The indignant feeling of the house soon became so demonstrative, in view of the treatment I was receiving, that the Dr. seemed compelled to discharge Mrs. De La Hay to defend his own character from the charge of abusing me, and Mrs. De La Hay soon after became insane, and a tenant of Jacksonville poor-house.
He cut me off from all written communication with the outside world, except under the strictest censorship, and made it a dischargeable offence of his employees to permit me to have any means of communication with the outside world. He has refused Mrs. Judge Thomas and other friends, whom he knew desired to comfort me with human sympathy and some choice viands, admission into my presence, and has put them off with the inquiry, "why do you wish to single out Mrs. Packard from the other patients, to administer to her comfort?" and when asked by his guests, who often mistook me for the matron, "why he kept so intelligent a lady in an Insane Asylum?" he would reply, "you must not take any notice of what a patient says!" And the reply he would make to my indignant friends at the hospital, who ventured sometimes to inquire "why are you treating Mrs.
Packard in this manner?" has invariably been, "it is all for her good!"
Time will not allow me to detail my sufferings and persecutions at that hospital; I will only add, may the Lord forgive Dr. McFarland for the injustice I have suffered at his hands! And G.o.d grant that the legislature of 1867 may have the moral courage to effectually remove the liabilities to a repet.i.tion of wrongs like my own!
Various attempts were made by my Manteno friends to rescue me, but all in vain. My legal non-existence rendered it difficult to extend legal aid to a nonent.i.ty, except it come through the ident.i.ty of my only legal protector, and so long as it was possible to cut me off from any direct application for deliverance, he could ward off the habeas corpus investigation they wished to inst.i.tute, and as long as the Doctor claimed I was insane, so long this unjust law consigned me to legal imprisonment.
My relatives and other friends applied to lawyers, judges and the Governor in my behalf, but all in vain, as these officers were only authorized to administer existing laws; they could neither repeal them nor act contrary to them. On the 18th of June, 1863, I was finally removed from my asylum prison, by order of the Trustees, as the result of a personal interview which Dr. McFarland kindly consented to grant me, and put again into the custody of my husband, who consigned me to a prison in my own house, claiming, as his excuse, that I was just as insane as when I was entered just three years previously, for I had neither recanted nor yielded my right to my ident.i.ty: therefore, in the judgment of your superintendent, I am hopelessly insane, and am doomed, by his certificates, to a life-long imprisonment in the Insane Asylum at Northampton, Ma.s.s., and my husband was just on the point of starting with me for a consignment in that living tomb, when he was arrested by a writ of habeas corpus, issued by judge Starr, of Kankakee City, and used by my Manteno friends in defence of my personal liberty. I was now where I could make direct application, by pa.s.sing a letter clandestinely through a crack in my window.
The trial lasted five days, and resulted in a complete vindication of my sanity, although his witnesses swore that it was evidence of insanity for a person to wish to leave a Presbyterian church and join a Methodist! A full account of this trial is found in this "Three Years Imprisonment for Religious Belief." It was reported by one of my lawyers, and is an impartial record of the whole case.
During the trial, Mr. Packard "fled his country" in the night, to avoid the danger of a mob retribution. He took with him all our personal property, even my own wardrobe and children, and rented our home, so that I found myself, at the close of court, homeless, penniless and childless.
And this, gentlemen, is legal usurpation, also, on the slavish principle of common law--the legal nonent.i.ty of the wife, the man and wife being one, and the one, the man! Gentlemen, we married women need emanc.i.p.ation; and will you not be the pioneer State in our Union, in woman"s emanc.i.p.ation? and thus use my martyrdom for the ident.i.ty of a married woman, to herald this most glorious of all reforms--married woman"s legal emanc.i.p.ation, from that of a slave in law, to that of a partner and companion of her husband, in law, as she now is in society?
And, lest there be a misunderstanding on this subject, permit me here to explain what kind of slavery I refer to. This slavish position which the principles of common law a.s.signs the married woman, is a relic of barbarism, which the progress of civilization will, doubtless, ere long, annihilate. In the dark ages, married woman was a slave to her husband, both socially and legally, but, as civilization has progressed, she has outgrown her social position--that of a slave--and is now regarded in society as the companion and partner of her husband. But the law has not progressed with civilization, so that married woman is still a slave, legally, while she is his companion, socially.
