Skip to main content
Updated September 23, 2019 | Infoplease Staff Information
by LucretiaMott

There is nothing of greater importance to the well-being of society at large - of man as well as woman - than the true and proper position of woman. Much has been said, from time to time, upon this subject. It has been a theme for ridicule, for satire and sarcasm. We might look for this from the ignorant and vulgar; but from the intelligent and refined we have a right to expect that such weapons shall not be resorted to, - that gross comparisons and vulgar epithets shall not be applied, so as to place woman, in a point of view, ridiculous to say the least.

This subject has claimed my earnest interest for many years. I have long wished to see woman occupying a more elevated position than that which custom for ages has allotted to her. It was with great regret, therefore, that I listened a few days ago to a lecture upon this subject, which, though replete with intellectual beauty, and containing much that was true and excellent, was yet fraught with sentiments calculated to retard the progress of woman to the high elevation destined by her Creator. I regretted the more that these sentiments should be presented with such intellectual vigor and beauty, because they would be likely to ensnare the young.

The minds of young people generally, are open to the reception of more exalted views upon this subject. The kind of homage that has been paid to woman, the flattering appeals which have too long satisfied her - appeals to her mere fancy and imagination, are giving place to a more extended recognition of her rights, her important duties and responsibilities in life. Woman is claiming for herself stronger and more profitable food. Various are the indications leading to this conclusion. The increasing attention to female education, the improvement in the literature of the age, especially in what is called the “Ladies' Department,“ in the periodicals of the day, are among the proofs of a higher estimate of woman in society at large. Therefore we may hope that the intellectual and intelligent are being prepared for the discussion of this question, in a manner which shall tend to ennoble woman and dignify man.

Free discussion upon this, as upon all other subjects, is never to be feared; nor will be, except by such as prefer darkness to light. “Those only who are in the wrong dread discussion. The light alarms those only who feel the need of darkness.“ It was sound philosophy, uttered by Jesus, “He that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.“

I have not come here with a view of answering any particular parts of the lecture alluded to, in order to point out the fallacy of its reasoning. The speaker, however, did not profess to offer anything like argument on that occasion, but rather a sentiment. I have no prepared address to deliver to you, being unaccustomed to speak in that way; but I felt a wish to offer some views for your consideration, though in a desultory manner, which may lead to such reflection and discussion as will present the subject in a true light.

In the beginning, man and woman were created equal. “Male and female created he them, and blessed them, and called their name Adam.“ He gave dominion to both over the lower animals, but not to one over the other.

“Man o'er woman He made not lord, such title to himself Reserving, human left from human free.“

The cause of the subjection of woman to man, was early ascribed to disobedience to the command of God. This would seem to show that she was then regarded as not occupying her true and rightful position in society.

The laws given on Mount Sinai for the government of man and woman were equal, the precepts of Jesus make no distinction. Those who read the Scriptures, and judge for themselves, not resting satisfied with the perverted application of the text, do not find the distinction, that theology and ecclesiastical authorities have made, in the condition of the sexes. In the early ages, Miriam and Deborah, conjointly with Aaron and Barak, enlisted themselves on the side which they regarded the right, unitedly going up to their battles, and singing their songs of victory. We regard these with veneration. Deborah judged Israel many years - she went up with Barak against their enemies, with an army of 10,000, assuring him that the honor of the battle should not be to him, but to a woman. Revolting as were the circumstances of their success, the acts of a semi-barbarous people, yet we read with reverence the song of Deborah: “Blessed above woman shall Jael, the wife of Heeber, the Kenite be; blessed shall she be above women in the tent. She put her hand to the nail, and her right hand to the workman's hammer; she smote Sisera through his temples. At her feet he bowed, he fell, he lay down dead.“ This circumstance, revolting to Christianity, is recognized as an act befitting woman in that day. Deborah, Huldah, and other honorable women, were looked up to and consulted in times of exigency, and their counsel was received. In that eastern country, with all the customs tending to degrade woman, some were called to fill great and important stations in society. There were also false prophetesses as well as true. The denunciations of Ezekiel were upon those women who would “prophesy out of their own heart, and sew pillows to all armholes,“ &c.

Coming down to later times, we find Anna, a prophetess of four-score years, in the temple day and night, speaking of Christ to all them who looked for redemption in Jerusalem. Numbers of women were the companions of Jesus, - one going to the men of the city, saying, “Come, see a man who told me all things that ever I did; is not this the Christ?“ Another, “Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it.“ Philip had four daughters who did prophesy. Tryphena and Tryphosa were co-workers with the apostles in their mission, to whom they sent special messages of regard and acknowledgment of their labors in the gospel. A learned Jew, mighty in the Scriptures, was by Priscilla instructed in the way of the Lord more perfectly. Phebe is mentioned as a servant of Christ, and commended as such to the brethren. It is worthy of note, that the word servant, when applied to Tychicus, is rendered minister. Women professing godliness, should be translated preaching.

The first announcement, on the day of Pentecost, was the fulfilment of ancient prophecy, that God's spirit should be poured out upon daughters as well as sons, and they should prophesy. It is important that we be familiar with these facts, because woman has been so long circumscribed in her influence by the perverted application of the text, rendering it improper for her to speak in the assemblies of the people, “to edification, to exhortation, and to comfort.“

If these scriptures were read intelligently, we should not so learn Christ, as to exclude any from a position, where they might exert an influence for good to their fellow-beings. The epistle to the Corinthian church, where the supposed apostolic prohibition of women's preaching is found, contains express directions how woman shall appear, when she prayeth or prophesyeth. Judge then whether this admonition, relative to speaking and asking questions, in the excited state of that church, should be regarded as a standing injunction on woman's preaching, when that word was not used by the apostle. Where is the Scripture authority for the advice given to the early church, under peculiar circumstances, being binding on the church of the present day? Ecclesiastical history informs us, that for two or three hundred years, female ministers suffered martyrdom, in company with their brethren.

