This, so briefly mentioned, was the beginning of the revolution in sentiment respecting woman’s sphere, which, though it was met at the outset with much the same spirit which opposed abolitionism, soon spread and became a principle of reform as conscientiously and as ably advocated as any other, moral or political.  Neither Sarah nor Angelina had any idea of starting such a revolution, but when they found it fairly inaugurated, and that many women had long privately held the same views as they did and were ready to follow in their lead, they bravely accepted, and to the end of their lives as bravely sustained all the responsibilities their opinions involved.  They were the pioneers in the great cause of political freedom for women, and opened the way in the true pioneer spirit.  The clear sense of justice and the broad humanity which inspired their trenchant rebukes and fervid appeals not only enlightened and encouraged other women, but led to inquiry into various wrongs practised towards the sex which had up to that time been suffered in silence and in ignorance, or in despair of any possibility of relief.  The peculiar tenderness of Sarah Grimke’s nature, and her overflowing sympathy with any form of suffering, led her, earlier than Angelina, to the consideration of the necessity of some organized system of protection of helpless women and children; and, from the investigation of the impositions and abuses to which they were subjected, was evolved, without much difficulty, the doctrine of woman’s equality before the law, and her right to a voice on every subject of public interest, social or political.  Sarah’s published letters during the summer of 1837 show her to have been as deeply interested in this reform as in abolitionism, and to her influence was certainly due the introduction of the “Woman Question” into the anti-slavery discussions.  That this question was as yet a secondary one in Angelina’s mind is evident from what she writes to Jane Smith about this time.  She says:  “With regard to speaking on the rights of woman, it has really been wonderful to me that though, everywhere I go, I meet prejudice against our speaking, yet, in addressing an audience, I never think of referring to it.  I was particularly struck with this two days ago.  Riding with Dr. Miller to a meeting at Franklin, I found, from conversation with him, that I had a great amount of prejudice to meet at that town, and very much in his own mind.  I gave him my views on women’s preaching, and verily believe I converted him, for he said he had no idea so much could be adduced from the Bible to sustain the ground I had taken, and remarked:  ’This will be quite new to the people, and I believe they will gladly hear these things,’ and pressed me so much to speak on the subject at the close of my lecture that I was obliged to promise I would if I could remember to do so.  After speaking two hours, we returned to his house to tea, and he asked:  ’Why did you not tell the people why you believed you had a right to speak?’ I had entirely forgotten all about it until his question revived the conversation we had on the road.  Now I believe the Lord orders these things so, driving out of my mind what I ought not to speak on.  If the time ever comes when this shall be a part of my public work, then I shall not be able to forget it.”