New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-05-30
MARRIAGE And DIVORCE.

To the Editor Of The ~ y. Tribune
SIR: At our recent National Womans Rights Con-
vention many were surprised hear Wendell Phillips
object the question of Marriage and Divorce as IT.
relevant to our platform. lie said we had no right to
discuss there any laws or CUSTOMS but those where
Inequality existed in the That the laws on
| Marriage and Divorce rested equally on man and
woman that he suffered much as she possibly could
the wrongs and abuses of an assorted marriage.
| Now, il mutt strike every careful thinker that an
immense difference in the fact that man has made
the laws cunningy and seshy, for his own purpose.
From Coke down 10 Kent, who can cite one clause OF
the marriage contract where woman has the advant-
age! When man suffers from false legislation, he has
his remedy in his own hands. Shall woman be denied
the right of protest against laws in which she has had
no voice-laws which outrage the hottest affections of
her naure-laws which transcend the limits of human
legsation-in Convention called for the express pur-
| pose of considering her wrongsl He might as well
object to a protest against the injustice of hanging
woman, because capital punishment bears equally upon
man and woman.
The contract of Marriage is by equal. The
law permits the girl TO marry at twelve years of age,
while il requires several years of experience
the part Of the boy. In entering this compact the
gives up nothing that he before possessed-he is man
still; while the legal existence of the woman is
pended during maTriage-henceforth she is known but
in and through the husband-she is naIneless, purse
less, chldless-though woman an heiress, and
mother.
Blackstone says: The husband and rife are one,
and that one as tie husband. Kent says: The
illegal effects of marriage generally dedueble from
" the principle of the Common Law by which the hus
" band and wife are regarded one person, and her
legal existence and authority. lost or suspended
during the continuance Of the matrimonial
ON "n0 Get0n o ne e. 49, b. Ne Lite tS' sec o lss
29l. The wife is regarded by all legal authorities
femme corert, placed wholly sub potentate rtri.
Her moral responsibility even, is merged in the hus
band The law takes il for granted that the wife lives
in fear of her husbandtha his command is her high
est law; hence wife is not punishable for theft
mitted in presence of her husband. Kent, VOL 9, p
127.) An unmarried woman can make contracts, sue
and be sued, enjoy the rights of properiy-to her in
heritance TO her wages TO her person, to her children
But in marriage, she is robbed by law OF all and every
natural and civil right. The disability Of the wife to
contract so as to bind herself arises not from want of
discretion, but because she has entered into ali inds
soluble connection by which she is placed under the
"pOwer and protection of her husband" Kent, vol
q D. III She is possessed of certain rights until she
il married then all suspended, to revive again the
moment the breath goes out of the husbands body.
(See Governs Treatise, vol. 9, P 7o9.l
If the contract be equal, whence come the terms
marital p0'ceT, marital rights" " dominion and
control, obedience and restraint &c.? Many
stated, showing the exercise of most ques
tonable power the wife, sustained by the Courts.
(See Bishop on Divorce page 4S9D
The laws on Divorce are quite as unequal as are
those on Marriage. Yes, and far more so. The adj
vantages seem g re al on one side, and the penalties
Oh TIE other In case of Divorce if the husband be
the guilty party he still retains the greater part of the
property; while, if the wife be the guilty party, she
goes ont of the partnership penness. Kent vol. !,
page 49, Bishop on Divorce, page 1922
In New-York and other States, the wife Of the
guilty husband may now sue for Divorce In her own
name, and the costs out Of the husbands estate
But in the majority of the States she is still compelled
to sue in the name of another as she has means of
paying COSTS though she may have brought thou
sands into the partnership. The allowance to the
innocent wife Of dd interim alimony, and money 10
sustain the suit is regarded strict right in her
but of sound discretion in the Court" Bishop on D-
vorce, page 5Sl.l
Many juriss," says Kent, vol. 9, p. 49, " are of
opinion that the adultery of the husband ought not
:" TO be noticed OF made subject TO the anmad
" versions that of the wife, because it is not evidence
of such entire depravity, nor equally inuriousin It's
effects upon the morals good ORDER and happiness OF
" domestic life. Monesquieu, Pothier, and DIR. Taylor
all insist that the cases of husbandand wife ought TO
be distinguished and that the violation Ofthe marriage
" vow, the part of the wife, is the most mischiev-
ous and the prosecution ought TO be confined to the
" olieuse on her part Esprit des Loix tom. 3, lS6;
Trate du Contrat de Marriage, No. SIC; Elements of
Civil Laws, p. 2a
Say you these are but the opinions of men On
what else, ask, are the hundreds Of women depend
", u
burdensome eontractsl Are not these delicate mat
ters left wholly TO the discretion of Courts Are not
Young women from our first families dragged into the
public COurts-int0 assemblies of men exclusively
the Judges all men, the Jurors all menno true
there to shield them by her presence from gross and i'm
pertinent qucstcnngs, To pity their mlsortunes or to
protest against their wrongs The administration Of
justice depends far more on the opinions of eminent
Juriss than on law alone; for law Is poweress when
at variance with public sentiment.
DO not the above citations clearly prove inequality
ls not the very letter and spirit of the marriage
tract based IN the idea Of the supremacy OF man. the
Keeper OF womans virtue her sole protection and sup
port
Out Of marriage woman asks nothing at this hour
but the elective franchise IL is ony in marriage that
she must demand her rights person, children prop
eIy wages, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
How can we discuss all the laws and conditions of
marriage, without perceylng its essential essence end
and aim? Whether the institution of marriage be human
astca Courts or dissoluble by Civil Courts Woman.
finding herself equally degraded in each and every
phase of always the victim of the institution-it Il
her right and her duty TO t The relation and the COM
pact through and through until she finds ont the true
cause II her false position. How can we 20 before
the Legislatures of our respective States, and demand
new laws or no laws, on divorce until we have some
idea of what the true relation isl
We decide the whole question of Slavery by settling
the sacred rights Of the individual. We that
man cannot hold property in man, and reject the whole
code of laws that conflict with the secy truth of
that assertion.
Again ask IL II possible 10 discuss all the laws Of
-.l..on "a no, ,o.cb the relafion itself1 A..