Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1850-11-21
DEBATES
CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION.
REPORTED By HARVEY FOWLER ESQ
Rights of Married Women to Property.

confess my anxiety regarding the fate of the
tons that have Just been read. No subject Of greater
Importance than that to which they refer has come up
since met here. No subject OF greater Importance
will engage attention. till close abors and 60
hence. As ia estimation next the right OF enjoy
ing life and liberty Constitution enumerates the right
of ACQUIRING possessing protecting property And
these sections refer to the latter right heretofore de-
clared to be NATURAL inherent lnaenabe, yet virtually
withheld from one-half the citizens of our State.
Women are not represented in our legislative halls
They have voice selelcctng those who make laws
and constitutions for them. There may be good reason
for that enter not the enquiry One reason often
given for excluding from the right OF suffrage IS
expression of confident belief that their husbands
and their fathers will surely guard their interests, and
see fair justice melted out to these, the especial objects
Of their care
l should like to have little more confidence in this
opinion than experience has given should like for
the honor of my SEX believe that the legal rights Of
are all times, as ealonsiy guarded, as they
would be, if women had votes to give to those who
watch their interests and to withhold from those
who pass by and neglect them.
mpute to gentleman the deliberate intention to
render less than nstce the other merely because
we have DISTINGUISHED them. but say that sellInter
marvellous sharpener of the wits, and causes
10 think of and enables TO discover, many things
which, without its quickenng influence, might escape
observation.
Suffer me, SIR in defence of my scepticism this
point to lay before YOU and this Convention item from
my legislative rccolleetions.
1t will be thirteen years next winter since (hen
member of the Legislature and of Its committee TO
wise the laws) reported from seat Just the way,
change in the then existing law of descent. At that
time the widow oil ntestate dying without children,
entitled under ordinary circumstances, to dover In
her husbands real and onehird of his personal
property. The change proposed, was to give her one
third Of the real estate of her husband absolutely and
two-hirds Of his personal property; far little in
deed; but yet great innovation Mr.. Marshall of
Jefferson and myself 1--WE were the subcommittee to
whom that law had been reierred) thought probable
could carry.
remember il ELL assaled by distinguished
lawyer then member of the house, in mild
ured terms, seeking to subvert the whole or
der Of society," innovator, to whom nothing was
sacred not laws and principles dating back to the
days of Edward the Conessor. The attack failed in It's
object the proposed change became the law of the land
where received so far as have heard, with
appreciation and remained in force, until commission
appointed IN lS41, repsred, year or two afterwards,
present Revised Code.
How stands the law nowl As regards real estate,
YOU will find the page 437 of that Revised
Code Nothing but an actual inspection OF the law IT.
self could have persuaded me, that, in this nineteenth
century and in this republican land such could have
been permitted TO disgrace Statute Book. am
very sure, that there gentlemen this oor TO whom
even now Of its provisions will appear Incredible
The widow OF intestate, in there be no chill
dren and in there be father mother, brother
sister of the husband alive is heir to part what
of her deceased husbands real estate She is
titled TO dover only that to the rents and profits, du.
ring her life, of one third of his estate.
IL there be father mother, brother, sister
you imagine perhaps that the law suffers her TO enjoy
unmolested, the property her husband has left behind
him. Vain expectation The law goes in search of a
grandfather or grandmother; or failing these, of an
uncle or an aunt or failing these again of cousin
cousins child and if it find any such, grants two
thirds Of the husbands property to these relatives lv
ing, perhaps, in distant region unknown, II may
have been 10 the deceased, from whom they in
hcrit.
But yet again Say there be no father no mother no
brother, sister, grandfather grandmother, no
uncle, no aunt not a cousin q cousins child
then you feel assured the law will be satisfied instead
Of wandering the world in search of knsolk
distant STILL 10 let the widow take the property left by
the husband she has lost. gain you fault The
law has such intention IL Institutes the inquiry
whether, under the title Of nearest Of KIM" some
farod relative, little dreaming OF such windla
not be ferreed ont, upon whom It may bestow as the
Statute has H. 'one equal half Of the inheritance
heir of the ntestatc the widow receiving the other
half only.
And il is at last, after the law has exhausted its in.
genuity in discovering relative, matter how
feeling in blood in whose favor il divert
the dead husbands property from her who the
wife ofhs bosom tits then only last reluctant alter.
native that the law permits the ohidess widow inherit
the farm where perchance, her youth and womanhood
have been spent!
marvel, since are all somewhat related through
ancestor, Adam, that il has been pro-
posed carry out the inquit)us principle little fur.
Their, and enact, that where relatives how remote
soever he found half the widows portion shall be
equally divided among the citizens Of the county, OF
the State.
The gross injustice in its practical workings Of such
rule Of descent does fully appear, until we call to
mind approaching all questions oflegal reform il be-
hooves TO do the actual condition in life of the
population in this State We have few among US, who
are the proper acceptaon of the term poor we have
few who may be called rich Most of citizens in
moderate circumstances But look little farther. We
are an agricultural population. Farming is our chie
occupation large majority Of our people are small
propetors Of land the best and happest and in
dependent class in the world They live on their own
FARMS purchased inherited usually early youth
worth, average III the owner have survived TO en-
large and improve them perhaps from thousand to
two thousand dollars, and affordng annual rental
say of from hundred hundr dollars Suppose
the rental to average hundred and fifty dollars That
a living n very humble one indeed but still a living
II the law permitted the widow inherit it, were in
life rental only she would be raised above pecunary
pendence And Is It not right and Just that she
should BET In the heavy abOrs incident to the set
Element Of country who takes lot and part? Is il
the aonel Is there task but that he performs
no home duties no domestic labor, sometimes weighing
down has weaker partner to the gravel / appeal
10 the successful settler who has raised his cabin first
IN the wild woods, has gradually opened hourishino
farm, and, at last, has flow in upon him com.
fort and plenty whether he alone and unaded built up
his fortune and made comfortable his homel ask him
whether there who saved while he accu
muiated whether when his arm was busy without heI
hand was idle wthinl l ask him, whether his heart
does revolt at the dea that when he is carried
his long home his widow shall snached from her. BY
an inhaman law, the very property her watchul
had mainly contributed increase and Keep together
let this idea, unnatural revolving IL IS, is carried
out in all its unmitgated rgor, by the statute to which
have Just referred. Out OF a yearly rental Of a hun
dred and fifty dollars. il is seldom that the widow of an
intestae becomes entitled TO than fifty az um Who'll
iy inadequate her support. The other hundred dol
lars eo-whitherl To the husbands father or mother
Yes, If they survive and in that case there is chance