Man, we know, is woman"s natural protector, and, in most instances, is all the protection a married woman needs. Still, as the laws are made for the exceptional cases, where man is not a law unto himself, what can be the harm in emanc.i.p.ating woman from this slavish position, so that she can receive governmental protection of her right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," as well as the marital protection? So, in case where the marital fails, she can have legal protection, while married as well as when single. Then when your darling daughter is called to exchange the paternal protection for the marital, she will not be obliged to alienate her right to governmental protection by this exchange of her natural protectors, but she, the tenderest and the best, can then claim of her government, while a married woman, the same protection of her rights as a woman, which your sons now claim as men.
The need of this radical change in married woman"s legal position, is more fully elucidated in this book, which contains a detailed account of my persecutions in Illinois, when your State hospital was used, in my case, as inquisition. My object in bringing these facts to your notice is to secure legislative action, where these facts show the need of action.
In conclusion, gentlemen of this a.s.sembly, may I be allowed to read a few extracts from Dr. McFarland"s published letters on this subject, showing, from his own words, his ground of self-defense.
The Doctor says: "All Mrs. Packard"s wrongs, persecutions and sufferings, of every description, are utterly the creation of a diseased imagination."
Now, I ask, is this so? Can facts be trans.m.u.ted into fiction by the simple a.s.sertion of one man? And is it a mere creation of a diseased imagination that has torn me from my helpless babe and deprived my darling children of a fond mother"s tender care? Is it the mere creation of a diseased imagination to find that good conduct, not even the best, is any guarantee of protection to a wife and mother under Illinois laws?
Neither Dr. McFarland nor Mr. Packard himself, has ever denied one of the facts in the statement I have made; but as their only justification, they claim that I am insane--and the only proof of insanity they have ever brought in support of this opinion is, "her views of things," as the Doctor expresses himself, or, my private, individual opinions.
Now I wish to ask the gentlemen of this a.s.sembly, if, for my using my right of opinion, or my right of private judgment, the public sentiment of this age is going to justify Illinois in keeping me a prisoner three years, under the subterfuge of insanity, based wholly upon my "views of things?"
Just consider, for one moment, the principle. Here my personal liberty, for life, hangs suspended wholly on the opinion of this one man, whom policy or interest might tempt to say I was insane when I was not; for this law expressly states that the cla.s.s I represent may be imprisoned without evidence of insanity, and without trial!
Just make the case your own, gentlemen: would it be easy for you to realize that it was a mere creation of your imagination to have two men take you by force from your business and family, without evidence of insanity and without trial, and your kidnappers claim as their only justification, that you are insane on some point in your religious belief, simply because Dr. McFarland says you are, and then lock you up for life, on his single testimony, without proof?
Now we, married women and infants, have had our personal liberty, for sixteen years, suspended on this one man"s opinion; and possibly he may be found to be a fallible man, and capable of corruption, if we may be allowed to judge of this great man from the standpoint of his own words and actions.
Now, if the Doctor was required to prove his patients insane, from their own conduct, there would be a shadow of justice attached to his individual judgment; but while this law allows him to call them insane, and treat them as insane, without evidence of insanity, where is the justice of such a decision?
You do not hang a person without proof from the accused"s own actions that he is guilty of the charge which forfeits his life. So the personal liberty of married women should not be sacrificed without proof that they are insane, from their own conduct.
When Dr. McFarland has brought forward one proof from my own conduct, by one insane act of my own, in support of his position, I will then say he has cause for calling me an insane person; but until that time arrives, I claim he is begging the question entirely, in calling me an insane person, without one evidence to sustain his charge.
Gentlemen, it is not merely for my own self-defence from this unpleasant charge, that I lay this argument before you, but it is that you may see, from my standpoint, how exceedingly frail is the thread on which our reputation for sanity is suspended, and how very liable married women and infants are to be thus falsely imprisoned in Jacksonville Insane Asylum.
