The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1903-07-12
7VE CAUSE OF WOMAN.
,>GES ~ WOMAN'S LEGAL
nnsJTION IN MASSiCHU SETS.

pxen Within Few Wears They Have Been
a., ,..,, AS n New Edition OF q Twenty
Ysar-Old Book Shows-Passing or the
CANNON Law, As Far rs women Are
concerncd-"O obey" in the Marriage
ssr,lcr--" Ing Away" the Bride
-wr. elders Gloomy FOrebOdng.
s,ri,nR illustration Of the great change
-Lioh i taking place in the laws relating
'.,,nep is furnished in a new book en-
.,,,od "Women Under the Law of Massa-
"buse,ts." by Henry II. Sprague of Boston
Ti,,Io Brown Il Coz The author pre-
aorod n similar work less than twenty
rsors ago. hut so many have been the legal
t.,,storrnations that it was permitted to
m ont Of print long since. The English
common law, which our ancestors naturally
hrouoht to this country was, Mr.. Sprague
avs made up Of old maxims and customs
xhichwere repeated and practissd previous
,o the time of printing. They
hsuan with the sayings and doings or
,ime when each man was the subject or
r,ssal of n petty king or lord who assumed
~ rule over small piece of territory, who
was constantly fighting with a neighboring
lard for more, and who allotted out the Use
or this land to the men who would
bslp fight his battles The best fighters
received the most favors. While
a man was called on constantly to devote
Ria life TO the State, and to divide in I'M
nleasant proportions. his possessions with
his lord and king, it was the son who, to
the exclusion of the daughter, received
a, the death of the father the whole Of his
lnds, saddled, however, with the fathers
obligations to the king and the State.
"The husband, while his actions were
40 controlled by his superiors, could turn
about and control and correct his wife.
The loss Of man, then, was naturally
more serious matter to the State than the
loss Of woman Therefore, il man killed
his wife it was no more than II he murdered
stranger; but if ii wife killed her husband
she was punished as if she had slain the
king, for she had slain the kings defender.
and she was sentenced to be drawn and
burned alive as if for treason
An examination OF every feature OF this
English common law regarding women
shows the small value placed upon them
and the utter contempt in which they were
held In less than twenty years, however,
after our ancestors began to breathe the
free air of America, they commenced to
modify slightly its rigorous provisions. In
1888 punishment was fixed for those who
-enveagled a mans daughters OF maybe
servants into marriage In l6oO a
fine Of clio or corporal punishment was
provided for the man who struck his wife,
or the woman who struck her husband--a
more severe penalty than prevails at the
present day in most places There were few
more small improvements during the next
two centuries and gradual recognition OF
the unmarried women as an entity. a human
being with individual rights and RESPONSE
lties But the woman who married was
still rega rded as dead in the law, absolutely
swept out of legal existence.
1t was not until about sixty years ago
that any radical statute amendments were
enacted in recognition Of wife s rights, In
1915 she was permitted by an ante-marrlag &c
contract to hold her own separate property,
but could not use it in trade or commerce.
In 1855 she was allowed to carry on business
IN her own name and possess her earnings,
under certain restrictions She was also
given absolute control of her separate prop
erty, however obtained. There was slow
hut steady improvement in the legal posi-
ton Of married women for the next forty
five years. and on Dec. 81 1901, the last re-
vision of the laws took effect which pro-
vided for an equal Inheritance Of property
by widow or widower, and made many
liberal provisions for wives
to the property and personal rights, Obli-
cations and disabilities of married wcm-
en-, presenting n most valuable and inter
estng study. Nearly 200 references are
made TO legal decisions which have been
rendered on these questions during the last
half century One chapter is given TO the
public privileges and disabilities of women,
the author holding that the one in large
measure balances the other. He argues
this point with a legal acumen which would
be very convincing if ono did not know the
other side. "If the advantages which men
now have under the law over women" he
says, were 10 be weighed against the adj
rantageS which women possess over men,
II would he "A moot question as to which
side would turn the scales.
Men in general always have held this
opinion, Those of Massachusetts have been
275 years trying in an imperfect way 10 mti-
gate the atrOciolls bnrbarities of the English
common law, AMI yet Blackstone ge !test
OF legal commentators, in summing zap the
provisions Of that very law, declared with
lnctulus pride, $50 great a favOrte is TIE
female Sex in the laws of England 1t
seams mere trihe to the author that all
the women Of the Stale are dsfranchised
except for fragmentary vote for school
committee and that they are barred from
all hut few unimportant. Offices. This Is
compensated for. he thinks. by exemption
from military and jury duties and the pay
mont Of a poll tax. But only a fraction of
the men in Massachusetts ever render
military or jury duty, and failure to pay the
poll tax is almost Universal while no one
OF these three is made qualification for
the suffrage
In the marriage relation" he saws,
there Is undoubtedly some authority
given 20 the husband over the wife. He is,
10 a slight degree entitled TO her serN ices,
and TO a greater extent TO those of the
MINOR children. and he is endowed with
Tie headship of the family. There il in
measure the presumption that personal
property in the possession Of the husband
beIongs to him" These Inequalities he
considers are tYscI by laws requiring him
70 support the family and by various
U.'hcrS which on the surface seem to favor
me husband, But the author ignores
entirely the important fact that all the Joint
acc' nulatIons during marriage, through
ll' labor industry thrift economy and