Boston City (part 12 of 67)

Though the phase of thought which gave its name and character to this period is no longer so marked and conspicuous, it doubtless gave a permanent and still existing impulse to the mode of thinking and feeling on matters of philosophy and religion. New questions have since arisen to take the place of the old; or more accurately, perhaps, the old ones have passed into new forms and aspects. The hostility and ridicule which it aroused have died away, and its modifying influence is now silently, per¬ haps unconsciously, felt in many minds to whom it once seemed portentous in its aspect and pernicious in its consequences, and has undermined or lessened the hold of other opinions and doctrines. If we may venture to draw a lesson from a retrospect of the field which we have passed over, when we look back on the angry controversies and bitter hostilities of the past, it may impress upon us that what when novel and strange often seems sinister and threatening, a meteor "shaking from its horrid hair" all sorts of evils and disasters, " may by and by," to borrow the language of another, " take its place in the clear upper sky, and blend its light with all our day."

By Mrs. Ednah D. Cheney

\\ J HEN an English gentleman was asked what seemed to him the most ' ' remarkable thing in Boston, he promptly answered, "The Women ! " Mary Carpenter said " she did not see what more the women of Boston could ask for," so favorably did their position compare with that of women in any other country.

There is a strong and recognizable type of Boston women whose char¬ acteristics are clear and enduring; and the gradual formation of this type may be traced from the earliest periods of the town's history, as in leading individuals those qualities are clearly seen which have made the woman of to-day what she is. The Boston woman inherits from a line of well-bred and well-educated ancestors, mostly English, a physical frame delicate and supple, but enduring. It is capable of great nervous force and energy, and can be made to serve the mind and will' almost absolutely. But she is liable to attacks of disease, and under unfavorable conditions her nervous energy degenerates into irritability. More intellectual than passionate, her im¬ pulses are under control ; and she is reserved and cold in manner, while a gentle purity inspires confidence even before it awakens affection.

Her morality is stern and exacting, and she does not understand the temptations which beset other natures ; her own sense of chastity is so high that, like the lady in Comus, she walks amid a thousand dangers unheeding and unharmed. She shrinks from contact with evil until it appears as suf¬ fering, when duty and benevolence overcome her sensitiveness. She is speculative in theology, while conservative in her tastes; and, though in¬ dulging great freedom of thought, is devout in her habits. This conflict sometimes produces a strain upon her feelings too great for endurance, and she seeks refuge in an established church. Perhaps this is only a brief rest in her onward career, or it leads to a life of moral or benevolent activity in which she is content. Her aesthetic nature is serious and refined, preferring the classic music to the modern opera, and pre-Raphaelitism to sensuous

Aristocratic by tradition, she is in danger of becoming exclusive and narrow; but, liberalized by education, she is democratic in her work, if not in her tastes and social habits.

Her hospitality is not free, for her time is precious and her housekeep¬ ing orderly; but the old Boston matron made home a radiating centre of goodness and happiness. She gives the name of " friend " carefully, but holds it sacredly. Brissot de Warville said of Bostonians in 1788: -

"They unite simplicity of morals with that French politeness and delicacy of man¬ ners which render virtue more amiable. The young women here enjoy the liberty they do in England, - that they did in Geneva when morals were there, and the Re¬ public existed ; and they do not abuse it."

The Boston woman is exemplary in her conduct as a wife and mother. Brissot de Warville again says: "Bostonian mothers are reserved; . . . entirely devoted to their families, they are occupied in making their hus¬ bands happy and training their children to virtue." He also speaks of their preservation of health and beauty: "I have seen women of fifty with such an air of freshness that they would not have been taken by an European for more than forty. Women of sixty and seventy are sparkling with health." But Boston women are still more remarkable for their virtues in single life. Theodore Parker truly said that he missed elsewhere " his glorious phaianx of old maids."

Boston women have learned to respect work, and a woman can earn her living by labor of any kind, if she be honest, intelligent, and pure in her life, without losing the respect or the companionship of the most refined and re¬ spected. Ann Bent and Harriet Ryan1 - the one a shopkeeper and the other a hair-dresser - are instances within our own memory. Young aspi¬ rants in art, however wealthy, seek to sell their pictures, that they may be classed as artists, not as amateurs.

The Boston woman is a representative of New England; and the con¬ stant interchange between city and country makes it difficult to draw any sharp distinctions between their inhabitants.

The history of Boston women begins with a young girl, Ann by name, ten years old, who was the first person to leap from the boat which brought over the exploring party from Charlestown, in 1630; and when, as Mrs. Pollard, she died2 in 1725, aged one hundred and five, there was left be¬ hind her a canvas, still in existence,3 on which the strong hard lines of

The Women Of Boston

It is not certain that the gentle footfalls of the dearly beloved Lady Arbella were ever heard in what was to become Boston, but we like to recall what manner of woman she and her companions were, as pictured in the story of the voyage which they had just encountered: -

" When the officers were alarmed by the appearance of eight sail supposed to be enemies, the Lady Arbella and children were removed into the lower deck, that they might be out of danger ; but not a woman or child showed fear, though all did appre¬ hend the danger to be very great."

She took her full part in all the labors and dangers attendant upon their first landing in Salem ; but " the virtues of her mind were not able to stem the tide of those many adversities of her outward condition," and she died about Aug. 30, 1630, deeply lamented by the whole colony. But there were survivors of her sex who bore their part in all the hard labor of the new settlement. " They went once a day, as the tide gave way, to gather mussels and clams on the shore." When Mr. Garrett went to Plymouth, in Decem¬ ber, with several men and a girl, in an open shallop, encountering severe cold and storms, the girl suffered, we are told, least of all.

That woman's influence in sustaining the spirits of the colonists was ap¬ preciated, is shown by the tender mention of the daughter of Thomas Sharpe : " Boston had not received the like loss of any woman."

Hardly seven years after the settlement the peace of the colony was dis¬ turbed by religious troubles. The most distinguished leader of this Antinomian movement was a woman, - Mrs. Anne Hutchinson. She was the daughter of Mr. Thomas Marberry, an English preacher, and the wife of Mr. William Hutchinson, a man of good estate and mild temper. After all the searching criticism of her enemies, Dr. Ellis 1 asserts " that nothing can be discovered or inferred in this age, from any known record, which sullies her matronly or religious character." Her intellectual endowments were rich, and her personal gifts of eloquence and persuasion very great. Her religious nature having been quickened by the preaching of Mr. Cotton and Mr. Wheelwright in England, no other minister satisfied her, and she left her home and followed them to New England that she might have the nourish¬ ment which her soul craved. She already held " peculiar opinions," for she " vented them " on shipboard, to the dismay of the passengers. On ar¬ riving at Boston her eccentricities were reported to the Governor, but she made herself useful " as a woman very helpful in the times of childbirth and other occasions of bodily disease, and well furnished for these offices." Before she appeared in public she had won the confidence and affection of nearly all the members of the Boston church. When she had been thus engaged for about two years, she began to call her friends and converts to¬ gether, to discuss points of doctrine and strengthen each other in the faith.

Her meetings were confined to women, and sometimes she gathered a hun¬ dred. The nominal purpose was to repeat the discourses of Mr. Cotton, and impress them upon the minds of her hearers. She held these meetings twice a week, and at first they were looked upon with general favor; but in the progress of discussion the sermons of other ministers were commented upon and compared unfavorably with those of her favorites, and gradually her own views were presented. Without entering into her theological speculations, we must look through the mists of controversy and the quar¬ rels about words for the real essence of Anne Hutchinson's teachings, for what made her doctrine so welcome not only to the women but to many of the noblest men in the colony. Although expressed in hard, speculative phraseology, as suited the intellectual fashion of the times, yet her real mes¬ sage, as in all true religious revivals, was a re-assertion of the power of the life and the spirit over outward regulations and formalities. Not what you do, but what you are, is the measure of salvation : the covenant of works is of outward forms; the covenant of grace is of inward life. True as this doctrine is in its essence, none is more liable to run into error and extrava¬ gance, since the outward life is necessary as expression, test, and correction of the inward feeling. The belief in immediate revelation, which grew out of her spirit and faith, led Mrs. Hutchinson to such extravagant claims as gave occasion for alarm to the magistrates, whose great desire was to keep all things quiet and orderly, that the home government might have no pre¬ text for restricting their liberties.

Mrs. Hutchinson's trial took place in November, 1637, before the full court. William Coddington alone defended her. While her sex was fre¬ quently brought forward as a reason against the course she had taken, she was not treated with any courtesy on account of it, but was kept standing until weakness obtained for her the privilege of sitting. Her answers to the charges against her are full of wit and wisdom, and she often confounded her judges with her apt quotations from Scripture. She found her rule in Titus: "Let the older women instruct the younger." The proceedings of the court were arbitrary and severe, but the alarm of the magistrates was real. The Synod decreed, " that though some few women may meet together for prayer and mutual advice, yet such a set assembly as is in practice at Boston is unlawful (when sixty or more meet every week, and one woman takes upon herself the whole exercise)." The court decreed the banishment of Mrs. Hutchinson to Rhode Island. Her enemies declared that the judgment of God was seen in some personal afflictions which fell upon her, while her friends equally traced the finger of Providence in the sufferings of the colony. In 1642, after her husband's death, she removed to the Dutch settlements near New Haven, where she and all her family, with the exception of one daughter who was made captive, were murdered by the Indians.

