The President took the chair at half past two. The spacious Hall was crowded in every part by an intelligent, earnest-minded and attentive audience.

The second Resolution was taken up.

2d. Resolved, That every party which claims to represent the humanity, the civilization, or the progress of the age, is bound to inscribe on its banner, “Equality before the laws, without distinction of sex.”

After some remarks by Chandler Darlington it was adopted.

The next in order was the following:

3d. Resolved, That the science of government is not necessarily connected with the violence and intrigue which are now frequently practised by party politicians, neither does the exercise of the elective franchise, or the proper discharge of governmental duties necessarily involve the sacrifice of the refinement or sensibilities of true womanhood.

C. I. H. Nichols supported this resolution in a brief but pertinent speech. She said she had once thought politics necessarily too degrading for woman, but she had changed her views. The science of government, it is said, is of divine origin; a participation in its administration cannot then necessarily involve anything to deterioriate from the true dignity of woman. The world's interests have never yet been fully represented. The propriety of woman voting had been to her a stumbling block; the idea was repelling. She was not yet allowed to vote, but she had ceased to consent to the arrangement which deprived her of that right, and therefore experienced a freedom of spirit which she had not known before. The idea that woman could not go to the ballot-box without a sacrifice of her delicacy was absurd. Women were allowed to vote in church matters unquestioned. They can hold railroad stock, bank stock and stock of other corporations, where their influence is in proportion to the amount held.

But we are not called upon to maintain the position of the propriety 01516or expediency of women voting. The question is, shall they exercise the right so to do;—the propriety should be left to themselves. Women can now travel alone securely, where formerly it was considered a risk. She can deposite her vote with men, with as much propriety as she can ride with them in railroad cars, on steamboats, &c. She came all the way from the Green Mountains without any male attendant; she traveled with members of Congress and delegates to the Baltimore Convention, and not a “bear” among them offered her the least indignity.

Ernestine L. Rose quoted the testimony of Horace Mann, that our legislatures were bear gardens, but she looked upon them differently; men err ignorantly rather than wilfully. H. Mann represented Congress as the vilest of the vile, and argued thence the impropriety, the indelicacy of woman mingling in such company; but if H. Mann's representation be true, is it not time for woman to interfere? Men have had it their own way; in all the disgraceful political squabbles not a single son's mother of them all was present.

Further remarks were made by J. Miller McKim and Phebe Gibbons , after which the resolution was adopted.

The three following resolutions were separately considered and unanimously adopted, after remarks by P. E. Gibbons, J. A. Dugdale and E. L. Rose :

4th. Resolved , that the true interest of society demands, that woman should be represented in the government, and that her most strenuous exertions, and most valuable services are to be obtained only through her participation in its responsibilities and emoluments.

5th. Resolved , That if it be true, that it is woman's province to soothe the angry passions and calm the belligerent feelings of man, we known of no place where she would find a riper harvest awaiting her labor, than in the Halls of our National and State Legislatures.

6th. Resolved , That woman's sphere is that which her nature and capacity will enable her to fill, and not that appointed by man, and bounded by his ideas of propriety.

Dr. Harriet K. Hunt read the following letter from Elizabeth Blackwell, M. D., of New York.

New York, May 27, 1852.

Mrs. Darlington :—

Dear Madam —I thank you cordially for your very kind invitation, and would willingly attend your Convention did not my duties in New York prevent my leaving the city.

The Convention could not choose a more important subject than “Education” for discussion; and great good will be done if public attention 01617is roused to the imperfection of our present system, in which the physical nature and the duties of life are equally neglected. I believe that the chief source of the false position of women is, the inefficiency of women themselves . The deplorable fact that they are so often careless mothers, weak wives, poor housekeepers, ignorant nurses, and frivolous human beings. If they would perform with strength and wisdom, the duties which lie immediately around them, every sphere of life would soon be open to them. They might be Priests, Physicians, Rulers, welcome everywhere, for all restrictive laws and foolish customs would speedily disappear before the spiritual power of strong, good women.

In order to develop such women, our present method of educating girls, which is an injurious waste of time, must be entirely re-modeled, and I shall look forward with great interest to any plan of action that may be suggested by your Convention.

