A Short History of Women's Rights From the Days of Augustus to the Present Time. With Special Reference toEngland and the United States By Eugene A. Hecker _SECOND EDITION REVISED, WITH ADDITIONS_ To MY MOTHER PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION In this edition a chapter has been added, bringing down to date therecord of the contest for equal suffrage. The summary on pages 175-235is now largely obsolete; but it has been retained as instructiveevidence of the rapid progress made during the last four years. E. A. H. CAMBRIDGE, MASS. _August, 1914_. PREFACE While making some researches in the evolution of women's rights, I wasimpressed by the fact that no one had ever, as far as I could discover, attempted to give a succinct account of the matter for English-speakingnations. Indeed, I do not believe that any writer in any country hasessayed such a task except Laboulaye; and his _Recherches sur laCondition Civile et Politique des Femmes_, published in 1843, leavesmuch to be desired to one who is interested in the subject to-day. I have, therefore, made an effort to fill a lack. This purpose has beenstrengthened as I have reflected on the great amount of confusedinformation which is absorbed by those who have no time to makeinvestigations for themselves. Accordingly, in order to present anaccurate historical review, I have cited my authorities for allstatements regarding which any question could be raised. This isparticularly so in the chapters which deal with the condition of womenunder Roman Law, under the early Christian Church, and under Canon Law. In all these instances I have gone directly to primary sources, haveinvestigated them myself, and have admitted no secondhand evidence. Inconnection with Women's rights in England and in the United States Ihave either consulted the statutes or studied the commentaries ofjurists, like Messrs. Pollock and Maitland, whose authority cannot bedoubted. To such I have given the exact references whenever they havebeen used. In preparing the chapter on the progress of women's lights inthe United States I derived great assistance from the very exhaustive_History of Woman Suffrage_, edited by Miss Susan B. Anthony, Mrs. IdaH. Harper, and others to whose unselfish labours we are for everindebted. From their volumes I have drawn freely; but I have not giveneach specific reference. The tabulation of the laws of the several States which I have givennaturally cannot be entirely adequate, because the laws are beingchanged constantly. It is often difficult to procure the latest revisedstatutes. However, these laws are recent enough to illustrate theevolution of women's rights. Finally, this volume was written in no hope that all readers would agreewith the author, who is zealous in his cause. His purpose will be gainedif he induces the reader to reflect for himself on the problem in thelight of its historical development. E. A. H. CAMBRIDGE, MASS. , 1910. CONTENTS CHAPTER I WOMEN'S RIGHTS UNDER ROMAN LAW, 27 B. C. -527 A. D. Originally women were always under guardianship--But under the Empirethe entire equality of the sexes was recognised--Women inmarriage--Their power over their property--Divorce--Women engaged in allbusiness pursuits--Instances of women suing and pleading inlaw--Partiality of the law towards women--Rights of inheritance--Rightsto higher education fully allowed--Provision made for poor children tobe educated--The Vestals--Female slaves--Remarkable growth ofhumanitarianism towards slaves under the Empire--Sources CHAPTER II WOMEN AND THE EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH Christ laid down ethical principles but not minute regulations--TheApostles affected by Jewish and Oriental or Greek conceptions ofwomen--Examples of these--St. Paul and St. Peter on the position ofwomen--The Church Fathers elaborated these teachings--Examples of theircontempt for women--Mingled with admiration for particular types ofwomen--Their views of marriage--Their strictures on unbecomingdress--Summary of their views and how the status of women was affectedby them--Sources CHAPTER III RIGHTS OF WOMEN AS MODIFIED BY THE CHRISTIAN EMPERORS Old Roman Law not abrogated suddenly--Divorce--Adultery--Secondmarriages--Engagements--Donations between husband and wife--Sundryenactments on marriage--Inheritance--Guardianship--Bills of Attainder ofChristian Emperors merciless, in contrast to acts of paganpredecessors--Sources CHAPTER IV WOMEN AMONG THE GERMANIC PEOPLES A second world force to modify the status of women--Accounts of Caesarand Tacitus on position of women among Germanic peoples--The writtenlaws of the barbarians--Guardianship--Marriage--Power of thehusband--Divorce--Adultery--The Church indulgent tokings--Remarriage--Property rights--Peculiarities of the criminallaw--Minutely-graded fines--Compurgation and ordeals--Innocence testedby the woman walking over red-hot ploughshares--Women inslavery--Comparison of position of women under Roman and under Germaniclaws--Influence of theology--Sources CHAPTER V DIGRESSION ON THE LATER HISTORY OF ROMAN LAW Explanation of the various social and political forces which affectedthe position of women in the Middle Ages CHAPTER VI THE CANON LAW AND THE ATTITUDE OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH Canon law reaffirms the subjection of women--Women andmarriage--Protection to women--Divorce--Cardinal Gibbons on protectionof injured wives by Popes--Catholic Church has no divorce--But it allowsfourteen reasons for declaring marriage null and void and leaving ahusband or wife free to remarry--Some of these explained--Dirimentimpediments and dispensations--Historical instances of the RomanChurch's inconsistency--Attitude towards women at present day--Opinionsof Cardinals Gibbon and Moran, and Rev. David Barry and Rev. WilliamHumphrey--Sources CHAPTER VII WOMEN'S RIGHTS IN ENGLAND Single women have always had private rights--But males preferred ininheritance--Examples--Power of parents--Husband and wife--Wifecompletely controlled by husband--He could beat her and own all herproperty--Recent abrogation of the husband's power--Divorce--JeremyTaylor and others on duty of women to bear husband's sins withmeekness--Injustice of the present law of divorce--Rape and the age oflegal consent--Progress of the rights to an education--Women in theprofessions--Woman suffrage--Sources CHAPTER VIII WOMEN'S RIGHTS IN THE UNITED STATES Examples of the early opposition to women's rights--Age ofconsent--Single women--History of agitation for women'srights--Convention of 1848--Progress after the Civil War--Beginnings ofhigher education--First women in medicine--And in law, the ministry, journalism, and industry--Status of women in all the States in1910--Sources CHAPTER IX GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS The five arguments commonly used against equal suffrage--Thetheological--The physiological--The social or political--Theintellectual--The moral--Lecky on the nature of women--The old and thenew conception--Thomas on the power of custom--Taboo--All evolutionaccompanied by some extravagance--Macaulay on liberty--The doublestandard of morality--Co-operation--The proper sphere for a humanbeing--Discrepancies of wages--Legal evolution in the interpretation oflabour laws--The alarmist view of divorce CHAPTER X FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS The rapid spread of suffrage throughout the world--Table of suffragegains from early times to present date--In national politics in theUnited States--Attack on the suffrage parade and colloquy between Mr. Hobson and Mr. Mann on the subject--Suffrage amendment defeated in theSenate--Mr. Heflin's remarks in the House--Mr. Falconerreplies--President Wilson refuses to take a stand--Amendment lost--Mr. Bryan on suffrage--Examples of legislation to protect women passedrecently--The tendency is to complete equality of the sexes--Suffrage inEngland--A delayed reform in divorce--Women's rights on theContinent--Especially in Germany--Schopenhauer's views of women--Furtherremarks on the philosophy of suffrage--"Woman's sphere"--Ultimateresults of women entering all businesses and professions--Feminism--Thehome is not necessarily every woman's sphere and neither is motherhoodnor is it her congenital duty to make herself attractive tomen--Unreasonableness of gratuitous advice to women and none tomen--What we don't know--Fallacy of the argument that the fall of theRoman Empire was due to the liberty given to woman--Official organs ofvarious suffrage societies INDEX A Short History of Women's Rights CHAPTER I WOMEN'S RIGHTS UNDER ROMAN LAW, FROM AUGUSTUS TO JUSTINIAN--27 B. C. TO527 A. D. [Sidenote: Guardianship. ] The age of legal capability for the Roman woman was after the twelfthyear, at which period she was permitted to make a will. [1] However, shewas by no means allowed to do so entirely on her own account, but onlyunder supervision. [2] This superintendence was vested in the father or, if he was dead, in a guardian[3]; if the woman was married, the powerbelonged to the husband. The consent of such supervision, whether offather, husband, or guardian, was essential, as Ulpian informs us, [4]under these circumstances: if the woman entered into any legal action, obligation, or civil contract; if she wished her freedwoman to cohabitwith another's slave; if she desired to free a slave; if she sold anythings _mancipi_, that is, such as estates on Italian soil, houses, rights of road or aqueduct, slaves, and beasts of burden. Throughout herlife a woman was supposed to remain absolutely under the power[5] offather, husband, or guardian, and to do nothing without their consent. In ancient times, indeed, this authority was so great that the fatherand husband could, after calling a family council, put the woman todeath without public trial. [6] The reason that women were so subjectedto guardianship was "on account of their unsteadiness of character, "[7]"the weakness of the sex, " and their "ignorance of legal matters. "[8]Under certain circumstances, however, women became _sui iuris_ orentirely independent: I. By the birth of three children (a freedwoman byfour)[9]; II. By becoming a Vestal Virgin, of whom there were butsix[10]; III. By a formal emancipation, which took place rarely, andthen often only with a view of transferring the power from one guardianto another. [11] Even when _sui iuris_ a woman could not acquire powerover any one, not even over her own children[12]; for these an agnate--amale relative on the father's side--was appointed guardian, and themother was obliged to render him and her children an account of anyproperty which she had managed for them. [13] On the other hand, herchildren were bound to support her. [14] [Sidenote: Digression on the growth of respect for women] So much for the laws on the subject. They seem rigorous enough, and inearly times were doubtless executed with strictness. A marked feature, however, of the Roman character, a peculiarity which at once strikes thestudent of their history as compared with that of the Greeks, was theirgreat respect for the home and the _materfamilias_. The stories ofLucretia, Cloelia, Virginia, Cornelia, Arria, and the like, familiar toevery Roman schoolboy, must have raised greatly the esteem in whichwomen were held. As Rome became a world power, the Romans likewise grewin breadth of view, in equity, and in tolerance. The politicalinfluence wielded by women[15] was as great during the first threecenturies after Christ as it has ever been at any period of the world'shistory; and the powers of a Livia, an Agrippina, a Plotina, did notfail to show pointedly what a woman could do. In the early days of theRepublic women who touched wine were severely punished and malerelatives were accustomed solemnly to kiss them, if haply they mightdiscover the odour of drink on their breath. [16] Valerius Maximus tellsus that Egnatius Mecenas, a Roman knight, beat his wife to death fordrinking wine. [17] Cato the Censor (234-149 B. C. ) dilated with joy onthe fact that a woman could be condemned to death by her husband foradultery without a public trial, whereas men were allowed any number ofinfidelities without censure. [18] The senator Metellus (131 B. C. )lamented that Nature had made it necessary to have women. [19] The boorish cynicism of a Cato and a Metellus--though it never expressedthe real feelings of the majority of Romans--gave way, however, underthe Empire to a generous expression of the equality of the sexes in therealms of morality and of intellect. "I know what you may say, " writesSeneca to Marcia, [20] "'You have forgotten that you are consoling awoman; you cite examples of fortitude on the part of men. ' But who saidthat Nature had acted scurvily with the characters of women and hadcontracted their virtues into a narrow sphere? Equal force, believe me, is possessed by them; equal capability for what is honorable, if theyso wish. " The Emperor Marcus Aurelius gratefully recalls that from hismother he learned piety and generosity, and to refrain not only fromdoing ill, but even from thinking it, and simplicity of life, farremoved from the ostentatious display of wealth. [21] The passionateattachment of men like Quintilian and Pliny to their wives exhibits anequality based on love that would do honour to the most Christianhouseholds. [22] All Roman historians speak with great admiration of themany heroic deeds performed by women and are fond of citing conspicuousexamples of conjugal affection. [23] The masterly and sympatheticdelineation of Dido in the _Aeneid_ shows how deeply a Roman couldappreciate the character of a noble woman. In the numerous provisionsfor the public education at the state's expense girls were given thesame opportunities and privileges as boys; there were five thousand boysand girls educated by Trajan alone. [24] [Sidenote: Decay of the power or the guardian. ] Such are a few examples of the growth of respect for women; and weshould naturally conclude that, as time progressed, the unjust laws ofguardianship would no longer be executed to the letter, even though thehard statutes were not formally expunged. This was the case during thefirst three centuries after Christ, as is patent from many sources. Itis to be borne in mind that because a law is on the books, does not meannecessarily that it is enforced. A law is no stronger than publicopinion. Of this anomaly there are plenty of instances even to-day--theBlue Laws of Massachusetts, for example. "That women of mature ageshould be under guardianship, " writes the great jurist Gaius[25] in thesecond century, "seems to have no valid reason as foundation. For whatis commonly believed, to the effect that on account of unsteadiness ofcharacter they are generally hoodwinked, and that, therefore, it isright for them to be governed by the authority of a guardian, seemsrather specious than true. As a matter of fact, women of mature age domanage their own affairs, and in certain cases the guardian interposeshis authority as a mere formality; frequently, indeed, he is forced bythe supreme judge to lend his authority against his will. " Ulpian, too, hints at the really slight power of the guardian in his day, that is, the first three decades of the third century. "In the case of male andfemale wards under age, the guardians both manage their affairs andinterpose their authority; but in the case of mature women they merelyinterpose their authority. "[26] The woman had, in practice, become freeto manage her property as she wished; the function of the legal guardianwas simply to see to it that no one should attempt a fraud against her. Adequately to observe the decay of the vassalage of women, we mustinvestigate the story of their rights in all its forms; and the positionof women in marriage will next occupy our attention. [Sidenote: Women and marriage. ] As in all Southern countries where women mature early, the Roman girlusually married young; twelve years were required by custom for her toreach the marriageable age. [27] In the earlier period a woman wasacquired as wife in three different ways: I. By _coemptio_--a mock saleto her husband[28]; II. By _confarreatio_--a solemn marriage withpeculiar sacred rites to qualify men and women and their children forcertain priesthoods[29]; III. By _usus_, or acquisition by prescription. A woman became a man's legal wife by _usus_ if he had lived with her onefull year and if, during that time, she had not been absent from him formore than three successive nights. [30] All these forms, however, had either been abolished by law or had falleninto desuetude during the second century of our era, as is evident fromGaius. [31] A man could marry even if not present personally; a womancould not. [32] The woman's parents or guardians were accustomed toarrange a match for her, [33] as they still do in many parts of Europe. Yet the power of the father to coerce his daughter was limited. Herconsent was important. "A marriage cannot exist, " remarks Paulus, "unless all parties consent. "[34] Julianus writes also that the daughtermust give her permission[35]; yet the statement of Ulpian whichimmediately follows in the Digest shows that she had not complete freewill in the matter: "It is understood that she who does not oppose thewishes of her father gives consent. But a daughter is allowed to objectonly in case her father chooses for her a man of unworthy or disgracefulcharacter. "[36] The son had an advantage here, because he could never beforced into a marriage against his will. [37] The consent of the fatherwas always necessary for a valid marriage. [38] He could not by willcompel his daughter to marry a certain person. [39] After she wasmarried, he still retained power over her, unless she became independentby the birth of three children; but this was largely to protect her andrepresent her in court against her husband if necessity shouldarise. [40] A father was not permitted to break up a harmonious[41]marriage; he could not get back his daughter's dowry without herconsent, [42] nor force her to return to her husband after a divorce[43];and he was punished with loss of citizenship if he made a match for awidowed daughter before the legal time of mourning for her husband hadexpired. [44] A daughter passed completely out of the power of her fatheronly if she became _sui iuris_ by the birth of three children or if shebecame a Vestal, or again if she married a special priest of Jupiter(_Flamen Dialis_), in which case, however, she passed completely intothe power of her husband. Under all circumstances a daughter must notonly show respect for her father, but also furnish him with thenecessaries of life if he needed them. [45] [Sidenote: "Breach of Promise. "] Under the Empire no such thing as a "breach of promise" suit waspermitted, although in the days of the Republic the party who broke apromise to marry had been liable to a suit for damages. [46] But this hadnow disappeared, and either party could break off the betrothal atpleasure without prejudice. [47] Whatever gifts had been given might bedemanded back. [48] The engagement had to be formally broken off beforeeither party could enter into marriage or betrothal with another;otherwise he or she lost civil status. [49] While an engagement lasted, the man could bring an action for damages against any one who insultedor injured his fiancée. [50] [Sidenote: Husband and Wife. ] The Roman marriage was a purely civil contract based on consent. [51] Thedefinition given by the law was a noble one. "Marriage is the union of aman and a woman and a partnership of all life; a mutual sharing of lawshuman and divine. "[52] The power of the husband over the wife was called_manus_; and the wife stood in the same position as a daughter. [53] Nohusband was allowed to have a concubine. [54] He was bound to support hiswife adequately, look out for her interests, [55] and strictly to avengeany insult or injury offered her[56]; any abusive treatment of the wifeby the husband was punished by an action for damages[57]. A wife wascompelled by law to go into solemn mourning for a space of ten monthsupon the death of a husband[58]. During the period of mourning she wasto abstain from social banquets, jewels, and crimson and whitegarments[59]. If she did not do so, she lost civil status. The emperorGordian, in the year 238, remitted these laws so far as solemn clothingand other external signs of mourning above enumerated wereconcerned. [60] But a husband was not compelled to do any legal mourningfor the death of his wife. [61] The wife was, as I have said, in the power of her husband. Originally, no doubt, this power was absolute; the husband could even put his wifeto death without a public trial. But the world was progressing, and thatduring the first three centuries after Christ the power of the husbandwas reduced in practice to absolute nullity I shall make clear in thefollowing pages. I shall, accordingly, first investigate the rights ofthe wife over her dowry, that is, the right of managing her ownproperty. Even from earliest times it is clear that the wife had complete controlof her dowry. The henpecked husband who is afraid of offending hiswealthy wife is a not uncommon figure in the comedies of Plautus andTerence; and Cato the Censor growled in his usual amiable manner at thefact that wives even in his day controlled completely their ownproperty. [62] The attitude of the Roman law on the subject is clearlyexpressed. "It is for the good of the state that women have theirdowries inviolate. "[63] "The dowry is always and everywhere a chiefconcern; for it is for the public good that dowries be retained forwomen, since it is highly necessary that they be dowered in order tobring forth offspring and replenish the state with children. "[64] "It isjust that the income of the dowry belong to the husband; for inasmuch asit is he who stands the burdens of the married state, it is fair that healso acquire the interest. "[65] "Nevertheless, the dowry belongs to thewoman, even though it is in the goods of the husband. "[66] "A husband isnot permitted to alienate his wife's estate against her will. "[67] Awife could use her dowry during marriage to support herself, ifnecessary, or her kindred, to buy a suitable estate, to help an exiledparent, or to assist a needy husband, brother, or sister. The numerousaccounts in various authors of the first three centuries after Christconfirm the statement that the woman's power over her dowry wasabsolute. [68] Then as now, a man might put his property in his wife'sname to escape his creditors, [69]--a useless proceeding, if she had nothad complete control of her own property. When the woman died, her dowry, if it had been given by the father (_dosprofecticia_) returned to the latter; but if any one else had given it(_dos adventicia_), the dowry remained with the husband, unless thedonor had expressly stipulated that it was to be returned to himself atthe woman's death (_dos recepticia_), [70] In the case of a dowry of thefirst kind, the husband might retain what he had expended for hiswife's funeral. [71] The dowry was confiscated to the state if the womanwas convicted of lèse majesté, violence against the state, ormurder. [72] If she suffered punishment involving loss of civil statusunder any other law which did not assess the penalty of confiscation, the husband acquired the dowry just as if she were dead. Banishmentoperated as no impediment; if the woman wished to leave her husbandunder these circumstances, her father could recover the dowry. [73] A further confirmation of the power of the wife over her property is thelaw that prohibited gifts between husband and wife; obviously, a womancould not be said to have the power of making a gift if she had no rightof property of her own. The object of the law mentioned was to preventthe husband and wife from receiving any lasting damage to his or herproperty by giving of it under the impulse of conjugal affection. [74]This statute acted powerfully to prevent a husband from wheedling a wifeout of her goods; and in case the latter happened to be of a graspingdisposition the law was a protection to the husband and hence to thechildren, his heirs, for whose interests the Roman law constantlyprovided. Gifts between husband and wife were nevertheless valid under certainconditions. It was permissible to make a present of clothing and tobestow various tokens of affection, such as ornaments. The husband couldpresent his wife with enough money to rebuild a house of hers which hadburned. [75] The Emperor Marcus Aurelius permitted a wife to give herhusband the sum necessary to obtain public office or to become a senatoror knight or to give public games. [76] A gift was also legal if made bythe husband in apprehension that death might soon overtake him; if, forinstance, he was very sick or was setting out to war, or to exile, or ona dangerous journey. [77] The point in all gifts was, that neither partyshould become richer by the donation. [78] Some further considerations of the relation of husband and wife will aidin setting forth the high opinion which Roman law entertained ofmarriage and its constant effort to protect the wife as much aspossible. A wife could not be held in a criminal action if she committedtheft against her husband. The various statements of the jurists makethe matter clear. Thus Paulus[79]: "A special action for the recovery ofproperty removed [_rerum amotarum iudicium_] has been introducedagainst her who was a wife, because it has been decided that it is notpossible to bring a criminal action for theft against her [_quid nonplacuit cum ea furti agere posse_]. Some--as Nerva Cassius--think shecannot even commit theft, on the ground that the partnership in lifemade her mistress, as it were. Others--like Sabinus and Proculus--holdthat the wife can commit theft, just as a daughter may against herfather, but that there can be no criminal action by established law. ""As a mark of respect to the married state, an action involving disgracefor the wife is refused. "[80] "Therefore she will be held for theft ifshe touches the same things after being divorced. So, too, if her slavecommits theft, we can sue her on the charge. But it is possible to bringan action for theft even against a wife, if she has stolen from himwhose heirs we are or before she married us; nevertheless, as a mark ofrespect we say that in each case a formal claim for restitution alone isadmissible, but not an action for theft. "[81] "If any one lends help oradvice to a wife who is filching the property of her husband, he shallbe held for theft. If he commits theft with her, he shall be held fortheft, although the woman herself is not held. "[82] A husband who did not avenge the murder of his wife lost all claims toher dowry, which was then confiscated to the state; this by order of theEmperor Severus. [83] The laws on adultery are rather more lenient to the woman than to theman. In the first place, the Roman law insisted that it was unfair for ahusband to demand chastity on the part of his wife if he himself wasguilty of infidelity or did not set her an example of goodconduct, [84]--a maxim which present day lawyers may reflect upon withprofit. A father was permitted to put to death his daughter and herparamour if she was still in his power and if he caught her in the actat his own house or that of his son-in-law; otherwise he could not. [85]He must, however, put both man and woman to death at once, when caughtin the act; to reserve punishment to a later date was