·Publications of the University of Texas Publications Committee: FREDERIC DUNCALF J. L. HENDERSON G. C. BUTTE E. J. MATHEWS KILLIS CAMPBELL H.J. MULLER F. W. GRAFF A. E. TROMBLY HAL C. WEAVER The University publishes bulletins four times a month, so numbered that the :first two digits of the number show the year of issue, the last two the position in the yearly series. (For example, No. 2201 is the :first bulletin of the year 1922.) These comprise the official publications of the University, . publications on humanistic and scientific sub­jects, bulletins prepared by the Bureau of Extension, by the Bureau of Economic Geology and Technology, and other bul­letins of general educational interest. With the exception of special numbers, any bulletin will be sent to a citizen of Texas free on request. All communications about Univer­sity publications should be addressed to University Publica­tions, University of Texas, Austin. University of Texas Bulletin No: 2212: March 22, 1922 BROCKDEN BROWN AND THE RIGHTS OF WOMEN BY DAVID LEE CLARK Inatructor in Enaliah COMPARATlVR LITRRATURR SERIRS No. 2 PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY FOUR TIMES A MONTH, AND ENTERED AS SECOND-CLASS MATTER AT THE POS'l'OFFICB AT AUSTIN. TBXAS, UNDER THE ACT OF AUGUST 24, 1912 The benefits of education and of uaeful knowledge, generally diffuaed through a community, are eHential to the preaervation of a free govern• ment. Sam Hou.ton Cultivated mind ia the guardian geniua of democracy. . • • It ia the only dictator that freemen acknowl­edge and the only aecurity that free­men deaire. Mirabeau B. Lamar BROCKDEN BROWN AND THE RIGHTS OF WOMEN BY DAVID LEE CLARK INSTRUCTOR IN ENGLISH NOTE This monograph is part of an extended study of the life and works of Brockden Brown which the author has in forward state of preparation. INTRODUCTION One cannot correctly appraise the literature dealing with the social and political emancipation of women in the last third of the eighteenth century without soipe knowledge of the evolution of the thought of which that literature is a record. Particularly is this so in evaluating the work of Mary Wollstonecraft, William Godwin, and Brockden Brown. ft is too generally assumed that the first two were the originators of the social theories that are now so in­variably associated with their names; and that their work in turn inspired Brockden Brown in America. Although a detailed study of the struggle for the social and political freedom of women is beyond the scope of the present work, certain general tendencies in the literature of revolt in England, France, and America, will be briefly traced. As a matter of fact neither Mary Wollstonecraft, nor William Godwin, nor yet Brockden Brown was an original thinker, for there is nothing really new in any of them. Mary Wollstonecraft in her Rights of Women (1792), and Godwin in his Politiool Justice (1793) and in his novels, did, however, put the arguments for the social emancipation of men and ·women in imperishable form, and thus estab­ lished their chief claim to a place in the literature of the movement. Brockden Brown was familiar with the works of these writers, but he was also famiiiar with what had been done by others earlier than the time of Godwin. It can be shown that Brown was full of the revolutionary spirit before the appearance of the Rights of. Women and Political Justice, and that the influence of these two works upon Brown has been overemphasized. Theories of government and social reform are so much a part of Brown's life and writings that some account of them in relation to his predecessors seems necessary. Brown's political theories were shaped by Locke and his French and American disciples. Hobbes had asserted the · university of Texas Bulletin absolute authority of the ruler, but Locke pointed out how the compact into which men had voluntarily entered by giving up some of their natural rights for certain ad­vantages, was unalterably binding upon all subsequent generations, and thus were established those rights of man that no law of man or king could transgress. This theory, so generally accepted during the first half of the eighteenth century, in the hands of the radical became the basis of an argument that led straight to the American Revolution and, subsequently, to the greater revolution in France. But in the hands of the conservative it was a tool for0 despotism, for it gave a kind of sanction to any existing order. Per­manence, not progress', became the ideal of government. According to Locke government existed solely for the good .of the people. He even spoke of an ideal state, a golden age in the·past, and of government as being made necessary to check the ambition and luxury that have subsequently crept in. No man, he said, should be governed except by his own consent, and no man should be punished by fallible men. Yet it is to be carefully noted that these doctrines of the natural rights of man had no marked effect upon the English people as a whole, for in England the conservative Whigs interpreted Locke as giving sanction to the position that "whatever is, is right," and it is upon this ground that. Burke defended the English Constitution and condemned the French Revolution. Price, Priestley, Paine, Jefferson, Brockden Brown, and others, however, put a construction upon Locke's theory of state that embraced all the current radicalism in France, England, and America. William Godwin, indeed, was an ultraradical and would have abol­ished all government. While Locke's plan of government did not specifically as­sign to woman a place in the body politic, by implication, at least, she was acknowledged to be an important factor in the social fabric. But women were so hopelessly low in the social scale that only the bravest men and women before 1790 ventured to suggest that women, like men, have polit­ical rights. They had first, indeed, to be emancipated so­cially and intellectually before