A brief summary in plain language of the most important laws concerning women : $b together with a few observations thereon

A BRIEF SUMMARY,

  IN PLAIN LANGUAGE,

  OF

  THE MOST IMPORTANT

  LAWS CONCERNING WOMEN;

  TOGETHER WITH

  A FEW OBSERVATIONS THEREON.

  BY BARBARA LEIGH SMITH.

  SECOND EDITION, REVISED WITH ADDITIONS.

  LONDON:
  HOLYOAKE AND CO., 147, FLEET STREET.

         *       *       *       *       *

  1856.

  PRICE THREEPENCE.




LAWS CONCERNING WOMEN.


LEGAL CONDITION OF UNMARRIED WOMEN OR SPINSTERS.

[Sidenote: A single woman.]

A single woman has the same rights to property, to protection from the
law, and has to pay the same taxes to the State, as a man.

[Sidenote: No political franchise.]

Yet a woman of the age of twenty-one, having the requisite property
qualifications, cannot vote in elections for members of Parliament.

[Sidenote: Has a parochial vote.]

A woman duly qualified can vote upon parish questions, and for parish
officers, overseers, surveyors, vestry clerks, etc.

[Sidenote: Heiress.]

If her father or mother die _intestate_ (_i.e._, without a will) she
takes an equal share with her brothers and sisters of the personal
property (_i.e._, goods, chattels, moveables, leases for years of
houses or land), but her eldest brother, if she have one, and his
children, even daughters, will take the _real_ property (_i.e._, not
personal property, but all other, as freehold houses and land, etc.),
as the heir-at-law; males and their issue being preferred to females;
if, however, she have sisters only, then all the sisters take the real
property equally. If she be an only child, and no parent surviving, she
is entitled to all the intestate real and personal property.

[Sidenote: No public employments.]

The church and nearly all offices under government are closed to women.
The Post Office affords some little employment to them; but there is no
important office which they can hold, with the single exception of that
of Sovereign.

The professions of law and medicine,[1] whether or not closed by law,
are closed in fact. They may engage in trade, and may occupy inferior
situations, such as matron of a charity, sextoness of a church, and
a few parochial offices are open to them. Women are occasionally
governors of prisons for women, overseers of the poor, and parish
clerks. A woman may be ranger of a park; a woman can take part in the
government of a great empire by buying East India Stock.

[Sidenote: Domestic servant.]

A servant and a master or mistress are bound by a verbal or written
agreement.

[Sidenote: Seduction.]

If a woman is seduced, she has no remedy against the seducer; nor has
her father, excepting as he is considered in law as being her master
and she his servant, and the seducer as having deprived him of her
services.

These are the only special laws concerning single women: the law speaks
of men only, but women are affected by all the laws, and incur the same
responsibilities in all their contracts and doings as men.


LAWS CONCERNING MARRIED WOMEN.

[Sidenote: Marriage.]

Matrimony is a civil and indissoluble contract between a consenting man
and woman of competent capacity.

[Sidenote: Prohibitions.]

These marriages are prohibited:--A widower with his deceased wife’s
sister; a widow with the brother of her deceased husband; a widower
with his deceased wife’s sister’s daughter, for she is by affinity in
the same degree as a niece to her uncle by consanguinity; a widower
with a daughter of his deceased wife by a former husband; and a widower
with his deceased wife’s mother’s sister. Consanguinity or affinity,
where the children are illegitimate, is equally an impediment.

A lunatic or idiot cannot lawfully contract a marriage, but insanity
after marriage does not make the marriage null and void.

A lunatic may contract a marriage during a lucid interval. Deaf and
dumb people may marry by signs.

The consent of the father or guardians is necessary to the marriage of
an _infant_ (_i.e._, a person under twenty-one), unless the marriage
takes place by banns. The consent of the mother is not necessary if
there be a father or a guardian appointed by him.

[Sidenote: Bigamy.]

A second marriage while a husband or wife is living is absolutely void,
and, except under certain circumstances, which raise a presumption
of ignorance of the fact of the former husband or wife being alive,
felony, and punishable by transportation.

[Sidenote: Breach of promise.]

An agreement to marry made by a man and woman who do not come under
any of these disabilities, is a contract of betrothment, and either
party can bring an action upon a refusal to complete the contract in a
superior court of Common Law.