unlawful. Thehusband was not permitted to kill his wife; he might kill her paramourif the latter was a man of low estate, such as an actor, slave, orfreedman, or had been convicted on some criminal charge involving lossof citizenship. [86] The reason that the father was given the power whichwas denied the husband was that the latter's resentment would be morelikely to blind his power of judging dispassionately the merits of thecase. [87] If now the husband forgot himself and slew his wife, he wasbanished for life if of noble birth, and condemned to perpetual hardlabour if of more humble rank. [88] He must at once divorce a wife guiltyof adultery; otherwise he was punished as a pander, and that meant lossof citizenship. [89] Women convicted of adultery were, when not put todeath, punished by the loss of half their dowry, a third part of theirother goods, and relegation to an island; guilty men suffered the lossof half of their possessions and similar relegation to an island; butthe guilty parties were never confined in the same place. [90] We havemention also in several writers of some curious and vicious punishmentsthat might be inflicted on men guilty of adultery. [91] Now, all this seems rigorous enough; but, as I have already remarked, wemust beware of imagining that a statute is enforced simply because itstands in the code. As a matter of fact, public sentiment had grown sohumane in the first three centuries after Christ that it did not for amoment tolerate that a father should kill his daughter, no matter howguilty she was; and in all our records of that period no instanceoccurs. As to husbands, we have repeated complaints in the literature ofthe day that they had grown so complaisant towards erring wives thatthey could not be induced to prosecute them. [92] A typical instance isrelated by Pliny. [93] Pliny was summoned by the Emperor Trajan to attenda council where, among other cases, that of a certain Gallitta wasdiscussed. She had married a military tribune and had committed adulterywith a common captain (_centurio_). Trajan sent the captain into exile. The husband took no measures against his wife, but went on living withher. Only by coercion was he finally induced to prosecute. Pliny informsus that the guilty woman had to be condemned, even against the will ofher accuser. A woman guilty of incest received no punishment, but the guilty man wasdeported to an island. [94] If the incest involved adultery, the womanwas of course held on that charge. [Sidenote: Divorce] We come now to a matter where the growing freedom of women reached itshighest point--the matter of divorce. Here again we have to note theprogress of toleration and humanitarianism. In the early days of theRepublic the family tie was rarely severed. Valerius Maximus tellsus[95] of a quaint custom of the olden days, to the effect that"whenever any quarrel arose between husband and wife, they would proceedto the chapel of the goddess Viriplaca ["Reconciler of Husbands"], whichis on the Palatine, and there they would mutually express theirfeelings; then, laying aside their anger, they returned homereconciled. " During these days a woman could never herself take theinitiative in divorce; the husband was all-powerful. The first divorceof which we have any record took place in the year 231 B. C. , whenSpurius Carvilius Ruga put away his wife for sterility. Public opinioncensured him severely for it "because people thought that not even thedesire for children ought to have been preferred to conjugal fidelityand affection. "[96] As the Empire extended and Rome became more worldlyand corrupt, the reasons for divorce became more trivial. SemproniusSophus divorced his wife because she had attended some public gameswithout his knowledge. [97] Cicero, who was a lofty moralist--onpaper, --put away his wife Terentia in order to marry a rich young wardand get her money if he could. Maecenas, the great prime-minister ofAugustus, sent away and took back his wife repeatedly atcaprice--perhaps he believed that variety is the spice of life. Butduring all this time the husband alone could annul marriage. [98] Gradually, however, the status of women changed and they were givengreater and greater liberty. Inasmuch as Roman marriage was a civilcontract based on consent, strict justice had to allow that on thisbasis either party to the contract might annul the marriage at his orher pleasure. The result was that during the first three centuries afterChrist the wife had absolute freedom to take the initiative and send herhusband a divorce whenever and for whatever reason she wished. Theproof of this fact is positively established not only from thestatements of the jurists, but also from numberless accounts in theother writers of the day. [99] Divorce became, at least among the higherstrata of society, extraordinarily frequent. That a lady of the UpperFour Hundred should have been content with only one husband was deemedworthy of special mention on her tomb; the word _univira_ (a woman ofone husband) may still be read on certain inscriptions. The satiristsare fond of dwelling on the license allowed to women in the case ofdivorce. Martial, for instance, [100] says that one Theselina married tenhusbands in one month. Still, allowing for the natural exaggeration ofsatirists, we are yet reasonably sure that divorce had reached greatheights in the upper classes. Whether it was as bad among the middleclasses is very improbable. There was one kind of marriage which, originally at least, did not admit of dissolution. [101] This was thesolemn marriage by _confarreatio_, already described, which qualifiedthe husband and wife for the special priesthood of Jupiter. Women soongrew to value their freedom too highly to enter it; as early as 23 A. D. The Senate had to relax some of the rigour of the old laws on the matteras a special inducement for women to consent to enter this union. [102] We may now observe what became of the wife's property after divorce andwhat her rights were under such circumstances. If it was the husband whohad taken the initiative and had sent his wife a divorce, and if thedivorce was not the fault of the woman, she at once had an action in lawfor complete recovery of her dowry; on her own responsibility if she was_sui iuris_, otherwise with the help of her father. [103] But even thewoman still under guardianship could act by herself if her father wastoo sick or infirm or if she had no other agent to act for her. [104] Forthe offence of adultery a husband had to pay back the dowry at once; forlesser guilt he might return it in instalments at intervals of sixmonths. [105] If, now, the divorce was clearly the fault of the woman, her husband could retain certain parts of the dowry in theseproportions: for adultery, a sixth part for each of the children up toone half of the whole; for lighter offences, an eighth part; if thehusband had gone to expense or had incurred civil obligations for hiswife's benefit or if she had removed any of his property, he couldrecover the amount. [106] A year and six months must elapse after a divorce before the woman wasallowed to marry again. [107] If at the time of the divorce she waspregnant, her husband was obliged to support her offspring, providedthat within thirty days after the separation she informed him of hercondition. [108] She could sue her former husband for damages if heinsulted her. [109] Whether the children should stay with the mother orfather was left to the discretion of the judge. [110] [Sidenote: Property rights of widows and single women. ] The married woman had, as I have shown, complete disposal of her ownproperty. Let us see next what rights those women had over theirpossessions who were widows or spinsters. Roman Law constantly strove to protect the children and laid it down asa maxim that the property of their parents belonged to them. [111] Awidow could not therefore, except by special permission from theemperor, [112] be the legal guardian of her children, but must ask thecourt to appoint one upon the death of her husband. [113] This was toprevent possible mismanagement and because "to undertake the legaldefence of others is the office of men. "[114] But she was permitted toassume complete charge of her children's property during their minorityand enjoy the usufruct; only she must render an account of the goodswhen the children arrived at maturity. [115] We have many instances ofwomen who managed their children's patrimony and did it exceedinglywell. "You managed our patrimony in such wise, " writes Seneca to hismother, [116] "that you exerted yourself as if it were yours and yetabstained from it as if it belonged to others. "[117] Agricola, father-in-law of Tacitus, had such confidence in his wife's businessability that he made her co-heir with his daughter and the EmperorDomitian. [118] A mother could get an injunction to restrain extravaganceon the part of her children. [119] Women could not adopt. [120] Married women, spinsters, and widows had as much freedom as men indisposing of property by will. If there were children, the Roman law putcertain limitations on the testator's powers, whether man or woman. Bythe Falcidian Law no one was allowed to divert more than three fourthsof his estate from his (or her) natural heirs. [121] But for any adequatecause a woman could disinherit her children completely; and there aremany instances of this extant both in the Law Books and in theliterature of the day. [122] Single women had grown absolutely unshackled and even their guardianshad become a mere formality, as the words of Gaius, already quoted (page8) prove. That they had complete disposal of their property is provedfurthermore by the numerous complaints in Roman authors about thesycophants who flattered and toadied the wealthy ladies with an eye tobeing remembered in their wills. [123] For it is evident that if thesewomen had not had the power freely to dispose of their own property, there would have been no point in paying them such assiduous court. Thelegal age of maturity was now twenty-five for both male and female. [Sidenote: Women engaged in business pursuits. ] Women engaged freely in all business pursuits. We find them in all kindsof retail trade and commerce, [124] as members of guilds, [125] inmedicin[126] innkeeping, [127] in vaudevil[128]; there were evenfemale barbers[129] and charioteer[130]. Examples of women who toiledfor a living with their own hands are indeed very old, as the widow, described by Homer, who worked for a scanty wage to support herfatherless children, or the wreathmaker, mentioned by Aristophanes. [131]But such was the case only with women of the lower classes; the lady ofhigh birth acted through her agents. [132] [Sidenote: The right of women to sue. ] When so many women were engaged in business, occasions for lawsuitswould naturally arise; we shall see next what power the woman had tosue. It was a standing maxim of the law that a woman by herself couldnot conduct a case in court. [133] She had to act through her agent, ifshe was independent, otherwise through her guardian. The supreme judgeat Rome and the governor in a province assigned an attorney to those whohad no agent or guardian. [134] But in this case again custom and the lawwere at variance. Various considerations will make it clear that womenwho sued had, in practice, complete disposal of the matter. I. --A womanwho was still under the power of her father must, according to law, suewith him as her agent or appoint an agent to act with him. Nevertheless, a father could do nothing without the consent of his daughter. [135]Obviously, then, so far as the power of the father was concerned, awoman had practically the management of her suit. II. --The husband hadno power. If he tried to browbeat her as to what to do, she could sendhim a divorce, a privilege which she had at her beck and call, as wehave seen; and then she could force him to give her any guardian shewanted. [136] III. --That the authority of other guardians was in practicea mere formality, I have already proved (pp. 7 and 8). From these considerations it is clear that the woman's wishes weresupreme in the conduct of any suit. Moreover, the law expressly statesthat women may appoint whatever attorneys or agents they desire, withoutasking the consent of their legal guardians[137]; and thus they were atliberty to select a man who would manage things as they might direct. There were cases where even the strict letter of the law permitted womento lay an action on their own responsibility alone: if, when a suit forrecovery of dowry was brought, the father was absent or hindered byinfirmities[138]; if the woman sued or was sued to get or render anaccount of property managed in trust[139]; to avenge the death of aparent or children, or of patron or patroness and their children[140];to lay bare any matter pertaining to the public grain supply[141]; andto disclose cases of treason. [142] [Sidenote: Instances of women pleading in public and suing. ] We read of many cases of women pleading publicly and bringing suit. Indeed, according to Juvenal--who is, however, a pessimist byprofession--the ladies found legal proceedings so interesting thatbringing suit became a passion with them as strong as it had once beenamong the Athenians. Thus Juvenal[143]: "There is almost no case inwhich a woman wouldn't bring suit. Manilia prosecutes, when she isn't adefendant. They draw up briefs quite by themselves, and are ready tocite principles and authorities to Celsus [a celebrated lawyer of thattime]. " Of pleading in public one of the celebrated instances was thatof Hortensia, daughter of the great orator Quintus Hortensius, Cicero'srival. On an occasion when matrons had been burdened with heavy taxesand none of their husbands would fight the measure, Hortensia pleadedthe case publicly with great success. All writers speak of her actionand the eloquence of her speech with great admiration. [144] We hear alsoof a certain Gaia Afrania, wife of a Senator; she always conducted hercase herself before the supreme judge, "not because there was any lackof lawyers, " adds her respectable and scandalised historian, [145] "butbecause she had more than enough of impudence. " Quintilian mentions several cases of women being sued[146]; Pliny tellshow he acted as attorney for some[147]; and the Law Books will supplyany one curious in the matter with abundant examples. [148] A quotationfrom Pliny[149] will give an idea of the kind of suit a woman mightbring, and the great interest aroused thereby: "Attia Viriola, a womanof illustrious birth and married to a former supreme judge, wasdisinherited by her eighty-year-old father within eleven days after hehad brought Attia a stepmother. Attia was trying to regain her share ofher father's estate. One hundred and eighty jurors sat in judgment. Thetribunal was crowded, and from the higher part of the court both men andwomen strained over the railings in their eagerness to hear (which wasdifficult), and to see (which was easy). " [Sidenote: Partiality of the law to women. ] There were many legal qualifications designed to help women evade thestrict letter of the law when this, if enforced absolutely, would workinjustice. Ignorance of the law, if there was no criminal offenceinvolving good morals, was particularly accepted in the case of women"on account of the weakness of the sex. "[150] A typical instance of thegrowth of the desire to help women, protect them as much as possible, and stretch the laws in their favour, may be taken from the senatorialdecree known as the Senatus Consultum Velleianum. [151] This was an orderforbidding females to become sureties or defendants for any one in acontract. But at the end of the first century of our era the Senatevoted that the law be emended to help women and to give them specialprivileges in every class of contract. "We must praise thefarsightedness of that illustrious order, " comments the great juristUlpian, [152] "because it brought aid to women on account of the weaknessof the sex, exposed, as it is, to many mishaps of this sort. " [Sidenote: Rights of women to inherit. ] The rights of women to inherit under Roman law deserve some mention. Here again we may note a steady growth of justice. Some general exampleswill make this clearer, before I treat of the specific powers ofinheritance. I. --In the year 169 B. C. The Tribune Quintus Voconius Saxahad a law passed which restricted greatly the rights of women toinherit. [153] According to Dio[154] no woman was, by this statute, permitted to receive more than 25, 000 sesterces--1250 dollars. In thesecond century after Christ, this law had fallen into completedesuetude. [155] II. --By the Falcidian Law, passed in the latter part ofthe first century B. C. , no citizen was allowed to divert more than threefourths of his estate from his natural heirs. [156] The Romans feltstrongly against any man who disinherited his children without very goodreason; the will of such a parent was called _inofficiosum_, "madewithout a proper feeling of duty, " and the disinherited children had anaction at law to recover their proper share. [157] A daughter wasconsidered a natural heir no less than a son and had equal privileges insuccession[158]; and so women were bound to receive some inheritance atleast. III. --It is a sad commentary on Christian rulers that for manyages they allowed the crimes of the father to be visited upon hischildren and by their bills of attainder confiscated to the state thegoods of condemned offenders. Now, the Roman law stated positively that"the crime or punishment of a father can inflict no stigma on hischild. "[159] So far as the goods of the father were concerned, theproperty of three kinds of criminals escheated to the crown: (1) thosewho committed suicide while under indictment for some crime, [160] (2)forgers, [161] (3) those guilty of high treason[162]. Yet it seemsreasonable to doubt whether these laws were very often carried outstrictly to the letter. For example, the law did indeed hold that theestate of a party guilty of treason was confiscated to the state[163];but even here it was expressly ordained that the goods of the condemnedman's freedmen be reserved for his children. [164] Moreover, in actualpractice we can find few instances where the law was executed in itsliteral severity even under the worst tyrants. It was Julius Caesar whofirst set the splendid example of allowing to the children of his deadfoes full enjoyment of their patrimonies. [165] Succeeding emperorsfollowed the precedent. [166] Tyrants like Tiberius and Nero, strangelyenough, in a majority of cases overruled the Senate when it proposed toconfiscate the goods of those condemned for treason, and allowed thechildren a large part or all of the paternal estate. [167] Hadrian gavethe children of proscribed offenders the twelfth part of their father'sgoods. [168] Antoninus Pius gave them all. [169] There was a strong publicfeeling against bills of attainder and this sentiment is voiced by allwriters of the Empire. The law forbade wives to suffer any loss for anyfault of their husbands. [170] Since we have now noticed that women could inherit any amount, that theywere bound to receive something under their fathers' wills, and that theguilt of their kin could inflict no prejudice upon them in the way ofbills of attainder involving physical injury or civil status and, inpractice, little loss so far as inheriting property was concerned, wemay pass to a contemplation of the specific legal rights of inheritanceof women. If women were to be disinherited, it was sufficient to mention them inan aggregate; but males must be mentioned specifically. [171] If, however, they were disinherited in an aggregate (_inter ceteros_), somelegacy had to be left them that they might not seem to have been passedover through forgetfulness. [172] I shall not concern myself particularlywith testate succession, because here obviously the will of the testatorcould dispose as he wished, except in so far as he was limited by theFalcidian Law. The matter of intestate succession may well claim ourattention; for therein we shall see what powers of inheritance weregiven the female sex. The general principles are explained by Gaius(iii, 1-38); and these principles followed, in the main, the law as laiddown in the Twelve Tables (451 B. C. ). According to these, the estates ofthose who died intestate belonged first of all to the children who werein the power of the deceased at the time of his death; there was nodistinction of sex; the daughters were entitled to precisely the sameamount as the sons. [173] If the children of the testator had died, thegrandson or granddaughter _through the son_ succeeded; or thegreat-grandson or great-granddaughter through the _grandson_. If a sona daughter were alive, as well as grandsons and granddaughters throughthe _son_, they were all equally called to the estate. The estate wasnot divided per capita, but among families as a whole; for example, ifof two sons one only was alive, but the other had left children, thetestator's surviving son received one half of the patrimony and hisgrandchildren through his other son the other half, to be divided amongthem severally. If, then, there were six grandchildren, each receivedone twelfth of the estate. Here the powers of women to inherit stopped. Beyond the tie of_consanguinitas_, that is, that of daughter to father, or granddaughterthrough a _son_, the female line must at once turn aside, and had nopowers; the estate descended to the _agnati_, that is, male relatives onthe father's side. Hence a mother was shut out by a brother of thedeceased or by that brother's children. If there were no _agnati_, thegoods were given to the _gentiles_, male relatives of the clan bearingthe same name. In fact, under this régime we may say that of the femaleline the daughter alone was sure of inheriting something. In the days of the Empire some attempts were made to be more just. Itwas enacted[174] that all the children should be called to the estate, whether they had been under the power of the testator at the time of hisdeath or not; and female relatives were now allowed to come in fortheir share "in the third degree, " that is, if there was neither a childor an agnate surviving. This was not much of an improvement; and theprinciple of agnate succession is the only point in which Roman lawfailed to give to women those equal rights which it allowed them inother cases. [Sidenote: Protection of property of children. ] There is no point on which Roman law laid more stress than that thechildren, both male and female, were to be constantly protected and mustreceive their legal share of their father's or mother's goods. After ahusband's divorce or death his wife could, indeed, enjoy possession ofthe property and the usufruct; but the principal had to be conservedintact for the children until they arrived at maturity. In the same waya father was obliged to keep untouched for the children whatever hadbeen left them by the mother on her decease[175]; and he must also leavethem that part, at least, of his own property prescribed by theFalcidian Law. A case--and it was common enough in real life--such asthat described by Dickens in _David Copperfield_, where, by the Englishlaw, a second husband acquired absolute right over his wife's propertyand shut out her son, would have been impossible under Roman law. Neither husband nor wife could succeed to one another's intestate estateabsolutely unless there were no children, parents, or other relativesliving. [176] [Sidenote: Punishment of crimes against women. ] Rape of a woman was punished by death; accessories to the crime meritedthe same penalty. [177] Indecent exposure before a virgin met withpunishment out of course. [178] Kidnapping was penalised by hard labourin the mines or by crucifixion in the case of those of humble birth, andby confiscation of half the goods and by perpetual exile in the case ofa noble. [179] Temporary exile was visited upon those guilty of abortionthemselves[180]; if it was caused through the agency of another, theagent, even though he or she did so without evil intent, was punished byhard labour in the mines, if of humble birth, and by relegation to anisland and confiscation of part of their goods, if of noble rank. [181]If the victim died, the person who caused the abortion was put todeath. [182] [Sidenote: Rights of women to an education. ] The rights of women to an education were not questioned. That Sulpiciacould publish amatory poems in honour of her husband and receiveeulogies from writers like Martial[183] shows that she and ladies likeher occupied somewhat the same position as Olympia Morata and TarquiniaMolza later in Italy during the Renaissance, or like some of thecelebrated Frenchwomen, such as Madame de Staël. Seneca addresses a_Dialogue on Consolation_ to one Marcia; such an idea would have madethe hair of any Athenian gentleman in the time of Socrates stand on end. Aspasia was obliged to be a courtesan in order to become educated and tofrequent cultivated society[184]; Sulpicia was a noble matron in goodstanding. The world had not stood still since Socrates had requestedsome one to take Xanthippe home, lest he be burdened by her sympathy inhis last moments. Pains were taken that the Roman girl of wealth shouldhave special tutors. [185] "Pompeius Saturninus recently read me someletters, " writes Pliny[186] to one of his correspondents, "which heinsisted had been written by his wife. I believed that Plautus orTerence was being read in prose. Whether they are really his wife's, ashe maintains; or his own, which he denies; he deserves equal honour, either because he composes them, or because he has made his wife, whomhe married when a mere girl, so learned and polished. " The enthusiasm ofthe ladies for literature is attested by Persius. [187] According to Juvenal, who, as an orthodox satirist, was not fond of theweaker sex, women sometimes became over-educated. He growls asfollows[188]: "That woman is a worse nuisance than usual who, as soon asshe goes to bed, praises Vergil; makes excuses for doomed Dido; pitsbards against one another and compares them; and weighs Homer and Maroin the balance. Teachers of literature give way, professors arevanquished, the whole mob is hushed, and no lawyer or auctioneer willspeak, nor any other woman. " The prospect of a learned wife filled theorthodox Roman with peculiar horror. [189] No Roman woman ever became apublic professor as did Hypatia or, ages later, Bitisia Gozzadina, who, in the thirteenth century, became doctor of canon and civil law at theUniversity of Bologna. I have been speaking of women of the wealthier classes; but the poorwere not neglected. As far back as the time of the Twelve Tables--450B. C. --parents of moderate means were accustomed to club together andhire a schoolroom and a teacher who would instruct the children, girlsno less than boys, in at least the proverbial three R's. Virginia was onher way to such a school when she encountered the passionate gaze ofAppius Claudius. Such grammar schools, which boys and girls attendedtogether, flourished under the Empire as they had under theRepublic. [190] They were not connected with the state, being supportedby the contributions of individual parents. To the end we cannot saythat there was a definite scheme of public education for girls at thestate's expense as there was for boys. [191] Still, the emperors didsomething. Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, Marcus Aurelius, andAlexander Severus, for example, regularly supplied girls and boys witheducation at public expense[192]; under Trajan there were 5000 childrenso honoured. Public-spirited citizens were also accustomed to contributeliberally to the same cause; Pliny on one occasion[193] gave theequivalent of $25, 000 for the support and instruction of indigent boysand girls. [Sidenote: The Vestals. ] It may not be out of place to speak briefly of the Vestal Virgins, thesix priestesses of Vesta, who are the only instances in pagan antiquityof anything like the nuns of the Christians. The Vestals took a vow ofperpetual chastity. [194] They passed completely out of the power oftheir parents and became entirely independent. They could not receivethe inheritance of any person who died intestate, and no one couldbecome heir to a Vestal who died intestate. They were allowed to bewitnesses in court in public trials, a privilege denied other women. Peculiar honour was accorded them and they were regularly appointed thecustodians of the wills of the emperors. [195] [Sidenote: Female slaves. ] The position of women in slavery merits some attention, in view of thehuge multitudes that were held in bondage. Roman law acknowledged nolegal rights on the part of slaves[196]. The master had absolute powerof life and death. [197] They were exposed to every whim of master ormistress without redress. [198] If some one other than their owner harmedthem they might obtain satisfaction through their master and for hisbenefit; but the penalty for the aggressor was only pecuniary. [199] Aslave's evidence was never admitted except under torture. [200] If amaster was killed, every slave of his household and even his freedmenand freedwomen were put to torture, although the culprit may alreadyhave been discovered, in order to ascertain the instigator of the plotand his remotest accessories. [201] The earlier history of Rome leaves no doubt that before the Republicfell these laws were carried out with inhuman severity. With thegrowth of Rome into a world power and the consequent rise ofhumanitarianism[202] a strong public feeling against gratuitous crueltytowards slaves sprang up. This may be illustrated by an event whichhappened in the reign of Nero, in the year 58, when a riot ensued out ofsympathy for some slaves who had been condemned _en masse_ after theirmaster had been assassinated by one of them. [203] Measures weregradually introduced for alleviating the hardships and cruelties ofslavery. Claudius (41-54 A. D. ) ordained[204] that since sick and infirmslaves were being exposed on an island in the Tiber sacred toAesculapius, because their masters did not wish to bother aboutattending them, all those who were so exposed were to be set free ifthey recovered and never to be returned into the power of their masters;and if any owner preferred to put a slave to death rather than exposehim, he was to be held for murder. Gentlemen began to speak withcontempt of a master or mistress who maltreated slaves. [205] Hadrian(117-138 A. D. ) modified the old laws to a remarkable degree: he forbadeslaves to be put to death by their masters and commanded them to betried by regularly appointed judges; he brought it about that a slave, whether male or female, was not to be sold to a slave-dealer or trainerfor public shows without due cause; he did away with _ergastula_ orworkhouses, in which slaves guilty of offences were forced to work offtheir penalties in chains and were confined to filthy dungeons; and hemodified the law previously existing to the extent that if a master waskilled in his own house, the inquisition by torture could not beextended to the whole household, but to those only who, by proximity tothe deed, could have noticed it. [206] Gaius observes[207] that forslaves to be in complete subjection to masters who have power of lifeand death is an institution common to all nations, "But at this time, "he continues, "it is permitted neither to Roman citizens nor any othermen who are under the sway of the Roman people to vent their wrathagainst slaves beyond measure and without reason. In fact, by a decreeof the sainted Antoninus (138-161 A. D. ) a master who without cause killshis slave is ordered to be held no less than he who kills another'sslave. [208] An excessive severity on the part of masters is also checkedby a constitution of the same prince. On being consulted by certaingovernors about those slaves who rush for refuge to the shrines of thegods or the statues of emperors, he ordered that if the cruelty ofmasters seemed intolerable they should be compelled to sell theirslaves. " Severus ordained that the city prefect should prevent slavesfrom being prostituted[209]. Aurelian gave his slaves who hadtransgressed to be heard according to the laws by public judges[210]. Tacitus procured a decree that slaves were not to be put toinquisitorial torture in a case affecting a master's life, not even ifthe charge was high treason[211]. So much for the laws that mitigatedslavery under the Empire. They were not ideal; but they would in morerespects than one compare favourably with the similar legislation thatwas in force, prior to the Civil War, in the American Slave States. SOURCES I. Iurisprudentiae Anteiustinianae quae Supersunt. Ed. Ph. EduardusHuschke. Lipsiae (Teubner), 1886 (fifth edition). II. Codex Iustinianus. Recensuit Paulus Krueger. Berolini apudWeidmannos, 1877. Corpus Iuris Civilis: Institutiones recognovit Paulus Krueger; Digestarecognovit Theodorus Mommsen. Berolini apud Weidmannos, 1882. Novellae: Corpus Iuris Civilis. Volumen Tertium recognovit RudolfusSchoell; Opus Schoellii morte interceptum absolvit G. Kroll. Beroliniapud Weidmannos, 1895. III. The Fragments of the Perpetual Edict of Salvius Julianus. Edited byBryan Walken Cambridge University Press. 1877. IV. Pomponii de Origine Iuris Fragmentum: recognovit FridericusOsannus. Gissae, apud Io. Rickerum, 1848. V. Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, Consilio et Auctoritate AcademiaeLitterarum Regiae Borussicae editum. Berolini apud Georgium Reimerum(begun in 1863). VI. Valerii Maximi Factorum et Dictorum Memorabilium Libri Novem: cumIulii Paridis et Ianvarii Nepotiani Epitomis: iterum recensuit CarolusKempf. Lipsiae (Teubner), 1888. VII. Cassii Dionis Cocceiani Rerum Romanarum libri octaginta: abImmanuele Bekkero Recogniti. Lipsiae, apud Weidmannos, 1849. VIII. C. Suetoni Tranquilli quae Supersunt Omnia: recensuit Carolus L. Roth. Lipsiae (Teubner), 1898. IX. A. Persii Flacci, D. Iunii Iuvenalis, Sulpiciae Saturae; recognovitOtto Iahn. Editio altera curam agente Francisco Buecheler. Berolini, apud Weidmannos, 1886. X. Eutropi Breviarium ab Urbe Condita: recognovit Franciscus Ruehl. Lipsiae (Teubner), 1897. XI. Herodiani ab Excessu Divi Marci libri octo: ab Immanuele Bekkerorecogniti. Lipsiae (Teubner), 1855. XII. A. Gellii Noctium Atticarum libri XX: edidit Carolus Hosius. Lipsiae (Teubner), 1903. XIII. Petronii Saturae et Liber Priapeorum: quartum edidit FranciscusBuecheler: adiectae sunt Varronis et Senecae Saturae similesqueReliquiae. Berolini, apud Weidmannos, 1904. XIV. M. Valerii Martialis Epigrammaton libri: recognovit WaltherGilbert. Lipsiae (Teubner), 1896. XV. Cornelii Taciti Libri qui Supersunt: quartum recognovit CarolusHalm. Lipsiae (Teubner), 1901. XVI. C. Vellei Paterculi ex Historiae Romanae libris duobus quaesupersunt: edidit Carolus Halm. Lipsiae (Teubner), 1876. XVII. L. Annaei Senecae Opera quae Supersunt: recognovit FridericusHaase. Lipsiae (Teubner), 1898. XVIII. Athenaei Naucratitae Deipnosophistaro libri XV: recensuitGeorgius Kaibel. Lipsiae (Teubner), 1887. XIX. Lucii Apulei Metamorphoseon libri XI. Apologia et Florida. Recensuit J. Van der Vliet. Lipsiae (Teubner), 1897. XX. C. Plini Caecili Secundi Epistularum libri novem. Epistularum adTraianum liber. Panegyricus. Recognovit C. F. W. Mueller. Lipsiae(Teubner), 1903. XXI. Scriptores Historiae Augustae: edidit Hermannus Peter. Lipsiae(Teubner), 1888. XXII. M. Fabii Quintiliani Institutionis Oratoriae libri XII: recensuitEduardus Bonnell. Lipsiae (Teubner), 1905. XXIII. Marci Antonini Commentariorum libri XII: iterum recensuit IoannesStich. Lipsiae (Teubner), 1903. XXIV. C. Plinii Secundi Naturalis Historiae libri XXXVII: recognovitLudovicus Ianus. Lipsiae (Teubner), 1854. XXV. XII Panegyrici Latini: recensuit Aemilius Baehrens. Lipsiae(Teubner), 1874. XXVI. Plutarchi Scripta Moralia, Graece et Latine: Parisiis, editoreAmbrosio F. Didot, 1841. Plutarchi Vitae Parallelae: iterum recognovit Carolus Sintennis. Lipsiae(Teubner), 1884. XXVII. Ammiani Marcellini Rerum Gestarum libri qui supersunt: recensuitV. Gardthausen. Lipsiae (Teubner), 1875. XXVIII. Poetae Latini Minores: recensuit Aemilius Baehrens. Lipsiae(Teubner), 1883. NOTES: [1] Paulus, iii, 4_a_, 1. [2] Ulpian, Tit. , xx, 16. Gaius, ii, 112. [ 3: Male relatives on the father's side--agnati--were guardiansin such cases; these failing, the judge of the supreme court (praetor)assigned one. See Ulpian, Tit. , xi, 3, 4, and 24. Gaius, i, 185, andiii, 10. Libertae (freedwomen) took as guardians their former masters. ] [4] Ulpian, Tit. , xi, 27. [5] The power of the father was called _potestas_; that of the husband, _manus_. [6] Aulus Gellius, x, 23. Cf. Suetonius, _Tiberius_, 35. [7] Gaius, i, 144. [8] Ulpian, Tit. , xi, I. [9] Ulpian, Tit. , xi, 28a. Gaius, i, 194. Paulus, iv, 9, 1-9. [10] Gaius, i, 145. Ulpian, Tit. , x, 5. [11] Gaius, i, 137. For an example see Pliny, _Letters_, viii, 18. Cf. Spartianus. _Didius Iulianus_, 8: filiam suam, potitus imperio, datopatrimonio, emancipaverat. See also Dio, 73, 7 (Xiphilin). If emancipated children insulted or injured their parents, they losttheir independence--Codex, 8, 49 (50), 1. [12] Ulpian, Tit. , viii, 7_a_. [13] Paulus, i, 4, 4; Mater, quae filiorum suorum rebus intervenit, actione negotiorum gestorum et ipsis et eorum tutoribus tenebitur. [14] Ulpian in Dig. , 25, 3, 5. [15] For Livia's great influence over Augustus see Seneca, _deClementia_, i, 9, 6. Tacitus, _Annals_, i, 3, 4, and 5, and ii, 34. Dio, 55, 14-21, and 56, 47. Agrippina dominated Claudius--Tacitus, _Annals_, xii, 37. Dio, 60, 33. Caenis, the concubine of Vespasian, amassed great wealth and sold publicoffices right and left--Dio, 65, 14. Plotina, wife of Trajan, engineeredHadrian's succession--Eutropius, viii, 6. Dio, 69, I. A concubine formedthe conspiracy which overthrew Commodus--Herodian, i, 16-17. Theplotting of Maesa put Heliogabalus on the throne--Capitolinus, _Macrinus_, 9-10. Alexander Severus was ruled by his motherMammaea--Lampridius, _Alex. Severus_, 14; Herodian, vi, i, i and 9. Gallienus invited women to his cabinet meetings--Trebellius Pollio, Gallienus, 16. The wives of governors took such a strenuous part inpolitics and army matters that it caused the Senate grave concern--seeexamples in Tacitus, Annals, in, 33 and 34, and iv, 20; also i, 69, andii, 55; id. _Hist_. , iii, 69. Vellcius Paterculus, ii, 74 (Fulvia). Of course, no woman ever had a right to vote; but neither did anybodyelse, since the Roman government had become an absolute despotism. Thefirst woman on the throne was Pulcheria, who, in 450 A. D. , wasproclaimed Empress of the East, succeeding her brother, Theodosius II. But she soon took a husband and made him Emperor. She had beenpractically sole ruler since 414. [16] Plutarch, _Roman Questions_, 6. Aulus Gellius, x, 23. Athenaeus, x, 56. [17] Valerius Maximus, vi, 3, 9. For this he was not even blamed, butrather received praise for the excellent example. [18] Aulus Gellius, x, 23. A woman in the _Menaechmi_ of Plautus, iv, 6, 1, complains justly of this double standard of morality: Nam si vir scortum duxit clam uxorem suam, Id si rescivit uxor, impuneest viro. Uxor viro si clam domo egressa est foras, Viro fit causa, exigitur matrimonio. Utinam lex esset cadem quae uxori est viro! [19] Aulus Gellius, i, 6. [20] De Consolatione ad Marciam, xvi, 1. [21] _Commentaries_, A, [Greek: gamma]. [22] Quintilian, _Instit. Orat_. , vi, 1, 5. Pliny, _Letters_, vi, 4 and7, and vii, 5. [23] Great admiration expressed for Paulina, wife of Seneca, who openedher veins to accompany her husband in death--Tacitus, _Annals_, xv, 63, 64. Story of Arria and Paetus--Pliny, _Letters_, iii, 16. Martial, i, 13. The famous instance of Epponina, under Vespasian, and her attachmentto her condemned husband--Tacitus, _Hist_. , iv, 67. Tacitus mentionsthat many ladies accompanied their husbands to exile anddeath--_Annals_, xvi, 10, 11. Numerous instances are related by Pliny oftender and happy marriages, terminated only by death--see, e. G. , _Letters_, viii, 5. Pliny the elder tells how M. Lepidus died of regretfor his wife after being divorced from her--_N. H. _, vii, 36. ValeriusMaximus devotes a whole chapter to Conjugal Love--iv, 6. But the bestexamples of deep affection are seen in tomb inscriptions--e. G. , CIL i, 1103, viii, 8123, ii, 3596, v, 1, 3496, v, 2, 7066, x, 8192, vi, 3, 15696, 15317, and 17690. Man and wife are often represented with armsthrown about one another's shoulders to signify that they were united indeath as in life. The poet Statius remarks that "to love a wife when sheis living is pleasure; to love her when dead, a solemn duty" (Silvae, inprooemio). Yet some theologians would have us believe that conjugal loveand fidelity is an invention of Christianity. [24] Pliny, _Panegyricus_, 26. For other instances see Capitolinus, _Anton. Pius_, 8; Lampridius, _Alex. Severus_, 57; Spartianus, Hadrian, 7, 8, 9; Capitolinus, _M. Anton. Phil_. , 11. [25] Gaius, i, 190. [26] Ulpian, Tit. Xi, 25. Cf. Frag, iur Rom. Vatic. (Huschke, 325): DiviDiocletianus et Constantius Aureliae Pontiae: Actor rei forum sequidebet et mulier quoque facere procuratorem _sine tutoris auctoritate nonprohibetur_. So Papinian, lib. Xv, Responsorum (Huschke, 327). I shalldiscuss these matters at greater length when I treat of women and themanagement of their property. [27] Dio, 54, 16. Pomponius in Dig. , 23, 2, 4. [28] Gaius, i, 113. [29] Ulpian, Tit. , ix, 1: Farreo convenit uxor in manum certis verbis ettestibus X praesentibus et sollemni sacrificio facto, in quo panisquoque farreus adhibetur. Cf. Gaius, i, 112. [30] Aulus Gellius, iii, 2, 12. Gaius, i, 111. [31] Gaius, i, 110 and 111. [32] Paulus, ii, xix, 8. [33] Pliny, _Letters_, i, 14, will furnish an example; cf. Id. Vi, 26, to Servianus: Gaudeo et gratulor, quod Fusco Salinatori filiam tuamdestinasti. Note the way in which Julius Caesar arranged a match for hisdaughter--Suetonius, _Divus Julius_, 21. [34] Paulus in Dig. , 23, 2, 2: Nuptiae consistere non possunt, nisiconsentiunt omnes, id est, qui coeunt quorumque in potestate sunt. [35] Julianus in Dig. , 23, 1, 11. [36] Ulpian in Dig. , 23, 1, 12. [37] Paulus in Dig. , 23, 1, 13. Terentius Clemens in Dig. , 23, 2, 21. [38] Paulus, ii, 19, 2. [39] Ulpian, 24, 17. [40] Cf. Ulpian, Tit. , vi, 6: Divortio facto, si quidem sui juris sitmuller, ipsa habet rei uxoriae actionem, id est, dotis repetitionem;quodsi in potestate patris sit, pater adiuncta filiae persona habetactionem. The technical recognition of the father's power was still strong. Cf. Pliny, _Panegyricus_, 38: Tu quidem, Caesar . .. Intuitus, opinor, vimlegemque naturae, quae semper in dicione parentum esse liberos iussit. The same writer, on requesting Trajan to give citizenship to thechildren of a certain freedman, is careful to add the specification thatthey are to remain in their father's power--see Pliny to Trajan, xi(vi). [41] Paulus, vi, 15. Codex, v, 4, 11, and 17, 5. [42] Paulus, in Dig. , 23, 3, 28. Codex, v, 13, 1, and 18, 1. [43] Codex, v, 17, 5. [44] Salvius Julianus: Frag. Perp. Ed. : Pars Prima, vii--under "De isqui notantur infamia. " [45] Codex, 8, 46 (47), 5. [46] Aulus Gellius, iv, 4. [47] Juvenal, vi, 200-203. Gaius in Dig. , 24, 2, 2. Ulpian, ibid. , 23, I, 10. Codex, v, 17, 2, and v, I, I. [48] Codex, v, 3, 2. [49] Dig. , 3, 2, 1. [50] Ulpian in Dig. , 47, 10, 24. [51] Cf. Alexander Severus in Codex, viii, 38, 2: Libera matrimonia esseantiquitus placuit, etc. Also Codex, v, 4, 8 and 14. [52] Modestinus in Dig. , xxiii, 2, 1. [53] Gaius, ii, 159. [54] Paulus, ii, xx, 1. [55] Note the rescript of Alexander Severus to a certain Aquila (Codex, ii, 18, 13): Quod in uxorem tuam aegram erogasti, non a socero repetere, sed adfectioni tuae debes expendere. [56] See, e. G. , Dig. , 47, 10, and Ulpian, ibid. , 48, 14, 27. [57] Cf. Gaius, i, 141: In summa admonendi sumus, adversus eos, quos inmancipio habemus, nihil nobis contumeliose facere licere; alioquininiuriarum (actione) tenebimur. [58] Paulus, i, 21, 13. [59] Paulus, i, 21, 14. [60] Codex, ii, 11, 15 [61] Paulus in Dig. , iii, 2, 9. [62] Aulus Gellius, xvii, 6, speech of Cato: Principio vobis muliermagnam dotem adtulit; tum magnam pecuniam recipit, quam in viripotestatem non committit, ean pecuniam viro mutuam dat; postea, ubiirata facta est, servum recepticum sectari atque flagitare virum iubet. [63] Paulus in Dig. , 23, 3, 2. [64] Pomponius in Dig. , 24, 3, 1. [65] Ulpian in Dig. , 23, 3, 7. [66] Tryfoninus in Dig. , 23, 3, 75. [67] Gaius, ii, 63. Paulus, ii, 21b. [68] E. G. Juvenal, vi, 136-141. Martial, viii, 12. [69] Apuleius _Apologia_, 523: Pleraque tamen rei familiaris in nomenuxoris callidissima fraude confert, etc. ; id. , 545, 546 proves furtherthe power of the wife: ea condicione factam conjunctionem, si nullis ame susceptis liberis vita demigrasset, ut dos omnis, etc. --evidently thewoman was dictating the disposal of her dowry. [70] Ulpian, Tit. , vi, 3, 4, and 5. Codex, v, 18, 4. [71] Ulpian in Dig. , xi, 7, 16; ibid. , Papinian, 17; ibid, Julianus, 18. Paulus, i, xxi, 11. [72] Ulpian in Dig. , 48, 20, 3. [73] Ulpian in Dig. , 48, 20, 5. [74] Ulpian in Dig. , 24, 1, 1: Moribus apud nos receptum est, ne intervirum et uxorem donationes valerent, hoc autem receptum est, ne mutuoamore invicem spoliarentur, donationibus non temperantes, sed profusaerga se facilitate. [75] Paulus in Dig. , 24, 1, 14. [76] Gaius in Dig. , 24, 1, 42; ibid. , Licinius Rufus, 41; Ulpian, Tit. Vii, 1. Martial, vii, 64--et post hoc dominae munere factus eques. [77] Paulus, ii, xxiii, 1. [78] Cf. Paulus, ii, xxiii, 2. [79] Paulus in Dig. , 25, 2, 1. Codex, v, 21, 2. [80] Gaius in Dig. , 25, 2, 2. [81] Paulus in Dig. , 25, 2, 3. [82] Ulpian in Dig. , 47, 2, 52. The respect shown for family relationsmay be seen also from the fact that a son could _complain--de factomatris queri_--if he believed that his mother had brought insupposititious offspring to defraud him of some of his inheritance; buthe was strictly forbidden to bring her into court with a public andcriminal action--Macer in Dig. , 48, 2, 11: _sed ream eam lege Corneliafacere permissum ei non est_. [83] Ulpian in Dig. , 48, 14, 27. [84] Ulpian in Dig. , 48, 5, 14 (13): Iudex adulterii ante oculos haberedebet et inquirere, an maritus pudice vivens mulieri quoque bonos morescolendi auctor fuerit periniquum enim videtur esse, ut pudicitiam vir abuxore exigat, quam ipse non exhibeat. Cf. Seneca, _Ep_. , 94: Scisimprobum esse qui ab uxore pudicitiam exigit, ipse alienarum corruptoruxorum. Scis ut illi nil cum adultero, sic nihil tibi esse debere cumpellice. Antoninus Pius gave a husband a bill for adultery against hiswife "Provided it is established that by your life you give her anexample of fidelity. It would be unjust that a husband should demand afidelity which he does not himself keep"--quoted by St. Augustine, deConj. Adult. , ii, ch. 8. In view of these explicit statements it isdifficult to see what the Church Father Lactantius meant by asserting(_de Vero Cultu_, 23): Non enim, sicut iuris publici ratio est, solamulier adultera est, quae habet alium; maritus autem, etiamsi plureshabeat, a crimine adulterii solutus est. Perhaps this deliberatedistortion of the truth was another one of the libels against pagan Romeof which the pious Fathers are so fond "for the good of the Church. " [85] Papinian in Dig. , 48, 5, 21 (20); ibid. , Ulpian, 24 (23). Paulus, ii, xxvi. [86] Macer in Dig. , 48, 5, 25 (24). [87] Papinian in Dig. , 48, 5, 23 (22). [88] Papinian in Dig. , 48, 5, 39 (38); ibid. , Marcianus, 48, 8, 1. [89] Paulus, ii, xxvi. Macer in Dig. , 48, 5, 25 (24), ibid. , Ulpian, 48, 5, 30 (29). [90] Paulus, ii, xxvi. [91] Juvenal, x. 317; quosdam moechos et mugilis intrat. Cf. Catullus, 15, 19. [92] See, e. G. , Capitolinus, _Anton_. _Pius_, 3. Spartianus, _Sept. Severus_, 18, Pliny, _Panegyricus_, 83: multis illustribus dedecori fuitaut inconsultius uxor assumpta aut retenta patientius, etc. [93] Pliny, _Letters_, vi, 31. [94] Paulus, ii, xxvi, 15. [95] Valerius Maximus, ii, 1, 6. [96] Aulus Gellius, xvii, 21, 44. Valerius Maximus, ii, 1, 4. Plutarch, _Roman Questions_, 14. [97] Valerius Maximus, vi, 3, 12. [98] "If you should catch your wife in adultery, you would put her todeath with impunity; she, on her part, would not dare to touch you withher finger; and it is not right that she should"--Speech of Cato theCensor, quoted by Aulus Gellius, x, 23. [99] E. G. , Marcellus in Dig. , 24, 3, 38: Maevia Titio repudium misit, etc. ; ibid. , Africanus, 24, 3, 34: Titia divortium a Seio fecit, etc. Martial, x, 41: Mense novo lani veterem, Proculeia, maritum Deseris, atque iubes res sibi habere suas. Apuleius, _Apologia_, 547: utramvishabens culpam mulier, quae aut tam intolerabilis fuit ut repudiareturaut tam insolens ut repudiaret. _Novellae_, 140, 1: Antiquitus quidem licebat sine periculo tales [i. E. , those of incompatible temperament] ab invicem separari secundum communemvoluntatem et consensum. [100] Martial, vi, 7. [101] Aulus Gellius, x, 15: Matrimonium flaminis nisi morte dirimi iusnon est. [102] Tacitus, _Annals_, iv, 16. [103] Ulpian, vi, 6; id. In Dig. , 24, 3, 2. Pauli fragmentam in Boethiicommentario ad Topica, 2, 4, 19. [104] Paulus in Dig. Ii, 3, 41. [105] Ulpian, vi, 13. [106] Ulpian, vi, 9-17, and vii, 2-3. Pauli frag, in Boethii comm. AdTop. , ii, 4, 19. [107] Ulpian, xiv: feminis lex Iulia a morte viri anni tribuitvacationem, a divortio sex mensum; lex autem Papia a morte viri biennii, a repudio anni et sex mensum. [108] Ulpian in Dig. , 25, 3, 1. Paulus, ii, xxiv, 5. [109] Ulpian in Dig. , 25, 4, 8. [110] Codex, v, 24, 1. [111] Codex, vi, 60, 1: Res, quae ex matris successione fuerint adfilios devolutae, ita sint in parentum potestate, ut fruendi dumtaxathabeant facultatem, dominio videlicet carum ad liberos pertinente. [112] Neratius in Dig. , 26, 1, 18. [113] Codex, v, 35, 1. [114] Codex, ii, 12, 18: alienam suscipere defensionem virile officiumest . .. Filio itaque tuo, si pupillus est, tutorem pete. [115] Ulpian, Tit. Viii, 7_a_. Paulus, i, 4, 4. [116] _ad Helviam matrem de consol_. , xiv, 3. [117] Other instances of women trustees will be found in Apuleius, _Apologia_ 516; Paulus in Dig; iii, 5, 23 (24): avia nepotis sui negotiagessit, etc. ; ibid. , Marcellus, 46, 3, 48: Titia cum propter dotem bonamariti possideret, omnia pro domina egit, reditus exegit, etc. [118] Tacitus, _Agricola_, 43. [119] Frag. Iur. Rom. Vat. , 282. [120] Ulpian, viii, 7a. [121] Gaius, ii, 227. Digest, 35, 2. [122] E. G. Pliny, _Letters_, v, 1. Codex, iii, 28, 19; id. , iii, 28, 28. Cf. Codex, iii, 29, I, and 29, 7; and Paulus in Dig. , v, 2, 19. Note theextreme anxiety of the son of Prudentilla about her money as given byApuleius, _Apologia_, 517. The estate of a mother who died intestatewent to her children, not to her husband; the latter could only enjoythe interest until they arrived at maturity--Codex, vi, 60, 1;Modestinus in Dig. , 38, 17, 4. [123] E. G. , Juvenal, iv, 18-21. Pliny, _Letters_, ii, 20. [124] Digest, xiv, 1 and 3 and 8--on the actio exercitoria andinstitoria. Cf. Codex, iv, 25, 4: et si a muliere magister navispraepositus fuerit, etc. [125] CIL, xiv, 326. [126] Martial, xi, 71. Apuleius, _Metam_. , v, 10. Soranus, i, 1, ch. 1and 2. Galen, vii, 414 (cf. Xiii, 341). [127] E. G. Suetonius, _Nero_, 27. [128] Carmina Priapea, 18 and 27. Ulpian, xiii, 1. The Roman drama hadnow degenerated into mere vaudeville, mostly lascivious dancing. Senators and their children were forbidden to marry any woman who hadherself or whose father or mother had been on the stage. [129] Martial, ii, 17, 1. [130] Petronius, _Sat_. , 45: Titus noster . .. Habet et mulieremessedariam. This would not be strange, when we reflect that underDomitian noble ladies even fought in the arena. [131] _Thesmophoriazusae_, 443-459. [132] See Cicero, _pro Caecina_, 5, for an account of these businessagents for women. [133] Paulus, ii, xi; id. In Dig. , 16, 1, 1; Aulus Gellius, v, 19;Pomponius in Dig. , 48, 2, 1: non est permissum mulieri publico iudicioquemquam reum facere. [134] Ulpian in Dig. , 1, 16, 9. Salvius Julianus, Pars Prima, vi: si nonhabebunt advocatum, ego dabo. Alexander Severus (222-235 A. D. ) gavepensions to those advocates in the provinces who pleaded free ofcharge--Lampridius, _Alex. Severus_, 44. [135] Cf. Paulus in Dig. , 23, 3, 28. Codex, v, 13, 1, and 18, 1. Ulpianin Dig. , iii, 3, 8. [136] Gaius, i, 137. [137] Frag. Iur. Rom. Vat. , 325; id. , 327 (from Papinian): mulieresquoque et sine tutoris auctoritate procuratorem facere posse. [138] Ulpian in Dig. , iii, 3, 8; ibid. , Paulus, iii, 3, 41. [139] Ulpian in Dig. , iii, 5, 3. [140] Pomponius in Dig. , 48, 2, 1; ibid. , Papinian, 48, 2, 2--who addsthat she could also do so in a case regarding the will of a mother orfather's freedman. [141] Marcianus in Dig. , 48, 2, 13. [142] Papinian in Dig. , 48, 4, 8. [143] Juvenal, vi, 242--245. [144] Valerius Maximus, viii, 3, 3. Appian, _B. C. _, iv, 32 ff. Quintilian, i, 1, 6. [145] Valerius Maximus, viii, 3, 2. [146] Quintilian, ix, 2, 20 and 34. [147] E. G. , Pliny _Letters_, i, 5, and iv, 17. [148] E. G. , Huschke, pp. 796, 797, 803, 807, 809, 810, 856, 857, 858. Orinstances such as that mentioned in Digest, 48, 2, 18, where a sisterbrings an action to prove her brother's will a forgery. [149] Pliny, _Letters_, vi, 33. [150] Paulus in Dig. , 22, 6, 9. [151] Fully treated in Dig. , 16, 1, and Paulus, ii, xi. [152] Ulpian in Dig. , 16, 1, 2. [153] Aulus Gellius, xvii, 6. St. Augustine, de Civit. Dei, iii, 21: namtunc, id est inter secundum et postremum bellum Carthaginiense, lata estetiam illa lex Voconis, ne quis heredem feminam faceret, nec unicamfiliam. [154] Dio, 56, 10. [155] Aulus Gellius, xx, 1, 23. According to Dio, 56, 10, it wasAugustus who in the year 9 A. D. Gave women permission to inherit anyamount. [156] Fully treated in Dig. , 35, 2. Also in Gaius, ii, 227, and Paulus, iii, viii, 1-3, and iv, 3, 3, and 5 and 6. [157] Paulus, iv, Tit. V, 1. Cases in which "Complaints of UndutifulWill" were the issue will be found, e. G. , in Codex, iii, 28, 1 and 19and 28; id. , iii, 29, 1 and 7. [158] Ulpian in Dig. , 38, 16, 1: suos heredes accipere debemus filiosfilias sive naturales sive adoptivos. Instances of daughters being leftheiresses of whole estates may be found, e. G. , in Dig. , 28, 2, 19: cumquidam filiam ex asse heredem scripsisset filioque, quem in potestatehabebat, decem legasset, etc. Or the example mentioned by Scaevola inDig. , 41, 9, 3: Duae filiae intestato patri heres exstiterunt, etc. [159] Callistratus in Dig. , 48, 19, 26: crimen vel poena paterna nullammaculam filio infligere potest. Namque unusquisque ex suo admisso sortisubicitur nec alieni criminis successor constituitur; idque divi fratresHierapolitanis rescripserunt. "Nothing is more unjust, " writes Seneca(de Ira, ii, 34, 3), "than that any one should become the heir of theodium excited by his father. " [160] Paulus, v, xii, 1. [161] Paulus, v, xii, 