to put our heads together and work up that lecture grows every day a greater blunder, if nothing more.  It was like going down into South Carolina and failing to illustrate human oppression by negro slavery.  I hope you are not haunted with it as I am.  God helping me, I will yet ease my spirit of the load.

After this lecture she wrote again: 

The first fire is passed.  I send you the Bulletin and Oregonian notices.  I have not seen the Democratic paper—­the Herald—­but am told it says Miss Anthony failed to interest her audience.  Not a person stirred save when I made them laugh.  But tomorrow night’s audience will tell the people’s estimate.  My speech then will be on the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments.  Last night I made the San Francisco speech, but was not nearly so free and easy in the brain-working; still I got my points clearly stated.  The wet blanket is now somewhat off.  I hope to present the fact of our right to vote under these amendments with a great deal more freedom.  If I am able to do so, I shall talk to women alone Saturday afternoon on the social evil; then, if interest warrants, answer objections Monday evening, and close here.  I have contracted for one-half the gross receipts of evening and the entire receipts of afternoon lectures.

I want to tell you that with my gray silk I wore a pink bow at my throat and a narrow pink ribbon in my hair!  Mrs. Duniway is delighted, so you see my tide is turning a little from that terrible, killing experience. You never received such wholesale praise—­I never such wholesale censure.  But enough; it is a comfort to get a little outside assurance again.

Miss Anthony met with a friendly reception from the press of Oregon.  She was extensively interviewed by the leading papers and reported in a complimentary manner.  The Oregonian thus closed a column account:  “The audience, which listened attentively and with evident deep interest to this address, was large and chiefly composed of the intelligent portion of our citizens.  Miss Anthony talked clearly, more concisely than the average speaker, kept the thread of her logic well in hand and, it must be confessed, made a strong argument, though we can hardly admit that it was conclusive.  She is a fluent speaker and well sustains the cause she advocates.”  The Herald said in a lengthy interview:  “Her conversation is fluent and concise, each word expressing its full complement of meaning.  Her system of argument is logical and, in contradistinction to the sex in general, she does not depend on mere assertions but gives proofs to carry conviction."[59]