to qualify him for his earthly existence, which is a convincing proof of his immortality. Woman, equally with man, is a candidate for eternity, and has powers of intellect suited to her probation for so high a destiny.

The lecturer says, "One important characteristic of woman is self-control and self-government; she should govern herself well, that she may be better able to fill her subordinate station." That is, she must have the power of self-government in an eminent degree, because she is never permitted to exercise it, but is destined all her life to be governed by others. We should suppose it was an indication that she did not need others to govern her if she was endowed with the powers of self-government, for such people would be a law to themselves. We had supposed the reason why governments are established is because people will not govern themselves. One would suppose it ought to be an indispensable pre-requisite with those who profess to have the government of others, that they should have the power of self-government in an eminent degree.

For example, Moses was eminently endowed with the power of self-government, and virtues that belong to women, such as meekness, humility, esteeming others as he did himself, &c. These virtues are indispensable qualities in those invested with so much authority as this aristocracy claims, to prevent their abuse of authority, unless they wish to play the tyrant, which we strongly suspect is their design. The lecturer supposes that woman is made of such a flexible material, or as Mrs. Swisshelm says, "the softness of wax," that it gives her no pain to occupy her inferior station, and bow to the authority of man. He says, "She is adapted to endurance, she can yield like the willow, and therefore is not liable to be overturned by the rude blasts like the sturdy oak; and it is well that she is so-destined all her life to yield and be submissive. It is easier for a woman to yield, as it is her duty, and the God of nature has formed her of more plastic material for the very purpose.' Now this is always the tyrant's plea; he is created to command, as his subjects are born to obey. This is the kind of gospel preached to slaves. Frederick Douglass, the eloquent fugitive slave, tells of a preacher he heard while in bondage, who called the attention of his slave hearers to the wonder

ful adaptation of things to their appropriate use, as manifested in the Creator's works. The white man, said he, has a soft and slender hand, but you, who are made to labour for him, have hard and horny hands, that enable you to do his work. He adds, the poor ignorant creatures had no opportunity to learn that a cessation from labour would make their hands likewise soft, and some of them went home saying, "What a nice preacher that was! every word he spoke was true-how kind it was of God to make our hands so hard-how they would blister, if they were as soft as the white man's."

If we would view the "oak and the willow" growing side by side on some of our southern plantations, under the same culture, we would see that the "sturdy oak yields to the rude blast" with as much flexibility as the "willow," and does it as submissively and as patiently. Many of these "willows" that the lecturer speaks of go weeping to an untimely grave from the degraded place they are forced to occupy. They are uncomplaining, for they are ashamed to mention their degradation, except to some particular confidant. In despotisms there is much suffering and little complaint. Woman loves liberty as well as man; it costs her the same pain as man to be divested of liberty. She is created with an inherent and inalienable love of liberty the same as man. Eradicate a love of liberty from a human being, and you will leave him a mere wreck of humanity. If woman does not love liberty, why is she so anxious to corceal her degradation when she is divested of liberty?

No doubt there are some women, like the slave-hearers, who believe they are made of a different material from man, not made of man's rib, and are quite thankful that they are constituted "willows," and not "oaks." There are others who can act the sycophant for the purpose of enjoying their liberty, for a great many men can be cajoled and wheedled out of their authority, so that instead of being the governors, they are the governed. Woman is taught the philosophy that she is to "gain power by concession," and this bait is held out to her in this lecture. A great many women, who are the most clamorous in pretensions that they have all the liberty they want, are the very ones who take more than their share. The most servile slave is generally the greatest tyrant when he gets the power.

The lecturer assigns to woman the most arduous self-denying duties, without any expectation of her labours ever being seen or appreciated. Destined all her life to live in obscurity unobserved. He says, "Woman's influence, though never to be seen, is always to be felt," and then eulogizes her unbounded influence in society-"every chord vibrates to her touch with magic sensibility, and every harmony in the social sensibility waits on her influence," that is, if she does not neutralize her influence by transcending the limits of her station, “by mingling with it the appropriate acts and offices of the other sex.