any thought could be given Brockden Brown and the Rights of Women to political and economic freedom. Woman had for cen­turies been considered a shallow, helpless creature, to be petted, caressed, or corrected by her superior lord, or else she was a moral being whose virtue had to be constantly guarded. The old Hebrew canon law was generally in force and was pointed to as authority for the enslavement of women. The sacred scriptures were invoked to prove that woman was created solely for the comfort of man, and as such had no liberty of active or independent judgment. Her highest virtue was obedience to the will of her lord, and her chief occupation was child-bearing. Indeed, her . whole life was regulated by these considerations. She had no part in the moral, intellectual, or economic .direction of her home, ·and no authority over her children. But, as there was no alternative course to marriage, we· read much in the literature of the times of woman's use of social tricks and snares to inveigle men into marriage, and to keep them hoodwinked afterwards. This notion of woman as a mere charmer grew to such proportions that it came to the notice of the English Parliament, and as late as 1770 a law was passed that prescribed that "all women, of whatever age, rank, profession, or degree, whether virgins, maids, or widows, that shall, from and after such act, impose upon, induce, or betray into matrimony, any of his Majesty's male subjects by scents, paints, cosmetic washes, artificial teeth, false hair, Spanish wool, iron stays, hoops, high-heeled shoes, etc., shall incur the penalty of the law now enforced against witchcraft and like demeanors, and that the mar­riage upon conviction shall stand null and void."1 . Oliver Cromwell in the famous civil marriage code of 1653 sought to lighten the burden for women by placing all marriages and divorces in the hands of the civil courts, in which the man and the woman were on an equality. But this law was ineffectual, for public opinion was against it. 1woman: Women of England, Vol. IX, p. 318. Cf. Pope's Epistle tu a Lady (1735) in which woman's ruling passion is said to be "the love of pleasure and the love of sway." UniversUy of Texas Bulletin Milton's attitude toward matrimony was more nearly rep­resentative of the Puritan point of view. He pleaded vig­orously for liberal divorce laws, but solely for the sake of the man. Imbued as he was with the sentiments of the scriptures Milton's position was not at all singular. There were many arguments in the literature of his time for the enslavement of women. It is not necessary in this connec­tion to consider the social freedom of certain types of women in the beau monde. I The first significant reaction in favor of women set in during the closing years of the seventeenth century.2 Mary Astell (1668-1731) in her Serious Proposal (1695) endea­vored to lift the women of her day to a dignified, moral, and self-sustaining life. She emphasized economic inde­pendence and a life of religious service, an ideal which was to be attained through proper education of young women. It may be urged against her scheme of education that it was too far removed from life-a kind of nunnery. In her Reflections on Marriage (1700) Mary Astell took the contemporary Lockean view of the permanence of the mar­riage bond, and argued against divorce. Her remedy for unhappiness in the matrimonial state was timely preven­tion of unwise marriages. This prevention would be found only in a more generous education for women. When once married, the woman was submissively to bear the yoke ; the family must have a head and the man, though not superior, is the natural head. Daniel Defoe in his An Essay Upon Projects (1697) was the first writer of any importance to champion the cause of women. In a way his essay has a modern ring to it, and is very suggestive of Mary Wollstonecraft and Brockden Brown. He argued that man reproached the sex-the usual designation of woman throughout the eighteenth century­for folly and impertinence, but he maintained that the only remedy for the deplorable condition of women was adequate educational opportunities. It is a wonder, he said, that they do so well when "their youth is spent to-teach them to stitch and sow or make bawbles." What would a man be good 2The Renaissance and Reformation had promised much in disa­busing the minds of men of long-established errors and prejudices, yet their influence in the matter was but limited and feeble. Only a few men, like Coverdale, Tyndale, More, and Hooker questioned the absolute authority of the church in matters of divorce. These men maintained the dignity of woman, and claimed for her'an equality with man in matrimonial affairs. University of Texas Bulletin for if taught nothing else? Why have women been denied the benefits of instruction so necessary? Knowledge and understanding would be useful to the sex, and why can any man wish to keep women ignorant? Why upbraid them with folly when only the error of this inhuman custom made them foolish? "The capacities of women," he goes on to say, "are supposed to be great, and their senses are quicker than those of the men."3 Have men denied them an educa­tion for fear of competition with themselves? Defoe was ultra-revolutionary when he asserted that "God has given to all mankind equal gifts and capacities, in that he has given them all souls equally capable; and that the whole · difference in mankind proceeds either from accidental dif­ference in the make of their bodies, or from the foolish difference of education."4 Women must not be men's cooks or slaves, but men's companions. · l have dwelt on this work of Defoe because there is a striking similarity of argument between it and Brown's Rights of Women, just one hundred years later. Defoe makes the first claim for woman's natural equality with man. In only one particular was he a slave to contemporary prejudices, and even in this, one cannot be sure that Defoe was not ironical. Woman's virtue, he said, must be a clois­tered virtue, and consequently proper guards must be set. He would place women in public academies with all the facilities for advanced work in the arts and the sciences, but the school building must be so plain and so situated that a watchful eye could take in all parts of it at one glance; and he would take particular pains to surround it with a large moat having only one accessible entrance, that intrig­uing with young men might be made difficult. The work of Mary Astell and of Defoe was oot particu­larly influential, and the first third of the eighteenth cen­tury saw but little improvement in the condition of women. The attitude of Addison,5 under the thin disguise of helping 3An Essay upon Projects, p, 284. 