Her influence was very great, and has undoubtedly left its impress upon the life of Boston women to this day. It has been asserted that she was insane, but there seems no ground for charging her with more than the en¬ thusiasm of a highly wrought and sensitive nature, somewhat bewildered by theological and speculative subtleties.1

At a very early period the staid colonists found it necessary to pass sump¬ tuary laws against dress. Roger Williams had enjoined the women to wear veils, but John Cotton especially condemned the practice as not required by Scripture. In Salem- his sermon had so much effect that those who wore veils at the morning service left them off in the afternoon. A little later the General Court enacted that " women, not enjoying property to the value of £200, were forbid to wear silk, or tiffany hoods, or scarfs." In 1665 there was such a lack of clothing in the colony that a law was passed, " enjoining all, not otherwise employed, - as women, boys, and girls, - to engage in spinning; " and the selectmen of the town were required to look into the condition of every family and " assess spinners." 2

About 1648 the nightmare horror of witchcraft began to spread through the colonies, and women were the most frequent victims of the fatal delu¬ sion ; but the horrors of that story need not be repeated here.3

Many of the punishments inflicted on women for other offences were extremely cruel. Dorothy Talboy was hanged for the murder of her child, - although she was unquestionably suffering under ^religious insanity. Mrs. Oliver "was whipped for -reproaching the magistrates," and " had a cleft stick put on her tongue half an hour for reproaching the elders." A severe law against marriages of persons within the degree of relationship pro¬ hibited by the Jewish Code, applied to both men and women: -

" Such man or woman shall be set upon the gallows by the space of an hour, with a rope about their neck, and the other end cast over the gallows ; and on the way from thence to the common gaol shall be severely whipped, not exceeding forty stripes each. Also, every person so offending shall forever after wear a capital I of two inches long and proportionable bigness, cut out in cloth of a contrary color to their cloaths, and sewed upon their upper garments, on the outside of their arm or on their back, in open view."

Even as late as May 10, 1752, an unfortunate woman was sentenced to stand upon a scaffold for the space of an hour, facing the four cardinal points of the compass a quarter of an hour each. In this situation she was obliged to suffer from the mob treatment so brutal that the historian refrains from describing it.

The most severe sufferers from the old-time legal sternness were the Quaker women ; and the names of Mary Fisher, Dorothy Waugh, and Mary Dyer fill us with pathetic sadness, but their story has already been told.4

Women, of course, shared deeply in the anxieties and sufferings caused by the wars with the Indians. Mrs. Mary Rowlandson, of Lancaster, and her family were taken captive by the Indians. After her release she ar¬ rived in Boston, May 3, 1676, and published a narrative of her experience. She says: "The twenty pounds, the price of my redemption, was raised by some Boston gentlewomen and Mr. Usher, whose bounty and charity I would not forget to make mention of."

Owing to these wars, to fires, and the difficulties with the mother country, there was much distress in Boston during the latter part of the seventeenth century; and in 1698 " the town was full of widows and orphans, and many of them are very helpless creatures." It was counted that one sixth of the communicants in Cotton Mather's church were widows. At the same time the former strictness of morals had become much relaxed, and new laws against all manner of indulgence were required. The laws regarding mar¬ riage were severe, and bore harder upon women than upon men, - even upon Indian women; but perhaps they were not more unequal than in any other civilized community. The English law against marrying a wife's sister was strictly enforced.1

Only one woman became distinguished in literature during this earlier period. Anne Dudley, the wife of Governor Bradstreet, was born in Eng¬ land, in 1612 or 1613. She was married at sixteen, and probably came over in the " Arbella." Her first book was published in London, in 1650, under the title, The Tenth Muse , lately sprung up in America : Several Poems compiled with great variety of wit tind learning. By a Gentlewoman of America. She had eight children, but still found time for much study and writing. Her poems2 are mostly versifications of history. The opposition to literary pursuits is shown by the statement in her prologue : -

A little poem on her children, and another to a bird in contemplation, show a tender feeling for Nature, which, had she lived in happier times for the muse, might have made her a poet of higher rank: -

1 [This law was dropped at the revisal of the 2 [See Vol. I. p. 461, and the authorities there laws of marriage and divorce, in 1785. - Ed.] cited. - Ed.]

From the close of the religious persecutions to the actual outbreak of the Revolution we find very slight indications of woman's presence and in¬ fluence. The town was growing in wealth and importance, and there was evidently an increase of aristocratic society. Olclmixon says : " A gentle¬ man from London would almost think himself at home at Boston, when he observes the number of people, their houses, their furniture, their tables, their dress and conversation, which perhaps is as showy as that of the most considerable tradesman in London." Women must have contributed to this pleasing condition of society, and an occasional mention of funeral honors shows the deference which was paid to them. Hannah Waldo is recorded as " a pattern of every female virtue." The Castle guns were fired in honor of the funeral of Governor Shirley's wife, and Dr. Colman com¬ memorated her at the lecture before the General Court.

Women were not unfrequently conspicuous in church affairs.1 The Sandemanian Society was largely composed of women ; and " thirty men and twice as many women seceded with Samuel Mather " when he with¬ drew from the Second Church.2 Yet the church had treated women rather harshly, for " under certain accusations they were obliged to stand up with a white robe or sheet over them, while the minister read aloud their confes¬ sion. Afterward, such brethren and sisters who should fall into scandal were allowed to confess to church members only." Women were also active in charity: Dorothy Saltonstall left to the poor two hundred pounds, and twenty pounds to be laid out in Bibles and Testaments to be distributed among poor children. She was also the executrix of the will of her hus¬ band, Mr. John Frizzell. Both Increase and Cotton Mather preached funeral sermons on the death of Mrs. Foster, " who dispensed her alms with an uncommon generosity." A French observer of Boston customs says " that men make it not a business to pay court to women; " but I find no indications of special want of courtesy, - the tone is that of polite society.

There was much extravagance in dress as the colony grew in years, and hoops had attained to such a size in 1726 as to be severely attacked. Yet the women were not unwilling to give up their finery, and during the periods of suffering in Boston they wore calicoes and chintzes.3 When the people, somewhat later, resolved to avoid the use of articles taxed by the English Parliament, women as well as men gave up wearing expensive mourning; and at the funeral of Mr. Ellis Callender " his sister appeared with no other token of mourning than a black bonnet, gloves, ribbons, and hand¬ kerchief."

Judge Sewall's Diary gives a lively picture of home life during the early part of the eighteenth century. His thirteenth child was born January 2, and on the 1 6th his wife treats her midwife and women. "They had a good dinner of boiled pork, beef, fowls, roast beef, turkey, pye, and tarts, for seventeen guests." Hannah Greenleaf was the midwife.

But the woman of elegant society was not the only representative of her sex in days a century agonc. We hear of Mrs. Avery, and many others, keeping shop; and in 1794 a writer of the Historical Journal of the Amer¬ ican War says a word in behalf of his countrywomen, who bring various articles of home manufacture into Boston for sale. They are exposed to the inclemencies of the weather, and often obliged to part with goods at a low price, or barter them for articles of luxury. He urges that stands be erected for them near the market.

When the soldiers raised by Governor Shirley to aid General Braddock, in 1755, had been three months in the field, news of their sufferings from want of suitable clothing reached their friends. Immediately a number of young ladies volunteered their services to the town authorities, offering gra¬ tuitously to make garments for them. When, some years later, the Stamp Act was repealed, it is said that the subscription to pay the debts of poor prisoners was set on foot by " a fair Boston nymph ; " and fifteen hundred families discontinued tea, to thwart the designs of the Parliament in tax¬ ing it.

There are slight indications which show that women, or rather ladies, in Boston were less robust in the days of which we now write than they were a century earlier. Whether this was owing to the stove, which then, as when Judge Sewall wrote, " made the room comfortable," or to a growing dispo¬ sition to consider women as delicate and ornamental, I cannot say; but Blanchard, who visited Boston in 1780, reports: -

" The women are tall, well formed, of regular features ; their complexion is gener¬ ally only pale , without any color. They have fewer attractions and less ease of manner than our French women, but more dignity. ... At twenty years of age the women have already lost the freshness of youth ; at thirty-five or forty they are wrinkled and decrepit. ... I found that the great part of those who had died were under fifty years of age. There were a very few of sixty, almost none so old as seventy, and I saw none older."

