On the second morning your delegate wisely waited until the resolutions offered to the convention by the Business Committee were opened for discussion. When the first resolution, declaring the _religious character_ of the Temperance Movement, was submitted to the meeting, Miss Brown rose to speak. She rose calmly in the body of the house; she was a minister of religion, an advocate of temperance; she had it in her heart to press this reformation onward in a religious spirit; she had avoided all disputes on petty points of order, and now wished to address herself earnestly to the momentous theme. Had she not a perfect right to do so? And what fitter occasion could occur? The very topic was of a kind to banish personalities and hush low pa.s.sions. Your delegate was invited by the President to take the platform; she did so with quiet dignity, but scarcely had she reached the stand when all around her on the platform itself, and among the officers of the Convention, began that disgraceful row, which led an onlooker in the gallery to cry out, "Are those men drunk?" I have no wish to dwell upon that cowardly transaction, but this remark I am bound in honor to make: If any man says that Antoinette Brown forced the subject of "Woman"s Rights" on that Temperance Convention in plain Saxon speech, _He Lies_. She never dreamed of asking any _privilege_ as a woman; she stood there in her _right_ as a delegate; her aim was to urge forward the Temperance Reform. No! the whole uproar on "Woman"s Rights" came from the professed friends of Temperance, and began with the insulting cry--from a man on the platform--of, "Shame on the woman!" That man I need hardly tell you was the notorious John Chambers, of Philadelphia--the so-called Rev. John Chambers!--he it was who, with brazen face and clanging tongue, stood stamping until he raised a cloud of dust around him, pointing with coa.r.s.e finger and rudely shouting "shame on the woman," until he even stood abashed before the indignant cry from the Convention of "shame on John Chambers."
The Reverend John Chambers! _Reverend_ for what? For his piety; manifested in the fact that he, a professed minister of the gospel, could by rowdy tumult drown the voice of another minister of the gospel while she was a.s.serting the religious character of the Temperance Reform! _Reverend_ for what? For his charity; manifested by low cries and insulting gestures, to a gentlewoman who stood there firm yet meek, before him! Strange that he, of all, should thus seek a bad eminence in outraging the decencies of social life; for unless report is false, John Chambers owes whatever position he may have to woman. It is said--I believe on good authority--that he was educated for the ministry by the contributions of women; that he preaches in a church built and endowed by a woman; that his salary is chiefly paid by hard-working needle-women; finally, that he married a rich wife!
Now what a sight was there! A man, whose brain had been fed with books by woman, whose body had been fattened with bread by woman, every fragment and st.i.tch of whose ministerial garb, from his collar to his boot-heels, had been paid for by woman, whose very traveling ticket to that convention had been bought by woman, could find no better way to discharge his mission as minister of the gospel than to point his finger and shout, "Shame on the woman!"
Mr. Channing then bore his testimony to the admirable combination of energy and mildness, by which Miss Brown"s whole air and manner were distinguished amid these hours of tumult. He said: "Such serene strength comes only from religious principle and life. I know not how it may have been with nerves and pulses--there was no apparent tremor.
But of this I am a.s.sured, whatever disturbance there was in the outer court of the Temple, in the Holy of Holies was the heart of peace, and the dove of the Spirit brooded in light on the tabernacle of conscience."
In an editorial of _The Una_, headed "Rev. John Chambers Recommended to Mercy," Mrs. Davis says: "We publish the letter of Rev. Wm. Henry Channing because it is a n.o.ble defence of woman and a part of the history of the movement. We do not give Mr. Chambers" reply, 1st, Because we find in it no evidence of penitence nor any testimony as to who was the guilty party--if he was not; and 2d, Because the tone and language of the letter is of a character we trust will never sully the pages of _The Una_. Mr. Channing"s rebuke is severe, but we believe it to have been richly deserved and given in true Christian love."
ROCHESTER, N. Y., Oct. 18, 1853.