4An Essay Upon Projects, p. 299. SAddison: Tatler, Nos. 100, 102, 120, 250, 256, 265; Spectf of Alcuin, 1797, an enthusiastic but inexperienced essay on the ques­tion of woman's rights and liberties."_.The Encyclopaedia Brittan­nica, Eleventh Edition. (F) "It is not surprising, therefore, that his ,first publication, Alcuin, in 1797, dealt with the social position of woman, and advocated a very advanced theory of divorce. This brief work, in the form of a rather stilted dialogue, made little impression." Trent and Erskine in "Great American Writers, p. 15. ( G) "In 1797 he published a work on marriage and divorce entitled The Dialogue of Alcuin.''-Wendell and Greenough's A History of Literature in America. (H) "The spirit of Godwin stirred eagerly in Brown during the early days of his freedom. Toward the end of 1797 he bore witness by writing Alcuin, a dialogue on the rights of women which took its first principles from Mary Wollstonecraft and God­win." Van Doren, Chapter VI, The Cambridge History of American Literature. In an unpublished article recently put into my hands Professor Carl Van Doren, however, takes note of this confusion. There is an entry in Dunlap's Diary, August 8, 1797, which lends support to the statement Alcuin was published in 1797. He writes: "Now S[mith] showed me 2 dialogues called Alcouin sent on by B. to be forwarded to Danies paper." It is quite likely that Dunlap­ none too careful with his spelling at any time-meant to write Den­ nie's instead of Danies. Joseph Dennie, a friend and correspondent of Smith, was at this time editor of The Farmer's Museum of Wal­ pole, New Hampshire. As I have not yet had ac~ess to the complete files of this paper, I cannot deny that Alcuin was published therein. But granting that it was published in 1797, its appearance did not prevent subsequent confusion with the second dialogue. Brockden Brown antf, the Rights of Women that only three and one-half pages in Dunlap were taken from the Smith Alcuin-to serve, it seems, as an introduc­tion to the second dialogue published in Dunlap's Life in 1815. The Smith Alcuin is a small volume of seventy-seven pages or approximately eleven thousand words, and is di­vided into two parts to correspond to Alcuin's two visits to the home of Mrs. Carter, who conducts a kind of Philadel­phia salon. The dialogue as printed in the Weekly Magazine differs in many points from the Smith Alcuin. It is some­what shorter; the title is changed to The Rights of Women; the hero is Edwin instead of Alcuin ; significant references to certain famous characters and events are omitted ; tlre slur on the professions of soldier and barber is deleted; and the last thirteen lines of Alcuin are lacking in the magazine edition. Why Brown made these changes is not readily seen, and why he failed to have Smith make the same altera­tions in the volume published by Swords, both of which ap­peared in print during the same month, is even more mys­terious. It seems likely that Swords printed the book in the spring of 1797 or soon thereafter, but did not publish it until March, 1798. This asssumption would explain the differences in the two versions. The concluding paragraph of the Smith Alcuin clearly points to a sequel. "Here the conversation was interrupted by one of th~ company, who, after listening to us for some time, thought proper at last to approach, and contribute his mite to our mutual edification. I soon seized an opportunity of withdrawing, but not without requesting and obtaining permission to repeat by visit." The Smith "Advertise­ment" definitely states that the discussion was continued in another '1ialogue. That Dunlap's "copious extracts" are the continuation of the subject foreshadowed in Alcuin and clearly expressed in the "Advertisement," is beyond cavil. Then, too, the permission to repeat his visit which Alcuin sought is realized in the continuation-which begins : "A week elapsed and I repeated by visit to Mrs. Carter." The continuation, referred to hereafter as the second dialogue, was entitled Alcuin in the Philadelphia edition (1815) of University of Texas Bulletiri Dunlap's Life of Brown, and the Paradise of Women38 in the London edition of that work (1822). It is safe to conclude, then, that it was to the second dia­logue that Dunlap referred as being written in the fall and winter of 1797. Smith and Dunlap both agree that the second dialogue was written after March, 1797. The time of the first is less certain, but more significant, as it was Brown's first publication. Reasoning from internal ev­idence alone, however, the date can be quite definitely established as the fall of 1796. On page eleven of Alcuin the priggish schoolmaster speaks of the pleasure he derives during his leisure evenings from watching a declining moon and the varying firmament with the optics of "Dr. Young." The Dr. Young here referred to was Thomas Young ( 1773­1829), a noted British physicist, whose paper on the struc­ture of the eye was read before the Royal Society when he was only twenty years old, and established for him the name of founder of physiological optics. Young shortly thereafter werit to Germany, and in July, 1796 received