The record-union., 1894-05-26
WRONGS OF MARRIED MEN.
Advantages Women Already Have
Over Them.
Some Points in Present Laws That
Need Very Careful Con-
sideration.

Contributed to the REcoRD-UNIoN by Lady
Cook-1enneSsee Clahin.
The circumstances relating to marriage
are becoming so confused and anomalous
that a recasting of the laws pertaining to
it must soon be universally demanded.
At present married people scarcely know
where they are. The daily papers con-
stantly give most pathetic accounts OF in
iured husbands in humble life resortiDg
to police magistrates for assistance or ad-
vice, and finding that they have no REM
edy against the misconduct OF their
worthless partners. l have not been
sparing, from time to time, in enumerat-
ing the wrongs of women. But the men
have theirs also to less degree, and 1t is
only equitable that attention should be
drawn TO them, for justice and fair play
should be given to all. l have never de-
manded that women should have any
privileges denied to men. 1 only ask
that both should share alike.
Not long ago, when the law gave the
husband sole control of the wile's un-
settled property, it was right that he
But when, as now, married woman re-
tains her own, the reason for compelling
maintenance from the husband has dis
appeared. She may have good house
and good income, and from caprice or
other cause may deny him admittahce to
his married home, aud to any share OF
her living. Ii destitute he may 60 to the
workhouse while she is living in luxury,
and no claim can be made upon her for
his suStenance. But reverse the positions,
and the husband will be compelled to
allow her maintenace. This system
falls hardest on the poor. 1t is not un-
common for Police Magistrate to order
a working man to contribute twelve shill-
ingS week or more to the support OF
separated wife. Few men of such a class
can do this and live.
Again, since the Jackson case, no huS-
band can compel an unwilling wife TO CO.
habit with him. OF course this is right
enough. But, on the other hand, a wife
can compel an unwilling husband by
Judges order to restore her to cohabita-
ton or pay the penalty of refusal. This
seems an unfair distinction. If hus-
band negiects his wife ana family. SO that
it become constructive cruelty, the wife
can obtain separation order without so
much as the asking. But wife may
spend her days in dissipation, may fire.
quent public-h houses, and neglect her chill
dren, and the husband has neither rem
edy nor power to prevent her.
The wife may be a nagger, scold, a
perpetual tormenter-one of the class
whom our humorous and practical fore
fathers cured by the application of
ducking-stool and a horse pond; she may
be guilty of any misconduct short of
adultery, and the unfortunate husband
must put up with it all. Many such fly
for refuge to the nearest tavern and
n n ri nj nffa
become criminal from misfortune. Many
an honest, hardworking man, too, is
punished by The magistrate because, in
his absense from home, his wife neglected
her duties and kept his children from
school. II the fines are not paid, it is he
who is imprisoned and not the culprit
wife.
Widows can claim absolutely one
third Of the personality of husbands
dying intestate, but widowers haYe only
a iife interest in the unwilled property of
deceased wives.
These are some of the wrongs under
which married men suffer, owing to the
radical changes which have taken place
in the relations OF husband and wife
since marriage was made a religious
sacrament. A more rational perception
of it's nature, however, is beginning to
prevail, and it is time that all these and
other anomalies should cease. The re-
ligious idea of its character must give
way. Marriage will have to be thor
oughly reconstructed on the basis of a civil
partnership, terminable at will or from
breach of contract, as in other associa-
tions. Even time partnerships to lapse
at the end OF term, say seven or any
other number of years to be agreed upon,
would be better than the haphazard
happy-go-lucky system now i'll vogue.
These, if agreeable, could be renewed or
continued at the will of both. AS Mr..
Labouchere has just said in the House of
Commons, the law of divorce is utterly
absurd. IF two people," he added,
wanted to be married, let them be mar
ried and if they wanted to be divorced,
let them be divorced" Although these
opinions were greeted with much laugh
ter by the House, as though they were
excessively funny, they are never theless
correct, and domestic happiness will
never be universal until they be received
as serious truths. Should there be chill
dren of those separated, it would be
simple matter to compel parents to set
aside sum for their support in q ratio
according to the individual property of
each. This would put an end to the filthy
accounts of divorce suits which pollute
our daily papers, and which obtain ready
admittance into families where a serious
essay on manners and morals is too often
excluded because it contains little neces-
sary plain speaking as though omelettes
could be expected without breaking eggs.
If people would divorce themselves at
will and without publicity, they would be
as careful to preserve each others esteem
after, as they We're before marriage We
should then seldom see what so fre-
quently happens now; the charming.
neat. obliging fianee developing into the
giddy, careless, slatternly and disoblig-
| ing wife, or the and devoted lover cooling
down into the neglectful and heartless
husband. Those truly married would
continue to do all they could to please
each other; and those superiicially united
would practice the outward decencies of
married life from mutual and self-inter-
ests. Marriage would cease to be the
grave of love. and the sum total OF hu-
man happiness would be Immensely in
creased. Possession during good be-
havior is far better for our weak human
nature than possession absolute. In the
Awarded Highest T