LIFE AND WRITINGS OF
AMELIA BLOOMER

BY
D. C. BLOOMER, LL. D.
WITH PORTRAITS

BOSTON
ARENA PUBLISHING COMPANY
Copley Square
1895

Republished 1976
Scholarly Press, Inc., 22929 Industrial Drive East
St. Clair Shores, Michigan 48080

Copyrighted, 1895,
BY
D. C. BLOOMER.

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Bloomer, Dexter C   1820-1900.
Life and writings of Amelia Bloomer.
Reprint of the ed. published by Arena Pub. Co.,
Boston.
1. Bloomer, Amelia Jenks, 1818-1894. 2. Women’s
rights—United States. I. Title.
HQ1413.B6B6  1975b  301.41’2’0924  72-78650
ISBN 0-403-01994-X

TO MY WIFE.

PREFACE.

As Mrs. Bloomer was one of the pioneers in what is sometimes called the “Woman’s Movement,” it seems right that a record of her work should be placed in durable form. Such a record I have endeavored to set forth in the following pages. While giving a brief narrative of her life, I have also included, as being most satisfactory, quite extended extracts from her writings; and one of her lectures is printed in full. I will add for the information of the curious that a complete bound copy in one volume of the Lily, as printed and issued by Mrs. Bloomer for six years, is deposited in the State Library, in Albany, N. Y., and is probably the only copy of that work in existence.

D. C. Bloomer.

September, 1895.

CONTENTS.

ILLUSTRATIONS.

LIFE AND WRITINGS OF
AMELIA BLOOMER.

CHAPTER FIRST.

HER EARLY LIFE.

The early life of the subject of this Memoir was devoid of any striking incidents. Her parents were natives of the little State founded by Roger Williams, where both were born, passed their early years, and were married some time in the year 1806. Her father, Ananias Jenks, was a clothier by trade, and was a man of a great deal of force of character. The maiden name of her mother was Lucy Webb. She was a devoted Christian woman, and had enjoyed to the fullest extent the training of a New-England Puritan family of the last century. She was a faithful member of the Presbyterian church, and she aimed to bring up her children in its somewhat strict teachings. With her and her family the holy Sabbath commenced with the going down of the sun on Saturday evening, and ended with the setting of the sun on the following day. This was an old Puritan notion, and was very convenient for the boys and girls who wished to form acquaintances and spend pleasant hours together on the evening of the first day of the week. Ananias Jenks, the father of Amelia Jenks, removed to the state of New York with his wife in the early days of their married life, residing successively in the counties of Onondaga, Cortlandt, Wayne, and Seneca. To Ananias and Lucy Jenks several children were born, at least four daughters and two sons. One of the latter died in early childhood; but the other, Augustus, was spared until about his thirtieth year. He married, removed to the state of Michigan, where five children were born in his family, enlisted as a volunteer in one of the Michigan regiments in the Civil War, and lost his life at the great battle of Gettysburg. The four daughters were Adaline, Elvira, Amanda, and Amelia; Amelia being the youngest of the family, with perhaps the exception of Augustus, who may have been younger. All the children married: Adaline left children surviving her; Amanda, one only, a daughter; while none were born to either Elvira or Amelia.

The last named, Amelia, was born in the town of Homer, Cortlandt County, New York, on the 27th day of May, 1818. In some autobiographical notes left by her, we find the following in reference to her early years:

“My earliest recollections are of a pleasant home in Homer, Cortlandt County, New York. Here was I born, and here the first six years of my life were passed. But little of these early days can now be recalled after sixty years have been added to them, yet there are a few incidents that are so deeply impressed upon memory, that they seem but the occurrence of a week ago. First I recall the visit of some Indians to my father’s house, and the latter buying a large knife of them. The Indians, my father and the knife come before me now as though they were indeed a reality of the present. Again, a scene comes before the mind’s eye of my brother and myself looking from an upper window, and seeing some Indians knocking at the door of a small untenanted house opposite to us. My brother, who was a few years older than myself, called out ‘Come in.’ The Indians opened the door and stepped in, then out, and looked up and around sorely puzzled at hearing a voice, but seeing no one, while my brother and I laughed and danced behind the blind at the trick which we had played upon them. Several children were on their way to school. One little girl jumped upon the wheel of a wagon which stood in front of a house, intending to get in and ride to school. The horse became frightened while she stood on the wheel, and ran away, throwing her violently to the ground and injuring her severely. The mirth of childhood was turned to sadness, and we trudged on to school, after seeing her unconscious form carried into the house. I could not have been over four or five years old when these things happened, but they are deeply engraved on memory’s tablet.”

Amelia was carefully trained at home by her truly Christian mother, and from her she imbibed those high sentiments of honesty, truth, duty, fidelity and regard for the rights of others which actuated her during the whole course of her life. Her educational opportunities were limited to the district school of those early days. Then, it was commonly thought that about all a girl should be taught was to read and write, with a little grammar and less arithmetic. These essentials of a common-school education were fairly mastered by the little girl, and to such an extent that, when she arrived at about the age of seventeen years, she was employed as a teacher in one of the district schools at or near the village of Clyde, in Wayne County, New York. A single short term, however, was the whole extent of her life as a teacher. For the brief period of her engagement, we are told, she discharged her duties with much acceptance. Her kindness of heart, united with wonderful firmness and a strict regard for truth and right, qualities which distinguished her throughout her whole life, endeared her to the children who came under her care.

HER MARRIAGE.

School-teaching however soon ended; and shortly after, she became a member of the family of her sister Elvira, then recently married and residing in Waterloo, New York, to which place her father’s family also removed about the same time. Here the days passed along smoothly and quietly until about the year 1837, when she became an inmate in the family of Mr. Oren Chamberlain residing near Waterloo, as the governess and tutor of his three youngest children. This position she continued to fill with entire satisfaction for two or three years. The children all lived to years of maturity, and always manifested great affection in subsequent years for their former teacher. In this family, the life of Miss Jenks moved along quietly and evenly. She enjoyed fully its confidence and the love of her pupils. She formed new friendships and the circle of her acquaintances was widened. Among the latter, was a young man residing in Seneca Falls engaged in the study of law, while taking also a large interest in the political movements of that day. They met quite frequently, and soon strong ties of friendship were formed between them, and the friendship ripened as the months passed by into love. They became engaged, and finally were married at the residence of John Lowden in the village of Waterloo, New York, on the 15th day of April, 1840, by the Rev. Samuel H. Gridley, the Presbyterian clergyman of the village; and in subsequent years Mrs. Bloomer frequently alluded with much satisfaction to the fact that he omitted altogether the word “obey” in the marriage ceremony. Only a few friends were present at the marriage, but among them besides Mr. and Mrs. Lowden were A. E. Chamberlain, Miss Caroline Starks, and Mr. and Mrs. Isaac Fuller, all of whom together with Mr. Lowden are still living at the time (March, 1895) of writing these lines.

At the time of this marriage Mr. Bloomer was twenty-four years of age, quite tall and slim, weighing about one hundred and fifty pounds, with gray eyes, a rather tall forehead, and long arms, and of bashful and reserved demeanor. His bride was much smaller, five feet four inches in height, and weighed about a hundred pounds. She had a well-formed head, bright, blue eyes bordering on black, auburn hair and an exceedingly pleasant and winning smile. Like her husband, she was reserved in manner, and very unwilling to force herself upon the notice of strangers, but when she once became acquainted with them she enjoyed their society most heartily. She was small in person and modest in demeanor, and standing beside her tall husband, at once attracted the attention and secured the confidence of her friends and associates. She was twenty-two years of age at the time of her marriage. Her husband, Dexter C. Bloomer, was of Quaker parentage, had a fairly good common-school and academic education, had spent several years in teaching school, commenced the study of law at the age of twenty, and at the time of his marriage was still a student and one of the proprietors and editors of the Seneca County Courier, a weekly newspaper printed in Seneca Falls, N. Y.

The day following their marriage Mr. and Mrs. Bloomer drove in a carriage to the residence of Mr. Isaac Fuller, in Seneca Falls, where rooms had been prepared for their reception. Mr. Fuller was Mr. Bloomer’s partner in the printing business, and both he and his excellent wife are still (in 1895) living in the same town, and have ever proved most dear and excellent friends of the young couple who on the 16th day of April, 1840, took up their residence with them.

Mr. Bloomer had very many friends in the town, and on the evening of his arrival with his bride they filled Mr. Fuller’s rooms to welcome the newly wedded couple to their new home and their new life. With them came many members of a fire company of which Mr. Bloomer was a member, accompanied by a band of music, and all went merry as a marriage bell. Refreshments were of course served, and among them a plentiful supply of wine, for in those days, this was the almost certain accompaniment of all social gatherings. All, or nearly all, partook of it; and just then occurred an incident which told most instructively as to the moral character and firmness of the young and happy bride. Glasses were filled with the sparkling beverage, and one of them was presented to her by the bridegroom himself, but she firmly yet pleasantly declined to accept it. “What,” he said with the greatest earnestness, “will you not drink a glass of wine with me on this joyful occasion? Surely it can do you no harm.” “No,” she smilingly yet firmly replied, “I cannot,—I must not.” A crowd of guests standing around could but admire her great self-denial and devotion to principles; and ever after, to the end of her days, she was the firm and consistent advocate of Temperance and the unceasing enemy of strong drink in all its varied forms.

TIPPECANOE AND TYLER, TOO!

The year 1840 was a memorable one in the history of this country. It witnessed the great “Tippecanoe and Tyler, too,” campaign, in which Gen. William Henry Harrison and Martin Van Buren were opposing candidates. The whole country went wild with political speech-making, songs, log-cabins, great gatherings of people and enormous processions of the opposing hosts. Mr. Bloomer was absorbed heart and soul in the contest. He was the editor of the only Whig paper in the village and county, and he was present at political caucuses, conventions and assemblages in all that region. His wife at first took little interest in the great hubbub raised over the land. In fact, her health was quite delicate that first summer of her married life. It is remembered distinctly now by the writer of these lines, that while he was on the 4th of July, 1840, delivering an address at a political celebration, she was at home prostrated with some form of intermittent fever. His address over, he hastened to her bedside; and soon after, having so far recovered as to leave her room, she was taken to Avon Springs, in western New York, where she regained her health so as to return to her boarding place early in August. But Mrs. Bloomer gradually became interested in the political turmoil so far as to attend political gatherings, visit the log-cabin which stood on one of the principal streets of the town, and assist in preparing badges and mottoes for the use of those who espoused the cause advocated by her husband.

And so the months moved quietly along during that eventful year, and the first of October found Mr. and Mrs. Bloomer settled down to housekeeping in a modest dwelling in Seneca Falls. The great election contest terminated in November, and they both rejoiced most heartily in the result, although what particular benefit it would be to either of them, except the satisfaction of being on the winning side, it would have been very difficult for either to very fully explain.

A WRITER FOR NEWSPAPERS.

As has already been stated, Mr. Bloomer was one of the editors of a village paper printed in Seneca Falls. He was a great reader of books and newspapers, and sought to inspire in his young wife a similar love for the current literature of the day. This was no difficult task, for she also was fond of books and sought in all suitable ways to store her mind with useful knowledge. But Mr. Bloomer desired her to go further and become a writer for the papers also. He had got the idea well fixed in his mind, from letters received from her during the years preceding their marriage, that she possessed the power of expressing her thoughts on paper with both ease and grace. But from the natural modesty of her character, she was quite unwilling to embark in this to her new and untried field of mental experience. Nevertheless, through the kind and persuasive appeals of the husband the young wife began to commit her thoughts to paper, and from time to time there appeared in the newspapers of the town various articles bearing upon the social, moral and political questions of those times. They all appeared anonymously, sometimes written over one signature and then over another, but they all came from Mrs. Bloomer’s pen and excited no little curiosity among the people of the town as to their real author. It was in this way that Mrs. Bloomer acquired that easy and pleasant style of writing for publication which so marked her career in later years.

WASHINGTONIANISM.

Meantime, the great Washingtonian Temperance Reformation of 1840 and 1841 made its appearance, led by the six reformed drunkards of Baltimore. It swept over the country like a whirlwind; thousands of men under its influence were led to abandon their drinking habits and become useful and sober citizens, while thousands more attached their name to the Temperance pledge of total abstinence from all intoxicating liquors. This movement reached Seneca Falls and produced a great sensation, almost revolutionizing public sentiment on the subject. Pollard and Wright, two of the reformed men of Baltimore, visited the town and held public meetings in halls and parks and were listened to by great crowds of people. An “Independent Temperance Total-Abstinence Society” was formed headed by reformed men, and the current topics of the time nearly all turned upon this all-absorbing subject.

Into this movement Mrs. Bloomer entered with her whole heart and soul. Along with her husband, she attended the great Temperance gatherings, and took an active part in carrying forward the great reformation. She acted on committees, and wrote articles in support of the good work. A newspaper called the Water Bucket was issued as the organ of the Temperance society of the village. For this Mrs. Bloomer wrote freely and vigorously. A copy of this paper cannot be found, but a few articles from her pen have been preserved. Here is one of them. It was written in 1842 and is a fair specimen of Mrs. Bloomer’s then style of composition. She has been answering objections to the Temperance pledge, when she proceeds as follows:

“Another cannot make cake fit to eat without wine or brandy. A third must have brandy on her apple dumplings, and a fourth comes out boldly and says she likes to drink once in a while herself too well. What flimsy excuses these! brandy and apple dumplings, forsooth! That lady must be a wretched cook indeed who cannot make apple dumplings, mince pies or cake palatable without the addition of poisonous substances. But I would ask these ladies if they have ever tried to do without it? Their answer I fear would be in the negative. They do not wish to do without it. They act from purely selfish motives. Would they but visit the drunkard’s home and see the misery and wretchedness that is brought upon families once happy and prosperous as themselves, and hear the drunkard’s wife recount her tale of woe, methinks their hearts would soften. They could then sympathize with those who are trying to break loose from the galling yoke of intemperance, and instead of being stumbling blocks in our way, they would come to our aid with their whole hearts and devote their talents to the cause of temperance, nor cease in their efforts until drunkenness should be completely driven from the land. What examples these ladies are setting before their families! Have they a husband, a brother or a son, and have they no fear that the example they are now setting them may be the means of their filling a drunkard’s grave? Have they a daughter? Their example teaches her to respect moderate-drinking young men, and receive their addresses, and should she unite her fate with such an one, almost certain ruin awaits her. * * * Could all those ladies who oppose the efforts which we are making to reform our land, but have their minds awakened to the importance of the subject! Could they but know the experience of thousands of their own sex, who from being surrounded by every happiness that wealth and station can impart, have through the means of that fell destroyer, intemperance, sunk to the lowest depth of misery and degradation, and, more than all, did they but know how far their influence may be instrumental in saving a fellow-creature, they would hasten to the standard of temperance and unite their influence against the disturber of human happiness, and become volunteers in the moral contest to extirpate the fell monster from our shores.”

The above article was signed “Gloriana,” a favorite signature of Mrs. Bloomer’s. Another which is preserved, and was printed over the signature of “Eugene” at about the same date, is as follows:

“Many people think there is nothing more to do towards the advancement of temperance in this place, because we have succeeded in breaking up the drinking of ardent spirits in a measure, and have enlisted some four or five hundred members under our banners. This is a mistaken idea, and if cherished long, those who feel most secure will find to their dismay that the viper has only been crushed for a time, and will arise again upon his victim with a firmer and more deadly grasp than before. It is the duty of every man to be at his post, to lend his aid in sustaining the weak, and to encourage others by his presence and example of perseverance in the course they have begun. If the reformed inebriates see those whom they have looked upon to sustain and encourage them in this great work grow careless and indifferent towards them and the cause, have we not reason to fear that they too will drop off one by one into their old practices, and forsake that Temperance Hall where they have long passed their evenings so pleasantly and so profitably for their old haunts, the grogshop and the gutter? * * * Let it not be said of Seneca Falls that she deserted her post in the hour of danger, but let every temperance man feel that he has a duty to perform and that there is no time for rest or inaction until the ‘hydra-headed monster’, shall be driven from our borders.”

