The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, May 26, 1895, Page 8

8 THE SAN FRANCISCO CALL, SUNDAY, MAY 26, 1895. THE WOMAN'S CONGRESS COMES TO AN END. HE Woman’s Congress is inurned in the awful past. It came, it was, and itis not. For six days did it labor and, now, Christian- like, it rests on this holy Sabbath day. It has gone, butits deeds will live after it. Behind it has left a booming train of onrushing thought, a band of clear- self-sacrificing women, and a heaven of hope. Itis dead, but will come to life again and again if need be, that the prayers of the prayerful may be answered— that woman may have the power to guide her children right and make the ideal home so pleasantly pictured forth. The last day was not the best day, tak- ing the measure of new thought furnished, as probably more interesting than It was Saturday, “hash day,” as one | v aptly put it, and the harvest of the week’s thought, carefully garnered, was thoroughly thrashed and securely housed. The last sessions epitomized the work of all the others and those who had been un- fortunate enough to miss the earlier days received their reward in the compact con- densation of the whole. Morning and afternoon the First Con- h was crowded. At night it was jammed—jammed so tightly that had not the stern old Gothic walls been builded for all time, they must have yielded to the enormous strain. Standing- room was out of the question. There was not even hearing-room. Hundreds and hundreds were turned sadly away. Hun- | dreds and hundreds more stood stolidly in | the entrance-w unable to see, fortunate in the consciousness that, now and then, | they could hear the echo of a burning | word. Toward the end of the session so great was the crowd that the heat of the church became almost unbearable, and only the extreme fortitude of the listeners and the intense interest excited in them by the speakers heiped them bear up under the temperature. * It was a gala night, for all the heat and the crowding, the officers of the congress beaming with satisfaction as they looked back on the week’s work. Far and beyond their most sanguine expectations had been the success of the congress. It had ex- cited a wide interest, had occupied the public mind to a greater degree, had been more productive of brilliant reasoniag than they had thought intuitive minds capable of, and they were perfectly justified in smiling and beaming and congratulat- ing one another. The two honored guests of the congress, Susan B. Anthony and the Rev. Anna H. Shaw, were greeted with the most deafen- ing applause as they appeared on the plat- form, and again and again during the evening, when they set forth their views on the subject in hand. The session concluded the most brilliant and successful week in work for woman in the history of this or any other State, and the congress has adjourned with the hope r another, and this hope will be gratified, announced by Mrs. Cooper, a year hence with & two weeks’ session, with Miss An- thony and Miss Shaw in attendance, not to speak of several other well-known work- ers in the cause of woman. ke THE REAL NEW WOMAN. Miriam Michelson Likens Her to a Pleasant Dream, Not a Nightmare. 1 went to the Woman'’s Congress expect- | ing to be bored. From what I had heard and seen of the new woman I had come to the conclusion that new womanhood was in so crude a condition that its friends would only be pained by its premature ex- hibition. I anticipated hearing women “make fools” of themselves. I expected | ympathies alienated by hard- | soft-headed women, whose only excuse for addressing an audience is the possession of a tongue and | quantities of assurance. I expecied to be repelled by the undignified effort a woman | must make to be heard in a large hall and | Iimagined myself straining to catch the | speakers’ words only to find that they were | not worth listening to. I wasn't wholly disappointed. The women whose names are a pestilence flag | to warn healthy-minded people to stay | away and whose presence insures the ab- | sence of men and women of brains were | there. But, after all, the close of the con- | gress finds me with a greater respect for women’s abilities, and consequently in a more hopeful frame of mind as to woman | sufirage and the effect it will have upon | woren. \ | Judged solely by comparison with any similar association of men, the Woman’s Congress has been, on the whole, a worthy, interesting, creditable session. I have seen Miss Shaw set her teeth and hide her open, expressive face behind her programme so that the audience should not see her impatient scorn for ~some mindless, meddling woman, with neither good taste mor common sense enough to | know that she was offending, just as I have seen a politician of tact and brains writhe under the sense of good work un- done by the male blunderers and knaves and fools. There have been sessions of the congress when the great crowd at the church sat or stood and listened to papers and addresses which were uninteresting, badly delivered i and altogether purposeless; when -the | meeting became a dreary kind of com- mencement day exercises with the only redeeming feature—the youth and beauty and grace of the graduates—left out. But there have been many sessions when women of brains and heart and sense have talked logically, honestly, excellently upon subjects of wide range and universal in- terest. The congress has been conducted in a business-like way. A little more experi- | ence and less consideration will be neces- sary, however, before the bores and the busy-bodies can be made to realize their insignificance. A curious feature has been | the persistence with which women cling to | the idea that poetry is always welcome. Many of them begin their discussions with “I want to say” and conclude, or hope to conclude, with an appropriate verse. But the president, with laudnbla: insensibility to the flowers of speech, has often spared the audience and economized time. The discussions, however, have shown a degree of practical knowledge, a wide-spread