Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1909-10-28
YouGe

oeath OF the father, succeeds to the same
rights but seldom is she liable for her
ch1lds support. A man prominent in set
Element work has said that it was not
necessary to make the support of the
child legal liability on the mother, for
she rarely. If ever, failed to recognize her
moral liability in this respect
When the child reaches It's ma jority
and earlier. If the young woman marries.
the emancipation from parental control
is complete, and the parent has no more
financial responsibility for his child than
for stranger.
In the case of children born out Of we'd
lock the mother alone is recognized. un-
less by statute the subsequent marriage
of the parents or. parental recognition
gives the offspring q legal status.
While only the English colonies that
afterward became states took the statute
of Charles II, yet many Of the western
states practically enacted the same laws.
Probably Kansas was the first to recog-
nice the father and mother as the joint
head Of the household, having Jointly the
responsibility for the welfare of their Off
spring
AS early as 1860. for brief time. there
was similar law on the statute book in
New York, but it was SO far In advance
Of civilization and public opinion that 1t
was repealed. 80;
Wives No Longer Servants.
When the Federation of Womens Clubs
in the District Of Columbia first began to
agitate the repeal of the statute of
Charles II in 1894. two hundred and
thirty-four years after it was enacted In
Great Britain. there were varying opin-
ions upon the subject, but the twentieth
century woman as unit said:
I'VE are no longer the servants of our
fathers, husbands. brothers and sons. We
60 to college with our brothers and sweet
hearts. and we carry of our full proper
ton Of honors. The care and education
of the rising generation are largely In our
hands, whether as mothers or teachers.
There are four million women wage
earners in the country. many of whom
are the real support of the family. We
are worthi'y represented In all the learned
profession and In all the great move
ments Of the day. whether educational,
philanthr0pic. scientific industrial.
Shall we then bring up our children under
the laws enacted In the seventeenth GEN.
tury-before women and children had
come into their heritage?'
The District Of Columbia was the first
battle-ground on the Atlantic coast for
joint guardianship. and the District Fed
Grafton Of Women's Clubs was the organ
ization that. through Its committee on
legislation. prepared and had introduced
in the Congress Of the United States
bill giving married women the right to
their own earnings and making parents
the joint guardians Of their children, and
repeating the former laws on these sub
jects.
At this time publicity was given to
some very sad cases under the old law.
In one Of Mrs. Hearst's free kindergar-
tens beautiful and unusually happy
little girl of five years came to school one
day. evidently very unhappy. A strange
man had appeared in the home who
claimed to be her father. He had been
away over two years, and In that time
the family had been supported by the
young mother and cared for by the grand
mother The man had fled the District
to escape arrest for some crime. and
shortly after his disappearance the second
babe was born. On his return he forced
his wife to resume marital relations and
support him. by the threat that under
the law the children were his. not hers.
Little Mary conf1ded to her teacher her
fear Of him. and wondered II "all papas
were SO cruel" until at last. with the
mothers tacit consent. she remained all
the time with teacher Although he
had never contributed to the support Of
wife or children. and had never seen the
babe Of two years. he was strictly within
his legal rights. for his wife's earnings
not hers. 1t made no matter that he had
never fulfilled any Of the natural or
moral responsibilities Of father. For
tunately in this case, the man having
committed another violent crime left for
parts unknown.
This case was not single or peculiar
one. In many instances women were
forced to live with and support indolent
husbands "for fear he would exercise his
right to the custody Of the children"
The bill referred to was first introduced
In the Senate. and. following the usual
course OF business. referred to the proper
committee to be especially considered by
subcommittee. The chairman of the
subcommittee promptly declared himself
as opposed to the joint guardianship
clause, on the ground that "men had
more sense than women" and should
guardian other than the mother After a
long conference and much argument the
chairman still remaining obstinate, one of
the women advocates. herself a widowed
mother as well as a lawyer hurled at
him her final argument: "If woman
Is ieft with little children, she never fails
to both support and take care OF them;
II a man Is left widower with little
children he makes haste to get a young
woman to marry him and take care of
them. This sally caused the senator to
1aughingly beat a hasty retreat safely
beyond the sacred doors Of the Senate
chamber.
deep chagrin. that the remark was sus-
ceptible Of personal application by the
senator addressed. She awaited in fear
and trembling the result. but In a few
days was made happy by having the bill
favorably reported and passed.
vote for the bill as reported responded:
Don't waste any time on me; I must
vote for 1t. am here by reason OF
women's votes'' That was a convincing
argument for equal suffrage
1t Ia conceded by every one that in an
will provide the home and maintain the
family and the mother he the home