These extracts show how earnestly Mrs. Bloomer gave herself to the great Temperance reform. Of some of the features of the reform she gives the following sketch in an historical review written at a much later date:

“In 1840 a great impulse was given to the temperance cause, such as had never been known before in the world’s history. This movement originated with seven drunkards of Baltimore, who met in a saloon in that city and then and there, with their glasses filled before them, resolved that they would drink no more. They poured out the liquor and went home. They at once formed a society for the promotion of total abstinence among those who, like themselves, had been addicted to the use of intoxicating drink. Only one of the seven is known to have backslidden, while the others lived and died honoring the cause they had embraced. Several of these men became eloquent speakers, and traveled the country over, holding meetings, pleading earnestly for the reformation of others, and depicting in burning words the sad lot of the drunkard and his wretched family. No such temperance meetings have been held since, no such eloquent appeals made for temperance. This was called the great ‘Washingtonian movement,’ and by it an impetus was given that has led to all subsequent effort in that cause. Following this movement various societies were started, some open, some secret. We had the Sons of Temperance, Reformed Brotherhood, Rechabites, Cadets of Temperance, Carson Leagues, Alliances, Good Templars, Temple of Honor, and open local, county and state societies, and finally the Women’s Christian Temperance Union.”

JOINS THE CHURCH.

About this time (1843) Mrs. Bloomer and also her husband united with and became members of the Episcopal Church, in Seneca Falls; she maintained her membership in that body until the end of her life, a period of over fifty years. This new relation opened a new field for her quiet and gentle activities. She became very soon deeply interested in parish work in its various forms, and as a member of various parochial organizations labored faithfully to advance Christian progress. This was especially noticeable after her removal to her new home in the West, as we shall have occasion to remark further on. We may add here that Mrs. Bloomer, while a firm believer in the truth of the Christian religion, always insisted that certain passages in the Scriptures relating to women had been given a strained and unnatural meaning, and that the whole teaching of the Bible, when fully interpreted, elevated her to a joint companionship with her brother in the government and salvation of the race.

CHAPTER SECOND.

UNJUST LAWS FOR WOMEN.

Up to about the middle of the nineteenth century, the maxims of the common law of England relating to the rights and responsibilities of married women were in force in nearly all the states of the Union. This was true especially in the state of New York. They were exceedingly stringent in their character, and confined her, so far as related to her property rights, within exceedingly narrow limits. Indeed, in some respects they might well be regarded as brutal. They merged the legal being of the wife in her husband. Without him, and apart from him, she could hold no property, make no contracts, nor even exercise control over her children. If she earned money by whatever means, she could not collect it. Her time and her earnings belonged to her husband; and her children, when above the age of infancy, could be taken from her by will or otherwise and committed to the charge of strangers. On the decease of the husband, the personal property acquired through their joint efforts and industry passed at once to his heirs, through the legal administration of his estate; while the wife was turned off with a bare life estate in one-third of the real property standing in his name at the time of his decease.

The gross injustice of these laws began to excite attention soon after the adoption of the new constitution in the state of New York, in 1846. The first step towards their modification was taken in the legislature of 1844-5, when certain recognitions of the property rights of married women were enacted into laws; and in other states attention about that time began to be turned in the same direction. These were the beginning of the series of laws since enacted in nearly all the states as well as in the dominions and provinces of the British Empire, by which the old and absurd and barbarous features of the old common law of England applicable to married women have been to a large extent abrogated. But this result has been the work of years of earnest thought, earnest labor and earnest devotion to the principles of right and justice, upon which it is our boast that all our laws are based.

REFORM BEGINS.

To Ansel Bascom, a lawyer of Seneca Falls, a member of the Constitutional Convention of 1846 and of the first legislature following its adoption, and to David Dudley Field, a distinguished citizen of the state, were largely due the modifications in the laws relating to married women which began about that time. These gentlemen were also largely instrumental in securing the adoption of the reformed code of practice in the courts, which has since been substantially enacted in nearly all the states of the Union. But women themselves had much to do in this most important work. Two of them were Lucretia Mott, a well-known Quaker preacher of those days, and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, wife of Henry B. Stanton and daughter of Daniel Cady, an eminent lawyer and judge. These ladies had been delegates to an anti-slavery convention in London, to which they were refused admission on account of being women, and they mutually resolved to enter upon an effort to secure an amelioration in the laws relating to the legal and property rights of their sex. They even went further and asked that the constitutions of the several states should be so amended, that to women should be extended the right to vote and even to hold office. That was a new thing under the sun. It was the beginning of what has since been so widely known as the women’s rights movement, the agitation of which has occupied a large place in the public discussions of the last half century.

WOMEN TO THE FRONT.

The first public meeting to bring these questions prominently before the country was held in the Wesleyan Chapel, in Seneca Falls, on the 19th day of July, 1848. It was attended by the ladies I have mentioned, by Mr. Bascom, by Mr. Thomas McClintoch, a Quaker preacher and member of his family, by several clergymen, and other persons of some prominence in the village. Frederick Douglass was also present. Mr. James Mott, the husband of Lucretia, presided, and that lady opened the meeting with a careful statement of women’s wrongs and grievances and made a demand for their redress. Mr. Stanton read a clearly written paper to the same purport and reported a woman’s declaration of independence, in which her wrongs were fully set forth and her rights as fully insisted upon and proclaimed. The position was boldly taken that the ballot should be placed in her hands on a perfect equality with man himself, as only through the ballot could her rights be effectually asserted and maintained. The discussion lasted through two days, and the declaration was signed by fifty women and about the same number of men. The papers over the country generally noticed the gathering, and with few exceptions ridiculed the whole movement, while bearing testimony to the earnestness of those engaged in it.

Two weeks later, a second meeting of the same character was held in Rochester; and this one, as showing signs of progress, was presided over by a woman, the first event of the kind that had occurred up to that date, although since then it has become a common occurrence, and as a general rule it has been found that women make excellent presiding officers. Several new recruits were enlisted at the Rochester meeting, both women and men, among the latter being the Rev. William Henry Channing, a popular Unitarian clergyman of that city. The Rochester meeting fully endorsed the resolutions and declaration of independence of the Seneca Falls meeting, and from that time the new movement of women’s rights was fully launched upon the great ocean of public discussion and public opinion. Lucretia Mott and Mrs. Stanton were the acknowledged leaders; but soon other advocates of wide influence were enrolled in the cause, and its influence from that day has continued to widen and extend, until it now includes men and women of great distinction and power in every English-speaking country in the world.

MRS. BLOOMER THINKS ABOUT IT.

Mrs. Bloomer, at the time these meetings were held, was residing quietly at her home in Seneca Falls, engaged in a modest way in religious and temperance work. She had not yet thought much on the subject of women’s rights, so called, except so far as it related to the obstacles which the laws as then formed threw in the way of securing the triumph of total-abstinence principles. The Washingtonian movement had continued to exert its influence upon the community. Now total-abstinence societies sprang up, among them the Sons and Daughters of Temperance,—separate organizations, but including within their lists of members many thousands of both sexes. The Temperance Star of Rochester was an organ of these organizations, and Mrs. Bloomer wrote freely and frequently for its columns. She attended the Mott-Stanton convention in Seneca Falls, but took no part in its proceedings and did not sign either the resolutions or declaration of independence.

But the principles promulgated in those documents began to have an effect upon her thoughts and actions, as they did upon those of many other women of that day. They realized, almost for the first time, that there was something wrong in the laws under which they lived, and that they had something to do in the work of reforming and improving them. Hence they moved slowly out of the religious circles in which their activities had hitherto been confined and, while not neglecting these, yet began in a modest way to organize societies in which they could work for the improvement of their surroundings and the moral regeneration of society. In Seneca Falls a Ladies’ Temperance Society was organized for the first time in 1848. Mrs. Bloomer became a member of it and one of its officers. Whether she ever became a member of the “Daughters of Temperance” lodges is not now remembered, but it is thought no lodge of that order had been organized in the place of her residence.

Of some of these movements, Mrs. Bloomer in later years wrote as follows:

“In 1848 or ‘49, after the order of the ‘Sons’ was started, which order excluded women, some one among them conceived the idea of starting a similar order for women. This was probably as a salve to the wounded feelings of the women, just as Masons and Odd Fellows at this day will not admit women to their lodge-rooms, but to pacify them have branches called Star of Hope and Daughters of Rebekah, composed of women. Be this as it may, the order of the Daughters of Temperance was started, composed of women entirely. It continued many years and may still be in existence, though I have not heard of it for years. The order was planted in twenty-four states and in England and the British provinces. The daughters held state and national conventions, issued addresses and appeals to the women of the state, circulated petitions to the legislature, and were very zealous in good works. In 1851 this order numbered over twenty thousand members. It was a secret society, and no one could gain admittance to their meetings without the password. This, so far as I know, was the first organized movement ever made by women to make themselves felt and heard on the great temperance question, which was then agitating the minds of the people as it never had done before. And so long as they kept to themselves and held secret meetings they were not molested, their right to talk and resolve was not called in question. But as the years rolled on, women became more earnest and self-reliant, and were not satisfied with these secret doings. They wanted to let their light be seen. So a few prominent daughters, with Susan B. Anthony (who up to that time had only been known as a Daughter of Temperance, an earnest temperance worker and a school-teacher) as leader, called an open temperance meeting at Albany. This was not largely responded to, women not daring to come out openly after having so long heard ‘let you women keep silence’ sounded in their ears from the sacred desk. This meeting was conducted so quietly it hardly caused a ripple of excitement, and passed almost unnoticed by the press.”

CHAPTER THIRD.

SHE WRITES ABOUT IT.

Women up to this time had never, or very seldom, indeed, come forward as public speakers in behalf of Temperance or any other reform movements. True, Abby Kelly Foster had made her appearance on the platform as an abolition lecturer, but her speeches were so radical and denunciatory in their character that they added little strength to the position or popularity of women speakers. The Quaker preachers were of both sexes; of these Lucretia Mott was the recognized leader among the gentler sex, and the purity of her character and the mildness of her addresses, compared with those of Mrs. Foster, made her popular with all classes. Mrs. Bloomer heard both of these women, and her husband well remembers that, on one occasion after she had been listening to Mrs. Foster’s radical criticisms on an article which appeared in the editorial columns of his paper, she came home greatly distressed and with tears in her eyes over the denunciations, to which she had listened. She learned in subsequent years to take such things more calmly.

But though public sentiment did not then sanction the appearance of women speakers even to advocate so good a cause as Temperance, yet they could use their pens in its support. Mrs. Bloomer did this quite freely as we have seen, but the little society in Seneca Falls concluded that it must have a paper of its own, and on the 1st of January, 1849, such a paper was commenced in that place.

BIRTH OF THE LILY.

Mrs. Bloomer herself tells the story of its birth and her connection with it as follows:

“Up to about 1848-9 women had almost no part in all this temperance work. They could attend meetings and listen to the eloquence and arguments of men, and they could pay their money towards the support of temperance lecturers, but such a thing as their having anything to say or do further than this was not thought of. They were fired with zeal after listening to the Washingtonian lecturers and other speakers on temperance who then abounded, and in some instances held little private meetings of their own, organized societies and passed resolutions expressive of their feelings on the great subject. It was at a meeting of this kind in Seneca Falls, N. Y., which was then my home, that the matter of publishing a little temperance paper, for home distribution only, was introduced. The ladies caught at the idea and at once determined on issuing the paper. Editors were selected, a committee appointed to wait on the newspaper offices to learn on what terms the paper could be printed monthly, we furnishing all the copy. The president was to name the paper, the report to be made at next meeting by committee. And so we separated, satisfied and elated with our doings. But on my reporting my proceedings to my husband on my return home he ‘threw cold water’ on the whole thing. He said we women did not know what we were talking about, that it cost a good deal of money to print a paper, and that we could not carry on such an enterprise and would run ourselves into debt, get into trouble and make a failure of it. He advised that I counsel the ladies to abandon all thought of such a movement. At the next meeting I reported all he said, but it was of no avail. The ladies had their hearts set on the paper and they determined to go ahead with it. They were encouraged thereto by a temperance lecturer who was traveling over the state. He promised to get subscribers for them and greatly help them. He kept his word so far as sending us a goodly list of names, but the money did not accompany them and we never saw the man or the money afterwards. This was very discouraging, and the zeal of the ladies abated wonderfully. They began to realize that they had been hasty in incurring a great responsibility for which they were not fitted, and very soon the society decided to give up the enterprise altogether. But meantime we had been getting subscribers and money, had issued a prospectus, and every arrangement was made at the printing office for bringing out the paper January 1, 1849. We had even ordered a head from New York. I could not so lightly throw off responsibility. Our word had gone to the public and we had considerable money on subscriptions. Besides the dishonesty of the thing, people would say it was ‘just like women’; ‘what more could you expect of them?’ As editor of the paper, I threw myself into the work, assumed the entire responsibility, took the entire charge editorially and financially, and carried it successfully through.”

The following is taken from the first editorial in the new paper, written by Mrs. Bloomer:

“It is woman that speaks through The Lily. It is upon an important subject, too, that she comes before the public to be heard. Intemperance is the great foe to her peace and happiness. It is that above all which has made her home desolate and beggared her offspring. It is that above all which has filled to its brim her cup of sorrow and sent her moaning to the grave. Surely she has a right to wield the pen for its suppression. Surely she may, without throwing aside the modest retirement which so much becomes her sex, use her influence to lead her fellow-mortals away from the destroyer’s path. It is this which she proposes to do in the columns of this paper. Like the beautiful flower from which it derives its name, we shall strive to make the Lily the emblem of ‘sweetness and purity;’ and may heaven smile upon our attempt to advocate the great cause of Temperance reform!”

NEW WORK FOR HER.

With the birth of this little journal, a new life opened before Mrs. Bloomer. She was at once initiated into all the mysteries and details of an editor and publisher. She had to make contracts for the printing and publication, to send out circulars to friends asking for their assistance in extending its circulation, place the papers in proper covers and send them to subscribers through the mails, to prepare editorials and other matter for its columns, to read the proofs and, in short, to attend to all the details of newspaper publication. She gave herself heartily and earnestly to the work. Of the first issue of the Lily not over two or three hundred copies were printed, but the number of its subscribers steadily increased. Many friends came forward from different parts of the state to help in adding new names to its lists. Among these none were more zealous and earnest than Miss Susan B. Anthony, then a very competent school-teacher in the city of Rochester, but whose name has since become one of world-wide fame as that of the great leader in the cause of woman’s emancipation. Mrs. Mary C. Vaughan, a most estimable lady and fine writer, also came forward both with her pen and lists of new subscribers to help in the great Temperance reform to which the Lily was devoted.

FIRST IN THE FIELD.

The Lily was very nearly, if not quite, the first journal of any kind published by a woman. Mrs. Nichols, in Vermont, and Mrs. Swishelm, in Pennsylvania, were connected with newspapers published in each case by their husbands, and they wrote vigorous editorials for their papers, but neither of them took upon herself the entire charge of the publication. Mrs. Bloomer did this to the fullest extent, and it therefore may be justly claimed that she was the pioneer woman editor and proprietor. True, her journal was not a very large one, yet it labored zealously in the cause to which it was devoted and prepared the way for other and more pretentious publications to follow, under the charge of women. It showed what women could do when their thoughts and energies were directed to some practical and beneficial purpose, and so made ready for the great advance which has since taken place in opening for her wider fields of usefulness.