the degree of doctor of physic from the University of Gottingen. On his return to England, he was hailed as a great genius. It is not likely that Brown would refer to him as Dr. Young be­fore July, 1796. Significant, too, is Alcuin's remark, on page fourteen, that "the theme of the discourse was political. The edicts of Carnot, and the commentary of that profound jurist, Peter Porcupine, had furnished ample materials of discussion." Lazare Nichols Marguerite Carnot (1753­1823) was a member of the French Convention, an import­ant member of the Committee of Public Safety, and the guiding genius of the Executive Directory. He became a member of the Directory in 1795, and because of his oppo­sition to the extreme measures of his colleague Barras, he was suspected of royalist sympathy and was sentenced to deportation in 1797. He spoke strongly against the viola-· tions of the Bill of Rights, and objected to the dictatorial and autocratic action of the .Directory. But Brown's refer­ ss1n Bage's novel, Man As He Is (1792), Fran1~e is referred to as the "paradise of women," Vol. II, p. 234. Brockden Brown and the Rights of Women ence to the edicts of Carnot undoubtedly suggests the un­compromising measures which Carnot felt were necessary during the troublous fall of 1796. In order to put down · royalist and anarchistic plots, the Directory assumed ab­solute power over the life and property of the citizen. It is quite certain, however, that Brown had in mind Carnot's instruction to ·Citizen Adet, the French minister to the United States, to address. a note to the American Secretary ·of State reproaching the Washington Administration fol' the position of the President in his Farewell Address and for the Administration's attitude toward the Jay Treaty. Citizen Adet declared that America had violated her sacred treaty with the French Republic, and that as a solemn pro­test against that dereliction his government had instructed him to suspend his duties as minister. War with France or rather with the Directory seemed imminent.39 Peter Porcupine, mentioned in the same sentence with Carnot and referred to as a profound jurist, was William Cobbett (1762-1835). He was an English soldier, essayist, politician, editor, and farmer who came to the United States in 1792 to seek a berth with the Washington Administration. But, failing in this, he settled down in Philadelphia as a tutor in English to French political refugees. In 1794 Joseph Priestley also came to America and plunged immediately into the fight for republicanism. This action of Priestley drew Cobbett to the defense of the Federalists, and his vi­ cious attack upon the friends of democracy stirred up the bitterest pamphlet war known in American history. He issued at Philadelphia a monthly pamphlet under the title or The Censor (January, 1796-to March, 1797) which he signe~ as Peter Porcupine. In this paper he was a vigorous and unreasonable advocate of everything British and a violent critic of everything republican. Cobbett even went so far as to place in the windows of his bookstore in Philadelphia pictures of nobles, princes, and kings-including the infa­ mous George the Third. We first learn of him as Peter Porcupine in .January, 1796, but if one may judge from 39Stanwood, Edward, A History of the Presidency, Vol. I, 1898. University of Texas Bulletin · newspaper allusions, he was not well known under this pseudonym until August of the same year. In September. 1796, he wrote, "What must I feel upon seeing the news­ papers filled from top to bottom-with A Blue Shop for Peter Porcupine, A Pill for Peter Porcupine, Peter Porcu­ pine Detected,"40 etc. Cobbett reached the zenith of his rav­ ings against American and French republicanism during the fall elections of 1796. While these allusions to contemporary characters and events do not definitely fix the date of the Smith Alcuin, they at least point to an earlier one than has usually been assigned. It is unfortunate that Brown is known only by the second dialogue, which is on the very face of it only an Utopian dream, not to be taken as representing Brown's real opin­ ions. It is significant, too, that the second dialogue is one of the few pieces that remained unpublished during the life­ time of the author. It is a work of pure speculation, and as such may represent Brown's fanciful interpretation of so­ ciety in Godwin's Political Justice. But it will be seen that the commonwealth here described has more in common with the Utopia of Sir Thomas More than with the speculations of William Godwin. In fact the influence of Godwin on the thought of the two dialogues diminishes in proportion as one studies them in relation to the temper of the age. The discussions in the first dialogue, on the other hand, are thoroughly sincere and practical, and represent the most respectable democratic doctrine of the day. Indeed, it is Brown's contribution to the great debate between the Fed­ eralists and Republicans during the stormy days of 1796, and registers his protest against the conservative American Constitution. Brown, with others, had been clearly disap­ pointed with the failure of the framers of the Constitution to embody in that document the principles of the Declaration of Independence. The Smith Alcuin is, furthermore, the 4oSelections from Cobbett's PoUtical Works: being a complete abridgement of the 100 volumes which comprise the writings of Peter Porcupine, London, 1835. Brockden Brown and the Rights of Women 37 . first extended serious argument for the rights of women that had yet appeared in America, and as such it merits the praise that is the pioneer's. It is the author's plea for the natural right of women to share in the political and eco­nomic life of the nation. In this general claim for women Brown was not at all singular, as has already been pointed out, for he only gave voice to a time-honored Quaker con­viction of the essential equality of women with men. Fur­thermore, we