With hearty sympathy in every aspiration, and the right hand of fellowship to every conscientious worker, believe me Very truly yours, 44 University Place Elizabeth Blackwell.

H. K. Hunt then read an address upon the medical education of women; on concluding she offered the following resolutions:

1st. Resolved , That the present position of medical organizations, precluding women from the same educational advantages with men, under pretext of delicacy, virtually acknowledges the impropriety of his being her medical attendant.

2nd. Resolved , That we will do all in our power to sustain those women who, from a conviction of duty, enter the medical profession, in their efforts to overcome the evils that have accumulated in their path, and in attacking the strongholds of vice.

3rd. Resolved , That the past actions and present indications of our medical schools should not affect us at all; and notwithstanding Geneva and Cleveland Medical Colleges closed their doors after graduating one woman each, and Harvard, through the false delicacy of the students, declared it inexpedient to receive one who had been in successful practice many years, we would still earnestly follow in peace and love where duty points, and leave the verdict to an enlightened public sentiment.

P. E. Gibbons advocated the relation. She remarked that the presence of woman is refining and civilizing. In large assemblies especially her influence is powerfully felt in restraining the boisterous passions of men. The Professors of the Geneva Medical College wished that Miss Blackwell might remain among them; her influence upon the class being highly beneficial.

Mrs. Nichols spoke earnestly of the imperfect education of woman. She has no knowledge of the laws of health, nor has she the means of obtaining the required information. Men hold the purse even when the money is made by the labor of both. We are ignorant of the laws which govern our being. Does it cost too much to educate us in a knowledge of these? How much greater are the expenses incurred by our ignorant violations of the laws of health?

Mrs. Gage testified to the ability of women to become good physicians. As the medical Colleges, none passed examination more successfully than the women students. The Professors granted their capability for the study. We are all liable to disease, sickness and death. Women mst be the physicians of their own children. The lives of children are in the hands of their mothers.

Mrs. Rose said, These are mighty questions. When our little ones are removed by death from our care and affection, we feel keenly our ignorance, and long to know more of the laws of health. Woman might be physicians to herself and her children. But the medical schools are closed against her; she is denied the advantages granted to man, for obtaining knowledge of these things, more necessary if possible to her than to her sex. Thus are her rights curtailed in this important respect. Public sentiment is against her. The idea of a female doctor is ridiculed. But what is she worth as a nurse of the sick, without a knowledge of the art of healing? I call upon the people to open the avenues to all occupations equally to woman, to remove the political and legal shackels from her, and all will be benefited thereby. Why am I, in the prime of life, in such feeble health? In my country the laws of health are, comparatively speaking, kept in a nut shell. The girl must not exercise herself. It is not fashionable! She must not be seen in active life, it is not feminine. The boy may run, the girl must creep. The great basis of this Convention is, th at the rights of women are not inferior to those of men.

Evan Pugh , said, the question of women's rights affects the whole human race. We know from sad experience that man cannot rise while woman is degraded. No one soul can degrade another without injuring himself. Who were the mothers of great men? Women of mind, of thought, of independence; not women degraded by men's tyranny, laboring in prescribed limits, thinking other people's thoughts. No fact is better established than that the character of the parent is inherited by the child. Can noble men be born of inferior women? This question was universal, affecting all alike. The degradation of one sex was the degradation of the other.

Mrs. Mott spoke of the great change in public opinion, within her recollection, in regard to the so-called sphere of woman. There had been progress. Twenty-five years ago people wondered how a modest girl could attend lectures on botany; but modest girls did attend them, and other places, in former times, frequented only by men; and the result was not a loss of delicacy, but a higher and nobler development,—a truer modesty. She took a hopeful view of the cause, and closed with words of encouragement.

Dr. E. Harvey moved that ten cents admission be charged for each session to-morrow.

After some opposition, the motion was adopted by a large majority.

Adjourned to meet a 9 o'clock to-morrow morning.

The Convention met at 9 o'clock—the Hall crowded. The President in the chair.

The minutes of yesterday's proceedings were read by Sidney Pierce , and approved by the Convention.

