The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1900-01-31

Another change in the law affects the
married woman's right to engage N
business. SO lOng as she could make
no contracts. Of course she could not
be the active party in any business
The only way she could then act was
through her husband. If a woman wish
ed 10 conduct millinery store. her
husband, however worthless he might
be, was the only agency through whom
she could act. In many cases she went
into business because of his inability
or unWIiilnsneSs to support her, or per
haps. support himself. And yet she was
obliged to act through him. PennSyl-
vania was one Of the first states to start
the new movement by enacting that a
married woman could engage in bust
ness and make binding contracts while
her husband was at sea. From this
mustard seed has grown uD the law
around this subject. Today. almost
everywhere, she can engage in business
and make contracts with as much free
dom as an unmarried woman. One limi-
JatiOn on her power relates to the in
dOrslng or guaranteeing of notes. She
cannot indOrse or guarantee the debt
or another But she can indOrse a note
OF her own. Thus, if A made his note
payable to 3. who wished additional
security, it's Endorsement by a married
woman for AS accommodation would
not be valid, and she could escape pay
ment if she pleased. But if che took a
note in her business for goods that she
had sold, payable to her order, and she
wished to raise money on it by having
/ 1t discounted, she could indoTse it. Sld,
# ii were not paid by the maker, she
! would be held as indorser, if the proper
steps were taken to faSten her liability.
| The difference between the the two
cases, we think, is plain. Though the
form Of Endorsement in each case may
be the same, in the one case she in
dOrses for the benefit of another, who
gets the money; in the other case she
indOrses for her own benefit and re
ceives the money herself
A married woman could give a power
of attorney, a written authority to an
other to do something relating to her
separate estate. whenever she was per-
mftted to hold it, but abe could not give
ont for any other purpose. Yet it has
| been questioned whether she could sell,
/ through another, her separate real es-
I tate; in other words, whether she could
authorize an agent to sign a deed for
I her. It is said that in those cases in
[ which at the time Of signing a deed she
must be examined apart from her hus
/ band, for the purpose Of finding out
| whether the sale is voluntary on her
/ part and free from all influence by him,
/ she cannot sell through another be-
cause if this were done she would avoid
( the needful examination. In other cases.
/ where such an examination is not re-
! quired, she can appoint an agent or at
/ toTney to act for her and sign the deed.
/ When this is done her husband must
/ sign the power of attorney, just as he
would the deed itself. In other words,
/ the paper or instrument she signs he
/ must sign, too.
By the modern law a married woman
/ ia liable for all the wrongs, or forts, as
( they are called, which she commits
/ She is liable for SANDER, for fraud, for
burning property poisoning geese, etc.
/ She may be liable even for the wrongs
1 Of an agent appointed by her, though
/ at common law she could not be, be-
/ cause she could not contract, and,
/ therefore, could not appoint an agent.
/ For wrongs of any kind, except those
I against the man she narries, done be-
I fore marriage, she is liable afterward,
/ the same as though she were unmar-
Tied, and generally her husband is IL
able also. She also continues liable for
/ crime committed before marriage, and
may be prosecuted for any crimes she
! commits afteTWard, with a few exCep-
tons in which her husband is also an
active participant. and. being so, is
l deemed the sole offender.
All interesting RUE VI INV III us dp-
/ plicatiOn to women is the statute Of
/ limitations If A owes B a note drawn
in the usual way, which is not paid at
the end of six years, the law presumes,
! nevertheless, that It was paid. and 3
| cannot sue A for the money. The stat
ute cuts off his right to sue. B cannot
get anything from A unless he is will
ing to paw, or makes a new promise
that he will pay il. This statute does
efr-1
! a should owe G Ga married woman)a a
note that became due while she was
married, and ne did not pay it within
six years, her right to sue him is not
/ cut off. The reason given for this rule
Is that a married woman cannot sue
4 alone, and, therefore, her right to col
lect the note is not perfect as long as
she is a married woman. Of course, she
/ would be obliged to sue within six
years after the end of her marriage re-
latiOn, or lose her right to recover at
all. 1t is contended in some Of the
states where her right to sue on con-
tracts is as perfect as though she Syere
| unmarried, that this rule no longer pre-
| walls, and that there is no exception
in the statute of Limitation in her favor
The wide departure in the law with
respect to the legal rights and liabili-
ties of a married woman may be illus
y =
married woman died and her husband
/ declined to pay the bills of the physic.
ian and undertaken. Naturally enough
| the law has gone 80 far in permitting
/ a married woman to keep her property
and make contracts that the sorrOwing
/ husband may have thought that his
I wife had made a contract with both
the doctor and the undertaken, and if
she had, respect for her memory should
| keep him from interfering The court
however, decided that a husband ought
to pay such bills, but if ne failed to do
50 her estate could be held for them. A
/ similar decision was rendered not long
/ ago in Pennsylvania. In like manner, if
/ a dying woman should make a contract
for her gravestOne, her estate clearly
could be held for the amount.
.LZAu<~~