The plain English of the whole matter is, she is to labour incessantly in a clandestine manner, both physically and mentally, and whatever honour or emolument may accrue from her labours man is to arrogate to himself, in good slaveholder style-appear wise and great on the unrequited labours of others, and whatever share of the pecuniary emoluments she may receive, she must place that to the credit of man's munificence. He throws the whole weight and responsibility of training children upon her. He lets the father out at a loop-hole. He says, "It is not the father that moulds and directs the character, not only of our girls but of our boys, for the first ten or twelve decisive years of their life; for such are his engagements, or such the state and reserve of his manners, that his sons, in their early years, rarely come in contact with him." Christ's engagements, or the reserve of his manners, did not prevent him from taking up children in his arms and blessing them. Can the father have any more important engagements than to assist in training his own offspring for time and eternity? Is he discharging his duties as a Christian parent in "bringing up his children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord?" Perhaps it is woman's monopoly to rear and train the minds of children. The father would be out of his sphere in attending to this business-if woman has a sphere, man must also have a sphere, and he must not encroach on her monopoly. What is the reason we never hear of man going out of his sphere? Neither man nor woman is to labour from a motive of ambitious display. Yet woman has as good a right, for her works, to "praise her in the gates" as has man, and the Almighty has seen proper to make that one reward of the

righteous at the day of judgment, that their good works will be openly acknowledged. Wherever the gospel was to be preached, Mary's good deed was to be told as a memorial of her. A great and good name has its influence in stimulating to exertion, either physically or mentally, and why should woman be deprived of this stimulus, and the honest reward of her labours more than man? Their example is a stimulus to others to perform good works. It is woman's duty to "let her light shine before men, that they may see her good works, and glorify their Father who is in heaven;" let that work be physical, moral, or intellectual, whether it will come into competition with man's great name or not. She is to be judged by what talent she possesses the same as man, and it would be positively sinful for her to put her "light under a bushel, she must place it on a candlestick, that it may give light unto all that are in the house."

There is nothing peculiar to an individual in the lecture we have had under review, and we have noticed it for the purpose of illustrating public opinion. We understood it was very much admired by gentlemen in the place where it was delivered, and a copy solicited for publication; and it is in perfect accordance with the disposition manifested by our anti-slavery brethren, in the preceding part of this chapter; that is to say, woman is always to consider herself an inferior being to man, his subordinate and dependent-she is studiously to manifest this in all places and situations, and in a particular manner, she is to conceal any extraordinary intellectual gifts she may possess. She is always to look up to him for guidance and direction, and however potent she may be in the promotion of any enterprise calculated to elicit eclat, particularly if it is of an intellectual character, man is to reap all the glory. She is to assume no other character than that of an automaton. In fine, she must occupy the negro pew in the human family, and be ready to do any job of journey-work that their "lordships" may assign, whilst they pocket her wages.

This is the true element of slavery, to appropriate the unrequited labour of others to our own benefit. The same principle runs through all despotisms. Despotism is a unit, though it assumes different phases-and of all robberies, intellectual robbery is the most flagitious-it is robbing us of

the god-like attributes of our nature-it is sacrilege, mean and contemptible. What a contemptible being is the plagiarist, the literary thief! But the intellectual robber is a more daring and atrocious character! The same principle that would impel us to steal the products of mind, would impel us to steal men under different circumstances. If man occupies so exalted a position in the human family as he represents, alas! why does he envy woman her humble position? If he is so richly endowed with intellect, why does he rob her, that is in penury, of her mite? There is a great discrepancy between Mr. Barnes, whom we have previously noticed, and the lecture which we have just reviewed, respecting the mother's duty of training her children: the latter says the whole duty of training children devolves upon her, but the former gives her neither lot nor part in the matter. Now, these gentlemen are both "masters in Israel," and may be said to be of the same religious denomination. One of them says, a prominent part of woman's duty is to attend to the rearing and educating of children, whilst the father is entirely excused. Mr. Barnes would say she would be "out of her sphere," and that it was only the father's province to train the puerile mind. Indeed, there are scarcely two of our dictators who agree as to "her sphere." How is woman to know when she is in her sphere, when her censors cannot agree? We think this will show that there is urgent necessity for the convention (which we have already proposed) of the would be "lords of creation," to settle definitely when woman is in her sphere-as man is her lord and master, instead of her Creator.

But an all-wise and beneficent Creator has not given woman into the hand of her domineering, capricious, selfish, fellow-creature to be dictated to; for God is her "king and law-giver," as he is man's; the same law governs bothwe call no man master. You take too much upon you, ye sons of Adam, "you are out of your sphere" when you profess to be woman's dictators or law-givers-you are only her fellow-servants, and not her superiors in any respect. She has not, more than yourselves, a prescribed "sphere"her sphere varies according to circumstances, and according to her qualifications, the same as your own. If woman has a prescribed sphere, man must also necessarily have a pre