Slavery existed, indeed, nearly through the last century; but its evils were much mitigated by the kindness of the women, who took pains to protect their slaves. In 1699 Mrs. Eunice Wait went to Judge Sewall, expressing her desire that her slave Sebastian might marry Mrs. Thair's Jane ; but Mrs. Thair insisted " that Sebastian should have one day in six for the support of Jane, his intended wife, and her children, if it should please God to give her any." The demand was compromised for five pounds per annum. At a somewhat later day a little ragged child was purchased in the slave market by Mrs. John Wheatley, whose heart was drawn to the little modest, sickly-looking girl, and she took her home and taught her to read and to write. When she was fourteen years old, Phillis began to write poetry. She was encouraged by her mistress in her efforts to learn, and she soon at¬ tracted the attention of clergymen and other literary gentlemen. Flattery and attention did not spoil her, but she remained modest and thoughtful. She went to England for her health, where she received even more atten¬ tion, and her poems were printed, with an engraved likeness of herself. Her poem addressed to the Earl of Dartmouth is noble in sentiment and smooth in versification. She also wrote complimentary verses to General Washing¬ ton, who sent her a courteous reply. She made an unfortunate marriage with a colored man of pleasing appearance, but selfish disposition and idle habits, and in the troubled time of the Revolutionary war she sank into poverty and distress. Mrs. Wheatley's family tried to relieve her when they learned of her wants, but death soon put an end to her trials. She was never called by the name of her unworthy husband, but always Phillis Wheatley.1

During the Revolutionary period we find no woman taking a very promi¬ nent position in affairs in Boston ; but how deeply interested they were in the struggle, how full of patriotic ardor and willingness to bear their share of toil and privation, is shown by the letters and journals of the day, espe¬ cially those of Mrs. Quincy and Mrs. Adams.

Dorothy Quincy married John Hancock when he was in concealment with Samuel Adams in Fairfield, Connecticut. A fortnight after the birth of her first child she travelled by carriage to Philadelphia with her husband, then chosen President of the first Congress. When her husband informed her, in great secrecy, that it was thought it might be necessary to burn Boston to prevent its falling into the hands of the enemy, and that he had consented to the destruction of all his property, she was so calm as to be able to attend Quaker meeting immediately after. At a later day she was accustomed to receive all classes at her Saturday salt-fish dinner. When Admiral d'Estaing was invited to breakfast with Hancock, and requested permission to bring all his officers, to the number of three hundred, Mrs. Hancock, being unable to procure milk enough for her table, sent out her servants to milk all the cows on the Common, with directions to send any persons who complained to her. It is said that the owners were rather amused than offended by the proceeding.

Of an interesting circle of women associated with Boston during the stirring periods of the last century, and some of whom still live for us on Copley's canvases, we may not happily forget Mrs. John Murray, who pub¬ lished both poetry and dramas, and Mrs. Edmund Perkins, who was cele¬ brated for her fine intellect. Mrs. Mercy Otis Warren, the sister of James

Otis, was one of the most gifted women of the time ; and although born in Barnstable and living mostly at Plymouth, she yet mingled in Boston society, and published some of her writings there. Copley depicts " her face as delicate and intellectual ; hair and eyes dark. Her head-dress is of white lace with white satin ribbons. Her robe is of dark-green satin, with pompadour waist trimmed with point lace. Full plait at the back hanging from the shoulders, and sleeves of point lace ; front of skirt and sleeves elaborately trimmed with puffings of satin." She wrote, at a later day, a voluminous history of the Rise, Progress, and Termination of the American Revolution , interspersed with Biographical, Political, and Moral Observations, in three volumes, the last of which was published in 1805. It is written with great spirit and enthusiasm, though in a quaint style. She gives a clear narrative of events, and paints the leading characters in strong colors. She is not lukewarm in her feelings. She was a Democrat, and a warm admirer of Jefferson. Some of her remarks on John Adams were so severe that he defended himself in a series of letters. She replied rather sharply to him, and the dispute was so warm as to endanger their friendship ; but after some time their intercourse was pleasantly renewed.1

The women of Boston had then little opportunity for methodical educa¬ tion ; but they read a great deal, and, having little new reading, faithfully studied the older English literature, especially that of Queen Anne's time. They also saw a great deal of good society ; and as the best men were deeply engaged with serious questions of political government, the ladies, who shared their anxiety, gained much from their conversation, and ac¬ quired great power of thought and expression. Mrs. Abigail Smith Adams,2 wife of John Adams, born in 1744, says: " I never was sent to any school;

I was always sick. Female education in the best families went no further than writing and arithmetic; in some few and rare instances music and dancing." She says : " It was fashionable to ridicule female learning, and I regret the trifling, narrow, contracted education of the females of my own country." Ladies had a great propensity for letter-writing, which was con¬ sidered an elegant accomplishment, and they used classical names as sig¬ natures, - Miss Smith's being Diana, and afterwards Portia. Calliope, Myra, Aspasia, and Aurelia were used by her friends. Mrs. Adams saw the evil to the Republic from the abasement of one half of its people. She says, somewhat playfully, yet evidently with deep meaning, in 1776: -

" I cannot say that I think you are very generous to the ladies, for, whilst you are proclaiming peace and good-will to men, emancipating all nations, you insist upon re¬ taining an absolute power over wives. But you must remember that arbitrary power is like most other things which are very hard, - very liable to be broken; and, not¬ withstanding all your wise laws and maxims, we have it in our power not only to free

1 [These letters are printed in 5 Mass. Hist. 2 [A portrait of Mrs. John Adams is one of Coll., iv. She was the wife of James Warren, the those given in Griswold's Republican Court, p. President of the Provincial Congress. - Ed.] 169. It is also in the Familiar Letters. - Ed ]

Again she says : " If we mean to have heroes, statesmen, and philoso¬ phers, we should have learned women?" Mr. Adams seems to have felt the power of a wife to mould her husband's fortunes, for he closes a letter on the subject by saying, " A smart wife would have put Howe in possession of Philadelphia a long time ago."

Occasionally the women of Boston, like the men who destroyed the tea, took the righting of wrongs into their own hands. Mrs. Adams writes, July 3r> 1 777 -

" There is a great scarcity of sugar and coffee, - articles which the female part of the State is very loath to give up, especially whilst they consider the scarcity occasioned by the merchants having secreted a large quantity. There had been much rout and noise in the town for several weeks. Some stores had been opened by a number of people, and the coffee and sugar carried into the market and dealt out by pounds. It was rumored that an eminent, wealthy, stingy merchant (who is a bachelor) had a hogshead of coffee in his store, which he refused to sell the committee under six shil¬ lings per pound. A number of females - some say a hundred, some say more - assembled with a cart and trucks, marched down to the warehouse, and demanded the keys, which he refused to deliver. Upon which one of them seized him by his neck and tossed him into the cart. Upon his finding no quarter, he delivered the keys, when they tipped up the cart and discharged him ; then opened the warehouse, hoisted out the coffee themselves, put it into the trunks, and drove off. It was reported that he had personal chastisements among them ; but this I believe was not true. A large concourse of men stood amazed, silent spectators of the whole transaction ! "

To come down somewhat later, Miss Eliza Susan Morton, afterward Mrs. Josiah Quincy,1 visited Boston in 1 795, and speaks of the delightful society which she met there. She was married in 1797, and came to Boston to live. She writes : -

"Thanksgiving Day, December r, 1808. On this day of thanksgiving there is no subject which excites more in my mind than the location of our family in New England, and, above all, in Boston."

This circle of Boston ladies showed a warm interest in literary women. Mrs. Quincy and Miss Lowell had become acquainted with Mrs. Grant's letters from the Mountains. They caused an American edition of her work to be published in 1809, and sent the profits to the author. Mrs. Quincy remarked that while assisting Mrs. Grant they ought to remember that their own countrywoman, Hannah Adams,2 the author of many valuable works,

2 [There is much about Hannah Adams in quarian Society at Worcester. See Allibone's Woods's Brookline, p. 159, etc. ; and a portrait Dictionary of Authors. - Ed.]

was braiding straw for a living. They exerted themselves for her benefit, and succeeded in obtaining subscribers to a life annuity. But " it was requisite that the subscriptions of married women should stand in the name of their husbands." Miss Anna Cabot Lowell was another highly accom¬ plished woman, whose letters and poems were greatly admired : she died in 1820. Mrs. Quincy also exerted herself to have Miss Edgeworth's Moral Tales republished in Boston. While she took an active interest in her hus¬ band's political affairs, she also taught her children two hours every morn¬ ing, during which- he was in attendance at the Capitol. When Lafayette visited Boston she, as the Mayor's wife, welcomed him in " an elegant and appropriate speech." She was early convinced of the sin of Slavery, and was also interested in philanthropic movements, being for thirty years a subscriber to the Boston Female Asylum. There was of course, in these early days of this century, a prodigy. Miss Helen Sheafe, who died in 1802, wrote a poem at thirteen years of age, in answer to the question, "What is Religion?" But the few did not make the rule, and John Quincy Adams could write, -

" Oh that our young ladies were as distinguished for the beauties of their minds as they are for the charms of their persons ! But, alas ! too many of them are like a beautiful apple that is insipid to the taste."

The nineteenth century, so remarkable for its rapid progress in the emancipation of the masses from political tyranny, and of the negroes from personal slavery, has also brought great improvement in the condition of women in Boston, as elsewhere. Legislation in regard to women has been greatly amended. The common law of England, which generally prevailed here, was very unjust to married women, who were almost without personal rights in property. But one of its provisions, which held the husband re¬ sponsible for the crimes of his wife, was disregarded. Mary Dyer suffered in her own person.

Yet there was in Boston society a strong feeling in favor of protecting the pecuniary interests of married women. In 1640 the General Court "voted Mrs. Winthrop three thousand acres of land," although her husband was then living. In the early part of this century the best men of Boston took care to secure a provision for their daughters by will, and to settle their property beyond their husbands' control. Jonathan Jackson used his influence to promote this custom, and as he had given an expensive educa¬ tion to his sons he left his money to his daughters.

