one of his most reliable friends and counsellors, in planning and executing his lifelong work. She is one of the most terse and finished writers of the age. Her anti-slavery reports made out annually, and published in "The Anti-slavery Standard," are concise and comprehensive statements of facts and principles governing them. She is a woman of vigorous thought, and high moral principle. Gentle, refined, unobtrusive in manner, she is still a woman of great independence, and self-reliance of character. Being one of the delegates to the World's Anti-slavery Convention, I met her for the first time in London in 1840. I remember how charmed I was to hear her laud our republican institutions, in the presence of boasting Englishmen, and, in her keen, sarcastic way, express the utmost contempt for the sham and tinsel, the pomp and ceremony of the Old World. I was especially pleased with a little incident that occurred one day, at a large dinner party, at Samuel Gurney's, a wealthy banker who had a beautiful country-seat near London. Lord Morpeth and the Duchess of Sutherland had been invited to meet a party of Americans there, as they had expressed a wish to see the American abolitionists. As it was a warm, pleasant afternoon in June, we went out on the smooth green lawn, under the shade of some majestic old trees, to hear Lord Morpeth read the reports to the British government from Jamaica. Most of us had been formally presented to the Lord and Lady, but Mr. Grew, having come late, had not yet had the honor of an introduction. Having formed ourselves into a semicircle round his lordship during the reading, at the close Miss Grew took her father's arm, and, in a cool, self-possessed manner, walked across the intervening space, and introduced her father to the Duchess of Sutherland, then mistress of the robes, with the same air as she would have presented two plain republicans in her own country. Standing near the daughter of Sir Fowell Buxton, she said to me, "What are you American girls made

of? Not a girl in all England would have presumed to introduce a commoner, to one of such rank as her Grace." "Ah! madam," I replied, "you forget that in our country we are all of noble blood, all heirs apparent to the throne."

The women who devoted themselves to the anti-slavery cause in the early days, endured the double odium of being abolitionists, and "women out of their sphere;" hence the men who were engaged in the same cause little knew all the peculiar aggravations and trials of their position. The admiration such women as Angeline Grimké, Abby Kelley, and Lucretia Mott, commanded by their presence and eloquence, was well tempered by ridicule and denunciation. The press and the pulpit exhausted the English language to find adjectives to express their detestation of so horrible a revelation as "a woman out of her sphere." A clerical appeal was issued and sent to all the clergymen in New England, calling on them to denounce in their pulpits this unwomanly and unchristian proceeding. Sermons were preached portraying in the darkest colors the fearful results to the church, the State, and the home, in thus encouraging women to enter public life. It was the opposition of the clergy to woman's speaking and voting in their meetings, that occasioned the first division in "The American Anti-slavery Society."

The reports of the meeting held in New York, May, 1840, are worthy the perusal of every philosophical thinker, to see how ridiculously even good common-sense men can talk and act when moved by prejudice rather than principle.

The question under debate on that occasion was, whether woman should speak and vote in all business matters in their meetings. Men opposed to this went through the audience urging every woman who agreed with them to vote against it, thus calling on them to do then and there what, with fervid eloquence, on that very occasion, they had declared a sin against nature and Scripture for them to do anywhere. It

was a stormy meeting held that day by the friends of the slave, and, though he still groaned in bondage, it was urged by many that woman's voice should not be heard in his behalf. Whilst with one hand they strove to loose the chains that clanked on the rice plantations in Georgia, with the other they tried to force woman back into the narrow niche where barbarism had found her. So partially does truth illumine some minds that even the colored man was found voting to exclude woman from an anti-slavery organization. History, however, records that William Lloyd Garrison, ever sound on questions of human rights, carried the resolution by one hundred majority in favor of woman's right to speak and vote in their meetings. At this crisis a World's Anti-slavery Convention was called to meet in London. Several American organizations saw fit to send women as delegates to represent them in that august assembly. But, after going three thousand miles to attend a World's Convention, it was discovered that woman formed no part of the constituent elements of the moral world.