12. [162] Ulpian in Dig. , 48, 4, 11. [163] Ulpian in Dig. , 48, 4, 11. [164] Hermogenianus in Dig. , 48, 4, 9. [165] Sulla had not only deprived the children of the proscribed of alltheir estates, but had also debarred them from aspiring to any politicaloffice--see Velleius Paterculus, ii, 28. [166] For examples of the clemency of Augustus see Suetonius, _div. Aug. _, 33 and 51 and 67; Seneca, _de Ira_, iii, 23, 4 ff. , and 40, 2;Velleius Paterculus, ii, 86, 87. [167] For Tiberius see, e. G. , Tacitus, _Annals_, iv--case of Silius;id. , _Annals_, iii, 17, 18--case of Piso. For Nero, note Tacitus, _Annals_, xiii, 43--case of Publius Suilius. Clemency of Claudiusmentioned in Dio, 60, 15, 16; of Vitellius in Tacitus, _Hist_. , ii, 62. [168] Spartianus, _Had. _, 18. [169] Capitolinus, _Anton. Pius_, 7. See also the anecdote of Aurelianin Vopiscus, _Aurelian_, 23. [170] Codex, iv, 12, 2, rescript of Diocletian: ob maritorum culpamuxores inquietari leges vetant. Proinde rationalis noster, si res quae afisco occupatae sunt dominii tui esse probaveris, ius publicum sequetur. [171] Gaius, ii, 129 and 132. [172] Gaius, ii, 132. [173] Codex, iii, 36, 11: Inter filios ac filias bona intestatorumparentium pro virilibus portionibus aequo iure dividi oportere exploratiiuris est. [174] Gaius, iii, 25-31. [175] See, e. G. , Codex, vi, 60, i: Res, quae ex matris successionefuerint ad filios devolutae, ita sint in parentum potestate, ut fruendidumtaxat habeant facultatem, dominio videlicet eorum ad liberospertinente. [176] For all this, see Codex, v, 9, 5, and vi, 18, q. [177] Paulus, v, 4, 14, who adds that exile was the penalty if the crimehad not been completely carried out. It would seem also that ravishedwomen had the option of deciding whether their seducers should marrythem or be put to death--see the _vitiatarum electiones_ as mentioned byTacitus, _Dial. De Orat_. , 35. According to Ruffus, 40, a soldier whodid violence to a girl had his nostrils cut off, besides being forced togive the injured woman a third part of his goods: militi, qui puellaevim adtulerit et stupraverit, nares abscinduntur, data puellae tertiamilitis facultatum parte. [178] Paulus, v, 4, 21. [179] By the lex Fabia. Paulus, v, 30 B. Digest, 48, 15; 17, 2, 51. [180] Ulpian in Dig. , 48, 8, 8; ibid. , Tryphoninus, 48, 19, 39. [181] Paulus, v, 23, 14; id. In Dig. , 48, 19, 38. [182] Paulus, supra cit. [183] Martial, x, 35, and x, 38. [184] Sappho, Telesilla, and Corinna belong to an earlier period, whenthe Oriental idea of seclusion for women had not yet become firmly fixedin Greece. Women like Agallis of Corcyra, who wrote on grammar(Athenaeus, i, 25) and lived in a much later age, doubtless belonged tothe _hetaerae_ class. [185] See, e. G. , Pliny, _Letters_, v, 16. [186] Pliny, _Letters_, i, 16. [187] Persius, i, 4-5: Ne mihi Polydamas et Troiades Labeonempraetulerint? "Are you afraid that Polydamas and the Trojan Ladies willprefer Labeo to me?" The _Trojan Ladies_, of course, stand for thearistocratic classes, Colonial Dames, so to speak, who were fond oftracing their descent back to Troy just as Americans like to discoverthat their ancestors came over in the _Mayflower_. [188] Juvenal, vi, 434-440. [189] Cf. Martial, ii, 90: sit mihi verna satur, sit non doctissimaconiunx. [190] The famous verses of Martial: Quid tibi nobiscum, ludi scelerate magister? Invisum puerisvirginibusque caput! [191] Vespasian (69-79 A. D. ) started free public education by appointingQuintilian Professor of Rhetoric subsidised by the state. Succeedingemperors enlarged upon it; but especially Alexander Severus (222-235A. D. ), who instituted salaries for teachers of rhetoric, literature, medicine, mechanics, and architecture in Rome and the provinces, and hadpoor boys attend the lectures free of charge--see Lampridius, _Alex. Severus_, 44. [192] Pliny, _Paneg. _, 26. Spartianus, _Hadrian_, 7, 8-9. Capitolinus, _Anton. Pius 8_; id. _M. Anton. Phil. _ II. Lampridius, _Alex_. _Severus_, 57. [193] Pliny, _Letters_, vii, 18. The sum was 500, 000 sesterces. [194] Any infringement of this vow was punished by burial alive--forinstances, see Suetonius, _Domitian_, 8; Herodian, iv, 6, 4: Pliny, _Letters_ iv, 11; Dio, 77, 16 (Xiphilin). Their paramours were beaten todeath. [195] A full account of the Vestals will be found in Aulus Gellius, i, 12. [196] Quintilian, vii, 3, 27: ad servum nulla lex pertinet. On the rareinstances when a slave could inform against his master in a publiccourt, see Hermogenianus in Dig. , v, 1, 53. [197] Gaius, i, 52 ff. [198] Gaius, iii, 222. Cf. Juvenal vi, 219-223, and 474-495. [199] Gaius, iii, 222. Salvius Julianus, Pars Secunda, xv. AulusGellius, xx, i. [200] Paulus, v, 16. [201] Paulus, iii, v, 5 ff. Pliny, _Letters_, viii, 14. Tacitus, _Annals_ xiii, 32. [202] Valerius Maximus, vi, 8, in a chapter entitled _de fide servorum_speaks with great admiration of instances of fidelity on the part ofslaves. Seneca ate with his--_Epist_. 47, 13. Martial laments the deathof a favourite slave girl--v, 34 and 37. Dio (62, 27--Xiphilin) notesthe heroic conduct of Epicharis, a freedwoman, who was included in aconspiracy against Nero; but she revealed none of its secrets, thoughtortured in every way by Tigellinus. The pages of Pliny are full of thespirit of kindliness to slaves. [203] See Tacitus, _Annals_, xiv, 42 ff. [204] Suetonius, _Claudius_, 25. Dio, 60, 29 (Xiphilin). [205] Sec, e. G. , Seneca, _de Clem_. , i, 18, 1 and 2--especially theanecdote of Vedius Pollio (mentioned also by Dio, 54, 23). The interesting letter of Pliny, viii, 16; and cf. Iii, 14, and v, 19. Juvenai, vi, 219-223. [206] Spartianus, _Hadrian_, 18. [207] Gaius, i, 52 ff. Cf. Ulpian in Dig. , 1, 12, 1 and 8. [208] The punishment for this was pecuniary damages equal to twice thehighest value of a slave during the year in which he was killed. [209] Ulpian in Dig. , i. , 12, 8: hoc quoque officium praefecto urbi adivo Severo datum est, ut mancipia tueatur ne prostituantur. [210] Vopiscus, _Aurelian_, 49 [211] Vopiscus, _Tacitus_, 9. CHAPTER II WOMEN AND THE EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH Meanwhile a new world force, destined to overthrow the old order ofthings, was growing slowly to maturity and spreading out its might untileventually it fought its way to preeminence. I have traced the rights ofwomen under the regime of pagan Rome; I shall inquire next into theposition of women under Christianity. We must first note the attitude ofthe early Christians towards women in general; for that attitude willnaturally be reflected in any laws made after the Church has becomesupreme and is combined with and directs the State. That will demand aspecial chapter on Canon Law; but in the present chapter I propose toshow how women were regarded by the Christians in the centuries whichwere the formative period of the Church. The direct words of Christ so far as they relate to women and as we havethem in the Gospels concern themselves wholly to bring about purity inthe relation of the sexes. "Ye have heard that it was said, Thou shaltnot commit adultery; but I say unto you, that every one that looketh ona woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already inhis heart. "[212] His commands on the subject of divorce are positive andunequivocal: "It was said also, Whosoever shall put away his wife, lethim give her a writing of divorcement; but I say unto you, that everyone that putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, maketh her an adultress; and whosoever shall marry her when she is putaway, committeth adultery. "[213] Christ was content to lay down greatethical principles, not minute regulations. Of any inferiority on thepart of women he says nothing, nor does be concern himself with givingany directions about their social or legal rights. He blessed themarriage at Cana; and to the woman taken in adultery he showed his usualclemency. For the rest, his relations with women have an atmosphere ofrare sympathy, gentleness, and charm. But as soon as we leave the Gospels and read the Apostles we are in adifferent sphere. The Apostles were for the most part men of humbleposition, and their whole lives were directed by inherited beliefs whichwere distinctly Jewish and Oriental or Greek; not Western. In the Orientwoman has from the dawn of history to the present day occupied aposition exceedingly low. Indeed, in Mohammedan countries she isregarded merely as a tool for the man's sensual passions and she is notallowed to have even a soul. In Greece women were confined to theirhouses, were uneducated, and had few public rights and less morallatitude; their husbands had unlimited license. [214] The Jewish ideal isby no means a lofty one and cannot for a moment compare with the honouraccorded the Roman matron under the Empire. According to _Genesis_ awoman is the cause of all the woes of mankind. _Ecclesiasticus_ declaresthat the badness of men is better than the goodness of women. [215] In_Leviticus_[216] we read that the period of purification customaryafter the birth of a child is to be twice as long in the case of afemale as in a male. The inferiority of women was strongly felt; andthis conception would be doubly operative on men of humble station whonever travelled, who had received little education, and whose ideas werenaturally bounded by the horizon of their native localities. We are toremember also that the East is the home of asceticism, a convictionalien to the Western mind. There is no parallel in Western Europe to St. Simeon Stylites. We would, therefore, expect to find in the teachings of the Apostles anexpression of Jewish, i. E. , Eastern ideals on the subject of women; andwe do so find them. Following the express commands of Christ, theyexhorted to sexual purity and reiterated his injunctions on the matterof divorce. They went much farther and began to legislate on more minutedetails. Paul allows second marriages to women[217]; but thinks itbetter for a widow to remain as she is. [218] It is better to marry thanto burn; yet would he prefer that men and women should remain incelibacy. [219] The power of the father to arrange a marriage for hisdaughter was, under Roman law, limited by her consent; but the words ofPaul make it clear that it was now to be a Christian precept that afather could determine on his own responsibility whether his daughtershould remain a virgin. [220] Wives are to be in subjection to theirhusbands, and "let the wife see that she fear her husband. "[221] Womanis the weaker vessel[222]; she is to be silent in church; if she desiresto learn anything, she should ask her husband at home. [223] Furthermore:"I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but tobe in quietness. For Adam was first formed, then Eve; and Adam was notbeguiled, but the woman being beguiled hath fallen into transgression;but she shall be saved through childbearing, if they continue in faithand love and sanctification with sobriety. "[224] The apparel of womenalso evoked legislation from the Apostles. Women were to pray with theirheads veiled "for the man is not of the woman, but the woman for theman. "[225] Jewels, precious metal, and costly garments were unbecomingthe modest woman. [226] In this early stage of Christianity we may already distinguish threeconceptions that were quite foreign to the Roman jurist: I. Theinferiority and weakness of women was evident from the time of Eve andit was an act of God that punished all womankind for Eve'stransgression. Woman had been man's evil genius. II. She was to besubmissive to father or husband and not bring her will in opposition totheirs. III. She must not be prominent in public, she must consider herconduct and apparel minutely, and she was exhorted to remain a virgin, as being thus in a more exalted position. At the same time insistencewas placed on the fact that a virgin, wife, and widow must be given duehonour and respect, must be provided for, and allowed her share intaking part in those interests of the community which were consideredher sphere. If, now, we examine the writings of the Church Fathers, we shall seethese ideas elaborated with all the vehemence of religious zeal. The general opinions of the Fathers regarding women present a curiousmixture. They are fond of descanting on the fact that woman isresponsible for all the woes of mankind and that her very presence isdangerous. At the same time they pay glowing tribute to women inparticular. St. Jerome held that women were naturally weaker, physicallyand morally, than men. [227] The same saint proves that all evils springfrom women[228]; and in another passage he opines that marriage isindeed a lottery and the vices of women are too great to make it worthwhile. [229] "The sex is practiced in deceiving, " observes St. Maximus. [230] St. Augustine disputes subtly whether woman is the imageof God as well as man. He says no, and proves it thus[231]: The Apostlecommands that a man should not veil his head, because he is the image ofGod; but the woman must veil hers, according to the same Apostle;therefore the woman is not the image of God. "For this reason, again, "continues the Saint, "the Apostle says 'A woman is not permitted toteach, nor to have dominion over her husband. '" Bishop Marbodius callswoman a "pleasant evil, at once a honeycomb and a poison" and indictsthe sex, [232] something on the order of Juvenal or Jonathan Swift, byciting the cases of Eve, the daughters of Lot, Delilah, Herodias, Clytemnestra, and Progne. The way in which women were regarded as atonce a blessing and a curse is well illustrated also in a distich ofSedulius: "A woman alone has been responsible for opening the gates ofdeath; a woman alone has been the cause of a return to life. "[233] That women should be in subjection, in accordance with the dictum ofPaul, the Church Fathers assert emphatically. "How can it be said of awoman that she is the image of God, " exclaims St. Augustine, [234] "whenit is evident that she is subject to the rule of her husband and has noauthority! Why, she can not teach, nor be a witness, nor give security, nor act in court; how much the more can she not govern!" Women arecommanded again and again not to perform any of the functions of men andto yield a ready and unquestioning obedience to their husbands. [235]The Fathers also insist that marriage without a paternal parent'sconsent is fornication. [236] Marriage was looked upon as a necessary evil, permitted, indeed, as aconcession to the weakness of mankind, but to be avoided if possible. "Celibacy is to be preferred to marriage, " says St. Augustine. [237]"Celibacy is the life of the angels, " remarks St. Ambrose. [238]"Celibacy is a spiritual kind of marriage, " according to St. Optatus. [239] "Happy he, " says Tertullia[240] "who lives like Paul!"The same saint paints a lugubrious picture of marriage and the "bitterpleasure of children" (_liberorum amarissima voluptate_) who are burdensand just as likely as not will turn out criminals. "Why did the Lord crywoe unto those that are pregnant and give suck, unless it was to callattention to the fact that children will be a hindrance on the day ofjudgment?"[241] When such views were entertained of marriage, it neednot seem remarkable that Tertullian and St. Paul of Nolan, like Tolstoyto-day, discovered the blessings of a celibate life after they weremarried and ran away from their wives. [242] Jerome finds marriage usefulchiefly because it produces virgins. [243] As for second marriages, the Montanist and the Novatian sects condemnedthem absolutely, on the ground that if God has removed a wife or husbandhe has thereby signified his will to end the marrying of the parties;Tertullian calls second marriage a species of prostitution. [244]Jeromeexpresses the more tolerant and orthodox view: "What then? Do we condemnsecond marriages? Not at all; but we praise single ones. Do we cast thetwice-married from the Church? Far from it; but we exhort theonce-married to continence. In Noah's ark there were not only clean, butalso unclean animals. "[245] As the Fathers were very well aware of the subtle influence of dress onthe sexual passions, we have a vast number of minute regulationsdirecting virgins, matrons, and widows to be clothed simply and withoutornament; virgins were to be veiled. [246] Tertullian, with that keenlogic of which the Church has always been proud in her sons, argues thatinasmuch as God has not made crimson or green sheep it does not behoovewomen to wear colours that He has not produced in animalsnaturally. [247] St. Augustine forbids nuns to bathe more than once amonth, unless under extreme necessity. [248] As soon as the Church begins to exercise an influence upon law, we shallexpect to see the legal position of women changed in accordance withcertain general principles outlined above, viz: I. That inasmuch as Adamwas formed before Eve and as women are the weaker vessels, they shouldconfine themselves to those duties only which society has, from timeimmemorial, assigned them as their peculiar sphere. II. They should bemeek, and not oppose father or husband; and to these they should go foradvice on all matters. III. All license, such as the Roman woman's rightof taking the initiative in a divorce, must never be tolerated. IV. Theyshould never transgress the bounds of strictest decorum in conduct anddress, lest they seduce men; and they must never be conspicuous inpublic or attempt to perform public functions. V. They are to be givendue honour and are to be cared for properly. The legal rights of women would be affected, moreover, by a differencein the spirit of the law. The Roman jurist derived his whole sanctionfrom reason and never allowed religious considerations, as such, toinfluence him when legislating on women. He recognised that laws are notimmutable, but must be changed to fit the growth of equity andtolerance. No previous authority was valid to him if reason suggestedthat the authority's dictum had outlived its usefulness and must beadapted to larger ideas. It never occurred to him to make theinferiority of woman an act of God. On the other hand, the Churchreferred everything to one unchanging authoritative source, the Gospelsand the writings of the Apostles; faith and authority took the place ofreason; and any attempt to question the injunctions of the Bible wasregarded as an act of impiety, to be punished accordingly. And as thevarious regulations about women had now a divine sanction, thepermanence of these convictions was doubly assured. SOURCES I. The Bible. II. Patrologia Latina: edidit J. P. Migne. Parisiis. 221 volumes(finished 1864). NOTES: [212] _Matthew_ 5, 27 ff. [213] _Matthew_ 5, 31 ff. ; id. 19, 3 ff. _Mark_ 10, 2-12. _Luke_ 16, 18. [214] Plutarch lived in the second century A. D. ; but he has inheritedthe Greek point of view and advises a wife to bear with meekness theinfidelities of the husband--see _Praecep. Coniug_. , 16. His words areoften curiously similar to those of the Apostles, e. G. , _Coniug. Praecep_. , 33: "The husband shall rule the wife not as if master of achattel, but as the soul does the body. " Id. 37: "Wives who are sensiblewill be silent when their husbands are angry and vent their passion;when their husbands are silent, then let them speak to them and mollifythem. " However, like the Apostles, he enjoins upon husbands to honourtheir wives; his essay on the "Virtues of Women"--[Greek: gynaikônaretai]--is an affectionate tribute to their worth. Some of the respectable Puritan gentlemen at Rome also held that a wifebe content to be a humble admirer of her husband (e. G. , Pliny, _Paneg_. , 83, hoc efficiebat, quod mariti minores erant . .. Nam uxori sufficitobsequii gloria, etc. ). But Roman law insisted that what was morallyright for the man was equally so for the woman; just as it compelled ahusband himself to observe chastity, if he expected it from his wife. [215] _Ecclesiasticus_ 42, 14. [216] _Leviticus_ xii, 1-5. [217] _Romans_ 7, 2-4. [218] _Corinthians_ i, 7, 39. [219] _Corinthians_ i, 7, 1 ff. [220] _Corinthians_ i, 7, 37. [221] _Ephesians_ 5, 22 and 33. [222] _Peter_ i, 3, 7. [223] _Corinthians_ i, 14, 34. [224] _Timothy_ i, 2, 12-15. [225] _Corinthians_ i, II, 8. [226] _Timothy_ i, 2, 9. _Peter_ i, 3. [227] Abelard, Ep. , 9, in vol. 178, p. 325, of Migne: Beatus Hieronymus. .. Tanto magis necessarium amorem huius studii (i. E. The Scriptures)censuit, quanto eas naturaliter infirmiriores et carne debiliores esseconspexit. Cf. St. Paul of Nolan, _Letters_, 23, § 135--Migne 61, p. 273: Hi enim (i. E. Evil spirits) petulantius infirmiora vasa pertentant, sicut non Adam, sed Evam coluber aggressus est. [228] Adversus Iovianum, i, 48--Migne, vol. 23, p. 278. [229] Adversus Iovianum, i, 28--Migne, vol. 23, pp. 249-250: Qui enimducit uxorem, in ambiguo est, utrum odiosam an amabilem ducat. Siodiosam duxerit, ferri non potest. Si amabilem, amor illius inferno etarenti terrae et incendio comparatur. He quotes the Old Testament, especially _Pr_. 30, 16, to support his views. [230] S. Maximi Episcopi Taurinensis--Homilia 53, I--Migne, vol. 57, p. 350. [231] Augustinus: _Quaest. Ex vet. Test_. , 21: an mulier imago Dei sit. .. Unde et Apostolus, Vir quidem, inquit, non debet velare caput, cumsit imago et gloria Dei; mulier autem, inquit, velet caput. Quare? Quianon est imago Dei. Unde denuo dicit Apostolus: Mulieri autem docere nonpermittitur, neque dominari in virum. Migne, vol. 35, p. 2228. [232] Migne, vol. 171, pp. 1698-1699: Femina dulce malum, pariter favus atque venenum, Melle linens gladiumcor confodit et sapientum. Quis suasit primo vetitum gustare parenti?Femina. Quis patrem natas vitiare coegit? Femina. Quis fortem spoliatumcrine peremit? Femina. Quis iusti sacrum caput ense recidit?Femina. --etc. , ad lib. However, in another poem he acknowledges that there is nothing morebeautiful than a good woman: In cunctis quae dante Deo concessa videntur Usibus humanis, nilpulchrius esse putamus, Nil melius muliere bona, etc. [233] Migne, vol. 80, p. 307. The sentiment is more fully developed inanother poem--Migne, vol. 80, p. 307: Femina causa fuit humanae perditionis; Qua reparatur homo, femina causafuit. Femina causa fuit cur homo ruit a paradiso; Qua redit ad vitam, femina causa fuit. Femina prima parens exosa, maligna, superba; Feminavirgo parens casta, benigna, pia. [234] _Quaest. Ex vet. Test_. , 45; Migne, vol. 35, p. 2244. [235] E. G. , Tertullian, _de virg. Vel_. , 9. St. Paul of Nolan, letter23, § 135--Migne, 61, p. 273. Id. , letter 26, vol. 61, p. 732 of Migne. Cf. Augustine, letter 262, § 5--Migne, 33, p. 1079. [236] Basilius, _ad Amphil_. , c. 42: Matrimonia sine iis, qui potestatemhabent, fornicationes sunt. Ambrose says: Honorantur parentes Rebeccae muneribus, consulitur puellanon de sponsalibus, illa enim expectat iudicium parentum; non est enimvirginalis pudoris eligere maritum. [237] Virginitas praeferenda coniugio--August. , vol. 44, p. 142 ofMigne. The Council of Trent, eleven centuries later, in itstwenty-fourth session, re-echoed this sentiment and anathematised anyone who should deny it. [238] Migne, vol. 16, p. 342. [239] Id. , II, p. 1074. [240] Tertullian _ad uxorem_, i, 3. [241] Id. _ad uxorem_, i, 5. See also Gregory of Nyassa, _de Virg_. , iii, on the evils of matrimony. [242] v. Tertullian, _ad uxorem_. For Paul of Nolan, see Migne, vol. 61, p. 22. [243] Laudo nuptias, laudo coniugium, sed quia mihi virgines generant. [244] _Ad uxorem_, i, 7 and 9: non aliud dicendum erit secundummatrimonium quam species stupri. [245] Jerome, _Epist_. , 123. See also id. , _Epistola de viduitateservanda_, Migne 22, p. 550, and the _Epist. De monogamia_, Migne, 22, p. 1046. Ambrose, _de viduis liber unus_, Migne, 16, p. 234. Cf. Alanusde Insulis in Migne, vol. 210, p. 194: Vidua ad secundas nuptias nontranseat. [246] See, e. G. , St. Cyprian, _de habitu virginum_. Tertullian, _devirginibus velandis_ and _de cultu feminarum_. Treatises on the waywidows should dress were written, among others, by St. Paul of Nolan, _Epist_. 