These things are too much lost sight of. They should be known, in order that we may be prepared to meet the assertion, so often made, that woman is stepping out of her appropriate sphere, when she shall attempt to instruct public assemblies. The present time particularly demands such investigation. It requires also, that “of yourselves ye should judge what is right,“ that you should know the ground whereon you stand. This age is notable for its works of mercy and benevolence - for the efforts that are made to reform the inebriate and the degraded, to relieve the oppressed and the suffering. Women as well as men are interested in these works of justice and mercy. They are efficient co-workers, their talents are called into profitable exercise, their labors are effective in each department of reform. The blessing to the merciful, to the peacemaker is equal to man and to woman. It is greatly to be deplored, now that she is increasingly qualified for usefulness, that any view should be presented, calculated to retard her labors of love.

Why should not woman seek to be a reformer? If she is to shrink from being such an iconoclast as shall “break the image of man's lower worship,“ as so long held up to view; if she is to fear to exercise her reason, and her noblest powers, lest she should be thought to “attempt to act the man,“ and not “acknowledge his supremacy;“ if she is to be satisfied with the narrow sphere assigned her by man, nor aspire to a higher, lest she should transcend the bounds of female delicacy; truly it is a mouruful prospect for woman. We would admit all the difference, that our great and beneficent Creator has made, in the relation of man and woman, nor would we seek to disturb this relation; but we deny that the present position of woman, is her true sphere of usefulness: nor will she attain to this sphere, until the disabilities and disadvantages, religious, civil, and social, which impede her progress, are removed out of her way. These restrictions have enervated her mind and paralysed her powers. While man assumes, that the present is the original state designed for woman, that the existing “differences are not arbitrary nor the result of accident,“ but grounded in nature; she will not make the necessary effort to obtain her just rights, lest it should subject her to the kind of scorn and contemptuous manner in which she has been spoken of.

So far from her “ambition leading her to attempt to act the man,“ she needs all the encouragement she can receive, by the removal of obstacles from her path, in order that she may become a “true woman.“ As it is desirable that man should act a manly and generous part, not “mannish,“ so let woman be urged to exercise a dignified and womanly bearing, not womanish. Let her cultivate all the graces and proper accomplishments of her sex, but let not these degenerate into a kind of effeminacy, in which she is satisfied to be the mere plaything or toy of society, content with her outward adornings, and with the tone of flattery and fulsome adulation too often addressed to her. True, nature has made a difference in her configuration, her physical strength, her voice, &c. - and we ask no change, we are satisfied with nature. But how has neglect and mismanagement increased this difference! It is our duty to develope these natural powers, by suitable exercise, so that they may be strengthened “by reason of use.“ In the ruder state of society, woman is made to bear heavy burdens, while her “lord and master“ walks idly by her side. In the civilization to which we have attained, if cultivated and refined woman would bring all her powers into use, she might engage in pursuits which she now shrinks from as beneath her proper vocation. The energies of men need not then be wholly devoted to the counting house and common business of life, in order that women in fashionable society, may be supported in their daily promenades and nightly visits to the theatre and ball room.

The appeal of Catharine Beecher to woman some years ago, leading her to aim at higher pursuits, was greatly encouraging. It gave earnest of an improved condition of woman. She says, “The time is coming, when woman will be taught to understand the construction of the human frame, the philosophical results from restricted exercise, unhealthy modes of dress, improper diet, and other causes, which are continually operating to destroy the health and life of the young. Woman has been but little aware of the high incitements which should stimulate to the cultivation of her noblest powers. The world is no longer to be governed by physical force, but by the influence which mind exerts over mind. Woman has never wakened to her highest destinies and holiest hopes. The time is coming when educated females will not be satisfied with the present objects of their low ambition. When a woman now leaves the immediate business of her own education, how often, how generally do we find her, sinking down into almost useless inactivity. To enjoy the social circle, to accomplish a little sewing, a little reading, a little domestic duty, to while away her hours in self-indulgence, or to enjoy the pleasures of domestic life, - these are the highest objects at which many a woman of elevated mind, and accomplished education aims. And what does she find of sufficient interest to call forth her cultivated energies, and warm affections? But when the cultivation and developement of the immortal mind shall be presented to woman, as her especial and delightful duty, and that too whatever be her relations in life; when by example and experience she shall have learned her power over the intellect and the affections, then we shall not find woman, returning from the precincts of learning and wisdom, to pass lightly away the bright hours of her maturing youth. We shall not so often see her, seeking the light device to embroider on muslin and lace, (and I would add, the fashionable crochet work of the present day;) “but we shall see her, with the delighted glow of benevolence, seeking for immortal minds, whereon she may fasten durable and holy impressions, that shall never be effaced or wear away.“

A new generation of women is now upon the stage, improving the increased opportunities furnished for the acquirement of knowledge. Public education is coming to be regarded the right of the children of a republic. The hill of science is not so difficult of ascent as formerly represented by poets and painters; but by fact and demonstration smoothed down, so as to be accessible to the assumed weak capacity of woman. She is rising in the scale of being through this, as well as other means, and finding heightened pleasure and profit on the right hand and on the left. The study of Physiology, now introduced into our common schools, is engaging her attention, impressing the necessity of the observance of the laws of health. The intellectual Lyceum and instructive lecture room are becoming, to many, more attractive than the theatre and the ball room. The sickly and sentimental novel and pernicious romance are giving place to works, calculated to call forth the benevolent affections and higher nature. It is only by comparison that I would speak commendatory of these works of imagination. The frequent issue of them from the press is to be regretted. Their exciting contents, like stimulating drinks, when long indulged in, enervate the mind, unfitting it for the sober duties of life.