If my testimony might be allowed to add weight to this suspicion or presumption, I would state that, to my certain knowledge, there were married women there when I left, more than three years since, who were not insane then at all, and they are still retained there, as hopelessly insane patients, on the simple strength of the above ground of evidence; and it is my womanly sympathy for this cla.s.s of prisoners that has moved me to come, alone, from Ma.s.sachusetts, in the depth of winter, to see if I could not possibly induce this legislature to compa.s.sionate their case: for it is under your laws, gentlemen, I have suffered, and they are still suffering, and it is to this legislature of 1867 that we apply for a legal remedy; and we confidently trust you will vindicate the honor of your State in the action you take upon this subject. We trust you will not only have the manliness and moral courage to repeal this unjust law, forthwith, but also extend, promptly, a just trial to its wronged and injured victims.
Again, Dr. McFarland writes: "Mr. Packard is suffering from a cause which only gather his church and the public about him, in the bonds of a generous sympathy."
I reply to this a.s.sertion by stating a few simple facts. Mr. Packard"s church and people in Manteno, Illinois, withdrew from him their confidence and support, while I was incarcerated, instead of gathering about him, because public sentiment would not tolerate him, as a minister, with this stigma upon him; and it was the fear of lynch law which drove him from this State during the court, to seek shelter and employment in Ma.s.sachusetts, his native State. There he succeeded in securing a place as stated supply, by ignoring the decision of your court, and by misrepresenting the west to be in such a semi-barbarous state that it was impossible to get a just decision at any legal tribunal in this uncivilized region, where, he tells them, "a large portion of community were more intent on giving Presbyterianism a blow, than in investigating the question of Mrs. Packard"s insanity!"
He occupied his new field in Sunderland, Ma.s.s., fifteen months, when I returned to my father"s house in Sunderland, on a visit, and the result was, my personal presence, together with the facts in the case, upset him, so that neither Sunderland nor any other society in New England can be induced to employ him in defiance of enlightened public sentiment. Indeed, the public sentiment of New England has so blighted and withered his ministerial influence, that the remark of a lawyer in Worcester, Ma.s.s., made a few months since, reflects his true social position there, at present. Said he, "there is not a man in New England, neither do I think there is one man in the United States, who would dare to stand the open defender of Mr. Packard in the course he has taken, and in view of the facts as they are now known to exist."
Now I would like to ask Dr. McFarland, where are to be found these "bonds of generous sympathy" to which he refers? in the region of the west, or in the east?
Here, where the Doctor"s a.s.sertion is found to be plainly contradicted by facts, can his simple a.s.sertions be relied upon as infallible testimony and infallible authority?
Again, another extract, and I am done.
Dr. McFarland writes, "I have no question but that Mrs. Packard"s committal here was as justifiable as in the majority of those now here."
Now if this statement of your superintendent is true, viz.: that I am a fair specimen of the majority of his patients, then the Doctor himself must admit that the majority of inmates there are capable of a.s.suming a self-reliant position, and, instead of being supported there as State paupers, as I was during my imprisonment of three years, ought they not to be liberated, and supporting themselves and their families as I am now doing?
Mr. Packard has become an object of charity since he cast me penniless upon the world, while I have, without charity, not only supported myself, but have already become voluntarily responsible for his support, and the support and education of my children, from the avails of my own hard labor, since my discharge from my prison; while at the same time, he will not allow me to live in the house with my dear children, lest my heresies contaminate them!
Now, Gentlemen, is it not better that I be thus employed, selling my books for their support, rather than be held as your State"s prisoner and State"s pauper simply because my "views of things" do not happen to coincide with your Superintendent"s views of things?
It is true, and, gentlemen, your Superintendent"s own statement verifies it, that I am not the only one who has been so unjustly imprisoned there, and in the name and behalf of those now there, I beg of this body that you extend to such a fair trial or a discharge. Really, the claims of humanity and the honor of your State both demand that my case stimulate the Illinois legislature of 1867 to provide legal safeguards against false commitments like my own.
Permit me here to add, that although I have come from Ma.s.sachusetts to Illinois at my own expense, without money and without price, for the express purpose of bringing these claims of oppressed humanity to your notice, I do not demand nor ask for any remuneration for my false imprisonment in your State inst.i.tution, nor for any personal redress of those legal wrongs which have deprived me of my reputation, my home, my property, my children, my liberty; but I do ask that the legal liabilities to such like outrages may be effectually removed by this legislature, and that the justice of a trial by jury may be forthwith extended to those now in that asylum, who have been consigned to an indefinite term of imprisonment, without any trial.
