Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1857-03-14
WHOLE NO. 500,


to attempt to amend it-"there must be total re.
construction, before q woman can have any iustce'
i The wrong lies not so much in any special stat.
ute, in the fundamental theory Of the law, yet
no man read the statutes of the most enight-
ned nation, without admitting that they were obv.
ously made by man, not with view to woman's
interest, but his oten. Our Ohio laws may not be
so bad as the law repealed in Vermont in 1850,
which confscated TO tie State one.half the proper
ty of every childless widow, unless the husband
had other heirs. But they must compel from ev-
cry generous the admission, that neither JUS
tice gallantry has yet avaied to procure any.
thing like impartiality in the legal provisions for
the two sexes, With what decent show Of justice.
then can man, thus disbonored claim continu-
ance Of this suicidal confidence
There is something respectable in the frank bar.
barism OF the old Russian nuptial conservation,
Here, wolf, take thy lamb" But we cannot easi.
ly extend the charity to the civilized wolf of
England and America clad in the sleeps clothing
of volume of revised statutes; caressng the per-
son of the bride, and devouring her property.
1t is said the husband can, by will, provide
against these cases of hardship and injustice.--
True, he can, if he will, but does he? The num-
Der is few, some of the more thoughtful and
scentious; but this is only obtaining justice as
favor, and not a natural right But it is
iority OF husbands who make these laws, and they
generally have no desire to amend them by will
Beside the will Of the husband, is sometimes
worse than the law itself. Such cases are by no
furnish or more examples, that have fallen un-
der his immediate notice. One or two only, We
will mention. \ woman, advanced in life, who
owned valuable farm in her own right, i1 the
border of flourishing town, married a man who
had little or no property. The farm soon cut
up into town lots, and sold at high prices. In q
few years the husband died, leaving no children,
but, by will, directed the division of nearly the
whole estate among his relatives persons whom the
wife never saw.
| The only remedy in this case was to fall back
upon her right of dover, and submit to the rob-
berry of the law, in order to escape the worse rob-
berry of the will This will was not the resut OF
any disagreement between the husband and wife.
1t was only the natural outgrowth! of the whole
policy of our laws regards the property rights
Of woman. Permit to notice one other case,
which occurred in neighboring State Many
similar ones, no doubt, have occurred in our own.
| The law in both States being the same.
A woman who had fortune of fifty thousand
dollars, in personal property" married. All this,
! by law, belonged, absolutely. to the husband. In
II year he died. directing that the widow should
have the proceeds of certain part of this money,
so long she remained unmarried Ii she married
again. or at her death, t was to 90 to his heirs.
/ How different in all cases is the condition of the
Il husband, upon the death of the wife. There is.
then, no oficious intermeddlng of the law in his
, domestic affairs. His house, sad and desolats
though it be, is still sacred and secure from the
foot Of unbidies guests There is no legal ''set-
f tlement 10 eat up HE state. He is not told that
''cae eQun third fa%t' OF Az his lands and tene
ments shall be sci apart f hfs as ass his life time
lie has ell. every thing, his wifes bridal
4 presents too are his. If the wife had lands in her
own right, and if they had living child, be
has life estate in the whole Of it; not beggarly
D third part"
. Such is the result of mans government OF
: woman, without her consent. Such is the protec-
/ ton he affords her. She now asks the means of
protecting herself, bv the same instrumentality
/ which man considers so essential to his freedom
and security, representation, political equality
sttutional restriction is Of great consequence, be-
cause it casts upon woman stigma Of inferiority,
of incompetency, of unworthiness of trust. 1t
ranks her with criminals and mad-men and idiots.
1t is essential to her, practically, being the key
to all her rights, which will open to her the door
of equality and justice.
Does any one believe, that if woman had possess.
ed an equal voice in making Jaws, we should
have standing statute books, for generations.
laws so palpably unequal and MUST toward her :
The idea is preposterous.
e If our sense OF natural justice, and our theory
of government, both agree, that the being who is
to suffer under laws, shall first personally assent
i to them and that the being whose industry the
J., government is to burden should have voice in
r fixing the character and amount of that burden ;
then while woman is admitted to the gallows, the
jail and the tax list hare no right to debar her
o from the ballot-box.
it Your committee recommend the adoption Of tho
: following resolution:
: j. D. CATTELL,
n n