In summoning the friends of the slave from all parts of the two hemispheres, to meet in London, John Bull never dreamed that woman, too, would answer to his call, though the idea of immediate emancipation was first published by Elizabeth Herrick, an English woman, in a well-reasoned pamphlet in 1824.

Accordingly, on the opening of the convention in London, June 12th, 1840, the delegates from the Massachusetts and Pennsylvania societies were denied their seats. The delegation consisted of Lucretia Mott, Mary Grew, Abby Kimber, Elizabeth Neale, Sarah Pugh, from Pennsylvania; Emily Winslow, Abby Southwick, and Anne Greene Phillips, from Massachusetts. This sacrifice of human rights, by men who had assembled from all quarters of the globe to proclaim universal emancipation, was offered up in the presence of such women as Lady Noel Byron, Harriet Martineau, Eliza

beth Fry, Mary Howitt, and Anna Jamieson. The delegates had been persuasively asked to waive their claims that the harmony of the convention might not be disturbed by a question of such minor importance. But through their champion, Wendell Phillips (who was then a young man, and brave too, I thought, to advocate so unpopular an idea almost alone in such an assembly), they maintained that as they had been delegated by large and influential organizations, they must press their claims and thus discharge their duty, not only to those whom they represented, but to the speechless victims of American slavery. Thus the debate on this question was forced upon them, and many distinguished gentlemen of France, England, and America took part in the discussion,. which lasted through one entire day.

ANNE GREENE PHILLIPS.

event, I saw the wife of Her earnest, impressive She had just returned.

As we stood in the vestibule of Freemason's Hall that. morning, talking over the coming Wendell Phillips for the first time. manner arrested my attention at once. from her bridal tour on the continent, and was in the zenith of her beauty. She had a profusion of dark-brown hair, large, loving blue eyes, and regular features. She was tall, graceful, and talked with great fluency and force. Her whole soul seemed to be in the pending issue. As we were about to enter the convention she laid her hand most emphatically on her husband's shoulder and said, "Now, Wendell, don't be simmy-sammy to-day, but brave as a lion ;" and he obeyed the injunction. Most of the speeches that day were narrow and. bigoted, setting forth men's prejudices without touching the principle under consideration, and, when the vote was taken, among the few who stood by principle, were Daniel O'Con-

nell, Dr. Bowring, Henry B. Stanton, George Thompson, and Wendell Phillips. William Lloyd Garrison did not reach England until the third day of the convention, having been unfortunately becalmed at sea. When he learned that Massachusetts women had been denied their rights in the convention he declined to take his seat as a member of that body. His anti-slavery principles being too broad to restrict human rights to color or sex, he took his seat in the gallery, and through all those days looked down on the convention. Thomas Clarkson was chosen president, but he being too old and feeble to endure the fatigue, Joseph Sturge, the celebrated Quaker merchant, presided over the deliberations. Sitting near Mrs. Mott in the convention, I mischievously suggested to her one day a dangerous contingency. "With a Quaker in the chair," said I, "suppose, in spite of the vote of excommunication, the spirit should move you to speak, what could the chairman do, and which would you obey, the spirit, or the convention?" She promptly replied, "Where the spirit of God is, there is liberty." The general indignation felt by the advanced minds among the women of England, France, and America, and the puerile tone of the debates on this question, gave birth to what is called the Woman's Rights movement on both continents. The women of England soon after established a Woman's Rights journal, and petitioned Parliament for their rights of property. Their demands were ably maintained by Lord Brougham in the House of Peers. The French women, too, soon after established a journal, so liberal and republican in its sentiments, that they were compelled to publish it in Italy, though it was clandestinely circulated in France. At the same time Frederika Bremer, in her popular novels, was ridiculing the creeds and codes and customs of her country, and thus undermining the laws of Sweden in regard to women, which, in many particulars, were soon after essentially modified