These duties are not to be limited by man. Nor will woman fulfil less her domestic relations, as the faithful companion of her chosen husband, and the fitting mother of her children, because she has a right estimate of her position and her responsibilities. Her self-respect will be increased; preserving the dignity of her being, she will not suffer herself to be degraded into a mere dependant. Nor will her feminine character be impaired. Instances are not few, of woman throwing off the incumbrances which bind her, and going forth in a manner worthy of herself, her creation, and her dignified calling. Did Elizabeth Fry lose any of her feminine qualities by the public walk into which she was called? Having performed the duties of a mother to a large family, feeling that she owed a labor of love to the poor prisoner, she was empowered by Him who sent her forth, to go to kings and crowned heads of the earth, and ask audience of these; and it was granted her. Did she lose the delicacy of woman by her acts? No. Her retiring modesty was characteristic of her to the latest period of her life. It was my privilege to enjoy her society some years ago, and I found all that belonged to the feminine in woman - to true nobility, in a refined and purified moral nature. Is Dorothea Dix throwing off her womanly nature and appearance in the course she is pursuing? In finding duties abroad, has any, “refined man felt that something of beauty has gone forth from her?“ To use the contemptuous word applied in the lecture alluded to, is she becoming “ mannish?“ Is she compromising her womanly dignity in going forth to seek to better the condition of the insane and afflicted? Is not a beautiful mind and a retiring modesty still conspicuous in her?

Indeed, I would ask, if this modesty is not attractive also, when manifested in the other sex? It was strikingly marked in Horace Mann when presiding over the late National Educational Convention in this city. The retiring modesty of William Ellery Channing, was beautiful, as well as of many others, who have filled dignified stations in society. These virtues, differing as they may in degree in man and woman, are of the same nature and call forth our admiration wherever manifested.

The noble courage of Grace Darling is justly honored, leading her to present herself on the coast of England, during the raging storm, in order to rescue the poor, suffering, shipwrecked mariner. Woman was not wanting in courage, in the early ages. In war and bloodshed this trait was often displayed. Grecian and Roman history have lauded and honored her in this character. English history records her courageous women too, for unhappily we have little but the records of war handed down to us. The courage of Joan of Arc was made the subject of a popular lecture not long ago, by one of our intelligent citizens. But more noble, moral daring is marking the female character at the present time, and better worthy of imitation. As these characteristics come to be appreciated in man too, his warlike acts, with all the miseries and horrors of the battle-ground, will sink into their merited oblivion, or be remembered only to be condemned. The heroism displayed in the tented field, must yield to the moral and Christian heroism which is shadowed in the signs of our times.

The lecturer regarded the announcement of woman's achievements, and the offering of appropriate praise through the press, as a gross innovation upon the obscurity of female life - he complained that the exhibition of the attainments of girls, in schools' was now equal to that of boys, and the newspapers announce that “Miss Brown received the first prize for English grammar,“ &c. If he objected to so much excitement of emulation in schools, it would be well; for the most enlightened teachers discountenance these appeals to love of approbation and self-esteem. But, while prizes continue to be awarded, can any good reason be given, why the name of the girl should not be published as well as that of the boy? He spoke with scorn, that “we hear of Mrs. President so and so; and committees and secretaries of the same sex.“ But if women can conduct their own business, by means of Presidents and Secretaries of their own sex, can he tell us why they should not? They will never make much progress in any moral movement, while they depend upon men to act for them. Do we shrink from reading the announcement that Mrs. Somerville is made an honorary member of a scientific association? That Miss Herschel has made some discoveries, and is prepared to take her equal part in science? Or that Miss Mitchell of Nantucket has lately discovered a planet, long looked for? I cannot conceive why “honor to whom honor is due“ should not be rendered to woman as well as man; nor will it necessarily exalt her, or foster feminine pride. This propensity is found alike in male and female, and it should not be ministered to improperly, in either sex.

In treating upon the affections, the lecturer held out the idea, that as manifested in the sexes, they were opposite, if not somewhat antagonistic; and required a union, as in chemistry, to form a perfect whole. The simile appeared to me far from a correct illustration of the true union. Minds that can assimilate, spirits that are congenial, attach themselves to each other. It is the union of similar, not opposite affections, which are necessary for the perfection of the marriage bond. There seemed a want of proper delicacy in his representing man as being bold in the demonstration of the pure affection of love. In persons of refinement, true love seeks concealment in man, as well as in woman. I will not enlarge upon the subject, although it formed so great a part of his lecture. The contrast drawn seemed a fallacy, as has much, very much that has been presented, in the sickly sentimental strains of the poet, from age to age.

The question is often asked, “What does woman want, more than she enjoys? What is she seeking to obtain? Of what rights is she deprived? What privileges are withheld from her? I answer, she asks nothing as favor, but as right, she wants to be acknowledged a moral, responsible being. She is seeking not to be governed by laws, in the making of which she has no voice. She is deprived of almost every right in civil society, and is a cypher in the nation, except in the right of presenting a petition. In religious society her disabilities, as already pointed out, have greatly retarded her progress. Her exclusion from the pulpit or ministry - her duties marked out for her by her equal brother man, subject to creeds, rules, and disciplines made for her by him - this is unworthy her true dignity. In marriage, there is assumed superiority, on the part of the husband, and admitted inferiority, with a promise of obedience, on the part of the wife. This subject calls loudly for examination, in order that the wrong may be redressed. Customs suited to darker ages in Eastern countries, are not binding upon enlightened society. The solemn covenant of marriage may be entered into without these lordly assumptions, and humiliating concessions and promises.