Mrs. Bloomer herself writes as follows:

“The Lily was the first paper published devoted to the interests of woman and, so far as I know, the first one owned, edited and published by a woman. It was a novel thing for me to do in those days and I was little fitted for it, but the force of circumstances led me into it and strength was given me to carry it through. It was a needed instrumentality to spread abroad the truth of the new gospel to woman, and I could not withhold my hand to stay the work I had begun. I saw not the end from the beginning and little dreamed whereto my proposition to the society would lead me.”

MRS. STANTON APPEARS.

Among those who soon became writers for the Lily was Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, a resident of Seneca Falls. One day during the summer of 1849, she came into the post office where the editor of the Lily was busily engaged and introduced herself to Mrs. Bloomer, and proposed to write for the columns of her paper. The offer was gladly accepted, and very soon articles began to appear in the columns of the Lily over the signature of “Sunflower.” They were forcibly written and displayed not a little wit and many sharp hits at some of the prevailing “fads” of the day. At first they were on Temperance and literary subjects, and the duties of parents in bringing up their children. The various theories of education were also vigorously analyzed and some new ideas put forth. By and by, as months went by, her readers were apprised as to her views on Woman’s Rights, so called. They learned something from her of the unjust laws relating to married women, and saw that the writer was about right in asking that they should be changed and made better. And then the paragraphs moved further along and intimated that women should vote also for her rulers and legislators. Mrs. Bloomer herself became a convert to these views. How this came around, she herself tells in the two following paragraphs:

MRS. BLOOMER CONVERTED.

“When a child of fifteen years, my feelings were deeply stirred by learning that an old lady, a dear friend of mine, was to be turned from her home and the bulk of her property taken from her. Her husband died suddenly, leaving no will. The law would allow her but a life interest in one-third of the estate, which had been accumulated by the joint earnings and savings of herself and husband through many years. They had no children and the nearest relative of the husband was a second or third cousin, and to him the law gave two-thirds of her property, though he had never contributed a dollar towards its accumulation, and was to them a stranger. Later, other similar cases coming to my knowledge made me familiar with the cruelty of the law towards women; and when the Woman’s Rights Convention put forth its declaration of sentiments, I was ready to join with that party in demanding for women such change in the laws as would give her a right to her earnings, and her children a right to wider fields of employment and a better education, and also a right to protect her interests at the ballot-box.”

BECOMES ASSISTANT POSTMASTER.

“In the spring of 1849, my husband was appointed postmaster at Seneca Falls, N. Y. He proposed that I should act as his deputy. I accepted the position, as I had determined to give a practical demonstration of woman’s right to fill any place for which she had capacity. I was sworn in as his deputy, and filled the position for four years, during the administration of Taylor and Fillmore. It was a novel step for me to take in those days, and no doubt many thought I was out of woman’s sphere; but the venture was very successful and proved to me conclusively that woman might, even then, engage in any respectable business and deal with all sorts of men, and yet be treated with the utmost respect and consideration.”

THE LILY ON HER HANDS.

During the first year of its existence, the Lily bore at its head the words “published by a committee of ladies”; but the truth was that no person, save Mrs. Bloomer herself, had any responsible share in its management or control. Therefore, at the beginning of the new year 1850 that fiction was dropped, and her name alone appeared as publisher and editor, and at its head stood the legend “devoted to the interests of woman.” Says Mrs. Bloomer:

“I never liked the name of the paper, but the society thought it pretty and accepted it from the president. It started with that name, and became known far and wide. It had been baptized with tears and sent forth with anxious doubts and fears. It was not easy to change, and so it remained The Lily to the end, pure in motive and purpose as in name. * * * It was never the organ of any society, party or clique, or of any individual but myself. That it was always loyal to temperance is evidenced by the fact that its files are sought after by writers of temperance history. That subject was never lost sight of in a single number, as its files will show. Mrs. Stanton became a contributor to the Lily near the close of its first year. Her subjects were temperance and woman’s rights. Her writings added interest to the paper and she was welcome to its columns, as were Frances D. Gage, Mary C. Vaughan, and many others who came to my aid. She occupied the same position as any other contributor, and she never attempted to control the paper in any way.”

The year 1850 was a quiet one for Mrs. Bloomer. Early in the spring, her husband purchased a modest cottage. This had to be fitted up and occupied, and took up a good deal of her attention. Then several hours each day were spent in the post office in the work of receiving and delivering letters. Once a month the Lily continued to make its appearance, filled with good, substantial temperance arguments and pleadings, and occasional articles pointing strongly in the direction of the new doctrines of woman’s rights then coming more and more into prominence. Her editorials were written plainly but with a good deal of spirit, and whoever attacked her position on either of these subjects was sure to receive a sharp rejoinder from her pen. Several weeks during the summer were spent at a sanatorium in Rochester, from which she returned greatly improved in health. Sometime during the year a great anti-slavery meeting was held in the town, attended by the celebrated English orator, George Thompson, and many prominent abolitionists of the state. Among others came Susan B. Anthony, who was the guest of Mrs. Bloomer and whom she introduced to Mrs. Stanton, and then commenced that life-long intimacy of these two celebrated women.

VISITS NEW YORK CITY.

During the winter of 1849-50 Mrs. Bloomer visited the city of New York for the first time, accompanied by her husband. They passed up Cayuga Lake on a steamer, and from there were in the first railroad cars, by special invitation, over the Erie railroad from that village to the metropolis. It is remembered that several of the men who afterwards became distinguished as railroad magnates were on that train, and their conversation was listened to with a great deal of interest. That was long before the days of sleeping cars, and they had to pass the night as comfortably as they could in their seats in the passenger coach. In the city, they spent three or four days visiting some of the noted places, including Barnum’s Museum on Broadway, then one of the great attractions of the growing town. They returned by the same route in the midst of a great snowstorm which, with the high wind that came along with it, made their trip down the lake somewhat hazardous.

Mrs. Bloomer wrote of this trip as follows:

“We traveled by the route of the lake and the New-York-and-Erie railroad. Those who have not been over this road can form no idea of its sublimity and grandeur. To one who like myself had never been beyond the level country of western New York, it presents a grand, imposing spectacle. The prospect is at one moment bounded on either side by lofty mountain peaks covered with evergreens, and the next by solid masses of rock towering higher than the eye can reach, and through which at an enormous expense and great amount of labor the road has been cut. The water pouring over these rocks from above had frozen in its descent, and now hung in masses and irregular sheets down their perpendicular sides, forming a beautiful contrast to their surface. Occasionally you come into a more open country, while at one spot you find yourself on the summit of a mountain where you have a view of ten miles in extent through the valley below. * * * Winter had robed all in her snowy mantle on our return, adding new beauty to the scene. Summer, we think, would lend enchantment to the picture; and should we ever take a trip over this road again, we shall aim to do so at a more mild and genial season.

“We were fortunate in meeting several directors of the road on our downward trip from Ithaca. To them, and especially to Mr. Dodge, of New York City, we are indebted for much information concerning the road. Every attention was shown us by this enterprising gentleman from the time we left Ithaca until we shook hands with him at parting upon our arrival in the city.”

MISS ANTHONY IS INTRODUCED.

Mrs. Bloomer, in later years, wrote:

“It was in the spring of 1850 that I introduced Susan B. Anthony to Mrs. Stanton. Miss Anthony had come to attend an anti-slavery meeting in Seneca Falls, held by George Thompson and William Lloyd Garrison, and was my guest. Returning from the meeting, we stopped at the street corner and waited for Mrs. Stanton, and I gave the introduction which has resulted in a life-long friendship. Afterwards, we called together at Mrs. Stanton’s house and the way was opened for future intercourse between them. It was, as Mrs. Stanton says in her history, an eventful meeting that henceforth in a measure shaped their lives. Neither would have done what she did without the other. Mrs. Stanton had the intellectual, and Susan the executive, ability to carry forward the movement then recently inaugurated. Without the push of Miss Anthony, Mrs. Stanton would probably never have gone abroad into active life, or achieved half she has done; and without the brains of Mrs. Stanton, Miss Anthony would never have been so largely known to the world by name and deeds. They helped and strengthened each other, and together they have accomplished great things for woman and humanity. The writer is glad for the part she had in bringing two such characters together.”

MRS. BLOOMER ON THE TENNESSEE LEGISLATURE.

The columns of the Lily during the first year of its publication were almost exclusively filled with articles bearing upon the great purpose for which it was established, the promotion of the Temperance cause. True, some other questions were touched upon by Mrs. Stanton, and perhaps by other correspondents; but Mrs. Bloomer’s editorials were all directed to that end. With the March Lily for 1850 she struck out in a new direction, as will appear from the following article which appeared in the editorial columns for that month:

“The legislature of Tennessee have in their wisdom decided after gravely discussing the question that women have no souls, and no right to hold property. Wise men these, and worthy to be honored with seats in the halls of legislation in a Christian land. Women no souls! Then, of course, we are not accountable beings: and if not accountable to our Maker, then surely not to man. Man represents us, legislates for us, and now holds himself accountable for us! How kind in him, and what a weight is lifted from us! We shall no longer be answerable to the laws of God or man, no longer be subject to punishment for breaking them, no longer be responsible for any of our doings. Man in whom iniquity is perfected has assumed the whole charge of us and left us helpless, soulless, defenseless creatures dependent on him for leave to speak or act.

“We suppose the wise legislators consider the question settled beyond dispute, but we fear they will have some trouble with it yet. Although it may be an easy matter for them to arrive at such a conclusion, it will be quite another thing to make women believe it. We are not so blind to the weakness or imperfections of man as to set his word above that of our Maker, or so ready to yield obedience to his laws as to place them before the laws of God. However blindly we may be led by him, however much we may yield to his acquired power over us, we cannot yet fall down and worship him as our superior. Some men even act as though women had no souls, but it remained for the legislature of Tennessee to speak it to the world.

“We have not designed ourself saying much on the subject of ‘Woman’s Rights;’ but we see and hear so much that is calculated to keep our sex down and impress us with a conviction of our inferiority and helplessness, that we feel compelled to act on the defensive and stand for what we consider our just rights. If things are coming to such a pass as that indicated by the above decision, we think it high time that women should open their eyes and look where they stand. It is quite time that their rights should be discussed, and that woman herself should enter the contest.

“We have ever felt that in regard to property, and also as to many other things, the laws were unjust to women. Men make laws without consulting us, and of course they will make them all in their own favor, especially as we are powerless and cannot contend for our rights. We believe that most women are capable of taking care of their own property, and that they have the right to hold it, and to dispose of it as they please, man’s decision to the contrary notwithstanding. As for ourselves, we have no fears but we could take care of a fortune if we had one, without any assistance from legislators or lawyers, and we should think them meddling with what did not concern them should they undertake to control it for us.

“The legislature of our own state has taken a step in advance on this subject and granted to women the right to their own property. We trust this is but a forecast of the enlightened sentiment of the people of New York, and that it will pave the way to greater privileges, and the final elevation of women to that position in society which shall entitle her opinions to respect and consideration.”

FOR WOMAN SUFFRAGE.

And from that time on, a considerable part of the Lily was devoted to the same subject. The above article related simply to property rights, but Mrs. Bloomer’s views rapidly widened out until she took the position, also, that women should be granted the right of suffrage and thus possess a controlling influence in the passage of all laws. Nevertheless, she remained true and faithful to her temperance principles and firm in their advocacy. Witness the following written and printed in her paper in 1853:

“We think it all-important that woman obtain the right of suffrage, but she cannot do this at once. She must gradually prepare the way for such a step by showing that she is worthy of receiving and capable of exercising it. If she do this, prejudices will gradually give way and she will gain her cause. We cannot consent to have woman remain silent on the Temperance question till she obtain her right of suffrage. Great as is our faith in the speedy triumph of temperance principles were women allowed their right of franchise, and strong as is our hope that this right will be granted ere many years, we feel that the day is too far distant for her to rest all her hopes and labors on that issue. Let her work with her whole heart in this cause and, while she demands a law that entirely prohibits the traffic in strong drink, let her also obtain a right to a voice in making all laws by which she is to be governed.”

LETTER TO AKRON CONVENTION.

On the ninth of May, 1851, Mrs. Bloomer addressed an elaborate letter to the women’s convention held at Akron, O., in that month, in which she discussed at great length the position of woman as regards her education, her right to employment, and the laws relating to her property rights. She first takes up the liquor traffic and shows wherein it was unjust to woman in her dearest privilege,—the enjoyment of children, family and home. She “unfolds the great wrong done to woman in her circumscribed sphere of industry, and the meagre wages she receives for her industry.” Passing on from this, the property rights of married women are considered, and their unjust provisions are pointed out. She concludes as follows:

“But woman is herself aroused to a sense of her wrongs, and sees the necessity of action on her part if she would have justice done her. A brighter day has dawned for her. A spirit of inquiry has awakened in her bosom, which neither ridicule nor taunts can quench. Henceforth her course is upward and onward. Her mind is capable of grasping things hitherto beyond her reach and she will not weary of the chase until she has reached the topmost round in the ladder. She will yet prove conclusively that she possesses the same God-given faculties which belong to man, and that she is endowed with powers of mind and body suitable for any emergency in which she may be placed.”

“RULING A WIFE.”

During this year, Mr. T. S. Arthur published a book bearing this title, in which he undertook to define the duties of the wife of a hard-hearted, thoughtless man, and to show that even under the most shocking circumstances of injustice it was still the wife’s duty to submit and obey. Mrs. Bloomer took exception to this position. Mr. Arthur answered her, and she then wrote in reply in part as follows:

“I have too good an opinion of my sex to admit that they are such weak, helpless creatures, or to teach them any such ideas. Much rather would I arouse them from their dependent, inferior position, and teach them to rely more upon themselves and less upon man, so that when called upon, as many of them are and ever will be, to battle with the rough things of the world, they may go forth with confidence in their own powers of coping successfully with every obstacle and with courage to meet whatever dangers and difficulties may lie in their way. The more you impress this upon their minds, the more you show that she is man’s equal, and not his slave, so much the more you do to elevate woman to her true position. The present legal distinctions between the sexes have been made by man and not by God. Man has degraded woman from her high position in which she was placed as his companion and equal, and made of her a slave to be bought and sold at his pleasure. He has brought the Bible to prove that he is her lord and master, and taught her that resistance to his authority is to resist God’s will. I deny that the Bible teaches any such doctrine. God made them different in sex, but equal in intellect, and gave them equal dominion. You deny that they are ‘intellectually equal.’ As a whole, I admit that at the present day they are not; though I think there have been individual cases where woman’s equality cannot be denied. But at her creation no difference existed. It is the fault of education that she is now intellectually inferior. Give her the same advantages as men, throw open the door of our colleges and schools of science and bid her enter, teach her that she was created for a higher purpose than to be a parlor ornament or mere plaything for man, show her that you regard her as an equal and that her opinions are entitled to consideration, in short, treat her as an intelligent, accountable being, and when all this has been done, if she prove herself not man’s equal in intellect I will yield the point and admit her inferiority. It is unjust to condemn her as inferior when we consider the different education she has received and the estimation in which she has ever been held. We are by the laws and customs of society rendered dependent and helpless enough, at the best; but it is both painful and mortifying to see our helplessness shown up to the world in such colors, and by such a writer as yourself. If, instead of leading Mrs. Long into such difficulties after she had left her husband, you had allowed her to hire out as a servant, if nothing better presented itself, you would have done justice to woman, set her a better example, and more truly drawn her character.”

The above presents very fully the views of Mrs. Bloomer at that time (1850). She was pleading for the elevation of woman, for her redemption from the curse of drink, for a better education for her, and wider fields for the work of her hands. She had not yet troubled herself much about the suffrage question,—the right to the ballot; that came along later in life, as we have already seen.

