New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-01-05

Tba asfor,u;tv of the hand only MARKS
tbc oss Of womanbood in 40 much grace and beauty
She may indeed do worse than have haru hanoH'
and face and form disfgured by toll "
question between dishonorable dependence ana ue-
forming labor there is but one choice. Dut 'in'
does not lessen the amount OF the sacrinoe. in' p
feet woman ia as beautiful as she Is strong. ono
macs her hands but never abuses them. She COM
mands her household. but does not drudge for ~
She Iooka we'll TO the ways of her family, but she
never eats her bread in the sweat OF her brow Her
mind Ia in every corner Of her house, but her race
shipes chiefly where husband. and children, ana
friends sit In It's placid light She organizes oraer
and comfort in her family. but they are merely tno
foundation for the spiritual temple of home. which
in its holiness Of beauty should DO made tho JOY oi
the earth.
In fact the primary value of woman, In the wow
of Gail Hamilton. is wholly Incompatible WIN
physical toll manual labor commercial industry.
II we are to Judge Of design by results. she was not
made for either of those pursuits but for precisely
the opposite The work Of woman Is not to toll Tor
the bread of the family. 1t Is the appointed duty OF
man 70 wrest food and shelter and warmth from the
earth and TO make straight In the desert highway
for the human raoe To nurture the race thus pro-
vided for into purity and sweetness and strength Is
the duty Of woman; rather her noblest JOY, rs
sho transmutes all coarse metal into gold by the I'M
conscious alchemy Of her love- without thought Oh
constraint OF obligation
The difference between tho Conservatives and the
Radicals on tho Woman Question" in the au-
tbor's opinion is ono Of degree not OF kind, OF
subordinate not Of primary interest The Conserya-
tves arc right in thinking that tho Radicals are try
ing to make woman over into kind Of man. But
they also think that they themselves are trying to
keep woman, woman, which they are not They are
simply trying TO keep woman the kind OF man sne
already is. No convention has been called to make
her woman. Nature needs no assistance In that
direction II only wants the absence OF restraint
Take away from woman the necessity OF being any
kind of man. she will never grow into anything
but a woman. The speakers on the "Womans
Rights side demand that woman shall have man
advantage to do mans work The opposing speakers
demand that she shall continue to do mans work
with womans disad vantages. But the true woman's
right is not to do mans work at all The demands OF
tho Radicals that woman shall have chance
to do mans work and receive mans wages is I'M
tenablo. Womans primary right is TO BIO supported
by men. Not only ought women mover TO be forced
to get their own living, but the living which is got
for them should be one Of comfort and ease. wo-
man Is not supported by her husband, her father
when she works as hard in the house he does out
of it, The peculiar work of woman lies within
sphere that ia nearly invisible to the common vision
No woman ia free to live the life which she ought to
live until to the carnal eye she seems to have pretty
nearly nothing at all to do But upon this point
women seem TO DO as much in tho dark as the men.
You would judge from their writings and public
speeches that women had only to choose between
idleness on the one side or mans work the other
They believe in the dignity Of labor but not In the
existence of womans work. Apart from the acct
dent of motherhood they virtually hold that women
are
But in the present condition! of society, if woman
puts herself into the sphere of man, and undertakes
to do mans work, she must do it in mans way. or
suffer the consequences. The value OF her labor
must be brought into direct comparison with that of
man. and be judged sololy by its character, not by
the weakness surmounted in its accomplishment.
The author does not present fattering view OF the
practical and executive capacities OF women In the
present arrangements ofbusiness She describes their
ignorance and inexactness something appalling.
Men are apparently as bad as they be in this
spect but it would that they cannot be as bad
as women. Theyhave at least been taught the diff
ference between yes and no, but women
have yet to learn that they are not one
and the same thing. Gail Hamilton IS
guilty even of the monstrous assertion that they
lack moral sense, or mental perception. or what
ever be the faculty which makes capable OF con-
tracing an engagement. Her experience has GER
has fallen into such bad company. One hardly
knows of whom she speaks when she so grossly calls
in question the loyalty and good faith of woman.
Whom she declares that they do not comprehend the
nature of a promise, that it has moro binding
force for them than rope of sand, and that they
break it with serene Inconsistencies that any
thing is broken, that there anything TO
break" she utters extravaganza, of which tho
paradox affords no excuse for its injustice.
The author has much in the same strain, though
not of 50 extreme character with regard to the
cal disabilities Of women, their causes and their
remedies Poor work, poor pay, is at the bottom
Of this industrial inferlOrity cure for the evil is
10 be foundin good work. but this will not be sup
piled by women. They have not the ingenuity, the
courage or the perseverance, to devise and carry out
responsible undertakings. Nor do they possess the
patience, the sense the wisdom to work faithfully
under the direction of others IL is easier for them
to pod on in the old track TO be slaves TO hearess
employers and to cry ont against injustice and par
TALLY than it is strike silently into untried paths
to bend circumstances, and control fate But If wo
men have not the ability to open the avenues Of en-
ployment for themselves they win be unable to |
walk in them after they have been opened for them
by Others. The barriers such that her feet can
not pass beyond them whose hand cannot remove |
them.
1t ia not so much opportunity that women need |
says Gail Hamilton az qualities Here again the pitt
less writer is hard upon her SEX including all in her
bold cancellations. They do not succeed in BUSH |
ness, she AYERS because they timid, tame, in
effective. They have not energy, enterprise, spirit
daring They not far-seeing, ready N plan, or |
fertile in resource. II to-day the successful men
and the unsuccessful women could change places, in
FIVE years every thing would be as it is now. There
k.llr ohOuf xvi1a