interest and an enthusiasm which are significant of the change in women. Many of the women in the gudi- ence spoke ungrammatically, some of them betrayed an hysterical inclination to preach, some of them made short speeches, remarkable only in being utterly foreign to the topic under discussion; but the general effect was to disclose & common - sense point of view, a thoroughness of practice and a surprising aetivity in affairs. The reappearance of the superannuated, out-of-date woman suffragists has been both pathetic and ridiculous. These women have been galvanized back into public life by the approaching triumph of the cause, the advocacy of which formerly | | | time begin? We must go to nature and to { which is the handmaid of evolution, has Suggestions and Thoughts of the Week Epitomized by Clever Speakers=-Hundreds and meant ridicule for them but now means | roses for others. They have suffered in the past, and the prospect of future re- | ward brings them back like retired war- | horses to the combat, which is 2 modern | one and for which their ideas and their | experiences are wholly useless. They ‘ wave the bloody shirt of *tyrantman,” which the latter-day suffragist laughs at; they are full of awful reminiscence; they are utierly impractical; they are a thorn in the side of the women who respect them for their age and their unavailing work in the past, but dread their effect on the work of the present and the future. The toneof the congress is very devout. Not only the ministers but most of the other speakersand those in the audience “Thank God!” for something or other. As far as I can judge it is not a particular form of religion the women of the congress cling to; they are quite tolerant, but they | insist upon some form of religious belief. To be irrelizious in the congressis to be unpopular. One thing to the credit of the thousands | of women who have attended the congress | 1s their appreciation of those who repre- sent the better side of the suffrage ques- | tion. The favorites of the congress are not those who love to listen to the empty babble | of their own voices. It isthe women who | have something to say, who are fearless | anditactful in saying it, who have minds | large enough to realize the prejudice and | | that any place inclosed within four walls { what she had heard on the home question Hundreds of People Turned Away. The home or place of habitation without music and art and literature is barren. “The home is the type of the complete law of evolution. What forces are at work in our homes? The law of evolution is ever at work gradually carrying us toward the goal of the ideal. Woman in the home may be taken as the symbol or_type of the ideal. She tells the story of evolution. Again, I say. the idea of the home is funda- mental, leading' up from the mineral through the vegetable and animal world, finally culminating in the human habitat called the modern home of man.” On conclusion of the paper Miss An- thony said she wished the five papers read at the present congress could be trans- ported to the Woman's National Congress in Washington. She said she had never heard such thoughtful and beautiful papers at any gathering of women she had ever attended. Miss Shaw said she hoped the women were not there to enjoy merely an intel- lectual feast, but that they should seek to evolve and’ extract new ideas looking | toward the perfecting of their own homes. ““What is needed is to get out of the idea | is a home,” she continued. ‘‘More is re- quired to make the perfect home. They | should be uplifted into the realms of love | and universal kindness.”” In conclusion she said she had_been very much helped by at this congress and that she was going | home a better woman. | Mrs. Frances Fuller Victor's paper, “Qur Errors of Ignorance,”” was read by Mrs. Charlotte Perkins Stetson. She said: There isin Carlyle’s ““Sartor Resartus,” after MRS, NELLIE HOLBROOK BLINN. [From a photograph.] sentiment against them and to make allow- | ances for them. | The applause which greeted Miss An- | thony every time she stepped upon the | platform was due not only to a sentiment of obligation, but also to respect for her dignity, her good sense, her unpretentions, | simple honesty, her quiet unwavering de- termination. her well-advised counsel. o Miss Shaw has won the women of San Francisco by the charm of her modesty, her kindliness, her keen sense of justice as much as by her wise head, her clever tongue, her sense of humor and her forci- ble, fluent speech. Mrs. Stetson, Dr. Shuey, Dr. Maxson, Mrs. McComas, Mrs. Maynard, Mrs. Mil- ler and Mrs. Campbell are among those who have introduced us to the real new ‘woman, who, by the way, is as different from the terrible new woman of our ap- prehension as a pleasant dream is from a nightmare. MirraM MICHELSON. SR i THE MORNING SESSION. Evolution and Ignorance in Their Connection With the Home | Discussed. , The initial paper of the morning session was made by Miss Lydia Bell of Oakland, ““The Evolutiou of the Home.” She began by speaking of the ancient architecture of Greece, Egypt and Rome, contrasting what we know of the time-incrusted ruins and the structures of which they are the historically honored relics with buildings of modern times. “I reter to the evolution of architecture, because in it we have the evolution of the home. Evolution means rolling out, by which man attains his highest state. Ideas obey the laws of evolution. It isalways the giving place of the wrong form to the right; new forms are always taking the place of the old. “The circle of any type of the law will be in accordance with the depth and truth of that type. Where does the evolution of natural law—to the animate and the in- animate. In the mineral world it is found | that two minerals will accommodate them- selves to each other and to their environ- ment. We can trace the same law through the vegetable world. But we have never constructed a human home that can com- pare with the home of the diamond or the coral. We turn to the law of evolution to find the possibility