It is a mistake to call Miss Anthony a reformer, or the movement in which she is engaged a reform; she is a revolutionist, aiming at nothing less than the breaking up of the very foundations of society, and the overthrow of every social institution organized for the protection of the sanctity of the altar, the family circle and the legitimacy of our offspring, recognizing no religion but self-worship, no God but human reason, no motive to human action but lust.  Many, undoubtedly, will object that we state the case too strongly; but if they will dispassionately examine the facts and compare them with the character of the leaders and the inevitable tendency of their teachings, they must be convinced that the apparently innocent measure of woman suffrage as a remedy for woman’s wrongs in over-crowded populations, is but a pretext or entering wedge by which to open Pandora’s box and let loose upon society a pestilential brood to destroy all that is pure and beautiful in human nature, and all that has been achieved by organized associations in religion, morality and refinement; that the whole plan is coarse, sensual and agrarian, the worst phase of French infidelity and communism....

She did not directly and positively broach the licentious social theories which she is known to entertain, because she well knew that they would shock the sensibilities of her audience, but confined her discourse to the one subject of woman suffrage as a means to attain equality of competitive labor.  This portion of her lecture we have not time to discuss.  Our sole purpose now is to enter our protest against the inculcation of doctrines which we believe are calculated to degrade and debauch society by demolishing the dividing lines between virtue and vice.  It is true that Miss Anthony did not openly advocate “free love” and a disregard of the sanctity of the marriage relation, but she did worse—­under the guise of defending women against manifest wrongs, she attempts to instil into their minds an utter disregard for all that is right and conservative in the present order of society.

Apparently Mr. Brown did not approve of woman suffrage.  According to his own statement Miss Anthony confined her entire discourse to the one point of competitive labor.  The editorial was founded wholly upon his own depraved imagination.

Miss Anthony went into British Columbia and spoke several times at Victoria.  The doctrine of equal rights was entirely new in that city and on the first evening there was not a woman in the hall.  At no succeeding lecture were twenty women present, although there were fair audiences of men.  The press was respectful in its treatment of speaker and speeches, but some of the “cards” which were sent to the papers were amusing, to say the least.[61]