But until 1855 a woman could secure the possession of her own property only by placing it in the hands of a trustee, to whose will she was subject, or by making, before marriage, a contract with her husband by which he relinquished his claims to certain designated property. This custom of pro¬ tection gave some security to wealthy women, but it afforded no relief to the large class who might earn money and be at the same time at the mercy of an extravagant or intemperate husband. In 1855 a very broad statute was passed, giving a woman the right to hold all property earned or ac¬ quired by her, independent of the control of her husband. Some trouble¬ some restrictions in regard to selling her property and conducting business still remain ; but the main points are secured.

The laws of inheritance are not yet equalized. A woman cannot, with¬ out his consent, deprive by will her husband of more than one half of her personal property; nor can she take away his life interest in her real estate if they have had a living child.

4 he laws of divorce have been much improved, although still defective, and bearing unequally upon the wife. Even more unequal is the effect of guilt in the marriage relation. Samuel E. Sewall says: "She, if guilty, can under the most favorable circumstances retain only a naked subsistence out of her property; while he, if guilty, may still retain the bulk of his wealth."

In education the advance has been even greater than in legislation in regard to property. Although as early as 1635 measures were taken to es¬ tablish a school in Boston, yet, as we have seen, there was very little pro¬ vision for the education of women. Whether from law or custom, girls do not seem to have attended the schools to any great extent. Wealthy fam¬ ilies had their children taught at home. The public school system as we now know it was established in 1789. " Children of both sexes were to be admitted, boys for the year round, and girls from April to October; " to be taught to spell, accent, and read prose and verse, and also to be instructed in English grammar and composition. In 1806 the number of scholars in all the schools was 1,760, - boys 1,030, girls 730. No child was admitted under seven years of age. This rule led to the establishment, in 1816, of Sunday schools, for instruction not only on religious subjects, but as pre¬ paratory to the grammar and writing schools. This provision being found inadequate, primary schools were established and placed under the care of female instructors, thus introducing this important feature into the school system. In 1825 the number of pupils was 6,220, of whom 2,723 were girls. The girls received rewards at the expense of the city.1

The inequality in the provision of education for girls led the Rev. John Pierpont, then Secretary of the School Committee, to propose the establish¬ ment of a high school for girls. He advocated his proposition on grounds of " general expediency, and as an object of ambition and of profitable employment of three years of life now inadequately occupied." The school was organized, with Mr. Ebenezer Bailey as master, in 1825. Two hundred and eighty-six candidates presented themselves for examination, but many of them were unprepared for a course of study higher than that of the grammar schools. As many of the best candidates were selected as the single room would accommodate. This school was " kept open eighteen or nineteen months, during which time not one pupil voluntarily quitted it, nor would as long as they could be allowed to stay, except in case of marriage."

This is said to have been the first institution of the kind ever established. Many wealthy pupils were taken from private schools to attend it, and many entered the grammar schools to fit themselves for it. A great impulse was given to all the schools. The conduct of the school was entirely satis¬ factory, and many of the young women fitted themselves to be teachers, and sought employment in the primary schools. The sub-committee reported in its favor. But the very success of the school was its ruin 1 Mayor Ouincy reported against it, on the ground of the large numbers who would desire to attend it in future, and the consequent expense to the city. The cost of each pupil was eleven dollars per year. Mr. Quincy proposed as a substitute to add one year to the course of the grammar schools. The high school for girls was abolished.1 The cost of this experiment was about $4,500. Public feeling was very much excited on the subject. Many young Irish girls had entered the school and had proved fine scholars; and an outcry was raised against higher education for the poorer classes, as un¬ fitting them for domestic service. The failure of this school, however, stimulated improvement in the private schools.

Schools for young ladies had been largely devoted to teaching the ac¬ complishments. Modern languages and polite literature were studied, and Paradise Lost was parsed until hardly a shred of it remained. Mrs. Rowson's school was one of the most famous of the early schools, and was succeeded by Dr. Park's. Mr. Cummings was one of the first to aim at more thorough education, and he introduced the study of Latin: the wellknown Mrs. Ripley of Waltham was' one of his pupils. Mr. George B. Emerson established his admirable school; and Mr. Bailey, bitterly disap¬ pointed at the abandonment of the public high school, opened his private " High School for Girls," which continued for ten years. The monitorial system had attracted much attention and been partially introduced into the public schools. Mr. Wm. B. Fowle opened a school for girls on this plan. These two schools, having about a hundred pupils each, introduced many important features, such as gymnastics, dancing, greater attention to solid branches, with scientific experiments, and great care in sanitary arrange¬ ments. It would be impossible to number the many excellent schools which have succeeded. The Chauncy Hall School, originally established for boys, introduced the principle of co-education in 1862. The number of female pupils has risen to sixty-four, the maximum number.

I must indulge myself in speaking of one teacher whose influence has been far-reaching in society, as well as in education, - Mrs. Anna Cabot Lowell, - born Jackson. When suddenly reduced from affluence to pov¬ erty, she refused generous offers of support from both her own and her husband's family, and chose to earn an independence for herself and her children by teaching. Her social position and fine education at once brought her pupils, and her school was a triumphant success. She made $3,000 the first year. She did not aim at having a fashionable school, and discountenanced any pretensions of caste. Her great power lay in arousing the minds of her pupils to intense action, and awakening a love of literature which they never lost. Their enthusiasm for their teacher lasted through their lives. When the Civil War broke out, her sons gave their lives to their country, while she and her daughters labored in the sanitary and freedmen's work. Her influence has been to elevate the office of teacher, and no Boston woman can ever feel that she is lowering her social position by following in her footsteps.

The subject of a Girls' High School was not again brought forward for several years, when the demand for teachers had greatly increased, and Normal Schools had been established by the State. A city normal school for girls was founded in 1852, but the great general demand for highschool education caused its change, three years later, into the " Girls' High and Normal School." 1 Colleges and professional schools being now largely open to women, a strong need of classical education was felt, and in prefer¬ ence to opening the old Latin School to them, a Latin School for girls was opened Jan. 1, 1878,

The employment of women as teachers gradually extended from the primary to the higher grades, and was very much stimulated by the exer¬ tions of Horace Mann, on the Board of Education. The highest positions are still closed to women, only one woman - Miss Baker - having ever been appointed head of a grammar or high school.2

The subject of co-education does not seem to have been agitated at an early period. When girls went to school at all, the arrangements were made rather from convenience than from theory. In 1830, however, a separation on the basis of sex was made in a few of the grammar schools. This movement was very unpopular in some sections of the city. In 1836 six out of ten of the grammar schools had both boys and girls; and the Committee of that year gave two memorable statements in their re¬ port, - one, "That the children of our own city have ever been distinguished for moral and upright behavior; " the other, " That the tendency of mixed schools is to demoralization ! " Since that time the grammar and high schools in the old part of the city have been divided by sex; while in the suburbs, some of them are mixed and others are not.

The Boston University, established in 1869, has from the first opened its doors freely to women in all its departments. In 1879 it had in its colleges one hundred and forty-seven young women, to four hundred and fifty-eight young men. One female student was in law, two in theology, thirteen in music, and forty-eight in medicine. Two ladies serve on the Board of Cor-

2 In 1S80 one thousand and eighty-nine women dred and twelve girls, to fourteen thousand three were employed as teachers in the public schools, hundred and twenty-two boys; and in the priand one hundred and eighty men. Of the pupils mary schools, nine thousand five hundred and in the normal and high schools, there are one forty-two girls, to eleven thousand one hundred thousand nine hundred and seventy-one girls, and eighty-eight boys.

porators, and several as official visitors in the Faculties of liberal arts and medicine, and as managers of the hospital connected with the medical school. The aim of the Massachusetts Society for the University Education of Women was to found free scholarships at this university. It has sup¬ ported seventeen young women wholly or in part, but has as yet no endowed scholarships.1

The Women's Education Association, founded in 1872, has done a large and varied work. Among other good things, it has established training schools for nurses, diet kitchens, and cooking schools, the Harvard Exami¬ nation, the Women's Laboratory, and a summer home for working girls. Mrs. Ellen M. Richards was the first female student at the Massachu¬ setts Institute of Technology, which now admits women to all its classes. She is doing a great work in teaching science, as well as in her investiga¬ tions of adulteration in food. The Society for Encouraging Studies at Home, founded by Miss Anna E. Ticknor, extends its benefits throughout the land. It would indeed be tedious to enumerate all the opportunities for instruction now open to women in Boston. They are sufficient, if well used, to lead to a full recognition of her rights to education everywhere.

The Lowell Institute has done a great deal for women, by simply open¬ ing its fine courses of lectures to the citizens of Boston without distinction. It was once thought improper for ladies to attend lectures, and even as late as 1838 the Lyceum audiences were so rude as to make it disagreeable for ladies to gain admission. Mrs. Lowell, the wife of the founder of the In¬ stitute, was herself a fine scholar, studying even the higher mathematics with her husband.