of man's advancement. When he starts to make new homes or to make new discoveries the home has already been established in the idea and the ideal. The ideu of evolution is funda- mental in the constitution of man and his government. Homes are embryotic types or functions in the circle of the law of evo- lution. Notalone in massive arches and architecture do we find the home, but in that blessed peace and goodwill amon; fixfen that exist in the humblest walks of e. “Evolution makes us honest with our- selves. We have to admit that all are im- mature in our development. The ancients bave left us ruins of their palatial homes which stand as monuments to the intel- lectual evolution of mankind. Invention, reached the boundary of the unseen and unknown; Iyefll and peneirated within it. so, Religion, also, is in the law of evolution and a part of it. To what is the home consecrated? have been in palatial homes where the furnishings were mag- nificent, but_starvation smfiied throug] the halls. No idea was expressed in the furniture of those large and lofty apartments. The hand was not there. But on the other hand I have been in the ugliest shanty on the prairie and found myself in the midst of a perfect home. | their movements. Itwas not every one could | omers, and ignorance was the popular condi- | be conscientious) one of his bitterest animadversions uoon the ins of society, this finale: “But the greatest of ail {hese is the sin and grief of ignorance.” Upon this predicate, and consid- ering how difficult itis to know everything— even o know one thing well—the doctrine of | original sin and of total depravity does not seem so questionable as it might. But, hap- pily, not every writer on ethics takes such strong ground as Carlyle, As we cannot know everything, the question arises concerning what is most important to know. The ancients represented truth as being found in the bottom of a well, and & very deep one at that. It was to be studied, as they studied the heavens, by & mirror far down in the earth, which reflected only the stars and have Truth’s well or a subterranean observa- | ory, and so few became philosophers or astron- tion. Of this condition the ‘‘wise men” took ad- vantage, leading the multitude whither they pleased. They invented religions andj made laws for the common people which they them- selves disregarded, while seeming to conform to them in order t0 control the populace. It is not so very different in our time. Law and religion have usually been behind the best in- telligence of the age]; the best intelligence con- forming outwardly to both. rether than extend to ignorance a liberty of action it assumed for itself. It is this seli-denial which conserves society in all ages. But to get back to the pl’ogosilkon that ignor- ance is sin. 1 wish to submit another, that ignorance is not innocence. Innocence is iree- om from sin. not freedom from knowledge. The most truly innocent person is one who knowing of sin, yet from choice pursues the aths of virtuous living. Such a person is in ittle danger ofi {falling into evil, because knowledge bars the way; while he or she who is spotless through innocence which comes from ignorance, is in constant peril of a false step. Evidently the guilt and punishment which attaches to the errors of ignorance, or the vio- lation of intelligent consciousness, should cor- respond to that knowledge or that want of knowledge. Yet nature takes no account of the difference in conscious responsibility; nor can society afford to encourage ignorance by con- doning its errors, and has therefore to punish the only half-conscious criminal as severely as the most intelligent—often more % because imelhience assists the guilty to escape. We all have heard that the attraction of the sexes for each other is the infiuence which, more than any other, has made the history as well as the poetry of the world. at it should be thought worthy of _serious consideration is evident from the fact that it lies at the root of all—of our being, of the family, of the home and of all the amenities of life. Of what do we as women need knowledge more than of this? Yet how are we taught? In childhood we are told tne baldest untruths; in maidenhood we have our natural and very proper desire to know more about ourselves checked, and are made suspicious or ashamed of ourselves by the pe- culiar mystery thrown around our being. 1 know of no more painfpl humiliation than that which an ignorant girl suffers when she discovers she is & woman—unless it is when she is made a wife. What justice is there in making her suffer these shocks, or what profit toany one is this 1¥|ornce of the fundamental laws of her being? There should be no mystery, more than ordinary delicacy would impart to matters so purely personal. The girl should y Tlplred for the physical a knowledge of the meaning facts of her being. It is cruelly untair to her to leave her in ignorance of any- thing which so_vitally concerns her as the knowledge of physiology, and especially of those laws which relate to married Maidenly purity! The phrase means usualy a condition of complete ignorance—such ignor- ance as is & sin. Does the sneerer remark that in these days the old fashioned gurlty is not to be found? Whose fault is that? If the mothers had done their duty by their daughters, the motive to the prurient curiosity which has re. sulted in faise ideas and injurious beliefs would not have existed. But it is not our sex alone which itis wrong to leave uninstructed. The boy, even more than the girl, needs educating in tne laws of his being, yet the lipsof both mother and father are sealed. The boys learn s great deal in other ways, but what ways uld parents commit a worse error thanto leave their som: to slean knowledge from indecent publications and chance associates? ain, if son be- comes profligate, his errors are condoned be- cause it does not hurt a man’s standing to be known to have suilied his own purity or the purity of some_unprotected girl, though the girl mey have lost her home, her hngmnuu and even her life