and women of irreproachable character for an
intellectual difference, he is engaged in a very unworthy
business. When he charges immorality upon the _New York
Independent_ and infidelity upon John Stuart Mill, he forgets
that his readers have minds of their own.

But, suppose it were true that newspapers and individuals who
believe in woman suffrage held objectionable views on other
subjects, what has this to do with the merit of the proposed
reform? There are impure and intemperate men in the Republican
party. Is the Republican party therefore "low company"? There are
brutal and ignorant and disloyal men in the Democratic party.
Does this prove that Dr. Lord and every other Democrat in the
State of Vermont is brutal and ignorant and disloyal? The Supreme
Court of the United States has just decided that a divorce
obtained under the laws of Indiana is legal and binding in every
other State. In thus affirming Mrs. McFarland's right to marry
Mr. Richardson, has the Supreme Court of the United States
sanctioned free-love? Will the _Watchman_ call Chief-Justice
Chase and the Supreme Court free-lovers? We have very little hope
that the _Watchman_ will treat this question with fairness or
candor. Our cause is too strong. The argument from reason, from
revelation, from nature, from history, is on our side. The
_Watchman_ is fighting against the Declaration of Independence,
the bill of rights of the State of Vermont, and the principles of
representative government. No wonder that it raises false issues.
No wonder that it evades the question.

H. B. B.

The following editorial in the _Woman's Journal_, from the pen of
Mary A. Livermore, does not give a very rose-colored view of the
reception of the Massachusetts missionaries on their first advent
into Vermont:

The Vermont constitutional convention has rejected a proposition
to give the ballot to woman, by a vote of 231 to 1. It flouted
all discussion of the question, and voted it down with the utmost
alacrity. No one cognizant of the bigotry, narrowness and general
ignorance that prevail there will be surprised at this result. It
is not a progressive State, but the contrary. Great stress has
been laid on the fact that "Vermont never owned a slave"--and
from this