[Sidenote: Celebration Banns.]

Marriages may be celebrated as a religious ceremony after the requisite
public proclamations or banns, or as a secular form.

[Sidenote: Civil marriage.]

[Sidenote: Superintendent Registrar.]

The object of the Act[2] for authorising civil marriages was to
relieve Dissenters and those who could not conscientiously join in
the formulary of the Church. Due provision is made for necessary
publicity, and the marriage can be legally contracted in a Register
Office, or in the presence of the Registrar in a place licensed for the
purpose. Marriages in the Church of England (without banns or license),
marriages of Quakers, Jews, Dissenters, and Roman Catholics, and
marriages according to the civil or secular form, must be preceded by a
given notice from one of the parties to the Superintendent-Registrar of
the district.

[Sidenote: Scotch marriages.]

The marriage law of Scotland is founded upon the _Canon Law_ (_i.e._,
rules drawn from Scriptures and the writings of the Church). In
Scotland there are regular and irregular marriages. Irregular marriages
are legal without any ceremony, and are of three sorts.

1. By a promise of marriage given in writing or proved by a reference
to the oath of the party, followed by consummation.

2. By the solemn mutual declaration of a man and woman, either verbally
or in writing, expressing that the parties consent to take each other
for husband and wife.

3. By notorious cohabitation as man and wife.

Persons living in England and having illegitimate children, cannot by
going to Scotland, there marrying, and then returning, legitimatise
their children in England. A domicile (or abiding home) in Scotland,
and a marriage of the father and mother, legitimatises the children in
Scotland whenever born.

[Sidenote: Foreign marriages valid.]

Lawful marriages in foreign countries are valid in England unless they
are directly contrary to our laws.

Marriage with a deceased wife’s sister is valid in England, if it has
been celebrated in a country where such marriage is legal, provided the
parties were at the time of the marriage domiciled in such country.

[Sidenote: Married women no legal existence.]

A man and wife are one person in law; the wife loses all her rights as
a single woman, and her existence is entirely absorbed in that of her
husband. He is civilly responsible for her acts; she lives under his
protection or cover, and her condition is called coverture.

[Sidenote: A husband has a right to the person of his wife.]

A woman’s body belongs to her husband; she is in his custody, and he
can enforce his right by a writ of _habeas corpus_.

[Sidenote: Her personal property becomes his.]

What was her personal property before marriage, such as money in hand,
money at the bank, jewels, household goods, clothes, etc., becomes
absolutely her husband’s, and he may assign or dispose of them at his
pleasure whether he and his wife live together or not.

[Sidenote: He takes her chattels real.]

A wife’s _chattels real_ (_i.e._, estates held during a term of years,
or the next presentation to a church living, etc.) become her husband’s
by his doing some act to appropriate them; but, if the wife survives,
she resumes her property.

[Sidenote: Equity.]

_Equity_ is defined to be a correction or qualification of the law,
generally made in the part wherein it faileth, or is too severe. In
other words, the correction of that wherein the law, by reason of its
universality, is deficient. While the Common Law gives the whole of a
wife’s personal property to her husband, the Courts of Equity, when
he proceeds therein to recover property in right of his wife, oblige
him to make a settlement of some portion of it upon her, if she be
unprovided for and virtuous.

If her property be under £200, or £10 a-year, a Court of Equity will
not interpose.

[Sidenote: Her right to support.]

Neither the Courts of Common Law nor Equity have any direct power to
oblige a man to support his wife--the Ecclesiastical Courts (_i.e._,
Courts held by the Queen’s authority as governor of the Church, for
matters which chiefly concern religion) and a Magistrate’s court at the
instance of her parish alone can do this.

[Sidenote: His power over her real property.]

A husband has a freehold estate in his wife’s lands during the joint
existence of himself and his wife, that is to say, he has absolute
possession of them as long as they both live. If the wife dies without
children, the property goes to her heir, but if she has borne a child
capable of inheriting, her husband holds possession until his death.

[Sidenote: A married woman’s earnings not her own but her husband’s.]

Money earned by a married woman belongs absolutely to her husband;
that and all sources of income, excepting those mentioned above, are
included in the term personal property.