in consequence. To the man it was om‘y & passing_experience, and to quiet any gossip about himself he very lhely life before her by underlying the l marries—as society says he nas _a perfect right to do—some. flower. of um.menl’f modesty” with the consent of her parents, What chance for health or happiness has that ignorant wife with her equally ignorant and brutalized hus- band? Ts it no sin to ignore your responsibility for the misery of such homes? And while you are guilty of participation in this wrong, which chielly Concerns the physical and personal features of the subject, your neglect has this effect on society, that it _destroys the sanctity and beauty of the passion which “rules the world,” debasing it to the level of an obscene jest. All this is monstrous, and results in rmge'd\ca such as too often have upheaved society. Every marriage is, or should be, meant to be alinkin the endless chain of human life. It should bea sacramant more sacred than all others, and not to be diminished by meaning- less though fashionable ceremonials. Let us review the position of woman as a bride from immemorial times to the present. In the remote past she was the property of her male relatives, and was sold or stolen'as any other property might be. If purchased, there Was fome cerémony to show the good will of the seller and buyer, end the article handed over was warranted. As civilization progressed and laws were established some form of civil contract was required, securing to the woman certain legal rights, but she still was regarded as akind of family property, whom the fathers and brothers, or even remote male kindred, | could dispose of at their pleasure or for their profit. The condition of women in Europe, previous to the sixteenth century, was such that thou- sands fled from the brutality of husbands, fathers, brothers and uncles to the omnipotent protection of the church. It was, indeed, from this cause that nunneries were §0_nUMErous. Out of this oppression arose the orders of chiv- alry—the knights devoting themselves to res- cuing fair and noble Indice from eapivity or enforced marriage. At length the church again came to the relief of distressed womau- hood, end established the religious right of marriage, making it a sacrament, without privilege of divorce; a change which, while it enefited women in meny_ways, especially in the matter of property and motherhood rights, does not seem to have tended much to the pur- ity o f morals. Probably women, uneducated, and born to a condition of subjugation, were unprepared to seize their opportunities at once. Ttisalso true that several generations must sncceed each other before the hereditary tendencles arising from customs can be eradi- cated. No one will in these times deny the right of an adult woman to dispose of herself as her ai- fections prompt her, but that disposal is a mat- ter after all in which society is concerned, and 0oicty has its rights as well as individuals. Every boy and girl should be taught that as & member of the great social world he or he is under implied obligations to perform certain duties toward it, or at least to refrain from do- ing anything injurious tosits welfare; that treachery ioward society makes them justly liable to outlawry, and that if they betray the public confidence ' they are not deserving the protection of luws made for the safety of the ody politic. Alas, how difficult must it be 1o fix this idea in young minds when the fact is constantly before them that the highest and best educated talent of the State finds employ- ment in defending crimes against society. Nevertheless, it is the plain duty of parents o teach the highest truths in the hope that a generation may arise which loves purity and justice, and which, while holding an accused person guiltless until condemned by satisiac- tory evidence, feels equally bound to make such amends to society as it can by punishing social disorder with prohibitory penalties. One hears not inirequently among women the declaration, ‘I hete men!” Why? The daily newspapers answer that. The young hear and read, and the girl makes up her mind t0 be & bachelor rather than enter a_condition of moral and social subjection, with the risks attending it. Men feel this repulsion on the part of the new woman, as we perceive by their sportive or thefr satirical ailusions to it in the Prese or on the rostram. To them it seems un- natural, as it is, because they have not looked sympathetically for the causes. Women do not hate mem. They cannot. They are only deeply hurt at their apparent want of feeling, of justice, of delicacy, and most of all by their sneers. They do not want reillery; they want_rtecognition and brotherly aid. They feel thelr fmportance in the world and de- sire to have it admitted. Only the scientists among men have come to confess it. Says one of the most gifted of these, “Nature lo best the woman,” and shows that in tenac: ot life, and the ‘power to resist contagion she | is superior to the man. In her indignation against what appears to | her insnfferable egotism and cruel injustice, | the bachelor girl loses her balance and the | pendulum of her feelings swings out of line. | She is not a very dangerous element in society, | for, like the floral freak, she exists but for her | own little season and leaves nothing after her. Not only is she not dangerous, but she is a com- fort and o grace in many a home to which she devotes her life as completely as if it were her | own individual Garden of Eden. Society in | general also owes much to the unmarried woman. If you follow her about vou will find her in all charitable and womanly works and | an “ever present help in time of trouble.” If | she hasignorantly erred in not marrying it is e | fault that has leaned to virtue's side. This congress has been honored by the presence of one bachelor girl to whom women everywhere | pay deference and gratitude. In the homes of the past which knew not Susan B. Anthony they served with obedience; in the homes of the future, where her name shall ever he hon- ored, they