Year: 1879

REPRESENTATION OF MINOIITIEs. The act of 1877, allowing authorities repre- 1 sentation upon certain town boards is an ex cellent measure, founded upon just principle | and adopting.a method of carrying it into ef- 1 feet already known to the Connecticut law. It should be extended to the election of consta- bles and grand jurors.

 Useful and convenient as the method of se- 1 curing to mnorities representation adopted in our Connecticut statutes has proved itself to be, it is by no means the most perfect plan 'Ssloie. Minority representation is equitable because when properly applied 1t makes the board or representative body chosen. an eX act epitome of the entire body of voters It is needed because it will destroy the power of rings, of wire pullers and political agents. and emancipate the voter and the person voted for from their power.

 Just as the older form of choosing officers by a majority vote recognizes the existence of majority party.only the newer method applied in our StatuteS--i. e. the 'iNnite(i vHtR"-rec- OgniZes the existence of but two parties. A perfect plan of minority representation must, however provide ferthe possibility of as many parties as there are officers in the board to be chosen. For instance, in town of 800 voters Ii board of five officers is to be chosen and one party has 260 votes another 40, and still another 100, the old system would give the majority three of the five and the larger minor ity two and the smaller minority none A juster arrangement would give the latter the one member to which their vote fairly entitled them. The remedy for this defect is not diff cult. Plans of cumulative voting have been devised and can easily be adopted in practice, which give smaller minorities as well as larger ones representation.

 Our statute of 1S77'has commended itself to favor srOm the fact that it tends to expose of hclal rings in the majority party But the history of political corruption shows that rings have sometimes been formed of the office hold CTS of both the regular political parties To prevent such combinations every opportunity should be given to smaller minorities to break any rings formed by the politicians of the greater parties.

 Fuller reference is made to the methods of minority representations because this reform is yet in it's infancy, and its best working plans cannot be too early adopted,

 PROPERTY OF MARRIED WOMEN

 So many and such imI ortant changes have been recently made in the property rights of married women in this state, that several in- cidental subjects of legislation require your attention. To some of them I will briefly refer.

 Where the wife is legally entitled to the income of property. and where the husband has no interest whatever in it, as he does not have by the acts of 1877 and 1878, the taxes thereon ought to be assessed against her, and such property should not be set in the lists of the husband, as now provided by statute. An act requiring that the separate property of married women should be set in lists against themselves, at the last session of the legisla- ture, failed ot passing. mainly on the ground that it would add greatly to the labors of as- sessors. venture the hope that there will be some way found to relieve this class of public servants. and that law so simple and so obviously just this, will not again fail of being enacted.

 The equitable separate property so frequent ly set apart for married women under the laws of England seldom occurs in Connecticut practice. By the statute passed at the last session of the legislature it was provided that ''all property hereafter acquired by any mar ried women shall be held by her to her sole and separate use" Our courts have decided that the surviving husband has no successery right in the deceased wifes personal estate Where, however. there are children. he would seem to be entitled to a life use of her separate real estate. The distinction is purely an arbi trary one. The act of 1877 gives husband and wife equal successory rights in each others es- tates. Why should not the husband be given an equal successory right in the wife's sepa- rate property whether real or personal?

 X husbands interest in his wife's property under the old law. and the wifes estate under the law of 1877, are liable in certain cases for the support of the family. Her separate es- tate under the law of 1878 would net seem to be subject to that burden. Is there any good reason why the rule of liability should not be made uniform?

 WOMAN SUFFRAGE.

 

 gle as we'll as married, will confront you Shall they be permitted to vote-at least at all municipal meetings? An unmarried woman holding property is required to pay taxes the same as man. The acts of 1877 and 1878 give to married women the right to hold prop erty as entirely beyond the control of their husbands, as though they had never been mar ried. You will undoubtedly provide that all such property shall be Set in tax lists against the married women themselves. And vet you do not allow these women to vote Would it not be right to allow them to vote in all places where taxes may be laid, as in town meetings, city and borough meetings. and in school dis trict meetings! In the session of 1877 and again in 1878 the house of Representatives. pass ed bills granting municipal suffrage to proper ty-holdlng women. Such an act obliges no one to vote. It simply permits women who hold property to have voice in appropriating portion of theincome of their property to the various purposes made necessary by the biting taxation of these later days. The real objec- tlon to this measure springs from the fear that 1t may prove the entering wedge for full wo- man suffrage. Should such law work badly, It will De in the power of any legislature, chos- en solely by male suffrage. to repeal it.

 The cry of taxation without representation" has had great influence in the history of Amer. lca Connecticut, true to its traditional love for fairness, so long as colored men were not allowed to vote, exempted their property from taxation. Will you do this for women leave you face to face with the question.

 TAXATION.

 Adam Smith, speaking of taxation, says that ''the expense of government to the indi- | YlQual2 Of nation ie liLo