251

TAKES ISSUE WITH GIBBONS

Mrs. Peattie Discusses the Cardinal's Position Regarding "The New Woman."

Men Are Inferior to Women in Endurance of Pain and Resistance to Nervous Strain.

Some Plain Statements Relative to Motherhood -- Attitude to Be Assumed Toward the Criminal Classes.

Last Sunday there was published in the World-Herald an interesting interview, held by a young woman reporter, with Cardinal Gibbons. The subject discussed by these two persons was "The New Woman," whatever that may mean. Apparently it means, according to his eminence and the bright young reporter, the woman who is graduated by universities, who takes an interest in civic affairs, and who believes in science as much as she does in instinct.

Cardinal Gibbons has never approved of this type of woman. He has preached against her, and talked against her. IF he is correctly reported by his interviewer -- and, indeed, the interview bears every evidence of being truthful -- he says:

"As a Catholic, I am bound to disapprove of any so-called woman movement. The church of Rome exalts womanhood in the veneration it accords the mother of Jesus Christ, but in exalting a woman it still has regard for the special nature of her mission in the world, which is equal to man's though not identical with it."

His eminence refers, very evidently, to the mammal functions of a woman. She is elevated, he appears to think, in proportion as she exercises these. Napoleon, be it remembered, was of the same opinion. He respected most the woman who could bear the most children. He desired to have the women bear men in order that he might slay them. Cardinal Gibbons' reasons are, no doubt, less sanguinary. But he also appears to entertain the same idea. The woman he elevates above all others is distinguished because she bore a son in an unheard sort of a way -- a unique way, and one in which she set an example that no other woman has ever been able to follow.

IS BUT AN INCIDENT.

It seems then, that it is not for the truth, honor, industry, sobriety, intellectual development and spiritual growth that woman is honored or exalted, but merely because she can bear children. Now it is natural for woman to bear children. She does it as a matter of course. Sometimes she does it with joy and sometimes with sorrow, but in one way of another three-fourths of the women of the world reproduce themselves. But this is only an incident of their lives. They are responsible for their children only secondly. First comes their responsibility for themselves -- for their own lives, their own duties, their own destiny.

The age has passed when one sees the hand of God in an epidemic. Physicians are here, scientists have labored. When an epidemic arises it is fought and frequently defeated. Has not the time also passed when on secs the hand of God in the indiscriminate bearing of children?

Every thoughtful philanthropist knows that it would be a blessing to humanity if the criminal and half witted were emasculated so that it would be impossible for them to reproduce themselves. The statistics on such matters fill one with horror. Not long ago Dr. Kiernan mentioned the case of one insane criminal woman in Illinois who had eighteen children and grandchildren, none of whom were sane or innocuous. Is it possible that this is the hand of God?

Who has not seen a fretful, overworked, nervous wreck of a woman with six or eight little children tugging at her skirts, none of them properly cared for, all of them rather dirty, and doomed to poverty of the sort that grinds the soul down into the muck? Is the hand of God in that?

Not long ago I was sitting in a public medical clinic. A dragged-out looking young woman entered, carrying one little child, and with another tugging at her skirts. She was ill and told her symptoms to the physician who was in charge that day.

"Madam," he said gently, but with something of amusement in his tone, "is it possible that you have these children, and that you do not know what your symptoms signify? Why did you come to me? I can give you a little medicine to ease some of your suffering, but you are not afflicted with a disease. Your illness has natural causes."

She looked at him a moment, flushed a deep scarlet, and went wearily out trying to hide the tears that had gathered in her eyes. The students laughed after she was gone. They couldn't understand that a sentence of death would have been hardly more terrible to her than that verdict. It meant that with a back which was never free from pain, with a purse that never reached her needs, with two little ones not yet through teething, she was to go again through all the torments of a year's illness and anxiety. With each month of growing weakness her cares would be increased. No one would think of relieving her. No one would consdier her really ill. Her neighbors might come in and compare pains with her. They would probably never think of helping her. And then would come the final agony -- that black suffering which, once experienced, is never forgotten, and then the dragging convalescence, very likely with complications of the most painful sort.

One often wonders if men would consider the unrestricted bearing of children such a God ordained institution if they had some of the suffering to bear themselves.

THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER.
The truth of the matter is, that so inferior are men in physical endurance of pain, and in resistance to nervous strain, that they would perish under the suffering that women endure while they continue their daily work. The work is not well done, perhaps, and the body a mere house of pain, but someway or other they live and fret.

The question arises, are not two well-educated, self-respecting, well-trained, carefully developed children of more value to the state from an economic point of view than twelve under-fed, dirty, half-educated, weak and nervous children?

I once knew a woman who believed that it was God's will that she should have a child every year, or, at least, every year and a half. There were nine of them. She was not strong. She did not love her husband. She was bitterly poor. The children were fine babies, and the two eldest grew to strong manhood. The others, as they reached the age of puberty, developed the most astonishing weakness. Every joint seemed to be dissevered. The arms swung helplessly back and forth. The legs would sustain the body only at times and then with the greatest difficulty. The head would lie on the shoulders. It used to be very obvious that if the woman had cared for her health, built up her vitality, and waited a few years after bearing her first two children, she might have had a family to be proud of. As it was, her poor heart broke with grief and shame -- and it really seemed as if she had done something to be ashamed of. As for laying such misery as; this to God -- it would be blasphemous!

One does not deny that there are women who can bear twelve, twenty or thirty children. In Italy the descendants of the Roman matrons not infrequently bear thirty children. To be sure, they cannot very well support them. But in Italy one only lies in the sun and lives. In America it is against the law to merely lie in the sun and live, unless one has a bank account. The only vagrants approved of here are those who draw interest on invested money. Thirty children would consequently be a horrible embarrassment in America. But there are women here who can bear twelve children and still be strong and well. There is one very lovely and well-known Irish-American woman in this town who has borne twelve children, and still is comparatively young and happy and handsome. She, evidently, is the woman made for the task and, since she is able to educate and properly care for them, she has reason to feel herself blessed.

But no man would think of asking a broncho to drag the same loads a Normandy draft horse would. .The load is intelligently tempered to the powers of the animal. Are we not to show as much humanity and intelligence where human life is concerned?

CRITICISES RELIGION.

There was a time when religion was even more tyrannical in its attitude toward woman, than now. Not only was woman expected to bear children, but she was disgraced if she could not. A barren woman was considered accursed, and unworthy of a man's love. As a matter of fact, behind the smiling faces of many women in this very city, who are much in society and club life because they are childless and have no duties to keep them at home. He bitter histories of disappointment, of withered hopes and physical suffering. Though fitted spiritually and mentally for motherhood, the boon has been denied them. But, fortunately, science has, at least, exploded the superstition that woman is bewitched or accursed because she cannot bear children. And men, apparently have, as a class, outgrown the ideas of Napoleon and Cardinal Gibbons and love women regardless of their abilities in that direction. They have married their wives for companionship, hoping, without doubt, for sons and daughters, but too well satisfied with the marital associations to fume over their disappointment, and certainly too just to resent such a condition.

It is also noticeable that Cardinal Gibbons fears that the higher education takes women from religious influences. His eminence has a much poorer opinion of religion than most laymen, who frankly think that the more one knows of God's world the more sincerely and reverently religious will one be. Ignorance is not the handmaid of God.

"God has given us a heart to be formed, as well as a head to be enlightened," says the cardinal. That is very true. But he is wrong in assuming, as he does, that it is the uneducated woman who cultivates the heart. The New Woman, as she is ridiculously called, finds in her college, her clubs, and her social intercourse, the very things that teach her how great is her responsibility to her kind. The small gossipings which used to drag the sex into abject puerility are recognized now as hopeless bad form. They stand associated with women of the old provincial type. The women who think are the women who feel. They are those who try to better the condition of their sisters by practical measures. They provide houses of refuge for the fallen, secure physicians of their own sex for the insane, put matrons in the police stations, build college settlements in the slums, teach good cooking and house cleaning, put traveler's aid agents at the stations to protect the unsophisticated, inculcate and live up to democratic principles, indorse and encourage legislation protecting their kind, and wage organized war against the vices that have for centuries corrupted men and wrecked homes.

LIBERTY AND INDEPENDENCE.