CHAPTER FOURTH.

THE REFORM DRESS.

The reform-dress movement was simply an episode in Mrs. Bloomer’s life and work, although perhaps an important one. She never dreamed of the wonderful celebrity which it brought to her name. This came upon her accidentally, as we shall see later on. It was first mentioned in the Lily in February, 1851. Other short articles on the subject appeared in subsequent numbers during that year, with pictures of herself dressed in the new costume. The whole story she herself told in the following article which appeared originally some years ago in the Chicago Tribune and is here reproduced in full, followed by some further items bearing on the subject:

“In January or February, 1851, an article appeared editorially in the Seneca County Courier, Seneca Falls, N. Y., on ‘Female Attire,’ in which the writer showed up the inconvenience, unhealthfulness and discomfort of woman’s dress, and advocated a change to Turkish pantaloons and a skirt reaching a little below the knee.

“At the time, I was publishing a monthly paper in the same place devoted to the interests of woman, temperance and woman’s rights being the principal subjects. As the editor of the Courier was opposed to us on the woman’s-rights question, this article of his gave me an opportunity to score him one on having gone so far ahead of us as to advocate our wearing pantaloons, and in my next issue I noticed him and his proposed style in a half-serious, half-playful article of some length. He took up the subject again and expressed surprise that I should treat so important a matter with levity. I replied to him more seriously than before, fully indorsing and approving his views on the subject of woman’s costume.

“About this time, when the readers of the Lily and the Courier were interested in and excited over the discussion, Elizabeth Smith Miller, daughter of the Hon. Gerrit Smith, of Peterboro, N. Y., appeared on the streets of our village dressed in short skirts and full Turkish trousers. She came on a visit to her cousin, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, who was then a resident of Seneca Falls. Mrs. Miller had been wearing the costume some two or three months at home and abroad. Just how she came to adopt it I have forgotten, if I ever knew. But she wore it with the full sanction and approval of her father and husband. During her father’s term in congress she was in Washington, and the papers of that city described her appearance on the streets in the short costume.

“A few days after Mrs. Miller’s arrival in Seneca Falls Mrs. Stanton came out in a dress made in Mrs. Miller’s style. She walked our streets in a skirt that came a little above the knees, and trousers of the same material—black satin. Having had part in the discussion of the dress question, it seemed proper that I should practise as I preached, and as the Courier man advised; and so a few days later I, too, donned the new costume, and in the next issue of my paper announced that fact to my readers. At the outset, I had no idea of fully adopting the style; no thought of setting a fashion; no thought that my action would create an excitement throughout the civilized world, and give to the style my name and the credit due Mrs. Miller. This was all the work of the press. I stood amazed at the furor I had unwittingly caused. The New York Tribune contained the first notice I saw of my action. Other papers caught it up and handed it about. My exchanges all had something to say. Some praised and some blamed, some commented, and some ridiculed and condemned. ‘Bloomerism,’ ‘Bloomerites,’ and ‘Bloomers’ were the headings of many an article, item and squib; and finally some one—I don’t know to whom I am indebted for the honor—wrote the ‘Bloomer Costume,’ and the name has continued to cling to the short dress in spite of my repeatedly disclaiming all right to it and giving Mrs. Miller’s name as that of the originator or the first to wear such dress in public. Had she not come to us in that style, it is not probable that either Mrs. Stanton or myself would have donned it.

“As soon as it became known that I was wearing the new dress, letters came pouring in upon me by hundreds from women all over the country making inquiries about the dress and asking for patterns—showing how ready and anxious women were to throw off the burden of long, heavy skirts. It seemed as though half the letters that came to our office were for me.

“My subscription list ran up amazingly into the thousands, and the good woman’s-rights doctrines were thus scattered from Canada to Florida and from Maine to California. I had gotten myself into a position from which I could not recede if I had desired to do so. I therefore continued to wear the new style on all occasions, at home and abroad, at church and on the lecture platform, at fashionable parties and in my business office. I found the dress comfortable, light, easy and convenient, and well adapted to the needs of my busy life. I was pleased with it and had no desire to lay it aside, and so would not let the ridicule or censure of the press move me. For some six or eight years, or so long as I remained in active life and until the papers had ceased writing squibs at my expense, I wore no other costume. During this time I was to some extent in the lecture field, visiting in all the principal cities of the North and lecturing on temperance and woman suffrage; but at no time, on any occasion, alluding to my style of costume. I felt as much at ease in it as though I had been arrayed in the fashionable draggle skirts. In all my travels I met with nothing disagreeable or unpleasant, but was universally treated with respect and attention by both press and people wherever I appeared. Indeed, I received from the press flattering notices of my lectures. If the dress drew the crowds that came to hear me it was well. They heard the message I brought them, and it has borne abundant fruit.

“My paper had many contributions on the subject of dress and that question was for some time kept before my readers. Mrs. Stanton was a frequent contributor and ably defended the new style. She continued to wear it at home and abroad, on the lecture platform and in the social parlor, for two or three years; and then the pressure brought to bear upon her by her father and other friends was so great, that she finally yielded to their wishes and returned to long skirts.

“Lucy Stone, of the Woman’s Journal, adopted and wore the dress for many years on all occasions; but she, too, with advancing years, saw fit to return to the old style. We all felt that the dress was drawing attention from what we thought of far greater importance—the question of woman’s right to better education, to a wider field of employment, to better remuneration for her labor, and to the ballot for the protection of her rights. In the minds of some people, the short dress and woman’s rights were inseparably connected. With us, the dress was but an incident, and we were not willing to sacrifice greater questions to it.

“* * * I have not worn the short dress for thirty years, and it does seem as though in that time the interest concerning it must have died out. My reasons for abandoning I have in substance stated above. I never set up for a dress reformer, like Anna Jenness-Miller of the present day. Mrs. Miller, if I understand her correctly, really believes the short skirt and trousers the true style for woman’s costume; but that the time for its adoption has not yet fully come. Women are not sufficiently free and independent to dare to strike for health and freedom. Jenness-Miller is going over the country lecturing on dress and disposing of patterns, and is doing a vast amount of good. I am glad to know that she is not assailed and made the butt of ridicule and caricatured by the press.”

In reference to the further connection of Mrs. Bloomer with the dress she wrote to a friend, in 1865, as follows:

“It is very true that I have laid aside the short dress which I wore for a number of years, and to which the public (not I) gave my name. I have not worn the dress for the last six years or more. * * * As to my reasons for laying aside the dress, they may not satisfy you, though they were sufficient for me. It was not at my husband’s dictation, by any means, but was my own voluntary act. * * * After retiring from public life and coming to this land of strangers where I was to commence life anew and make new friends, I felt at times like donning long skirts when I went into society, at parties, etc., and did so. I found the high winds which prevail here much of the time played sad work with short skirts when I went out, and I was greatly annoyed and mortified by having my skirts turned over my head and shoulders on the streets. Yet I persevered and kept on the dress nearly all the time till after the introduction of hoops. Finding them light and pleasant to wear and doing away with the necessity for heavy underskirts (which was my greatest objection to long dresses), and finding it very inconvenient as well as expensive keeping up two wardrobes—a long and short—I gradually left off the short dress. I consulted my own feelings and inclinations and judgment in laying it off, never dreaming but I had the same right to doff that I had to don it, and not expecting to be accountable for my doings, or required to give a reason to every one that asked me. There were other questions of greater importance than the length of a skirt under discussion at the time, and I felt my influence would be greater in the dress ordinarily worn by women than in the one I was wearing. * * * I always liked the dress and found it convenient and comfortable at all times, and especially so for a working dress. I never encountered any open opposition while wearing it, though I have traveled much in the dress and freely walked the streets of all our large cities. On the contrary, I was always treated with respect and should continue to be, I have no doubt, did I still wear it. * * * When I saw what a furor I had raised, I determined that I would not be frightened from my position, but would stand my ground and wear the dress when and where I pleased, till all excitement on the subject had died away. And I did so.”

As to just how the reform dress should be prepared, Mrs. Bloomer gave her idea as follows in the Lily at the time when the subject was most prominently before the public eye:

“We would have the skirt reaching down to nearly half way between the knee and the ankle, and not made quite so full as is the present fashion. Underneath this skirt, trousers made moderately full, in fair mild weather coming down to the ankle (not instep) and there gathered in with an elastic band. The shoes or slippers to suit the occasion. For winter or wet weather the trousers also full, but coming down into a boot, which should rise at least three or four inches above the ankle. This boot should be gracefully sloped at the upper edge and trimmed with fur or fancifully embroidered, according to the taste of the wearer. The material might be cloth, morocco, mooseskin and so forth, and made waterproof if desirable.”

The above describes the dress as Mrs. Bloomer wore it at the time it was written, but she afterwards abandoned the elastic band and allowed the trousers to hang loose about the ankle. The general opinion expressed in those early days was favorable.

Mrs. Russell Sage, now a venerable and highly respected matron, was a young woman and a resident of Syracuse at the time of Mrs. Bloomer’s visit to that place to attend a Temperance convention; in a recent interview, she thus describes her appearance at that time:

“Mrs. Bloomer came as a delegate and her appearance excited some attention. Her manner was unpretentious, quiet and delicately feminine. Her costume showed a total disregard for effect, and was mannish only to the extent of practicability. Her bodice was soft and belted at the waist, her collar simple and correct, as was also her prim bonnet; her skirt fell half way from knee to ankle, and then the bloomer—really a pantalet—made of black material, as the rest of her costume, reaching to her boot tops.”

The interviewer continues:

“As Mrs. Sage so knew Mrs. Bloomer, she agreed she was entirely what she aimed to be—a practical woman, progressive and competent of realizing results from her theories.”

WOMAN’S ATTIRE.

On this subject Mrs. Bloomer, in an elaborate review (only a part of which is here presented) of a sermon by the Rev. Dr. Talmage in which he had quoted Moses as authority for women not wearing men’s attire, wrote as follows:

“There are laws of fashion in dress older than Moses, and it would be as sensible for the preacher to direct us to them as to him. The first fashion we have any record of was set us by Adam and Eve, and we are not told that there was any difference in the styles worn by them. ‘And they sewed fig-leaves together, and made themselves aprons’: Genesis, iii., 7. Nothing here to show that his apron was bifurcated, and hers not; that hers was long, and his short. We are led to suppose that they were just alike.

“The second fashion was made by God Himself, and it would be supposed that if He intended the sexes to be distinguished by their garments explicit directions would have been given as to the style of each. ‘Unto Adam, also, and unto his wife, did the Lord God make coats of skins and clothed them’: Gen. iii., 21. Not a word as to any difference in the cut and make-up of the coats. No command to her that she must swathe and cripple herself in long, tight, heavy, draggling skirts, while he dons the more comfortable, healthy, bifurcated garment. God clothed them just alike, and made no signs that henceforth they should be distinguished by apparel. And for long years there was little, if any, difference.”

After showing the character of the dress of different ancient nations, Egyptians, Babylonians, Israelites, Persians, Romans, Saxons, Normans, Turks, and Chinese, and that there was no essential difference between the dress worn by men and women, Mrs. Bloomer proceeds:

“With all the history of male and female attire before him, and with so much proof of the similarity in dress, how can Mr. Talmage set up the claim that men have a right to any particular style, and that if women dare to approach that style they break divine law and commit great sin and wrong? It is a presumption and insult which women everywhere should resent.

“It matters not to us what Moses had to say to the men and women of his time about what they should wear. Our divine entirely disregards the command of the ancient lawgiver by not putting fringes and blue ribbons on his garments. Common sense teaches us that the dress which is the most convenient, and best adapted to our needs, is the proper dress for both men and women to wear. There is no reason why woman should burden herself with clothes to the detriment of her health, comfort and life, while man adopts a style that gives freedom of limb and motion. There is no divine law requiring such doings. A hundred other laws and customs of the days of Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses are as binding upon the men and women of this day as the text from which he gives his lecture. Judging from the present customs, men have transgressed that law more than women.

“We do not advocate the same style of dress, altogether, for both sexes and should be sorry to see women dress just like men; yet we should like to see a radical reform in woman’s costume, so that she might be the free, healthy being God made her instead of the corseted, crippled, dragged-down creature her slavery to clothes has made her. No law of God stands in the way of her freedom. Her own judgment and inclination should be her guide in all matters of attire.

“If divine law or vengeance is ever visited upon woman because of the cut of her garments, it will be upon the wearers of the suicidal long, heavy skirts, instead of upon those who have rid themselves of the grievous burden. That sorrow and suffering are visited upon woman because of her clothes we know, and that her sin is visited upon her we know; and yet how dare she throw off the burden and the sin, when the clergy from the pulpit hold over her head the threatenings of divine vengeance!

“No sensible woman can sit under such preaching. Would that women had the independence to act out the right in defiance of such sermons, and in disregard of all laws that condemn her to the slavery of a barbarous age.

“A. B.”

FASHION IN DRESS.

On the general subject of “Fashion in Dress,” Mrs. Bloomer wrote to Charlotte A. Joy, June 3, 1857, as follows:

“Your letter inviting me to attend the annual meeting of the National Dress Association to be held in Syracuse on the 17th inst. is received. Owing to the great distance and my imperfect health, it will be impossible for me to be with you on that occasion, much as I should be pleased to meet some of the members personally and listen to their deliberations on so important a subject as a reform in woman’s costume.

“At the present moment there is perhaps no subject which is more frequently pressed upon the attention of the public than that of dress. Our magazines are radiant with fashion plates illustrating the latest styles; our newspapers abound with allusions and discussions bearing upon the subject, as though it were a matter of national concernment; and it is continually the theme of conversation and a subject either of praise or satire wherever men and women meet together. It would be fortunate, indeed, if this discussion should result in securing a reform in all those styles and modes of woman’s dress which are incompatible with good health, refined taste, simplicity, economy and beauty; and it is to be hoped that the labors of your association may be so discreetly directed and so faithfully prosecuted, that they may go far to the accomplishment of this end.

The costume of woman should be suited to her wants and necessities. It should conduce at once to her health, comfort, and usefulness; and, while it should not fail also to conduce to her personal adornment, it should make that end of secondary importance. I certainly need not stop to show that these conditions are not attained by the present style of woman’s dress. All admit that they are not. Even those who ridicule most freely the labors of your association are ready to admit the folly and inutility of the prevailing styles.

“It is well, perhaps, in the present aspect of the movement, that its friends should abstain from prescribing any particular form of dress. It is better to learn wisdom from the experience of the past and, while successively lopping off all excrescences, produce at last that outward form of personal garniture which shall most fully secure the great end to be attained.

“What may be the next feat of the fickle goddess of Fashion, or how near or how soon it may approach the more rational and more desirable form recommended by your association, none can say. At present, we must admit, the reform dress is quite obnoxious to the public and all who bear testimony in its favor, either by precept or example, must expect to meet with some trials and discouragements; yet it may, as you believe it will, be ultimately adopted. In bringing about such a result your association will have a leading part to perform, and in your labors you will have the good wishes, if not the active coöperation, of all who desire the emancipation of woman from the tyranny of prejudice and fashion.

“A. B.”

CHAPTER FIFTH.

THE LILY PROSPEROUS.

As intimated by Mrs. Bloomer in the preceding pages, the circulation of her paper was largely increased through the notoriety given to it by her adoption and defense of the new costume. Nearly every newspaper in the land had to have its comments on it, as well as upon those who had the courage to wear it. Some denounced, some ridiculed. Besides receiving numerous letters on the subject, many persons called to see how the little woman appeared in the short dress and trousers. Fortunately or otherwise, they became her very well; usually they were becoming when worn by small persons or those of medium stature. People generally retired well pleased with their interview with her. She said but little about it in her paper, as she had subjects of much greater importance to engage her attention and fill its columns. Occasionally a sharp article appeared in its defense. She had many offers to take the platform as a public speaker. Even the stage was suggested as a fit place for bringing the new costume before the public. The interest in the subject was not confined to this country only, but extended to England, also; the matter was commented on by the press of Great Britain very generally, and the London Graphic contained pictures of the new costume more or less correct.