In the first half of our century the ladies of Boston were more literary in their tastes than scientific or artistic. They read much, and were familiar with modern languages. Sophia Dana (Ripley) had classes in history, which were highly enjoyed by her pupils. The lectures of the " Society for the Diffusion of Knowledge," and afterward those of Richard H. Dana, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and other eminent literary men, were largely attended by ladies. Miss Sarah Freeman Clarke, the first Boston woman who excelled in landscape painting, and one of the few persons who had the benefit of Mr. Allston's instruction, writes: "In 1827, I think, the first Athenaeum exhibition of pictures was announced. A joyous whisper went about that ladies might go to this exhibition unattended by a gentleman. Advanced womanhood will smile at this concession, granted by I know not what social power." This marks a great difference in social customs.

Until within forty years no decent woman entered the pit, now raised into the parquet, of the theatre, and an insulting regulation made the third row infamous. Now ladies go freely into all parts of the theatre, with or with¬ out gentlemen, and Kean riots and the rule of the pit are things of the past. Two Boston women - Mrs. Snelling Powell and Miss Charlotte Cushman - have proved that the position of an actress is not inconsistent with the noblest private virtues and the purest reputation. On the fifth of May, 1852, ladies were for the first time invited to a public political dinner; it was given in honor of Hon. John P. Hale.

Few women have received professional education, except in medicine. As the courts decided that a woman could not even be appointed justice of the peace, the law held out little attraction to those seeking occupation. Few have sought to enter the Church, although one woman has attended theological lectures at Harvard, by favor. But many women have become religious teachers without professional preparation, and it is no unusual thing for a Boston pulpit to be occupied by a woman. The Boston Daily Advertiser of Nov. 1, 1880, says: "Pulpits in Boston, in the suburban towns, and in cities as far distant as Lowell, were occupied by delegates to the Women's Temperance Convention to the number of twenty-four; and prayer-meetings were also led by them." The " Women's Industrial and Educational Union " hold a service on Sunday afternoons, conducted entirely by women. The city of Anne Hutchinson does not find them to be disturbers of the peace.

The Woman's Board of Missions, incorporated in 1869, has done a large work. Its President, Mrs. Albert Bowker, and its leading Vice-President, Mrs. R. Anderson, as well as many of its officers, are Boston women; but its work is not confined to the city. The Home Missionary Association has also done a good work.

The advancement of women in the profession of medicine during the last forty years has been so great, that it must have more than a passing word.

The work of women in caring for the sick began very early in the history of the colony. Anne Hutchinson was physician as well as preacher. The practice of midwifery was. mostly if not entirely in women's hands. But, as years went by, provision was made both for the elementary and pro¬ fessional education of men, while that of women was neglected ; so that as the city progressed in knowledge and prosperity, the demand for the edu¬ cated and scientific physician drove the midwife, who had only learned her business in the school of experience, out of practice. The most remark¬ able midwife was Ruth Barnaby, who practised her profession forty years in Boston, dying in 1765, at the great age of one hundred and one years. Mrs. Alexander, a highly-educated Scotch physician, well known in the city in the early half of the century, was probably the last midwife whose skill was recognized by the higher classes in Boston, although many still find employment among families of moderate means.

Harriot Keziah Hunt, born in Boston in 1805, gave a great impulse to the employment of women in medicine. A woman of great original vigor of intellect, warmth of heart, and strength of will, she was driven to the study and practice of medicine by her observation of the. treatment of disease in her own family. She was educated at private schools, and her¬ self taught in one for a short time. Through the illness of a beloved sister she became acquainted with two English physicians, Dr. Valentine Mott and his wife. She lived with them for several years, learning all she could of the theory and practice of medicine. Miss Hunt was never strictly a prac¬ titioner of any school. A Swedenborgian in faith, she believed much in spiritual and mental influences upon health. Her object was to cure her patients, and she gave them whatever counsel and treatment she felt they needed. Her admirable good sense and warm sympathy often enabled her to " minister to a mind diseased." That she was not more scientifically educated was not her fault, for she repeatedly petitioned to attend the lec¬ tures of the Harvard Medical School, but without success. She took an active interest in all reforms, protested against paying her taxes without the right of representation, and being called to court as a witness, she refused to stoop under the chains placed around the court-house in the time of a fugitive-slave case. Full of oddities and humor, her ringing laugh was a tonic more refreshing to her patients than her bitter herbs, and she some¬ times recalled them to life by refusing to entertain the idea of their dying. If she failed to gain a good medical education herself, she appreciated its importance, and tried to secure it for others. She aided in the formation of a society for medical education, which established a college in 1850.

I have not space to trace minutely the interesting history of this college. In 1859, Dr. Marie E. Zakezewska was invited to the chair of obstetrics; and by her wish a clinical department was formed, of which she took charge. At the end of three years she resigned her position, the clinical instruction was abandoned, and the " New England Hospital for Women and Children " was established. Dr. Lucy E. Sewall was its first resident physician. This institution still affords almost the only opportunity in. New England for the clinical instruction of female medical students. In 1879 ninety-one resi¬ dent students had received their practical education here, and entered into practice. Several women came from Europe for the purpose of enjoying the educational advantages of the hospital. It has now nine women on its medical staff. The New England Hospital Medical Society numbers thir¬ teen physicians, resident in Boston, with a few from other places.

In 1873 the Trustees of the Female Medical College, by permission of the Legislature, transferred its property to the Boston University. As the Homoeopathic Association was the only medical society ready to comply with the terms on which the funds could be transferred, the school was placed under its care. All its advantages are as freely opened to women as to men, and a good opportunity is here offered to study all branches of medical science, as well as the theory and practice of homoeopathy. A small hospital gives opportunity for cliniques. About sixteen women of this school are now in practice in Boston, many of whom have recently graduated.

The fourth charitable society in Boston, and the first founded bywomen, was the Boston Female Asylum, suggested by Mrs. Hannah Stillman. The first meeting was held at the house of Mrs. Jonathan Mason, Sept. 26, 1800. The most wealthy and influential ladies of the city united in this work, and they were cordially aided by the wealthy citizens with money, and by the clergy, who helped to make their anniver¬ sary meetings occasions of public interest. Two curious provisions are found in their Charter: -

1. "That every married woman belonging to said society who shall, with consent of her husband, receive any of the money or other property of said society, shall thereby render her said husband accountable therefor to said society.

Miss Elizabeth Eaton, well known as a teacher, organized the first Moral Reform Society. The influx of foreigners of the lower classes, which in¬ creased very rapidly from 1830 to 1840, bringing so much of want, suffering, and vice in their train, aroused deeply the feelings and consciences of the ladies of Boston. Their exclusive and elegant lives looked to themselves selfish and unfruitful in contrast with the world of human needs brought to their very doors, and they began to ask themselves earnestly as to their duty in regard to it.

Dorothea Lynde Dix was much influenced by the preaching and life of Dr. Channing. She was a woman of delicate physical organization and sensitive nerves, but of fine culture, and was an accomplished teacher. In the midst of her pleasant literary labors she was suddenly impelled to a life of self-sacrifice for others, and turned her thoughts to the condi¬ tion of prisoners in her own city and State, whom she wished to visit. Every one discouraged her from pursuing her purpose, telling her that it would be at the risk of her life ; but she persevered through the winter, and in the spring she saw signs that her labors had not been all in vain. From finding persons of unsound mind confined in the common jails, her attention was turned to the condition and treatment of the insane. In pur¬ suance of this object she visited Europe in 1834, and also travelled over all the United States. Her exertions have contributed largely to the establish¬ ment of hospitals for the indigent insane. She was appointed superintendent of nurses during the Civil War, and at its close resumed her philanthropic labors. In spite of her early feeble health she is still living, although she must be about eighty years old, and continues to be interested in her benev¬ olent work.

It would be impossible to name all the important benevolent institutions in Boston in which women have taken part, often originating them, although it is deemed wiser that both sexes should unite in carrying them on. Every sect has done its part. The Catholic Sisters of Charity are constantly engaged in works of mercy, and the Jervs never allow their poor to beg of others. The same zeal is shown in the temperance reform, in the work of the North-End Mission, and in the North-End Industrial Home founded by Mrs. Harriet L. Clarke (Caswell), in the care of foundling and destitute chil¬ dren, in the prevention of cruelty to animals, and in many other ways. But it is alike impossible to separate the work of Boston from that of the Com- monwealth, or of its women from its men. Yet the reflex action upon the life and character of Boston women is very marked : a lady hardly thinks her life complete unless she is directly aiding in some work of reform or charity.

The working women of Boston form a very large and important class, whose influence is too great to be overlooked. While the higher classes of work receive recognition and reward greater than in any other time or country, there are yet many evils pressing heavily upon shop-girls and sewing women,1 and those employed in serving others. Educated women and men are earnestly engaged in efforts to improve the condition of these classes by industrial education, by opening new avenues of employment, and by promoting a better understanding between employers and em¬ ployed.

While we cannot willingly admit that the social morality of our city is degenerating, we cannot deny the fact that the efforts of philanthropists and reformers seem as yet only to have revealed the appalling extent of vice, rather than to have devised any practical means of checking it. The question is too profound and too painful to be discussed here, but on its righteous solution depends the future permanence and well-being of our civilization.2

In literature, the progress of women has been so rapid that now a woman's name on the titlepage of a book hurts neither its acceptance with the publisher nor its sale to the public. The results of higher educa¬ tion are marked in the superior style and method in the writings of younger women. Of the many women who have contributed to this success, I can name only a very few of those who have most influenced the character of Boston women.

