No authority was given for this story in the newspaper where I saw it; but it certainly did not first appear in a woman-suffrage newspaper, and cannot therefore be a manufactured “outrage.”  I use it simply to illustrate the low-water mark at which the position of woman may rest, in the largest Christian nation of the world.  All the refinements, all the education, all the comparative justice, of modern society, have been gradually upheaved from some such depth as this.  When the gypsies described by Leland treat even the ground trodden upon by a woman as impure, they simply illustrate the low plane from which all the elevation of woman has begun.  All these things show that the position of that sex in society, so far from being a thing in itself permanent, has been in reality the most changing of all factors in the social problem.  And this inevitably suggests the question, Are we any more sure that her present position is finally and absolutely fixed than were those who observed it at any previous time in the world’s history?  Granting that her condition was once at low-water mark, who is authorized to say that it has yet reached high tide?

It is very possible that this Russian wife, once scourged back to submission, ended her days in the conviction, and taught it to her daughters, that such was a woman’s rightful place.  When an American woman of to-day says, “I have all the rights I want,” is she on any surer ground?  Grant that the difference is vast between the two.  How do we know that even the later condition is final, or that anything is final but entire equality before the laws?  It is not many years since William Story—­in a legal work inspired and revised by his father, the greatest of American jurists—­wrote this indignant protest against the injustice of the old common law:—­

“In respect to the powers and rights of married women, the law is by no means abreast of the spirit of the age.  Here are seen the old fossil footprints of feudalism.  The law relating to woman tends to make every family a barony or a monarchy, or a despotism, of which the husband is the baron, king, or despot, and the wife the dependent, serf, or slave.  That this is not always the fact is not due to the law, but to the enlarged humanity which spurns the narrow limits of its rules.  The progress of civilization has changed the family from a barony to a republic; but the law has not kept pace with the advance of ideas, manners, and customs.  And, although public opinion is a check to legal rules on the subject, the rules are feudal and stern.  Yet the position of woman throughout history serves as the criterion of the freedom of the people or an age.  When man shall despise that right which is founded only on might, woman will be free and stand on an equal level with him,—­a friend and not a dependent."[1]

We know that the law is greatly changed and ameliorated in many places since Story wrote this statement; but we also know how almost every one of these changes was resisted:  and who is authorized to say that the final and equitable fulfilment is yet reached?