All these proposals for public action were declined by Mrs. Bloomer; but nevertheless the suggestion as to public speaking, the advocacy by woman of temperance and woman’s rights through the medium of the public platform and her own voice as a public speaker, were not forgotten by her and brought forth from her very much in these directions in future years. But for the time being she continued on in the even tenor of her work, transforming her paper steadily more and more, as the months went by, into an advocate of woman’s enlargement in various directions. “Devoted to the interests of woman,” was now its motto, and she strove to faithfully carry out the legend. It was still the ardent advocate of temperance, but it insisted also that the evils of intemperance could only be effectually overthrown by giving to woman a more potent voice both in the making and enforcement of the laws designed to overthrow that great evil.

WOMAN’S TEMPERANCE SOCIETY.

We now copy again from Mrs. Bloomer’s writings:

“In the Spring of 1852 a few of the daughters [of Temperance] celebrated an open two-days temperance meeting at Rochester, N. Y. It was very largely attended, between four and five hundred women being present at the first session. The numbers increased, and at the later sessions the large hall, which would contain 1,800, was packed to the platform with eager, earnest temperance men and women. This meeting was not only not secret, it was not exclusive,—men forming a large part of it and doing their share of talking. It was at this meeting that I first let my voice be heard in public after much persuasion. Able men came to our aid—among them I remember the Rev. William H. Channing (the younger), an eloquent divine of those days; and the meeting was very enthusiastic, and was the beginning of much in the same direction that followed. This convention resulted in organizing a woman’s state Temperance Society, which became very effective and had much to do in breaking down the barriers and introducing women into temperance and other work. Some half-dozen women were employed by the society as agents on salaries of twenty-five dollars per month and their expenses. These lecturers traveled through the state, holding meetings, and securing membership to the society and signatures to the pledge, and petitions to the legislature. They were well received on all sides, partly because of the novelty of a woman speaking, and partly because the principle of total abstinence and Washingtonian temperance was stirring all hearts. Up to these times no woman had thought of speaking in public outside a Quaker meeting-house. To have attempted such a thing at an earlier day would have called down upon her much censure, and St. Paul would have been freely quoted to silence her. Now, however, women took matters Into their own hands and acted as their own impulses prompted and their consciences approved. And it was surprising how public sentiment changed and how the zeal of temperance men and women helped on the new movement of women.”

Mrs. Bloomer and Miss Anthony were secretaries of this convention, and Elizabeth Cady Stanton president; in the final organization Mrs. Stanton was made president, Mrs. Bloomer corresponding secretary, and Miss Anthony and Mary C. Vaughan recording secretaries.

MRS. BLOOMER ON DIVORCE.

At this convention, Senator Gale used very strong language in regard to women who had petitioned the legislature for a Maine Law. Mrs. Bloomer criticised him for saying in a sneering way “that representatives were not accustomed to listen to the voice of women in legislating upon great public questions.” A resolution was proposed in the convention that “no woman should remain in the relation of wife to the confirmed drunkard, and that no drunkard should be father of her children.” On this Mrs. Bloomer said:

“We believe the teachings which have been given to the drunkard’s wife, inculcating duty—the commendable examples of angelic wives which she has been exhorted to follow—have done much to continue and aggravate the vices and crimes of society growing out of intemperance. Drunkenness is ground for divorce, and every woman who is tied to a confirmed drunkard should sunder the ties: and if she do it not otherwise, the law should compel it, especially if she have children.

“We are told that such sentiments are exceptional, abhorrent, that the moral sense of society is shocked and outraged by their promulgation. Can it be possible that the moral sense of a people is more shocked at the idea of a pure-minded, gentle woman sundering the tie which binds her to a loathsome mass of corruption, than it is to see her dragging out her days in misery tied to his besotted and filthy carcass? Are the morals of society less endangered by the drunkard’s wife continuing to live in companionship with him, giving birth to a large family of children who inherit nothing but poverty and disgrace, and who will grow up criminal and vicious, filling our prisons and penitentiaries and corrupting and endangering the purity and peace of the community, than they would be should she separate from him and strive to win for herself and her children comfort and respectability? The statistics of our prisons, poorhouses, and lunatic asylums teach us a fearful lesson on this subject of morals!

“The idea of living with a drunkard is so abhorrent, so revolting to all the finer feelings of our nature, that a woman must fall very low before she can endure such companionship. Every pure-minded person must look with loathing and disgust upon such a union of virtue and vice; and he who would compel her to it, or dissuade the drunkard’s wife from separating herself from such wretchedness and degradation, is doing much to perpetuate drunkenness and crime and is wanting in the noblest feelings of human nature. Thanks to our legislature, if they have not given us the Maine law they are deliberating on giving to wives of drunkards and tyrants a loophole of escape from the brutal cruelty of their self-styled lords and masters. A bill of this kind has passed the house, but may be lost in the senate. Should it not pass now, it will be brought up again and passed at no distant day. Then, if women have any spirit, they will free themselves from much of the depression and wrong which they have hitherto by necessity borne.”

CONVENTION INFLUENCE.

Probably, no single event ever had so great an influence in promoting the cause of woman’s enlargement as this Rochester convention. It opened the door wide for women to enter. It brought out a number of faithful workers in that cause, as well as in the cause of Temperance, who from that time devoted their lives to the work. Some took a wider view of their work than others, but all devoted themselves with a singular fidelity and earnestness to the noble aims before them. Nor was the influence confined solely to women who took part in that convention. Others, in every part of the country, soon enlisted in the cause and became zealous advocates of woman’s redemption from the thralldom of evil habits and unjust laws. Mrs. Stanton and Miss Anthony continued a tower of strength for half a century and upwards, and Mrs. Bloomer nearly as long, but in the latter years of her life not so prominently; and there came to their aid Lucy Stone, Frances D. Gage, Mrs. C. H. Nichols, Antoinette L. Brown, Mary A. Livermore, Lydia A. Fowler, and many more who might be mentioned.

Mrs. Bloomer, as corresponding secretary of the new society, was brought into immediate and close connection with its agents and friends. Her home was at all times open to them, and they often visited and consulted with her and Mrs. Stanton, who resided in the same village. Mrs. Vaughan, Mrs. Albro, and Miss Emily Clark, besides Miss Anthony, were earnest workers in the good cause. Mrs. Bloomer’s correspondence was also very extensive; but in her removals from place to place it has been mostly destroyed, and the death of nearly all her correspondents renders it impracticable to procure copies of her letters to them.

THE WOMEN REJECTED AT SYRACUSE.

At the Rochester convention Gerrit Smith, Mrs. Bloomer, and Miss Anthony were appointed delegates to the state convention then soon to meet in Syracuse. The call was to all temperance organizations to send delegates to it, and clearly included the Woman’s Temperance Society. Mrs. Bloomer and Miss Anthony accepted the appointment and attended; but their simple appearance caused a tremendous hubbub, and after a whole day spent by the men in discussing the question of their admission they were excluded. Mrs. Bloomer describes the scene as follows:

“The women had friends in the convention who were as determined on their side that women should be recognized, and so they had it, each side determined to have it’s way—a dozen men talking at the same time all over the house, each claiming the floor, each insisting on being heard—till all became confusion, a perfect babel of noises. No order could be kept and the president left his chair in disgust. Time and words fail to give you the details of this disgraceful meeting. The ringleaders were prominent clergymen of Albany, Lockport, and Buffalo. Their names and faces are indelibly engraven on my memory. During this whole day’s quarrel of the men, no woman said a word, except once Miss Anthony addressed the chair intending to prefer a request for a donation of temperance tracts for distribution by our society. She got no farther than ‘Mr. President,’ when she was rudely called to order by one of the belligerent clergymen and told to sit down. She sat down and no other woman opened her mouth, though they really were entitled to all the rights of any delegate, under the call; and the treatment they received was not only an insult to the women present, but to the organization that sent them.”

In referring to this incident, on page 488 Vol. I. of History of Woman Suffrage, it is said: “Rev. Luther Lea offered his church just before adjournment, and Mr. May announced that Miss Anthony and Mrs. Bloomer would speak there in the evening. They had a crowded house, while the conservatives scarcely had fifty. The general feeling was hostile to the action of the convention. The same battle on the temperance platform was fought over and over again in various parts of the state, and the most deadly opposition uniformly came from the clergy, though a few noble men in that profession ever remained true to principle through all the conflicts of those days in the anti-slavery, temperance, and woman’s rights movements.”

CONVENTION IN ALBANY.

In the winter of 1852 and 1853, meetings of both the regular state Temperance societies were held in Albany for the purpose of influencing the legislature then in session to pass the Maine prohibitory law. Mrs. Bloomer attended the women’s convention, and delivered an elaborate speech in the Baptist church. She herself gives the following report of the proceedings at the convention:

“The ladies were there with their officers and lecturers. During the day they held meetings in the large Baptist church which was packed, seats and aisles, to its utmost capacity. During the morning session a committee of three ladies, previously appointed, slipped out through a back entrance and wended their way to the capitol bearing between them a large basket filled with petitions from 30,000 women of the state, each petition neatly rolled and tied with ribbon and bearing upon it the name of the place from which it came, and the number of names it contained. We were met at the state-house door by Hon. Silas M. Burroughs, of Orleans, according to previous arrangement, and escorted by him within the bar of the house. Mr. Burroughs then said: ‘Mr. Speaker, there is a deputation of ladies in this house with a petition of 30,000 women for a prohibitory law, and I request that the deputation may present the petition in person.’ He moved a suspension of the rules for that purpose. Some objection was raised by two or three members who sneered at the idea of granting such privileges to women, but the vote was taken and carried; and then the committee and the big basket, carried by two of us by the handles at each end, passed up in front of the speaker’s desk, when one of our number made a little speech appealing for prohibition and protection from the rum power in the name of the 30,000 women of the state whom we represented. The petitions were sent up to the clerk’s desk, while we retired again to the bar where we were surrounded and received congratulations of members. We soon after retired and returned to the meeting at the church. On the announcement being made to the meeting of what we had done and our success, it was received with a perfect shout of congratulation by the vast audience. It was an unheard-of thing for women to do, and our reception augured success to the hopes of temperance people for a prohibitory law. But alas! Our petitions availed us nothing, as we learned in due time. Those 30,000 petitioners were only women; and what cared our so-called representatives for the petitions of a disfranchised class? Our meetings were kept up during the day and evening, women doing all the talking though men composed full half the audience. In the evening, in addition to the Baptist church meetings were held in another church and in the representatives’ hall, the capitol having been placed at our service, our lady speakers separating and going by twos and threes to each house; and all were crowded, every foot of standing room being occupied.”

It should be added, that Mrs. Bloomer was one of the Committee of Three who appeared before the legislature and presented the petitions. The other members were Miss Emily Clark and Mrs. Albro.

A LECTURER.

Mrs. Bloomer’s life during the latter part of 1853 was a very busy one. In addition to her duties as editor and publisher of the Lily and clerk in the post office, she was also frequently invited to deliver addresses on Temperance. A few of these invitations she accepted, and appeared before well-pleased audiences in villages of western New York. She never until later years acquired the habit of extemporaneous speaking, but all her addresses were carefully written out and delivered from manuscript. There is a big pile of her writings now before me. They are all characterized by great earnestness in appeal both to the reason and sympathies of her hearers.

Mrs. Bloomer’s appeals were mainly addressed to her own sex, but she never failed to call upon the men also to practise total abstinence and give their influence in all proper ways for the overthrow of the liquor traffic. She also introduced other questions into her addresses. She insisted that the laws relating to women were narrow and unjust and should be changed. She thought that women should have a voice in making the laws and also in their enforcement. When this change should be brought around, she had hopes that woman would be relieved from the curse of drunkenness under which she suffered so keenly. And it so happened that it was frequently said of Mrs. Bloomer that “she talks on temperance, but she gives us a large supply of woman’s rights, also.” To this Mrs. Bloomer in the Lily in April, 1853, made the following reply:

“Some of the papers accuse me of mixing Woman’s Rights with our Temperance, as though it was possible for woman to speak on Temperance and Intemperance without also speaking of Woman’s Rights and Wrongs in connection therewith. That woman has rights, we think that none will deny; that she has been cruelly wronged by the law-sanctioned liquor traffic, must be admitted by all. Then why should we not talk of woman’s rights and temperance together? Ah, how steadily do they who are guilty shrink from reproof! How ready they are to avoid answering our arguments by turning their attention to our personal appearance, and raising a bugbear about Woman’s Rights and Woman’s Wrongs! and a ready response to the truth we utter wells up from women’s hearts, and breaks forth in blessings and a hearty God-speed in our mission.”

IN NEW YORK CITY.

We now quote from Mrs. Bloomer’s personal reminiscences:

“In February, 1853, in company with Miss Susan B. Anthony, Rev. Antoinette L. Brown, and Mrs. L. N. Fowler, I held three meetings in the city of New York. We had been attending a Temperance mass meeting in the city of Albany, where we had both day and evening been addressing the assembled temperance hosts that had come together from all parts of the state in response to a call for that purpose. At these meetings we were met by parties from New York, who invited us to visit that city and hold a series of meetings, assuring us that every preparation would be made and we should be received by good audiences. We accepted the invitation and in a few days went to New York to fill the engagement. Full notice had been given and all things put in readiness for us. These meetings were held in Metropolitan Hall, where Jennie Lind made her début on arriving in this country, which has since been burned down; and in the old Broadway Tabernacle; and in Knickerbocker Hall.

“That was in the early days of the woman’s movement, and women speaking in public was a new thing outside of a Quaker meeting-house. We were the first to address an audience of New Yorkers from a public platform; and much curiosity was excited to hear and see the wonderful women who had outstepped their sphere and were turning the world upside down by preaching a new doctrine which claimed that women were human beings, endowed with inalienable rights, among which was the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

“The halls at each of these meetings were filled to their utmost capacity, from 3,000 to 5,000 persons being the estimated number in attendance. At the Metropolitan, Horace Greeley and wife, Dr. S. P. Townsend, Colonel Snow, and a number of others were seated with us on the platform; and in all the after meetings, Mr. Greeley was present and manifested much interest in our work, taking copious notes and giving columns of the Tribune to reports of our speeches. While in the city we were guests of the great phrenologist, L. N. Fowler, one of the editors of the Phrenological Journal, and his wife, and Mrs. S. P. Townsend; and the evening was spent at the home of the Greeleys.

“AT HORACE GREELEY’S HOUSE.

“At the latter place we met about a dozen of New York’s literati. Of these I only remember Charles A. Dana, then on the Tribune staff; Mrs. E. F. Ellet, a prominent story writer of that time; and Alice and Phœbe Gary, the poet sisters. I remember the latter as dressed with very low necks and arms bared to the shoulders, while their skirts trailed upon the floor. Around their necks were hung huge boas, four feet long, the style of that day; as a protection, I suppose, from the cold. These being heaviest in the middle were continually sagging out of place, and kept the wearers quite busy adjusting them. I confess to a feeling short of admiration for this dress display at a little social gathering in midwinter, and my estimation of the good sense of the Cary sisters sank accordingly. And I never read of them to this day but those bare necks and shoulders and trailing skirts appear before me. They, no doubt, were as much disgusted with my short dress and trousers which left no part of the person exposed. Tastes differ, that is all; and I was not used to seeing women in company half-dressed.