Gentlemen of this a.s.sembly, in view of the facts now before you, please allow me the additional privilege of adding a few suggestions. You see it has become a demonstrated fact that I, a minister"s wife, of Illinois, have been three years imprisoned in your State, by your laws, simply because I could not tell a lie--that is, I could not be false to my own honest convictions; and since I simply claim the right to be an individual instead of a parasite, or an echo of others" views, I am branded by your laws as hopelessly insane!
Is it not time for you to legislate on this subject, by enacting laws which shall make it a crime to treat an Illinois citizen as an insane person simply for the utterance of opinions, no matter how absurd those opinions may be to others? Opinions cannot harm the truth, nor the individual, especially if they are absurd or insane opinions.
But for irregularities of conduct, such as my persecutors have been guilty of, the law ought to be made to investigate. Imprisonment for religious belief! What is it but treason against the vital principle of this American Government, viz.: religions toleration?
Would that I could have claimed protection under the banner of my country"s flag, while a citizen of Illinois. But no; this unjust statute law has consigned me to the reign of despotism. And so are all my married sisters in Illinois liable to this consignment, so long as this barbarous law is in force.
And O! the horrors of such a consignment! Only think of putting your own delicate, sensitive daughter through the scenes I have been put through.
Do you think she would have come out unharmed? G.o.d only knows. But this I do know: that it is one principle of ethics, that a person is very apt to become what they are taken to be. You may take the sanest person in the world, and tell them they are insane, and treat them as your Superintendent treats them there--it is the most trying ordeal a person can pa.s.s through and not really become insane.
And most reverently does Mrs. Packard attribute it to G.o.d"s grace alone, for carrying her safely through this most awful ordeal, unharmed, and--I am almost tempted to add--G.o.d himself could not have done this thing without the strictest conformity on my part, to His own laws of nature, in connection with a well-balanced organization. As it is, to G.o.d"s grace alone. I say it, I am a monument for the age--a standing miracle, almost, of the power of faith to shield one from insanity, by having come out unharmed, through a series of trials, such as would crush into a level with the beasts, I may say, any one, who did not freely use this antidote.
Here let me make one practical suggestion. Is that kind of treatment which causes insanity the best adapted to cure insanity?
O, my brothers! my gallant brothers! will you not protect us from such liabilities? Will you not have the manliness to grant to us, married women, the legal right to stand just where our own actions will place us, regardless of our views of things, or our private opinions? that is, may we not have the privilege of being legally protected, as you are, in our rights of opinion and conscience, so long as our good conduct deserves such protection?
We have an individuality of our own, which is sacred to ourselves; will you not protect our personal liberty, while in the lawful, lady-like exercise of it? for personal liberty is a boon of inestimable value to ourselves as well as you, and by guarding our liberty against false commitment there, you may have fortified the personal liberty of some of Illinois" best and sanest cla.s.s of citizens, whose interests are now vitally imperiled by this unjust law.
Yes, gentlemen, I, their representative, now stand legally exposed to be kidnapped again, and hid for life in some lunatic Asylum; and since no laws defend me, this may yet be done. Should public sentiment--the only law of self-defence I have--endorse the statements of this terrible conspiracy against the personal liberty and stainless character of an innocent woman, I may yet again be entombed, to die a martyr for the Christian principle of the ident.i.ty of a married woman. Three long years of false imprisonment does not satisfy this l.u.s.t for power to oppress the helpless. No; nothing but a life-long entombment can satisfy the selfhood of my only legal protector.
O! I do want laws to protect me, and, as an American citizen, I not only ask, but I demand that my personal liberty shall depend upon the decision of a jury--not upon the verdict of public sentiment, or forged certificates, either.
My gallant brothers, be true to my cause, if false to me. Be true to woman! defend her as your weak, confiding sister, and Heaven shall reward you; for G.o.d is on her side, "and he always wins who sides with G.o.d."
Fear not; fear nothing so much as the sin of simply not doing your duty.
Maintain your death grapple in defence of the heaven-born principles of liberty and justice to all human kind, especially to woman. Emanc.i.p.ate her! for above this cross hangs suspended a crown, of which even our martyred Lincoln"s crown of negro emanc.i.p.ation is but a mere type and shadow in brilliancy. And G.o.d grant that this immortal crown of unfading honor may be the rightful heritage--the well-earned reward of Illinois"