The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram., 1911-03-10
DUTCH MARRIAGE
Laws ARE UNJUST
Don't Put Mothers on Equal.
ity with Fathers-Pow-
cr of Ten Is Abused.

Chicago, March 10.-A correspondent
OF the Daily News, writing from The
Hague, says: Recent discussions OF
the faults of the marriage laws and
the advocacy OF few noted statesmen
and writer's Of free or common law
marriage led the correspondent of the
Daily News the other day TO have a
talk on the subject with Miss +. c.
Van Dorp. the first woman to take up
the study OF law In this country, and
TO gain "A considerable practice.
what Ia your opinion OF the mar.
riage law OF Holland?" the correspon-
dent asked.
1T is very bad indeed" she replied.
at is most unjust TO women. Perhaps
the most grieyously unjust clause Is
that which gives the sole power over
the children to the father The moth
or has no legal right whatever with
respect to her own children? The
meancst advantage In often taken Of
this by men who wish to be disagree
able TO their wives: they wish to
make them suffer through their chill
drcn. A very common case, often
brought to me by distracted mothers.
is that their children have been taken
away from them and sent TO boarding
school or TO some family in another
place. when she knows that this not
for the god OF tho children, but sim
ply to annoy her.
Cause Of Wasted Lives.
Far worse are those cases where
drunken or immoral fathers drive
their children to actions that imperil
body and soul and which the mothers
are entirely powerless to prevent un-
I'll few years ago. when the enact
ment OF the child law made II posi-
bic for them to appeal to the district
Judge and board OF child guardians
But case must be very bad indeed
before such a step is taken. and the
evil example set by fathers is the
cause Of many wasted life in Hol-
land.
III we now turn to those clauses in
the marriage law dealing with proper.
ty we see another injusticee. II. as
IN usually the case here, husband and
wife are welded in community of
property this means that the husband
alone can use the property. dispose Of
II. and even waste II without the wife
being able legally to protest. On the
other hand. she may not in any way
touch II. Her signature alone to a
receipt, a bill, or a deed Is not valid
and she has nothing whatever to say
even about the money she herself
earns. Her husband may take II from
her and spend 1t as he likes. This is
the cause Of endless misery, especially
among the laboring people.
but did not the government laws
on labor contracts and the govern
ment postal bank in great measure OBJ
viate this abuse?"
ut Is true that according to that
law the woman worker has the right
to place her earnings in the postal
savings bank and that her husband
can not touch the money as long as 1t
Is there. but neither can she make
use of II TO buy necessaries for the
the household. Note this carefully,
that by the law married woman
may only dispose Of her money in and
for tho household. while a man has
free disposal Of his money. II the
husband demands the money she has
drawn from the bank she has no legal
right to refuse It. and he can take it
to the nearest dramshop to squander
It. The savings Of the wife may also
be seized for the husbands debts.
Marriage Contracts.
"Now you will say 1t isn't necessary
TO marry In community of property
and that contracts and settlements
can be made. So they can be. but ev.
en- the most careful way Of tying up
property for the use Of the woman on
ly cannot annul the law, which says
that the man is the head Of the house