Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1902-12-28
called his honor's attention to the feet
but he dismissed the complaint as Of 20
consequence.
BEATING ONES WIFE.

Something OF 7utter-not to menHnn
! much suppressed feminine indigna ttonrTY
has been caused throughout the MMdle
West by an alleged decision of the Mn
nrsota Supreme Court. which. according
TO newspaper reports, has held that "a
nan has q right to beat his wife. Unfer-
tunately. the circumstances which iedSthe
heater to chastsse the fair beatee in ques-
ton are not mentioned. SO we are not
prepared TO discuss the case confidently.
either from a legal or casuisYical
viewpoint And moreover. we have before
lis the views OF several ladies. which ARE
! much more forcib4y expressed than eny.i
thing we might say. 4 81
Mrs. Percy niddrington. an English
woman of note. now in Chicago. when
interviewed. about ...e matter, said-auong
other things:
"It IS not my mission here to find fanit'
with. The laws of any State. but it seems.
TO ME that this is the last stage Of barr
barisrn # is TO be placed in the same
class with lynching.'' -
Miss Jane Adams. although never mar
rie5 and consequently still unbeaten, says
that .wife-beating is cruel and unjustffta-
BILE under any circumstances She thinks.
some OF the judges must have been IN.
nuenced by personal feeling IN the mat75t
Ter" which NC consrue to mean a secret
longing to have an Understanding with
their own consorts.
Mss Julia Lathrop. another OF sLhe
weaker ones vino. up TO this time. has
run no risks by getting married. very.
truly, says IF the Supreme Courts in,
the country were TO lcgalize the whipping
Of wives by their husbands. no sensible
woman could ever De brought to believe
that there was any righteousness init.
Quite SO: we fancy that few Of the la.
dies would DE enthusiastic over their
chances for punishment.
Catherine Waught McCulloch. who is,
too sensible even 10 spell her Christian
name With K and practices law in Chi
cago. shows that she at least knows
the entire legal history OF wife-beaung.c
Says she: s. u
The United States inherited. as the
basis Of IFS legal code. the old Engiisl,
common law. which sanctions wife-Deat-
ing within limitations. This old law! OBJ
tanned in all the States until modified
BY legislative enactment of the States
themselves. ] am not familiar with the
laws of Minnesota, and do not know
whether The old English law is still IN
force there. If il IS a man has a right
10 c1- n ia ct;a 1- toll
er tnan his thumb whether he has good
reason to believe she mas been unfaithfuIo
or not. rsz
''If the Minnesota Legislature has pass
ed no statutes altering the old Ia W. gtflei .
ruling OF The Supreme Court. which! l9Y1
the way established precedent for the
future was the only proper ruling under
the law. cannot but think there must
have been some mistake in the newspaper
report Of the courts decision. for it is
hard to believe that a code descended
from the MIDDLE ages and in many re-
spacts brutal. should be in effective ope-
ration in an unmodff1ed form in a State
OF the American Union at the beginning
OF the twentieth century" 21oosi
Judge Tuthill also Of the Windy City.
characterizes the decision as absurd and
He says: ''T have no pa !
thence with Judge who Will make suchra
ruling. L seems probable that the real
meaning OF the court III this case has
been misinterp-eted. but il the judge
meant 10 legalize wife-beattng.
he belongs TO the middle ages
In the face OF such authorities as those
quoted in the foregoing paragrap hs. we
can only conclude that the Minnesota. ju-
rist who rendered the decision has maaea
q fatal nlista!ze-possibly owing to his
vife's cooking. Or it may be that The
precedent is the logical outcome OF seve-
raj recent legal opinions holding that
q wife has a right 10 go through her
husbands pockets '.unbeanownst'' TO him.
and to take therefrom whatever sum she
car TO help run the house. st. Louis
judge SO decided q few days ago, While 2
hen-pecked jurist in Maine even wenttsssoo.
far as TO hold q woman guiltless after
she had burrowed beneath the pillow OF e
snoozing consort and distracted $1,000
from q 81 ,o50 wad which he was sleeping
upon. Il