have seen that this conception of women's rights and capabilities was of slow growth from Mary Astell to Brockden Brown, and that it was neither fathered nor fostered exclusively by only one. So much for the general character of the work. As Alcuin is almost inaccessible, a detailed account of it is advisable. In each dialogue the argument is conveyed in a conversation between the priggish schoolmaster Alcuin and the widowed Mrs. Carter, a Philadelphia blue-stocking.41 She is familiar with the current arguments for the rights of women, and generally takes a more radical stand than Alcuin. Her argument goes beyond that of Mary Woll­stonecraft, whose plea is fundamentally for the emancipa­tion of women from low social standards through an educa­tion similar to that for men; Mrs. Carter's contention is for . political and economic equality with men. Indeed, her ideas on this and other subjects are so singular that her home be­comes a rendezvous for all liberal and respectable talent, so that perhaps the strongest inducement to visit her home was not the attraction of the woman, but that of the brilliant so-· cieythat gathered there. Following the description of Mrs. Carter and her liberal coterie is a bit of philosophy on the comparative merits of reading and conversation as means of instruction. Like Swift, Alcuin sings the praises of con­versation. Books are too dull and insipid, and he hates a lecturer, because his audience cannot canvass each step in the argument. Formal debate is also condemned. But con-_ versation is free and unfettered and blends, more happily 41Brown may wish to remind his readers of the famous London blue-stocking, Elizabeth Carter ( 1717-1806) . University of Texas Bulletin than any other method of instruction, utility and pleasure. Alcuin spends the day in repeating the alphabet or engrav­ing on infantile minds that twice three make six, and the evening, until his acquaintance with Mrs. Carter, in ampli­fying the seductive suppositions, "if I were a king" or "if I were a lover." The schoolmaster longs for the liberalising influence that only the conversation of the ingenious can give, and after a careful self-analysis he decides to become a frequent visitor at the home of Mrs. Carter. We are now, after fourteen dreary pages of introduction, permitted to hear the dialogue between Mrs. Carter and Alcuin. The very dullness and narrow outlook of this prologue, the least attractive part of the book, stand in striking contrast to the liberal views that follow. Alcuin, when the embarrassment of the introduction to the circle is over, respectfully withdraws to a corner of the room and there finds opportunity to engage the lady in con­versation. He somewhat awkwardly begins: "Pray, madam, are you a federalist?" She evades the question, and replies indirectly that she has often been called upon to listen to political discussions, but never before was she asked her own opm10n. Mrs. Carter declares that women, shallow and inexperienced as they all are, have nothing to do with politics; that their time is consumed in learnng the price of ribbon or tea or in plying the needle. No wonder, then, ·she asserts with Defoe, Swift,42 and others, that women are narrow, and for the sake of variety they sometimes wan­der into the pleasant fields of scandal. Alcuin admits the force of this argument, but submits that the work of woman is not Jess useful and honorable than that of many prores­sions assigned to men, notably those of barber and soldier. He dwells on the noble character of practical, simple, every­ ~:Mary Astell, Defoe, Swift, Mary Wollstonecraft, and Godwh1, whcse ideas are paralleled in Alcuin, are not specifically mentioned; Plato, Lycurgus, Newton, and Locke are, however. Brockden Brown and the Rights of Women day work. 43 He further declares that women are the equals of men in all essential respects and morally their superiors; that the distinctions based upon sex differences are of nv consequence; and with the whole body of French and Eng­lish advocates of the rights of women, Alcuin maintains that whatever important distinctions there are between men and women are the direct results of differences in oppor­tunities. Women are superficial and ignorant because they are generally cooks and seamstresses. But unlike those who believe in the infinite perfectibility of m~m, Alcuin takes a pessimistic view. He declares that it is doubtful whether the career of the species will end in knowledge, and with Locke he holds that man is born in ignorance, that habit has given permanence to error. He rejects the notion of innate ideas. Through ignorance or prejudice certain employments have been exclusively as-. signed to men, and the constitutional aversion of human nature to any change has confirmed this error. Mrs. Car­ter adds that of all forms of injustice that is most vicious which makes the circumstance of sex a reason for exclud­ing half of mankind from the more useful and honorable professions. Alcuin falls back for a moment upon the re­spectable Whig doctrine of "Whatever is, is right," and replies that the real evil lies in the fact that so much human · capacity is perverted.44 Then Alcuin follows the argument of Plato, More, and Godwin in desiring to have all tasks shared in common without distinction of sex, but, unlike Godwin, Alcuin is not sure that such an arrangement would be practicable. He laments that, on account of a perverted civilization, large portions of mankind are doomed to toil, but he laments thus not because they are men or women, but because they are human bengs. This is in line with the 42Alcuin's reasoning here parallels in' a remarkable way that of Fenelon in his De l'etiucation des filles (1681). It is very likely that Brown was acquainted with this work, as he certainly was with Telemaque, for he mentions Fenelon in an address before the Belle::. Lettres Club. HCf. Poulain's De l'Egalite des deux Sexes. University of Texas Bulletin