All this means, of course, that woman enjoys liberty and independence. American men, as a class, are not afraid of this. They are proud of it and glad of it, and heaven knows that never in the history of the world were there happier homes or more devoted husbands than here. Some of these husbands are even unselfish enough to feel proud of their wives' achievements. Or, to put it better, they look upon these achievements as their own, seeing no division in the perfect partnership which they and the woman of their choosing enjoy together.

One never sees a man fretting about the development of a woman without wondering what mystery he is trying to protect, or what injustice he is endeavoring to foster.

But it is too late for the protests. It is rapidly becoming too late for the mysteries. Turn the light on. Let it flood the whole world -- the light of learning and liberty! If this loses any woman a man's love, his love is well lost. If it keeps children from being born, they are well in their oblivion.

His eminence says that the cardinal virtues of a woman are chastity and humility. It is unfortunate that it should seem to be the chief occupation of a large part of the men to destroy the first and to identify the second with servitude.

Chastity and humility! Women are chaste by nature, thank God. And they will be more humble when they know more than they do now -- and the "New Woman" is trying to speed that day.

It does not seem odd to refer to educated women as new women. Is human development a novelty?

But after all, it is pity rather than resentment that one should feel for Cardinal Gibbons. His opportunities for knowing and enjoying the "New Woman" are so exceedingly limited.
ELIA W. PEATTIE.

TROUBLE IN POLICE COURT.

The police are up in arms against Acting Police Judge Crosby, whom they accuse of offering a premium upon crime by his easy way of discharging every hard citizen who is brought before him and who tell a hard luck story. They quote several instances of ex-convicts who ought to have been sent up on general principles. On the other hand, Judge Crosby insists that the police must prove their cases and declares he will not send a man to jail unless he is satisfied that he deserves it.

A SMALL FIRE.

A fire occurred at 1:30 p. m. yesterday in the two-story dwelling at 1385 South Seventeenth street, occupied by A. L. Emminger. The blaze arose from a defective [flue?], causing a damage to the house and contents of $1,000. The house was insured, but none was carried on the contents.

TAKES ISSUE WITH GIBBONS

Mrs. Peattie Discusses the Cardinal's Position Regarding "The New Woman."

Men Are Inferior to Women in Endurance of Pain and Resistance to Nervous Strain.

Some Plain Statements Relative to Motherhood -- Attitude to Be Assumed Toward the Criminal Classes.

Last Sunday there was published in the World-Herald an interesting interview, held by a young woman reporter, with Cardinal Gibbons. The subject discussed by these two persons was "The New Woman," whatever that may mean. Apparently it means, according to his eminence and the bright young reporter, the woman who is graduated by universities, who takes an interest in civic affairs, and who believes in science as much as she does in instinct.

Cardinal Gibbons has never approved of this type of woman. He has preached against her, and talked against her. IF he is correctly reported by his interviewer -- and, indeed, the interview bears every evidence of being truthful -- he says:

"As a Catholic, I am bound to disapprove of any so-called woman movement. The church of Rome exalts womanhood in the veneration it accords the mother of Jesus Christ, but in exalting a woman it still has regard for the special nature of her mission in the world, which is equal to man's though not identical with it."

His eminence refers, very evidently, to the mammal functions of a woman. She is elevated, he appears to think, in proportion as she exercises these. Napoleon, be it remembered, was of the same opinion. He respected most the woman who could bear the most children. He desired to have the women bear men in order that he might slay them. Cardinal Gibbons' reasons are, no doubt, less sanguinary. But he also appears to entertain the same idea. The woman he elevates above all others is distinguished because she bore a son in an unheard sort of a way -- a unique way, and one in which she set an example that no other woman has ever been able to follow.

IS BUT AN INCIDENT.

It seems then, that it is not for the truth, honor, industry, sobriety, intellectual development and spiritual growth that woman is honored or exalted, but merely because she can bear children. Now it is natural for woman to bear children. She does it as a matter of course. Sometimes she does it with joy and sometimes with sorrow, but in one way of another three-fourths of the women of the world reproduce themselves. But this is only an incident of their lives. They are responsible for their children only secondly. First comes their responsibility for themselves -- for their own lives, their own duties, their own destiny.