EDITORS SUNDAY MERCURY:--You ask for proof that Rev. John Chambers took part in the brutal insult offered to a Christian gentlewoman at the late "World"s Temperance Convention." I was _witness_ of the conduct of that man and his abettors during that _cowardly transaction_, and I hereby charge him with being a ringleader in that platform row.
When my honored friend and fellow-delegate, the Rev. Antoinette L. Brown, was standing calm, yet firm, amidst those rude scoffers, the words of the Psalmist kept sounding in my ear: "Strong bulls of Bashan have beset me roundabout, gaping upon me with their mouths." I marked the _biggest_ of the herd with the purpose, at the first suitable season, of laying on one blow of the lash with such a will that it should cut through any hide, however callous. That season came when, as a delegate, I was called upon to report to the "Toronto Division of the Sons of Temperance" how my fellow-delegate had been treated.
But having thus _indicted the bully_ and put him on trial in open court, I merely record my testimony and leave him to go to judgment; the public will render a verdict, pa.s.s sentence, and inflict the _penalty_ in the pillory where he has placed himself; may their justice be tempered with mercy. It was necessary, in order to _protect women_ in future from the _insolence of tyrants_, to make this example; yet let him be cordially pardoned as soon as he gives sincere proof of penitence.
WILLIAM HENRY CHANNING.
Another letter of Mr. Channing"s of same date to the editor of _The Daily Register_:
SIR:--Respect for yourself, your readers, and your paper, prompts me to reply at once to your article headed, "Answer," etc., by Rev. John Chambers, which, through the courtesy of some friend, reached me last evening. I must be frank, but will aim to be brief.
And first, Mr. Birney, a word to yourself. You knew me in "former days as mild," etc., and were not prepared for such a speech; you charitably suggest that its "vindictiveness" may be owing to a subst.i.tution of the reporter"s language for my own, and "are not without hope of seeing a disclaimer." Now, far from wishing to disclaim the _one real accusation_ made in my remarks, I am ready, anywhere and everywhere, to reiterate that charge. Yet there is no "vindictiveness" in my heart toward the criminal whom I thus arraign, and no emotion which I should not honor any man for feeling toward myself, if I was consciously guilty of having played so base a part. You were not wrong in thinking me "mild in former days"; I trust I am milder now than then. But my mildness never was, and never will be, of that mean quality, which can tamely see a sister insulted, whether by a pugilist from the ring, or by a _rowdy from the pulpit_. My principle is peace, but I remember the saying, "You can not become an angel till you are first a man.".... Womanhood, as such, claims honorable courtesy of every manly heart; and he is unmanly who does not rejoice to testify this respect. The man who can be rude to even a poor prost.i.tute in the street, will be rude to wife or daughter at his own fireside; while he who is a _gentle_ man to any woman, will be a _gentle_ man to all women. _His spirit is brutal_, who could ever dream of applying the slang phrase "creature" to any woman under any conceivable conditions. What shall be thought then of the moral grade of him who chose as the mark for his missiles of "contempt," a young lady of rare refinement in her whole presence and manner, of spotless delicacy and gentlest dignity, of commanding talent and philanthropic earnestness, and who stood there before him, serene amid the tumult, clad, even then, in the bright robe of heavenly peace?
And now one word in closing. Let Mr. Chambers, and all of like spirit, be a.s.sured, that I am but a representative of a large, rapidly growing, and influential body in every community throughout our land, who are resolved, that women shall no longer be insulted in public a.s.semblies with impunity.
WM. HENRY CHANNING.
Through this fierce conflict Horace Greeley, with his personal presence on the platform, and his brave editorials in the _New York Tribune_, fought a great battle for free speech and human equality.
Speaking of the _Whole_ World"s Convention, he said:
_New York Tribune, September 3, 1853._
This has been the most spirited and able Convention on behalf of temperance that was ever held. It has already done good, and can not fail to do more. The scarcity of white neck-ties on the platform so fully atoned for by the presence of such champions of reform and humanity as Antoinette L. Brown, Lucy Stone, and Mrs.