humanitarian movement of the latter part of the eighteenth century and is not exclusively Godwinian. But Mrs. Carter insists that under any arrangement women would bear the greater burden because of the duties of motherhood. Al­cuin replies that luxury and its attendant evils have greatly increased that burden. Mrs. Carter believes that woman's field of usefulness is too much limited by a consideration 'Jf her function as mother, particularly as regards the liberal professions.45 But Alcuin insists that women are not really excluded from the higher professions, that in Europe at least women are found in such professions. He could never wish woman to stoop to the practice of law, and as for the ministry some sects (the Quakers and Methodists, of course) do not debar women from the pulpit. The Christian re­ligion has done much to break down distinctions of rank, wealth, and sex. Mrs. Carter does not try to refute Alcuin's argument, but she points out that all professions which require most vigor of mind, the greatest contact with en­lightened society and books, are filled by men only. Alcuin replies by attacking all the liberal professions, charging them with sordid motives ; usefulness as such is but a sec­ondary consideration. Benevolence, universal benevolence, should be the keynote of all the liberal callings-college de­grees and examinations matter but little. At this point Mrs. Carter broaches the question of wo­man's education. She takes the same line of argument a::s Defoe, Swift, and others that women have been educated for the profession of household slaves, that women of qual­ity are instructed in the art of the coquette. Men believe that women should be thus educated; consequently, they are excluded from schools and colleges. Here again Alcm.u takes a wholly unexpected turn in his argument by question­ing the advisability of a college education, even for men, for it seems unfavorable to moral and intellectual improve­ment.46 It would be indelicate to conduct mixed classes in 45Cf. Poulain's De l'Egalite des deua; Sexes. 4GFenelon in I/Education des Filles takes this same position. See also John Trumbull's The Progress of Dulness (1772-3). The same strictures on college education are found in the works of Hopkinson and Freneau. Brockden Brown and the Rights of Women anatomy or other such subjects. This idea of false mod­esty gives Mrs. Carter an opportunity to inveigh against those who urge the separation of the sexes on the score of delicacy. With Mary Wollstonecraft and Condorcet she in­sists that nothing has been so injurious as the separation of the sexes. They are associated in childhood, but soon they are made to take different paths, learn different language:::., different maxims, different pursuits; their relations become fettered and embarrassed. With the one all is reserve and artifice, with the other adulation and affected humility: the man must affect ardor, the woman indifference-her tongue belies the sentiments of her heart and the dictates of her mind. Her early life is a preparation for marriage; her married life is a state of slavery. She loses all title to pri­vate property, and the right of private opinion; she knows nothing but the will of her husband, and she may prevail only by tears and blandishments. Alcuin thinks this a great exaggeration, but Mrs. Carter asserts that the picture is exact, that her own life has suf­fered from a mistaken education. Man is physically stronger and thus in the primitive condition of society, woman was enslaved; but the tendency toward rational improvement has been to equalize conditions and to level all distinctions not based upon truth and reason. Women have benefited by this progress of reason, but they are not wholly exempt from servitude. Alcuin admits that the lot of woman is hard, but he points out that it is the preferable one, freest .from the thorns of life-and then he trails off into the song of the needle, and the hand that conjures a piano. Mrs. Carter replies that this is but a panegyric on indolence and luxury, in which neither distinguished virtue nor true hap­piness is found. Alcuin agrees that ease and luxury are pernicious ; that the rich and the poor alike are denied real happiness and peace,47 but still their lot is better than brutal toil and ignorance. He concludes his argument by a state­ 47This point is particularly emphasized in Poulain's De l'Egalite des deux Sexes. Univer;;ity of Texas Bulletin ment that there is something wrong with society as it is now constituted, and appeals to Mrs. Carter to waive the problem of women and urge the much greater claims of enslaved human beings. Again Alcuin inquires of Mrs. Carter whether she is a federalist; again she protests that women have nothing to do with politics, that the American government takes no heed of them, that the Constitution-makers, without the slightest consciousness of inconsistency or injustice, ex­cluded them from all political rights, and made no distinc­tion between women and irrational animals. In the sense that she prefers union to dissension she is a federalist; but if the term means the approval of the Constitution as a document embodying the principles of right and justice, she is not a federalist. It is when Mrs. Carter inveighs against the Constitution of the United States as harsh and unjust that she waxes most eloquent. She scoffs at the maxims of the Constitu­tion that proclaim that all power is derived from the people, that liberty is every one's birthright and is the immediate gift of God to all mankind, that those who are subject to the laws should enjoy a share in their enactment. · These maxims are specious, and our glorious Constitution in practice is a system of tyranny. One is denied a voice in the election .of his governor because he is not twenty-one; another because he has not been a resident for two years; a third because he can not show a tax receipt; a fourth because his skin is black; a fifth merely