, 1879-10-11
Descent OF Real and Personal
PrOOeFty.

The Ncrr Northwest is displeascd with the
SrArEsx,S because of its advocacy OF the
re-enactment of the common law of England
ot. this subject. The common law OF Eng
land is virtually the Justinian code, which
has stood the test since the sixth century
and wbicn extended its influence throughout
all portions of the Roman dominions, aud
shaped and modified the Jurisprudence OF
al succeeding tim $. In the eleventh CEN
tury, Edward, the confessor, king OF Eng
land, again codifed these laws, which code
was STYLED the common law OF England, and
that code is to this day the rule OF decision
in almost all the courts OF the United States
and territories, so far as 1t does not conflict
or is inconsistent with the constitution Oh
the United States and the constitutions OF
the several states, and whenever legislature
allows itself to improUe upon laws which
have witbstood the revolutions OF all civil
lied nations for thousands of years, inilu-
enced by the strong minded-w weakness OF
women. it will invariable make mistake.
Under the common law the wife was, entI-
tied to a Interstate in her husbands real
estate, and to one third Of the personal prop
crty if more than one child, and One-half OF
all the personal property II but one child.
This is certainly All ample provision, and II,
as our laws do. entItle a wlie to her own
earnings, it is impossible to think that any
more can be asked TO protect the wIfe's IN
terest. Under our present community prop
erty act, the whole OF it goes to the survivor
to the exclusion of the children. 1t Is true
when our sister says, that mother will do
what is right by her children, but where 1t
concerns the interest OF the step-children.
the proverbial stepmother will excuse the
STATESMAN for interposing doubt. But
what is true of the children, is also true OF
wife; namely, if wife has been, what all
OF them are not, true wife to her husband,
he will do what is right 10y her and a great
deal more. Why not trust the husband as
we'll as her,
But here is another feature IN Us matter:
The widow receiving tue :. noie of the cOm-
munity property = IN many cases the prey of
adventures, who upon marriage, under our
LAWS, has the management and control OF the
separate property OF the wife, and she cannot
dispose of any of her real property without
the signature of her husband the wife on
the other hand to avoid publicity viii sub
NIT, and IN the end often loses her property
which her former husband labored hard to
acquire Few women are calculated Tor
business, and less number desire to ningle
in the strife of business life, or compete with
business men, generally, notwithstanding the
fact that few masculine females, who made
a mistake in not being born men aver the
contrary. To prove that the success OF the
women's right movement is not all appreci-
ated by large majority of the women them
selves, We reproduce the following from the
New York Graphic:
Apparently the women of Massachusetts,
do not banker after the right of voting The
books for the registration Of women under le
new law OF Massachusetts have now been
closed and the whole number of women who
have come forward to qualify themselves for
the discharge of the voting franchise is about
1000 The female population Of Massachusetts
amounts to about 900, ,090 souls, of whom prob
ably not more than 200,000 at the least are
adults, so that it would seem that only one
woman out Of each 100 cared to claim that in.
estimable boon for which Mrs. Susan Anthony
and her iilustrious compeers have been long
contending"
With these views we leave the adjustment
of this question with the assembled wisdom
OF the territory now in session at Olympia