Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1857-04-25
REMARKS OF MR. CATTELL,
In tie Senate of Ohio, on his bill to amend The Ac
Regnlating Descent and Distribution Of Mfestat
Estates, AprH9, 1857.

In tie Senate OF ONO, on ms OIL TO amend me Act
Regulating Descent and Distribution Of Infestate
Estates, AprHe, 1857.
Mr. President: This bill proposes to amend
the law of descent and distribution Of intestate
estates, pass led in 1859 so as to make some aD-
pronch toward equality and justice between man
and woman in the descent of estates. This law
was itself, when passed, an advanced step in the
right direction 1t gave relief to some extent in
cases of great hardship which existed before; but
it still falls very short of doing evenhanded jus.
tice between husband aud wife, in the descent and
distribution of estates.
The FIRST section of the law provides for the
descent of intestate estates Of Inheritance in the
following order
First, To the children Of the intestate or their
legal representatives.
Second To the brothers and sisters of the intes-
tate and their legal representatives.
Third, If they be dead. it shall ascend to
the ancestor, if living, from whom the estate
came ..r
Fourth, If none of these be living, nor their
legal representatives it shall pass to and vest in
the husband or wife, relcit of such intestate dur
ing his or her natural life.
This bill proposes to make the wife second, in
stead of fourth. in tho lineiof descent which will
give her the same interests in the husbands estate
that the husband now has in hers. A piece of
fair dealing to which think no one ought to
object.
The husband is named with the wife in all these
propositions of the law, which is calculated to
lead to suppose they treated equally in the
distribution of The property. This is fair, only IN
seeming; it is not in fact The husband
has already secured to him life interest in the
wiles estate, "by the courtesy" taking precedence
Of all others, and not put off to tho'tourth degree
is the wife. And for fear that this classification
Of tile husband with the wife might irjure his in.
terests the seventeenth section of the law provides
a., ,.l; 81, Oh, uctr n
afrct the right Of the husband to the estate of the
deceased wife by the courtesy" The utmost
care is everywhere taken to preserve the interest
of the husband in the estate Of the wife, but there
is no corresponding zeal to guard tue interests of
the wife. tbs certain, her right of dover Is pre-
serevd but that is at best only third part OF JUS
tice and very often not even that; 1t is quite time
these thirteenth century notions Of the rights Of
the wife, were reviewed in the broader and clearer
light Of the nineteenth century.
As the law now stands if wife who has the
right to any real estate by inheritance, or by deed
of gift from ancestor, die intesate, the husband
has the whole of the rents and profits of the estate
during his life. But il the husband die intestate,
having the right to such estate, the wife has but
her right Of dover: two thirds less unless there
be children, brothers or sisters or their legal
representatives, and no living ancestor from whom
the estate came. These intervening heirs, in
nInety-nine cases in q hundred, will cut her OH
from two-thrds of the interests secured by the
law to the husband, when the estate came from
her ancestors Now this is all wrong 1t is unee
quail it is unjust; it is robbing the weak for tho
benefit of the strong. Why should we apply te
her. different rule Of inheritance from the one ".
claim ourselves? We claim for ourselves life
estate in the lands of the wife, "by the courtesy,
To that do rot object; but | ask, why not extend
the same courtesy to the wife. II right by cour-
tesy is due to any one, is surely the weaker party
who has the best claim. We acknowledge the ruth
of this every day in our social relations with the
sex. For example, few men hesitate to abandon
the most comfortable and desirable seat to wo'
man; but if the courtesy we thus extend to her is
TO be paid for by the loss of valuable property
rights she may be after all, paying more for these
attentions, and courtesies, than their true value
in cash."
The second section Of the law declares the order
of descent, and the amount of interest, when the
estate came by purchase. &c. 1t provides That
if the estate came not by descent, devise, or deed
of gift, it shall descend and pass az follows" :"
First, To the children of the intestate, and
their legal representatives"
"Second, If there be no children, or their legal
representatives, the estate shall pass to- and vest
in the husband, or wife, relict of such intesate
during ms or Ter natural hfe."
Here is an estate generally acquired by the uni
ted means and joint earnings of the husband and
wife. 1t is their common property. 1t belongs tt
duct principally of the wife's earnings and sayings
yet ii the wife die, whether leaving children OF
not the whole estate belongs solely, and exclu
sively to the husband That is right. 1t is his
The only other person who had any right to it, is
dead. The law takes no cognizance of her death
There is no settlement of the estate to be made
with the Court. lie may sell it, or give it away
or waste it, and no nan saws, what doest thou!
! But if it is the husband who dies, what is the
interest we provide the wife shan have in the es
tate she has helped to acquire? II he leave ch'l
dren, she has but life estate in one'third. The
The rents and profits of one-third part Of the es
tate during her life and if there be no children
or their legal representatives, then she has iift
estate in the whole with the duty of paying tazei
and keeping up repairs, and preventing waste
But why should she have only lie estate 10 thu
property? The husband, the only other person
who had any right in it, is dead. BY what rlgh
do we say she shall have only life estate il
Iit2.-that she shall not sell it if necessary, anC
use the mears, even to save her from starvation
or the Poorhouse? BY what right do we appl,
to these two persons q different rule of inherit
ance? BY no other right we are compelled
admit, than the robbers right Of the strongest.
| When the conquered Romans were weighing ou
the gold for the ransom for their conquered city
\ the naughty Gaulic general threw his sword an
belt into the opposite scale, and when ren,onsrate
with for tho unfsirness. aud asked what itmean
Bieunus answered with asneer, what should