Jackson, of England, Mrs. C I. H. Nichols, Mrs. Frances D. Gage, etc., that like the absence of wine from our festive board when it is graced by women, it was the theme of no general or very pointed regret. It was a great occasion, and we know truth was there uttered which will bear fruit through coming years.
_Tribune, September 7, 1853._
When the call of the World"s Temperance Convention was issued, we were appealed to by valued friends, whom we know as devoted to the temperance cause, to discountenance all efforts to get up a rival Convention. "The call is unexceptionably broad," we were reminded, "it invites all and excludes n.o.body, then why not accept it and hold but one Convention?" The question was fair and forcible, and had there been no antecedents we should have acceded to its object. But we could not forget the preliminary meeting at the Brick Church Chapel, and we could not take the hazard of having many whom we knew as among the most efficient and faithful laborers in the Temperance cause shut out of a World"s Convention of its advocates; so we cast our lot with them about whose catholicity of sentiment and action there could be no dispute, and yesterday"s doings at the Metropolitan Convention maintained the conviction created by the whole World"s Convention that our decision was right.
We ask especial attention to the proceedings of the World"s Convention yesterday morning, particularly with reference to Antoinette Brown, who had been chosen by two separate temperance organizations of men to represent them at this Convention. How she was received, how treated, and how virtually crowded off the platform, our report most faithfully exhibits. They who are sure that the Age of Chivalry is not gone, are urged to ponder this treatment of a pure and high-souled woman, a teacher of Christian truth, an ornament of her s.e.x, and an example to all, by a Convention of Reformers and Gentlemen, many of them from that section of the Union where the defence of woman from insult has been deemed a manly grace, if not a manly duty. We presume the matter will be further considered to-day.
Of the _Whole_ World"s Temperance Convention a correspondent of _The Una_ says: "Throughout, the meeting has been one of intense interest; not a moment"s flagging, not a poor or unworthy speech made by either man or woman. Again and again, as we pa.s.sed into the large hall, filled with eager listeners, we felt it to be one of the most sublime scenes we had ever looked upon. There the audience remained, hour after hour, patient, earnest, full of enthusiasm, and yet hundreds could scarcely hear a single connected sentence. The majority were women, but the larger number of the speakers were men. The right and equality being recognized, there was no longer a necessity for controversy to maintain principle, hence no woman attempted to speak except she had something to say. Mrs. Jackson, of England, Mrs. Nichols, Mrs. Vaughan, Miss Stone, Rev. A. L. Brown, Lucretia Mott, and Mrs. F. D. Gage addressed the Convention during the different sessions."
The same correspondent says of the _World"s_ Temperance Convention: "There was one feature more anomalous than the rejection and gagging of Miss Brown, darker and far more cruel, for it has not the excuse of custom, nor can the Bible be tortured into any justification of it. This was the exclusion of Dr. James McCune Smith, a gentleman, a graduate of the Edinburgh University, a member of a long-established temperance society, and a regularly appointed delegate. And wherefore? simply for the reason that nature had bestowed on his complexion a darker, richer tint than upon some of the sycophants who gathered there; it appears to have been simply to pander to a bigoted priesthood and a corrupt populace."
In deciding the action of the Convention to be worse in its treatment toward Mr. Smith than toward Miss Brown, we think _The Una_ correspondent makes a grave mistake.
In point of courtesy the treatment of a lady of culture and refinement, the peer of any man in that a.s.sembly, with the unpardonable rudeness they did, was infinitely worse than to have done the same thing to any man, white or black, because by every code of honor or chivalry all men are bound to defend woman. Again, as a question of morals, custom, and prejudice, they occupied the same position in the State and the Church. The "white male" in the Const.i.tutions placed women and black men on the same platform as citizens. The popular interpretation of Scripture sanctioned the same injustice in both cases. In the mouths of the false prophets, "Servants, obey your masters," was used for the same purpose, and with equal effect, as "Wives, be in subjection to your own husbands."