23, §§ 133-135--Migne 61; Augustine, St. Fulgentius Rusp. , St. Paulinus Aquil. , and St. Petrus Damianus. [247] _De cultu feminarum_, i, 8. [248] Lavacrum etiam corporum ususque balneorum non sit assiduus, sed eoquo solet intervallo temporis tribuatur, hoc est, semel in mense. Nisiinfirmitatis necessitas cogat, corpus saepius non lavandum--Augustine, _de monialibus_, Migne, vol. 33, page 963. CHAPTER III RIGHTS OF WOMEN AS MODIFIED BY THE CHRISTIAN EMPERORS Christianity became the state religion under Constantine, who issued theEdict of Milan, giving toleration to the Christians, in the year 313. The emperors from Constantine through Justinian (527-565) modified thevarious laws pertaining to the rights of women in various ways. To theenactments of Justinian, who caused the whole body of the Roman law tobe collected, I intend to give special attention. We must not, as yet, expect to find the strict views of the Church Fathers carried out in anysevere degree. On the contrary the old Roman law was still so powerfulthat it was for the most part beyond the control of ecclesiasts. Justinian was an ardent admirer of it and could not escape from itsprevailing spirit. Canon law had not yet developed. When the old Romancivilisation in Italy has succumbed completely to its barbarianconquerors; when the East has been definitely sundered from the West;when the Church has risen supreme, has won temporal power, and hasdeveloped canon law into a force equal to the civil law, --then finallywe shall expect to see the legal rights of women changed in accordancewith two new world forces--the Roman Catholic Church and the Germanicnations. I shall now discuss legislation having to do with my subjectunder the Christian emperors from Constantine (306-337) through thereign of Justinian (527-565). [Sidenote: Divorce: rescript of Theodosius and Valentian. ] The power of husband and wife to divorce at will and for any cause, which we have seen obtained under the old Roman law, was confined tocertain causes only by Theodosius and Valentinian (449 A. D. ). Theseemperors asserted vigorously that[249] the dissolution of the marriagetie should be made more difficult, especially out of regard to thechildren. Pursuant to this idea the power of divorce was given for thefollowing reasons alone: adultery, murder, treason, sacrilege, robbery;unchaste conduct of a husband with a woman not his wife and vice-versa;if a wife attended public games without her husband's permission; andextreme physical violence of either party. A woman who sent her husbanda bill of divorce for any other reason forfeited her dowry and allante-nuptial gifts and could not marry again for five years, underpenalty of losing all civil rights. Her property accrued to her husbandto be kept in trust for the children. [Sidenote: Justinian on divorce] Justinian made more minute regulations on the subject of divorce. To thevalid causes for divorce as laid down by Theodosius and Valentinian headded impotence; if a separation was obtained on this ground, thehusband might retain ante-nuptial gifts. [250] Abortion committed by thewife or bathing with other men than her husband or inveigling other mento be her paramours--these offences on the part of the wife gave herhusband the right of divorce. [251] Captivity of either party for aprolonged period of time was always a valid reason. Justinian addedalso[252] that a man who dismissed his wife without any of the legalcauses mentioned above existing or who was himself guilty of any ofthese offences must give to his wife one fourth of his property up to asum not to exceed one hundred _librae_ of gold, if he owned propertyworth four hundred _librae_ or more; if he had less, one fourth of allhe possessed was forfeit. The same penalties held for the wife whopresumed to dismiss her husband without the offences legally recognisedexisting. The forfeited money was at the free disposal of the blamelessparty if there were no children; these being extant, the property mustbe preserved intact for their inheritance and merely the usufruct couldbe enjoyed by the trustees. A woman who secured a divorce through afault of her husband had always to wait at least a year before marryingagain _propter seminis confusionem_. [253] [Sidenote: Justin revokes decrees of Justinian. ] Justin, the nephew and successor of Justinian, reaffirmed the right todivorce by mutual consent, thus abrogating the laws of hispredecessors. [254] Justinian had ordained that if husband and wifeseparated by mutual consent, they were to be forced to spend the rest oftheir lives in a convent and forfeit to it one third of theirgoods. [255] Justin, then, made the pious efforts of his uncle naught. Nothing can more clearly illustrate than his decree how small a powerthe Church still possessed to mould the tenor of the law; for such athing as divorce by mutual consent, without any necessary reason, was aserious misdemeanour in the eyes of the Church Fathers, who passed uponit their severest censures. [Sidenote: Adultery. ] On the subject of adultery Justinian enacted that if the husband was theguilty party, the dowry and marriage donations must be given his wife;but the rest of his property accrued to his relatives, both in ascendingand descending lines, to the third degree; these failing, his goodswere confiscated to the royal purse. [256] A woman guilty of adultery wasat once sent to a monastery. After a space of two years her husbandcould take her back again, if he so wished, without prejudice. If he didnot so desire, or if he died, the woman was shorn and forced to spendthe rest of her life in a nunnery; two thirds of her property were givento her relatives in descending line, the other third to the monastery;if there were no descendants, ascendants got one third and the monasterytwo thirds; relatives failing, the monastery took all; and in all casesgoods inserted in the dowry contract were to be kept for thehusband. [257] [Sidenote: Second marriages. ][Sidenote: Strict laws of Gratian, Valentinian, and Theodosius. ] The legislation of the earlier Christian emperors on second marriagesreflects the various feelings of the Church Fathers on the subject. Under the old law, people could marry as often as they wished withoutany penalties. [258] But we have seen that among some of the Churchmensecond marriages were held in peculiar abhorrence, and third nuptialswere regarded as a hideous sin; while the orthodox clergy, like St. Augustine and St. Jerome, permitted second and third marriages, butdamned them with faint praise and urged Christians to be content withone venture. Public opinion, custom, and the influence of the old Romanlaw were too powerful to allow Christian monarchs to become fanatical onthe subject[259]; but certain stricter regulations were introduced bythe pious Gratian, Valentinian, and Theodosius, in the years 380, 381, and 382. [260] As under the old laws any widow who married again beforethe legal time of mourning--a year--had expired, became infamous andlost both cast and all claims to the goods of her deceased husband. Shewas furthermore not permitted to give a second husband more than onethird of her property nor leave him more than one third by will; and shecould receive no intestate succession beyond the third degree. A womanwho proceeded to a second marriage after the legal period of mourning, must make over at once to the children of the first marriage all theproperty which her former husband had given or left to her. As to herown personal property, she was allowed to possess it and enjoy theincome while she lived, but not to alienate it or leave it by will toany one except the children of the first marriage. As I have beforeremarked, Roman law constantly had the interest of the children atheart. [261] If there was no issue of the first marriage, then the womanhad free control. A mother acquired full right--as the old Senatusconsultum Tertullianum had decreed--to the property of a son or daughterwho died childless[262]; but if she married a second time, and her sonor daughter died without leaving children or grandchildren, she wasexpelled from all succession and distant relatives acquired theproperty. [263] [Sidenote: Justinian moderates these laws to a great degree. ] Justinian changed these enactments to a pronounced degree. "We are notmaking laws that are too bitter against women who marry a second time, "he remarks, [264] "and we do not want to lead them, in consequence ofsuch action, to the harsh necessity, unworthy of our age, of abstainingfrom a chaste second marriage and descending to illegitimateconnections. " He ordained, therefore, that the law mentioned above beannulled and that mothers should have absolutely unrestricted rights ofinheritance to a deceased child's property along with the latter'sbrothers and sisters; and second marriage was never to create anyprejudice. [265] In the earlier part of his reign Justinian also forbadehusband or wife to leave one another property under the stipulation thatthe surviving partner must not marry again[266]; but later, when hiszeal for reform had become more pronounced and fanatical, he revokedthis and gave the conditioned party the option either of enjoying theproperty by remaining unmarried or of forfeiting it by a secondunion. [267] [Sidenote: Breaking of engagements. ] Constantine ordained, [268] in the year 336, that if an engagement wasbroken by the death of one of the contracting parties and if the_osculum_[269] had taken place, half of whatever donations had beengiven was to be handed over to the surviving party and half to the heirsof the deceased; but if the solemn _osculum_ had not yet taken place, all gifts went to the heirs of the deceased. There was also a law thatif either party broke the engagement to enter monastic life, the man whodid so lost all that he had given by way of earnest money for themarriage contract (_arrarum nomine_); if it was the woman who took theinitiative, she was compelled to return twice the amount of any sums shehad received. This was changed by Justinian, who enacted that those whobroke an engagement to enter monastic life should merely return orreceive whatever donations had been made. [270] Constantine and hissuccessors abrogated the old time Julian laws, which had inflictedcertain penalties--such as limited rights of inheritance--on men andwomen who did not marry. [271] [Sidenote: Changes in the law of gifts. ] I have already pointed out that gifts between husband and wife wereillegal and I have explained the reasons. Justinian allowed the husbandto make donations to his wife, in such wise, however, that all chance ofintent to defraud might be absent. [272] He ordained also that if husbandor wife left the married state to embrace a celibate life, each partywas to keep his or her own property as per marriage contract or as eachwould legitimately in the case of the other's death. [273] If any one, after vowing the monastic life, returned to the world, his or her goodswere forfeit to the monastery which he or she had left. [274] [Sidenote: Various enactments on marriage. ] The consent of the father or, if he was dead, of near relatives wasemphatically declared necessary by the Christian emperors for a marriageand the woman had practically no will of her own although, if severalsuitors were proposed to her, she might be requested to name which oneshe preferred. [275] Marriage with a Jew was treated as adultery. [276]Women who belonged to heretical sects were to have no privileges. [277]Justinus and Justinian abrogated the old law which forbade senators tomarry freedwomen or any woman who had herself or whose parents hadfollowed the stage. Actresses were now permitted, on giving up theirprofession, to claim all the rights of other free women; and a senatorcould marry such or even a freedwoman without prejudice. [278] [Sidenote: Changes in the laws of inheritance. ] Under the old law, as we have seen, a son and a daughter had equalrights to intestate succession; but beyond the relationship of daughterto father or sister to brother women had no rights to intestatesuccession unless there were no agnates, that is, male relatives on thefather's side. Thus, an aunt would not be called to the estate of anephew who died childless, but the uncle was regularly admitted. So, too, a nephew was admitted to the intestate succession of an uncle, whodied without issue, but the niece was shut out. All this was changed byJustinian, who gave women the same rights of inheritance as men undersuch conditions. [279] If the children were unorthodox, they were to haveabsolutely no share of either parent's goods. [280] [Sidenote: Women as guardians. ] [Sidenote: In suits. ] The Christian emperors permitted widows to be guardians over theirchildren if they promised on oath not to marry again and gave securityagainst fraud. [281] Justinian forbade women to act by themselves in anylegal matters. [282] [Sidenote: Bills of attainder. ] Arcadius and Honorius (397 A. D. ) enacted some particularly savage billsof attainder, which were in painful contrast to the clemency of theirpagan predecessors. Those guilty of high treason were decapitated andtheir goods escheated to the crown. "To the sons of such a man [i. E. , one condemned for high treason], " write these amiable Christians, [283]"we allow their lives out of special royal mercy--for they ought reallyto be put to death along with their fathers--but they are to receive noinheritances. Let them be paupers forever; let the infamy of theirfather ever follow them; they may never aspire to office; in theirlasting poverty let death be a relief and life a punishment. Finally, any one who tries to intercede for these with us is also to beinfamous. "[284] However, to the daughters of the condemned theseemperors graciously granted one fourth of their mother's but not any oftheir father's goods. In the case of crimes other than high treason thechildren or grandchildren were allowed one half of the estate. [285]Constantine decreed that a wife's property was not to be affected by thecondemnation of her husband. [286] [Sidenote: Rape. ] Ravishers of women, even of slaves and freedwomen, were punished byJustinian with death; but in the case of freeborn women only did theproperty of the guilty man and his abettors become forfeit to theoutraged victim. A woman no longer had the privilege of demanding herassailant in marriage. [287] SOURCES Roman Law as cited in Chapter I, especially the _Novellae_ of Justinian. NOTES: [249] Codex, v, 17, 8 contains this rescript in full. [250] Codex, v, 17, 10. [251] Codex, v, 17, 11. [252] Id. [253] Novellae, 22, 18. [254] Novellae, 140, 1: Antiquitus quidem licebat sine periculo tales(i. E. , those of incompatible temperament) ab invicem separari secundumcommunem voluntatem et consensum hoc agentes, sicut et plurimae tuncleges extarent hoc dicentes et _bona gratia_ sic procedentem solutionemnuptiarum patria vocitantes voce. Postea vero divae memoriae nostropatri. .. . Legem sancivit prohibens cum consensu coniugia solvi. .. . Haecigitur aliena nostris iudicantes temporibus in praesenti sacramconstituimus legem, per quam sancimus licere ut antiquitus consensuconiugum solutiones nuptiarum fieri. [255] Novellae, 134, 11. [256] Novellae, 134, 10. [257] Novellae, 134, 10. [258] Novellae, 22 (praefatio): Antiquitas equidem non satis aliquid deprioribus aut secundis perserutabatur nuptiis, sed licebat et patribuset matribus et ad plures venire nuptias et lucro nullo privari, et causaerat in simplicitate confusa. [259] The language of some of them is pretty strong, however--matre iamsecundis nuptiis _funestata_--Codex, v, 9, 3 (Gratian, Valentinian, Theodosius). [260] For these see Codex, v, 9, 1 and 2 and 3. [261] Cf. Codex, v, 9, 4. Nos enim hac lege id praecipue custodiendumesse decrevimus, ut ex quocumque coniugio suscepti filii patrum suorumsponsalicias retineant facilitates. [262] Codex, vi, 56, 5. [263] Novellae, ii, 3: ex absurditate legis, licet praemoriantur filiiomnes, non relinquentes filios aut nepotes, nihilominus suppliciummanet, et non succedit eis mater, sed expellitur ab eorum inhumanesuccessione . .. Sed succedunt quidem illis aliqui ex longa cognatione. [264] Novellae, ii, 3. [265] Novellae ii, 3. [266] Codex, vi, 40, 2 and 3. [267] Novellae, 22, 44: unde sancimus, si quis prohibuerit ad aliudvenire matrimonium, etc. [268] Codex, v, 3, 16. [269] The _osculum_ was a sort of "donation on account of marriage" madeon the day of the formal engagement. [270] Codex, i, 3, 54 (56). [271] Codex, viii, 57 (58), I and 2. Cf. Codex, viii, 58 (59), 1 and 2. [272] Codex, v, 3, 10. [273] Codex, i, 3, 54 (56). Gregory of Tours informs us that accordingto the Council of Nicaea--325 A. D. --a wife who left her husband, to whomshe was happily married, to enter a nunnery incurred excommunication. Hemeans probably: if she went without her husband's consent. Greg. 9, 33:Tunc ego accedens ad monasterium canonum Nicaenorum decreta relegi, inquibus continetur: quia si quae reliquerit virum et thorum, in quo benevexit, spreverit, dicens quia non sit ei portio in illa caelestis regnigloria qui fuerit coniugio copulatus, anathema sit. (Note of editor:Videtur esse canon 14 concilii Grangensis, quod concilium veteresNicaeno subiungere solebant; idque indicat titulus in veteribusscriptis. ) [274] Codex, i, 3, 54 (56). [275] Codex, v, 4, 20, and 5, 18. [276] Codex, i, 9, 6. [277] Novellae, cix, 1. [278] Codex, v, 4, 23 and 28. [279] Codex, vi, 58, 14. [280] Codex, i, 5, 19. [281] Codex, v, 35, 2 and 3. [282] Codex, ii, 55, 6. [283] Codex, ix, 8, 5. [284] This law was evidently lasting, for it is quoted with approval byPope Innocent III, in the year 1199--see Friedberg, _Corpus IurisCanonici_, vol. Ii, p. 782. [285] Codex, ix, 49, 10. [286] Codex, v, 16, 24. [287] For all these enactments see Codex, i, 3, 53 (54), and ix, 13. CHAPTER IV WOMEN AMONG THE GERMANIC PEOPLES A second world force had now come into its own. The new power was theGermanic peoples, those wandering tribes who, after shattering the RomanEmpire, were destined to form the modern nations of Europe and to findin Christianity the religion most admirably adapted to fill theirspiritual needs and shape their ideals. In the year 476 the barbarianOdoacer ascended the throne of the Caesars. He still pretended to governby virtue of the authority delegated to him by Zeno, emperor atConstantinople; but the rupture between East and West was becoming finaland after the reign of Justinian (527-565) it was practically complete. Henceforth the eastern empire had little or nothing to do with westernEurope and subsisted as an independent monarchy until Constantinople wastaken by the Turks in 1453. I shall not concern myself with it anylonger. In western Europe, then, new races with new ideals were forming thenations that to-day are England, Germany, France, Spain, Italy, andAustria. It is interesting to note what some of these barbariansthought about women and what place they assigned them. [Sidenote: Julius Caesar's account. ] Our earliest authorities on the subject are Julius Caesar and Tacitus. Caesar informs us[288] that among the Gauls marriage was a wellrecognized institution. The husband contributed of his own goods thesame amount that his wife brought by way of dowry; the combined propertyand its income were enjoyed on equal terms by husband and wife. Ifhusband or wife died, all the property became the possession of thesurviving partner. Yet the husband had full power of life and death overhis wife as over his children; and if, upon the decease of a noble, there were suspicions regarding the manner of his death, his wife wasput to inquisitorial torture and was burnt at the stake when adjudgedguilty of murder. Among the Germans women seem to have been held insomewhat greater respect. German matrons were esteemed as prophetessesand no battle was entered upon unless they had first consulted the lotsand given assurance that the fight would be successful. [289] As for theBritish, who were not a Germanic people, Caesar says that they practicedpolygamy and near relatives were accustomed to have wives incommon. [290] [Sidenote: The account of Tacitus. ] Tacitus wrote a century and a half after Julius Caesar when the tribeshad become better known the Romans; hence we get from him more detailedinformation. From him we learn that both the Sitones--a people ofnorthern Germany--and the British often bestowed the royal power onwomen, a circumstance which aroused the strong contempt of Tacitus, whowas in this respect of a conservative mind. [291] The Romans had, indeed, good reason to remember with sorrow the valiant Boadicea, queen of theBritons. [292] Regarding the Germans Tacitus wrote a whole book in whichhe idealises that nation as a contrast to the lax morality of civilisedRome, much as Rousseau in the eighteenth century extolled the virtues ofsavages in a state of nature. What Tacitus says in regard to loftymorals we shall do well to take with a pinch of salt; but we may withmore safety trust his accuracy when he depicts national customs. FromTacitus we learn that the Germans believed something divine resided inwomen[293]; hence their respect for them as prophetesses. [294] OneVelaeda by her soothsaying ruled the tribe of Bructeri completely[295]and was regarded as a goddess, [296] as were many others. [297] The Germanwarrior fought his best that he might protect and please his wife. [298]The standard of conjugal fidelity was strict[299]; men were content withone wife, although high nobles were sometimes allowed several wives asan increase to the family prestige. [300] The dowry was brought not bythe wife to the husband, but to the wife by the husband--evidently asurvival of the custom of wife purchase; but the wife was accustomed topresent her husband with arms and the accoutrements of war. [301] She wasreminded that she took her husband for better and worse, to be afaithful partner in joy and sorrow until death. [302] A woman guilty ofadultery was shorn and her husband drove her naked through the villagewith blows. [303] [Sidenote: The written laws of the barbarians. ] We see, then, that by no means all of these barbarian nations had thesame standards in regard to women. Of written laws there were none asyet. But contact with the civilisation of Rome had its effect; and whenGoths, Burgundians, Franks, and Lombards had founded new states on theruins of the western Roman Empire, the national laws of the Germanictribes began to be collected and put into writing at the close of thefifth century. Between the fifth and the ninth centuries we get theVisigothic, Burgundian, Salic, Ripuarian, Alemannic, Lombardian, Bavarian, Frisian, Saxon, and Thuringian law books. They are written inmedieval Latin and are not elaborated on a scientific basis. Threedistinct influences are to be seen in them: (1) native race customs, ideals, and traditions; (2) Christianity; (3) the Roman civil law, whichwas felt more or less in all, but especially in the case of theVisigoths; as was natural, since this people had been brought intoclosest touch with Rome. Inasmuch as the barbarians allowed all peoplesconquered by them to be tried under their own laws, the old Roman civillaw was still potent in all its strength in cases affecting a Roman. Letus endeavour to glean what we can from the barbarian codes on the matterof women's rights. [Sidenote: Guardianship. ] The woman was always to be under guardianship among the Germanic peoplesand could never be independent under any conditions. Perhaps we shouldrather call the power (_mundium_) wielded by father, brother, husband, or other male relative a protectorate; for in those early days amongrude peoples any legal action might involve fighting to prove the meritsof one's case, and the woman would therefore constantly need a championto assert her rights in the lists. Thus the woman was under theperpetual guardianship of a male relative and must do nothing withouthis consent, under penalty of losing her property. [304] Her guardianarranged her marriage for her as he wished, provided only that he chosea free man for her husband[305]; if the woman, whether virgin or widow, married without his consent, she lost all power to inherit the goods ofher relatives[306]; and her husband was forced to pay to her kin arecompense amounting to 600 _solidi_ among the Saxons, 186 among theBurgundians. [307] [Sidenote: Marriage. ] The feeling of caste was very strong; a woman must not marry below herstation. [308] By a law of the Visigoths she who tried to marry her ownslave was to be burned alive[309]; if she attempted it with another'sbondman, she merited one hundred lashes. [310] The dowry was a fixedinstitution as among the Romans; but the bridegroom regularly paid alarge sum to the father or guardian of the woman. This _wittemon_ wasregarded as the price paid for the parental authority (_mundium_) andamounted among the Saxons to 300 _solidi_. [311] As a matter of fact thiscustom practically amounted to the intended husband giving the dowry tohis future wife. The husband was also allowed to present his wife with adonation (_morgengabe_) on the morning after the wedding; the amountwas limited by King Liutprand to not more than one fourth of all hisgoods. [312] Breaking an engagement after the solemn betrothal had beenentered into was a serious business. The Visigoths refused to allow oneparty to break an engagement without the consent of the other; and if awoman, being already engaged, went over to another man without herparent's or fiancé's leave, both she and the man who took her werehanded over as slaves to the original fiancé. [313] The other barbarianswere content to inflict a money fine for breach of promise. [314] [Sidenote: Power of the husband. ] The woman on marrying passed into the power of her husband "according tothe Sacred Scriptures, " and the husband thereupon acquired the lordshipof all her property. [315] The law still protected the wife in some ways. The Visigoths gave the father the right of demanding and preserving forhis daughter her dowry. [316] The Ripuarians ordained that whatever thehusband had given his wife by written agreement must remaininviolate. [317] King Liutprand made the presence of two or three of thewoman's male relatives necessary at any sale involving her goods, to seeto it that her consent to the sale had not been forced. [318] [Sidenote: Divorce. ] On the subject of divorce the regulations of the several peoples arevarious; but the commands of the New Testament are alike strongly feltin all; and we may expect to find divorce limited by severerestrictions. [319] The Burgundians allowed it only for adultery or gravecrimes, such as violating tombs. If a wife presumed to dismiss herhusband for any other cause, she was put to death (_necetur in luto_);to a husband who sent his wife a divorce without these specific reasonsexisting the law was more indulgent, allowing him to preserve his lifeby paying to his injured wife twice the amount that he had originallygiven her parents for her, and twelve _solidi_ in addition; and in casehe attempted to prove her guilty of one of the charges mentioned aboveand she was adjudged innocent, he forfeited all his goods to her and wasforced to leave his home. [320] The Visigoths were equally strict; thehusband who dismissed his wife on insufficient legal grounds lost allpower over her and must return all her goods; his own must be preservedfor the children; if there were none, the wife acquired his property. Awoman who married a divorced man while his first wife was living, wascondemned for adultery and accordingly handed over to the first wife tobe disposed of as the latter wished; exile, stripes, and slavery werethe lot of a man who took another wife while his first partner was stillalive. [321] The Alemanni and the Bavarians, who were more remote fromItaly and hence from the Church, were influenced more by their owncustoms and allowed a pecuniary recompense to take the place of theharsher enactments. [322] [Sidenote: Adultery. ] Adultery was not only a legal cause for divorce, but also a grave crime. All the barbarian peoples are agreed in so regarding it, but theirpenalties vary according as they were more or less affected by proximityto Italy, where the power of the Church was naturally strongest. TheRipuarians, the Bavarians, and the Alemanni preferred a money fineranging from fifty to two hundred _solidi_. [323] Among the Visigothsthe guilty party was usually bound over in servitude to the injuredperson to be disposed of as the latter wished. [324] Sometimes the lawwas harsher to women than to men; thus, according to a decree ofLiutprand, [325] a husband who told his wife to commit adultery or whodid so himself paid a mulct of fifty _solidi_ to the wife's malerelatives; but if the wife consented to or hid the deed, she was put todeath. The laws all agree that the killing of adulterers taken in theact could not be regarded as murder. [Sidenote: The Church indulgent toward kings. ] It is always to be remembered that although the statutes were severeenough, yet during this period, as indeed throughout all history, theywere defied with impunity. Charlemagne, for example, the most Christianmonarch, had a large number of concubines and divorced a wife who didnot please him; yet his biographer Einhard, pious monk as he was, has noword of censure for his monarch's irregularities[326]; and policyprevented the Church from thundering at a king who so valiantly crushedthe heretics, her enemies. Bishop Gregory of Tours tells us without ahint of being shocked that Clothacharius, King of the Franks, had manyconcubines. [327] Concubinage was, in fact, the regular thing. [328] Butneither in that age, nor later in the case of Louis XIV, nor in our ownday in the case of Leopold of Belgium has the Church had a word ofreproach for monarchs who broke with impunity moral laws on which sheclaims always to have insisted without compromise. [Sidenote: Remarriage. ] In accordance with the commands of Scripture neither the divorced mannor the divorced woman could marry again during the lifetime of theother party. To do so was to commit adultery, for which the usualpenalties went into effect. [Sidenote: Property rights and powers. ] A woman's property would consist of any or all of these: I. Her share of the property of parents or brothers and sisters. II. Her dowry and whatever nuptial donations (_morgengabe_) her husbandhad given her, and whatever she had earned together with her husband. There could be no account of single women's property or disposal of whatthey earned, because in the half-civilised state of things which thenobtained there was no such thing as women engaging in business; indeed, not even men of any pretension did so; war was their work. The unmarriedwoman was content to sit by the fire and spin under the guardianshipand support of a male relative. Often she would enter a convent. I shall first discuss the laws of inheritance as affecting women, inorder to note what property she was allowed to acquire. In thisconnection it is well to bear in mind