The weekly Ottumwa courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1857-1872, 1871-08-17
MIR. GREELEY ON THE WOMAN
QUESTION.

MIR. GREELEY ON THE WOMAN /
QUESTION.
To the Editor of the Golden Age:
SIR Your article on this topic is
go !orcibie aud just in the main, that
presume you will DO quito willing
to have its slight inaccuracies correc
ted in your columns. / do not as.
sumo that my views on the Woman
Question are of much consequence to
Others but, in 80 far as they may
possess interest, 1t is we'll that they be
clearly understood. let me, then,
indicate your misrepresentation with
out further preface.
l. You say l "hold that there
ought to be no divorce at all-not
for any crime, even the worst" So
far as can recolleot, your only au-
thority tor this statement is re.
mark that, had not the Master spo.
ken otherwise, I would not have
deemed adultery sufficient reason
for dissolving a marriage. As you
seem to have given these words un-
due weight, allow me to explain my
view more fully.
That persistent flagitious adultery
in husband or wife affords good cause
for divorce, have not meant to de-
ny. But there have been cases OF
transient infidelity to marriage vows,
under the influence of passions in
famed by wine and other unnatural
excitements, which, being followed
by prompt and profound coptrition, /
would not judge an adequate reason
for divorce. You and l both know
that wives have often pardoned such
lapses in husbands you and / agree
that husbands have no rightful i'm
munity in such matters which ought
not also to be accorded to wives.
And l profoundly honor and rever-
ence the husband who can say to his
crring wife, Though l know that
you have been false to God and to
me, yet because of the love l have
borne you, of the vow which pledged
me to love and cherish you till death,
and for the sake OF the dear children
which God has given us. /, believing
you truly penitent, will forgive and
try almost to forget your crime, and
thus shield our little ones from undo.
served shame" / regard the hus-
band who thus speaks and acts as q
better Christian, q t,uer man. than
Is he who exposes, discards, and out
laws the wife OF his youth for a fla.
grant transgression, now sincerely
and bitterly rspented. l suggest,
therefore, that you henceforth repre-.
sent me as holding that adultery may,
bat does not always, justify, an APP
plioation for divorce.
You say l hold that cit man
marries and his wife dies. there
should be no second marriage
This, also, is too sweeping. s me OF
my besU and most esteemed friends
are remarried-happily, l am sure
wisely and nobly l judge. Nay: 1
can imagine case 10 which the poor,
Woodworking, widowed father OF
| young children whom he cannot I; ke
with him to his daily labor, should
tee! constrain q for their sake TO re
place his lost wife by another in
whose perfect acceptance and dis
charge Of mothers duties toward
those children he could implicitly
tlust. Pardon me, but | am quite
confident that the causal remark
on which you based your broad as
serLi0n referred to remarriage fol
lowing separation by divorce, no,
death.
| LII. Let me state my own concep
tion OF remarriages as complicating
marital relations in the other world
| l do not dispute the doctrine Of
Jesus that "In heaven there is Meth
er marrying nor given in marriage
ifyou have quoted his words exactly
And yet l feel that that there are
couples so completely and happily
united in this world that they will bt
nearer and dearer to each other il
the next than they would or coulG
have been had they failed to meet II
this life and | think these are hap
| pier in either world than though one
or both of them had remarked. Idt
not hold that either would hvae beer
culpable in remarrying if widowed
on this planet; l only insist that they
will both rejoice-and with reason =
in their higher life. that neither il
this life was married q second time
| ~. You are entirely, eminently
right, MIR. Editor, in asserting tha
my conviction Of the proper indissol
utility OF marriage is the handspring
OF my hostility to Woman Suffrage
and 10 the social philosophy from
which many vainly seek to separat,
the Woman movement. Though
have written or dictated very littl,
OF what has, during the last ter
years, been printed as editorial il
The Tribune on this subject. it il
nevertheless true that my conception
OF the nature and scope of the mar
riage relation renders my conversion
to Woman Suffrage moral imporsi
bility.
| l have but two left of seven chill
dren, and these are both daughters
| would gladly fit them for lives OF
usefulness and honor, as beloved and
loving wives of virluous. upright
noble men, and mothers, if it shall
please God, of goou, healthy, happy
children. fin be decreed That they
are to be not such women as those ]
have most admired and reyereL ced,
but men with female physique
powerful in ward caucuses and nomi
mating conventions vehement in sell
ate and on the stum'', and effective
before juries in the trial of actions
for Grim CON- pray that my cureer
on this globe shall close before theirs
IL lalrly begun. When and where
they shall thus shine, il will not be
pleasant for me to stay.
Mr.. EDITOR, | belive our country
men are indebted to you for having
discovered (perhaps should say in
nted) me as II possible (though
most improbable) candidate for the
Presidency. Allow me, then, to
thank you for your early and frank