her liberty that she may serve the Lord her God in every department of life, that she may promote the glory of God and the interests of mankind, and the pursuit of her own happiness.

In our enlightened community women experience more mental anguish than physical suffering in consequence_of their position in society. Yet, in the course of our remarks, we have shown that many experience both in an eminent degree. What portion of the human family ever usurped authority over another portion but represented themselves to be superior, and professed to have their commission from heaven? The political despot, the ecclesiastical despot, and the slave-holder profess to have their charters from the divine record; but the days of the reign of these despots are well nigh numbered, they will only be known on the historic page as that which has been. The foundation of the authority we have under consideration is tottering, and gives strong indications that its dissolution is not far distant. It has been the most arrogant, proud, boaster of the four, but it will soon find its rest in the grave with its three younger brethren, to wit, political despotism, slavery, and ecclesiastical despotism. They may accost him thus when descending into the pit:-"Art thou also become weak as we? art thou become like unto us? thy pomp is brought down to the grave. The worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee." O "secondary god!" Arbitrary power has always been a curse to the possessor, and a grievous wrong to those over whom it was exercised. God never designed man to exercise arbitrary power, and he is not qualified for

the task.

We will give an extract from Wayland's Moral Science upon the evil effects of slavery upon the morals of both master and slave. Whatever name or garb arbitrary power assumes, its evil effects are the same. But to the extract.

"Its effects (slavery) must be disastrous upon the morals of both parties. By presenting objects on whom passion may be satiated without resistance, and without redress, it cultivates in the master pride, anger, cruelty, selfishness, and licentiousness. By accustoming the slave to subject his moral principles to the will of another it tends to abolish in him all moral distinctions, and thus foster in him lying, deceit,

hypocrisy, dishonesty, and a willingness to yield himself up to minister to the appetites of his master."

It may be said the wife is not a slave, and is not without redress. She is not a slave in degree, but her situation is of that character to produce the evil results here enumerated. She is frequently an object on whom the husband satiates his turbulent and angry passions-a safety valve, on whom he may expend some of his superabundant choler; and he supposes that it is his privilege to do so, and she is doing no more than her duty to make no resistance, and not to give "railing for railing, but to give blessing for cursing." What sermons are preached to women, that when the husband comes home angry and petulant from his conflicts with the world it is her duty as wife to receive him with gentleness and affection, and sooth his turbulent passions. We have no objection for it to be considered the duty of the wife to thus take up her cross and follow her divine Master; but why is it supposed that the husband has a right to act in this turbulent manner, and inflict a life of crucifixion on the wife? Does not domineering at home cultivate those angry passions, and make him the victim of pride, anger, and selfishness, thus totally unfitting him for conflict with the world? It is a curse to himself to consider it his privilege to act the demoniac in his family; and has not the wife's position a tendency to abolish in her all moral distinction?

Is she not taught that man is her lawgiver, instead of Christ? Is not that portion of scripture, "The husband is the head of the wife," so construed? As Milton's Eve, "God is thy law, thou mine," although Christ says, "Call no man master." Do we not hear it affirmed as a principle, that the wife owes a higher duty to her husband than to her God? Does not the civil law excuse her from punishment for gross immoralities, if she committed them "in the presence of her husband, or by his command?" Do not these opinions tend to abolish in her all moral distinctions; and does not her situation tend to foster in her lying, deceit, and hypocrisy? Is she not taught that the main end of her being is to please man, and that "her power is greatest in concession?" When one human being is so dependent on another as the laws have made the wife on the husband, it has a direct tendency to make her a low, servile, cringing,

hypocrite. As the wife has no pecuniary means under her control, she is frequently under the necessity to steal from the husband to supply her own wants or the wants of the family, although we do not consider this stealing, because the wife has as good a right to make a proper use of their pecuniary means as has the husband; but the means of effecting this is deceptive. This is highly demoralizing to children or servants, or any under its influence. These are no chimerical notions, for the theory of the standing of husband and wife is directly calculated to produce these practical results.