Lydia Maria Francis (Child), born in 1804, exercised a powerful in¬ fluence both by her character and her writings. An ardent lover of beauty and truth, she was also eminently practical in her work and simple in her habits. Her career was long and brilliant. She wras the first (in 1821) to publish a novel, - Hobomok, - founded on the Pilgrims' history, and the first to edit a child's magazine. Her Juvenile Miscellany was the delight of the children, while her Philothea charmed romantic maidens, and her Frugal Housewife was the oracle of New England kitchens; it was published in 1829, and had reached its thirty-third edition in 1855. She consciously perilled all her literary success by entering upon Antislavery work, and her Appeal for that Class of Americans called Africans made a profound im-

1 Bv the last census of Massachusetts, in 1875, there were one hundred and seventy-nine thou¬ sand six hundred and fifty-seven women in Bos¬ ton, - an excess over men of nearly seventeen thousand. It is difficult to classify working women accurately, but it is estimated that there are now twenty thousand sewing women and shop girls in Boston, and twenty to twenty-five thousand engaged in domestic service of all

2 The latest authorities estimate that there are in Boston five thousand women who may be classed under the usual phrase of "lost women," - women who are lost to morality and happi¬ ness themselves, and who are the sources of evil to others. The deep interest on this subject should look to the prevention of its causes.

pression upon the best minds of the community.1 Her History of the Pro¬ gress of Religious Ideas is also a work of great value, which has only been thrown into the shade by the great light shed upon the subject since she published it. The loveliness of her life and character was equal to her intellectual ability. She died in 18S0.2

Although the influence of Sarah Margaret Fuller (Ossoli) - born in 1810 - was by no means confined to Boston, it was here fully felt; and it lingers in all the life and character of Boston women. Rarer than her great intel¬ lectual attainments was her power of vitalizing all knowledge, by bringing it into relation with life, not in its practical, but in its ideal aspect. " Is life rich and full to you? " was the question she asked of her pupils; and the heartfelt answer was: "Yes, since I have known you." The Greek mytho¬ logy, German philosophy, the old English drama, Italian poetry, Beethoven's music, all became part of every individual, as of the universal, life. This transcendental elevation of common life stamped itself strongly on those who came within her influence. Her book on Woman in the Nineteenth Century is yet the high-water mark of thought on that subject. She was a leader in the great intellectual movement which introduced to us German literature and philosophy, and at one time edited The Dial , whose value has only increased with age. She died, by shipwreck, in 1850. 3

We still have with us Elizabeth Palmer Peabody, born in 1804, wittily and wisely called the " Grandmother of Boston," for what Boston woman cannot trace much of her best intellectual life to this fountain? The daughter of a scientific father and a mother who was an accomplished teacher, her whole life has absorbed and radiated education ; and to her is due much of the highest religious, intellectual, and moral influence of Boston, as well as the wide-spread knowledge of Froebel's thoughtful and humane system of education. Her individual deeds of kindness and her zeal for humanity almost overshadow her literary merits, until we observe the depth of her historic and philosophic learning, the vigor of her thought, and the strength and purity of her style. Her little book-shop, in West Street, was at one time the resort of the most distinguished literati of Boston, as well as of eager school-girls, who bought more pencils than they could use for the sake of a chance word from its presiding genius.

2 [There is an appreciative sketch of her by Colonel Higginson in Eminent Women of the Age, 1S68. Her novel, The Rebels, deals with events in Boston during the Revolution, and may be compared with Cooper's Lionel Lincoln , a story covering Bunker ITill and other events of the same time. - Ed.]

Memoirs, a joint work by R. W. Emerson, James Freeman Clarke, and William H. Channing. Some autobiographic memoranda, etc., of her later years will be found in At Home and Abroad, edited by her brother, A. B. Fuller, in 1856. Also see Horace Greeley's Recollec¬ tions of a Busy Life , ch. xxii. ; his introduction to her Papers on Literature and Art; O. B. Frothingham's Transcendentalism in New Eng¬ land, ch. xi. For her family connection, see the Fuller Family in N. E. Hist, and Geneal. Reg., Oct. 1859. - Ed.]

Daily Evening Transcript immediately on the death of her brother, its first editor, in 1843, but the fact was not publicly announced until the first of January following, when her success was assured. This is believed to be the first instance of the successful conduct of a daily journal by a woman. Miss Walter was the avowed and responsible editor, taking that position at the request of the proprietors and publishers of the paper. The paper gained both in circulation and reputation, especially for the truthfulness of its notices, under her management, which continued until her marriage, in 1848.

Women have advanced very rapidly in the plastic arts. Miss Goodrich1 took high rank as a miniature painter in the early part of the century; her portrait of Daniel Webster is in the cabinet of the Massachusetts Historical Society. In 1851 a school of design for women was established, with the object of fitting them for practical work. Owing to various causes, the school was not a success; but a class in practical design, under the charge of the Lowell Institute, is freely open to women, who share in its honors and employments. The Normal Art School and the School of Drawing and Painting, at the Museum of Fine Arts, afford to women full opportunity for thorough study. William M. Hunt, for many years the leading artist in Boston, formed a school of women distinguished for the energy and vigor of their work. He gave a great impulse to the pursuit of art, not as an amusement, but as an earnest vocation. In sculpture success has been quite as marked. Harriet Hosmer's fame is European, and Anne Whitney's statues 2 do not " fear the light of the public square." Decorative art has gone beyond all possibility of measurement. Warville " hopes the Boston women may never, like those of Paris, acquire ' la maladie ' of perfection in music, which is not to be attained but at the expense of the domestic virtues." Education in music has come, but we hope without the pre¬ dicted loss of domestic happiness.

Sumptuary laws have been abandoned, but there have been earnest at¬ tempts to reform the dress of women, so as to secure greater simplicity and healthfulness. While no great revolution in costume has been affected, and fashion still dictates absurdities, a woman in Boston may now dress simply and reasonably without attracting unpleasant attention by her short dress or thick boots.

The Antislavery movement brought out the influence of women in a remarkable degree. That party which recognized their equal right in the councils of the society was predominent in Boston through the influence of its great leaders, William Lloyd Garrison and Wendell Phillips. Angelina Grimke (Weld) was the first woman who spoke in the State House on behalf of the slave. The charm of her voice, her earnestness, and refine-

1 [Or Goodridge, as the family seem to have at the age of twenty-four, and lived there till written it. See her sister's account of her in 1851, when she removed to Reading, where she Mason's Gilbert Stuart , 78. She was born in died late in 1853. - Ed.]

ment won all hearts. Maria Weston (Chapman), Lucy Stone, and Abby Kelley (Foster) soon made Boston familiar with the accents of truth from woman's lips.

But there was a comic side to this grand drama. Abby Folsom, that " flea of conventions," made herself heard in every meeting, till one longed for the authority of the Puritan elders to banish her from the State. She was a working woman from New Hampshire, with some noble qualities of mind and heart ; but an over-excitable brain and lively temper made her like " the old woman who never was quiet." She was sincere in her reform work, and would take the drunken woman from the gutter, and shelter her in her own poor home.

Eliza Lee Cabot (Follen), Mary Goddard (May), and numberless other women of Boston were unwearied in raising money for the Antislavery cause by fairs, which they knew how to make occasions of great social enjoyment.

During the late Avar a woman's branch of the Sanitary Commission was organized in New England. Mary Dwight (Parkman) was its first president, but Abby Williams May soon took her place, which she held till the close of the war. With unwearied zeal Miss May presided over its councils, organized its action, and encouraged others to the work. She went down to the hospitals and camps to judge of their needs with her own eyes, and travelled from town to tOAvn in New England, arousing the women to new effort. Then might be seen young and old, rich and poor, bearing bundles of blue flannel through the streets, and unaccustomed fingers knitting the coarse yarn, while the heart throbbed with anxiety for the dear ones gone to the war. A noble band of nurses volunteered their services, and the strife was as to which should go soonest and do the hardest work. Hannah E. Stevenson, Helen Gilson, and many another name became as dear to the soldiers as that of mother or sister. A committee was formed to supply the colored soldiers with such help as other soldiers received from their relatives ; and when one of the noblest of Boston's sons passed through her streets at their head, his mother " thanked God for the privilege of seeing that day." The same spirit went into the work of educating the freedmen. Young men and young women, the noblest and the best, went forth together to that work of danger and of toil. These experiences stamped the character of Boston women anew.

The political rights of women have not been forgotten during the whole of this century, although this interest has been postponed to the more pressing dangers produced by Slavery. Seeing the necessary outcome of the doctrines of the last century embodied in the Declaration of Indepen¬ dence, Mrs. Adams had made the comparison of theory with practice in her day. The first Women's Rights Convention in Boston was held June 2, 1854. Since that time agitation has been maintained by means of public meetings, distribution of printed matter, petitions to the Legislature, and the publication of newspapers devoted to the subject. vol. iv. - 45.

The Woman's Journal, originally edited by Mary A. Livermore, Julia Ward Howe, and Lucy Stone, with the aid of William Lloyd Garrison and Thomas Wentworth Higginson, has now continued for ten years, and is in¬ creasing yearly in value and influence. The legislatures have, through their committees, given respectful hearings to the petitioners for equal suffrage; and a bill for committing the question to the people has been frequently reported by the committee, but has not yet gained a majority in the House. Special efforts to enable women to hold various offices have been more suc¬ cessful ; but the history of women's appointment on boards of charity, as inspectors of prisons, alms-houses, etc., belongs rather to Massachusetts than to Boston.

