The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-06-08

Ii the discovery OF tn1S Cnlcago outrage Snau
have the effect of correcting the prevailing
evil in this respect, it may be regarded as a
public benefit
THE PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CONNEO-
TICUT WOMEN.
From the N. T. Tribune
In New York the property rights of married
women are most sedulogsly guarded, and so
is the sanctity of the marriage tie In Con-
necticut married women are too often treated
as if they had no property rights which their
husbands are bound to respect, and divorces
are easy and frequent. We do not think the
arrangement good one, and hope, right ear
nestly, that the present Connecticut Legisla-
ture may be trusted to better it.
We do not ask that the laws of New York
should be slavishly copied. AS we lately had
occasion to show, it might be urged by people
of a dissatisfied turn of mind that there is
some need here for movement in behalf of
mems rights. Certainly, on the theories of
equality now so popular, it must be admitted
that the laws of New York, in some most i'm
portant particulars, display favoritism to-
wards the fair sex far removed from the equal
and exact justice of which we hear so much.
For ourselves, we are entirely satisfied, how
ever, with the advantages given women over
men by the laws of our State we prefer that
they should continue to enjoy them; and we
Cdu dSSuIe our uelBuDOrS IuhU, tnuS lar, CnoV
work WELL
Connecticut still maintains the old-time
property determinations against women, and
denies them the legitimate control of what
they may be able to acquire, as well as of
what they may become nominal owners of
in other ways. While they are charged with
the responsibilities pertaining to other prop
erty, they are deprived of the corresponding
franchises In recent years, however, there
l. e..
failed-to obtain such legislation on the sub
ject as would bring the laws of Connecticut
into accord, more or less, with the liberal
laws of other States, or rather with the even
handed Justice now accorded to women else
where. But at last there is prospect that the
Legislature will take favorable action upon q
bill which will be brought under consid-
Grafton this week, ''for securing the
protection of married women in the enioy-
ment of their property" In its main prin-
ciple the bill resemble the existing law of
this State, though differing from the latter
upon several points of detail. The funda-
mental provision is that the real and personal
estate, and all property of any description,
belonging to married women, whether ac-
quired by gift, bequest, devise, purchase, or
in any other way, shall be her sole and sepa-
rate estate, notwithstanding her marriage
and that all rents, interest, and income
her in her own right, exactly as if she were
sole and unmarried; no part of this property
being liable to be taken for the hus-
bands debts or liabilities The subordinate
features of the bill are in reference Cd to
a wife's special right to lease or sell her pro-
perty; and (2) to the ife-estate of husband
or wife in case of the death of either. If
married woman possessed of real estate desire
to lease or sell it, and her husband refuse to
10 xr,f ha- in, TIC H.
bring the matter before a county court, which
is empowered to authorize her to execute the
deed in her own name. In case of the death
of husband or wife the survivor is entitled
to life estate in one-third of the property of
the deceased-this provision, however, not
being allowed to affect ante-nuptial agree
ments.
In regard to these points of legal detail,
and to the authority of courts in the aliena-
ton and entail of property, we offer no OPT
nion here. But we earnestly hope there may
be no doubt of the enactment at the present
session of the Legislature of the leading prin-
ciple of the bill, by which married women
are entitled to the legitimate ownership and
control of their own property, and guaran-
teed those rights which are necessarily asso-
ciated Herewith. As to the intrinsic justice
of the principle, there cannot be any doubt.
Why should the marriage of a woman deprive
ner Oh ner rlSnts oi properly, or tne control
of her own earnings? Why should husband
be allowed to squander his wife's estate with
out her consent? Why should he have the
power to seize her income against her will?
Why should she be held responsible for his
liabilities, in the accidents of his life or folly?
Why should she not legally own what she
properly possesses, and why should she not
control what she owns? Let the Legislature
of Connecticut do justice to the women of
the State!
REPUTATION AND THE INCOME TAX.
From the N. Y. Sun.
The Republican National Convention. held