A letter addressed to the Convention by Mary Mott of De Kalb Co., Indiana, was read by one of the Secretaries. The following passages are extracted from the letter.

Auburn, De Kalb Co., Indiana, May 17.

Sisters :—You have called another Convention, and all who are the friends of equal rights are invited to attend and participate in the deliberations. The invitation will probably meet the eye of thousands who would gladly encourage you by their presence, did circumstances permit them to do so. Your aim is the moral, physical, and intellectual elevation of woman, and through her to benefit the whole human race. Can a Convention be called for a nobler purpose? Have men ever aimed so high? They have had Conventions without stint; old men and young men, Whigs Democrats, Abolitionists and Slaveholders, all have had Conventions; but how few have aimed at anything higher than political power for themselves and party. We have looked upon their contests without personal interest in their result. Some benefits might come to our husbands and brothers, but none to us. We are permitted to talk about liberty, but we may not enjoy it. We may water the tree with our tears, while our husbands pluck and enjoy the fruit. Of what advantage is it to us to live in a Republic? Our social position is no better than it was in the days of Queen Elizabeth. Men have made great progress since that day; from being subjects they have becomes Sovereigns, 01920ruling as she professed to rule—by divine right. True, many of these Sovereigns have not a foot of ground, and but one subject, a wife; but then he has absolute control over that one. Yes, they have made progress; but for that progress they are much indebted to men who, being in possession of power, were only anxious to retain and extend it. The Great Charter was extorted from King John by the Barons in order to consolidate their power; they attended to the interests of the common people (who then were in a state of villanage) just so far as they could clearly see would be for their own interest, and no further. The world is much indebted to those sturdy Barons; they did more good than they ever thought of doing. There were germs in that charter that have borne excellent fruit since that day.

Error delights in obscurity; surrounded with clouds and darkness it is comparatively secure; but let these clouds be scattered, let the light of reason fall upon it, and it is dangerous no longer. Any act that causes men to think, is so far an advantage to society. The ideas will not be lost. When King James the First talked and wrote upon the doctrine of the divine right of Kings, he little thought it would result in the beheading of his son Charles, and the expulsion of his son James from the throne. Shrouded in mystery, it was approached with reverence, and seldom critically examined, until he lifted the veil and invited others to behold its beauty. What had been a mystery was a mystery no longer. He forgot what others remembered—that it might have different aspects for the Sovereign and subject. I was judged unworthy of national homage; but very desirable as a household god. And men who thought Paul was in the dark when he wrote “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers, for there is no power but of God. The powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever resisteth the powers resisteth the ordinance of God; and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation”—the men, I say, who could not and would not receive such doctrine from Paul, found him worthy of all praise, when he said, “wives, obey your husbands.” After awhile England proposed taxing the colonies. One party held that protection gave them the right of taxation. The other said the British Constitution gave the Government no power to tax, unless the persons were represented in Parliament. They declared their resolution to pay no taxes without representation. Much was said about the rights of man. And when at last aa three penny tax was laid upon tea, the men being brimfull of patriotism, cared nothing for the tax; it was the principle they cared for, and they would fight for their principles. How very sincere they were, let the millions of wives answer, whose very existence is ignored 02021in law. The was one thing women gained by that contest; they gained a clearer knowledge of their rights, a better understanding of their wrongs, which, according to Blackstone, are a deprivation of rights. A knowledge of these has produced a strong desire to seek a remedy. Hence the call for a Woman's Convention. We must expect some difference of opinion as to the extent of the reforms proposed; but none who have carefully examined the subject will see reason to doubt that our rights run parallel with the rights of man. That being granted, we may then inquire into their expediency. Many things we have a right to do which are inexpedient; but it is for us to say what rights we will waive and what we will enjoy.