In 1873 four ladies - Abby W. May, Ann Adeline Badger, Lucretia Crocker, and Lucia M. Peabody - -were elected to the School Committee of Boston. This Committee, doubting the legality of these elections, asked the opinion of the City Solicitor, which was given against them. When the School Committee organized, they reported against the right of the ladies to their seats. This decision produced great excitement, especially, in ward fourteen, which had given Miss Peabody a large vote. The House of Rep¬ resentatives then asked for the opinion of the Supreme Court ; this was given to the effect " that there is nothing in the Constitution of the Com¬ monwealth to prevent a woman from being on the School Committee." At the urgent entreaty of her constituents, Miss Peabody carried her claim to her seat to the Supreme Judicial Court, which decided that the Legislature had made the School Committee judges of the qualifications of its members " finally and without appeal," and dismissed the case. Before the close of the session the Legislature, almost unanimously, passed a law rendering women eligible on the School Committee. At the next election Misses May, Crocker, and Peabody, with the addition of Kate Gannett (Wells), Lucretia Hale, and Mary Safford (Blake) were elected and took their seats on the Board. The following year the School Board was reduced to twentyfour, to be voted for by the whole city, instead of by wards. Misses Crocker, Hale, May, and Peabody were re-elected. Miss Peabody received the largest vote ever cast for a member of the School Committee. Miss Crocker was appointed one of the new Board of Supervisors, and consequently resigned on the Committee. At the expiration of the terms for which they had been chosen, neither Miss Hale nor Miss May were re-elected; and so strong was the feeling aroused by this fact, that the friends of education petitioned the Legislature for a law similar to that recently passed in New Hampshire, enabling women to vote for school committee. This law was passed in the winter of 1879, and nearly a thousand women in Boston voted under it that year.1 The mayor courteously forbade smoking at the polls during the morning hours, and the women generally found the act of casting their ballots unattended by any disagreeable circumstances. A Massachusetts

School Suffrage Association was organized in 1880, "to make school suf¬ frage effective for the good of the schools.'' Miss Crocker was reappointed Supervisor at the expiration of her term of office, and Miss Peabody was re-elected on the committee in 1880. On Miss May's retirement from the board, Governor Talbot appointed her on the State Board of Education.

It is impossible in brief space to give an idea of the charm of Boston women in society. Many a foreign traveller has borne witness to it, and many old residents now love to recall the memories of those " who made this world the feast it was " in their youth. But Boston women were then eminently delicate and reserved, and little public record remains of their lives. Eliot, Lyman, Quincy, Sullivan, Amory, are names which at once call up visions of dignified womanly culture and poetic beauty.

Miss Emily Marshall became more widely known than any other lady, simply for her social attractions. Her charm of manner even more than her beauty influenced all who approached her, whether high or low; the hackmen were so spell-bound with admiration that they forgot to open the door of her carriage. She was neither a coquette nor a tyrant, but re¬ mained always winning and unaffected, commanding respect as well as love. She married Mr. William S. Otis, and died young.

The late Mrs. Harrison Gray Otis was less truly Bostonian in her man¬ ners. She had lived much abroad, and learned the art of entertaining guests simply and agreeably, and was also active in public matters. She took part in the fair for the Blind Asylum, and in 1840 roused the women of Boston to work for the completion of Bunker-Hill Monument. She helped to raise a fund for securing Mt. Vernon to the nation, partly by a successful ball, which brought $10,000. Her patriotism was always en¬ thusiastic ; she persuaded the State authorities to make Washington's birth¬ day a legal holiday, and she always held a reception on that day. During four years of the Civil War she had charge of the Evans House as a place of reception for goods and money.

A new feature in Boston society is the establishment of social clubs. Of these, the most celebrated is the New England Women's Club, of which Mrs. Caroline M. Severance was the first president. Mrs. Julia Ward Howe, distinguished both in literature and reforms, now fills that position. In its life of twelve years it has done much to encourage the formation of similar unions, as well as to promote all good causes, and to produce greater union among women of similar tastes and aims.

We may look with some complacency upon the history of women in our dearly beloved city for the last two hundred and fifty years, in spite of the blots upon its brightness which we have been obliged to point out; and surely never before to women were nobler opportunities open than those which the near future promises.

By William W. Clapp.1

-1- to the general reader, though it can scarcely be said to contain any elements of absorbing interest, or to present issues of vital importance when viewed as one of the component features of the growth of a city. A hundred years have not passed since it possessed with us " a local habitation and a name." In the early days of Boston the lovers of amusements were not sufficiently numerous to warrant even the strolling theatrical manager from England in hoping for a remunerative investment by seeking to intro¬ duce dramatic entertainments ; and when the population increased suffi¬ ciently to promise success, the opposition to stage performances was not only an inherited prejudice on the part of the majority of the people, but prohibitory legislation prevented the erection of a theatre or the presenta¬ tion of a play.

Cotton Mather, as early as 1686, in his preface to his Testimony against Profane and Superstitious Customs , says : " There is much discourse now of beginning stage plays in New England." It was not for many years after this warning note was sounded that any attempt was made to give dramatic entertainments with a view to invite the public and to render it pecuniarily profitable. The opposition to plays in England by the Puritans had been marked. Actors were whipped at the cart's tail. Macaulay says that the Puritans drove imagination from its last asylum. They prohibited theatrical representations, and stigmatized the whole race of dramatists as enemies of morality and religion. This spirit of intolerance was naturally inherited by the descendants of the Puritans in New England. Plays were performed in

1 [Colonel Clapp published a Record of the by Hon. J. T. Buckingham; Ireland's History Boston Stage in 1853. The Boston Public Li- of the Stage in New York: Cowell's Thirty brary has for some years preserved files of Bos- Years among the Players ; Blake's Historical Ac¬ ton play-bills. The principal books throwing cotint of the Providence Stage: The Stage, by J. light upon the history of the Boston Stage, and E. Murdock; Players of a Century, by IT. P. upon the careers of those who have been associ- Phelps, of Albany, N. Y. ; and the Lives of ated with it, are the History of the American nearly all the prominent actors of the last Theatre, by William Dunlap; The Polyanthus, half-century. - Ed.]

private, and no doubt even the more austere citizens derived gratification from what appeared to be a harmless method of passing a weary hour. The fear, however, that "a play-house" might be erected was so strongly entertained that the performance held at a coffee-house on State Street, when Otway's Orphan , or Unhappy Marriage , was given by two Englishmen assisted by some volunteers, led to the passage of " An Act to Prevent Stage Plays and other Theatrical entertainments," which became a law in March, 1750. It was stated by the framers of the law that stage plays "not only occasion great and unnecessary expenses, and discourage industry and frugality, but likewise tend generally to increase immorality, impiety, and a contempt for religion." The provisions were very stringent. Twenty pounds was the penalty to be paid by the owner of the premises let or used for any such purpose. Any actor or spectator present " where a greater number of persons than twenty shall be assembled together " was to pay five pounds. The intent of limiting the number was no doubt to prevent any such undertaking proving remunerative, without perhaps encroaching too harshly upon the right which some held that they possessed to give private dramatic performances at their residences. The law was accepted and enforced, as it was supported by public sentiment. Frequent attempts were made to secure its repeal. Intercourse with New York, where the theatre was established notwithstanding the same objections were urged which had prevailed in Boston, provoked a desire on the part of many of the more liberal citizens to erect a theatre and to conduct it in a manner that would remove many objections which were urged; but the more Puri¬ tanical held that stage plays were the " means of disseminating licentious maxims, and tending to immorality of conduct."

The Revolutionary war brought trials and privations which were suffi¬ cient to tax the energies of the people to the exclusion of all other topics, and the daily incidents of those troublesome times obliterated the mimic stage from the minds of the people. General John Burgoyne, who was a dramatic author of some note, had in 1774 produced a play at Drury Lane, London ; and while in Boston he brought out his second drama, called the Blockade of Boston, which was written with the intent of impressing his men with due contempt for American soldiery.1 In New York, and possibly in Boston, the expenses of living were so excessive that inferior officers of the British army endeavored by the performance of plays to add to their incomes, while the general officers encouraged dramatic performances as a means of relaxation for themselves and as a measure to secure contentment among their subordinates. The salvation of the country from the American point of view became a matter of such serious concern, that on Oct. 16, 1778, the Continental Congress passed the following resolve: -

" Whereas, frequenting play houses and theatrical entertainments has a fatal ten¬ dency to divert the minds of the people from a due attention to the means necessary to the defence of their country and preservation of their liberties, -

The Drama In Boston

" Resolved, That any person holding an office under the United States who shall act, promote, encourage, or attend such play, shall be deemed unworthy to hold such office, and shall be accordingly dismissed."

The severity of this act indicates the spirit which prevailed regarding the absolute necessity of avoiding the encouragement of any amusement calcu¬ lated to distract the public mind from the higher duties of the times.