The age has passed when one sees the hand of God in an epidemic. Physicians are here, scientists have labored. When an epidemic arises it is fought and frequently defeated. Has not the time also passed when on secs the hand of God in the indiscriminate bearing of children?

Every thoughtful philanthropist knows that it would be a blessing to humanity if the criminal and half witted were emasculated so that it would be impossible for them to reproduce themselves. The statistics on such matters fill one with horror. Not long ago Dr. Kiernan mentioned the case of one insane criminal woman in Illinois who had eighteen children and grandchildren, none of whom were sane or innocuous. Is it possible that this is the hand of God?

Who has not seen a fretful, overworked, nervous wreck of a woman with six or eight little children tugging at her skirts, none of them properly cared for, all of them rather dirty, and doomed to poverty of the sort that grinds the soul down into the muck? Is the hand of God in that?

Not long ago I was sitting in a public medical clinic. A dragged-out looking young woman entered, carrying one little child, and with another tugging at her skirts. She was ill and told her symptoms to the physician who was in charge that day.

"Madam," he said gently, but with something of amusement in his tone, "is it possible that you have these children, and that you do not know what your symptoms signify? Why did you come to me? I can give you a little medicine to ease some of your suffering, but you are not afflicted with a disease. Your illness has natural causes."

She looked at him a moment, flushed a deep scarlet, and went wearily out trying to hide the tears that had gathered in her eyes. The students laughed after she was gone. They couldn't understand that a sentence of death would have been hardly more terrible to her than that verdict. It meant that with a back which was never free from pain, with a purse that never reached her needs, with two little ones not yet through teething, she was to go again through all the torments of a year's illness and anxiety. With each month of growing weakness her cares would be increased. No one would think of relieving her. No one would consdier her really ill. Her neighbors might come in and compare pains with her. They would probably never think of helping her. And then would come the final agony -- that black suffering which, once experienced, is never forgotten, and then the dragging convalescence, very likely with complications of the most painful sort.

One often wonders if men would consider the unrestricted bearing of children such a God ordained institution if they had some of the suffering to bear themselves.

THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER.
The truth of the matter is, that so inferior are men in physical endurance of pain, and in resistance to nervous strain, that they would perish under the suffering that women endure while they continue their daily work. The work is not well done, perhaps, and the body a mere house of pain, but someway or other they live and fret.

The question arises, are not two well-educated, self-respecting, well-trained, carefully developed children of more value to the state from an economic point of view than twelve under-fed, dirty, half-educated, weak and nervous children?

I once knew a woman who believed that it was God's will that she should have a child every year, or, at least, every year and a half. There were nine of them. She was not strong. She did not love her husband. She was bitterly poor. The children were fine babies, and the two eldest grew to strong manhood. The others, as they reached the age of puberty, developed the most astonishing weakness. Every joint seemed to be dissevered. The arms swung helplessly back and forth. The legs would sustain the body only at times and then with the greatest difficulty. The head would lie on the shoulders. It used to be very obvious that if the woman had cared for her health, built up her vitality, and waited a few years after bearing her first two children, she might have had a family to be proud of. As it was, her poor heart broke with grief and shame -- and it really seemed as if she had done something to be ashamed of. As for laying such misery as; this to God -- it would be blasphemous!

One does not deny that there are women who can bear twelve, twenty or thirty children. In Italy the descendants of the Roman matrons not infrequently bear thirty children. To be sure, they cannot very well support them. But in Italy one only lies in the sun and lives. In America it is against the law to merely lie in the sun and live, unless one has a bank account. The only vagrants approved of here are those who draw interest on invested money. Thirty children would consequently be a horrible embarrassment in America. But there are women here who can bear twelve children and still be strong and well. There is one very lovely and well-known Irish-American woman in this town who has borne twelve children, and still is comparatively young and happy and handsome. She, evidently, is the woman made for the task and, since she is able to educate and properly care for them, she has reason to feel herself blessed.

But no man would think of asking a broncho to drag the same loads a Normandy draft horse would. .The load is intelligently tempered to the powers of the animal. Are we not to show as much humanity and intelligence where human life is concerned?