[Sidenote: A wife’s will.]

By the particular permission of her husband she can make a will of her
personal property, for by such a permission he gives up his right. But
he may revoke his permission at any time before _probate_ (_i.e._, the
exhibiting and proving a will before the Ecclesiastical Judge having
jurisdiction over the place where the party died).

[Sidenote: A mother’s rights over children.]

The legal custody of children belongs to the father. During the
lifetime of a sane father, the mother has no rights over her children,
except a limited power over infants, and the father may take them from
her and dispose of them as he thinks fit.

If there be a legal separation of the parents, and there be neither
agreement nor order of Court, giving the custody of the children to
either parent, then the _right to the custody of the children_ (except
for the nutriment of infants) belongs legally to the father.

[Sidenote: Responsibility of a wife.]

A married woman cannot sue or be sued for contracts--nor can she enter
into contracts except as the agent of her husband; that is to say,
neither her word nor her deed is binding in law, and persons giving a
wife credit have no remedy against her. There are some exceptions, as
where she contracts debts upon estates settled to her separate use, or
where a wife carries on trade separately, according to the custom of
London, etc.

[Sidenote: Responsibility of a husband for his wife’s debts prior to
marriage.]

A husband is liable for his wife’s debts contracted before marriage,
and also for her breaches of trust committed before marriage.

[Sidenote: Witnesses.]

Neither a husband nor a wife can be witnesses against one another in
criminal cases, not even after the death or divorce of either.

[Sidenote: Wife cannot bring actions.]

A wife cannot bring actions unless the husband’s name is joined.

[Sidenote: A wife acts under coercion of her husband.]

As the wife acts under the command and control of her husband, she
is excused from punishment for certain offences, such as theft,
burglary, housebreaking, etc., if committed in his presence and under
his influence. A wife cannot be found guilty of concealing her felon
husband or of concealing a felon jointly with her husband. She cannot
be found guilty of stealing from her husband or of setting his house on
fire, as they are one person in law. A husband and wife cannot be found
guilty of a conspiracy to which they themselves only are parties, as
that offence cannot be committed unless there are two persons.


USUAL PRECAUTIONS AGAINST THE LAWS CONCERNING THE PROPERTY OF MARRIED
WOMEN.

[Sidenote: An engaged woman cannot dispose of her property.]

When a woman has consented to a proposal of marriage, she cannot
dispose or give away her property without the knowledge of her
betrothed; if she make any such disposition without his knowledge, even
if he be ignorant of the existence of her property, the disposition
will not be legal.

[Sidenote: Settlements.]

It is usual, before marriage, in order to secure a wife and her
children against the power of the husband, to make with his consent a
settlement of some property on the wife, or to make an agreement before
marriage that a settlement shall be made after marriage. It is in the
power of the Court of Chancery to enforce the performance of such
agreements.

[Sidenote: Difference between Common Law and Equity.]

Although the Common Law does not allow a married woman to possess any
property, yet in respect of property settled for her separate use,
Equity endeavours to treat her as a single woman.

She can acquire such property by contract before marriage with her
husband, or by gift from him or other persons.

There are great difficulties and complexities in making settlements,
and they should always be made by a competent lawyer.

[Sidenote: Indictment for theft.]

When a wife’s property is stolen, the property (legally belonging to
the husband) must be laid as his in the indictment.


SEPARATION AND DIVORCE.

A husband and wife can separate upon a deed containing terms for their
immediate separation, but they cannot legally agree to separate at a
_future_ time. The trustees of the wife must be parties to the deed,
and agree with the husband as to what property the wife is to take, for
a husband and wife cannot covenant together.

[Sidenote: Divorce is of two kinds.]

Divorce is of two kinds:--

1st. Divorce _à mensâ et thoro_, being only a separation from bed and
board.

2nd. Divorce _à vinculo matrimonii_, being an entire dissolution of the
bond of matrimony.

The grounds for the first kind of divorce are, 1st. Adultery, 2nd.
Intolerable Cruelty, and 3rd. Unnatural Practices. The Ecclesiastical
Courts can do no more than pronounce for this first kind of divorce, or
rather separation, as the matrimonial tie is not severed, and there is
always a possibility of reconciliation.