shail serve with equality and love. As'I have said, the revolt against marriage has been one of outraged sentiment, .and as | such is not only justifiable, but inevitable, since women have achieved independence | enough 1o think for themselves. But the trous ble with these social problems is that emanci- pation comes before the knowledge which | makes it of its full worth. The freedom has to be achieved first, and the understanding of its value is learned by experience afterward. Thus the new woman, like the liberated black man, is liable to make some serious blunders, es- pecially in regard to berself as woman. A bet- ter knowledge of physical facts, while it might | not greatly alter flet ‘views of what her choice | would be under existing social conditions, | would lead her to look beyond her personal | bias to consider the relation of the sexes sox ologically. “We need and feed each othe: says one of the profoundest writers of our time, | in speaking of marriage, and he meant it liter- | ally. Even a child could tell you which were | thé married and which the unmarried women in an assembly, though not knowing how it knew. The married woman ““more queenly,” says the courtly er Some shal- low persons of her own sex might say ‘“she puts on airs because she has & husband to sup- port her who has money.” But look at the married man. Does not he also appear more | grand than the bachelor? Yet nobody insinu- ates that it is because he has a wife with money to support him, though that may be a fact. The cause of the change in both lies | deeper than that, and is one of the beautiful | physiological and psychological secrets of na- ture. Let woman make society better by study- ing herself. She s nature’s most wonderful production. Her name should be Love, and the names of her children Truth and Reason. In the discussion which followed this able papera Mr. O'Farrell said the men | did not dare to plead ignorance now_that | there is an opportunity forlearning offered them in the e’guman'q Congress. Mrs. Thorndyke paid a tribute to the pioneer women of California society, ana urged the imperative necessity of harmony among the women in all their work. Mr. Gilley thought the last paper was the most instructive of any read during the session, and he recommended that it beput in print in its entirety for the bene- fit of those who could not remember its contents. Miss Selina Solomons read a paper enti- tled “The Matriarchate.” ‘“In the past the only thing open to women was matri- mony,” said she. *‘She was absolutely de- pendent upon man. She was denied op- portunities for earning her own livelihood and was kept in a state of social subju- gation, The ‘matriarchate’—or mother- age, when women were the equal of men and the prime factor in the development of the human race—extended over several centuries in both hemispheres.” Miss Solomons here quoted from a num- ber of writers, showing that among several of the aboriginal tribes of America, as well as with the races of other countries, the women were not only the equal, but often superior to the men. In one or two instances squaws were at. the heads of their tribes. The women of the Nile go to market, and in other ways assume the care and direction of the household. “The transition from the mother to_the father age,” she proceeded. “was gradual. It is said history repeats itself, and is it not so that in the course of evolution our turn is coming again? Qur brothers seem to think so, and the signs of the time point that way. We women, who watch by the ‘Western sea, know that the time is here, Across the bridgs of the near future lies our promised land. % Ml’;s Pheebe Uouzins did not think that in the pracess of evolution woman would attain a higher standing and_status than that she enjoyed before. All evidences point to the fact that in the prehistoric times her position was elevated to a de- gree that it would be impossible to sur- “The women of all ages had their prejudices and sympathies, and we cannot take the ancient wonran as an infallible guide for the present at all times. The most important lesson the past teaches us is not to_rely too much on our class prejudices. It also teaches us that, accorgingw the laws of evolution, women’s turn is coming around again as sure as the natural laws are followed throughout all nature.” The secretary here announced that only one meeting of the congress would be held Sunday—in the synagogue on Sutter street, near Powell. She also said that in pur- suance of the suggestion thata fund be raised to defray the expenses of having all the papers of the congress printed for dis- tribution in pamphlet form, a number of donations l.\alfbeen made. There is alread, on hand about $30, and she requested all present who would like to help the cause of women to contribute to the fund. Miss Anthony said she had had much experience in such matters, and would ad- vise the committee to add two more ciphers to the amount already on hand. “What Home Means,”’ by Mrs. George T. Gaden. was the last paper of the morn- ing. Shesaid: What the home means to society has been the subject of nearly every theater and opera for me. He insisted and I had to attend the theater and opera six nights in the week, staid old Methodist arson as I was, and my cure was perfect. fhave never hated men since. And you talk about unmarried women hating men, will you? Why, 1 don’t think there is an unmarried woman in the land who likes men better, or who ever trying to do more for them at her own home than Miss Anthony. As I said, I have never hated men_since those eventful six months, but, oh, I have pitied them very much. Itisa shame that society has al- lowed men so much license in setting his standard of morality.” X In conclusion shesaid: “I believe that the unmarried women to-day are the ones who have the noblest and holiest idea of marriage and what it should be.” A recess was then taken until 2:30 o'clock. — THE AFTERNOON SESSION. Several Speakers Say That the Modern Home Is Not So Bad. Another overfiow crowd jammed the First Congregational