The Bienville Democrat. [volume] (Arcadia, Bienville Parish, La.) 1912-1980, 1921-10-20
WOMEN PROTEST AGAINST
SEPARATE PROPERTY BILL

LII Tie lduAc VI tuc COuStlfdlNC W.
men who comprise the large majorit
Of the women of this state, we ask yo1
to vote against the Separate Propert,
| Bill blouse Bill No. 93) introduced
by Llr. Dymond.
Men will, upon serious consideration
turn down a measure that would taxi
from women one Of the best safeguards
that our laws have given her, in so fal
as her financial protection is concern
ed They will not punish the majority
of the women of the state, among whom
are their own daughters and sisters, be-
cause a small but clamOr0uS group Of
militaristic women demand that by
crrutc measures they prove themselves
the equal or peer of men by exercising
every privilege of the male, even if
by doing 50 they work an actual hard.
ship upon many other women.
However, it is with the following
quoted statement in the New Orleans
States and its equivalent in the Shreve-
port Times that l take particular is,
sue: it, referring to the Dymond
bill, is said to be a counterpart Of the
Stafford bill Of 1916 and signed by
Gov. Pleasant"
1t is true that my husband during
the year 1916 and also 1918, signed the
Stafford bill giving a woman the leg
al right to contract, and bind, and OBJ
Iigate herself personally with reference
to her separate and paraphernal prop
crty. There followed conflict of
opinion among lawyers Of the state as
to whether this went so far as to
make it legal for a woman to mortgage
her separate and paraphernal property |
to defray her husbands debts. The |
Supreme Court of Louisiana finally |
passed upon this point, declaring that |
he wife could mortgage her separate
md paraphernal property but not for
lebts contracted by her husband be-
ore or during the marriage. Lawyers
till wrangled over it, so that in 1920
Judge Gilbert Lupre very wisely in.
reduced and got successfully through
he legislature an amendment to the
stafford bill setting in clear and un-
terms that a woman can
ot bind herself for her husbands
ebts.
In all other respects she is a free
gent in so far as alternating, selling
+ mcrtgaging her separate and para
hernal property. This law now ,
:ands on our statute books and should
emain there, not only as a safeguard
,r women, but as silent testimonial
the unselfish spirit Of the men who
gislaterd against their own sex in s
vor Of women.
| am reliably informed that Mrs.
ydia W. Holmes is authority for the
atement that the Dymond measure r.
hich she is sponsoring is in reality n
e one signed by my husband in 1916. II
1e Supreme Court Of the state ha. #
cided to the contrary as to the point II
question, and l think that its inter. IL u,
citation would take precedence over D.
7 opinion.
Also it must not be lost sight of tina til
lille 1t is true my husband was gov wi
lor in 1916 and 1918, he never pre-.
lded to write, or have written, meas ~
IS for the legislature. Nor did he r.
o measures passed overwhelmingly to
that honorable body. He consider.
himself its servant, not its master
colonel Pleasant and are in entire .
ord' in 50 far as l know, regarding r
$ equal rights for women legislation
ut must not be overlooked that ]
acting as citizen of the State Of
reserves and is exercising tn,
1t to her individual opinion upon
and all other subjects.
igned: MRS. Lp RyRD
lrman' Conservative League Of Wo.
len Rights Advocates.
MRS. R. G. PLEASANT.
MRS. NJ. R. PURNELL