We believe the place man has assigned himself as to superiority over woman is better calculated to produce pride and vain boasting than is even slaveholding. Slavery has concomitants, which make it a greater evil in some respects, but man's supposed superiority over woman is better calculated to produce pride and self-adulation, and it is done without any remorse of conscience. For the slaveholder to assume superiority over the slave is a matter of small moment, compared to affecting superiority over a person that is his equal. But man finds an inferior in woman, his companion! Hence he is the superior without any effort on his part; his physical organization constitutes him the superior, no matter how inferior may be his mental and moral endowments! This is food for his pride and self-esteem; it costs him nothing, and is calculated to give a very low estimate of intellectual and moral worth, and can have no good effect on either party-it is an unmitigated evil, without a redeeming quality.

The position of both man and woman in society is beset with evils. Still woman's position is far more favourable to the growth of the humble Christian than is man's. Man has been the means of elevating woman, in a moral point of view, above himself, and also in a religious. He has no desire to vie with her as to purity of morals, or religious devotion, his ambition does not run in these channels. Dr. Wayland, in his Moral Science, represents the wife and slave as occupying a position which enables them to attain to a sublimity of moral character and virtue which is unattainable by the husband and master in their position. He places the husband and the slaveholder in the same depreciated category as to virtue

and moral sublimity, and he places the wife and the slave in the same predicament as to submission and obedience. Wayland's Moral Science, 3d edition, pages 216-17, 313.

Man has also elevated woman above himself by awarding to her a monopoly of the Christian graces. The Author of our holy religion, who knows best what is good for man, gives the graces a prominence in the Christian character. He was an example of meekness, gentleness, and self-denial, with all other kindred graces; he warns against the love of dominion, for its own sake, or vain glory. There are heavy denunciations pronounced against pride throughout the scriptures. Solomon says, "Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall." Some, as soon as their vain boastings were uttered, were made monuments of divine justice. Nebuchadnezzar was driven from the society of men, and ate grass as oxen, till his hairs were grown like eagles' feathers, and his nails like birds' claws, until he was brought to acknowledge that the Most High reigneth, and had not resigned the dominion of this world into the hand of man. And what did Nebuchadnezzar say that was the cause of such judgments overtaking him? Dan. iv. 30, "The king spake and said, Is not this great Babylon, that I have built for the house of the kingdom, by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty?" While the word was in the king's mouth the judgments of God overtook him. Herod, also, was made a monument of the divine judgments for his love of idolatrous adulation. Acts xii. 21, 22, 23, "Upon a set day, Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them. And the people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man. And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost."

Now who does not see a striking similarity between the vain boastings we have had under consideration, and the boastings of those, who were made immediately the monuments of God's wrath? Vain boastings are as hateful in the sight of God as ever, though he does not make the transgressors so visibly the monuments of his judgments, as formerly. Is it not a severe judgment on any portion of the community," to be given over to a strong delusion to be

lieve a lie," that purity of morals, and the Christian graces, are designed only for their neighbours, who are of an inferior caste. In consequence of this delusion, so many of their sex are permitted to degrade themselves by vice and debauchery, rendering themselves unfit for the society of men, and reduced to the level of the brute, like Nebuchadnezzar, and worse than Nebuchadnezzar. Their debauchery, like a besom of destruction, has swept, and is sweeping thousands off the stage of action; in a far greater proportion in respect to number, than their fellow-creatures, whom they have well nigh pushed off the platform of humanity. True it is, that "pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall."

Our view in writing, is not to compliment either sex, at the expense of truth; our earnest desire is to profit both, and we feel ourselves as much disgraced by the aberrations of one sex, as the other-for "whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it." Our earnest desire is to say with the apostle, "Who is weak, and I am not weak? Who is offended, and I burn not?" We are just as much grieved when the father of mankind acts incompatibly with his dignified station, as when the mother of mankind falls from her excellency. "Have we not all one father? Hath not one God created us?" We do not think that either sex is exalted, by detracting from the other. To the moral distinction of the sexes, we attribute the great amount of moral depravity in man-we must probe the wound, however painful. It is necessary to show the cause, and the extent of the disease, before a remedy is applied. If we know our own heart, this is the true reason why we look into this Augean stable, with the view of contributing our mite for the removal of its filth. 66 'Open rebuke is better than secret love." Men are to be commiserated, because "they know not what they do"-they are the victims of a perverted social organization which governs them from their birth!

But to return to the commentators. We have been finding fault pretty liberally, and we must not forget to award the meed of praise where it is justly due. Although they award to man unlimited power and authority over woman they do not all forget to remind him to act with lenity toward his vassal,-this "second-handed" portion of hu