There are large Christian denominations who do not recognise such degrading relations of husband and wife. They ask no magisterial or ministerial aid to legalize or to sanctify this union. But acknowledging themselves in the presence of the Highest, and invoking his assistance, they come under reciprocal obligations of fidelity and affection, before suitable witnesses. Experience and observation go to prove, that there may be as much harmony, to say the least, in such a union, and as great purity and permanency of affection, as can exist where the more common custom or form is observed. The distinctive relations of husband and wife, of father and mother of a family are sacredly preserved, without the assumption of authority on the one part, or the promise of obedience on the other. There is nothing in such a marriage degrading to woman. She does not compromise her dignity or self-respect; but enters married life upon equal ground, by the side of her husband. By proper education, she understands her duties, physical, intellectual and moral; and fulfilling these, she is a help meet, in the true sense of the word.

I tread upon delicate ground in alluding to the institutions of religious associations; but the subject is of so much importance, that all which relates to the position of woman, should be examined, apart from the undue veneration which ancient usage receives.

“Such dupes are men to custom, and so prone To reverence what is ancient, and can plead A course of long observance for its use, That even servitude, the worst of ills, Because delivered down from sire to son, Is kept and guarded as a sacred thing.“

So with woman. She has so long been subject to the disabilities and restrictions, with which her progress has been embarrassed, that she has become enervated, her mind to some extent paralysed; and, like those still more degraded by personal bondage, she hugs her chains. Liberty is often presented in its true light, but it is liberty for man.

“Whose freedom is by suffrance, and at will Of a superior - he is never free. Who lives, and is not weary of a life Exposed to manacles, deserves them well .“

I would not, however, go so far, either as regards the abject slave or woman; for in both cases they may be so degraded by the crushing influences around them, that they may not be sensible of the blessing of Freedom. Liberty is not less a blessing, because oppression has so long darkened the mind that it cannot appreciate it. I would therefore urge, that woman be placed in such a situation in society, by the yielding of her rights, and have such opportunities for growth and developement, as shall raise her from this low, enervated and paralysed condition, to a full appreciation of the blessing of entire freedom of mind.

It is with reluctance that I make the demand for the political rights of woman, because this claim is so distasteful to the age. Woman shrinks, in the present state of society, from taking any interest in politics. The events of the French Revolution, and the claim for woman's rights are held up to her as a warning. But let us not look at the excesses of women alone, at that period; but remember that the age was marked with extravagances and wickedness in men as well as women. Indeed, political life abounds with these excesses, and with shameful outrage. Who knows, but that if woman acted her part in governmental affairs, there might be an entire change in the turmoil of political life. It becomes man to speak modestly of his ability to act without her. If woman's judgment were exercised, why might she not aid in making the laws by which she is governed? Lord Brougham remarked that the works of Harriet Martineau upon Political Economy were not excelled by those of any political writer of the present time. The first few chapters of her 'Society in America,' her views of a Republic, and of Government generally, furnish evidence of woman's capacity to embrace subjects of universal interest.

Far be it from me to encourage woman to vote, or to take an active part in politics, in the present state of our government. Her right to the elective franchise however, is the same, and should be yielded to her, whether she exercise that right or not. Would that man too, would have no participation in a government based upon the life-taking principle - upon retaliation and the sword. It is unworthy a Christian nation. But when, in the diffusion of light and intelligence, a convention shall be called to make regulations for self-government on Christian, non-resistant principles, I can see no good reason, why woman should not participate in such an assemblage, taking part equally with man.

Walker, of Cincinnati, in his Introduction to American Law, says: “With regard to political rights, females form a positive exception to the general doctrine of equality. They have no part or lot in the formation or administration of government. They cannot vote or hold office. We require them to contribute their share in the way of taxes, to the support of government, but allow them no voice in its direction. We hold them amenable to the laws when made, but allow them no share in making them. This language, applied to males, would be the exact definition of political slavery; applied to females, custom does not teach us so to regard it.“ Woman, however, is beginning so to regard it.

“The law of husband and wife, as you gather it from the books, is a disgrace to any civilized nation. The theory of the law degrades the wife almost to the level of slaves. When a woman marries, we call her condition coverture, and speak of her as a femme covert. The old writers call the husband baron, and sometimes, in plain English, lord. The merging of her name in that of her husband is emblematic of the fate of all her legal rights. The torch of Hymen serves but to light the pile, on which these rights are offered up. The legal theory is, that marriage makes the husband and wife one person, and that person is the husband. On this subject, reform is loudly called for. There is no foundation in reason or expediency, for the absolute and slavish subjection of the wife to the husband, which forms the foundation of the present legal relations. Were woman, in point of fact, the abject thing which the law, in theory, considers her to be when married, she would not be worthy the companionship of man.“

I would ask if such a code of laws does not require change? If such a condition of the wife in society does not claim redress? On no good ground can reform be delayed. Blackstone says, “The very being and legal existence of woman is suspended during marriage, - incorporated or consolidated into that of her husband, under whose protection and cover she performs every thing.“ Hurlbut, in his Essays upon Human Rights, says: “The laws touching the rights of woman are at variance with the laws of the Creator. rights are human rights, and pertain to human beings, without distinction of sex. Laws should not be made for man or for woman, but for mankind. Man was not born to command, nor woman to obey. The law of France, Spain, and Holland, and one of our own States, Louisiana, recognizes the wife's right to property, more than the common law of England. The laws depriving woman of the right of property is handed down to us from dark and feudal times, and not consistent with the wiser, better, purer spirit of the age. The wife is a mere pensioner on the bounty of her husband. Her lost rights are appropriated to himself. But justice and benevolence are abroad in our land, awakening the spirit of inquiry and innovation; and the Gothic fabric of the British law will fall before it, save where it is based upon the foundation of truth and justice.“