"Servant of servants shall he be" has been used with the same prophetic force as the more cruel curse p.r.o.nounced on woman. The white man"s Bible has been uniformly used to show that the degradation of the woman and the black man was in harmony with G.o.d"s will. On what principle is proscription on account of color more cruel than on account of s.e.x?
Most of the liberal men and women now withdrew from all temperance organizations, leaving the movement in the hands of time-serving priests and politicians, who, being in the majority, effectually blocked the progress of the reform for the time--destroying, as they did, the enthusiasm of the women in trying to press it as a moral principle, and the hope of the men, who intended to carry it as a political measure. Henceforward women took no active part in temperance until the Ohio crusade revived them again all over the nation, and gathered the scattered forces into "The Woman"s National Christian Temperance Union," of which Miss Frances E. Willard is president. As now, so in 1853, intelligent women saw that the most direct way to effect any reform was to have a voice in the laws and lawmakers. Hence they turned their attention to rolling up pet.i.tions for the civil and political rights of women, to hearings before legislatures and const.i.tutional conventions, giving their most persistent efforts to the reform technically called "Woman"s Rights."
Susan B. Anthony had a similar battle to fight in the educational conventions. Having been a successful teacher in the State of New York fifteen years of her life, she had seen the need of many improvements in the mode of teaching and in the sanitary arrangements of school buildings; and more than all, the injustice to women in their half-pay as teachers. Her interest in educational conventions was first roused by listening to a tedious discussion at Elmira on the "Divine ordinance" of flogging children, in which Charles Anthony, princ.i.p.al of the Albany Academy, quoted Solomon"s injunction, "Spare the rod, and spoil the child."
In 1853, the annual convention being held in Rochester, her place of residence, Miss Anthony conscientiously attended all the sessions through three entire days. After having listened for hours to a discussion as to the reason why the profession of teacher was not as much respected as that of the lawyer, minister, or doctor, without once, as she thought, touching the kernel of the question, she arose to untie for them the Gordian knot, and said, "Mr. President." If all the witches that had been drowned, burned, and hung in the Old World and the New had suddenly appeared on the platform, threatening vengeance for their wrongs, the officers of that convention could not have been thrown into greater consternation.
There stood that Quaker girl, calm and self-possessed, while with hasty consultations, running to and fro, those frightened men could not decide what to do; how to receive this audacious invader of their sphere of action. At length President Davies, of West Point, in fall dress, buff vest, blue coat, gilt b.u.t.tons, stepped to the front, and said, in a tremulous, mocking tone, "What will the lady have?" "I wish, sir, to speak to the question under discussion," Miss Anthony replied. The Professor, more perplexed than before, said: "What is the pleasure of the Convention?" A gentleman moved that she should be heard; another seconded the motion; whereupon a discussion pro and con followed, lasting full half an hour, when a vote of the men only was taken, and permission granted by a small majority; and lucky for her, too, was it, that the thousand women crowding that hall could not vote on the question, for they would have given a solid "no." The president then announced the vote, and said: "The lady can speak."
We can easily imagine the embarra.s.sment under which Miss Anthony arose after that half hour of suspense, and the bitter hostility she noted on every side. However, with a clear, distinct voice, which filled the hall, she said: "It seems to me, gentlemen, that none of you quite comprehend the cause of the disrespect of which you complain. Do you not see that so long as society says a woman is incompetent to be a lawyer, minister, or doctor, but has ample ability to be a teacher, that every man of you who chooses this profession tacitly acknowledges that he has no more brains than a woman? And this, too, is the reason that teaching is a less lucrative profession, as here men must compete with the cheap labor of woman. Would you exalt your profession, exalt those who labor with you. Would you make it more lucrative, increase the salaries of the women engaged in the n.o.ble work of educating our future Presidents, Senators, and Congressmen."
This said, Miss Anthony took her seat, amid the profoundest silence, broken at last by three gentlemen, Messrs. Cruttenden, Coburn, and Fanning, walking down the broad aisle to congratulate the speaker on her pluck and perseverance, and the pertinency of her remarks. The editor of _The Rochester Democrat_ said the next morning, that "whatever the schoolmasters might think of Miss Anthony, it was evident that she hit the nail on the head."
