New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-04-21
NETWORK DAILY TRIBUNE SUNDAY, THIRTY PAGES

real estate In other words, she Will receive OK
actly the same share that she would II she was
his daughter At the same time she is permitted
by the generous provisions OF this statute 10 erect
10 take her dover rights in her deceased NUS
bands real estate. il because OF the numDer OF
his surviving children, or any other reason sue
should find II more advantageous TO do So
II is difficult 70 conceive how statutory law can
20 further than this act goes, taken in connection
with other legislation OF recent years, to protect
and extend the rights Of married women respect
Ing property owned by them ana their h'ispands
They are now permitted 10 carry on business
Independent OF their husbands control to buy
and sell real estate without the intervention OF
their husbands; in fact to do substantially any
thing and everything with their separate fortunes
as II they were single And In addition they re-
tain under the old common law. or receive under
recent legislation. privileges and protection not
accorded TO men themselves. Husbands cannot
convey real property with complete title unless
thcr wives ioin 10 convey their dover rights;
nor has the Legislature yet consented 10 make
husbands the heirs Of their deceased wives. 1t
may b. difficult 10 tell why such radical change
I'm the law Of descent as Is made by this new
s,otu,c should not be reciprocal and give mutual
rights 10 husbands and wives. 1t may have been
considered that as women had lived and suffered
for 50 many centuries under the Determinations
and Injustice Of the old English law, it would be
only fair that for time. nj least. they should In
turn have advantages at law over their husbands.
At all events. this law. remarkable as 1t Is for
the changes it makes. TO the extent that It goes,
can only he received with approval, not I'M
mingled with wonder that it has taken Ameri-
tI,.,. nni,l1
work So salutary n modification of the law of
descent.
Tho other recent action of the Legislature re-
fcrrcd to is that 10y which it was decided 10 sub
mi, 70 The vote Of the people the proposed consti-
tuliona amendment giving women the right 10
vote Especially noteworthy is the vote In the
Senate - 10 in favor ~ The resolution
There is lust one step further that W" believe 'hc
LEGISLATURE is bound 10 60 and N It's present s's-
sion too-apply the principle Of the referendum
10 the women Of the state upon this question:
or course women cannot vote upon the coilstitu-
tional amendment when 1t comes b"for" the poo
pie: the Constitution. ~ II stands, forbds mat
Rui such vote Of the people cannot he taken I'M
Ill another LEGISLATURE has approved OF me
amendment In The mean time ana IN" coming
election being in an of year would b" IN" apprV
priatr time. why should not III" women oi 'h'
State be- permitted 10 express thcir s'htimch'S
upon the question for the gudanc" OF the com
Ing Irgislnjurc and ~ the male electors when
they come finally 10 vot" upon IN" am"ndn'h''
II has been said over and over again. publciF
and privately that II the majority "f N" women
~ the state really wanted The rirciiv" franchise
they should have II, hut that they did not want
H. How can that question satisfactorily ID" d"-
icrmincd except IN the way above proposed! W"
submit This suggestion 10 the members ~ me
legislature who seriously desire To So" ihis
question determined intelligcntly and adviSrtly'
believing that this way lies the solution OF IN"
problem.