because she is a woman. So what have we to boast in the name of divinest liberty when only a small fraction of our people have a voice in our government? Here Alcuin takes refuge in the Quaker doctrine that the spirit is of vastly more importance than the form of gov­ernment; that the value of any government is measured by the character of the men who administer its laws. But this subtle distinction between power and the exercise of power does not find favor with Mrs. Carter; she wishes a voice Brockden Brown and the Rights of Women in the choice of even the wise man. She is willing to ad­mit that government by the wisest would be the best gov­ernment, but how are the sages to be distinguished from the mediocre, and how is one to know that the wise man cannot be corrupted? That government is best, all things considered, that consults the feelings and judgments of the governed. Alcuin insists, however, that some qualifications should be required of the voter. Mrs. Carter sidetracks by saying that she is not arguing the claims of man.kind in general, but the rights of women in particular; for mere sex is so purely a physical matter that to make it a basis for excluding one-half of mankind from the enjoyment of their natural rights is sheer folly. Alcuin is most absurd in the eyes of Mrs. Carter when he suggests that women justly relinquish all claims to liberty and property when they marry; that they are contented with their present position; that they would not exercise the rights of citizens if the privilege were extended to them -this was a common argument in New Jersey where women had the privilege of voting, but very seldom took part in the elections. Alcuin admits that he is prejudiced, that he could never bring himself to sympathize with the claims of women to rights in business and politics; but he closes the argument by prudently acknowledging that since women are as thoughtful as men, and are more beautiful, they are therefore the superior sex. Thus ends the first dialogue or the Smith Alcuin. Just why Dunlap elected to publish the more Utopian second is a matter that passes understanding. It is only possible that he wished thereby to re-create the speculative phase through which Brown was then (1797) passing. That Dunlap was acquainted with the first dialogue is evident from the fact he recorded in his Diary (April 28, 1798) : "Read today Smith's publication of Brown's 'Alcuin,' 1 & 2 parts." Then on the following day he notes that he read parts three and four. It may be suggested that Dunlap felt that the first dialogue had received sufficient publication in the Smith volume and the Weekly Magazine. Certainly Dunlap thought Univer.-;ity of Texas Bulletin highly of the first one, for an entry in his Diary (August 8, 1797) states that "there is much truth, philosophical ac­curacy and handsome writing in the essay." Perhaps, if Dunlap had foreseen the misunderstanding growing out of his publication of the second dialogue, he would have spared his friend's reputation. v The second work opens with Alcuin's declaration that he has just returned from a visit to the paradise of women­a phrase commonly applied to France-and that the journey had been made instantaneously. To allay Mrs. Carter's suspicion, Alcuin gives a lecture on the nature of the ex­ternal world, following with aimost verbal minuteness at times, the argument which George Berkeley (1685-1733) advanced to show that the external world48 exists only in the mind that perceives it. Alcuin states that the language of the people whom he visited is English; that their buildings show traces of Greek and Roman models. This may be meant to suggest Godwin's Political Justice, but more likely Utopia of Sir Thomas More, for Godwin says little about the rights of women apart from their mat­rimonial enslavement. But with the Utopia there are nu­merous points of contact. The frame-work is suggestive of Gulliver's Travels. In this island commonwealth of Brown both sexes were engaged in "awakening by their notes, the neighboring echoes, or absorbed in musing silence, or en­gaged in sprightly debate." There were vast halls for mu­sicians and dancers; halls where state affairs were the theme of sonorous rhetoric, or where the poet or annalist, or the chemist, or the mechanical inventor, displayed his ,gifts. At this point Mrs. Carter stinteth Alcuin of his glowing description; she wishes information unembarrassed for rhetoric or ignorant conjecture. In response he draws a picture of conditions as he observed them: there was no distinction in dress; the women shared equally with men in all recreational activities; in the matter of art, poetry, science, or debate the sexes mingled their inquiries, as all were votaries of reason. As Gulliver found it difficult to 48Dialogues, p. 379 ff.; Commonplace B'ook, Vol. I, p. 92. Alexan , der C. Fraser ed. It should be noted that Godwin in the second edition of Political Justice (1796) had a brief footnote on Berkeley's theory, but Brown does not seem to have followed him. University of Texas Bulletin make himself understood among the Houyhnhnms because of the irrational meanings that he attached to words, just so Alcuin is rebuffed in drawing moral and political dis­tinctions from a consideration of a difference in sex. His guide admits finally that he has heard of nations of men universally infected by error, and asks Alcuin to give an account of some of those errors. He mentions differences in dress, in education, in occµpations, and in marriage. The guide replies that utility guided by reason should deter­mine one's choice in dress; as to education it is prepos­terous to think that there should be any difference for the two sexes-the only demand made is that those instructed be rational. With Locke he holds that we are born in i.