We claim that the professions should be open to woman, believing she can preach as acceptably, study the law as thoroughly, and practice medicine as successfully, as man. The business of a clerk seems to us to be peculiarly feminine, and we claim the rights to choose any trade or business for which we have strength and capacity. If it is true that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, we would respectfully ask, by what authority men legislate for us, and who gave them that authority? If the power is a just one, from what source did they derive it? Certainly not from the consent of the governed. We presume neither men nor women care for the privilege of voting, except as a means of securing the enjoyment of the rights with which they have been endowed by their Creator, and for the protection of which “Government were first instituted among men.” The rights of woman have been long in abeyance, but no lapse of time can deprive her of them; they are not transferable. She does not ask the law to confer upon her new rights. She only asks to have her just rights recognized and protected. A glance at the present position of women will show that the Law does not effect this. It places Minors, Idiots, Insane Persons and Married Women in the same category. Man takes all that the wife has to his own use, and such robberies are so common that they excite no indignation in the breasts of his fellow men. He can spend all she has at the gaming table, and who can hinder him? He can spend it in dissipation, while his deceived wife is suffering at home for the necessary of life. The law gives him the property, and with that he can usually find tools to work out his designs. The law interposes no barriers between him and his victim. If a married woman had equal protection with the husband, she would be ambitious to acquire property by her own industry, and the habit of industry and forethought thus acquired, would be found valuable in the marriage relation, and she would not be compelled to enter matrimony as a house of refuge. 02122But we are told that marriage is a contract, voluntarily entered into by competent parties, and by this contract the rights of the woman are transferred to the man. But marriage is not a contract, it is an union instituted by God himself, anterior to any contract whatever. Man was not pronounced good until woman created, and God said, let us make man in our image after our likeness, and let THEM have dominion. But some one may meet us here with the questions, did he not say to the woman, after the fall, “thy desire shall be to thy husband and he shall rule over thee?” Yes, the Bible says so: and in the next chapter we are told, that Adam and Eve had two sons, the eldest called Cain, the youngest Abel; and God said to Cain when speaking of Abel, unto thee shall be his desire, and Thou shalt ruled over him, You see they are the very words used to Eve; therefore, if dominion was taken from the woman and given to the man; it was taken from all younger brothers and given to the first born. If marriage be a contract, why is it not governed by the same rules that govern other contracts? A consideration is necessary to the existence of a contract. In marriage, the man offers love for love and hand for hand, but what is the consideration for those personal rights of which he dispossesses her? If a contract, why is there no remedy for its violation, either in Law or Equity, as is the case with other contracts? The bridegroom says in the marriage service, “with all my worldly goods I thee endow.” Those who framed that impressive service no doubt considered it but just, that he who received all by the courtesy of England, should endow her as liberally, and they thus reminded every bridegroom of his duty, even before the altar; and what honest man will say he should not keep his word?

Mary Mott

The following Address, written by Ann Preston, and designed as an exposition of the principles and purposes of the Convention, was impressively read by the author:

President in the chair at half-past two. House excessively crowded.

The Convention resumed the consideration of the 9th Resolution.

B. Rush Plumly said: I desire to speak, although very briefly, upon this important reform, which, it seems to me, has a wider scope and a deeper significance-than we are accustomed to believe.

It is not, as many persons imagine, a small insurrection against authority, or even tyranny, in the domestic circle; nor is its object limited to the alleviation of that unspoken and often unspeakable wretchedness which results from the discordant relations of the sexes in the present state of society.

It seeks, not only diminish the vice an disease and lessen the suffering of the present, but to so promote and establish true and harmonious relations between man and woman, that, in the future, the steadily improving race shall out-grow perverse propensities which have become characteristics in millions of human beings, from which the vices and misery and degeneracy of society inevitably result.

This is the depth and compass of the Woman's Rights movement, and considered in this aspect it has, in my opinion, an importance not equalled by any reform of this reformatory era; it is of greater moment than Peace, Anti-slavery, or Temperance,—although no candid person will suspect me of a design to depreciate any one of these beneficent efforts.

It is urged against this movement, that woman must leave her sphere to prosecute it. This we deny. We affirm that she is not now in her sphere, nor ever will be, until she has equal advantages with man, and is no longer regarded as his inferior.

