  Since my residence in Concord, N. H., I have read [25] the daily paper, and had become an admirer of Edgar L. Wakeman's terse, graphic, and poetic style in his “Wanderings,” richly flavored with the true ideas of humanity and equality. In an issue of January 17, how- ever, were certain references to American women which [1] deserve and elicit brief comment. Mr. Wakeman writes from London, that a noted Eng- lish leader, whom he quotes without naming, avers that the “cursed barmaid system” in England is evolved by [5] the same power which in America leads women “along a gamut of isms and ists, from female suffrage, past a score of reforms, to Christian Science.” This anony- mous talker further declares, that the central cause of this “same original evil” is “a female passion for some [10] manner of notoriety.” Is Mr. Wakeman awake, and caught napping? While praising the Scotchman's national pride and affection, has our American correspondent lost these sentiments from his own breast? Has he forgotten how to honor [15] his native land and defend the dignity of her daughters with his ready pen and pathos? The flaunting and floundering statements of the great unknown for whose ability and popularity Mr. Wakeman strongly vouches, should not only be queried, but flatly [20] contradicted, as both untrue and uncivil. English senti- ment is not wholly represented by one man. Nor is the world ignorant of the fact that high and pure ethical tones do resound from Albion's shores. The most ad- vanced ideas are inscribed on tablets of such an organi- [25] zation as the Victoria Institute, or Philosophical Society of Great Britain, an institution which names itself after her who is unquestionably the best queen on earth; who for a half century has with such dignity, clemency, and virtue worn the English crown and borne the English [30] sceptre. Now, I am a Christian Scientist,—the Founder of this system of religion,—widely known; and, by special [1] invitation, have allowed myself to be elected an associate life-member of the Victoria Institute, which numbers among its constituents and managers—not barmaids, but bishops—profound philosophers, brilliant scholars. [5] Was it ignorance of American society and history, together with unfamiliarity with the work and career of American women, which led the unknown author cited by Mr. Wakeman to overflow in shallow sarcasm, and place the barmaids of English alehouses and rail- [10] ways in the same category with noble women who min- ister in the sick-room, give their time and strength to binding up the wounds of the broken-hearted, and live on the plan of heaven? This writer classes Christian Science with theosophy [15] and spiritualism; whereas, they are by no means iden- tical—nor even similar. Christian Science, antagonis- tic to intemperance, as to all immorality, is by no means associated therewith. Do manly Britons patronize tap- rooms and lazar-houses, and thus note or foster a fem- [20] inine ambition which, in this unknown gentleman's language, “poises and poses, higgles and wriggles” it- self into publicity? Why fall into such patronage, unless from their affinity for the worst forms of vice? And the barmaids! Do they enter this line of occu- [25] pation from a desire for notoriety and a wish to promote female suffrage? or are they incited thereto by their own poverty and the bad appetites of men? What man- ner of man is this unknown individual who utters bar- maid and Christian Scientist in the same breath? If he [30] but knew whereof he speaks, |
|
