asking to have inserted the name, "Moses, the Jewish Lawgiver," instead.

But why all these arguments to prove the wisdom and practicability of the Christian religion? I confess while I write to a feeling at times of self-reproach, and find it difficult to make myself believe that it is necessary. If I were writing a defence of Christianity to be distributed in heathen lands, I should have no such misgivings; but I am writing for Christian readers, and it is hard to realize that it is not a supererogatory service. But when I lay down my pen to look over the morning news, and then see, almost daily, reports made by Investigating Committees or private persons, of acts of cruelty and neglect that are systematically practiced on the unfortunate inmates of our pauperhouses, mad-houses and prison-houses, that should bring the blush of shame to a savage cheek; when I read with a shudder of horror the shocking, sickening recital of public executions; of Christians dragging human beings to the scaffold to be hung by the neck. till dead; of ropes breaking and letting the doomed. wretches fall to the ground, only to be dragged back and hung over; of drunken hangmen, whose little humanity it was necessary to drown in liquor before they could perform their horrible task-when these things force themselves upon my notice, then I am brought back to my senses again, and painfully made to realize that all my feeble efforts are necessary to help Christianize Christians.

My misgivings are now changed to a feeling of bewilderment as I think of the monstrous inconsistency of Christian men sustaining and defending laws that permit and require these barbarous practices. It is

the most stupendous stultification of principle that can possibly be conceived of. With all our intelligence, how men can study the Christian system of religion, the plain, simple declarations of its great Founder, as he places them in opposition to the Mosaic code, and give them their endorsement, and declare themselves His special disciples and worshipers, and then go straightway and embody the spirit of the ancient Law in all the forms and institutions of government, surpasses belief. And I will not admit that they are altogether oblivious of their inconsistency and wrong. Thousands of men feel the embarrassment of the situation, but do not know how to extricate themselves. The inward sentiment and intuition of the heart tells them that the system of Christian ethics is true-thus far they have got in their spiritual develop ment—and there they falter and hesitate, lacking faith to put it to a practical test. It is such a great change. The world has so long relied upon the principle of brute force to govern it, and it is, besides, so agreeable and natural to the material, masculine nature to use it, that they are reluctant to give it up, long after their judgment is convinced that it is wrong.

With men it would seem that pure religion, justice and mercy, are little more than an intellectual faith without works; not a living, heart belief, that evolves itself into a law of life and action.*

And so we come around to the conclusion which

* It is an interesting confirmation of the oneness and sameness of the Christian principle and the feminine life, that man should hold them both in about the same degree of confidence and respect. In his sentiment, he worships both, defends both, exalts both, loves both; but neither may be trusted with absolute governing powers. What astonishing confidence masculinity has of its own ability to manage things; and what a record!

forces itself upon the mind at every turn we make, that men by nature are characteristically material beings, and cannot be relied upon alone to eliminate the elements of brute force, selfishness and corruption from existing institutions, and organize government upon a moral and Christian basis. Our dependence in such an undertaking is on Woman. The divine principles need to be organized into governmental agencies, and Woman's brow, it is admitted, is more radiant with the light of these heavenly virtues than man's. In her is exemplified the spirit of Christ, the love, the compassion, the pity, the mercy, the forgiveness, that are for the healing of the nations. The new methods of the spirit belong naturally to the Woman heart to systematize and carry out. In the plenitude of her affection she will lay the foundations of a divine order of society and erect thereon a government of Love—a true Christian Republic. The why? the how? and the when? will be discussed in another chapter.

CHAPTER VII.

WOMAN'S PUBLIC FUNCTION.

Having made now an exposition of the general principles that underlie the new type of civilization, there are things of a more special character that need to be considered, to complete this work. There are explanations to make, illustrations to give, questions to answer, fears to allay, and objections to overcome. While these will receive as much notice as the intended limits of this essay will permit, I would here say that it is no part of my design to attempt to formulate a system of laws and government for the New Era. Such a system will be developed and perfected as experience, and the exigencies of the new conditions, may determine-no intellect can foresee what it will be in detail. My main object is to explain the general character of the civilization which will succeed the emancipation of Woman from her subject condition to one of direct controlling influence in the affairs of State, and reasons for the same. As a further effort in this direction, let us proceed to the consideration of her special public function, and her relation to certain great reformatory questions pressing upon us for immediate solution.

In the natural distribution of duties and responsi bilities between the sexes, what work may we expect will fall properly to Woman's hands to perform when she takes her place by man's side in the administration of public affairs?

I have no idea of trying to define or prescribe Woman's sphere; I could not do so if I would, for I believe it includes, in some respects, every department of human life; and yet, it must be admitted by every one, I think, there are labors and pursuits that are especially congenial to each sex, and that, in an untrammeled condition, such would be selected in preference to others. Even among individuals of the same sex there are differences of temperament and faculty, that naturally impel them to dissimilar pursuits; and where differences are so great and marked as those that separate the two sexes, this must be eminently the case.

The organs and faculties of any creature determine its use and destiny. On the truth of this proposition we may conclude that while men will continue to represent the material interests and enterprises of life, Woman, by virtue of her larger moral and spiritual endowments, will assume more the moral supervision of public and social affairs.* But this distribution of functions draws no distinct line of demarkation between the two spheres of action; for there is no material interest demanding legislation or public notice that has not its moral side or bearings, which need to be detected and directed by Woman's moral perception and judgment.

* I purposely avoid discussing the intellectual and educational pursuits and studies of the two sexes, because they do not necessarily belong to the subject under attention; and besides they are receiving from able writers a pretty thorough examination under the head of "Sex in Education;" yet I would say, considering the mental differences which we discover existing between them, we may expect to see man more absorbed in material science and inductive philosophy, and Woman more especially attracted to moral and social science, and deductive philosophy. This does not apply to academic and collegiate studies, for these are so merely rudimentary and preparatory to the greater studies and pursuits of after-life, that little, if any, difference need be made in the class of studies for male and female.