May these statements lead you to reflect upon this subject, that you may know what woman's condition is in society - what her restrictions are, and seek to remove them. In how many cases in our country, the husband and wife begin life together, and by equal industry and united effort accumulate to themselves a comfortable home. In the event of the death of the wife, the household remains undisturbed, his farm or his workshop is not broken up, or in any way molested. But when the husband dies, he either gives his wife a portion of their joint accumulation, or the law apportions to her a share; the homestead is broken up, and she is dispossessed of that which she earned equally with him; for what she lacked in physical strength, she made up in constancy of labor and toil, day and evening. The sons then coming into possession of the property, as has been the custom until of latter time, speak of having to keep their mother, when she in reality is aiding to keep them. Where is the justice of this state of things? The change in the law of this State and of New York, in relation to the property of the wife, go to a limited extend, toward the redress of these wrongs; but they are far more extensive, and involve much more, than I have time this evening to point out.

On no good ground can the legal existence of the wife be suspended during marriage, and her property surrendered to her husband. In the intelligent ranks of society, the wife may not in point of fact, be so degraded as the law would degrade her; because public sentiment is above the law. Still, while the law stands, she is liable to the disabilities which it imposes. Among the ignorant classes of society, woman is made to bear heavy burdens, and is degraded almost to the level of the slave.

There are many instances now in our city, where the wife suffers much from the power of the husband to claim all that she can earn with her own hands. In my intercourse with the poorer class of people, I have known cases of extreme cruelty, from the hard earnings of the wife being thus robbed by the husband, and no redress at law.

An article in one of the daily papers lately, presented the condition of needle women in England. There might be a presentation of this class in our own country, which would make the heart bleed. Public attention should be turned to this subject, in order that avenues of more profitable employment may be opened to women. There are many kinds of business which women, equally with men, may follow with respectability and success. Their talents and energies should be called forth, and their powers brought into the highest exercise. The efforts of women in France are sometimes pointed to in ridicule and sarcasm, but depend upon it, the opening of profitable employment to women in that country, is doing much for the enfranchisement of the sex. In England also, it is not an uncommon thing for a wife to take up the business of her deceased husband and carry it on with success.

Our respected British Consul stated to me a circumstance which occurred some years ago, of an editor of a political paper having died in England; it was proposed to his wife, an able writer, to take the editorial chair. She accepted. The patronage of the paper was greatly increased, and she a short time since retired from her labors with a handsome fortune. In that country however, the opportunities are by no means general for Woman's elevation.

In visiting the public school in London, a few years since, I noticed that the boys were employed in linear drawing, and instructed upon the black board, in the higher branches of arithmetic and mathematics; while the girls, after a short exercise in the mere elements of arithmetic, were seated, during the bright hours of the morning, stitching wristbands. I asked, Why there should be this difference made; why they too should not have the black board? The answer was, that they would not probably fill any station in society requiring such knowledge.

But the demand for a more extended education will not cease, until girls and boys have equal instruction, in all the departments of useful knowledge. We have as yet no high school for girls in this state. The normal school may be a preparation for such an establishment. In the late convention for general education, it was cheering to hear the testimony borne to woman's capabilities for head teachers of the public schools. A resolution there offered for equal salaries to male and female teachers, when equally qualified, as practised in Louisiana, I regret to say was checked in its passage, by Bishop Potter; by him who has done so much for the encouragement of education, and who gave his countenance and influence to that convention. Still the fact of such a resolution being offered, augurs a time coming for woman, which she may well hail. At the last examination of the public schools in this city, one of the alumni delivered an address on Woman, not as is too common, in eulogistic strains, but directing the attention to the injustice done to woman in her position in society, in a variety of ways. The unequal wages she receives for her constant toil, &c., presenting facts calculated to arouse attention to the subject.

Women's property has been taxed, equally with that of men's, to sustain colleges endowed by the states; but they have not been permitted to enter those high seminaries of learning. Within a few years, however, some colleges have been instituted, where young women are admitted, nearly upon equal terms with young men; and numbers are availing themselves of their long denied rights. This is among the signs of the times, indicative of an advance for women. The book of knowledge is not opened to her in vain. Already is she aiming to occupy important posts of honor and profit in our country. We have three female editors in our state - some in other states of the Union. Numbers are entering the medical profession - one received a diploma last year; others are preparing for a like result.

Let woman then go on - not asking as favor, but claiming as right, the removal of all the hindrances to her elevation in the scale of being - let her receive encouragement for the proper cultivation of all her powers, so that she may enter profitably into the active business of life; employing her own hands, in ministering to her necessities, strengthening her physical being by proper exercise, and observance of the laws of health. Let her not be ambitious to display a fair hand, and to promenade the fashionable streets of our city, but rather, coveting earnestly the best gifts, let her strive to occupy such walks in society, as will befit her true dignity in all the relations of life. No fear that she will then transcend the proper limits of female delicacy. True modesty will be as fully preserved, in acting out those important vocations to which she may be called, as in the nursery or at the fireside, ministering to man's self-indulgence.

Then in the marriage union, the independence of the husband and wife will be equal, their dependence mutual, and their obligations reciprocal.