The law cannot dissolve a lawful marriage; it is only by the act of
the legislature altering the law in this particular instance that
such dissolution can be effected. It requires an Act of Parliament to
constitute a divorce _à vinculo matrimonii_, but the investigation
rests by usage with the Lords alone, the House of Commons acting upon
the faith that the House of Lords came to a just conclusion.

This divorce is pronounced on account of adultery in the wife, and in
some cases of aggravated adultery on the part of the husband.

The expenses of only a common divorce bill are between six hundred and
seven hundred pounds, which makes the possibility of release from the
matrimonial bond a privilege of the rich.

A wife cannot be plaintiff, defendant, or witness in an important part
of the proceeding for a divorce, which evidently must lead to much
injustice.


LAWS CONCERNING A WIDOW.

[Sidenote: Her property.]

A widow recovers her real property, but if there be a settlement she
is restricted by its provisions. She recovers her chattels real if her
husband has not disposed of them by will or otherwise.

[Sidenote: A wife’s paraphernalia.]

A wife’s paraphernalia (_i.e._, her clothes and ornaments) which her
husband owns during his lifetime, and which his creditors can seize for
his debts, becomes her property on his death.

[Sidenote: Her liabilities.]

A widow is liable for any debts which she contracted before marriage,
and which have been left unpaid during her marriage.

A widow is not bound to bury her dead husband, it being the duty of his
legal representative.

[Sidenote: A widow’s one-third.]

If a man die intestate, the widow, if there are children, is entitled
to one third of the personalty; if there are no children, to one half:
the other is distributed among the next of kin, among whom the widow is
not counted. If there is no next of kin, the moiety goes to the crown.

A husband can, of course, by will deprive a wife of all right in the
personalty.

[Sidenote: Quarantine.]

A right is granted in Magna Charta to a widow to remain forty days in
her husband’s house after his death, provided she do not marry during
that time.

[Sidenote: Dower.]

A widow has by law a _right of dower_ of her husband’s freehold lands,
which is a right to the possession of a third of them during her life,
and a right called _freebench_ to a portion of his copyholds, but these
rights are generally taken away by settlements or conveyances, giving
the wife a jointure. If she accept a jointure she has no claim to dower.


LAWS CONCERNING WOMEN IN OTHER RELATIONSHIPS.

[Sidenote: Agent.]

A woman can act as agent for another, and, as an attorney, legally
execute her authority. A wife can so act if her husband do not dissent.

[Sidenote: Trustee.]

An unmarried woman can be vested with a trust, but if she marry, the
complexities and difficulties are great, from her inability to enter
alone into deeds and assurances.

[Sidenote: Executrix.]

A single woman can act as executrix under a will, but a wife cannot
accept an executorship without her husband’s consent.

[Sidenote: Administratrix.]

A woman is capable of holding the office of administratrix to an
intestate personalty, and administration will be granted to her if she
be next of kin to the intestate. But a wife cannot act without the
consent of her husband.

If a man place a woman in his house, and treat her as his wife, he is
responsible for her debts to the same extent as if they were actually
married.


LAWS CONCERNING ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN AND THEIR MOTHERS.

[Sidenote: Maintenance.]

A single woman having a child may throw the maintenance upon the
putative father, so called to distinguish him from a husband, until the
age of thirteen.

The law only enforces the parents to maintain such child, and the sum
the father is obliged to pay, after an order of affiliation is proved
against him, never exceeds two shillings and sixpence a week.

The mother, as long as she is unmarried or a widow, is bound to
maintain such child as a part of her family until such child attain the
age of sixteen.

A man marrying a woman having a child or children at the time of such
marriage, is bound to support them, whether legitimate or not, until
the age of sixteen.

[Sidenote: Disabilities of a natural child.]

The rights of an illegitimate child are only such as he can acquire; he
can inherit nothing, being in law looked upon as nobody’s son, but he
may acquire property by devise or bequest. He may acquire a surname by
reputation, but does not inherit one.

The only incapacity under which he labours is that he cannot be
heir-at-law or next of kin to any person, nor can he have any heirs
except lineal descendants; if he acquire property and die without a
will, such property will go to the crown unless he leave a lineal
descendant.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Elizabeth Blackwell, M.D., received her diploma in America before
she walked St. Bartholomew’s Hospital in London.