a difference between Roman andGermanic law. The former viewed an inheritance as consisting always of atotality of all goods, whether of money, land, movables, cattle, dress, or what not. But among the Germanic peoples land, money, ornaments, andthe like were regarded as so many distinct articles of inheritance, tosome of which women might have legal claims of succession, but notnecessarily to all. This is most emphatically shown in the case of land. Of all the barbarian peoples, the Ripuarians alone allowed women theright to succeed to land. [329] Among other nations a daughter or sisteror mother, whoever happened to be the nearest heir, would get the money, slaves, etc. , but the nearest _male_ kin would get the land. [330] Onlyif male kin were lacking to the fifth degree--an improbablecontingency--did alodial inheritance "pass from the lance to thespindle. "[331] In respect to all other things a daughter was co-heirwith a son to the estate of a father or mother. According to the Salicand Ripuarian law this would be one order of succession[332]: I. Children of the deceased. II. These failing, surviving mother or fatherof deceased. III. These failing, brother or sister of deceased. IV. These failing, sister of mother of deceased. V. These failing, sister of father of deceased. VI. These failing, male relatives on father's side. It will be observed that in such a succession these laws are morepartial to women relatives than the Roman law; an aunt, for example, iscalled before an uncle. An uncle would certainly exclude an aunt underthe Roman law; but most of the Germanic codes allowed them an equalsuccession. [333] Nevertheless, when women did inherit under the former, they acquired the land also. Moreover, the woman among the Germanicnations must always be under guardianship; and whereas under the Empirethe power of the guardian was in practice reduced to nullity, as I haveshown, among the barbarians it was extremely powerful, because to assertone's rights often involved fighting in the lists to determine thejudgment of God. It was a settled conviction among the Germanic peoplesthat God would give the victory to the rightful claimant. As women couldnot fight, a champion or guardian was a necessity. This was not true inRoman courts, which preferred to settle litigation by juristic reasoningand believed, like Napoleon, that God, when appealed to in a fight, wasgenerally on the side of the party who had the better artillery. Children inherited not only the estate but also the friendships andenmities of their fathers, which it was their duty to take up. Hereditary feuds were a usual thing. [334] King Liutprand ordaine[335]however, that if a daughter alone survived, the feud was to be broughtto an end and an agreement effected. Some of the nations seem to have provided that children must not bedisinherited except for very strong reasons; for example, the law of theVisigoths[336] forbids more than one third of their estate beingalienated by mother or father, grandmother or grandfather. The Alemannipermitted a free man to leave all his property to the Church and hisheirs had no redress[337]; but the Bavarians compelled him beforeentering monastic life to distribute among his children theirproportionate parts. [338] [Sidenote: Property of the married woman. ] We may pass now to the property rights of the married woman. Therelation of her husband to the dowry I have already explained. The dowrywas conceived as being ultimately for the children; only when there wereno children, grandchildren, or great-grandchildren did the woman havelicence to dispose of the dowry as she wished: this was the law amongthe Visigoths. [339] The dowry, then, was to revert to the children orgrandchildren at the death of the wife; if there were none such, to theparents or relatives who had given her in marriage; these failing, itescheated to the Crown--so according to Rotharis. [340] By the laws ofthe Visigoths[341] when the wife died, her husband continued in chargeof the property; but, as under the Roman law, he had to preserve itentire for the children, though he might enjoy the usufruct. When a sonor daughter married, their father must at once give them their share oftheir mother's goods, although he could still receive the income of onethird of the portion. If son or daughter did not marry, they receivedone half their share on becoming twenty years of age; their father mightclaim the interest of the other half while he lived; but at his death hemust leave it to them. When a woman left no children, her father ornearest male kin usually demanded the dowry back. [342] When the husband died, his estate did not go to wife, but to hischildren or other relatives. [343] If however, any property had beenearned by the joint labour of husband and wife, the latter had a rightto one half among the Westfalians; to one third among the Ripuarians; tonothing among the Ostfalians. [344] Children remained in the power oftheir mother if she so desired and provided she remained a widow. Amother usually had the enjoyment of her dowry until her death, when shemust leave it to her children or to the donor or nearest relative. [345]If the husband died without issue, some nations allowed the wife acertain succession to her husband's goods, provided that she did notmarry again. Thus, the Burgundians gave her under such conditions onethird of her husband's estate to be left to his heirs, however, at herdeath. [346] The Bavarians, too, under the same conditions allowed herone half of her husband's goods[347] and even if there was issue, granted her the right to the interest of as much as one childreceived. [348] A widow who married again lost the privilege of guardianship over herchildren, who thereupon passed to a male relative of the first husband. As to the dowry of the prior union the woman must make it over at onceto her children according to some laws or, according to others, mightreceive the usufruct during life and leave it to the children of thefirst marriage at her death. Any right to the property of her firsthusband she of course lost. [349] When there was no issue of the firstmarriage then the dowry and nuptial donations could usually follow herto a second union. [Sidenote: Criminal law pertaining to women. ] Criminal law among these half civilised nations could not but be a crudeaffair. Their civilisation was in a state of flux, and immediatepractical convenience was the only guide. They were content to fix thepenalties for such outrages as murder, rape, insult, assault, and thelike in money; the Visigoths alone were more stringent in a case ofrape, adding 200 lashes and slavery to the ravisher of a free woman whohad accomplished his purpose. [350] Some enactments which may well strikeus as peculiar deserve notice. For example, among the Saxons the theftof a horse or an ox or anything worth three _solidi_ merited death; butmurder was atoned for by pecuniary damages. [351] Among the Burgundians, if a man stole horses or cattle and his wife did not at once disclosethe deed, she and her children who were over fourteen were bound over inslavery to the outraged party "because it hath often been ascertained, that these women are the confederates of their husbands in crime. "[352] The most minute regulations prevailed on the subject of injury to women. Under the Salic law[353] for instance, if a free man struck a free womenon the fingers or hand, he had to pay fifteen _solidi_; if he struck herarm, thirty _solidi_; if above her elbow, thirty-five _solidi_; if hehit her breast, forty-five _solidi_. The penalties for murdering a freewoman were also elaborated on the basis of her value to the state as abearer of children. By the same Salic law[354] injury to a pregnantwoman resulting in her death merited a fine of seven hundred _solidi_;but two hundred was deemed sufficient for murder of one after her timefor bearing children had passed. Similarly, for killing a free womanafter she had begun to have children the transgressor paid six hundred_solidi_; but for murdering an unmarried freeborn girl only two hundred. The murder of a free woman was punished usually by a fine (_wergeld_)equal to twice the amount demanded for a free man "because, " as the lawof the Bavarians has it, [355] "a woman can not defend herself with arms. But if, in the boldness of her heart (per audaciam cordis sui), sheshall have resisted and fought like a man, there shall not be a doublepenalty, but only the recompense usual for a man [160 _solidi_]. " Fineswere not paid to the state, but to the injuried parties or, if these didnot survive, to the nearest kin. If the fine could not be paid, thenmight death be meted to the guilty. [356] Another peculiar feature of the Germanic law was the appeal to God todecide a moot point by various ordeals. For example, by the laws of theAngles and Werini, if a woman was accused of murdering her husband, shewould ask a male relative to assert her innocence by a solemn oath[357]or, if necessary, by fighting for her as her champion in the lists. Godwas supposed to give the victory to the champion who defended aninnocent party. If she could find no champion, she was permitted towalk barefoot over nine red-hot ploughshares[358]; and if she wasinnocent, God would not, of course, allow her to suffer any injury inthe act. [Sidenote: Women in slavery. ] Perhaps a word on the status of women in slavery among the Germanicnations will not be out of place. The new nations looked upon a slave asa chattel, much as the Romans did. If a wrong was done a slave woman, her master received a recompense from the aggressor, but she did not, for to hold property was denied her. But we may well believe that thegreat value which the Church put on chastity and conjugal fidelityrendered the slave woman less exposed to the brutal passions of her lordthan had been the case under the Empire. Thus, by a law of KingLiutprand, a master who committed adultery with the wife of a slave wascompelled to free both[359]; and the Visigot[360] inflicted fiftylashes and a fine of twenty _solidi_ upon the man who used violence toanother man's slave woman. On comparing the position of women under Roman law and under theGermanic nations, as we have observed them thus far, we should notefirst of all that under the latter women benefited chiefly by theinsistence of the Church on the value of chastity in both sexes. Thatin those days the passions of men were difficult to restrain in practicedoes not invalidate the real service done the world by the ideal thatwas insisted upon, [361] an ideal which was certainly not held in paganantiquity except by a few great minds. Although the social position ofwoman was thus improved, the character of the age and the sentiments ofthe Bible which I have already quoted made her status far inferior toher condition under Roman law so far as her legal rights were concerned. In a period[362] when the assertion of one's rights constantly demandedfighting, the woman was forced to rely on the male to champion her; theChurch, in accordance with the dicta of the Apostles, encouraged andindeed commanded her to confine herself to the duties of the household, to leave legal matters to men, and to be guided by their advice; andthus she was prevented from asserting herself out of regard for thestrong public opinion on the subject, which was quite alien to thesentiments of the old Roman law. Henceforward also we are to have lawbased on old customs and _theology_, [363] not on practical convenienceor scientific reasoning. SOURCES I. Corpus Iuris Germanici Antiqui: edidit Ferd. Walter. Berolini--impensis G. Reimeri, 1824. 3 vols. II. C. Iulii Caesaris Commentarii de Bello Gallico: recognovit Geo. Long. Novi Eboraci apud Harperos Fratres. 1883 III. Cornelii Taciti libri qui supersunt: quartum recognovit CarolusHalm. Lipsiae (Teubner), 1901. IV. Sancti Georgii Florentii Gregorii, Episcopi Turonensis, HistoriaeEcclesiasticae Francorum libri decem: edidit J. Guadet et N. R. Taranne. Parisiis, apud Julium Renouard et Socios, 1838. V. Iordanis de Origine Actibusque Getorum: edidit Alfred Holder. Freiburg und Tubingen; Verlagsbuchhandlung von J. C. B. Mohr. VI. Widukindi Rerum Gestarum Saxonicarum libri tres. Accedit libellus deOrigine Gentis Suevorum. Editio quarta: post Georgium Waitz recognovitKarolus A. Kehr. Hannoverae et Lipsiae Impensis Bibliopolii Hahniani, 1904. VII. Procopii Caesariensis opera omnia: recognovit Jacobus Haury. Lipsiae. (Teubner). 1905. VIII. Einhardi Vita Karoli Magni. Editio quinta. Post G. H. Perterecensuit G. Waitz. Hannoverae et Lipsiae, 1905. IX. Pauli Historia Langobardorum: edidit Georg Waitz. Hannoverae, impensis Bibliopolii Hahniani, 1878. NOTES: [288] _de Bell. Gall_. , vi, 19. [289] Id. , i, 50. [290] Id. , v, 14. [291] _Agricola_, 16. _Germania_, 45: Suionibus Sitonum gentescontinuantur. Cetera similes, uno differunt, quod femina dominatur; intantum non modo a libertate, sed etiam a servitute degenerant. No womanever reigned alone as queen of the Roman Empire until 450 A. D. , whenPulcheria, sister of Theodosius II, ascended the throne of the East; butshe soon took the senator Marcian in marriage and made him king. [292] _Agricola_, 16. [293] _Germania_, 8. [294] Procopius, _de bello Vandalico_, ii, 8, observes the same thingamong the Maurousians, or Moors, in northern Africa: [Greek: andra garmanteuesthai en tô ethnei toutô ou themis, alla gunaikes sphisi katochoihek dê tinos lerourgias ginomenai prolegousi ta esomena, tôn palaichrêstêriôn oudenos êsson. ] [295] Tacitus, _Hist_. , iv, 61, and v, 24. [296] Id. , _Germania_, 8. [297] Ibid. , 8. [298] Ibid. , 7. [299] Ibid. , 17. [300] Ibid. [301] Ibid. , 18. [302] Ibid. , 18 and 19. [303] Ibid. , 19. [304] Liutprand, i, 5: Si filiae aut sorores contra voluntatem patrisaut fratris egerint, potestatem habet pater aut frater iudicandi ressuas quomodo aut qualiter voluerit. [305] Leges Liutprandi, vi, 119: si quis filiam suam aut sororem aliisponsare voluerit, habeat potestatem dandi cui voluerit, libero tamenhomini. Lex Wisigothorum, iii, 1, 7 and 8. [306] Leges Liutprandi, vi, 119. Lex Angliorum et Werinorum, x, 2: silibera femina sine voluntate patris aut tutoris cuilibet nupserit, perdat omnem substantiam quam habuit vel habere debuit. Reply of abishop quoted by Gregory of Tours, 9, 33: quia sine consilio parentumeam coniugio copulasti, non erit uxor tua. But the law of the Visigoths(iii, i, 8, and 2, 8) merely deprived her of succession to the estate ofher parents. [307] Lex Saxonum, vi, 2: Si autem sine voluntate parentum, puella tamenconsentiente, ducta fuerit (uxorem ducturus) bis ccc solidos parentibuseius componat. Lex Burgundionum: _Add_. , 14. Cf. Edictum Rotharis, 188:si puella libera aut vidua sine voluntate parentum ad maritumambulaverit, liberum tamen, tunc maritus, qui eam acceperit uxorem, componat pro anagrip solidos XX et propter faidam alios XX. [308] By a law of the Alemanni (_Tit_. , 57), if two sisters wereheiresses to a father's estate and one married a vassal (_colonus_) ofthe King or Church and the other became the wife of a free man equal toher in rank, the latter only was allowed to hold her father's land, although the rest of the goods were divided equally. [309] Lex Wisigothorum, iii, 2, 2. [310] Ibid. , iii, 2, 3. [311] Lex Saxonum, vi, I: uxorem ducturus CCC solidos det parentibuseius. See also the lex Burgundionum, 66, I and 2 and 3. In the case of awidow who married again the gift of the husband was called _reiphe_ or_reippus_ and very solemn ceremonies belonged to the giving of itaccording to the Salic law, _Tit_. , 47: si, ut fieri adsolet, homomoriens viduam dimiserit et cam quis in coniugium voluerit accipere, antequam eam accipiat Tunginus aut Centenarius Mallum indicent, et inipso Mallo scutum habere debet, et tres homines vel caussas mandare. Ettunc ille, qui viduam accipere vult, cum tribus testibus qui adprobaredebent, tres solidos aeque pensantes, et denarium habere debet, etc. [312] Leges Liutprandi, ii, 1. [313] Lex Wisigothorum, iii, 1, 2 and 3, and iii, 6, 3. [314] E. G. , 62 _solidi_ by the Salic law, _Tit_. , 70. See also LexBaiuvariorum, _Tit_. , vii, 15 and 16 and 17. Lex Alemannorum, 52, i; 53;54. [315] Lex Burgundionum, _Add. Primum_, xiii: quaecumque mulier Burgundiavel Romana voluntate sua ad maritum ambulaverit, iubemus ut maritus ipsede facultate ipsius mulieris, sicut in eam habet potestatem, ita et derebus suis habeat. Lex Wisigothorum, iv, 2, 15: Vir qui uxorem suam secundum sacramscripturam habet in potestate, similiter et in servis suis potestatemhabebit, et omnia quae cum servis uxoris suae vel suis in expeditioneacquisivit, in sua potestate permaneant. [316] Lex Wisigothorum, iii, Tit. I, 6. [317] Lex Ripuariorum, 37, 1. [318] Leges Liutprandi, iv, 4. [319] That is, for the common people. Kings have always had a little wayof doing as they pleased. See the anecdote of King Cusupald in Paulus'_Hist. Langobard_, i, 21: secunda autem (sc. Filia Wacchonis) dicta estWalderada, quae sociata est Cusupald, alio regi Francorum, quam ipseodio habens uni ex suis, qui dicebatur Garipald, in coniugium tradidit. [320] For all this see Lex Burgundionum, 34, 1-4. [321] For all these, see Lex Wisigothorum, iii, 6, 1 and 2. [322] Capitula Addita ad Legem Alemannorum, 30. Lex Baiuvariorum, vii, 14. [323] Lex Ripuariorum, _Tit_. , 35. Lex Baiuvariorum, vii. LexAlemannorum, 51, 1. [324] Lex Wisigothorum, iii, 6, 1 and 2, and iii, 4, 1. [325] Leges Liutprandi, vi, 130. [326] Einhard, _Vita Kar. Mag_. , 17: Deinde cum matris hortatu filiamDesiderii regis Langobardorum duxisset uxorem, incertum qua de causa, post annum eam repudiavit et Hildigardam de gente Suaborum praecipuaenobilitatis feminam in matrimonium duxit . .. Habuit et alias tres filias. .. Duas de Fastrada uxore . .. Tertiam de concubina quadam . .. DefunctaFastrada . .. Tres habuit concubinas. [327] Gregory of Tours, 4, 3. [328] The concubines of Theodoric--Jordanes, _de orig. Acti busqueGet. _, 58. Huga, king of the Franks, had a filium quem ex concubinagenuit--Widukind, _Res Gest. Sax. _, i, 9. [329] Lex Ripuariorum, _Til_. , 48. Lex Angliorum et Werinorum, vi--_dealodibus_, 1: hereditatem defuncti filius, non filia suscipiat. SalicLaw, _Tit_. , 62: _de alodis_, 6: de terra vero Salica in mulierem nullaportio hereditatis transit, sed hoc virilis sexus adquirat, hoc est, filii in ipsa hereditate succedunt. Lex Saxonum, vii, 1: Pater aut materdefuncti filio, non filiae hereditatem relinquit. [330] Cf. Lex Angliorum et Werinorum, vi: _de alodibus_. [331] Ibid. , vi, 8: post quintam autem (sc. Generationem) filia ex toto, sive de patris sive de matris parte, in hereditatem succedat, et tuncdemum hereditas ad fusum a lancea transeat. [332] Lex Salica, _Tit. _, 62. Lex Ripuariorum, _Tit. _, 56. [333] Cf. Lex Wisigothorum, iv, 2, 7 and 9. [334] Tacitus, _Germania_, 21. [335] Legis Liutprandi, ii, 7. [336] Lex Wisigothorum, iv, 5, I. [337] Lex Alemannorum, _Tit. _, i. [338] Lex Baiuvariorum, _Tit. _, i. [339] Lex Wisigothorum, iv, 2, 20. [340] Edictum Rotharis, i, 121. [341] Lex Wisigothorum, iv, 2, 13. [342] Cf. Capitula addita ad legem Alemannorum, 29. Lex Saxonum, viii, 2. [343] Cf. Lex Wisigothorum, iv, 2, 11: maritus et uxor tunc sibihereditario iure succedant, quando mulla affinitas usque ad septimumgradum de propinquis eorum vel parentibus inveniri poterit. See also LexBurgundionum, 14, 1. [344] Lex Saxonum, ix. Lex Ripuariorum, 37, 2. [345] Lex Saxonum, viii. Lex Wisigothorum, iv, 3, 3. Lex Burgundionum85, 1, and 62, 1. [346] Lex Burgundionum, 42, 1; 62, 1; 74, 1. [347] Lex Baiuvariorum, xiv, 9, 1. [348] Ibid. , xiv, 6. [349] For all this, see Lex Burgundionum, 24 and 62 and 74. LexWisigothorum, iv, Tit. 3. Lex Baiuvariorum, 14. Lex Alemannorum, 55 and56. [350] Lex Wisigothorum, iii, 3, 1. [351] Lex Saxonum, iv. In the early days when the Great West of theUnited States was just being opened up and when society there was in avery crude state, a horse thief was regularly hanged; but murder washardly a fault. [352] Lex Burgundionum, 47, 1 and 2. The guilty man was put to death. [353] Lex Salica, _Tit. _, 23. [354] Id, _Tit. _, 28. [355] Lex Baiuvariorum, _Tit. _, xiii, 2. [356] Cf. Lex Salica, _Tit. _, 61--a very curious account of formalitiesto be observed in such a case. [357] It was deemed sufficient for a male relative, say, the father, toassert the innocence of the woman under solemn oath: for it was thoughtthat he would be unwilling to do this if he knew the woman was guiltyand so incur eternal Hell-fire as a punishment for perjury. An exampleof this solemn ceremony is told interestingly by Gregory of Tours, 5, 33. A woman at Paris was charged by her husband's relatives withadultery and was demanded to be put to death. Her father took a solemnoath that she was innocent. Far from being content with this, thehusband's kin began a fight and the matter ended in a wholesale butcheryat the church of St. Dionysius. [358] Lex Angliorum et Werinorum, xiv: aut si campionem non habuerit, ipsa ad novem vomeres ignitos examinanda mittatur. [359] Leges Liutprandi, vi, 140. [360] Lex Wisigothorum, iii, 4, 16. [361] See the interesting story of the girl who slew Duke Amalo, asnarrated by Gregory of Tours, 9, 27. [362] The bloody nature of the times is depicted naïvely by Gregory, Bishop of Tours, who wrote the history of the Franks. See, e. G. , thestories of Ingeltrudis, Rigunthis, Waddo, Amalo, etc. , in Book 9. Gregory was born in 539. [363] _Corpus Iuris Canonici_ (Friedberg), vol. I, p. 1, _DistinctioPrima_: ius naturae est quod in lege et _evangelio_ continetur. CHAPTER V DIGRESSION OF THE LATER HISTORY OF ROMAN LAW With Charlemagne, who was crowned Emperor by the Pope in the year 800, began the definite union of Church and State and the Church's temporalpower. Henceforth for seven centuries, until the Reformation, we shallhave to reckon with canon law as a supreme force in determining thequestion of the position of women. A brief survey of the later historyof the old Roman Law will not be out of place in order to note whatinfluence, if any, it continued to exert down the ages. The body of the Roman law, compiled by order of Justinian (527-565A. D. ), was intended primarily for the eastern empire; but when, in theyear 535, the Emperor conquered the western Goths, who then ruled Italy, he ordered his laws taught in the school of jurisprudence at Rome andpracticed in the courts. I have already remarked that the barbarians whooverran Italy allowed the vanquished the right to be judged in mostcases by their own code. But the splendid fabric of the Roman law wastoo elaborate a system to win the attentive study of a rude people; theChurch had its own canons, the people their own ancestral customs; anduntil the twelfth century no development of the Roman Civil Code tookplace. Finally, during the twelfth century, the great school at Bolognarenewed the study with vigour, and Italy at the present day derives thebasic principles of its civil law from the Corpus of Justinian. Practically the same story holds true of France, [364] of Spain, and ofthe Netherlands, all of whom have been influenced particularly by thegreat jurists of the sixteenth century who were simply carrying furtherthe torch that had been lit so enthusiastically at Bologna in thetwelfth century. As to Germany, [365] when that unhappy country had been separated fromFrance and Italy after the Treaty of Verdun in 843, Carlovingian law andthe ancient German law books fell into disuse. The law again rested onunwritten customs, on the decisions of the judges and their assessors, and on agreements of the interested parties (feudal services andtenures). Not till the twelfth and thirteenth centuries was any recordmade of the rules of law which had arisen; many laws of cities onvarious matters and in various provinces were recorded by publicauthority; and thus originated the so-called law books of the MiddleAges, the private labours of experienced men, who set forth the legalprinciples which were recognised in all Germany, or at least in certainparts of it. There were no law schools as yet, and scientificcompilation of German law was not even thought of. After the Universityof Bologna had revived the study of Roman law in Italy, the Italianuniversities attracted the German youth, who on their return wouldlabour to introduce what they had learned. Their efforts were secondedby the clergy, through the close connection with canon law which was inforce in Germany. German emperors and territorial lords also favouredRoman law because they saw how well suited it was to absolutism; theyliked to engage jurists trained in Italy, especially if they weredoctors of both canon and Roman law. Nor did the German people object. From the fourteenth century many schools of jurisprudence wereestablished on Italian models. At present, the law of Justinian has only such force as is received byusage or as it has acquired by recognition. I. The Roman law forms inGermany the principal law in some branches, that is, it is in so far itsbasis that the German law is only an addition or modification of it. Inother branches it is only supplementary, that is, it is merelysubsidiary to the German law. II. Only the glossed parts and passages ofJustinian's law collection have binding force in Germany. III. Only those glossed passages are binding which contain the latestrule of law. Consequently the historical materials contained in them, though always of great importance for discovering the latest law, havenot binding force. IV. Those precepts of the Roman law which relate toRoman manners and institutions unknown in Germany are inapplicable here, though glossed. V. The Roman law has but slight application to suchobjects and transactions as were unknown to the Romans and are of purelyGermanic origin. VI. With the limitations above enumerated the Roman lawhas been adopted as a whole and not in detached parts. In England Roman law has had practically no effect. In the year 1149 aLombard jurist, Vacarius, lectured on it at Oxford; but there were noresults. Canon law is, of course, a force to be reckoned with in Britainas on the Continent. Before we enter the question of women's rights during the Middle Ages, we must take a general survey of the character of that period; forobviously we cannot understand its legislation without some idea of thebackground of social, political, and intellectual life. In the firstplace, then, the Church was everywhere triumphant and its idealsgoverned legislation completely on such matters as marriage. The civillaw of Rome, as drawn up first by the epitomisers and later studied morecarefully at Bologna, served to indicate general principles in cases towhich canon law did not apply; but there was little jurisdiction inwhich the powers ecclesiastical could not contrive to take a hand. Atthe same time Germanic ideals and customs continued a powerful force. For a long time after the partition of the vast empire of Charlemagnegovernment was in a state of chaos and transition from which eventuallythe various distinct states arose. A struggle between kings and noblesfor supremacy dragged along for many generations; and as during thatcontest each feudal lord was master in his own domain, there was noconsistent code of laws for all countries or, indeed, for the samecountry. Yet the character of the age determined in a general way thespirit that dictated all laws. Society rested on a military andaristocratic basis, and when the ability to wield arms is essential tomaintain one's rights, the position of women will