broad as is man's outlook upon the world of knowledge, and deep as are the well-springs of his love and tenderness for woman, that complete appreciation of needs and innate sympathy with wants which members of one sex alone can have for one another, and which is the golden heart of justice, has been wanting to his adjudications. It is sometimes claimed that men are better friends to women than women are to one another. All womanly, worldly experience denies this. Men are, it is true, generous lovers; but when it comes to a matter of simple, true, appreciative friendship, that of women for women can not be surpassed, and is equaled only by that of men for men. There is an innate knowledge that comes from sameness of organization, which seizes upon the difficulties of life and solves the problem for weal or woe without delay or difficulty. This innate knowledge women have of women, and men of men; but the distinct individuality of the sexes forbids it to one sex of the other, and so we find that the administration of law involving women's interests to-day wants the complete justice which the advanced thought of the time demands. Not only must women, for the establishment of their complete rights, be represented at the bar by those of legal knowledge who are capable of viewing their interests from the standpoint of perfect sympathy, but they should be able to take their rights and wrongs to courts capable of the same perfect understanding, and submit their causes to juries of their fellow-women-to juries of their unquestioned peers. Perhaps among all the innovations in Edward Bellamy's wonderful book, "Looking Backward," the most important is the one answering this need. He pictures to us a system in which causes where both parties are women are tried before women judges, while those where the litigants are a man and a woman are tried before judges of either sex. This is what we need now; and it is as well adapted to our own time as to the year 2000 — at least it is as well adapted as any scheme for the advancement of women can be under our present industrial system.

It may not be necessary that in every case where women are litigants only women should be upon the bench and jury. It probably would be better that both sexes be represented even then. There can not be as rounded, complete, harmonious action in any department of life by men. or women alone as there can be by both.

Humanity is dual in its nature, and the masculine and feminine qualities gain additional strength and perfection through union with each other. Possibly, nay, I would say certainly, woman's judgment upon woman might well be tempered by that mercy toward women which is the proverbial quality of man. But the knowledge each sex has of its own needs is, after all, the chief requisite in judge and jury; and if the qualities of both sexes are not to be brought into play, then by all means let women's interests be the especial care of women, and men's interests be the especial care of men. In the practice of the law the opinion has been forced upon me that not only is there need of women lawyers, but of women in all parts of our judicial system. Now it is a mother asking for the custody of her child, and that too in a State where the laws are so liberal that in case of separation of father and mother the mother is prima facie entitled to its custody, and the burden of proof is upon the father to show the mother's unfitness; but the judge, admitting the mother's perfect competency, gives the custody of a little deaf and dumb girl of nine years to the father, because, as stated by him, "the father appears to love the child, and I think would suffer very much in giving it up." Again, when an unhappy wife and mother wins relief from bonds not longer to be endured because of the fault of the husband and father, and is given, as she should be, the custody of her children, it is of almost universal practice for the judge, in dividing the property acquired during the marriage, to give the wife often less, but never more, than one-third of the estate. From this third she must support and rear her children and maintain herself, handicapped as she is both

by her sex and her guardianship of her little ones; while their father, with none but himself to support, and better equipped by nature and social economic conditions for a struggle with the world, is permitted to retain two-thirds of the whole. The judge is familiar with the wants of men in the business world; he knows the needs of the man for capital, and he reasons, "If I take from him more than a third of his property he will be crippled, and perhaps can not keep his business standing," etc.; and so, without meaning to be heartless or unfair, he, because of his incompetency to view the situation of the woman from the standpoint of experience, fails in complete equity. A woman would know full well the difficulties to be met by a mother thus thrown upon her own resources, and would add the weight of her knowledge to the decision. There is, perhaps, in the whole range of our daily experience no more glaring inconsistency than the failure to give women their full property rights, while at the same time deprecating their entering various new fields for their own and their children's support. "Women should remain in the home: they have higher and holier duties to perform than that of bread-winning," is cried from every side; and then straightway, if their rightful protector fails in his duty, instead of giving his substance to the woman so that she may remain in the home and fill her “proper sphere," the court gives her a paltry part, and she is left to perish in that home, or to go out into the world and compete with man for daily bread.

But space does not admit of relating the cases which have demonstrated to me the truth of my position. I must content myself with showing its antecedent probability from propositions admitted by all, and the assertion that my experience confirms it. In the relations of husband and wife, parent and child, guardian and ward- all the domestic relations, in short- a little thought will show that woman's knowledge-woman's instinct, if so you please to call it — should find play in their adjustment. What can the man

and father know of the vital interests of the woman and mother? He can learn something from what he sees as, standing upon the eminence of fatherhood, he looks up to the summit of motherhood towering beyond him. But, ah! who shall say what verdant depths, what crystal springs of thought and feeling are hidden beyond his ken! Do not misunderstand me. I am not arraigning man's wisdom, man's love of justice, or that attribute which gives the charm of poesy to life's prosaic details - man's chivalry; I am merely saying that there are some things men do not know, that men can not learn, and that women do know. Neither do I arraign the past, nor fail to see how natural it is that we to-day are suffering the necessary results of having outgrown our environment. Our civilization had its birth in a crude and barbarous age; and especially, as we have seen, did our common law spring from a condition far different from the present. It had its origin and early development. when the material interests of life were uppermost; when the muscular, the aggressive qualities of human nature were the ones required for the establishment of human rights and the maintenance of human government. And so man, by nature endowed with the ability to cope with the necessities of those times, was the active element in society and government, and naturally gave the coloring of his nature to the jurisprudence which developed. In this jurisprudence woman, the member of the human race representing by her weaker physical organization and her peculiar qualities of mind the more esthetic and ethical interests of the race, held the place of ward, so to speak, to the dominant sex. It was sought to protect her, that her high mission of motherhood might not be jeopardized by contact with the crude and incongruous influences of outer life in a material age. And it is well. Who shall say what development the race may not have reached from this very protection; from the seclusion incident to the condition of coverture and dependence! We can not know. The most that we can say is that whatever of greatness and

glory womanhood has reached has been achieved under the conditions men have imposed. That other conditions would have produced better results is not known, and does not to me seem probable. Now, however, all is changed, or at least is changing. The material world is well-nigh subdued. Man's dominion over the earth is accomplished. There is developing a desire for a more esthetic and ethical era among mankind. After a little, upon the world of human life there will burst the full day of woman's emancipation. In that day will be recognized the distinct individuality of her nature, and the need for full and perfect justice, that her qualities of head and heart may be brought into play. Then in the forum she will take her place by the side of her brother man, endowed with full powers to administer justice. The two shall form a perfect whole, each part supplementing the other, and each giving to the other the benefit of a different organization and a different experience.

From this view of woman's position and influence in the civil law let us gather hope for the future of humanity. Gradual as the change from her condition of dependence to her present anomalous position of semi-independence has been, we can see that it is in the logic of human progress for her to attain equality.

THE ETHICS OF SUFFRAGE ADDRESS BY ELIZABETH CADY STANTON OF NEW YORK.

The basic idea of the republic is the right of self-government; the right of every citizen to choose his own representatives and to make the laws under which he lives; and as this right can be secured only by the exercise of the right of suffrage, the ballot in the hands of every qualified person indicates his true political status as a citizen in a republic.

The right of suffrage is simply the right to govern one's