Evening star., 1896-01-27


Bob Ingersoll. For its name and its state
ments the N. A. w. 8. A. is in no wise re-
spensible, and tn. views 1t represents are
not those OF great majority Of the women
sunragists throughout the country. There
is no body of men who are today doing a.
much to promote equal rights for women IS
the ministers of the various denominatio
including those Of the so-called evangelical
cnurches. Such work as the Woman's
Bible does not represent their views, and is
not calculated to advance our cause. The
greatest objection to the book is its i'm
proper and misleading title. This conven-
ton is undoubtedly Overwhelmingly opposed
to the views expressed in the so-called
Woman's Bible"
DR.. Ella M. s. Marble. president of the
District Federation of Women's Clubs and
an ardent worker in the suffrage cause,
says: LAS an individual 1 accord Mrs.
stanton the fullest right to express her
opinion as she pleases, but as an associa-
ton, I think we should disclaim all con-
rection with the publica ton of the So
called Woman's Bible"
DR.. Cora Smith Eaton president of North
Dakota S. A, said that she did not think
that any structures should be placed by the
association in convention, in any way
But" she added 'it is a fact that the as
ISOLATION Is not responsible for Individual
speeches or writing, and the work of an
Bible"
Mrs. Carrie Chapman Gait smilingly re-
Piled to the question that she had not
II to the merits of the case. II can testify,
however" she added, that it has been in
furious to our work in the field, because
people object to the idea of it, though, like
read the criticisms on 1t in the papers, and
founded their opinions on those. which is
perfectly natural. We could simplify mat
ters not little by declaring that we are
not IN the publication business, and are
rot responsible for the stories by Mrs
stanton, or any other woman, no matter
how entertainingly or charmingly written.
This book has hindered my work greatly"
Miss Elizabeth u. Yates said: II realize
that 1t Is better to be honest than orthodox,
but 1t Is necessary that the convention dis
claim all responsibility for the publication
or the book. I have had to continually con-
tend against the impression that it was ad-
vised by our suffrage organization, and
have been obliged to declare that the N. A.
w. s. A. was no more responsible for 1t
than the Continental Congress for The Age
of Reason"
Rev. Anna Howard Shaw said: Its name
Is misnomer 1t is merely a woman's
critique of more or less Importance. ex-
pressing the views of certain women in re-
gard to the relation and influence of the
Bible upon the progress of women, which,
to them, seems to have been neglected. AS
any one has right to her own views upon
this as upon all other subjects, 1 have no
criticism to make upon the attitude of
these women. But do object to the public
at large holding the Suffrage Association
individual members upon this or any other
subject
Mrs. Dora Tichenor Voorhis of the Dis
trict does not think the cause of suffrage
has been advanced by the publication of
the so-called ''Woman's Bible" and regrets
the injudicious experiment, as likely to
tard the movement.
Mrs. Laura NJ. Johns of Kansas national
field worker and organizer, believes that
the convention will decide that the Suffrage
association must not be held responsible
for the so-called 'Woman's Bible I'VE
emphasis. I'm Minnesota, North Dakota,
New Mexico and Arizona, where 1 worked
from the 1st day of September to thirty-six
hours before Christmas day, 1 had to meet
that book at every turn. And 1 found that
National Association ought to make it
clearly understood that it is in no wise
responsible for the so-called Woman's
Bible. But, while 1 personally am in sym
pathy with Mrs. Stanton's motives strong
ly object to the misnaming of the book,
which is not woman'S Bible, but merely
a commentary. And 1 object to the way in
which the work is DONE and think the cause
has been injured by the misnaming and
by the manner in which the work is done.
Women are not helped by the book out of
the bondage of the old theological ideas,
but the effect is 40 hamper the workers.
Mrs. Blake.
Mrs. Lille Devereaux Blake who proba-
bly, had more to do with the work than
any other woman except Mrs. Stanton, is
not plea sed with the title of the work either
1T is in a certain sense" she said mis-
leading, because the book is really COM
mentaries on the parts of the. Bible of in
terest to women. These commentaries are
prepared by women. who have the same
right to CON nment on the Bible that men
have Ever since Martin Luther established
the right of individual Interpretation of the
scriptures every person has felt himself
entitled to read and understand for him
sell. You might just as well have STAN
ton commentaries as Clarks or Scotts.
Most of the persons who criticise the
work have never read it, and have a mis-
taken notion that it is new translation
or new Bible, or some such apprehension
Those who have read it, admire it, Fran
els Lord, the great English writer. saws
that she has read it through with the great
est interest. She considers the style of the
lntroduction strong and impressive, logical
ana unanswerable; the chapters bright.
graceful and with sufficient variety in the