Southport telegraph. [volume] (Southport, W.T. [i.e. Kenosha, Wis.]) 1840-1850, 1847-03-17

cong eneial with the sentiments of the peo-
pie the Constitution provides that bare
maiority oflhe legislature shall have power
to change il which with every reasonable
man should be sufficient, as then il will be
settled upon the true democratic rule that
minority shall govern.
Next in order though more pre- mlnent IN
the order of objections, comes the much a.
bused and grossly mistepresened article
securing to married women their rights
As this is the stumbling block of the Hon.
Marshall NJ. Strong, and over which he has
| fallen from our democratic ranks TO those OF
its opponents, shall endeavor to answer
his objections if they are tangible, at the
same time giving my reasons in favor of
the Article. Before entering into the dis
cussion | would say that do not expect
tina: my reasons will have any weight with
those who consider females as lower
grade Of organized beings created to pam
der to the passions Of men and subslst as
their servants. Neither do expect such
persons TO vote for any constitution that
contains this, or any other article which
| will project woman in her person or prop
erty. My remarks are intended for those
who have proper respect and regard Tor
the female character. But to Mr.. Strong:
The chief objection urged by that ge"tle>
man, is that this provision is substitution
Of The civil law for the common law under
which we live, and that it will be very
difficult task to revise the laws and make
them perfect with such AN innovation upon
the system. But let us see. The common
| law provides that a married woman can
hold her separate property by having put
! into The hands Of third persons as trustees,
for them TO manage and control, payirg o.
yer 10 her he rents and issues thereof af-
ter deducting their fees for services render
ed
The effect Of the clause in the Consii-
tuition is barely to do away with the neces-
sity Of trustees and allow the property 10
| be held in the y.omans name and subject TO
The control of her husband except as TO the
right ofdisposal in which the wife and hus
band must join. BY the Constitution and
common law The wife holds her seperaie
property in her own name the husband and
wife occupy ioin,ly,the husband has his life
estate or right Of possession during Ills lie
time and neither can dispose Of it without
! the consent Of the other. Therefore all
the Constitution does is TO dispense with
the trustees and allows the husband to be
| the agent in their stead. The assertion OF
the Hon. gentleman that the wife can tians
act bus ness with others without the privily
or consent Of her husblnd has no founda-
ton in fac!. Ii creates no seperate and dis
tinct interest, but on the contrary adds to
their 10 nj interest 10 the value of The wlfc's
property. In making the assertion that by
the adoption Of this article there would be
an incorporation Of The civil into the
common law he has shown himself either
grossly ignorant or devoid of candor.
Again he says that it opens door for
gross frauds. In answer | would ask the
gentle map,f 10 his knowledge gross frauds
cannot be perpelrated by the transfer OF
properly TO trustees tor the benefit OF the
wife, and further if the assgnees in bank
ruptcy can reach the improvements put up
on the property by the husband.
We all know that under any law or sys-
tenn Of laws, frauds can be and will be prac
lised and with such knowledge the aim Of
government should be 10 enact such
laws as will hold out the least Inducements
to fraud.
That this and the exemption article in
the Constitution will have that effect does
not admit of doub', and why? The in
ducement to fraud is to acquire large "a
mount Of property as an assurance against
want under any circumstances. There
fore each individual strives TO acquire
much more than is necessary for the sup
port of himsefan family through life and
consequently the organs of acquisitven
by this exIa exertion are so sharpened that
nothing will satisfy them but grasping
for everything within reach or sight. But
if the wife has property of an amount sufii
cient Cor her support, of which she cannot
be divested without her consent, one strong
inducement 20 over eXerlion on The part of
the husband is done away with. She has
an assurance Of food and clothing which
carno, be wrenched from her by the grasp
inc creditor Of an unfortunate husband
Mother does this security work an injury
TO any individual. 1t is no part Of that for
which the debt was created. Ii was not
cons dered as basis Of credit because the
creditor is advised by the law that he must
not touch tit is registered, he can see
what it is at The time Of giving the credit,
and no Gaud is praclised upon him but he
extends The credit on the responsibility of
the husband alone When mistoriunes fall
heavily upon them there is 70 nducement
10 secrete property-none to fraud or per-
Jury, because there is fund held sacred
upon which they can fall back and the
prospect Of deslitulion. starvation and want
is no longer presented to their view. And
this might be said with equal force and
ptopriety of the article exempling the