In conclusion, let me say, “Credit not the old fashioned absurdity, that woman's is a secondary lot, ministering to the necessities of her lord and master! It is a higher destiny I would award you. If your immortality is as complete, and your gift of mind as capable as ours, of increase and elevation, I would put no wisdom of mine against God's evident allotment. I would charge you to water the undying bud, and give it healthy culture, and open its beauty to the sun - and then you may hope, that when your life is bound up with another, you will go on equally, and in a fellowship that shall pervade every earthly interest.“

Source: Library of Congress, Rare Book and Special Collections Division, National American Woman Suffrage Association Collection. - Discourse On Woman (SGML)
.com/t/hist/discourse-on-woman/index.html
.com/t/hist/discourse-on-woman
See also:
 

World's Most Corrupt Leaders & Politicians

Updated January 27, 2025 | Maria Zlatareva Information

Corruption is a major concern around the world and some political leaders remain at the heart of scandals involving bribery, embezzlement, and power abuse. Over the years, there have been numerous occasions when different heads of state have abused their power for personal and political advantage.

Corrupt leaders and politicians have plagued the world since the creation of organized societies. In the modern era, this has escalated as more money and wealth have circulated the globe. 

What Is A Corrupt Leader?

A corrupt leader is anyone in a position of power within a government that uses their influence to illegally benefit themselves or someone else. Their actions typically result in a lack of transparency, accountability, and widespread harm to the economy and society. Corrupt leaders often maintain their power by silencing opposition and manipulating the system to protect their interests. A common example of corruption is embezzlement; where leaders appropriate funds from public projects or schemes and funnel them into their own pockets.

Acts of corruption represent an affront to the ideals of a healthy democracy and therefore, corrupt leaders become disgraced in their countries, with some even facing formal corruption charges.

What Do You Call A Corrupt Government?

The formal term for a corrupt government used in political science is a kleptocracy. Corruption is present in most governments across the world, occurring at higher levels in some and lower levels in others. However, this doesn’t mean every country can be classed as a kleptocracy. What sets kleptocracies apart from other governments is the lack of public accountability and legal prosecution for acts of corruption.

Those who indulge in corrupt activities are called kleptocrats and they are the main beneficiaries of their actions. However, a key feature of kleptocracies is the presence of cronies. Cronies are the close allies and friends of kleptocrats who are deliberately appointed to positions of power in order to support their regime. In return for their support, cronies also reap rewards such as money, fame, or power.

What Is Corruption?

Corruption takes many forms, but at its most basic it is an illegal abuse of power that takes advantage of public trust to benefit an individual or small minority. Corruption is seen as a disease within societies that not only undermines public trust in governments but also perpetuates poverty and other social ills. The eradication of corruption is seen by organizations like the UN as a major factor in creating more equal systems of wealth and increasing human rights standards.

What Are the Most Common Corruption Types?

  • Embezzlement - the misposition of funds that have been entrusted to one's care, most often by an employee or a public official.
  • Bribery - this involves accepting money or favours to make certain political decisions, such as passing laws 
  • Cronyism - appointing friends and political allies with government positions, contracts, or other benefits to secure loyalty and control of power.
  • Kickbacks - when a commission is granted from any government contracts so they can be facilitated.
  • Vote Buying - the act of offering money or benefits to voters in return for their votes, compromising the integrity of democratic systems.
  • Political Patronage - assigning government positions, contracts, or other benefits in order to gain political support or votes.

Perhaps the most frequent type of corruption is embezzlement, as described above, which comes hand-in-hand with money laundering. Money laundering is the process of hiding the origin of illegal funds to evade being caught. For example, if a person gains a large sum of money through embezzlement, this sudden income could look suspicious to the authorities that deal with corruption. To make it more likely to go undetected, this person could set up a fake business to be paid by fake customers using the embezzled funds. By doing this, the income looks legitimate.

Corruption isn’t always primarily about money; many countries are plagued by political corruption that focuses on power and influence. Rigged elections, where the outcome is already predetermined as a result of bribery and voter fraud, as well as cronyism are both examples of how power can be abused to benefit a certain group of people. If unchallenged, this can lead to heavily unfair societies that rarely see any change and are overseen by dictators with absolute power.

These are the most corrupt leaders according to recent reports.

1. Bashar al-Assad - President of Syria (2000 - 2024)

Source: The New Arab

Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad has been associated with widespread corruption during his rule and is a corruption winner of 2024, according to the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP).

Since 2012, OCCRP’s “Person of the Year” award has been given to those who have the biggest impact in causing chaos globally through organized corruption and crime. The winner is chosen by an expert panel of judges across civil society, academia, and journalism.

Some of his violations were connected to human rights, torture, murders, mass arrests, the use of chemical weapons, etc.

Funded through the production of the Captagon drug and other illicit activities such as human trafficking, cigarette smuggling and antiquities theft, Assad's regime has accumulated billions of dollars to uphold his oppressive authoritarian regime while promoting violence, the drug trade, and criminal activities throughout the country.

His regime is also known for embezzlement and the diversion of public funds. His family and close allies have benefited from profitable government contracts, often in key sectors like construction and energy. 

The Assad government’s abuse of public resources, particularly during the ongoing civil war, has intensified the economic crisis in Syria and led to international sanctions. These practices have contributed to the country’s financial instability and severe poverty.

2. Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif - Prime Minister of Pakistan (1990-1993, 1997-1999, 2013-2017)

Corrupt leaders

Source: PakistanToday

The former Prime Minister of Pakistan has faced multiple accusations of corruption throughout his political career. A key incident is the 2016 Panama Papers leak. It disclosed that Nawaz Sharif’s family owned offshore companies and assets that were not disclosed in official documents.

After a Supreme Court ruling in 2017, Nawaz Sharif has been disqualified from office due to corruption charges. He and his family have been blamed for money laundering, embezzlement, and misusing public funds for personal gain.