The close of the American Revolution was followed by a total reorgan¬ ization of society in all the large cities, and the people looking toward the possibilities of the future enlarged their views ; and the new generation, with higher aspirations, sought release from many of the restrictions which had so long prevailed. With increasing wealth came a more general attention to literature, and the dramatic works of English authors had peculiar attrac¬ tions for a large class. The reading of the plays of Shakespeare 1 induced a desire among the people to see with their own eyes the full presentation on the stage of these masterpieces. The fame of Garrick had been echoed by Americans who had witnessed his marvellous performances in London ; and John Philip Kemble was known to American readers of the English magazines, which then contained a monthly record of dramatic events. A coterie of wealthy gentlemen of culture in Boston attempted to educate public sentiment to a point which would permit the erection of a theatre. The law prohibiting theatricals had been re-enacted in 1784, though theatres in New York and Philadelphia were in full success. No attempt, however, was made in Boston to introduce theatrical entertainments until June 5, 1790, when Hallam and Henry, who had established play-houses in Phila¬ delphia, New York, and Providence, which had been managed with a due regard for the proprieties of life, presented a petition to the Legislature, praying for leave " to open a theatre in Boston under proper regulations." The petition was not considered. In 1791 several of the leading residents of the town took the subject under consideration. The fact that Philadelphia, New York, and even Providence - the last city being a place of far less importance than Boston - supported theatres, was an argument used in its favor. The attention of the people was called to dramatic entertainments by a special article in the warrant for a town-meeting. An attempt was

1 [The earliest American edition of Shake¬ speare was one printed in Philadelphia in 1795- 96, in eight volumes, of which there are two copies in the Public Library. In 1802-4 Munroe and Francis published the earliest Poston edi¬ tion, in sixteen numbers, fifty cents each, making eight volumes. " The press-work was mostly done by them personally on a hand-press, with ink-balls of sheepskin, the ink distributed by the hand. Ink and type imported, none worth using being made here. The engravings were executed by Dr. Alexander Anderson, of New York," - so writes Mr. David Francis, in a copy of a later edition preserved in the Lenox Library.

A ninth volume, containing the poems, was added to this edition in 1807, claiming to be the first American edition of the poems ; but this is ques¬ tionable. Dr. Moore, of the Lenox Library, calls my attention to the prospectus of a reprint of Reed's edition of Johnson and Steevens, in twenty-one volumes, announced in Boston about 1807 ; but no edition of that date is known. What Munroe and Francis call their third Bos¬ ton edition, 1810-12, in nine volumes, follows Reed's edition, and gave cuts engraved by An¬ derson. They printed from a copy owned by William S. Shaw. See Barton Catalogue. No. 49. - Ed.]

made to postpone the consideration of the subject; but public sentiment was becoming enlightened, and at an adjourned meeting the Boston mem¬ bers of the General Court were instructed to secure a repeal of the law. It was urged that "a theatre, where the actions of great and virtuous men are represented, under every possible embellishment which genius and elo¬ quence can give, will not only afford a rational and innocent amusement, but essentially advance the interests of private and political virtue; will have a tendency to polish the manners and habits of society, to disseminate the social affections, and to improve and refine the literary taste of our rising Republic." At a meeting of the Legislature in 1792, Mr. Tudor, of Boston, introduced a bill repealing the act prohibiting theatrical entertainments. The proposition was rejected promptly. A reconsideration was carried, but a protest was sent in by some of the inhabitants of Boston, and by a vote of ninety-nine to forty-four the law was kept among the statutes.1

During the summer of the same year a few gentlemen determined to erect a theatre, in order to prove that the much talked-of play-house was not open to the objections which were urged against it. A site' was selected in what was then known as Board Alley, now Hawley Street. The alley was originally a path through a pasture made by the worshippers at Trinity Church who resided on State Street and at the North End. It abounded in mud and in livery stables. It is probable that one of the stables became the theatre. A stage was erected, and the so-called " New Exhibition Room" was opened on Aug. 1, 1792, under the management of Mr. Joseph Harper, one of the prominent members of Hallam and Henry's company. The opening bill was rather a tentative performance to test the patience of those in favor of enforcing the prohibitory law, for it was more of the nature of a modern variety show than a dramatic performance. Tight-rope dan¬ cing, the minuet de la coitr, the gavotte , and recitations made up the pro¬ gramme. The drama was after this introduced to the expectant Bostonians in the disguise of a moral lecture. Garrick's farce of Lethe was produced as a satirical lecture called " Lethe, or TEsop in the Shades," by Mr. Watts, and Mr. and Mrs. Solomon. Otway's Venice Preserved was announced as a moral lecture in five parts, " in which the dreadful effects of conspiracy will be exemplified ; " and Romeo and Jidiet , Hamlet , etc., were masked under the same catching and hypocritical phraseology. On October 5 was pro¬ duced amoral lecture in five parts, "wherein the pernicious tendency of libertinism will be exemplified in the tragical history of George Barnwell, or the London Merchant," delivered by Messrs. Harper, Morris, Watts, Murray, Solomon, Redfield, Miss Smith, Mrs. Solomon, and Mrs. Gray.

This open defiance of the law induced the attempt to procure an indict¬ ment by the grand jury, which failed. A warrant, however, was obtained for the arrest of Harper and others, and on Dec. 5, 1792, Sheriff Allen, after the performance of the first act, executed his mandate, and Harper was

1 [The speech of Mr. John Gardiner, Jan. 26, ton the same year. See Amory's James Sullivan, 1792, on repealing the law, was printed in Bos- i. 270. - Ed.]

V. S. ThcDecrj.till Monday Orftober 3d, will be open at half part Five o'clock and the Curtain rife prcctft y Six- from the id of Oaobcr the Door, will be opened at Five, and Performance begin at Six o cloc . FltkeU and Places to be Jiad every Morning Sunday excepted) at 10 oclock, at the office ot the p heart.

arrested. The audience, composed largely of young men, became noisy. As Governor Hancock had always been a strong opponent of the theatre, it was supposed that the arrest had been made at his instigation, and the portrait of his Excellency, which had been hung in front of the stage box, was torn down and trampled upon, and the State arms shared the same fate at the hands of the descendants of the " Sons of Liberty." The Hon. Harrison Gray Otis, at the hearing the next day in Faneuil Hall before Justice Greenleaf, objected to the legality of the warrant, as contrary to the fourteenth article of the Declaration of Rights, which requires that no warrant shall be issued except upon complaint made under oath. Mr. Sullivan endeavored to combat this point, but the justices admitted the soundness of it, and Mr. Harper was discharged. This was the beginning of the era of legal opposition to dramatic entertainments. Owing to the prevalence of small-pox in Boston, the Legislature met in Concord, when Governor Hancock made allusion to the theatrical row as " an open assault upon the laws ancl government of the Commonwealth." The Exhibition Room continued to be opened at intervals after this, for The Contrasty written by Royal Tyler, Esq., afterward chief-justice of Vermont, was performed. It was the first American play ever produced by a regular company of comedians, and was originally given in New York, April 16, 1790. The new Exhibition Room was taken down in the spring of 1793, when a movement was initiated for the erection of a theatre upon a larger scale. From this date legal opposition to the drama ceased in Boston, though even later it included among its patrons only the more liberal-minded of the population. The argument since put forth, that a theatre is a neces¬ sity in every large city, affording a place of resort for visiting strangers who are attracted to a metropolis for pleasure or trade, was not then advanced. Those who enlisted and contributed the means to erect the Federal-Street theatre were actuated by a belief that the influence of the drama was benefi¬ cial to society. They regarded the stage as a great instructor, and confident¬ ly anticipated not only a harvest of pleasure in witnessing the production of the plays of the great dramatists, but they looked for ample recompense in the good that would arise by showing " the very age and body of the time, his form and presence." Many of the most influential citizens became in¬ terested in the erection of the theatre. The prohibitory law was still on the statute book, but it became a dead letter, and was finally repealed. The new theatre was located at the corner of Federal and Franklin streets, and was called the Boston I heatre. The record of the drama in Boston may be said to have begun with the opening of its doors on Feb. 3, 1794, under the man¬ agement of Messrs. Charles Stuart Powell and Baker. It was a commo¬ dious structure, substantially built of brick, and at the time was probably the most imposing theatre in the United States, its appointments being ex¬ cellent and its stage roomy. The opening performances included Gzistaviis Vasa and Modern Antilles, and the company came from England. The prologue, written by Robert Treat Paine, was delivered by the manager in the character of Apollo. The directors appointed by the stockholders had a supervisory management of the house, but when the season terminated in June, 1795, the management was bankrupt.

Although the success of the new theatre was not such as to tempt the cupidity of any one seeking a fortune, there appears to have been even at this early date a strange infatuation regarding the erection of theatres, which has continued to the present day. Without sufficient legitimate patronage to support one theatre, it was proposed to erect another; and Mr. C. S.

The First Boston Theatre.1

Powell, the first manager of the Boston Theatre, availed himself of the strong political antagonism which prevailed between the Federalists and socalled Jacobins to induce the latter to believe that the old theatre was managed with a view of promoting political animosities. The estimated cost of a new theatre was twelve thousand dollars. A site was selected near the corner of Tremont and Boylston streets, and the Haymarket Theatre was opened Dec. 26, 1 796.2 The most intense jealousy existed between the stockholders, managers, and others connected with the two establishments, and the presence of a supporter of the old theatre at the Haymarket was