Church yesterday afternoon, those not able to obtain admit- tance being reluctantly compelled to wend their disappointed ways homeward, while many who were fortunate enough to get inside were compelled to stand for two blessed hours listening to the proceedings of the congress. Mrs. Sarah Pratt Carr of Los Angeles was introduced by Mrs. Cooper as the | paper read at this congress; and for the first time in the history of the world 3000 author of the first paper, “The New Home.” She was received with much ap- MRS. McCOMUS. [From a photograph.] men and women have assembled under one | Toof to discuss the meaning of the home, and to try to settle the question of its | meaning to and connection with society. It has been said that the home is the | cradle of the'nation. Looking at the mere | dynamics, the family contains all the ma- | chinery for the education of the race. And | is there anything more important than | that the members of the family should understand its connection and relationship to the progress and evolution of the human | race? The first concern of every man and | woman should be the home, and if the ele- ments ot all homes were perfect, the homes, as units of the state, would soon bring | about a new nation. Some say it is foolish | to draw comparisons between the jhomes | of the prehistoric races and those of this | day. “But let us consider. To be sure there | is nothing poetic and romantic in the wig- | wam or mud hut, but is there anything | romantic in the thousands of homesin this fair land that are made in cellars, in gar-| rets and dugouts? Whereisthedifference? Some one says, ‘But those kind of homes | are not the cradles of civilization nor units | of the state.’ Yes, they are the units| of the state; but the cradle of civilization | is the home in which order, cleaniiness, | beauty and happiness have been brought out of chaos, Some one says again, ‘Why | do you not take the ideal home?' Because we have no ideal homes, and thus cannot | have an ideal nation. There can be no | ideal home or nation where people live in | separate spheres. They do not labor to- | gether for the accomplishment of their ! grand ideal. There are men and women all over the country laboring singly forthe | establishing of ideal homes, and they are doing good work, but that grander home | at large—the universal home—can never | be realized until women and men work | together. Women must have a voice in | making the laws which exercise such a potent influence on the life of the home. Mrs. Spencer opened the discussion. She | was followed by Mrs. Stetson, who took | the ground that the reason of the failure | of woman in accomplishing the ideal of | that home at large—the general home— was because she hag been contented to de- | vote ber time and exclusive care to her own home, her own husband, her own babies, her own kitchen and her own ser- vants. Aslong as she is contented to do | that she will have no time to do the world’s work. She cannot go out amon; the people and carry on the grand work ol idealizing the universal home. Mrs. Cooper tried to announce that the meeting stood adjourned until 2:30 p. u., but her voice was drowned amid the chorus of calls for Miss Shaw. It has been noticeable that since the opening of the Congress the ladies have not allowed nnE session to close without the amen remarks from the energetic and eloquent woman who has traveled 3000 miles to be with them for the one week. She complied with her usual pleasant smile and happy opening sentence. She: said she could not let the session close without sayinlg a little more about the girl bachelors, = ¢ t is a mistake to suppose that all unmarried women rail against the holy and beautiful institution of marriage because they hate the men,” said sh ‘‘They object only to marriage as it is to- d?, but not to marriage as it ought to be. Idoubt if there isan unmarried woman to-day who would not_be willing to marry if marriage was what it ought to be. The time was past when women had to marry for a home and for the sake of support and mmtmn. The time is close at hand, , when $10,000 women will no longer m 10-cent men. I think I never hated men but once, and that was for a period of six months. It was while I was doing my slumming work in Boston, and when I saw the depth of degradation to which women were brought thro the baseness and deceit of men w(?rgx- ing on their noblest and purest sen- timents —love and trust, and when I saw the bestial men consorting with these poor creatures, I positively hated man. I could not tolerate them. But I'll you how 1 was cured. My brother is & doctor, and | the thoughts and suggestions made in the “mating according to natural sel | father and mother have become separated rlause and began her remarks by stating thag her paper contained nothing particu- | larly new, being a sort of olla podrida of congress during the week. It was Satur- | day, teo, hash day, and what she had to | offer was in the nature of a hash. She said: Home is the combination of father, mother and offspring, znd the home cannot be & happy one until father love is developed. | The mother love has already attained that per- | far, has b what she called the absurdity of any one human being owing obedience to another. This was particularly ridiculous in the marriage relation. She wanted the word ““obey’” eliminated from the marriage vow. The marriage relation, she concluded, was a partnership, and no one bad ever heard ofa nrtnersglip where one of the members owecfobedience to another. A general discussion of the paper fol- lowed, in which Mrs. John Cushing stated as her opinion that home life and juvenile morals would be much better were the father love developed to such an extent that the so-called head of the family could bring himself to make a companion of his boys. He should join in their sports in- s;ead of smoking cigars while they smoked cigarettes. Miss Sarah Hamlin_was next heard on “Home Influence in History.” In the face of so much that has been said of the new home, the new woman, the new times, she began, it seems almost absurd to say enything of the old home, the old woman, or the old times. That task, however, has been assigned to me. Is there anything in the history of the home that can interest us to- day? 