But, the question is not whether woman shall desert her household, to cabal and intrigue in politics, vote at elections, harangue Senates, marshal Armies, and direct Navies,—for in these things man may be as much out of his sphere as woman. God did not create either of them to be the murders and marauders of their kind. But this is the matter at issue: Shall woman be herself the judge of her duties to God and humanity; shall she, as a citizen amenable to the laws under which she lives, have a voice in their enactment; as a member of the social compact, shall she participate in the formation and control of those institutions to which she is made subject; or shall man assume the power to prescribe the sphere of her duties, become the keeper of her conscience, the censor of her actions, and having first limited her development to the measure of his convenience, then estimate her abilities by that restricted and partial development?

This has been the usage of society towards woman,—a usage equally repugnant to common justice and sound philosophy, and for which tyranny the world has incurred unceasing retribution.

Nowhere is permanence in human institutions; nowhere is happiness among men. The whole history of the race is one continued story of violence, and crime, and suffering, with only occasional episodes of 03233peace and virtue. Although institutions which recognize all the rights of all classes of the people, and allow scope for the growth and activity of every faculty, must, in their very nature, increase in power and permanence, yet, compared with the duration of things, the oldest nations and the best founded governments have had but an ephemeral existence, appearing, maturing, and decaying with startling rapidity, and endless succession.

No form has been exempt from this national mortality. Theocracies, oligarchies, monarchies, despotisms, republics, have arisen, flourished and vanished into history or tradition. So inevitable does the successive ruin appear, that we have incorporated into our religious faith the idea that limitation, conflict and decay, rather than expansion, permanence and peace, are inherent in all human governments, and, in despair, man postpones his hope of national as well as of individual stability and happiness to some future existence.

For results so certain and so universal among all people, in every age, there must be some profound and radical cause, which religion and philosophy have not discovered, or for which they have proposed no remedy.

It is not sufficient to say that these are consequences of human imperfection; that we know; but whence arises the imperfection? It does not satisfy us to assert that they proceed from the depravity of man,—how came he depraved? Nor is it more consoling to declare that all human institutions must change and perish. Why must they? Human institutions, if founded upon eternal principles, become divine, and may be immortal; it is not the human, but the inhuman institution which perish; not humanity, but in humanity which fills the earth with strife and blood.

No! there is behind, and below all these imaginary causes, a real cause for the degeneracy of the race. It may be traced to the long continued disregard of the laws of God in relation to woman, and the retribution is worked out physiologically upon the whole nature of man, reaching every tissue of his body and every faculty of his mind.

It is a law of God, well understood, that whenever and wherever any community forcibly depresses any class of its people below the general level, it only injures and degrades that class, but is itself injured, degraded, and deranged in exact proportion to the wrong it perpetrates. Whenever we crowd any portion of our fellow beings into an abyss of ignorance and servitude, we are drawn irresistibly, by their weight, to the brink of the same gulf; in whatever country any degree of oppression exists, the oppressor will early discover that a measure of his own 03334freedom is lost, in the constant vigilance demanded to watch his victims; and by so teaching us that we cannot bind a chain on the neck of any man, without finding the other end on our own heel, God at once vindicates the immutable justice of his laws, and establishes the unity of the race.

If this be the inevitable result of the oppression of an individual, or a class, how much more forcibly must it apply when one-half the world, the “mothers of the living,” are made subject to systematic deprivation of rights, and tyrannous restriction in the exercise of high and noble faculties.

I do not propose to detail the disabilities under which woman suffers. They have been ably depicted by women in this meeting. But I wish to indicate the breadth and basis of this reform, for the consideration of those people who suppose it to be a fractional and transient movement.

Whatever suffering or degradation woman is subjected to, by the depression of the whole sex below the level of society, reacts with frightful force upon man; who is thus compelled to compensate for the cruel and mistaken policy, which, in all time, has denied to her equal opportunities of education and development, closed to her those avenues to profit and progress open to him, ignored her in the Church and State as feeble and inferior, rejected her counsels, and derided her authority in the creation of those institutions of society to which not only she but her children are to be subject; although if there be any induction more striking than another it is this, that a child, who is the offspring of the physical union of man and woman, can only be truly educated and nurtured by institutions springing from the unity of mental and moral elements in the father and mother.