In 2018, he was sentenced to ten years in prison after he was found guilty of a corruption case related to luxury apartments in London. Despite all the controversies and challenges he has faced, Nawaz Sharif continues to be a significant figure in Pakistani politics, leading his party, the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz), from exile in London.

3. Vladimir Putin - President of Russia (1999 - 2000, 2000 - 2008, 2012 - present) 

Corrupt leaders

Source: Atlantic Council

His government is criticised for the concentration of wealth among a small group of oligarchs that are closely connected. Allegations include embezzlement, improper allocation of public resources and personal wealth benefits.

Putin is closely linked to the rise of oligarchs in Russia. A notable example is the Rosneft case - the state-run oil company that has been controlled by oligarchs, closely connected to him. That involved assets, such as oil and gas firms, frequently through suspicious privatization transactions.

Another example is Sergei Magnitsky’s case. Magnitsky, a Russian attorney, uncovered a major tax fraud operation involving top officials, but he was taken into custody, tortured, and eventually passed away in 2009.

The international community, particularly the United States, reacted by passing the Magnitsky Act in 2012, which sanctioned Russian officials involved in corruption and abuses of human rights. The case brought attention to systemic corruption within the Russian government.

4. Kim Jong Un - The Supreme Leader of North Korea (2011-present)

Corrupt leaders

Source: The Diplomat

Kim Jong Un, the leader of North Korea, has faced allegations of widespread corruption within his government such as abuse of power, with state resources often used to benefit the ruling elite. Corruption involves redirecting funds from international aid and exploiting the nation's military and business sectors - all allowing Kim's inner circle to amass personal wealth.

Another facet of perceived corruption in North Korea is the regime’s methods for funding its nuclear and missile programs. Despite facing international sanctions intended to limit the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, some experts still believe the regime engages in illegal activities like counterfeiting currency, conducting cyberattacks, and engaging in arms sales to finance its military initiatives.

These reports, however, are founded on testimonies from defectors and external investigations, which makes the allegations challenging to be confirmed. Despite these allegations, his government remains highly centralized, with little transparency.

Most Corrupt Leaders of All Time With Numbers

Transparency International is a non-profit organization that aims to tackle and document corruption across the world. It regularly produces assessments of countries, their levels of corruption and, in 2004, published a list of the most corrupt leaders in the world.

The list is based on the amount various individuals embezzled whilst holding positions of power in their respective countries. Of course, not all of them are caught and there could be more to the list. If you wish to check further details on the most up-to-date reports, visit their list for 2023.

Below are some examples of corrupt leaders throughout the history as published in the Global Corruption Report 2004, according to the amount of embezzlement.

1. Mohamed Suharto - President of Indonesia (1967–1998)

Mohamed Suharto
Source: AP Photo/Alberto Marquez

Funds Embezzled: Up to $35 billion

Mohamed Suharto was the second president of Indonesia and served for a record 31 years from 1967 to 1998. Suharto oversaw a military dictatorship, which evolved into an authoritarian regime built on his own cult of personality and ended his rule with a personal net worth of $38 billion.

Following an economic downturn in 1997 that Indonesia was slow to recover from, prominent politicians started blaming Suharto and protests began in earnest that year. After mounting pressure and desertion by his political allies in May 1998, Suharto resigned.

He has been investigated for corruption numerous times since his resignation and was accused of embezzling $571 million of government funds through various personal charity foundations. Other lawsuits in Indonesia have sought to order Suharto to repay up to $1.5 billion in scholarship funds that supposedly disappeared during his tenure.

Suharto was never prosecuted, partly because he was said to be too ill to stand trial but also because he was still well-regarded by a large proportion of the population. He died on 27th January 2008 and remains a controversial figure in the country; some regard him as a hero whereas others see him as the main source of corruption in Indonesia.

2. Ferdinand Marcos - President of the Philippines (1972–1986)

Ferninand Marcos
Source: Wikimedia Commons

 

Funds Embezzled: $7.5 billion

Ferdinand Marcos entered politics in the late 1940s after World War 2. He ran for election in 1965 and won, partially due to his claims of bravery and achievement during the war. During his second term from 1969-1972, Marcos oversaw a debt crisis resulting from his policy of high public expenditure on infrastructure projects. This led to civil interest and rising political opposition which caused Marcos to declare martial law, placing him in sole charge of the country.

This period lasted until 1986 when his reign as leader ended. In 1986, Marcos was forced to call a snap election due to his rising unpopularity and coup threats, which ended in complex indecision as various vote counts declared different winners. A revolution followed and Marcos was forced to flee to Hawaii.

Marcos took with him around $717 million in cash, numerous crates of valuable physical objects, gold, and deposit slips totalling $124 million. All of this was amassed illegally during his time in power. In all, he is thought to have stolen $5-$10 billion from the Philippines Central Bank. He died in January 1995 without facing justice.

3. Viktor Yanukovych - President/Prime Minister of Ukraine (2002-2014)

Viktor Yanukovych
Source: Wikimedia Commons

 

Funds Embezzled: $5 billion

Viktor Yanukovych held the positions of Prime Minister and President of Ukraine variously from 2002 to 2014. During his time in office, he became increasingly sympathetic to his affiliation with Russia and represented the interests of big business in Ukraine. After the Ukrainian parliament voted to sign documents to more closely tie the country to the EU, Yanukovych instead decided to reject the vote at the last minute under pressure from Russia.

This angered the majority of the Ukrainian populace, who were mostly anti-Russian influence, and led to the Euromaidan protests. Yanukovych fled to Russia and entered a self-imposed exile. On 22nd February 2014, the Ukrainian parliament voted in favour of his impeachment, leading to the discovery of his embezzlement activities.