~norance, that ideas are received only through the senses, that our knowledge broadens with our experiences. In this, nature has made no distinction in the sexes; education and environment are the deciding factors in one's care~r, and the proper educational ideal is a curious mind in a sound body. The young are admitted to the assemblies of their elders and are instructed by them, as in the Utopm. Con­versations, books, instruments, specimens of art and na­ture, haunts of meditation, public halls, and leisure are at the disposal of all without discrimination of age or sex­again suggesting Utopia. As all must be provided with food, clothing, and shelter, all must share in the production of these necessities. Agri­culture is considered the most useful occupation, as in the Utopi,a; all are obliged to till the soil, thereby eliminating any drudgery that would otherwise be the lot of a few. One should share in the common labor, not because he shares in the fruits, but because he is being guided by reason and susceptible of happiness. It therefore becomes one's priv­ilege to promote the happiness of others. Alcuin suggests that women are usually thought to be too soft and delicate for rough and toilsome occupations, to which his interlocu­tor replies that that is the argument of men. At this juncture the conversation is changed from the general to the specific subject of marriage. Mrs. Carter here interposes a caution against Alcuin's overstepping the Brockden Brown and the Rights of Women bounds of modesty in the discussion of so delicate a ques­tion. She warns him that she is prepossessed in favor of the system of marriage, but she is willing to reason on the matter. With the preliminary sparring on questions of delicacy and sophistry over, Alcuin begins by declaring that in that paradise there is no institution of marriage. Mrs. Carter sees at once the course of his argument and accuses him of being in sympathy with that class of reasoners lately risen-meaning most likely Godwin and the whole French school-"who aim at the deepest foundation of civil so­ciety." She is thrown on the defensive and protests in solemn tones her belief in the institution of marriage, for without it all perception of moral rectitude would be de­stroyed. Mrs. Carter vigorously denounces Godwin's posi­tion on marriage and the sacred charities of family life­of course Godwin's name is not mentioned, but his pet phrases are. Alcuin reminds Mrs. Carter that she once submitted specific objections to the present system of mar­riage; that it renders the woman a slave to the man, that it leaves the woman destitute of property. At this point Alcuin philosophizes at length on the nature of property and its relation to the family, following rather closely Locke's ideas. With the same authority he urges that since the family must have some head the natural head is the man. Here, curiously, Mrs. Carter takes her main argument from Godwin in his condemnation of cohabita­tion as the destroyer of reverence, personality, opinion, lib­erty, and self-respect. But still Mrs. Carter insists that the institution of marriage is sacred, "but iniquitous laws, by making it a compact of slavery, by imposing impracticable conditions and extorting impious promises have, in most countries, converted it into something flagitious and hate­ful." Her remedy is spontaneous, unlimited divorce on the complaint of either party-such as obtained in France at that time. This is followed by a gruesome picture of the ills of domestic life. Such ills often result from a marriage of love or convenience, but seldom from one based upon friendship guided by reason. She borrows Godwin's phrase "groundless and obstinate attachment"49 to describe those affections that persist beyond reason. 49Godwin, William, Polritical Justice, Vol. 11, p. 245. University of Texas Bulletin Emboldened by Mrs. Carter's liberal views, Alcuin dares to advance a step further by suggesting that marriage is but custom after all, a suggestion, however, which Mrs. Carter rejects. She ends the dialogue by restating her position. Marriage, she says, is a union founded on free and mutual consent; it cannot exist without friendship and personal fidelity; it will cease to be just when it ceases to be sponta­neous. As the author's first serious publication, Alcuin is prom­1smg. The style is simple, easy, and forceful; the descrip­tions vivid and accurate, and the argument persuasive. But as a whole it is crude and unorganized; it lacks a good dispo­sition of the material and a consistent grasp of character; and the conversation is not at all brilliant. Only the un­usualness of the ideas could ever have made it interesting. But now that those ideas have been largely realized, one finds it increasingly difficult to read the book with sus­tained interest. Co-education is general, the professions are open to men and women without discrimination, women now have a share in the enactment of the laws under which they live, the marriage bond no longer makes a slave of the woman, and it begins to appear that spontaneous and unlimited divorce is the rule of the day. Common as these things are now, they were in Brown's day most revolution­ary, and for the advocacy of such, many men and women were dogged unceasingly by the law, particularly in France and England. It does not appear, however, that Alcuin made the least stir in America; even among the author's friends this maiden attempt was received but coldly. The Smith Alcuin must have had only a small circulation, for it is now one of the rarest American books. The version in the Philadel­phia Weekly Magazine, of course, reached a much larger public, but there is not the least evidence that it attracted any special attention. Smith in the "Advertisement" held out a promise of a second dialogue on the same subject if the first received a cordial welcome. It is to be observed that the second remaining in hiding until 1815. Brown must have felt that his talent did not lie in the field of dialectics, for he immediately turned to the writing of ro­mances to release the energy that stirred in him.