CRITICISES RELIGION.

There was a time when religion was even more tyrannical in its attitude toward woman, than now. Not only was woman expected to bear children, but she was disgraced if she could not. A barren woman was considered accursed, and unworthy of a man's love. As a matter of fact, behind the smiling faces of many women in this very city, who are much in society and club life because they are childless and have no duties to keep them at home. He bitter histories of disappointment, of withered hopes and physical suffering. Though fitted spiritually and mentally for motherhood, the boon has been denied them. But, fortunately, science has, at least, exploded the superstition that woman is bewitched or accursed because she cannot bear children. And men, apparently have, as a class, outgrown the ideas of Napoleon and Cardinal Gibbons and love women regardless of their abilities in that direction. They have married their wives for companionship, hoping, without doubt, for sons and daughters, but too well satisfied with the marital associations to fume over their disappointment, and certainly too just to resent such a condition.

It is also noticeable that Cardinal Gibbons fears that the higher education takes women from religious influences. His eminence has a much poorer opinion of religion than most laymen, who frankly think that the more one knows of God's world the more sincerely and reverently religious will one be. Ignorance is not the handmaid of God.

"God has given us a heart to be formed, as well as a head to be enlightened," says the cardinal. That is very true. But he is wrong in assuming, as he does, that it is the uneducated woman who cultivates the heart. The New Woman, as she is ridiculously called, finds in her college, her clubs, and her social intercourse, the very things that teach her how great is her responsibility to her kind. The small gossipings which used to drag the sex into abject puerility are recognized now as hopeless bad form. They stand associated with women of the old provincial type. The women who think are the women who feel. They are those who try to better the condition of their sisters by practical measures. They provide houses of refuge for the fallen, secure physicians of their own sex for the insane, put matrons in the police stations, build college settlements in the slums, teach good cooking and house cleaning, put traveler's aid agents at the stations to protect the unsophisticated, inculcate and live up to democratic principles, indorse and encourage legislation protecting their kind, and wage organized war against the vices that have for centuries corrupted men and wrecked homes.

LIBERTY AND INDEPENDENCE.

All this means, of course, that woman enjoys liberty and independence. American men, as a class, are not afraid of this. They are proud of it and glad of it, and heaven knows that never in the history of the world were there happier homes or more devoted husbands than here. Some of these husbands are even unselfish enough to feel proud of their wives' achievements. Or, to put it better, they look upon these achievements as their own, seeing no division in the perfect partnership which they and the woman of their choosing enjoy together.

One never sees a man fretting about the development of a woman without wondering what mystery he is trying to protect, or what injustice he is endeavoring to foster.

But it is too late for the protests. It is rapidly becoming too late for the mysteries. Turn the light on. Let it flood the whole world -- the light of learning and liberty! If this loses any woman a man's love, his love is well lost. If it keeps children from being born, they are well in their oblivion.

His eminence says that the cardinal virtues of a woman are chastity and humility. It is unfortunate that it should seem to be the chief occupation of a large part of the men to destroy the first and to identify the second with servitude.

Chastity and humility! Women are chaste by nature, thank God. And they will be more humble when they know more than they do now -- and the "New Woman" is trying to speed that day.

It does not seem odd to refer to educated women as new women. Is human development a novelty?

But after all, it is pity rather than rasentment that one should feel for Cardinal Gibbons. His opportunities for knowing and enjoying the "New Woman" are so exceedingly limited.
ELIA W. PEATTIE.

TROUBLE IN POLICE COURT.

The police are up in arms against Acting Police Judge Crosby, whom they accuse of offering a premium upon crime by his easy way of discharging every hard citizen who is brought before him and who tell a hard luck story. They quote several instances of ex-convicts who ought to have been sent up on general principles. On the other hand, Judge Crosby insists that the police must prove their cases and declares he will not send a man to jail unless he is satisfied that he deserves it.

A SMALL FIRE.

A fire occurred at 1:30 p. m. yesterday in the two-story dwelling at 1385 South Seventeenth street, occupied by A. L. Emminger. The blaze arose from a defective [flue?], causing a damage to the house and contents of $1,000. The house was insured, but none was carried on the contents.