Amongst a host of corrupt actions, Yanukovych was found to have used $220 million of state funds to set up a private communication company, stole $1.5 billion in assets from the state including property, and generally used public funds for his enjoyment.

4. Mobutu Sese Seko - President of Zaire (1965–1997)

Mobutu Sese Seko
Source: Wikimedia Commons

 

Funds Embezzled: $5 billion

Mobutu Sese Seko was president of Zaire, now known as the Democratic Republic of the Congo, from 1965 to 1997. After gaining independence from Belgium in 1960, Zaire went through a period of political turmoil during which Seko was the Chief of Staff of the Army. With the backing of the USA, Seko overthrew the elected left-wing leader Patrice Lumumba and installed his own autocratic government.

Known for his extravagant shopping sprees in Paris, speculation about his corruption was never far from the truth. Conservative estimates state that Seko embezzled $5 billion directly from the state’s purse, using the money to fund a luxurious lifestyle and buy gifts for his cronies. He is considered to be one of the richest world leaders of all time and was eventually deposed by a military coup in 1997. He died months later of prostate cancer without being prosecuted.

5. Sani Abacha - President of Nigeria (1993–1998)

Sani Abacha Signature
Source: Wikimedia Commons

 

Funds Embezzled: $2-$5 billion

Like many of the people on this list, Sani Abacha began his career as a military officer and became leader of Nigeria after seizing power in 1993 following a coup d’etat. He ruled for a shorter period than others due to his death in 1998, overseeing a strengthening of Nigeria’s economy but a violent approach to discipline.

Because of Nigeria’s unprecedented economic growth, the amount of money flowing through the country dramatically increased. This presented an opportunity for Abacha that he couldn’t resist. By setting up fake government funding requests, Abacha directly stole money sent from Nigeria’s central bank, laundered it abroad, and deposited it in offshore bank accounts. Estimates vary but in Jersey alone, they discovered an account holding $267 million linked to Abacha.

6. Najib Razak - Prime Minister of Malaysia (2009-2018)

Najib Razak
Source: Wikimedia Commons

 

Funds Embezzled: $4.5 billion

Najib Razak had been a politician in Malaysia for decades before he was elected as prime minister in 2009. During his time in power, he opened the country to more foreign investment and pursued a strategy of imprisoning his political opponents.

Due to his links with the 1Malaysia Development Berhad investment firm, which had been accused of embezzling money from the Malaysian sovereign wealth fund, Razak began to face rising criticism in 2013.

After he lost a general election in 2018, he was arrested by Malaysian anti-corruption investigators. In all, Razak was found guilty of embezzling $1 billion from Malaysia’s wealth fund with more expected held in assets. He was jailed in 2022 for 12 years and fined $45 million.

7. Slobodan Milosevic - President of Serbia/Yugoslavia (1989–2000)

Slobodan Milosevic
Source: Wikimedia Commons

 

Funds Embezzled: $1 billion

Milosevic was a key figure during the bloody breakup of Yugoslavia. First rising to power as the president of Serbia in 1989, Milosevic became the president of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1997. The politics of Yugoslavia was, and still is, incredibly complex with multiple ethnic groups involved in conflict with each other. Milosevic supported ethnic Serbs and aided in negotiating an end to the Bosnian War in 1995.

He was put on trial for war crimes by the UN whilst still in power in 1999, eventually losing power in the 2000 elections. He was arrested soon after by Yugoslav authorities on charges of corruption and embezzlement with his trial lasting five years. He died in prison in 2006.

A Snapshot Of Global Corruption

While many nations have taken steps to combat corruption, challenges continue because of fragile institutions, insufficient transparency, and a lack of accountability. Corruption cases are frequently reported in both developed and developing countries, often involving government officials, business elites, and criminal networks. Corruption leads to slower economic growth, inequality, and a decline in public confidence in government institutions, rendering it a significant barrier to long-term development and social justice.

Corruption was a huge problem throughout the second half of the 20th century. Many countries were gaining independence, power vacuums sucked in individuals with bad intentions, and there lacked any robust national-level anti-corruption watchdogs. As countries in Africa, South America, and Asia grappled with their systems of governance, many managed to settle into relatively transparent power structures.

And this is reflected in the latest Transparency International global corruption report. According to them, corruption levels have stabilized, remaining the same for the past ten years after a period of falling corruption from 2000-2010. A reduction in anti-corruption measures has meant that even in established democratic countries, corruption persists at all levels of governance. What remains clear is that areas with dictators, autocrats, or one-party systems in place will continue to see the most rampant levels of corruption.

corruption in politics, education, and other sectors. In 2004, they reported on (as of then) the rankings of the world's most corrupt leaders2, by order of funds embezzled. They have not updated this list since 2004, with most of their reports focusing on whole countries rather than individual leaders. They do regularly update the list of the world's most corrupt countries.

Name

Position

Funds embezzled

1. Mohamed Suharto

President of Indonesia (1967–1998)

$25 billion

2. Ferdinand Marcos

President of the Philippines (1972–1986)

$7.5 billion

3. Viktor Yanukovych

President/Prime Minister of Ukraine (2002–2014)

$5 billion

4. Mobutu Sese Seko

President of Zaire (1965–1997)

$5 billion

5. Sani Abacha

President of Nigeria (1993–1998)

$2-$5 billion

6. Najib Razak

President of Malaysia (2009–2018)

$4.5 billion

7. Slobodan Milosevic

President of Serbia/Yugoslavia (1989–2000)

$1 billion

If reading about the devious nature of governance has interested you, then check out our article on the world’s most notorious despots.

Sources: Transparency International

1. All sums are estimates of alleged embezzlement and appear in U.S. dollars.

2. Defined as former political leaders who have been accused of embezzling the most funds from their countries over the past two decades.