[2] 6th and 7th of William IV. chap. 85.




REMARKS.


These are the principal laws concerning women.

It is not now as it once was, when all existing institutions were
considered sacred and unalterable; and the spirit which made Blackstone
an admirer of, rather than a critic on, every law because it was _law_,
is exchanged for a bolder and more discriminating spirit, which seeks
to judge calmly what is good and to amend what is bad.

Philosophical thinkers have generally come to the conclusion that the
tendency of progress is gradually to dispense with law--that is to
say, as each individual man becomes unto himself a law, less external
restraint is necessary. And certainly the most urgently needed reforms
are simple erasures from the statute book. Women, more than any other
members of the community, suffer from over legislation.

A woman of twenty-one becomes an independent human creature,[3] capable
of holding and administering property to any amount; or, if she can
earn money, she may appropriate her earnings freely to any purpose she
thinks good. Her father has no power over her or her property. But if
she unites herself to a man, the law immediately steps in, and she
finds herself legislated for, and her condition of life suddenly and
entirely changed. Whatever age she may be of, she is again considered
as an infant--she is again under ‘_reasonable restraint_’--she loses
her separate existence, and is merged in that of her husband.

‘In short,’ says Judge Hurlbut, ‘a woman is courted and wedded as an
angel, and yet denied the dignity of a rational and moral being ever
after.’

‘The next thing that I will show you is this particularitie of law;
in this consolidation which we call wedlock is a locking together;
it is true that man and wife are one person, but understand in what
manner. When a small brooke or little river incorporateth with
Rhodanus, Humber, or the Thames, the poore rivulet loseth her name, it
is carried and re-carried with the new associate, it beareth no sway,
it possesseth nothing during coverture. A woman as soone as she is
married is called covert, in Latine _nupta_, that is, vailed, as it
were clouded and overshadowed she hath lost her streame.... I may more
truly farre away say to a married woman, her new selfe is her superior,
her companion, her master. The mastership shee is fallen into may be
called in a terme which civilians borrow from Æsop’s Fables, _Leonina
societate_.’[4]

Truly ‘she hath lost her streame,’ she is absorbed, and can hold
nothing of herself, she has no legal right to any property; not even
her clothes, books, and household goods are her own, and any money
which she earns can be robbed from her legally by her husband, nay,
even after the commencement of a treaty of marriage she cannot dispose
of her own property without the knowledge of her betrothed. If she
should do so, it is deemed a fraud in law, and can be set aside after
marriage as an injury to her husband.

It is always said, even by those who support the existing law, that
it is in fact never acted upon by men of good feeling. That is true;
but the very admission condemns the law, and it is not right that the
good feeling of men should be all that a woman can look to for simple
justice. This is the usual argument to support all bad laws.

There is now a large and increasing class of women who gain their own
livelihood, and the abolition of the laws which give husbands this
unjust power is most urgently needed.

Rich men and fathers might still make what settlements they pleased,
and appoint trustees for the protection of minors and such women as
needed protection; but we imagine it well proved that the principle
of protection is wrong, and that the education of freedom and
responsibility will enable women to take better care of themselves and
others too than can be insured to them by any legal precautions.

Upon women of the labouring classes the difficulty of keeping and using
their own earnings presses most hardly. In that rank of life where the
support of the family depends often on the joint earnings of husband
and wife, it is indeed cruel that the earnings of both should be in the
hands of one, and not even in the hands of that one who has naturally
the strongest desire to promote the welfare of the children.

All who are familiar with the working classes, know how much suffering
and privation is caused by the exercise of this _right_ by drunken
and bad men. It is true that men are legally bound to support their
wives and children, but this does not compensate women for the loss
of their moral right to their own property and earnings, nor for the
loss of the mental development and independence of character gained by
the possession and thoughtful appropriation of money; nor, it must be
remembered, can the claim to support be enforced on the part of the
wife unless she appeals to a court of law. Alas, how much will not a
woman endure before she will publicly plead for a maintenance!

