“If you adopt the views of H.C.  Wright, as you are reported to have done, in his official bulletin of a ‘domestic scene’ (where you are made to figure conspicuously among the conquests of the victor as rare spoils gracing the triumphal car), why then we are in one point of doctrine just as wide asunder as extremes can be.”

This letter was answered by Sarah, and with the most admirable patience and moderation.  She begins by saying:—­

“Angelina is so wrathy that I think it will be unsafe to trust the pen in her hands to reply to thy two last good long letters.  As I feel nothing but gratitude for the kindness which I am sure dictated them, I shall endeavor to answer them, and, as far as possible, allay thy uneasiness as to the course we are pursuing.”

She then proceeds to calmly discuss his objections, and to defend their views on the woman question, which, she says, she regards as second in importance to none, but that she does not feel bound to take up every caviller who presents himself, and therefore will not notice some others who had criticised her letters in the Spectator.

About H.C.  Wright, she says:  “I must say a few words concerning Brother Wright, towards whom I do not feel certain that the law of love predominated when thou wrote that part of thy letter relative to him....  We feel prepared to avow the principles set forth in the ‘domestic scene.’  I wonder thou canst not perceive the simplicity and beauty and consistency of the doctrine that all government, whether civil or ecclesiastical, conflicts with the government of Jehovah, and that by the Christian no other can be acknowledged, without leaning more or less on an arm of flesh.  Would to God that all abolitionists put their trust where I believe H.C.  Wright has placed his, in God alone....  I have given my opinions (in the Spectator).  Those who read them may receive or reject or find fault.  I have nothing to do with that.  I shall let thee enjoy thy opinion, but I must wait and see the issue before I conclude it was one of Satan’s providences....  I know the opposition to our views arises in part from the fact that women are habitually regarded as inferior beings, but chiefly I believe from a desire to keep them in unholy subjection to man, and one way of doing this is to deprive us of the means of becoming their equals by forbidding us the privileges of education which would fit us for the performance of duty.  I am greatly mistaken if most men have not a desire that women should be silly....  I have not said half I wanted, but this must suffice for the present, as Angelina has concluded to try her hand at scolding.  Farewell, dear brother.  May the Lord reward thee tenfold for thy kindness, and keep thee in the hollow of His holy hand.

“Thy sister in Jesus,

“S.M.G.”

Angelina’s part of the letter is not written in the sweet, Quaker spirit which prevails through Sarah’s, but shows a very interesting consciousness of her power over the man she addressed.