know how to use their human rights, and, moreover, the "households" of their present "owners" would receive quite a different shock by the emancipation of the slave than would that of a republican or socialist, if his wife were to take part in a deliberation, on, let us say, the reformation of the marriage laws. Yet these difficulties are nothing to you, in the discussion of the question, whether negroes are human beings and have human rights.
But while you are liberal and just toward the negroes, do you want to place women below the negro? The interests of the slave-owner are none of your concern, in the emancipation of the negro; but will you let the privilege of the frying-pan concern you in the emancipation of women?
Do not think that I am cruelly indifferent to the dreadful suffering that men would be subjected to if their emancipated wives would occasionally allow the roast to scorch, or if the coffee should be served five minutes later than usual, or if a missing button could not be instantly replaced. No, indeed, I appreciate this suffering thoroughly, and I sympathize beforehand with all men who may meet with such a fate. But I take comfort in the thought that development is never onesided, that inventions for the common good will go hand in hand with the progress in human rights, and that when once we shall have progressed as far as "the emancipation of woman," we shall also have learned the art of securing the roast against scorching, of always keeping