Why, we ask, should there be this difference between the married and
unmarried condition of women? And why does marriage make so little
legal difference to men, and such a mighty legal difference to women?
In France it is somewhat more equal; women have a choice, and can marry
under the _régime de communauté_, or _régime dotal_. We quote from the
recent admirable report of the Law Amendment Society:--

‘1. _Régime de Communauté_ is either _légale_ or _contractuelle_. By
the first, which is by operation of law without any contract, all the
_moveable_ property of the man and woman, both at marriage or acquired
during marriage (except specific legacies specially tied up), and the
immoveable property acquired during marriage, form one mass called
_communauté_, which is administered by the husband, and may be aliened
by him during marriage, but cannot be bequeathed except as to his
share; and at the dissolution of the marriage, a partition takes place
between husband and wife or their representatives.

‘The wife’s immoveable property belongs to the wife alone, but the
rents, and profits, and administration go to the husband.

‘The _communauté_, and therefore the husband, is answerable for all
the debts (except those belonging to the real estate) of the wife,
both before marriage, or contracted during the marriage. The wife can
obtain a _séparation des biens_, that is, a division of the moveable
property, and have the administration of her share committed to her, on
application to a Court of Justice, if the husband is making away with
the property.

‘By the _communauté conventionelle_, any provisions modifying the
community of law may be introduced in the antenuptial marriage
contract. The usual modification is to give the wife a lesser share
than half, according to the amount of moveable property she brings into
the common stock.

‘2. _Régime dotal._ Under this system the dowry is the sum brought to
the husband to sustain the charges of the marriage, and is specified
in the antenuptial contract. But the contract, like English marriage
settlements, may introduce any provisions whatever.’

In Turkey, daughters succeed equally with sons in houses and landed
property, and always take one-third of the personal property. A widow
receives one-eighth of the personal property, and must be provided for
during her life by the heirs. Women control their own inheritance when
married; the husband has no power over the inherited portion of his
wife or wives.

In Hungary, the common law, before 1849 (the German law is now
introduced), made a broad distinction between _inherited_ and
_acquired_ property, whether landed or personal. Whatever was inherited
went to the heirs; it could not be subject to a will.

As to _acquired_ property, the law only interfered to give half to the
wife; it was her absolute property, of which she might dispose in any
way during life or by will. Among the nobility this law did not obtain.
In cases where inherited property had been so left by the will of the
first _acquisitor_ as to exclude the female sex, the brothers were
obliged to give a handsome sum if they married to their sisters, and
provide for them in a becoming way if they remained single.

The rights of a widow were great; she was guardian of children,
administratrix of property, and, as long as she bore the name of
her husband, she could exercise all the political rights of a man;
she could vote in elections of county officers, and in those of the
Deputies to the Diet.

Single females, according to the Hungarian law, were considered as
minors, who became of age upon marriage, and by marriage came into full
control of all their estates. They were not liable for the debts of
their husbands; they were not even bound to provide for the domestic
expenses, the care of providing for the house and the education of
the children being incumbent on the husband. Wives could make wills
and sign deeds without the consent of the husbands. If a wife died
intestate, her property went to her children or collaterals.

In fact, a wife was not regarded in Hungary as a minor, her husband was
not her guardian, nor were there trustees appointed for her property.
‘None of my countrywomen would ever have submitted to such a marriage
settlement as is usual in England,’ said a Hungarian lady, well known
for her genius and reputation. With the one exception of considering
all unmarried women as minors, the Hungarian law was very much in
advance of ours.

In America, the great states of New York, Pennsylvania, and in New
England, California, Texas, and some of the newly settled States, a
married woman is allowed, with modifications differing in different
places, the same rights over property as if she were single.

What changes we find in the American laws are improvements upon ours.
Is there not evidence in our English laws of old opinions relating
to women which are passing away with the old state of things which
engendered them? In the early times, when women were obliged by the
violent state of society to be always under the guardianship of father,
brother, or husband, these laws might be necessary; but in our peaceful
times, such guardianship is proved to be superfluous by the fact of the
secure, honourable, and independent position of single women, who are
sufficiently protected by the sanctuary of civilisation.

