Nature and Culture

by Harvey Rice

In the sanitary commission, in the Christian commission, woman was the master-spirit, the angel of mercy, the music of whose hovering wings animated the weary march of our gallant volunteers, and inspired their souls with invincible courage. It is woman who weaves the only wreath of honor which a true-hearted hero desires to wear on his brow, and the only one worthy of his highest aspirations. It is an indisputable fact that the power, the patriotism, and the influence of woman constitute the great moral elements of our Republic, and of our civil and religious institutions.

It is the educated and accomplished women of our country who have refined the men as well as the youth of the land, and given tone to public sentiment. It is this class of women who have purified our literature, and moulded it to harmonize with the pure principles of a Christian philosophy. In the fine arts, and even in the abstruse sciences, women have excelled as well as men. In the catalogue of distinguished authors there are to be found, both in this country and in Europe, nearly as many women as men. From the facts which we have already adduced, it is evident enough that woman, in the exercise of intellectual, if not political power, is fully the equal of man; while in tact and shrewdness she is generally his superior. According to the old but truthful saying, it is impossible for a man to outwit a shrewd woman; and instead of asking, What can a woman do? we should ask, What is there a woman cannot do?

Whenever women are left to take care of themselves in the world, as thousands are, they should not only have the right, but it is their duty, to engage in any of the industrial pursuits for which they are fitted. The principal difference between man and woman is physical strength; and for this reason the lighter employments should be assigned to women. In whatever employment men are out of place, women should take their place; especially in retailing fancy goods, in book-keeping, in telegraphing, in type-setting, in school-teaching, and in many other like employments; nor need they be excluded from the learned professions. In fact, we already have lady clergymen and lady physicians; and some think the character of the Bar would be much elevated by the admission of lady lawyers. We cannot doubt that unmarried ladies, if admitted, would excel in prosecuting suits commenced by "attachment," but in other cases their success is not assured, if we may judge from the following incident: A lady lawyer of presidential aspirations, in conducting a suit before the late Judge Cartter in the district court at Washington, was opposed by an eminent lawyer of the other sex, who raised a vexed legal question which had not been "dreamed of in the philosophy" of the lady lawyer, and which so perplexed her that she, in the midst of her embarrassment, appealed to the judge for advice as to the course she had better pursue. The judge, who hesitated somewhat in his utterances, replied, "I think you had bet-bet-better employ a lawyer."

If women choose to compete with men in any of the learned professions, or in any other pursuit, and are fitted to achieve success, there is nothing in the way to prevent them; yet it does not follow that they can take the places of men in everything, especially in those employments which require masculine strength and great physical endurance. Nor does it follow that women who pay taxes should therefore have the right of suffrage. The fact that they hold property does not change their status, nor does it confer political rights.

The right of suffrage is a political right and not a natural right. The exercise of this political right carries with it the law-making power, the duty of protecting persons and property, and consequently of maintaining and defending the government. They who make the government are therefore bound to defend it. Nature never intended that women should become soldiers and face the cannon's mouth in the battle-field; nor did she give them strength to construct railroads, tunnel mountains, build war-ships, or man them. Yet women, prompted by affection or romantic sentiment, have been known to become soldiers in disguise, and perhaps have fought bravely in the battle-field. But this, of itself, proves nothing; it is merely an exception to a general rule, or in other words, an eccentricity of character. In all ages of the world, as we have shown, the mere force of circumstances has occasionally unsphered woman and placed her in unnatural situations, in which she has sometimes achieved a brilliant success,—on the throne and off the throne, in peace and in war, in political life and in social life. Yet in stepping out of her sphere, whatever may be her success, every true woman feels that she "o'ersteps the modesty of nature."

When woman glides into her natural position,—that of a wife,—it is then only that she occupies her appropriate sphere, and exhibits in its most attractive form the loveliness of her character. Marriage is an institution as essential to the stability and harmony of the social system as gravity is to the order and preservation of the planetary system. In the domestic circle the devoted wife becomes the centre of attraction, the "angel of the household." Her world is her home; her altar, the hearthstone. In her daily ministrations she makes herself angelic by making home a heaven, and every one happy who may come within the "charmed circle" of her kind cares and generous sympathies. In fact, there is no place like home, "sweet home," when on its sacred altar burns the blended incense of harmonious souls,—

"Two souls with but a single thought;

Two hearts that beat as one."

It is certain that man and woman were never created to live independent of each other. They are but counterparts, and therefore incomplete until united in wedlock. Hence they who prefer single blessedness are justly chargeable with the "sin of omission," if not the "unpardonable sin." It is difficult to estimate the fearful responsibilities of those fossilized bachelors who persist in sewing on their own buttons and in mending their own stockings. Yet these selfish gentlemen frankly admit that there may have been such a thing as "true love" in the olden times, but now, they say, the idea has become obsolete; and if a bachelor were to ask a young lady to share his lot, she would immediately want to know how large the "lot" is and what is its value. In further justification they quote Socrates, who, being asked whether it were better for a man to marry or live single, replied, "Let him do either and he will repent it." But this is not argument, nor is it always true, even in a sordid marriage, as appears in the following instance: Not long since, in New York, a bachelor of twenty-two married a rich maiden of fifty-five, who died within a month after the nuptials and left him a half-million of dollars. He says he has never "repented" the marriage.