be affected by thatfact. Beginning with the twelfth century city life began to exert apolitical influence; and this, again, did not fail to have an effect onthe status of women. Of any participation of women in intellectual lifethere could be no question until the Renaissance, although we do meethere and there with isolated exceptions, a few ladies of high degreelike Roswitha of Gandersheim and Hadwig, Duchess of Swabia, niece ofOtto the Great, and Heloise. The learning was exclusively scholastic, and from any share in that women were barred. When people are kept inignorance, there is less inducement for them to believe that they haveany rights or to assert them if they do think so. We shall do well to bear in mind, in noting the laws relative to women, that theory is one thing and practice quite another. Hence, although thedoctrines of the Church on various matters touching the female sex werecharacterised by the greatest purity, we shall see that in practice theywere not strictly executed. Religion does in fact play a lessconsiderable part in regulating the daily acts of men than theologiansare inclined to believe. If anything proves this, it is the history ofthat foulest stain on Christian nations--prostitution. We might expectthat since the Roman Catholic Church insists so on chastity the level ofthis virtue would certainly be higher in countries which are almostexclusively Catholic, like Spain and Italy, than in Protestant lands;but no one who has ever travelled in Spain or Italy fails to recognisethat the conduct of men is as lamentably low in these as in England, Germany, or the United States. With this brief introduction I shall proceed next to explain theposition of women under the canon law, a code which affected allcountries of Europe equally until the Reformation; and in connectionwith this I shall give some idea of the attitude of the Roman CatholicChurch towards women and women's rights at the present day. NOTES: [364] French customary law began to be written in the thirteenth centuryand was greatly affected by the Roman law. [365] The succeeding paragraphs are a summary of the account by thelearned Professor Mackeldey, who has investigated Roman law with themost minute diligence. CHAPTER VI THE CANON LAW AND THE ATTITUDE OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH [Sidenote: The canon law reaffirms the subjection of women. ] The canon law reaffirms woman's subjection to man in no uncertain terms. The wife must be submissive and obedient to her husband. [366] She mustnever, under penalty of excommunication, cut off her hair, because "Godhas given it to her as a veil and as a sign of her subjection. "[367] Awoman who assumed men's garments was accursed[368]; it will beremembered that the breaking of this law was one of the charges whichbrought Joan of Arc to the stake. However learned and holy, woman mustnever presume to teach men publicly. [369] She was not allowed to bring acriminal action except in cases of high treason or to avenge the deathof near relatives. [370] Parents could dedicate a daughter to God whileshe was yet an infant; and this parental vow bound her to the nunnerywhen she was mature, whether she was willing or not. [371] Virgins orwidows who had once consecrated themselves to God might not marry underpain of excommunication. [372] Parents could not prevent a daughter fromtaking vows, if she so wished, after she had attained the age oftwelve. [373] [Sidenote: Woman and marriage under canon law. ] The most important effect of the canon law was on marriage, which wasnow a sacrament and had its sanction not in the laws of men, but in theexpress decrees of God. Hence even engagements acquired a sacredcharacter unknown to the Roman law; and when a betrothal had once beenentered into, it could be broken only in case one or both of thecontracting parties desired to enter a monastery. [374] Free consent ofboth man and woman was necessary for matrimony. [375] There must also bea dowry and a public ceremony. [376] The legitimate wife is thusdefined[377]: "A chaste virgin, betrothed in chastity, dowered accordingto law, given to her betrothed by her parents, and received from thehands of the bridesmaids (_a paranimphis accipienda_); she is to betaken according to the laws and the Gospel and the marriage ceremonymust be public; all the days of her life--unless by consent for briefperiods to devote to worship--she is never to be separated from herhusband; for the cause of adultery she is to be dismissed, but while shelives her husband may marry no other. " The blessing of the priest wasnecessary. About every form connected with the marriage service theChurch threw its halo of mystery and symbol to emphasise the sacredcharacter of the union. Thus[378]: "Women are veiled during the marriageceremony for this reason, that they may know they are lowly and insubjection to their husbands. .. . A ring is given by the bridegroom tohis betrothed either as a sign of mutual love or rather that theirhearts may be bound together by this pledge. For this reason, too, thering is worn on the fourth finger, because there is a certain vein inthat finger which they say reaches to the heart. " [Sidenote: Clandestine marriages. ] Clandestine marriages were forbidden, [379] but the Church alwayspresumed everything it could in favour of marriage and itsindissolubility. Thus, Gratian remarks[380]: "Clandestine marriages are, to be sure, contrary to law; nevertheless, they can not be dissolved. "The reason for forbidding them was perfectly reasonable: one party mightchange his or her mind and there would be no positive proof that amarriage had taken place, so that a grave injury might be inflicted onan innocent partner by an unscrupulous one who desired to dissolve theunion. [381] Yet the marriage by consent alone without any of theceremonies or the blessing of the priest was perfectly valid, though not"according to law" (_legitimum_), and could not be dissolved. [382] Notuntil the great Council of Trent in 1563 was this changed. At that timeall marriages were declared invalid unless they had been contracted inthe presence of a priest and two or three witnesses. [383] [Sidenote: Protection to women. ] The Church is seen in its fairest light in its provisions to protect thewife from sexual brutality on the part of her husband, and it deserveshigh praise for its stand on such matters. [384] Various other laws showthe same regard for the interests of women. A man who was enteringpriestly office could not cast off his wife and leave her destitute, butmust provide living and raiment for her. [385] Neither husband nor wifecould embrace the celibate life nor devote themselves to continencewithout the consent of the other. [386] A man who cohabited with a womanas his concubine, even though she was of servile condition orquestionable character, could not dismiss her and marry another savingfor adultery. [387] Slaves were now allowed to contract marriages andmasters were not permitted to dissolve them. [388] [Sidenote: Divorce. ] It has always been and still is the boast of the Roman Catholic Churchthat it has been the supreme protector of women on account of its standon divorce. Says Cardinal Gibbons[389]: "Christian wives and mothers, what gratitude you owe to the Catholic Church for the honorable positionyou now hold in society! If you are no longer regarded as the slave, butthe equal, of your husbands; if you are no longer the toy of hiscaprice, and liable to be discarded at any moment; but if you arerecognised as the mistress and queen of your household, you owe youremancipation to the Church. You are especially indebted for your libertyto the Popes who rose up in all the majesty of their spiritual power tovindicate the rights of injured wives against the lustful tyranny oftheir husbands. " In view of such a claim I may be justified in enteringa somewhat more detailed account of this subject. On the subject of divorce the Roman Catholic Church took the decidedposition which it continues to maintain at the present day. Marriagewhen entered upon under all the conditions demanded by the Church for avalid union is indissoluble. [390] A separation "from bed and board"(_quoad thorum seu quoad cohabitationem_) is allowed for various causes, such as excessive cruelty, for a determinate or an indeterminate period;but there is no absolute divorce even for adultery. For this cause aseparation may, indeed, take place, but the bond of matrimony is notdissolved thereby and neither the innocent nor the guilty party maymarry again during the lifetime of the other partner. All this seems very rigorous. It is true that the Roman Catholic Churchdoes not permit "divorce. " But it allows fourteen cases where a marriagecan be declared absolutely null and void, as if it had never existed;and in these cases the man or woman may marry again. To say that theRoman Church does not allow divorce is, therefore, playing upon words. The instruments used to render its strict theory ineffective are"diriment impediments" and "dispensations. " By the doctrine of "diriment impediments" the Pope or a duly constitutedrepresentative can declare that a marriage has been null and void fromthe very beginning because of some impediment defined in the canon law. Canon IV of the twenty-fourth session of the Council of Trentanathematises anyone who shall say that the Church cannot constituteimpediments dissolving marriage, or that she has erred in constitutingthem. The impediments which can annul marriage are described in theofficial Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. Vii, pages 697-698. Among them areimpuberty and impotency. Then there is "disparity of worship, " whichrenders void the marriage of a Christian--that is, a Roman Catholic, with an infidel, --that is, one who is unbaptised. Marriage of a RomanCatholic with a baptised non-Catholic constitutes a "relative"impediment and needs a special dispensation and provisoes, such as aguarantee to bring up the children in the Roman faith to give itvalidity. Another impediment is based on the presumption of want ofconsent, "the nullity being caused by a defect of consent. " "Thisdefect, " says the Catholic Encyclopedia, "may arise from the intellector the will; hence we have two classes. Arising from the intellect wehave: insanity; and total ignorance, even if in confuso of what marriageis (this ignorance, however, is not presumed to exist after the age ofpuberty has been reached); and lastly error, where the consent is notgiven to what was not intended. Arising from the will, a defect ofconsent may be caused through deceit or dissimulation, when oneexpresses exteriorly a consent that does not really exist; or fromconstraint imposed by an unjust external force, which causes the consentnot to be free. " Consanguinity and affinity are diriment impediments. Consanguinity "prohibits all marriages in the direct ascending ordescending line in infinitum, and in the collateral line to the fourthdegree or fourth generation. " Affinity "establishes a bond ofrelationship between each of the married parties and the blood relationsof the other, and forbids marriage between them to the fourth degree. Such is the case when the marriage springs from conjugal relations; butas canon law considers affinity to spring also from illicit intercourse, there is an illicit affinity which annuls marriage to the second degreeonly. " Then there is "spiritual relationship"; for example, the marriageof one who stood as sponsor in confirmation with a parent of the childis null and void. Under the canon law, even more resources are open for the man who istired of his wife; by the doctrine, namely, of "spiritual fornication. "Adultery is, of course, recognised as the cause that admits aseparation. But the canon law remarks that idolatry and all harmfulsuperstition--by which is meant any doctrine that does not agree withthat of the Church--is fornication; that avarice is also idolatry andhence fornication; that in fact no vice can be separated from idolatryand hence all vices can be classed as fornication; so that if a husbandonly tried a little bit, he could without much trouble find some "vice"in his wife that would entitle him to a separation. [391] When all these fail, recourse can be had to a dispensation. The Churchreserves the right to give dispensations for all impediments. Canon IIIof the twenty-fourth session of Trent says: "If anyone shall say, thatonly those degrees of consanguinity and affinity which are set down in_Leviticus_ [xviii, 6 ff. ] can hinder matrimony from being contracted, and dissolve it when contracted; and that the Church can not dispense insome of those degrees, or ordain that others may hinder and dissolve it;let him be anathema. " [Sidenote: Inheritance] The minute and far-fetched subtleties which the Roman Church hasemployed in the interpretation of these relationships make escape fromthe marital tie feasible for the man who is eager to disencumber himselfof his life's partner. The man of limited means will have a hard time ofit. The great and wealthy have been able at all periods, by working oneor more of these doctrines, to reduce the theory of the Roman Church tonullity in practice. Napoleon had his marriage to Josephine annulled onthe ground that he had never intended to enter into a religious marriagewith her, although the day before the ceremony he had had the unionsecretly blessed by Cardinal Fesch. On the basis of this avowed lack ofintent, his marriage with Josephine was declared null and void, and hewas free to marry Louisa. A plea along the same lines is being worked bythe Count de Castellane now. Louis XII, having fallen in love with Anneof Brittany, suddenly discovered that his wife was his fourth cousin, that she was deformed, and that her father had been his godfather; andfor this the Pope gave him a dispensation and his legitimate wife wassent away. The Pope did not thunder against Louis XIV for committingadultery with women like Louise de la Vallière and Madame de Montespan. It is certainly true that in the case of Philip Augustus of France andHenry VIII of England the Pope did protect injured wives; but both thesemonarchs were questioning the Vatican's autocracy. The matrimonialrelations of John of England, Philip's contemporary, were more corruptthan those of the French king; but, while the Pope chastised John forhis defiance of his political autonomy, he did not excommunicate him onany ground of morality. The statement of Cardinal Gibbons is notentirely in accordance with history; he does not take all facts intoconsideration, as is also true of his complacent assumption that outsideof the Roman Church no economic forces and no individuals have had anyeffect in elevating the moral and economic status of women. Questions such as those of inheritance belong properly to civil law;but the canon law claimed to be heard in any case into which anyspiritual interest could be foisted. Thus in the year 1199 Innocent IIIenacted that children of heretics be deprived of all their offendingparents' goods "since in many cases even according to divine decreechildren are punished in this world on account of their parents. "[392] [Sidenote: General attitude towards women at the present day] The attitude of the Roman Catholic Church towards women's rights at thepresent day is practically the same as it has been for eighteencenturies. It still insists on the subjection of the woman to the man, and it is bitterly hostile to woman suffrage. This position is so wellillustrated by an article of the Rev. David Barry in the Roman Catholicpaper, the Dublin _Irish Ecclesiastical Review_, that I cannot do betterthan quote some of it. "It seems plain enough, " he says, "that allowingwomen the right of suffrage is incompatible with the high Catholic idealof the unity of domestic life. Even those who do not hold the high andrigid ideal of the unity of the family that the Catholic Church clingsto must recognise some authority in the family, as in every othersociety. Is this authority the conjoint privilege of husband and wife?If so, which of them is to yield, if a difference of opinion arises?Surely the most uncompromising suffragette must admit that the wifeought to give way in such a case. That is to say, every one will admitthat the wife's domestic authority is subordinate to that of herhusband. But is she to be accorded an autonomy in outside affairs thatis denied her in the home? Her authority is subject to her husband's indomestic matters--her special sphere; is it to be considered co-ordinatewith his in regulating the affairs of the State? Furthermore, there isan argument that applies universally, even in the case of those womenwho are not subject to the care and protection of a husband, and even, Ido not hesitate to say, where the matters to be decided on would comespecially within their cognisance, and where their judgment would, therefore, be more reliable than that of men. It is this, that in thenoise and turmoil of party politics, or in the narrow, but rancorousarena of local factions, it must needs fare ill with what may be calledthe passive virtues of humility, patience, meekness, forbearance, andself-repression. These are looked on by the Church as the specialprerogative and endowment of the female soul . .. But these virtues wouldsoon become sullied and tarnished in the dust and turmoil of a contestedelection; and their absence would soon be disagreeably in evidence inthe character of women, who are, at the same time, almostconstitutionally debarred from preeminence in the more robust virtuesfor which the soul of man is specially adapted. " Cardinal Gibbons, in a letter to the National League for the CivicEducation of Women--an anti-suffrage organisation--said that "womansuffrage, if realised, would be the death-blow of domestic life andhappiness" (Nov. 2, 1909). Rev. William Humphrey, S. J. , in his _Christian Marriage_, chap. 16, remarks that woman is "the subordinate equal of man"--whatever thatmeans. A few Roman Catholic prelates, like Cardinal Moran, have advocated equalsuffrage, but they are in the minority. The Pope has not yet definitelystated the position of the Church; individual Catholics are free to takeany side they wish, as it is not a matter of faith; but the tendency ofRoman Catholicism is against votes for women. SOURCES I. Corpus Iuris Canonici: recognovit Aemilius Friedberg. Lipsiae(Tauchnitz) Pars Prior, 1879. Pars Secunda, 1881. II. Sacrosanctum Concilium Tridentinum, additis DeclarationibusCardinalium, Concilii Interpretum, ex ultima recognitione JoannisGallemart, etc. Coloniae Agrippinae, apud Franciscum Metternich, Bibliopolam. MDCCXXVII. III. The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York, Robert Appleton Company. (Published with the _Imprimatur_ of Archbishop Parley. ) IV. Various articles by Catholic prelates, due references to which aregiven as they occur. NOTES: [366] Augustine quoted by Gratian, _Causa_, 33, _Quaest_. 5, chapters12-16--Friedberg, i, pp. 1254, 1255. Ambrose and Jerome on the samematter, ibid. , _c_. 15 and 17, Friedberg, i, p. 1255. Gratian, _Causa_30, _Quaest_. 5, _c_. 7--Friedberg, i, p. 1106: Feminae dum maritantur, ideo velantur, ut noverint se semper viris suis subditas esse ethumiles. [367] Gratian, _Distinctio_, 30, _c_. 2--Friedberg, i, p. 107: Quecumquemulier, religioni iudicans convenire, comam sibi amputaverit quam Deusad velamen eius et ad memoriam subiectionis illi dedit, tanquamresolvens ius subiectionis, anathema sit. Cf. Gratian, _Causa_, 15, _Quaest_. 3--Friedberg, i, p. 750. [368] Gratian, _Dist_. , 30, _c_. 6, Friedberg, i, p. 108. See also_Deuteronomy_ xxii, 5. [369] Gratian, _Dist_. , 23, _c_. 29--Friedberg, i, p. 86: Mulier, quamvis docta et sancta, viros in conventu docere non praesumat. [370] Id. , _Causa_, 15, _Quaest_. 3--Friedberg, i, p. 750. [371] Id. , _Causa_, 20, _Quaest_. 1, _c_. 2--Friedberg, i, pp. 843-844, quoting Gregory to Augustine, the Bishop of the Angles: Addidistisadhuc, quod si pater vel mater filium filiamve intra septa monasterii ininfantiae annis sub regulari tradiderunt disciplina, utrum liceat eis, postquam ad pubertatis inoleverint annos, egredi, et matrimoniocopulari. Hoe omnino devitamus, quia nefas est ut oblatis a parentibusDeo filiis voluptatis frena relaxentur. Id. , _c_. 4--Fried. , i, p. 844:quoting Isidore--quicumque a parentibus propriis in monasterio fueritdelegatus, noverit se ibi perpetuo mansurum. Nam Anna Samuel puerum suumnatum et ablactatum Deo pietate obtulit. Id. , _c_. 7--Fried. , i, pp. 844-845. [372] Gratian, _Dist_. , 27, _c_. 4 et 9, and _Dist_. , 28, _c_. 12--Friedberg, i, pp. 99 and 104. Id. , _Causa_, 27, _Quaest_. 1, _c_. 1and 7--Friedberg, i, pp. 1047 and 1O50. [373] Gratian, _Causa_, 20, _Quaest_. 2, _c_. 2--Friedberg, i, pp. 847-848. [374] Cf. Council of Trent, Session 24, "On the Sacrament of Matrimony, "_Canon_ 6: "If anyone shall say that matrimony contracted but notconsummated is not dissolved by the solemn profession of religion by oneof the parties married: let him be anathema. " Gratian, _Causa_, 27, _Quaest_. Ii, _c_. 28--Fried. , i, p. 1071. Id. , _c_. 46, 47, 50, 51--Fried. , i, pp. 1076, 1077, 1078. [375] Gratian, _Causa_, 30, _Quaest_. 2--Fried. , i, p. 1100: Ubi non estconsensus utriusque, non est coniugium. Ergo qui pueris dant puellas incunabulis et e converso, nihil faciunt, nisi uterque puerorum postquamvenerit ad tempus discretionis consentiat, etiamsi pater et mater hocfecerint et voluerint. Id. _Causa_, 31, _Quaest_. 2--Fried. , i, 1112-1114: sine libera voluntate nulla est copulanda alicui. [376] Gratian, _Causa_, 30, _Quaest_. 5, _c_. 6--Friedberg, i, p. 1106:Nullum sine dote fiat coniugium; iuxta possibilitatem fiat dos, nee sinepublicis nuptiis quisquam nubere vel uxorem ducere praesumat. [377] Gratian, _Causa_, 30, _Quaest_. 5, _c_. 4--Friedberg, i, p. 1105. [378] Gratian, _Causa_, 30, _Quaest_. 5, _c_. 7--Friedberg, i, p. 1106. [379] Id. , _c_. 1--Friedberg, i, p. 1104. [380] Id. , _c_. 8--Friedberg, i, p. 1107. [381] Gratian, _Causa_, 30, _Quaest_. 5, _c_. 9--Friedberg, i, p. 1107. [382] Gratian, _Causa, 28, _Quaest_. I, _c_. 17--Friedberg, i, p. 1089:illorum vero coniugia, qui contemptis omnibus illis solempnitatibus soloaffectu aliquam sibi in coniugem copulant, huiuscemodi coniugium nonlegitimum, sed ratum tantummodo esse creditur. [383] Sessio xxiv, cap. I--De Reformatione Matrimonii. [384] See Gratian, _Dist_. , v, _c_. 4--Friedberg, i, p. 8, e. G. , . .. Itaut morte lex sacra feriat, si quis vir ad menstruam mulierem accedat. [385] Gratian, _Dist_. , 31, _c_. 11--Friedberg, i, p. 114. [386] Gratian, _Causa_, 27, _Quaest_. 2, _c_. 18-22, and24-26--Friedberg i, pp. 1067-1070. [387] Gratian, _Dist_. , 34, c. 4--Friedberg, i, p. 126. Id. , _Causa_, 29, _Quaest_. 1--Friedberg, i, p. 1092. Id. , _Causa_, 29, _Quaest_. 2, c. 2. [388] Id. , _Causa_, 29, _Quaest_. 2, c. 1 and 8. [389] "Divorce, " by James Cardinal Gibbons, in the _Century_, May, 1909. [390] For this and what immediately follows see _Session_ 24 of theCouncil of Trent "On the Sacrament of Matrimony" and also the CatholicEncyclopedia under "Divorce. " [391] Gratian, _Causa_ 28, _Quaest_. I, c. 5--Friedberg, i, pp. 1080-1081. Licite dimittitur uxor que virum suum cogere querit ad malum. Idolatria, quam secuntur infideles, et quelibet noxia superstitiofornicatio est. Dominus autem permisit causa fornicationis uxoremdimitti. Sed quia dimisit et non iussit, dedit Apostolo locum monendi, ut qui voluerit non dimittat uxorem infidelem, quo sic fortassis possitfidelis fieri. Si infidelitas fornicatio est, et idolatria infidelitas, et avaritia idolatria, non est dubitandum et avaritiam fornicationemesse. Quis ergo iam quamlibet illicitam concupiscentiam potest recte afornicationis genere separate, si avaritia fornicatio est? [392] Friedberg, ii, pp. 782 and 783: Quum enim secundum legitimassanctiones, etc. Lea, in his _History of Confession and Indulgences_, ii, p. 87, quotesZanchini, _Tract. De Haeret. , cap. 33_, to the effect that goods of aheretic were confiscated and disabilities inflicted on two generationsof descendants. CHAPTER VII HISTORY OF WOMEN'S RIGHTS IN ENGLAND Since I have now given a brief summary of the canon law, which until theReformation marked the general principles that guided the laws of allEurope on the subject of women, I propose next to consider moreparticularly the history of women's rights in England; for theinstitutions of England, being the basis of our own, will necessarily bemore pertinent to us than those of Continental countries, to which Ishall not devote more than a passing comment here and there. My inquirywill naturally fall into certain well-defined parts. The status of theunmarried woman is different from that of her married sister and will, accordingly, demand separate consideration. The rights of women, again, are to be viewed both from the legal and the social standpoint. Theirlegal rights include those of a private nature, such as the disposal ofproperty, and public rights, such as suffrage, sitting on a jury, orholding office. Under social rights are included the right to aneducation, to earn a living, and the like. Let us glance first at thehistory of the legal rights of single women. [Sidenote: Single women: Pollock and Maitland i, pp. 482-485. ] From very early times the law has continued to put the single woman ofmature age on practically a par with men so far as private single rightsare concerned. She could hold land, make a will or contract, could sueand be sued, all of her own initiative; she needed no guardian. Shecould herself, if a widow, be guardian of her own children. [Sidenote: Pollock and Maitland, ii, 260-313. Blackstone, ii, ch. 13. ] In the case of inheritance, however, women have to within extremelyrecent times been treated less generously than men. The male sex hasbeen preferred in an inheritance; males excluded females of equaldegree; or, in the words of Blackstone: "In collateral inheritances themale stock shall be preferred to the female; that is, kindred derivedfrom the blood of the male ancestors, however remote, shall be admittedbefore those from the blood of the female, however near; unless wherethe lands have, in fact, descended from a female. Thus the relations onthe father's side are admitted _in infinitum_ before those on themother's side are admitted at all. " Blackstone justly remarks that thisharsh enactment of the laws of England was quite unknown to the Romanlaw "wherein brethren and sisters were allowed to succeed to equalportions of the inheritance. " As an example, suppose we look for theheir of John Stiles, deceased. The order of succession would be: I. The eldest son, Matthew Stiles, or his issue. II. If his line is extinct, then Gilbert Stiles and the other sons, respectively, in order of birth, or their issue. III. In default of these, all the daughters together, Margarite andCharlotte Stiles, or their issue. IV. On the failure of the descendants of John Stiles himself, the issueof Geoffrey and Lucy Stiles, his parents, is called in, viz. : first, Francis Stiles, the eldest brother of the whole blood, or his issue. V. Then Oliver Stiles, and the other whole brothers, respectively, inorder of birth, or their issue. VI. Then the sisters of the whole blood all together, Bridget and AliceStiles, or their issue. And so on. It will be noted that females of equal degree inheritedtogether; and that a daughter excluded a brother of the dead man. Menthemselves, if younger sons, have suffered what seems to us a graveinjustice