Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1860-02-04
0be Antt- 9lapcrp Buale.
THE RIGHTS OF MARRIED WOMEN, g.

Gict, has introduced bill in the Senate to define
she rights of married women in relation to holding
property &C. As the m after is one which interests
large class Of readers of both sexes, we clip as
follows from the official reports.
Mr.. Jones moved to strike out all after the en-
acting clause.
Mr.. Parish explained the objects of the bill
lst. 1t cxempss the property belonging to q wo-
man before marriage from the control or debts of
her husband upon her assuming tho marital rela.
lions, and continues it in her right. I'd. 1t also
secures property belonging to o woman already
married, the rents. profits &c., of it to them, the
same as IL they single excepting in SO far as
the property may already have bec,me liable for
her husband's debts; and it releases the husband
from liability for the debts Of the wife, whether
contracted before or after marriage.
See. 8. Allows married women to take by in
heritance, devise. 30, and to sell, &C., any proper
~, the same as an unmarried woman and it shall
be from her husbands authority; provided that if
she permits her husband to use her property in
business, said property shall be liable for his debts
contracted in said business.
ss Sec. a. Enables married women to make con-
trasts. to sue and be sued plead, &c, as if they
were single, except to their husbands. No such
proceedings to abate by marriage.
~ Sec. 8. Allows women during coverture right
to their time and to profits Of their labor earn
,ngs, &C.; provided, husband and vile shall be
Jointly and severally bound for the support, &C.,
oftheir own children, and Tor their own mutual
support while rhe marital relation exists.
See. 6 Enables woman who was executrix.
&C.. before marriage, to act in that capacity after
IL ~ Lao ;o3 al,
positions.
o.. Sec. Contracts between persons ir contem-
plasion of marriage, to iemain in force after mar
yiage. a
o.. Mr.. Parish expatated upon the evils of the ex-
isting laws in relation to women, and advocating
fevolution in the premises. He was in favor of
securing to the fullest legal rights compat-
ibls With their natural rights. lie said the first
three sections of the bill are almost verbatim the
law now the statute books of New York He
did not claim tina, the measure is altogether a
new thing although it is new here. He submit
Ted that an equalization of the rights of men and
women would contribute to the welfare of society.
Among other reforms he thought it would be apt
70 effect, would be reduction of divorce cases,
and be was opposed TO laws which require women
10 60 out of legal existence upon entering the
.
marriage condition.
Mr.. Cox was not satisfied with the arguments
Of the gentlemen for his bill. lie recognised pro-
gress in society, but did not regard the making
the direction of the interests of husbands and
wives more and more several in the right line Of
progress. He regarded it wise legislation to pro-
tect and make more sacred the family relation.
The bill before the committee would not do this as
itmakes distinctions and interests which should
be united. The true policy is to protect the per-
sonal independence of the wife, but make the in
tsras.fs of husbands and wives joint and closely
unisd as possible.
Mr.. Jones thought that the existing statute
meets the necessities of the case if men and their
wives would live together they should do. He
thought in6deity increased in proportion to the
legislation which makes seperate the interests Of
husband and wife, is a contravention of law Of
the author of our being. tits declaring that man
and his wife are no longer one flesh, but twain.
He did not like the partnership interest," alluded
TO ty the gentleman from TrumLull Instead of
making q union such as is contem D lated by mar
riags, but mere partnership contract.
Mr.. Parish thought tho progress contemplated
by the bill would not affect the sanctity of the
marriage relation. but would produce happy re-
suits. lie thoughtit just to relieve the wife from
ths.rsstraint to which she is now subjected, and
would promote the objects of marriage.
MIR. Monroe objected to the bill because he did
not believe in the philosophy which underlies leg
islaton 10 protect the rights of married women.
The happiness of the family will be best promoted
the nearer you come to perfect unity. Hence
he'was opposed to legislation that tends to make
husband and wife separate powers. just in pro-
portion as unity is promoted you increase the fam
lily and social happiness. He deemed it indispen-
sable to the happiness of couple that one or the
other should 90 nearly out of legal existence
possible, and could not discover the evils result
tipg from it which his friend from Erie seemed to
dsprecate.. He thought the worst off family in the
world,i is the family without head and the neu-
,rsl tendency Of bills like this is apt to destroy
that hssdship in the family, and promote discOrd.
Mr.. Key would not support the bill Of the
Senator from Erie, bpt he was fully o! the opinion
that there should be further Legislation in Ohio
for the protection of tho property and earnings of
married women. Separate property and the right
10 receive their own earnings would afford great
sEssoa.ity against bad treatment. The slow pro-
grsss Of legislative reform this subject was az
tribptsbe to the fact thatGeneral Assemblies were
eoppsasd chiefly of married men, and it was ap-
psssn. that ths great body of this class Of ctizens
wsrs astsrminsd not only to possess wives but
also 10 appropriate to themselves everything which
thsirswivss possess.
Mr. Cappy Ooncurred with Mr.. Key.
The motion TO strike out all after the enactng
elaass was carried H
sis baa cmil
CoLoREn PRopIss RIGHrs.-Tho Conductor OF
. Street Railroad Car, in Cincinnati, has been
6nsd ten dollars for siecting Q oolored passenger