New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1895-03-06


crime. It's the general prevalence off.
this feeling among i:i, hts minded men
which gives any sappo, I to the bill nov
before the Legislature which raises the
age Of consent from sixteen to eighteen
and provides that the boy OF man who
isconY1cted of Illicit commerce with q
woman more than sixteen and less than
eighteen years ofsage shall be punished.
with imprisonment il the penitentiary
for from one toseyen years. The pen
atty is not severe enough in any case Of
Ecoldly planned seduction Of an innocent
maiden. But instances Of this sort must.
from the nature Of the case, form q very
small prop rtion Of this class Of often
SEES. That is to say, in the great majori-
ty Of cases both the parties are willing
participants in the offense and share
equally in the guilt OF a mutual passion.
But the penalties of this bill fall indls-
criminately on the male offenders alone.
It assumes that in every case the man is
the brutal aggressor and the Woman the
innocent and helpless VICTIM It ignores
9 notorious fact of social life that it is.
the men in many cases who are the dupes
OF the wiles of artful and wickd wo-=
men. Every city swarms with female
adventuresses who make business Of.
inveigling men into compromising stu
atoms and levying blackmail upon them.
The records Of the courts are full Of such
instances, and probably hundred are
|, concealed where one becomes known
This bill would place new and terrible
weapon in the hands of these vile Wo-
men. Young girls would be used as de-
coys to tempt the passions Of youths. or
older men; and when the calculating
procnress had succeeded in her plot this
law would prove a mine of gold for her.
In the sums she could extort from her.
victim.
4 While every prostitute would find a
new and lucrative. field of operations
opened before her in this bill, it would
afford no protection to the innocent girl.
Beyond the age Of consent now fixed BY
law she needs no protection. If she has
been decently brought up, her innocence
needs no safer shield than the modesty
and virtue with which nature has usual
ly armed her sex. She is abundantly
able to take care of herself. When she
has lost her modesty no law will protect
her. A law which assumes that if she
falls she shares no part of the guilt and
exempts her from any responsibility for
her fault by imposing its penalties only
on her male accomplish is an essentially
immoral law immoral in principle, and
danger ously demoralizing in the lesson
it teaches to young girls. It is direct
encouragement to vice and depravity on
the part of girls of evil propensities BY
relieving them from any accountability
for even the sins which they themselves
melted.
1t is an anomalous measure, in conflict
with all our modern theories of intelli-
gsnce and capacity of women to take
care of themselves. The very women.
who are crying out for woman suffrage
and for opening all the avenues of en-
ployment to women on the ground that
women are as capable as men of govern
ing the state or of carrying on any sort
of business or profession, now come be-
fore the Legislature with bill which as
sumes that, as matter which vitality
concerns the most precious of their pos
sessions, their own virtue, women are
fools; that they are helpless fools, who
cannot be trusted to guard their own.
womanhood; that their ignorance and
imbecility are such that they are defense
less against the brutality of the yilest
and meanest of the opposite sex. Upon
this aspect of the case we commend the
reader to the perusal of he scathlng con-
demnation of a law which was enacted
in Kansas some years ago, somewhat
similar to the one now before our own
senate, which is contained in an opinion
rendered by Judge Valentine. of the Kan
sas supreme court. A youth had been
sentenced to five years. imprisonment
under its provisions. The court was
obliged toupbold the constitutionality of
the law, but accompanied the decision
with such an exposure Of its injustice
and absu1dity as should deter any other