“It was in the early days of spiritualism, when the Rochester rappings had excited much wonder throughout the country. Horace Greeley was known to have taken a good deal of interest in the subject, to have given time to its investigation, and to have entertained its first propagandists, the Fox sisters, for days at his house. During the evening of our visit that subject came up and Mr. Greeley warmly espoused the side of the spiritualists. He said many things in confirmation of his belief in the new doctrine of spirit visitation. Standing midway of the two parlors and pointing to a table that stood against the wall between the front windows, he said: ‘I must believe what my eyes have seen. I have seen that table leave its place where it now stands, come forward and meet me here where I now stand, and then go back to its place without any one touching it, or being near it. I have also seen that table rise from the floor, and the weight of a man sitting on it would not keep it down. I cannot deny the evidence of my own eyes.’ Miss Fox was in the house at the time of this occurrence, but not in the room. This he said in answer to questions.”

AT METROPOLITAN HALL.

Of the meeting in Metropolitan Hall, the New York Tribune stated that it was nearly as large and fully as respectable as the audiences which nightly greeted Jenny Lind and Catherine Hayes during their engagements in that hall. Mrs. Lydia N. Fowler presided, and delivered an address. The Tribune gave a full report of the meeting. It said: “Mrs. Bloomer was attired in a dark-brown changeable tunic, a kilt descending just below the knees, the skirt of which was trimmed with rows of black velvet. The pantaloons were of the same texture and trimmed in the same style. She wore gaiters. Her headdress was cherry and black. Her dress had a large open corsage, with bands of velvet over the white chemisette in which was a diamond-stud pin. She wore flowing sleeves, tight undersleeves and black lace mitts. Her whole attire was rich and plain in appearance. * * * She was introduced to the audience and proceeded to her address which occupied more than an hour.” And as giving a fair expression of Mrs. Bloomer’s then views on the subject of temperance and woman’s duty in reference to it, the Tribune’s full report of her address is here given:

MRS. BLOOMER’S SPEECH.

“Mrs. Bloomer, of Seneca Falls, was introduced and proceeded to read an address which occupied nearly an hour. She commenced by remarking that, from the earliest agitation of the subject of temperance down through the whole past course of the cause, woman has had a great and important part to perform in the great struggle for freedom. And most nobly has she performed her part, according to the light she possessed. She has done all that the custom of the time permitted her to do. She has faithfully attended temperance meetings and listened to many wise discourses from temperance lecturers. During all this woman has imagined that she was doing the cause good service. But lo! she still sees the great destroyer passing triumphantly on in his work of death; she sees poverty, wretchedness and despair still rampant in our midst; she sees that her prayers to rumsellers to desist from their murderous work have fallen upon hearts of stone; she sees that, in spite of her remonstrances, the stream of death still flows on and that thousands and tens of thousands are still going to destruction. But, though she is often weary, yet is she not hopeless; she still has faith to look beyond the clouds to the bright prospect beyond—still has faith to look beyond the efforts of man to One who is mighty for deliverance.

“Yet, notwithstanding the efforts already put forth in this work, woman was not without guilt in this matter. While man endeavors to compel obedience to his laws, and make woman dependent upon him and an echo of his thoughts, while man has greatly sinned in thus usurping this great prerogative, woman has greatly sinned in submitting to this power. Woman has suffered her individuality to be merged in a name. She forgets that God created them equal; she forgets that our Heavenly Father has not made one to rule over the other. She forgets that she is as necessary to his happiness as he is to hers. They are created to work hand in hand, bearing equally the burden of life; and though we may fail to do our duty on earth, yet will our individuality be recognized and held to account on the Last Day. The plea often raised that it is immodest and unladylike, that we are out of our sphere in thus battling against the evils of intemperance, will not avail in the sight of God who has commanded that even one talent should be put to a good use. He has created woman intelligent and responsible and given her a great work to do, and woe unto her if she does it not! Woe unto him who hinders her in its fulfillment! Her individuality must be recognized before the evils of intemperance can cease to exist. How absurd the idea, how degrading the thought, that before marriage woman can enjoy freedom of thought, but afterwards must endorse her husband’s sentiments be they good or bad! Call you not this slavery? But if she acts the part of true womanhood, the path of duty will be made so plain that she cannot err therein.

“The speaker next said that she proposed to show how woman, by her own acts, had retarded the cause of temperance. And, first, woman had done much to retard the cause by herself partaking of stimulating drink during lactation, and thus transmitting it through the system of her infant. She imagines that this gives her stimulus and strength. But in this she sins from ignorance. As the child grows, his appetite grows perverted, and he will desire still stronger stimulus such as tobacco and cigars. Let mothers study the physiology of themselves and their children that they may know how to feed them so as to give them regular appetites. Woman has also done much to retard the cause of temperance by presenting the intoxicating cup to her guest. Not unfrequently does the first glass taken from the hands of woman destroy both body and soul forever. Home is said to be woman’s sphere; herein, at least, she should forbid the intoxicating cup to enter. Women, Christian women, as you hope for salvation, let not this guilt rest upon your souls!

“Woman has also retarded the cause of temperance by using intoxicating drinks for culinary purposes. Such an one voluntarily yields up her children to the Moloch of intemperance. Let no woman think this a little matter. Let no woman think that because she occupies a high place in society the destroyer will pass her by. Such is not his course. He delights to cut down the high and noble and trample them beneath his iron hoofs.

“Another class who in my view greatly retard the cause of temperance principles are those who profess love for our cause and hope that it will triumph, but do nothing for it. They say we have men to attend to this work and that it is none of woman’s business. Deliver us from such dead weights on society and on the spirit of Progress! None of woman’s business, when she is subject to poverty and degradation and made an outcast from respectable society! None of woman’s business, when her starving, naked babes are compelled to suffer the horrors of the winter’s blast! None of woman’s business, when her children are stripped of their clothing and compelled to beg their bread from door to door! In the name of all that is sacred, what is woman’s business if this be no concern of hers? (Great applause.) None of woman’s business! What is woman? Is she a slave? Is she a mere toy? Is she formed, like a piece of fine porcelain, to be placed upon the shelf to be looked at? Is she a responsible being? or has she no soul? Alas, alas for the ignorance and weakness of woman! Shame! Shame on woman when she refuses all elevating action and checks all high and holy aspirations for the good of others! (Applause.) Sisters, the liquor traffic does concern woman deeply; and it is her business to bring her influence to bear against it, both by private and public acts. Some mothers say it is as much as they can do to look after their own children without going to the trouble of looking after children of their neighbors. If all mothers would do this and train up their own children in the right way, it would be all well. But such is not the case; and therefore are we to go out into the world and help reclaim the children of poverty and crime around us.

“Another obstacle to the progress of temperance principles is that women live in close companionship with drunken husbands. This may be a delicate point upon which to enter and many may object to mentioning it, but nevertheless the truth must be spoken. In my mind no greater sin is committed than by woman consenting to remain the wife of the drunkard, rearing children in poverty and wretchedness and thus transmitting his sins. A pure and virtuous woman tied to such a piece of corruption, and giving birth to children who will grow up to be a curse to themselves and society! The drunkard knows that the gentle being is bound close to him and is literally his slave, and that she will remain with him be his conduct what it may. Thus are thousands surrounded by these gentle and loving creatures, when they are not worthy to have even a dog for a companion. (Applause.)

“And yet public sentiment and law bid woman to submit to this degradation and to kiss the hand that smites her to the ground. Let things be reversed—let man be made subject to these various insults—and how long would he suffer anger, hunger, cold and nakedness! How many times would he allow himself to be thus trampled upon! (Applause.) Not long—not long—I think! With his right arm would he free himself from such degrading bondage. (Applause.) But thanks to a few brave hearts, the idea of relief to woman has been broached to society. She has dared to stand forth and disown any earthly master. (Applause.) Woman must banish the drunkard from her society. Let her utterly refuse to be the companion of a drunkard, or the man who puts the intoxicating cup to his lips, and we shall see a new order of society.

“Woman must declare an unceasing war to this great foe, at all times and upon every occasion that presents itself. She must not wait for man to help her; this is her business as much as his. Let her show to the world that she possesses somewhat of the spirit and the blood of the daughters of the Revolution! Such thoughts as these may be thought unladylike; but if they are so, they are not unwomanly. (Applause.)

“Mrs. Bloomer then made a brief argument in favor of the Maine Law, and concluded her remarks amid long continued applause.

“It will be seen that Mrs. Bloomer’s address was almost entirely confined to women, and marked out an entirely new field in temperance thought; and it therefore attracted not a little attention.”

The meeting in New York city did not end the work of the three ladies in the Temperance cause during the winter. They made a tour of the state, holding meetings in Brooklyn, Poughkeepsie, Sing Sing, Hudson, Troy, Cohoes, Utica, Syracuse, Rochester, Lockport, Buffalo, and other places along the Hudson River and the line of the Central Railroad. They were everywhere received by great crowds of people anxious to see the now famous speakers and listen to their words. It was a new thing for women to speak in public; and no doubt the fashion of the dresses worn by Mrs. Bloomer and Miss Anthony had something to do with calling out the people to their meetings.

IN BUFFALO.

Mrs. Bloomer described the closing meeting of the series at Buffalo as follows:

“Townsend Hall was crowded at an early hour by the curious and interested portions of the community, who came together to see the women who had made themselves notorious by their boldness in daring to face a city audience, and to listen to the strange and ‘funny things’ they might utter on the worn and rather unpopular subject of temperance. The capacity of the hall is said to be sufficient to seat 1,000. Every spot where a standing place could be had was occupied, and very many went away unable to gain admittance. Steps were immediately taken by some friends here to secure a hall for another meeting the next evening. Townsend Hall and American Hall were both engaged, and the Eagle-Street Theatre was secured; and last night, for the first time in many years, I attended a ‘theatre’ not as a looker-on but as an actor in the play. I don’t know the capacity of the theatre but it was estimated that fully 1,200 persons were present, the body of the house and lower gallery being densely filled, while many occupied the lower gallery and the rostrum. Seldom I think is a theatre put to better use, and pity it is that all its performances and performers are not as truthful and earnest in laboring for the good of humanity. The audience appeared interested, and was for the most part quiet and attentive.

“We received calls from a large number of ladies of the city who were interested in our movement, and we hear from all the same expression of feeling and that is: ‘We must have the Maine law; what can we do to obtain this law?’ I find there is a strong woman’s-rights sentiment prevailing on the subject among those whom I have met here. All feel that the only way in which women can do anything effectually in this cause is through the ballot-box, and they feel themselves fettered by being denied the right to thus speak their sentiments in a manner that could not be misunderstood. If voters would but all do their duty, all would be well and we should soon have a prohibitory liquor-law; and methinks that if voters who claim to be temperance men could hear all comments made by women upon their actions, and see themselves in the light that women see them, they would blush and hang their heads in shame at their treachery and inefficiency.”

AT HOME.

On returning home from one of her tours, Mrs. Bloomer wrote as follows:

“After an absence of two weeks, we again find ourselves in our own loved home, where we meet with a hearty welcome. Most forcibly do the words of the poet come before our mind as we enter our quiet sanctum, and from the depths of our heart we endorse them: ‘Home, sweet home! be it ever so humble, there’s no place like home.’

“During the two weeks spent in jaunting through some of the cities and villages of the beautiful Hudson, we have seen much of the grand and beautiful in nature and made the acquaintance of some of the choice spirits of that section of the state. It has been a relaxation from cares we much needed, and we trust will prove time profitably spent both to us and to those who listened to the message we bore them.”

HATING THE MEN.

The editor of the Utica Telegraph having charged Mrs. Bloomer with “hating the men,” she replied to the insinuation as follows:

“Bless your soul, Mr. Telegraph! we dearly love them all—except rumsellers and those editors who patronize and sustain them in their ruin-and-death-dealing business. Hate the men? Why, such an idea never entered our head and we are sure our tongue never gave expression to such a thought! You must have had a curtain lecture before going to the meeting that night, Mr. Telegraph, which soured your feelings toward all womankind so that you saw through green glasses and heard through a cracked ear-tube; or else you must be a devotee to the wine cup, and are frightened lest the women are going to adopt some measure to make it unlawful and disreputable for you to gratify your low appetite. Oh, dear! how people are worried about our domestic relations. How much sympathy our ‘bigger half’ receives because of his sore domestic troubles! Strange that the Telegraph forgot to speak of our ‘five neglected children’! They have met with great sympathy from many people, but are entirely overlooked by this student of the ‘Natural Sciences.’ We do wish those editors who are so much interested in our domestic affairs would appoint a committee to investigate the matter and devise some plan of relief for our poor suffering husband and ‘five children.’ Ha, ha! we should like to see the workings of our ‘gude man’s’ face as they offered words of condolence and sympathy, and hear the kind and unruffled tones in which he would thank them for their tender solicitude and politely bid them return and bestow equal care on their own domestic relations.”

GOOD TEMPLARS.

Up to 1852-3 women were excluded from the several temperance secret fraternities which had come into existence, such as the “Sons of Temperance” and similar societies. To give to women a chance to work for the cause in the same way the order of the “Daughters of Temperance” was organized, but Mrs. Bloomer persistently refused to connect herself with them for the reason that she believed that women and men should be admitted to all such societies on a footing of perfect equality. The church opened its doors to both alike; so she insisted the secret societies should do the same. But in the latter part of 1852, the order of “Good Templars” was organized in Onondaga County, and soon spread out over the adjacent counties. It admitted women to membership and to all offices on an entire equality with men. Mrs. Bloomer was greatly pleased with the idea, and when a lodge of the new order was established in the village she soon became an active member, took great interest in its work, and held various positions in the lodge. She believed that it furnished an opening for women’s work in the Temperance cause which should not be neglected. In a notice of this new temperance organization, in the July number of the Lily, Mrs. Bloomer says:

“Of course, to those who believe that women should not work together with the men in the Temperance Cause this organization presents insuperable objections. No man who is not willing to admit woman to entire equality with himself in labors, duties, honors and offices, who is not willing that her vote should be deposited with his in the same ballot-box, and her voice be raised with his on all questions relating to its affairs, need apply for membership in this order. But the number of such men is small, indeed, and is daily growing beautifully less. It has long been the desire of many Sons of Temperance to admit women into their doors, and the recent omission of the National Division of that order to comply with that desire has sadly disappointed many of its best members. But what the Sons of Temperance have refused to do, the Good Templars amply provided for, and this feature we believe to be one of its chief excellencies, and which more than any other will commend the order to the hearty approval of the high-minded and right-thinking portion of the temperance community.”

The first State gathering of the new order was held in Ithaca, in June, 1853. Mrs. Bloomer was appointed a delegate to it from her local lodge, along with her husband, and when the state grand-lodge was organized she was admitted to that, also. A Rev. Mr. Wilson had been engaged to deliver the address, but he failed to attend. Mrs. Bloomer described the result as follows:

“They then selected me to take his place. On the morning of the public demonstration, an unthought-of trouble arose. The church which had been engaged to Mr. Bristol was now refused to a woman. Its trustees would not open it for a woman to speak in. This caused a great excitement among the men. They gathered in the lodge-room to consider the situation. They were puzzled to know what to do. They would not give up their speaker. There was talk of going to a grove, but it was too far; talk of speaking in the street, but there was no shade; and the lodge-room was not large enough. Finally the Baptists came to their relief and offered their church, and I did the talking to the immense throng who gathered there.”

IN THE PULPIT.

