands and Wives OF
America-What He Thinks OF Free
Love and sPtogirssivs" Women.
The following letter from the venerable edi-
tor OF the Tribune, 'to.Theodore Tilton, is the
sensation of the hour in New York:
TO the Editor of the Golden Age:
SIR-Your article on this topic Is SO forclble
| and lust in the main that presume. you Will
/ be olite willing to have Its slight inaccuracies
CORRECTED In your columns: do not assume
| that my views of the woman question are OF
much consequence 70 others; but, 10 go lar as
they NAV possess interest, it is well that they
he Clearly understood. Let me, then, Indicate
your uisapprehensious without further pre-
I. You say .shold that there ought to be no
divorce at all-not for any crime, even the
worst" SO far as / can recolleet, your only
authority forthls statement is remark that,
not have deemed adultery q. sufficient reason
| for dissolviug a marriage. AS you seem. to.
| have given these words undue weight, allow
me to explain my view more fully. That per
sfsteilt, fagttous adultery In husband or vile
affords good cause ior divorce a nave no. o.
| transient infidelity to marriage vows, under
the influence or passions indamed by wine and
other q nnatural excltements, which, being fol.
lowed by prompt and profound contrition,
| I would not Judge On adequate reason tor
divorce. You and. l both know that wives
have often pardcned such lapses IN
you and agree 5aaa aoh ote1s
which ought not also to be accorded
to wives. And l profoundly honor and
reverence the husband who can say to his er-
ring wife, Though L know that you have been
false to God aud to me, yet, because OF the love
I have borne you, and OF the VOW Wnicn pleog;;
for the sake Of the dear children which God
has given. us, /, believing you truly penttent,
will forgive and try almost to forget your
crime, and thus shield our little ones from un-
deserved shame.n I regard the husband who
thus speaks and acts as better Christian, q
truer man, than is he who exposes, discards
and outlaws the wife OF his youth for fagrant
transgressIon, now sincerely and bitterly re-
pented. suggest, therefore, that you hence
forth represenL me. as holding that adultery
may. but does not always, Justify an applica-
ticn for divorce.
ii. You say hold that ''lf a man marries
and his wife dies, there should be no secoud
MARRIAGE This, also,.i too sweeping. Some
of my best and most esteemed friends are re@
married-happi am sure; wisely and no6ly,
Judge. Nay, can imagine case In which
the poor, hard-working, widowed father OF
young children whom he cannot take with MIN
to bis daily labor, should feel constrained for
their sake to replace his lost VIE ny anotneF es
In whose perfect acceptance and discharge OF
mothers duties towards those children he
could implicitly trust. Pardon me, but am
quite confident that the casual remark on
which you based your broad assertion referred
to a remarriage following separation by d.
yorce, not death.
III. Let me state my own conception of re-
marriages as complicating marital relations In
the other world. do not dispute the doc
trine Of Jesus, that sin heaven there Is neither
marrying nor giving In marriage If you have
quoted bis words exactly. And yet feel that
there ore couples 80 completely and happny
united In this world that they will be nearer
and dearer TO each other IN the next than tney
would or could have been had they Jailed to
meet In this life; and Lthink these are hap.
pier In either world than though one or both
OF them had remarked. do not hold that
either would have been culpable In remarry-
ing, II widowed, oil: this planet; l only Insist
that they will both rejoice, and with reason, on
in their higher life, thai neither In this life
was married second time.
= Nv. You are entirely, emlnently right. MT.
Editor, in asserting that my conviction OF the
proper indlssolubillty of marriage is the main.
spring of my hostility to woman suffrage, and
to the social philosophy from which many
vainly seek to separate the woman movement.
Though have written or dictated very little
OF what has during the last ten years been
printed as editorial in the Tribune on this sub.
ject, it is nevertheless true that my concepr
lion OF the nature and scope OF the marriage
relation renders my conversion to woman suit
rage q moral impossibility: | have but TWO
j'left OF seven children, and these are both
daughters. I would gladly 1t them Tor lives
OF Usefulness and honor, as beloved and
loving wives of virtuous, upright, noble men,
and mothers, If II shall please God, OF good,
healthy, happy children. II 1t be decreed
that they are to be, not such women as
those, have most admired and reVerenced,
but men with female physiqne-poWertul
in ward caucuses and nominating cenVen-
tions,- vehement in Senate and on. the stump,
and effective before jures in the trial of ac-
tons for Grim. con-, pray that my career on
this globe shall.cloae before theirs is fairly be-
gun When and where they shall thus shine,
It will not be pleasant for me to say. Dir. Ed.
itor, believe our countrymen are indebted 70
you for having discovered (perhaps 1 should
improbable) candidate for the presidency.
Allow me then to thank you for your early
and frank demonstration that can in no con-
tingency be counted on or hoped Tor az q
woman suffrage candidate. As you forcl6ly
and Justly say, there is not even remote pos
slbillty of my ultimately adapting myself to
this end. NY difference with your crowd Is
guine dreamer to hope for my conversion, l
am growing old; my opinions are tolerably
firm; and the advanced female OF the Laura
Fair type, who Kills the paramour of whom
she claims to be the rightful affinity, and gives
the lie in open court To tho wife sue mas
! doubly widowed, is my pet aversion. But why
| should any man be the candidate for President
of the woman suffraglsts? Logically and con.
sistently feel that their candidate should be
woman. She ought, moreover, to be one e
thoroughly emanclpated from the ,.absurdlty
and folly" the "narrowness," and the pale
| ful conservatism. which am now too old to
\ outgrow. Could you not find one vino illus
| trates In her own person and history what you
SO felicltously term '.the liberal thought OF an
enlightened age" Let her be one who has