This universal ignoring of the feminine element pervades not only the politics, but the religion of every country on earth. Men worship, as their supreme God, only an embodiment of the masculine element,—“Power,” whether in Jove or Jehovah; and ever in the Christian Trinity or Unity, the same masculine ideal is maintained. Jesus did, indeed, recognize the feminine element in his emphatic declaration that “God is Love,” but his professed followers have “not so learned him,” for they not only declare God to be a triune masculinity, but they have driven woman from the pulpit, and would dispute with her the place at the cross and the sepulchre.

The religions of antiquity permitted woman to be a priestess at the expense of wifehood and maternity, but our Christian protestantism denies to her the mission of minister, even with that penalty. It is true the Catholic Church does recognize women among its divinities, and it 03435might be a curious and instructive inquiry, how far that church owes its perpetuity, despite its gigantic crimes and crushing despotism, to the recognition of “Mary the mother of God.” In its effort to perpetuate the servitude of woman, as in other attempts to defend oppression and falsehood, society has suborned the handmaids of progress, Religion and Science, to justify its wickedness; the one to prove inferiority from her organism, the other to add the weight of its anathema against any effort at equality.

But Nature vindicates herself against the first, by presenting De Stael, Margaret Fuller and others; and to the cavilling bigot it may be said that whoever declared that “man is the head of the woman,” if he designed to justify the present interpretation of that expression, has forfeited all claim to the apostleship of a religion whose highest merit it is to equalize the people by elevating the oppressed. But Paul taught no such doctrine.

The result of all this circumscription of woman has been to enfeeble and misdirect her faculties, to weaken the influence of her nature upon society and specially upon her offspring. Driven from the thousand avenues to wealth and position open to man, denied access to the best institutions of learning, permitted to acquire only superficial accomplishments, she is ushered into society at an age when her brothers are preparing to enter colleges and halls of learning from which she is excluded, and thus undeveloped and comparatively helpless, he instincts vitiated and no freedom for her affinities, she is turned adrift to encounter obstacles for which she is unprepared, and in the severe conflict to barter her honor for subsistence; or if she escape that horrible contingency, to exchange her beauty or her services for a matrimonial establishment, and thus prepare to perpetuate human degeneracy.

There are many exceptions to this statement, but the statement is the rule. From these unequal and discordant relations, and the feeble and restricted influence of the mother, spring generations of children who are born constitutionally defective in the feminine qualities of gentleness, purity and love; and the utter rejection of that element in the societary arrangements under which they grow to manhood, aggravates their inherited tendencies, until whole nations of warriors founding governments of blood have filled the earth, and war and rapine have not only become the occupation and the pastime of man, but have grown into his religion and become incarnate in the Deities he worships.

It is thus that the seeds of violence and vice are sown with the germs of the generations, and they spring to a frightful harvest in each succeeding growth of the race. Millions of human beings issue into life, 03536pre-ordained—not in the theological but in the physiological sense—to violence and crime, and they go forth to make their calling and election sure.

From these the world recruits its armies, renews its tyrants, refills its slave-pens and its brothels, populates its prisons, alms-houses and asylums. It is vain to hope for other result while woman, upon whom, as “mother of the living,” depends the progress of man, is denied any other than a limited and indirect influence in the fabric of society.

We may abolish slavery, remove intemperance, banish war and licentiousness, but they will have frightful reproduction in the elemental discord of our natures; for that which is “in us will be revealed.” Man indicates his condition by the institutions he creates; they are the issues of the life he lives at the time, the outward sign of his inward state.

To improve that inward condition, and arrest at their origin these causes of human degeneracy, is the object of this reform. It proposes,a s before stated, not only to cure but to prevent the diseases of the body politic; to place man and woman in such natural and true relations of equal and mutual development, and to so sanctify marriage that from their union under the highest auspices, a regenerate humanity shall not only cease to be violent and vicious, but shall outgrow the dispositions to violence and vice.

