The new Northwest. [volume] (Portland, Or.) 1871-1887, 1872-12-20

dOWei hon. henFy wilson, Mary n.
Livermore, VIM. Lloyd Garrison, Mass;
Hannah NJ. Tracy Cutler, ILL.,; Geo.
Wm. Curtis, n. Y; Mrs. w. T. Hazard,
Missouri; Margaret V. Longley, Ohio.
Chairman of Executive Committee
Lucy Stone, Mass.
Foreign Corresponding Secretary
Kate n. Doggett, III.
Corresponding Secretary-Henry B.
Mass.
Treasurer-John X. Wildman, Pa.
Recording Secretaries-Mary Grew,
Pa; Amanda Way, Kansas.
Vice Presidents Er o6icio-Mrs. Oliver
bennett, Me-; Armenia 5. White, n.
H.; Hon. c. w. Willard, Vt; Jas. Free
man Clarke, Mass; Elizabeth B. Chace,
r. l.; Celia Burleigh, Conn; Oliver
johnson, y. V; John Whitehead; n. j.;
Passmore Williamson, Pa; Mrs. Eliza
beth Smith, Del; Miriam NJ. Cole,
Ohio; Mary F. Thomas, NJ. D., Ind;
Robert Collyer, ILL.,; Augusta J. Chaplin,
Wis; Stephen L. Brigham, Mich; Mrs.
y. Knight, Mimi; Mrs. Helen NJ. Star
rett, Kansas; Amelia Bloomer, Iowa;
Mrs. Beverly Allen, Mo-; Hon. Guy w.
Wines, Tenn; Seth Rogers, Fla; Gen.
Rufus Saxton, Oregon; Rev. Charles G.
Ames, Cali Hon. John c. Underwood,
Va; Rufus Leighton, Wash. Ter; A. X.
p. Stafford, Arizona; Sarah Jane Lippin-
colt Grace Greenwood, ID. G.; Hon. d.
X. Chamberlain, S. G.
Executive Committee E,r o6icio-Mrs.
T. B. Hussey, Me-; Hon. Nathaniel
White, y. H.; Albert Clarke, VT; Mar
garet w. Campbell, Mass; Mary F.
Doyle, r. l.; Phebe \. Hanaford, Conn;
Anna c. Field, y. Y; Mrs. c. c. Hus-
sey, Y. j.; Annie Shoemaker, Pa; John
Cameron, Del; Mrs. Rebecea A. 5. jan
ney, o.; Martha n. McKaye, Ind; Myra
Bradwell, ILL.,; Mrs. Frank Leland, Wis;
Lucinda II. Stone, Mich; Abby ].
Spaulding, Mimi; Hon. Isaac II. Stur-
geon, Mo-; John Ritchie, Kan; Mrs.
Lizzie b. Read, Iowa; Rev. Charles G..
Woodbury., Tenn; Miss Lottie ROllin,
). c.; Fanny B. Ames, Cal; Col. Ed
ward Daniels, Va; Mrs. Matilda G.
Saxton, Oregon; Rev. Frederick Hinck-
ley, d. c.; Mrs. G. I. II. Nichols, Col.
Hon. John y. Campbell, Wyoming.
Mrs. Julia Ward Howe delivered an
able address, marked by great beauty OF
diction. She compared the failure OF
man suffrage to the use of only one
soda powder, which, when dissolved,
was nauSeous. But when the powder
from the blue paper is added refresh
ing drink is produced. So when we
have the true blue of woman's influence
at the polls, the right effect will be pro-
duced, and society will be refreshed.
Miss Eastman answered the charge
that women are unfit to use the ballot.
There was quite an array of facts in her
discourse, and extreme beauty in her
language, though the latter covered at
times exquisite sarcasm that was rel
ished by all.
The closing speech of the evening was
made by Lucy Stone, who said that
after the golden words to which We had
been listening, silence was most fitting;
what she had to say, therefore, would
be brief and without preliminary. The
distinctions which are made on account
of sex are so utterly without reason,
that q mere statement Of them ought to
be sufficient to secure their immediate
correction.
For example, here are twins, a baby
boy and girl; they rock in the same
cradle; the same hreast blesses their
baby lips; the same hand guides their
first tottering steps. \ little later they
play the same plays, reeite the same
lessons, and hold the same rank as
scholars. They ask admission to Har-
ward college. Tile boy is received, and
the girl refused. Can any one tell me a
good reason why?
At twenty-one, the father gives them
each a house. They both pay taxes on
this real estate, but the young man has
and its use, all of which is denied to the
young woman. Can any one tell good
reason why?
They assume the marriage relation.
The young husband can sell his house,
give a good title, convey his stocks,
will his property according to his pleas
ure, have the guardianship and control
of his children. The young wife cannot
sell her house, or give valid title; can
not convey her stocks, or make a will OF
her property with the same freedom
that the husband can, has no equal
legal right to the control and guardian
ship of her children. Can any one tell
a good reason why?
The man becomes a widower, but the
house, the land, the furniture, and the
children are all undisturbed. The prop
erty is divided in fractions, the contents
of the cupboards and closets counted,
valued, divided, and the widows thirds
commonly known rs the widows in
cum5rance), arc left to this woman.
Can any one give n good reason why
there should be such a difference be-
tween the rights of the widow and the
widower? or why woman as student,
wife, mother, a widow, and citi-
zen, should be held at such disadvan-
tage?
The mere statement of the case shows
the injustice, and the wrong which
needs to be righted. There is only one