The labor world. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1896-current, 1914-09-05
WOMEN \ { D | | !: !.
!: 3*317 - :-7.1Gl< -'....-~'c-a:; ri
! FURTHER !. ]. ADVANCE | ]
- uOuVuhH n0v"vOk
+ 81. y,
Review of Old Battle For
!; Property Rights Same OBJ :
jections Urged.


:. I'VE all agree that women are bet-
ter off today than they have ever
been since the beginning of our civil
ization. WHY thens aren'ts>We con-
tent? Unfortunately som eAof sus are.
But some v,ofs,usIs havA been content
ever since the days when we were
denied souls. If it had not, been for
the disseminated ones we should still
be soulless as we'll as <Voteless.. When
We wanted to gain the privilege of
souls we were. met with certain OBJ
jections; when we revolted against
the power of life and death which
the Roman father, or husband held
over us we were met WITH Mnltlar. op-
position; when we .ventured toethink
we should own, and control :oilr own
property, here they came again, our
old opponents, the objections to wq-'
mems advance.
|" And now today, when we are ask
ing for the POLITICAL Equality which
all men in this country have, the
very same age old enemies are mar
shaled in force against us,
A Debate in 1868.
Here are some extracts from a de-
0ooo~
in 1868. They might we'll be- used
today as anti-suffrage arguments:
This is measure which is calcu-
lated to destroy that good feeling
which itsis so desirable should exist
between husband and wife"
1T will add another element to
deter young men from entering into
matrimony by introducing new seeds
of discard"
"A proposal such as that now made
would result If passed into law in
turning England into a beer garden
and every woman into a shrew."
An honorable member, Mr.. ;Lopes,
moved the rejection of this measure.
saying, There are not per cent of
the married women Of England in IA
vor of the bill.'' ~-'~ :
Another honorable gentleman, de-
Tending the bill, felt that instead of
lessening the respect of men for wom-
en-, with an increase of independence
such as this bill Will secure there will
be an increase ofrespect for women
of real respect-which is a thousand
times more valuable than the con-
ventional po1iteness which it is al
ways so easy to pay
:; Her Own Not Hers.
! :Arthur Hobhouse, in writing some
what later on the same subject, said,
NO wonder II by all who are timid,
by all who are superstitious, by the
majority Of those who obey sentiment
rather than reasonE and by many who
possess g large share Of reason and
judgm ent, any alteration 1of ! such a
law is regarded, according to the
character of the mind, wifi fear, with
horror, with disgust Or with calm dis
approval" I.ss :::.57s
SBut the measure under discussion
was not a woman suffrage bill, as one
might well suppose. 1T was a bill to
allow married women to own their
own property. '&
That mysterious and sacred thing,
the common law, decreed that the
personal property of married WON
an. whether possessed before or ac-
CURED after her marriage, was not
hers at all, but was the absolute pos
session Of her husband.
Old Law "Not Harsh.'
Whatever our view on the subject
is today, Lord. Penzance found In 1868:
| mon law not undu1y harsh in the case
| OF the married woman, but it. is en-
| tirely in accordance with the feelings
of the people Of this country and pro-
| ceeds on the Ineligible principle that
the wife Is the weaker, vessel and
| that the: husband SHOULD be- at the
head, of the establishment :'4~s
We had, however, a liberal defender
| who explained that the common law
was founded on the physical incapaci-
ty Of the wife ;tacperform the feudal
duties in times when property was in
separately connected with military
| services" those times presume bly,
| having passed away.
In America the same opposition was
encountered, and even greater disas-'
| tiers were predicted. In Ohio in 1850
1t was urged against a similar bill
that ito adopt it would throw a. whole
population, morally and politically,
into confusion,' and that this
doctrine of separate estate will stifle
all the finer feelings and blast the
brightest, fairest, happiest, hopes of
the human family"
1t is now argued that women will
! oe no petter OF With the ballot and
that the majority Of women? do not
want to vote. But neither did they
want to own their property. " j.
The objections to woman suffrage
have been we'll summed UP in this
nineteenth century debate: Sir; have
we not got along for 1900 years, and
shall we change now?''
- -
WAR CUTS COPPER MARKET