We know that this is a work for whole generations, but as we believe it to be radical and effectual, it should be at once begun. We think the first great step is to clear away the rubbish of ages from the pathway of woman, to abolish the onerous restrictions which environ her in every direction, to open to her the temples of Religion, the halls of Science and Art, and the marts of commerce, affording her the same opportunity for education and occupation now enjoyed by man; no longer, by corrupt public sentiment and partial legislation, to limit her to a few and poorly paid pursuits to obtain subsistence and thus increase her dependence upon the charity of man, not to deny her admission to any institution of learning, whose richly endowed professorships and vast advantages she by her labor has contributed to create only to see them monopolized by man. I know that in answer to this it is urged that she has organic limits intellectually which deny to her such attainments. It is sufficient to reply, that under all the disabilities to which she is subject, her sex has produced De Stael and Margaret Fuller. I may refer again to the old objection that she must neglect the sacred duties of home, to which we might reply by naming honorable women not a few, “who have made the highest attainments wholly compatible with domestic 03637duties and those of us who have the privilege of their friendship may point with silent exultation to Lucretia Mott and Mrs. Mira Townsend of Philadelphia, and many others whose names are destined to enviable fame, in this respect.

Give to woman her freedom from social tyranny, allow full development to her faculties and scope for her affinities, and then if the world shall need Napoleons it may also need Joans of Arc; if its is prepared for Newtons and Herschels, it may need its Mitchell; or if it ascend to the cycle of art, philanthropy, morals or religion, it will find in the mutual labors of the co-equal sexes its only hope of an ultimate rounding up of humanity to symmetry and perfection.

C. I. H. Nichol followed. The resolution was then passed by a large and unanimous vote.

The following persons were appointed as a publication Committee; Sidney Pierce, Hannah Darlington, Abby Kimber, Margaret Jones.

The Finance Committee reported, that from the amount of money received at the door, after the rent of the Hall had been paid, ninety dollars would be left for the publication of reports, and other expenses of the Convention.

The remainder of the Resolutions were separately considered and passed without discussion.

10. Resolved, That we cannot appreciate the justice or generosity of the laws which require women to pay taxes, and thus enable legislators richly to endow Colleges and Universities for their own sexes, from which the female sex is entirely excluded.

11. Resolved, That the growing liberality of legislation and judicial construction, in regard to the property rights of married women, affords gratifying evidence of the equity of our demands, and of their progress in public sentiment.

12. Resolved, That the disposition of property by law as affecting married parties, ought to be the same for the husband and the wife, “that she should have, during life, an equal control over the property gained by their mutual toil and sacrifices; and be heir to her husband, precisely to the extent that he is heir to her.”

13. Resolved, That the mother being as much the natural guardian of the child as the father, ought so to be recognized in law, and if it is justly the province of the Court to appoint guardians for minors, want of qualification in the surviving parent should be the required condition of the appointment.

14. Resolved, That the inequality of the remuneration paid for woman's labor compared with that of man, is unjust and degrading, for so long as custom awards to her smaller compensation for services of equal value, she will be held in a state of dependence, not by any order of nature, but by an arbitrary rule of man.

15. Resolved, That the distinctive traits of female character like is distinct physical organism, having its foundation in nature, the widest range of thought and action, and the highest cultivation and development of all its varied powers, will only make more apparent those sensibilities and graces which are considered it peculiar charm.

16. Resolved, That claiming for woman all the rights of human beings we are but asserting her humanity, leaving the differences actually existing in the male and female constitutions to take care of themselves, these differences furnishing no reason for subjecting one sex to the other.

On motion of Phebe E. Gibbons,

Resolved, That a Committee be appointed to prepare and circulate petitions, asking of our Legislature such a change in the Constitution and laws of this State, as shall extend to woman the privilege of the elective franchise, and equality in the division and inheritance of property.

Resolved, That said Committee be instructed to collect information upon the rights acknowledged and privileges guaranteed to women by other States and Governments, publishing it in such way as by them shall be deemed best for promoting political and legal equality between the sexes.

On motion,

Resolved, That H. M. Darlington, P. E. Gibbons, Hannah Wright, Mary Ann Fulton, Sarah E. Miller, Lea Pusey and Ruth Dugdale be the Committee.

Oliver Johnson offered a resolution expressing the satisfaction afforded to the members of the Convention by the presence and labors of those friends who had come from their distant homes in other States to be with us on this occasion. It was unanimously adopted.

The Convention adjourned sine die.