'Ithink there is. ¥rom whatever point of view we look at history, the home has been at the foundation of nations, and at the source of individual and natural life. Go back, if you please, to one of the earlier homes of humanity—in the hills of Asia, in & far distant, prehistoric age, before the separa- tion of the Aryan people into those grea waves of emigration which swept over Europe and some of the countries of Southern Asia. In the wreckage which has survived w d that that which remains in the languages of the people are those words which pertain ex- clusively to the home and the home relation; and, then, understand, the words are identi- cally the same in z modern and ancient Europe, and also in the languages of Persia and India to-day. The speaker traced the progress of the Aryan wave in India and the wisdom which culminated in that great work, the Rig-Veda. Inall the vedas, she said, is declared the fact that husbands aud wives were the joint rulers of the households; that a child was a golden child, the chofcest treasure of the family. You will say now that the mi[f;h!y have fallen and that the pright gold of ages has dimmed. Somewhere in these ages, after the eda, appeared & woman-hater, the first Schopenhauer of the world. He made the laws that declared the husband to be the home and declared that no woman could be saved except through her husband; and no woman could reach the life to come except she had done her duty on_earth according to the teachings of Manu. The reward of a woman in India who followed the directions of her hus- band and did his bidding well in this world is to be born again as & man. The punishment of a man who had notlived as heshould was to be born agein in the life to come 88 & woman; and no man in India but dreads such a fate. The speaker drew beautiful pictures of the Hebrew home in the hills of Judea and that other home on the banks of the Nile. From the latter home Moses drew that knowledge and power which fitted him to be the deliverer of his oppressed race, its reatest law-giver. The violation of the ome, taking history for it, she continued, has been the cause of many blood wars. The Greeks and the Trojans fougzht for ten mortal years through the misdeed of Paris. The home Hfe of the Greek people, as far as their appreciation of home extended, was the true home life. The Greeks fell when the ideal of the home became corrupted, and when Greek men introduced in its cities the hetairie from the cities of Asia Minor and the isles of the sea. Let us pass on to Rome. In the days of the republic_Roman families were the homes of Roman kings, and when to be & Roman matron or to be a Roman father was the high- est honor possible. They had such families as the family of Corrielia, the mother of the three Gracehil, and they had there in the center of the city, as a sample of the home, that altar of Vesta, whose fires were kept constantly burn- ing, the purest element &s the symbol of the home and its virtues. Rome began to decay when the ideal of the home was prostituted in the time of the Caesars. The ideal of the home passes all through history and establishes its reiation to the state. "It is the place where the civic virtues are developed, where children are to be taught obedience to the laws of home. The parents Tearn self-government, which prompte tham to be worthy citizens, where they learn higs v solves and heroisms, which g0 t0 the maxing of the state, and where they learn considers- tion for others. But the true citizen is not one who possesse simple pacific virtues. The true citizen is one ‘who is active in the s e and who carries the virtues of the home into the siate. He is ready to devote himself aud sacrifice himself, if need be, for the commonwealth Xow the new home tha is to come, that must be, ought to embrace within itself all that is best in the old home and must contain that which is germinated from the past. The new, the ideal home, is not tne new home alone, but also the old home. It is not the home of our imagination, or the home which we think, 50 unworthy of the promise of the fection. Father love is prefigured in bird life, | where the father helps the m¢ her to feed and | protect the young. The necessity of obedience | in the home comes to the father, the mother and the offspring alike. | After evolution of the home came the neces- sity of location. This tended to draw family lines closer and_resulted in the monogamous marriage and that unjust custom of entail, which, happily, does not obtain in America. Home, men and women are existing to-day as | they have existed from the long ago. There are great opportunities for women, vet there has been no time in the history of ihe world ‘when more outrages were perpefrated against them. This is because the men of to-day are | more absolutely the slaves of condition then | ever before. | A result of the property idea in which women heve been held is the perversion of the natural relation between the sexes to-day. Instead of | ction the man and the woman being mutuelly attracted.and | equally interested and equally fitted for matri- | mony, the man now selects the woman for | her purely feminine qualities to be & part of | himself, {0 love, honor and cherish as his own, | to work for, to fight for, to control. The wowan | accepts, expecting to be possessed, 10 be sup- | ported, to be controlled; and she is to-day the one female creature on earth who has to a large extent lost the power of selfs-upport and | who is not in possession of her own body. | Out of this unnatural relation between the sexes has grown most of the disease to man- | kind, the weaknesses of woman and the in- | ustices to children. Out of this unnatural re- | ation has come the separation of interests in the home until home is no longer home. In | the stern fight for money, which man must make to support his double burden the peo- ple have centered themselves in cities and | towns and the houses where the women and | children live are from two to forty miies dis- | tant from the offices and shops where fathers | live. And the father thus becomes the sole | earner, while the mother must be the spender, and must also be father and mother to the chil- dren. In the home the interests of the until the father has come to be only a sort of | money-making machine in the eyes of too many wives and children, located somewhere in that mysterious region called “downtown.”’ Verily the conditions which man made for woman’s hands years ago, by which he fenced her in, have grown with the sages until they have brought forth a boomerang in the person of thissame woman, who now exacts from him, as the price of her home and possessions, the sacrifice of his entire life. Is it & wouder that he, in his turn, is restive under the strain, and he iushes into all sorts of diversions, question- able and otherwise, controlling man, as much ayictim of his own injustice as is woman? The home of to-day is the flower of the ages, and though to-day the life line may seem to dip a little backwara, though conditions may seem hard and people may appear less interesi- ing than in the past, it is only because our eyes have been opened, our hearts have been stirred. Where we were asleep we are now awakened. We were once blind; we now can see. And \seiu¥ awake and seeing, let us set about making in that home the gt—thc more than_fit—successor of that home of to-day which is the gift of the past. The new home will extend itself into the streets and demand that, night as well as day, the streets shall be as safe for women and Joung girls as it is now at the best in the day- Mrs. Smith, who has offered several altruistic mgieauonu to the congress for the betterment of home conditions, arose to thank Mrs. Carr for the paper she had just read. “I declare,” she said, “in the presence of this audience, that if we could have such hash as that everidny of the 365 in the iea.r, we should be happy. I thank God I have lived to see the day that I could sit in any audience and hear read such a paper as that.” rs. Emma Gregory arose to state that she thoroughly agreed with the sentiments future, but it is the home in which is the king- dom of God, and that kingdom begins in the hearts and ihe lives of each one of us. Mrs. Laura ae Force Gordon arose to state her pleasure at the remarks delivered by Miss mlin, and to say that she fully believed that all the conditions of life that have been were necessary for each grade of civilization which has gone before. “But,” she continued, *‘I do not believe we should be satisfied with any condition, and for m I do not believe in the present conditions of the home. I think that we should look to a higher condition of things than is possible under the present training women and children receive in re- zard to the home. The present modern ome is a hotbed of unrighteousness, and [ will prove it—the modern home, Mrs. President, of intense selfishness, and that is anti-Christ. Instead of this the home should be as broad as God’s universe. The world, in the langunage of one of the women on that giatfcrm, should be our home."” Several others present joined in the dis cussion, all being unanimous in commenda- tion of the thoughts suggested by Miss Hamlin. “‘The Sister in the Family” was the sub- ‘Lect of the next paper, written and read by Miss Agnes Manning. She said: ‘*As I look back across the pages of hise tory I read a constantstory o wrong to the sister in the family. The Roman despised the sex though they had a woman in charge of the Sibylline book. Though they despised the sex, yet their oracles spoke through the women. The Greeks went so far as to deny to woman the power of love. It was one of the sharpest arguments of the ancients, however, that they placed women on an equality with men on the most important occasions. Even St. Paul was brought up in the old school of contempt for women, and he was a hard convert. St. Peter was another woman-hater, but he became a convert. Take the Chinese as an illustration of the condition of the women of the presentday in some countries. They are bought and sold in marriage and cannot eat at the same table with the male members of the family. The Saxons made slave traffic of their women."” “In truth men’s jdeas with regard to woman have been singularly in common in all ages, She has always been good enough to cook, scrub and sew, to work in the fields and do the drudgery of the household. And it was not until the sis- ters in the family asked for an equality that man ever thought of conceding her a single point in the equality of the sexes, The church has done much forthe equality of the sexes, and inreturn for what women have gained for Christianity it is con- ceded that but for women' Christianity would die. Let us turn to this fair land and see if the men who fled from persecu- tion were willing to grant the same bene- fits of freedom to these women which they had secured for themselves. Our early forefathers who came to our FEastern shores sent over to England for women, for whom they paid as for slaves and made them their wives. History is silent on the :lubject of the early women of the colonial ays. ‘yThe Pilgrim Fathers were not Ionfi in 4 establishing Harvard College for their boys, but_1t was fifty years before there was a school in New England where a woman could learn to write. It wasa common thing for the early women of expressed by Mrs. Carr. Until man and woman,” she said, “are on the same level, morally, politically and in virtue, the home cannot be what it should be.” once when I was sick he prescribed the _Mrs. Gregory then went on to point out ) vy ) New Enfiland to leave wills signed by their -~y 7 mark. It wasin 1828 before there wasa high school for girls in Boston. God pity the sister who remained unmarried in the early Puritan home. She was neither wanted by her brothers nor her parents. At 30 they were called thornbacks, and her