To give the women of to-day some idea of what it cost those who first thrust themselves into these conventions, at the close of the session Miss A. heard women remarking: "Did you ever see anything like this performance?" "I was actually ashamed of my s.e.x." "I felt so mortified I really wished the floor would open and swallow me up." "Who can that creature be?" "She must be a dreadful woman to get up that way and speak in public." "I was so mad at those three men making such a parade to shake hands with her; that will just encourage her to speak again." These ladies had probably all been to theatres, concerts, operas, and gone into ecstasies over f.a.n.n.y Kemble, Rachel, and Jenny Lind; and f.a.n.n.y Elsler, balanced on one toe, the other foot in the air, without having their delicacy shocked in the least. But a simple Quaker girl rising in a teachers" convention to make a common-sense remark modestly, dressed, making no display of her neck, or arms, or legs, so tried their delicate sensibilities that they were almost afraid to attend the next session.
At the opening of the next morning"s session, after Miss Anthony"s debut, Professor Davies, in all his majesty and pomposity, with his thumbs in the arm-holes of his regulation buff vest, called the Convention to order, and said: "I have been asked by several persons, why no provisions have been made for women to speak, and vote, and act on committees, in these a.s.semblies?" My answer is, "Be hold yonder beautiful pilaster of this superb hall! contemplate its pedestal, its shaft, its rich entablature, the crowning glory of the whole. Each and all the parts in their appropriate place contribute to the strength, symmetry, and beauty of the whole. Could I aid in taking down that magnificent entablature from its proud elevation, and placing it in the dust and dirt that surround the pedestal? Neither could I drag down the mother, wife, and daughter, whom we worship as beings of a higher order, on the common plane of life with ourselves."
If all men were pedestals and shafts capable of holding the women of their households above the dirt and dust of common life, in a serene atmosphere of peace and plenty, the good professor"s remarks would have had some significance; but as the burdens of existence rest equally on the shoulders of men and women, and we must ever struggle together on a common plane for bread, his metaphor has no foundation.
Miss Anthony attended these teachers" conventions from year to year, at Oswego, Utica, Poughkeepsie, Lockport, Syracuse, making the same demands for equal place and pay, until she had the satisfaction to see every right conceded. Women speaking and voting on all questions; appointed on committees, and to prepare reports and addresses, elected officers of the a.s.sociation, and seated on the platforms. In 1856, she was chairman of a committee herself, to report on the question of co-education; and at Troy, before a magnificent audience of the most intelligent men and women of the State, she read her report, which the press p.r.o.nounced able and conclusive. The President, Mr. Hazeltine, of New York, congratulating Miss Anthony on her address, said: "As much as I am compelled to admire your rhetoric and logic, the matter and manner of your address and its delivery, I would rather follow a daughter of mine to her grave, than to have her deliver such an address before such an a.s.sembly." Superintendent Randall, overhearing the President, added: "I should be proud, Madam, if I had a daughter capable of making such an eloquent and finished argument, before this or any a.s.sembly of men and women. I congratulate you on your triumphant success."
In 1857, at Binghamton, Professor Fowler, of Rochester, took up the gauntlet thrown down by Miss Anthony, and presented the other side of the question, taking the ground that boys and girls should not be educated together, and that women should not be paid equal wages even for equally good work. The gentlemen who sustained the side demanding equal rights for women in these conventions, were Randall, Rice, Cruttenden, Cavert, Fanning, Johonett, Coburn, Wilder, and Farnham.
The opposition was led by Davies, Valentine, Buckley, Anthony (not S.
