Woman's chronicle. (Little Rock, Ark.) 1888-1???, 1889-11-09

of Kentucky The question of becoming auxiliary
to the National-American Association will be con-
sldered. Delegates desiring entertainment will
address Miss Laura Clay Is North Broadway,
Lexington, Ky. LAURA CLAY, President.
EUGENIA B. FARMER, Cor. Secretary.
WE may always take an accurate measure of the
truth of any moral statement about women by
making the identical statement about men. If it
fits, then you are all right-and vice versa, any
moral statement made about men should be in the
same way applied to women. For the law of Right
eousness is one law, and not two laws, one mascu-
line and another feminine Here, at least we have
an infaible test to which we can bring every ques-
ton of right and affecting men and women. Mrs.
Hawes, in her letter speaks of "Disgraceful rreg
ularities in married life" 'Ihe woman
who cannot keep straight after marriage just be-
cause she is thrown with an agreeable man is
poor creature-what shall be said of her who will
not?" Let us use our test and apply this remark
to our brothers-"The man who cannot keep
straight after marriage just because he is thrown
with al agreeable woman is poor creature-what
shall be said of him who will not?' Thus, in con-
demning women, Mrs. Haweis herself condemns
the man whom she appears ready to screen She
does not like our criticisms nor those of our cor
respondents, and bases her objection on the fact,
amongst others, that she is acquainted with not
few good men who are much tempted. That may
be quite true, but in forming judgment on
matter that concerns nations, and even deals with
the whole human family, it is wise to carry our
field of observation beyond our personal expert
ence. While we must attach due weight to the
fact that we are acquainted In own private circle
with some men whose moral lives are excellent, we
must also, and mainly, look beyond our own little
group. We must watch the signs of national
character, of literature, of law for these shCw the
great and unchanging features of the characters
of men. These bear their impress pure and
simple, more especially in law, from the making
and administration of which women are excluded.
The law of England is therefore the outcome of
the opinion and thought of Engishmen about
themselves and about women. 1t lays down the
principle that man who INDUCES in ''disgraceful
Irregularities or 'who cannot keep straight after
marriage" is not OIL that account to be liable to a
divorce from his wife, however much she may wish
it; not so the woman who does the very same
thing. Again, the Contagious Diseases Act, now
in force in India and in many other lands, are
based upon the same assumption OF men, that man
is incapable of sef-restrant. These laws point
with telltale finger to the fact of "mens general
viciousness'' as compared to women This is logic,
not emotion. 1t is men themselves who declare to
us-alas that they shoud-that they are "vile
of necessity and for health's sake"
But there is another point that needs word OF
comment. What is the difference between abuse
and legitimate criticism of men? Our correspond
ents have voluntarily started an enquiry as to what
is our duty to illegitmate children; In the course