Since all the unmarried women in England are supported either by their
own exertions, or by the exertions or bequests of their fathers and
relations, there is no reason why upon marriage they should be thrown
upon the pecuniary resources of their husbands, except in so far as
the claims of a third party--children--may lessen the wife’s power
of earning money, at the same time that it increases her expenses.
Of course a woman may, and often does, by acting as housekeeper and
manager of her husband’s concerns, earn a maintenance and a right to
share in his property, independent of any children which may come of
the marriage. But it is evident that daughters ought to have some sure
provision--either a means of gaining their own bread, or property--as
it is most undesirable that they should look upon marriage as a means
of livelihood.

Fathers seldom feel inclined to trust their daughters’ fortunes in the
power of a husband, and, in the appointment of trustees, partially
elude the law by a legal device. Also, the much abused Court of
Chancery tries to palliate the Common Law, and recognises a separate
interest between husband and wife, and allows the wife alone to file
a bill to recover and protect her property, and trustees are not
necessary if there has been an agreement.

Why should not these legal devices be done away with, by the simple
abolition of a law which we have outgrown?

We do not say that these laws of property are the only unjust laws
concerning women to be found in the short summary which we have given,
but they form a simple, tangible, and not offensive point of attack.

Petitions have been presented to Parliament signed by upwards of 30,000
persons, praying for the alteration of this hard law. The Society
for Promoting the Amendment of the Law, has taken up this crying
grievance, and has published a valuable ‘Report of the Personal Laws
Committee on the Law relating to the Property of Unmarried Women.’ The
following are the heads of the new law of property which the committee
recommends:--

1. The Common Law rules which make marriage a gift of all the woman’s
personal property to the husband to be repealed.

2. Power in married women to hold separate property by law as they now
may in equity.

3. A woman marrying without any antenuptial contract, to retain her
property and after acquisitions and earnings as if she were a _feme
sole_.

4. A married woman, having separate property, to be liable on her
separate contracts, whether made before or after marriage.

5. A husband not to be liable for the antenuptial debts of his wife any
further than any property brought to him by his wife under settlement
extends.

6. A married woman to have the power of making a will; and on her death
intestate, the principles of the Statute of Distributions as to her
husband’s personalty _mutatis mutandis_ to apply to the property of the
wife.

7. The rights of succession between husband and wife, whether as
to real or personal estate, to courtesy or dower, to be framed on
principles of equal justice to each party.

We wish all, _women_ especially, to consider this proposed law, and if
they think it is a just law, let them use every means in their power
to help forward the measure. Let them express themselves either by
meetings or in petitions, perhaps the last is the best means. Let no
one person be content to wish simply for this change, but let him or
her join with others and express their wishes.

Short petitions praying that the law proposed by the Law Amendment
Society should be adopted by Parliament, sent in, in large numbers,
would do much to gain this reform. It depends principally on the
working classes whether this great injustice is to be overthrown or
not. All the best thinkers of the day have decided that women are no
longer to be considered as mere appendages of men, but as independent
human beings, who have a right to the produce of the labour of their
hands and to freedom, to work out their lives in their own way.
Philanthropists and reformers have stepped forward and are willing to
give a helping hand; and such men as Lord Lyndhurst, Lord Brougham,
Lord Stanley, Sir Erskine Perry, and Matthew Davenport Hill, are strong
hands to help any cause.

The thoughtful women of our day, those whose names adorn the age we
live in, have expressed themselves. It only remains for the working
women who earn money, to say--‘This law is a great injustice to us, we
wish to have our own money earnings in our own power,’ and the law will
be abolished.


  REMARKS ON THE EDUCATION OF GIRLS,
  With reference to the social, legal, and industrial position of women
    at the present day.
  BY BESSIE RAYNER PARKES.
  SECOND EDITION, PRICE THREEPENCE.


JOHN WATTS, PRINTER, 147, FLEET STREET.


FOOTNOTES:

[3] With regard to the property of women, there is taxation without
representation, for they pay taxes without having the liberty of voting
for representatives, and indeed there seems at present no reason why
single women should be denied this privilege.--_Note to Christian’s
Blackstone._

[4] The Lawe’s Resolutions of Women’s Rights, A.D., 1632.

       *       *       *       *       *




Transcriber’s note

Minor punctuation errors have been changed without notice.

Spelling was retained as in the original except for the following
changes:

Page 4 (sidenote): “but her husbands”   “but her husband’s”