At the time of the above occurrence it was a new thing indeed for women to appear in public, and especially to stand in the pulpit to deliver their thoughts. All this is now greatly changed. Mrs. Bloomer in writing on this subject in subsequent years says:

“The pulpit was sacred ground, that no woman’s foot must profane. One minister in Syracuse preached a sermon against us and had it printed in pamphlet form. These he sent out by hundreds to ministers of his church throughout the state for them to scatter among the women of their congregations, hoping to head off this new movement of women. Whether these determined opponents of other days who meant to crush the women’s movement in the bud ever became reconciled to the part she has since played in the world’s doings, I don’t know. Some of them, and probably all, have passed to their account where they have learned that God’s ways are not man’s ways. I suppose that we cannot greatly blame them when we remember that, up to that time, the world had been educated to believe woman an inferior creation; that she had been placed by her Creator in an inferior and subordinate position; and that St. Paul’s injunction to the uneducated women of his day to keep silence in the churches was intended for the women of all time, included public halls as well as churches, and political, social, temperance and all other subjects as well as the gospel of Christ, of which women were to know nothing except what they learned from their husbands at home. We find a very different state of things in these days, when the clergy everywhere are ready to listen to women—nay, to welcome and invite them to their desks; and even dismiss their own services that the women may be heard. They must have learned a new gospel, or a new interpretation of the old one. In those early days, ministers before hearing us would refuse to open our meetings with prayer—feeling, I suppose, that we had gotten too far out of our sphere to be benefited by their prayers. Now, they hesitate not to lend us all the aid in their power. There may be here and there one who turns the cold shoulder, but the cause is too far advanced to be affected by anything such can bring against it.”

IN ROCHESTER AGAIN—A CHANGE.

In May, 1853, the annual meeting of the Woman’s State-Temperance Society convened in the city of Rochester. It was very largely attended by many of the prominent Temperance workers in the state. Mrs. Bloomer was present and took an active part in the proceedings. At the convention, the question of admitting men as members came up and excited a great deal of interest. It was agreed that, as both sexes were equally interested in the work, they should all bear an equal responsibility in guiding the doings and sharing in the labor of the society. Those who took this view insisted that it should be placed on the broad grounds of equal rights and equal duties for all. Others thought the time had not yet come for so radical a change in the constitution, but preferred that it should continue to be an exclusively feminine organization. Mrs. Bloomer took this view and so the majority decided, with the result that Mrs. Stanton declined a reëlection as president and Miss Anthony also declined a reëlection as secretary.

In their places, Mrs. Mary C. Vaughan was elected president; Mrs. Angelina Fish, secretary; Mrs. Albro, chairman of the executive committee, and Mrs. Bloomer corresponding secretary. These ladies continued the work of the society with great zeal and fidelity. It kept its lecturers in the field and continued to labor earnestly in promoting its temperance work. Mrs. Bloomer’s connection with it ended with her removal from the state at the end of the year. She always exceedingly regretted that this divergence of views occurred between her and Mrs. Stanton and Miss Anthony, but their old-time friendship continued on as of old and Mrs. Stanton continued her interesting contributions to the columns of the Lily.

The proceedings of this convention, as also of the Good-Templars meeting at Ithaca, were printed as a double number of the Lily soon after the adjournment of these bodies. Many extra copies were also printed, for which there was a very active demand. Mrs. Bloomer insisted that the work of the Woman’s Temperance Society should go on vigorously, as in the preceding years, and she exerted all her influence to that end as one of its officers. She however did not long remain a resident of New York, and after leaving the state she was no longer responsible for the work. The zeal of some of the workers may have become cold, or rather (which seems to have been the fact) was turned into other channels. Mrs. Bloomer always looked upon her connection with the society as one of the most useful and interesting events of her life.

After the close of the convention Mrs. Bloomer visited Niagara Falls for the first time, accompanied by her husband, spending a couple of days of much needed rest and recreation. While there they looked over nearly all the most noted points, including a visit to Termination Rock under the mighty cataract itself, passing on their way under Table Rock, which has since disappeared.

A LECTURE TOUR—FOURTH OF JULY.

Of one of her lecturing tours, Mrs. Bloomer gives the following report:

“We left home on Saturday the second instant for Harford, where we were engaged as orator for the celebration on the Fourth. The weather was fine and the trip up the lake a delightful one, made doubly so by meeting some old acquaintances and the forming of some new ones on the boat. Arrived at Ithaca we found friends awaiting from Harford, and were soon on our way to that place, where we arrived after a pleasant carriage ride of sixteen miles at about ten o’clock in the evening. The glorious Fourth was ushered in by a salute at daybreak and another at sunrise. At an early hour people began to arrive from the country, and the streets soon presented a lively appearance. At ten o’clock the procession was formed in front of the Union Church and, the Good Templars and Sons of Temperance in the regalia of their orders first, led by a band of music and followed by the people, proceeded to a grove where seats and a stand handsomely decorated had been prepared for the occasion. We were escorted by a committee of ladies all in short dresses to the stand, where after the usual exercises came the address; but of the merits of this it becometh us not to speak. Suffice it to say that the large audience of fifteen hundred or two thousand persons listened to us throughout with the most earnest attention, and judging from their countenances the novelty of hearing a woman was lost in the interest excited by the subject.”

Mrs. Bloomer’s toast at the dinner was as follows:

“By Mrs. Bloomer: ‘The Women of the Revolution. Although they toiled along with the men of the Revolution for independence and freedom yet they failed, when the struggle was over, to secure an equality in those rights and duties which are the common birthright of all. May their daughters of the present generation be more fortunate in their struggle for rights so long withheld!’”

After several sentences laudatory of her hosts, Mrs. Bloomer continues:

“On our return home we were escorted as far as Homer by our friends from Harford. Homer is our native village, and as we had not been there since the days of our childhood we took advantage of our stay to stroll through the place in quest of our old home around which clustered many fond recollections. We had no one to guide us in the search, but the impressions left on our mind at six years of age were so strong that we could not be mistaken. The place was soon found and, though much altered, it still retained enough of its former likeness to enable us to identify it after an absence of twenty-nine years. Emotions both pleasurable and painful were awakened as we gazed upon the spot where we first drew breath and where we spent the early years of our life. Scenes long since forgotten arose in memory as clearly as though but yesterday enacted. Not to the old home only has change come, to us and ours Time has brought much of change and somewhat of sorrow; yet upon us personally has his hand rested lightly, to us he has imparted kindness and blessing far more liberally than sorrow. With saddened feelings we returned to the hotel where we left our friends. Here we were soon surrounded by those who had known us in childhood and were intimate friends of our parents. Somehow, they had gotten notice of our being there and came forward to offer congratulations and welcome us back to our early home. Intercessions were made for us to remain with them for the night and give them a lecture, which we decided to do. After bidding adieu to our kind friends from Harford, who now turned their steps homeward, we were escorted to the mansion of William Sherman who with his estimable wife and family contributed largely to the pleasures of our visit to Homer.

“The Presbyterian church was at once opened to us, and notice of the meeting circulated as fully as possible in the brief time that remained before the evening. The house though large was densely filled with an attentive and intelligent audience. On the earnest invitation of a committee of gentlemen we remained over another day and spoke in the same church on the following evening, when the body of the house and the large gallery were again as full as could be comfortably seated. Though we interspersed our lecture pretty freely with woman’s rights, or rather we might say with woman’s wrongs, no one seemed at all alarmed; but, if we may believe the assertions of the people, new trains of thought were awakened and a most favorable impression made on the minds of the community.”

Mrs. Bloomer then proceeded by stage to Glen Haven where she received a most cordial welcome from Dr. Jackson, and at his request:

“We addressed the patients and other inmates of the house in a large sitting room on Thursday evening, and at his solicitation concluded to accept the invitation of Judge Osborn, of Scott, to return to that place and speak on Friday evening, instead of returning home as we had intended to do. Accordingly on Friday evening we rode over to Scott, a distance of three or four miles. The church in which the meeting was held was densely filled, and we could but wonder where all the people came from in so small a place. Many warm though strange friends gathered around us here, and bade us a hearty God-speed in our mission. They would have kept us for another night, but home after a week’s absence was doubly endeared to us and we could be detained no longer; so we again took the stage for the Glen on Saturday morning, and from thence on steamboat and cars returned home on Saturday evening. Altogether the excursion was a delightful one and we have no cause to regret that we were induced to accept the invitation of our Harford friends to join with them in celebrating the 77th anniversary of the birthday of our National Independence.”

RESTING.

Mrs. Bloomer’s activities during the year had been so unremitting that she now needed rest. Small in person and fragile in health, she had been enabled to endure so much only by her indomitable courage and the spirit of perseverance which ever controlled all her actions. This needed rest she therefore sought at Dr. Jackson’s water cure, on the beautiful shores of Skaneateles Lake. Here secluded from public gaze she spent some weeks in retirement; and yet not entirely so, for she was there invited and consented to deliver her lecture on Woman’s Enfranchisement to the inmates of the cure.

NEW LECTURES.

This lecture had been prepared during the early months of the year and the closing months of 1852. She delivered it on many occasions in subsequent years in various parts of the country, rewriting it several times in whole or in part for that purpose. Towards the closing years of her life she revised it once more, fully setting forth her ideas and convictions on the subject of woman suffrage; and in this completed form it is printed in full in the Appendix of this work. It is believed to be one of the strongest arguments that has ever been written in favor of woman’s right to the ballot. Mrs. Bloomer also prepared lectures on woman’s right to employment and education as fully in all respects as that enjoyed by the other sex. These lectures, she delivered to audiences in different parts of the country as occasion offered. They were radical in their claims for equality for woman in all the employments and acquirements of life with man, for at that time this claim was only just beginning to be discussed. No colleges were then open to women. No universities offered her the literary advantages of their halls and lecture rooms, and the general opinion was entertained among the mass of the people that the three studies of reading, writing and arithmetic were enough for her. So also there was little for women to do but to sew and stitch, and occasionally teach school for wages far below those paid to men. There were no women lawyers, no women preachers, except among the Quakers, no typewriters, no clerks in the stores, no public offices filled by women. Mrs. Bloomer in her lectures insisted that all this was wrong. She argued that the schoolroom, the workshop, the public office, the lawyer’s forum and the sacred desk should be opened to her sex on entire equality with man. These were then unpopular doctrines to promulgate either in the public press or on the lecturer’s platform; but Mrs. Bloomer was spared long enough to see her rather radical ideas on this subject brought into practical application, for at the end of 1894 woman’s right to both education and employment on an equality with man had come to be almost universally recognized.

A CLUB OF TALKERS.

Mrs. Bloomer derived much mental culture from attending the conversation-club which had been organized through Mrs. Stanton’s exertions and was led by her. It followed largely the line of thought and action set forth in the Life of Margaret Fuller Ossoli, published about that time, who had conducted clubs of like character some years before in Boston. It met from time to time in the parlors of prominent residents of the village and many questions social, literary and even political were freely discussed at its meetings, each member being required to take some part in the conversation. It was not exactly a ladies’ club, for gentlemen also were invited to attend and did so to some extent; but the attendance and discussions were mainly confined to the other sex. Mrs. Stanton was eminently qualified to lead the club as she was and is a woman of great general information, of large culture and literary attainments, and an excellent talker. Occasionally an essay was read by some member previously appointed, and on the whole the club added greatly to the mental attainments of its members. Seneca Falls as a village was noted at that time for its liberality in all reformatory movements. It was the residence of Mrs. Stanton, of Bascom, of Tellman, and other leaders in liberal thought, to say nothing of the Bloomers.

CHAPTER SIXTH.

AT THE WORLD’S CONVENTION.

In September, Mrs. Bloomer attended the two great temperance conventions held in that month in the city of New York. During her stay of ten days she was the guest of Mrs. L. N. Fowler, where for the first time she met her old correspondent, Mrs. Frances D. Gage, between whom and Mrs. Bloomer there existed for many years and until Mrs. Gage’s decease the warmest friendship. She also here again met her old co-laborers in temperance and other reform work, Miss Lucy Stone and Miss Antoinette L. Brown. When the World’s Temperance Convention met in Metropolitan Hall a most bitter wrangle at once commenced over the question of admitting women to seats in the convention, and after one or two days spent in its discussion it was decided in the negative. The Whole World’s Temperance Convention then followed, over which Rev. T. W. Higginson presided. To this convention both men and women were admitted as delegates, and the proceedings throughout were intensely interesting. A public meeting held in the Tabernacle was interrupted to some extent by a noisy demonstration whenever a man attempted to speak, but the women were listened to without interruption. Among the speakers were Miss Stone, Miss Brown, Mrs. Gage, and Wendell Phillips. Mrs. Bloomer was an intensely interested participant in all these meetings, and in a quiet way took part in them, speaking briefly from the platform in Metropolitan Hall. She also delivered a temperance address in Broadway Tabernacle to a very large audience, Miss Emily Clark and Mrs. Mary C. Vaughan being the other speakers. While in the city Mrs. Bloomer also attended the Crystal Palace exhibition then open to the public. It was a very interesting presentation of the progress of the world up to that time in the several departments of human skill, industry and the fine arts, but has been far exceeded in extent and variety in subsequent years. One of the curious things occurring at these gatherings was a vegetarian banquet held in the Metropolitan Hall in which, it was said by the newspapers of the day, were gathered all the reformers of every description then in the city. The table was abundantly supplied with all kinds of fruit and vegetable productions, but every form of animal food was strictly excluded. Some speeches were made; but, on the whole, the affair was not esteemed a very great success. On the following day Rev. Miss Brown delivered a sermon from the platform in the same hall to a fair congregation on that old subject, “The exceeding sinfulness of sin.”

Of the Whole World’s Temperance Convention Mrs. Bloomer wrote as follows:

“It was largely attended, and passed off most happily. There were no old fogies present to raise a disturbance and guy the speakers; no questioning the right of each individual, whether man or woman, to utter his thoughts on the great subject which they had met to consider. All was peace and harmony and it did the heart good to be there.

“There were delegates present from some twenty states and Canada and Europe, and a more earnest and intelligent set of men and women were never met together. We had the pleasure of meeting and taking by the hand many of our friends and co-workers to whom though personally unknown we had long been attached.

“The time allotted to the convention was too short to allow so full and free an interchange of sentiment as was desirable. Many who had come up hither with hearts burning with zeal for the good cause, many from whom it would have been pleasant and profitable to hear, were obliged to forego the privilege of speaking on account of the limited time which had been fixed upon for the convention. The ‘whole world’ could not possibly be heard in two days, yet all appeared satisfied with the rich feast that had been furnished them; and we trust that those who were not heard in New York have gone home strengthened and better prepared to make themselves heard and their influence felt in the coming contest.”

Returning home Mrs. Bloomer issued another number of her paper, and then with her husband started on a Western trip. Of the first part of this tour, Mrs. Bloomer herself gave the following report:

A WESTERN TRIP.

“Columbus, Oct. 10, 1853. We reached Cleveland about six o’clock on Sunday morning, when we soon found our old friend C. E. Wheeler and wife where we spent the few days of our stay very pleasantly. We had heard much of the beauty of Cleveland, but in this respect I think it has not been overrated. It is indeed a fine city full of life and enterprise. The broad streets so nicely shaded give it an appearance of health and comfort unlike that of any other city I have ever visited. It is rapidly growing in population and wealth, and great numbers of fine buildings are now in process of erection. It is destined ere long to take rank in importance with any city in the West.

“On Monday evening, I addressed a large and attentive audience at the Athenæum on the subject of temperance and the Maine law. The subject is attracting great attention in this state this fall, and great efforts are being made to secure the passage of a prohibitory law at the next session of the legislature. Party lines are set aside and the frowns and threats of party leaders entirely disregarded in many sections. This is the only true course to be pursued, and I rejoice to see the men thus breaking away from party shackles and earnestly contending for the right.

