Report of the Woman's Rights Convention
Colorized photograph of a Suffragists march
Whereas, the great precept of nature is conceded to be; "that man shall pursue his own true and substantial happiness." This law of Nature being coeval with mankind, and dictated by God himself, is of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times; no human laws are of any validity if contrary to this, and such of them as are valid, derive all their force, and all their validity, and all their authority, mediately and immediately, from this original; Therefore,
Resolved, That such laws as conflict, in any way, with the true and substantial happiness of woman, are contrary to the great precept of nature, and of no validity; for this is "superior in obligation to any other."
Resolved, That all laws which prevent woman from occupying such a station in society as her conscience shall dictate, or which place her in a position inferior to that of man, are contrary to the great precept of nature, and therefore of no force or authority.
Resolved, That woman is man's equal--was intended to be so by the Creator, and the highest good of the race demands that she should be recognized as such.
Resolved, Therefore, That, being invested by the Creator with the same capabilities, and the same consciousness of responsibility for their exercise, it is demonstrably the right and duty of woman, equally with man, to promote every righteous cause, by every righteous means; and especially in regard to the great subjects of morals and religion, it is self-evidently her right to participate with her brother in teaching them, both in private and in public, by writing and by speaking, by any instrumentalities proper to be used, and in any assemblies proper to be held; and this being a self-evident truth, growing out of the divinely implanted principles of human nature, any custom or authority adverse to it, whether modern or wearing the hoary sanction of antiquity, is to be regarded as self-evident falsehood, and at war with the interests of mankind.
[...]
Elizabeth Cady Stanton & two of her sons: Henry (left) and Daniel -1848
Declaration of Sentiments
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one portion of the family of man to assume among the people of the earth a position different from that which they have hitherto occupied, but one to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes that impel them to such a course.
You'll find the full text HERE
Portrait of Lucretia Mott
Before the convention, women’s rights were usually ignored publicly, but after, they were almost always in the papers. Yes, at first there was mostly ridicule, but as months passed, people began to start thinking more about how women were treated, and then at least some people agreed that women were treated very poorly and something needed to be done about it.
Suffragists marching in New York City 1915
"Nothing blocks human progress more effectively than religious bigotry." - Elizabeth Cady Stanton
Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony in 1900
37 notes
·
View notes
As an acquisitions librarian, I’ve always had access to a plethora of books. I’d go thru phases, and one of my most fascinating was the “nun phase.” I found it so interesting to read what it was like, and many times I was very surprised. So, come along with me today and explore this abandoned 200 yr. nunnery and former care house in the UK.
So, it’s got Gothic vibes.
I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t be into a huge community living room.
I wonder if this was the refectory- what they call the dining room in a convent.
Nope.
I’m not a thief, but I think this would’ve gone home with me.
Wow, the rehab room looks like a torture chamber. We can thank Puddlebrigade for identifying everything- The torture chamber is actually the playing chamber for carillon bells. There is a second picture of the keys.
Of course, a nunnery has to have stained glass windows.
So, I think we’ve entered the church part.
Another device I don’t recognize. Puddlebrigade: That’s a stair lift without a seat on it
I would say that a statue stood here.
I searched this on Google Lens and it translates as “Closure.”
Corridor.
Wow, what is this? So then, these would be the keys for the carillon.
All the bathrooms seem to be single- inconvenient for a group home.
Cool architectural salvage piece.
I have no idea what that is. Puddlebrigade: That’s a manual hospital bed or gurney, you can see the foot pedal to lift the mattress.
This is nice.
The entrance in the dark.
via hidden midlands
158 notes
·
View notes
“Hamilton.” - Dr. William Samuel Johnson, delegate from Connecticut, in his diary
Only twice during the year did Dr. William Samuel Johnson (CT) indicate in his diary what had occurred in the Congress or the Convention. Today he followed the routine notation “In Convention” with one word, “Hamilton.”
(source — National Historical Park Pennsylvania)
This was the date of Hamilton's six-hour speech at the Constitutional Convention. I think it's telling why he wrote such.
47 notes
·
View notes
How do we know that COA was offered her daughter made bona fides and kept princess? When was this?
It was an offer made by Henry alongside Campeggio when he was there before the trial, that her acceptance of the offer meant the trial could be foregone ....
We (Wolsey and Campeggio) are agreed in opinion to test the mind of the Queen, and to persuade her to consent to the separation, and to enter the profession of some religion. For this purpose his Lordship promised me the assistance of himself and all the prelates of the kingdom, and the favor of the King, and that the Queen shall have any honorable conditions which she demands, retain her station as Queen*, and not lose anything except "l'uso della persona del Re," which he (Wolsey) says she has lost for many years; allowing her her dowry, rents, ornaments, and assignments for her support, and many other things; especially that the succession of the kingdom for the present shall be established in her daughter, by the ordinance and consent of all the estates, in case there should never be any legitimate male heir.
....(although, actually I don't exactly remember, that might have just been one stage of the offer...another might have been that her absence from the trial would ensure a result in Henry's favor; as we know she refused to attend after her speech and it did not, so whether or not that was true...Campeggio had a decretal comission to declare the marriage valid or invalid at Blackfriars and didn't, so in some sense they both got played, although Catherine only in hindsight...ironically, she would later vehemently complain about the severe injustice of the delay in any resolution, but she was the one that had interceded for that delay**, demanding the case only be tried in Rome). Even her counsel at the time, before becoming as contumacious as he did (Bishop Fisher), advised her to take this 'deal', as it were. Off the cuff, I don't remember every reference made to it, Chapuys some months later does also mention (very conditional) 'offers' made to her, but the dispatch is frustratingly vague:
Meanwhile the Queen is daily assailed by people making her all manner of offers, if she will only consent to the divorce; but she remains as firm as ever [...]
In 1533 Chapuys reports Catherine as having said she was willing to take the 'offer' made to her by the King's council three years ago, that then she had thought it was a feint to induce her to accept demotion, but she would accept it now. He does not specify what this offer was, I remember I went back to the sources of when Henry's council visited and argued with her and it was not clear then, either, but I always wondered if that was what she was alluding to. If so it was too late at that point; Henry had decided that the issue of any union that contravened divine law was irrevocably illegitimate (although technically, he would not manage to garner Parliamentary assent for this notion until three years later, he only managed it by implication in 1534), and he believed that was what it was.
Often apologia of Catherine's stance in the late 1520s has been, why should she have even considered that inducement, how was it even presented as an 'offer', even if the papacy had annulled the marriage, Mary would be bona fides regardless, etc. It was presented as an offer, inducement, compromise of sorts because in England that was not the legal precedent (ie, an offer made on behalf of her daughter that was not guaranteed otherwise):
"[Henry VIII] now argued she would would be barred by illegitimacy. This contention puzzled continental contemporaries because elsewhere in western Europe those children born to couples who in good faith believed themselves validly married were treated as legitimate. Nevertheless, Henry was right. After a period of some uncertainty, by the late fourteenth century England had opted out of the bona fides principle. As Sir John Baker notes, 'succession problems were usually debated in legal terms and in accordance with the common law canons of inheritance.' A successful challenge to his marriage would thus automatically bastardise Mary and leave Henry no direct heir... [although] Mary could have been legitimated by statute."
- JF Hadwin, The Journal of Ecclesiastical History
*One assumes this meant only a ceremonial title of some sort, ie Dowager Queen of England, as her sister-in-law was still referred to as Queen of France.
**Probably not anticipating resolution would not take place for another four years, but...still.
9 notes
·
View notes