The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1886-09-10
THE LEGISLATURE.
NrNErY-sEvENrn DAY. - CONTINUED
THURSDAY, September 9th.
AFTERNOON SESSION.

''NNO''N iNe'i'S5 VI an HASO w IllO-
vide a permanent settlement of
$500 year for the widow of the
late j. f. Barnard, clerk of the
Supreme Court.
Noble Bush moved the bill pass.
Carried. To be read third time on
Saturday.
Rep. Brown moved the bill pro-
viding pension for Daniel Napela
be laid on the table. Carried.
Third reading of the bill to amend
sections 21S and 221 Civil Code,
relating to prisons, iails and houses
of correction.
Rep. Thurston moved the bill
pass.
Rep. Kaulukou specified certain
defects in the bill.
Rep. Thurston moved the bill be
referred back to the select commit
tee. Carried.
Third reading of the bill to amend
section 247 Civil Code, relating to
lhc btullVlnS VI CilIlle.
Rep. Brown moved the bill pass.
Carried.
Third reading of the bill relating
to the property of married women.
Section II of this Act repeats sec
ton 1886 and 1897 of the Civil
Code.
Rep. Kalua moved the bill pass.
Rep. Palohau moved the bill be con-
sidered section by section. The Sec
ond section is very wrong. If his wife
goes away and makes contracts with
other people, why should he pay her
foolish bills. The Attorney-G General
seemed to be looking at the speaker
with some establishment, but he does
not understand Hawaiian women as
well as the Interpreter, Minister of
Finance and other members. He
was not married man himself but
these remarks We're for the benefit
of those who are married. And this
law, although it may not affect men,
bers of the house, will make much
trouble and co 'usion among COM
mon people.
Rep. kaunamano thought the pro-
posed law was wrong. 1t makes the
wife boss, head of the house. In
this respect it is contrary to the law
of God. The husband, under this
law, would be second in his own
house, and would have to take a
back seat. The present law is very
definite and very well understood.
1t gives the husband control of the
wife's property. The proposed law
gives the wife the power, if she
chooses, to make over her property,
if she sees fit, to the exclusion of
her own children. AS we have
good law on the subject, he thought
it was best to let we'll enough alone.
Rep. Thurston said he was certain
that if members understood the
terms and purposes of the bill, they
would support the it. The law as
it now stands, is the old common
law of England, by which a woman
on being married, was civilly dead,
and a law which was discarded
everywhere except in the Hawaiian
Islands. The proposed law does
not set the wife over the husband.
1t simply provides that the husband
cannot sell his wife's property for
the discharge of his own debts, and
provides that if a married woman
carries on business on her own re-
sponsibility, after complying with
the necessary regulations with regard
to advertising, her husband or her
husbands creditors cannot appro-
pirate either the stock or proceeds
of the business. The bill is for the
protection of the wife, and every
member of the house should support
it.
Rep. Nahinu agreed with the hon.
member for Hamakua. He was OPP
posed to this law from beginning to
end. While the law may relieve
women of some disabilities,
it creates other and greater troubles.
lie thought the law was contrary to
holy writ, which says, woman was
made for man and not man for
woman, and this law will revolu-
tionize that principle. If this law
goes into effect, it will break up
families. The hon. member for
Molokai has cited the United States
laws, but he had been informed that
they do things differently there
marry for money and not for love.
This law is not equity. Why should
a woman claim all her own property
and at the same time hold her hus-
band responsible for her support.
1t will enable woman to say to her
husband "what is yours is mine,
and what is mine is my own" He
thought the hon. member had an
eye to business in favoring this law,
as it would be likely to multiply
divorce suits.
Rep. Kauhane spoke In favor of
the bill. No law could be made to
suit all cases. The law provides
that if the husband makes unfor-
tunate investments, the wife can
use her own property for the sup
port of the family.
Rep. Kaulukou thought the oppo-
sition to the bill was owing to the
members not properly understand
ing it.
The motion to indeHnitoIu ,,os4