“Yesterday, the National Woman’s-Rights Convention commenced its session. The attendance, though respectable, was not large. There are many here from abroad, and I should judge the Northern states were well represented. Mrs. F. D. Gage, our dear Aunt Fanny, is president. I was prevented from attending the afternoon session on account of having accepted an invitation extended to me by the Temperance Convention to repeat before that body the address delivered on Monday evening at the Athenæum. Gen. Gary, Dr. Jewitt, and others of the great men were present. I was rather disappointed in Dr. Jewitt; but I was under the necessity of leaving before he finished his speech, to meet another engagement.

“The attendance at the Woman’s-Rights Convention at the Melodeon, in the evening, was very large. Mrs. Garrison read several resolutions submitted by the business committee. I followed with an address of about three-quarters of an hour on woman’s right of franchise, after which Lucretia Mott occupied a half-hour or more in her usual happy and interesting style of speech.

“We next visited Mount Vernon, which is a pleasant village of about 6,000 inhabitants, and where I addressed the people on the Maine law. There are four papers published here; among them is the Western Home Visitor, which is a reformatory paper of high character and has a circulation of about four thousand copies. Newart was our next stopping place. It has a rather bad reputation for hard drinking, but it has a division of the Sons of Temperance which is doing good work. I judge there is a considerable reform spirit here, also, from the fact that the First Presbyterian church was opened to me by the unanimous consent of the trustees, that I might be heard on the Maine law.

“We arrived in this city on Saturday, and stopped at the Niel House where the attendance is excellent. Just opposite is the magnificent state house in process of erection, which when completed will be second in size and grandeur only to the National Capitol at Washington. I addressed a large audience on Saturday evening on the Maine law, and this evening I propose speaking again on intemperance and the wrongs of woman. I had the pleasure of a call from Mrs. Janney, secretary of the Woman’s State-Temperance Society of this state, from whom I learned that the society is far less efficient than ours though it is slowly gaining ground. The reason for this inefficiency is doubtless the fact that its leaders are unwilling to send out agents of their own sex to lecture and gather funds to promote the cause. To-morrow we leave here and travel westward.”

CONTINUES HER JOURNEY.

Mrs. Bloomer then passed on to Richmond, Indianapolis, Detroit, Chicago, and Milwaukee. Unfortunately, her own report of her visits to these cities is lost and cannot be reproduced. She remained one or two days in each of them, and in each delivered one or two addresses,—certainly two in Detroit, Chicago, and Milwaukee, one on temperance and one on woman’s enfranchisement in each city. In all she was favored with large audiences and listened to with the closest attention, and highly favorable notices of her lectures appeared in the newspapers of all the cities visited. With the exception of Lucy Stone, who had previously spoken in some of them, she was up to that time the first woman who had been heard on the platform in the large towns of the great West.

But the journey, with all she did during its continuance, was really beyond her strength and she was very glad to return home the latter part of the month and secure the rest she so greatly needed. But she could not keep quiet, and her pluck and perseverance enabled her to go on with her work. The issues of the Lily were resumed, and she was soon again in the lecture field in reply to pressing invitations from surrounding towns. Her last lecture, at this time, in New York was delivered at the courthouse in Ovid, in which beautiful town some of the earlier years of her life had been spent.

AN ANNOUNCEMENT—A REMOVAL.

The December number of the Lily contained the following announcement:

“Our husband having purchased an interest in the Western Home Visitor published at Mount Vernon, Ohio, and determined upon moving to that place forthwith we, as a true and faithful wife, are bound to say in the language of Ruth ‘where thou goest, I will go’; and so, before another number of the Lily reaches its subscribers, we shall if all is well be settled in our Western home.

“This announcement, we are well aware, will be an unpleasant surprise to many of our readers and friends in this state; yet we trust that our change of location will not be deemed by them sufficient cause for deserting us. We go but a short distance to the west. The Lily will continue to be published and its character will be in no wise changed. ‘Uncle Sam’ will carry it as safely and regularly to the homes of our friends as he has done heretofore, and also convey all letters and remittances to us as safely and securely in Ohio as in New York. Then, friends, we pray you let not our change of location affect our intercourse with each other; but remember that, there as well as here, we shall labor for the promotion of the great and good cause to which we have devoted so many years of our life. We look confidently to you for that support and encouragement which you have bestowed so liberally heretofore, and we trust that your efforts in behalf of the Lily will be increased rather than diminished.

“We feel that it matters little in what part of the vineyard we are placed, so we but improve and cultivate to the best of our ability the part assigned us. And this feeling bears us up under the heart-sorrow occasioned by the sundering of the many ties that bind us to home and friends in our native state. We bid farewell to all with an aching heart.

“Yet our grief in parting with associations so dear, is mingled with hope for the future. We prefer to look on the bright side of every picture, and to do what we can to render life’s journey pleasant and happy rather than darken and embitter it by mournings and grief. So we will dash aside the tears, and school our heart to bear with fortitude this the greatest sorrow ever laid upon us; believing that it is for our interest to take this step, though it be so agonizing to part with those we love.

“We go to seek a home among strangers, not knowing what will be our reception, or whether kindred spirits are there to gather around and cheer our loneliness; but in this, too, we have hope that we shall be met in the same spirit of kindness which we bear with us.

“We have never been pleased with the appearance of our paper in folio form, and so have determined to change it back to a quarto; and we shall hope, with the increased facilities which we shall have for printing it at Mount Vernon, that The Lily will present a more respectable appearance than it has done the past year.”

The removal of Mr. and Mrs. Bloomer from Seneca Falls excited a good deal of interest, as they had been many years residents of that place and had taken an active part in the events of village life. A public meeting was called and largely attended by their friends and admirers, at which speeches were made and a fine supper served. A report of this gathering will be given in full. The editor of the Courier, Mr. Isaac Fuller, who had been intimately acquainted with Mr. and Mrs. Bloomer for many years, published the following article in his paper:

A TESTIMONIAL.

“The Lily. This paper will hereafter be published at Mount Vernon, Ohio, its editor and proprietor having moved with her husband to that place. Although we disapprove of some of the measures advocated in the Lily, we part with it and its worthy editor with sincere regret. It is now five years since its publication was commenced, and during the whole time Mrs. Bloomer has had the entire direction of it, both editorially and financially, displaying talents and business qualifications possessed by few of the gentler sex and which but few of her friends were prepared to see her exhibit. The ability and energy with which the Lily has been conducted have attained for it a circulation of over four thousand copies in different parts of the Union, thus giving to our enterprising village notoriety which it would not have otherwise obtained. Our business engagements with Mrs. Bloomer have been such as to give us a knowledge of the facts above mentioned, to which we add that she possesses in an eminent degree, those social virtues which everywhere command respect and which give value to character in every position occupied by members of refined society. We say this because we know that strangers are wont to consider the editor of the Lily a coarse, unrefined woman possessing few or none of the traits which adorn the female character, and as cherishing a disregard of the duties devolving upon woman in the domestic relations of society; whereas just the reverse is the fact. We hope the Lily will lose none of its vitality from being transplanted, and may its amiable editor enjoy a long and happy life!”[1]

DEMONSTRATION OF RESPECT TO MR. AND MRS. BLOOMER.

“D. C. Bloomer, Esq., having made known his intention to remove from the village where he has resided for sixteen years past, the numerous friends of himself and wife assembled by appointment at Union Hall, on Tuesday evening last, for the purpose of publicly testifying their respect for them. The proceeding originated with the Good Templars, a temperance order to which Mr. and Mrs. Bloomer belong, but was participated in by citizens of all classes. The assemblage composed about equally of both sexes was very large, numbering we should judge from 400 to 500 persons. Five tables most bountifully spread and extending the whole length of the hall were twice filled. After the refreshments were disposed of C. Salisbury, Esq., was called to the chair, and speeches and toasts followed. Appropriate and extended remarks were made by Gilbert Wilcoxen, Esq., C. H. Reed, Esq., S. D. Tillman, Esq., Rev. Mr. Fraly, and others. We are not able to report what was said, but the sentiments offered were highly complimentary to Mr. and Mrs. Bloomer, both of whom responded in a very handsome manner. The following resolutions were presented and passed by a hearty and unanimous ‘aye’:

“Whereas we have learned that our respected friend and fellow-citizen, Dexter C. Bloomer, and his wife, Mrs. Amelia Bloomer, are about to remove from this village;

“And whereas they have, during the long period they have resided among us not only sustained the character of good citizens, but have been known as efficient and active workers in the cause of temperance; therefore,

“Resolved that we, the temperance men and women of Seneca Falls here assembled on this occasion, do tender to Mr. and Mrs. Bloomer our warmest and most sincere acknowledgments for their faithful and devoted service in promoting the noble work of redeeming the world from the evils of intemperance.

“Resolved that, as citizens of the village, we also desire to tender to Mr. and Mrs. Bloomer an expression of the high regard we entertain for them, and to bear our willing testimony to the general esteem and respect in which they are held by their neighbors and associates among whom they have so long resided.

“Resolved that, while we part with our friends with sincere regret, our warmest wishes for their future welfare will go with them to their new home, and we shall always hear of their prosperity with the greatest satisfaction.

“The serious part of the proceedings having been gotten along with, music and dancing were introduced and the festivities were prolonged to a late hour, when the assembly dispersed and all retired to their homes with a consciousness of having discharged their duty to valued friends who were about removing from their midst.

“The whole of the proceedings passed off most agreeably and pleasantly, and we regard the affair as the very highest compliment that could have been paid to those in whose honor it was gotten up.”

FOOTNOTES:

[1] From Seneca County Courier, Dec. 1853.

CHAPTER SEVENTH.

AN ASSISTANT EDITOR.

On taking up her residence in Mount Vernon, Mrs. Bloomer became assistant editor of the Western Home Visitor, of which her husband was editor and one of the proprietors. This was a weekly family paper, having a large circulation and printed in folio form on a large sheet. It was devoted to educational progress and all reformatory questions designed to advance the interests of the community in which it circulated. It advocated temperance and sound morality, and its columns were filled weekly with matter appropriate to be read in the family circle. Its columns contained no advertisements, and it depended for its support solely on its patrons’ yearly subscriptions. We give below Mrs. Bloomer’s salutatory, and also her first additional article on assuming her position as assistant editor:

“Salutatory. Following the custom set to me by my husband, I make my editorial bow to the readers of the Visitor. I suppose it is not necessary for me to enter into any detailed account of myself, as the papers have already done that for me. Neither do I suppose it necessary to make any statements in regard to my sentiments and principles, as they are already generally well known to the public. What I have been in the past, I expect to be in the future,—an uncompromising opponent of wrong and oppression in every form, and a sustainer of the right and the true, with whatever subject it may be connected. I have no promises to make, preferring to stand uncommitted and at liberty to write as the spirit moves me, or as the circumstances of the case may require. Having a separate organ of my own independent of any other paper or person through which I can speak forth my sentiments on the great reform questions of the day, freely and independently, I probably shall not introduce into the columns of the Visitor anything particularly obnoxious on those subjects; yet I may frequently come in contact with old prejudices and bigoted notions, for it is impossible for the free progressive spirit of the present day to be bound by the opinion and prejudices of a former age. I trust, however, that my readers will bear with me and listen to me even though they do not approve, and if I say anything very bad, attribute it to my womanly folly or ignorance. And, as it is but right that I should bear whatever censure my doings may deserve, I shall write over my own initials in all matters of any moment. With this much for an introduction I extend to you, readers of the Visitor one and all, a cordial greeting, and wish you not only a ‘Happy New-Year’ but that it may prove happy and prosperous to you to its close.”

“Woman’s Right to Employment. To woman equally with man has been given the right to labor, the right to employment for both mind and body; and such employment is as necessary to her health and happiness, to her mental and physical development, as to his. All women need employment, active, useful employment; and if they do not have it, they sink down into a state of listlessness and insipidity and become enfeebled in health and prematurely old simply because denied this great want of their nature. Nothing has tended more to the physical and moral degradation of the race than the erroneous and silly idea that woman is too weak, too delicate a creature to have imposed upon her the more active duties of life,—that it is not respectable or praiseworthy for her to earn a support or competence for herself.

“We see no reason why it should be considered disreputable for a woman to be usefully employed, while it is so highly respectable for her brother; why it is so much more commendable for her to be a drone, dependent on the labors of others, than for her to make for herself a name and fortune by her own energy and enterprise. A great wrong is committed by parents toward their daughters in this respect. While their sons as they come to manhood are given some kind of occupation that will afford not only healthy exercise of the body and mind but also the means of an honorable independence, the daughters are kept at home in inactivity and indolence, with no higher object in life than to dress, dance, read novels, gossip, flirt and ‘set their caps’ for husbands. How well the majority of them are fitted to be the companions and mothers of men, every day’s history will tell.

“Certainly, our girls would be far better and happier than now if they were educated and encouraged to occupy their hands and minds in some useful business occupation; and parents do a great injustice to their daughters when they doom them to a life of idleness or, what is worse, to a life of frivolity and fashionable dissipation.

“It was said by a distinguished clergyman of one who had passed away from earth, ‘She ate, she drank, she slept, she dressed, she danced and she died.’ Such may be truly said to be the history of many women of the present day. They eat, they drink, they sleep, they dress, they dance and at last die, without having accomplished the great purposes of their creation. Can woman be content with this aimless, frivolous life? Is she satisfied to lead a mere butterfly existence, to stifle and crush all aspirations for a nobler destiny, to dwarf the intellect, deform the body, sacrifice the health and desecrate all the faculties which the Almighty Father has given her and which He requires her to put to good use and give an account thereof to Him? While all other created things both animal and vegetable perform their allotted parts in the universe of being, shall woman, a being created in God’s own image, endowed with reason and intellect, capable of the highest attainments and destined to an immortal existence, alone be an idler, a drone, and pervert the noble faculties of her being from the great purposes for which they were given?

“It will not always be thus; the public mind is undergoing a rapid change in its opinion of woman and is beginning to regard her sphere, rights and duties in altogether a different light from that in which she has been viewed in past ages. Woman herself is doing much to rend asunder the dark veil of error and prejudice which has so long blinded the world in regard to her true position; and we feel assured that, when a more thorough education is given to her and she is recognized as an intelligent being capable of self-government, and in all rights, responsibilities and duties man’s equal, we shall have a generation of women who will blush over the ignorance and folly of the present day.

“A. B.”

And for six months thereafter, the Visitor contained nearly every week one or more articles from her pen. Some were on temperance, some on woman’s “fads” and foibles of that day. She aimed to sustain every good word and deed and to rebuke vice in all its forms.

Of course she did not escape criticism in prosecuting her work. Especially, people at that early day would not listen quietly to her severe analysis of the laws bearing upon the legal rights of women. They sometimes denied her positions, and at other times doubted the wisdom of the changes which she advocated. Between her and the editor of another paper published in the city, quite an extended controversy arose which ran through several numbers of their respective papers, Mrs. Bloomer sustained her side of the debate with numerous quotations from legal writers, and she had the satisfaction of seeing her position substantially admitted by her opponents.

PROSPERITY OF THE LILY.

But Mrs. Bloomer’s attention and time were given chiefly to the Lily, the publication of which in her new home was commenced on the first of January. Printed in new type on a steam press, it presented a very neat and handsome appearance. The people of the state were greatly pleased with its removal to their limits and new subscriptions came in with surprising rapidity; its semi-monthly issue soon reached over six thousand copies. Mrs. Bloomer was greatly encouraged by these signs of approval and renewed her exertions and labors to make the Lily in all respects acceptable to its many friends. She wrote from one to three pages each week of original matter for its pages, and was aided at the same time by numerous correspondents. She continued to write continuously in advocacy of temperance, making that the leading object of her work, but she also wrote for woman’s advancement in all the fields of honest endeavor. She asked for her plenty of work and good pay; she insisted that to her should be opened every educational institution; and she demanded for her also the right of suffrage as her inalienable right. Some extracts from her editorials will follow.

ENFRANCHISEMENT OF WOMAN.