B. A.), Ross, an old bachelor, the b.u.t.t of ridicule, the clown of the Convention; and McElligott, the latter hardly ranking with the rest, for though opposed, he was always a gentleman, the others being ofttimes so coa.r.s.e in their sneers and innuendoes, that they disgraced the positions they occupied, as the educators of the youth of the State. In the discussion at Binghamton, where Miss Anthony introduced a resolution in favor of co-education, Mr. McElligott said "he was in favor of allowing her full and equal opportunity with any other member to present resolutions, or to call them up for discussion. Standing up as she does before large audiences, to advocate what she conscientiously considers the rights and privileges of her s.e.x, gives a touch of moral sublimity to our proceedings worthy the admiration of all."
Professor Davies denounced the resolutions in the strongest terms. "He had for four years been trying to escape this discussion; but if the question must come, let it be boldly met and disposed of. These resolutions involve a great social rather than an educational question, calculated to introduce a vast social evil; they are the first step in that school which seeks to abolish marriage, and behind the picture presented by them, I see a monster of deformity."[102]
In view of the grand experiment of co-education, so successful in every part of our country, the fears of those timid men thirty years ago provoke nothing now but a pa.s.sing smile. How few of them with a sober face could at this time defend their old positions. It is creditable to the stronger s.e.x that so many men in all those encounters, took no counsel with their fears nor prejudices, but seeing the principle steadfastly maintained it.
But the temperance and educational conventions, the clergy and the pedagogues, were alike abandoned now for the legislators. All this escapading of Miss Anthony"s was mere child"s play, compared with the steady bombardment kept up until the war on the legislators of the Empire State. Calls, appeals, pet.i.tions to rouse the women, fell like snow-flakes in every county, asking for the civil and political rights of woman; they were carried into the Legislature, frequent hearings secured, the members debating the question as hotly there as it had already been discussed in popular conventions. As New York could boast a larger number of strong-minded women than any other State, whose continuity of purpose knew no variableness nor shadow of turning, the agitation was persistently continued in all directions.
THE SYRACUSE NATIONAL CONVENTION,
_September 8, 9, and 10, 1852._
This Convention, lasting three days, was in many respects remarkable, even for that "City of Conventions." It called out immense audiences, attracted many eminent persons from different points of the State, and was most favorably noticed by the press; the debates were unusually earnest and brilliant, and the proceedings orderly and harmonious throughout. Notwithstanding an admission fee of one shilling, the City Hall was densely packed at every session, and at the hour of adjournment it was with difficulty that the audience could gain the street. The preliminary[103] editorials of the city papers reflected their own conservative or progressive tendencies.
In no one respect were the partic.i.p.ants in these early Conventions more unsparingly ridiculed, and more maliciously falsified, than in their personal appearance; it may therefore be wise to say that in dignity and grace of manner and style of dress, the majority of these ladies were superior to the ma.s.s of women; while the neat and unadorned Quaker costume was worn by some, many others were elegantly and fashionably attired; two of them in such extreme style as to call forth much criticism from the majority, to whom a happy medium seemed desirable.
The Convention was called to order by Paulina Wright Davis, chairman of the Central Committee, and prayer offered by the Rev. Samuel J.
May, pastor of the Unitarian Church in Syracuse.
Although this was the first Woman"s Rights Convention at which Mr. May was ever present, he had been represented in nearly all by letter, and as early as 1845 had preached an able sermon advocating the social, civil, and political rights of woman. He had been an early convert to this doctrine, and enjoyed telling the manner of his conversion.
Speaking once in Providence on the question of slavery, he was attracted by the earnest attention he received from an intelligent-looking woman. At the close of the meeting, she said to him: "I have listened to you with an interest that only a woman can feel. I doubt whether you see how much of your description of the helpless dependence of slaves applies equally to all women." She ran the parallel rapidly, quoting law and custom, maintaining her a.s.sertion so perfectly that Mr. May"s eyes were opened at once, and he promised the lady to give the subject his immediate consideration.
Lucy Stone read the call[104] and expressed the wish that every one present, even if averse to the new demands by women, would take part in the debates, as it was the truth on this question its advocates were seeking. Among the most noticeable features of these early Conventions was the welcome given to opposing arguments.