in the prevalence of the right of primogeniture, whereby, ifthere are two or more males in equal degree, the eldest only caninherit. This law might work for the benefit of certain females; thus, the daughter, granddaughter, or great-granddaughter of an eldest sonwill succeed before the younger son. To public rights, such as sitting on a jury[393] or holding offices ofstate, women never were admitted; that is a question that has becomeprominent only in the twentieth century and will demand consideration inits proper place. [Sidenote: Power of Parents. ] Unlike the Roman law, English law allows parents to disinherit childrencompletely, if they so desire, without being under any compulsion toleave them a part of their goods. As to legal power over children, themother, as such, is entitled to none, says Blackstone, [394] but only toreverence and respect. Now, however, by the statute 2 and 3 Vict. , c. 54, commonly called _Talfourd's Act_, an order may be made on petitionto the court of chancery giving mothers access to their children and, ifsuch children are within the age of seven years, for delivery of them totheir mother until they attain that age. But no woman who has beenconvicted of adultery is entitled to the benefit of the act. The fatherhas legal power up to the time when his children come of age; then itceases. Until that time, his consent is necessary to a valid marriage;he may receive the profit of a child's estate, but only as guardian ortrustee, and must render an account when the child attains his majority;and he may have the benefit of his children's labour while they livewith him. [Sidenote: Husband and wife. Pollock and Maitland, ii, 399-436. Blackstone, i, ch 15. Bryce, pp. 818-830. ] We are ready now to observe the status of women in marriage. Thequestion of their legal rights in this relation offers the mostilluminating insight into their conditions in the various epochs ofhistory. Matrimony is a state over which the Church has always assertedspecial jurisdiction. By the middle of the twelfth century it was law inEngland that to it belonged this prerogative. The ecclesiastical court, for example, pronounced in a given case whether there had been a validmarriage or not; the temporal court took this decision as one of thebases for determining a matter of inheritance, whether a woman wasentitled to dower, and the like. The general precepts laid down by canonlaw in the case of a wife have already been noted. These rules need nowto be supplemented by an account of the position of women in marriageunder the common law. Under the older common law the husband was very much lord of all hesurveyed and even more. An old enactment thus describes a husband'sduty[395]: "He shall treat and _govern_ the aforesaid A well anddecently, and shall not inflict nor cause to be inflicted any injuryupon the aforesaid A except in so far as he may lawfully and reasonablydo so in accordance with _the right of a husband to correct and chastisehis wife_. " Blackstone, who wrote in 1763, has this to say on thehusband's power to chastise his wife: "The husband also, by the old law, might give his wife moderate correction. For, as he is to answer for hermisbehaviour, the law thought it reasonable to intrust him with thispower of restraining her, by domestic chastisement, in the samemoderation that a man is allowed to correct his apprentices or children, for whom the master or parent is also liable in some cases to answer. But this power of correction was confined within reasonable bounds, andthe husband was prohibited from using any violence to his wife _aliterquam ad, virum, ex causa regiminis et castigationis uxoris suae, liciteet rationabiliter pertinet_. [396] The civil law gave the husband thesame, or a larger, authority over his wife; allowing him for somemisdemeanours _flagellis et fustibus acriter verberare uxorem_ [to givehis wife a severe beating with whips and clubs]; for others, only_modicam castigationem adhibere_ [to apply moderate correction]. Butwith us in the politer reign of Charles the Second, this power ofcorrection began to be doubted; and a wife may now have security of thepeace against her husband, or, in return, a husband against his wife. Yet the lower rank of people, who were always fond of the old commonlaw, still claim and exert their ancient privilege; and the courts oflaw will still permit a husband to restrain a wife of her liberty, incase of any gross misbehaviour. " Doubtless what Mr. Weller, Sr. , describes as the "amiable weakness" of wife-beating was not necessarilyconfined to the "lower rank. " For instance, some of the courtlygentlemen of the reign of Queen Anne were probably not averse toexercising their old-time prerogative. Says Sir Richard Steele(_Spectator_, 479): "I can not deny but there are Perverse Jades thatfall to Men's Lots, with whom it requires more than common Proficiencyin Philosophy to be able to live. When these are joined to men of warmSpirits, without Temper or Learning, they are frequently corrected withStripes; but one of our famous Lawyers is of opinion, That this ought tobe used sparingly. " The law was, indeed, even worse than might appearfrom the words of Blackstone. The wife who feared unreasonable violencecould, to be sure, bind her husband to keep the peace; but she had noaction against him. A husband who killed his wife was guilty of murder, but the wife who slew her husband was adjudged guilty of petty treason;and whereas the man would be merely drawn and hanged, the woman, untilthe reign of George III, was drawn and burnt alive. [397] The right of a husband to restrain a wife's liberty may not be said tohave become completely obsolete until the case of _Reg. V. Jackson in1891_. [398] Wife-beating is still a flagrantly common offence inEngland. [Sidenote: Wife's property in marriage. ] Turning now to the question of the wife's property in marriage, we shallbe forced to believe that Blackstone was an optimist of unusualmagnitude when he wrote that the female sex was "so great a favourite ofthe laws of England. " Not to weary the reader by minute details, Icannot do better than give Messrs. Pollock and Maitland's excellentsummary of the final shape taken by the common law--a glaring piece ofinjustice, worthy of careful reading, and in complete accord withApostolic injunctions: "I. In the lands of which the wife is tenant infee, whether they belonged to her at the date of the marriage or came toher during the marriage, the husband has an estate which will endureduring the marriage, and this he can alienate without her concurrence. If a child is born of the marriage, thenceforth the husband as 'tenantby courtesy' has an estate which will endure for the whole of his life, and this he can alienate without the wife's concurrence. The husband byhimself has no greater power of alienation than is here stated; hecannot confer an estate which will endure after the end of the marriageor (as the case may be) after his own death. The wife has during themarriage no power to alienate her land without her husband'sconcurrence. The only process by which the fee can be alienated is a_fine_ to which both husband and wife are parties and to which she givesher assent after a separate examination. "II. A widow is entitled to enjoy for her life under the name of dowerone third of any land of which the husband was seised in fee at any timeduring the marriage. The result of this is that during the marriage thehusband cannot alienate his own land so as to bar his wife's right ofdower, unless this is done with her concurrence, and her concurrence isineffectual unless the conveyance is made by _fine_. " [Thisinconvenience for an unscrupulous husband was evaded in modernconveyancy by a device of extreme ingenuity finally perfected only inthe eighteenth century. Professor James Bryce remarks (p. 820): "As thisright (i. E. , the right of dower) interfered with the husband's power offreely disposing of his own land, the lawyers at once set about to findmeans of evading it, and found these partly in legal processes by whichthe wife, her consent being ascertained by the courts, parted with herright, partly by an ingenious device whereby lands could be conveyed toa husband without the right of dower attaching to them, partly by givingthe wife a so-called jointure which barred her claim. "] "III. Our law institutes no community, even of movables, between husbandand wife. Whatever movables the wife has at the date of the marriagebecome the husband's, and the husband is entitled to take possession ofand thereby to make his own whatever movables she becomes entitled toduring the marriage, and without her concurrence he can sue for alldebts that are due her. On his death, however, she becomes entitled toall movables and debts that are outstanding, or (as the phrase goes)have not been 'reduced into possession. ' What the husband getspossession of is simply his; he can freely dispose of it _inter vivos_or by will. In the main, for this purpose as for other purposes, a 'termof years' is treated as a chattel, but under an exceptional rule thehusband, though he can alienate his wife's 'chattel real' _inter vivos_, cannot dispose of it by his will. If he has not alienated it _intervivos_, it will be hers if she survives him. If he survives her, he isentitled to her 'chattels real' and is also entitled to be made theadministrator of her estate. In that capacity he has a right to whatevermovables or debts have not yet been 'reduced into possession' and, whenthe debts have been paid, he keeps these goods as his own. If she diesin his lifetime, she can have no other intestate successor. Without hisconsent she can make no will, and any consent that he may have given isrevocable at any time before the will is proved. "IV. Our common law--but we have seen that this rule is not veryold--assured no share of the husband's personality to the widow. He can, even by his will, give all of it away from her except her necessaryclothes, and with that exception his creditors can take all of it. Afurther exception, of which there is not much to be read, is made ofjewels, trinkets, and ornaments of the person, under the name ofparaphernalia. The husband may sell or give these away in his lifetime, and even after his death they may be taken for his debts; but he cannotgive them away by will. If the husband dies during the wife's life anddies intestate she is entitled to a third, or, if there be no livingdescendant of the husband, to one half of his personality [but see thenote of Bryce, above]. But this is a case of pure intestate succession;she only has a share of what is left after payment of her husband'sdebts. "V. During the marriage the husband is in effect liable to the wholeextent of his property for debts incurred or wrongs committed by hiswife before the marriage, also for wrongs committed during the marriage. The action is against him and her as co-defendants. If the marriage isdissolved by his death, she is liable, his estate is not. If themarriage is dissolved by her death, he is liable as her administrator, but only to the extent of the property which he takes in thatcharacter. " [Mr. Ashton, in his very interesting book, p. 31, quotes apeculiar note from a Parish Register in the reign of Queen Anne to thiseffect: "John Bridmore and Anne Sellwood, both of Chiltern all Saints, were married October 17, 1714. The aforesaid Anne Sellwood was marriedin her Smock, without any clothes or headgier on. " "This is notuncommon, " remarks Mr. Ashton, "the object being, according to a vulgarerror, to exempt the husband from the payment of any debts his wife mayhave contracted in her ante-nuptial condition. This error seems to havebeen founded on a misconception of the law, as it is laid down 'thehusband is liable for the wife's debts, because he acquires an absoluteinterest in the personal estate of his wife. ' An unlearned person fromthis might conclude, and not unreasonably, that if his wife had noestate whatever he could not incur any liability. "] "VI. During the marriage the wife cannot contract on her own behalf. Shecan contract as her husband's agent and has a certain power of pledginghis credit in the purchase of necessaries. At the end of the Middle Agesit is very doubtful how far this power is to be explained by an 'impliedagency. ' The tendency of more recent times has been to allow her nopower that cannot be thus explained, except in the exceptional case ofdesertion. " A perusal of these laws shows that they are immensely inferior to theRoman law, which not only gave the wife full control of her property, but protected her from coercion and bullying on the part of the husband. The amendment of these injustices has been very recent indeed. Successive statutes in 1870, 1874, and 1882[399] finally abrogated thelaw which gave the husband full ownership of his wife's property by themere act of marriage. Beginning with the year 1857, too, enlightenmentin England had progressed to such a remarkable degree that certain actswere passed forbidding a husband to seize his wife's earnings andneglect her[400]; and she was actually allowed to keep her own wagesafter the desertion of her lord. Before that time he might desert hiswife repeatedly, and return from time to time to take away her earningsand sell everything she had acquired. An act in 1886 (_49 and 50 Vict. , c. 52_) gave magistrates the power to order a husband to pay his wife aweekly sum, not exceeding two pounds, for her support and that of thechildren if it appeared to the magistrates that the deserting husbandhad the means of maintaining her, but was unwilling to do so. Still, the husband can at any time terminate his desertion and force his wifeto take him back on penalty of losing all rights to such maintenance. There was frantic opposition to all of these revolutionary enactmentsand many prophets arose crying woe; but the acts finally passed andEngland still lives. [Sidenote: Divorce. Authorities as above; and Howard, ii, 3-117. ] Until the Reformation divorce was regulated by the canon law inaccordance with the principles which I have explained. After theReformation the matter at once assumed a different aspect because allProtestants agreed in denying that marriage is a sacrament. Scotland inthis as in other respects has been more liberal than England; as earlyas 1573 desertion as well as adultery had become grounds for divorce. But in England the force of the canon law continued. In Blackstone's daythere were still, as under the canon law, only two kinds of separation. Complete dissolution of the marriage tie (_a vinculo matrimonii_) tookplace only on a declaration of the Ecclesiastical Court that on accountof some canonical impediment, like consanguinity, the marriage was nulland void from the beginning. Separation "from bed and board" (_a mensaet thoro_) simply gave the parties permission no longer to live togetherand was allowed for adultery or some other grave offences, likeintolerable cruelty or a chronic disease. However, some time beforeBlackstone's day it had become the habit to get a dissolution ofmarriage _a vinculo matrimonii_ for adultery by Act of Parliament; butthe legal process was so tedious, minute, and expensive that only thevery rich could afford the luxury. [401] In the case of a separation _amensa et thoro_ alimony was allowed the wife for her support out of herhusband's estate at the discretion of the ecclesiastical judges. The initiative in divorce by Act of Parliament was usually taken by thehusband; not until 1801 did a woman have the temerity so to assert herrights. The fact is, ever since the dawn of history society has, withits usual double standard of morality for men and women, insisted thatwhile the husband must never tolerate infidelity on the part of thewife, the wife should bear with meekness the adulteries of her husband. Plutarch in his _Conjugal Precepts_ so advises a wife; and this piousframe of mind has continued down the centuries to the present day. Devout old Jeremy Taylor in his _Holy Living_--a book which is read byfew, but praised by many--thus counsels the suffering wife[402]: "Butif, after all the fair deportments and innocent chaste compliances, thehusband be morose and ungentle, let the wife discourse thus: 'If, whileI do my duty, my husband neglects me, what will he do if I neglect him?'And if she thinks to be separated by reason of her husband's unchastelife, let her consider that the man will be incurably ruined, and herrivals could wish nothing more than that they might possess him alone. "Dr. Samuel Johnson ably seconded the holy Jeremy's advice by declaringthat there is a boundless difference between the infidelity of the manand that of the woman. In the husband's case "the man imposes nobastards upon his wife. " Therefore, "wise married women don't troublethemselves about infidelity in their husbands. "[403] Until very recenttimes not only men but also women have been unanimous in counsellingabject submission to and humble adoration of the husband. A singleexample out of hundreds will serve excellently as a pattern. In 1821 a"Lady of Distinction" writes to a "Relation Shortly after Her Marriage"as follows[404]: "The most perfect and implicit faith in the superiorityof a husband's judgment, and the most absolute obedience to his desires, is not only the conduct that will insure the greatest success, but willgive the most entire satisfaction. It will take from you a thousandcares, which would have answered to no purpose; it will relieve you froma weight of thought that would be very painful, and in no wayprofitable. .. . It has its origin in reason, in justice, in nature, andin the law of God. .. . I have told you how you may, and how people whoare married do, get a likeness of countenance; and in that I have doneit. You will understand me, that by often looking at your husband'sface, by smiling on the occasions on which he does, by frowning on thosethings which make him frown, and by viewing all things in the light inwhich you perceive he does, you will acquire that likeness ofcountenance which it is an honour to possess, because it is a testimonyof love. .. . When your temper and your thoughts are formed upon those ofyour husband, according to the plan which I have laid down, you willperceive that you have no will, no pleasure, but what is also his. Thisis the character the wife of prudence would be apt to assume; she wouldmake herself the mirror, to show, unaltered, and without aggravation, diminution, or distortion, the thoughts, the sentiments, and theresolutions of her husband. She would have no particular design, noopinion, no thought, no passion, no approbation, no dislike, but whatshould be conformable to his own judgment . .. I would have her judgmentseem the reflecting mirror to his determination; and her form the shadowof his body, conforming itself to his several positions, and followingit in all its movements . .. I would not have you silent; nay, whentrifles are the subject, talk as much as any of them; but distinguishwhen the discourse turns upon things of importance. " It is not strange, therefore, that no woman protested publicly againsta husband's infidelity until 1801. Up to 1840 there were but three casesof a woman's taking the initiative in divorce, namely, in 1801, 1831, and 1840; and in each case the man's adultery was aggravated by otheroffences. In two other suits the Lords rejected the petition of thewife, although the misconduct of the husband was clearly proved. Butredress was still by the elaborate machinery of Act of Parliament andhence a luxury only for the wealthy until 1857, when a special Court forDivorce and Matrimonial Causes was established. [405] Nevertheless, thelaw as it stands to-day is not of a character to excite admiration or toprove the existence of the proverbial "British Fair Play. " A husband canobtain a divorce upon proof of his wife's infidelity; but the wife canget it only by proving, in addition to the husband's adultery, eitherthat it was aggravated by bigamy or incest or that it was accompanied bycruelty or by two years' desertion. Misconduct by the husband bars himfrom obtaining a divorce. The court is empowered to regulate at itsdiscretion the property rights of divorced people and the custody of thechildren. [406] All attempts have failed to make the law recognise thatthe misconduct of the husband shall be regarded equally as culpable asthe wife's. [Sidenote: Rape and the age of legal consent. ] We may pause a moment to glance at the provisions made by the criminallaw for protecting women. The offence that most closely touches women isrape. The punishment of this in Blackstone's day was death[407]; but inthe next century the death penalty was repealed and transportation forlife substituted. [408] The saddest blot on a presumably Christiancivilisation connected with this matter is the so-called "age of legalconsent. " Under the older Common Law this was _ten_ or _twelve;_ in 1885it was _thirteen_, at which period a girl was supposed to be at an ageto know what she was doing. But in the year 1885 Mr. Stead told theLondon public very plainly those hideous truths about crimes againstyoung girls which everybody knew very well had been going on forcenturies, but which no one ever before had dared to assert. The resultwas that Parliament raised the "age of legal consent" to sixteen, whereit now stands. [409] The idea that any girl of this age is sufficientlymature to know what she is doing by consenting to the lust of scoundrelsis a fine commentary on the acuteness of the legal intellect and thehigh moral convictions of legislators. [Sidenote: Women's rights to an education. ] The rights of women to a higher education is distinctly a movement ofthe last half of the nineteenth century. It is true that throughouthistory there are many examples of remarkably well-educated women--LadyJane Grey, for example, or Queen Elizabeth, or Olympia Morata, in Italy, she who in the golden period of the Renaissance became a professor atsixteen and wrote dialogues in Greek after the manner of Plato. But onlooking closely into these instances we shall find first that theseladies were of noble rank and only thanks to their lofty position hadaccess to knowledge; and secondly that they stand out as isolatedcases--the great masses of women never dreamed beyond the traditionalKleider, Küche, Kinder, and Kirche. That an elementary education, consisting of reading, writing, and simple arithmetic, was offered themfreely by hospital, monastery, and the like schools even as early asChaucer--this we know; nevertheless, beyond that they were not supposedto aspire. So very recently, indeed, have women secured the rights to ahigher education that many thousands to-day can easily recall theintensely bitter attacks which were directed against colleges likeWellesley and Bryn Mawr in their inception. Until the middle of thenineteenth century the whole education--what there was of it--of a girlwas arranged primarily with a view to capture a husband and, once havinghim secure, to be his loving slave, to dwell with adoring rapture on hissuperior learning, and to be humbly grateful if her liege deigned fromtime to time to throw his spouse some scraps of knowledge which might besafely administered without danger of making her think for herself. These facts no one can well deny; but a few instances of prevalentopinion, in addition to those which I have already quoted, will affordthe amusement of concrete examples. Mrs. Chapone, in the eighteenth century, advised her niece to avoid thestudy of classics and science lest she "excite envy in one sex andjealousy in the other. " Lady Mary Wortley Montagu laments thus: "Thereis hardly a creature in the world more despicable and more liable touniversal ridicule than a learned woman, " and "folly is reckoned so muchour proper sphere, we are sooner pardoned any excesses of that than theleast pretensions to reading and good sense. " Pursuant to the prevailingsentiment on the education of women, the subjects which they studied andthe books which they were allowed to read were carefully regulated. Asto their reading, it was confined to romantic tales whereof theexceeding insipidity could not awaken any symptom of intelligence. Lylydedicated his _Euphues_ to the "Ladies and Gentlewomen of England" andSidney's _Arcadia_ owed its vast success to its female readers. The subjects studied followed the orthodox views. Beginning with thereign of Queen Anne boarding-schools for girls became very numerous. Atthese schools "young Gentlewomen" were "soberly educated" and "taughtall sorts of learning fit for young Gentlewomen. " The "learning fit foryoung Gentlewomen" comprised "the Needle, Dancing, and the Frenchtongue; a little Music on the Harpsichord or Spinet, to read, write, andcast accounts in a small way. " Dancing was the all-important study, since this was the surest route to their Promised Land, matrimony. Thestudy of French consisted in learning parrot-like a modicum of thatlanguage pronounced according to the fancy of the speaker. As, however, the young beau probably did not know any more himself, the end justifiedthe means. Studies like history, when pursued, were taken inhomoeopathic doses from small compendiums; and it was adequate to knowthat Charlemagne lived somewhere in Europe about a thousand or so yearsago. Yet even this was rather advanced work and exposed the woman to bedamned by the report that she was educated. Ability to cook was notdespised and pastry schools were not uncommon. Thus in the time ofQueen Anne appears this: "To all Young Ladies: at Edw. Kidder's PastrySchool in little Lincoln's Inn Fields are taught all Sorts of Pastry andCookery, Dutch hollow works, and Butter Works, " etc. At last in the first decades of the nineteenth century the civilisedworld began slowly to take some thought of women's higher education andto wake up to the fact that because a certain system has been in voguesince created man does not necessarily mean that it is the right one; avery heretical and revolutionary idea, which has always been and stillis ably opposed by that great host of people who have steadilymaintained that when men and women once begin to think for themselvessociety must inevitably run to ruin. In 1843 there was established acertain Governesses' Benevolent Institution. This was in its inception asociety to afford relief to governesses, i. E. , women engaged intutoring, who might be temporarily in straits, and to raise annuitiesfor those who were past doing work. Obviously this would suggest thequestion of what a competent governess was; and this in turn led to thedemand for a diploma as a warrant of efficiency. That called attentionto the extreme ignorance of the members of the profession; and it wassoon felt that classes of instruction were needed. A sum of money wasaccordingly collected in 1846 and given the Institution for thatpurpose. Some eminent professors of King's College volunteered tolecture; and so, on a small scale to be sure, began what is now Queen'sCollege, the first college for women in England, incorporated by RoyalCharter in 1853. In 1849 Bedford College for women had been founded inLondon through the unselfish labours of Mrs. Reid; but it did notreceive its charter until 1869. Within a decade Cheltenham, Girton, Newnham, and other colleges for women had arisen. Eight of the ten men'suniversities of Great Britain now allow examinations and degrees towomen also; Oxford and Cambridge do not. [Sidenote: Women in the professions. ] Since then women's right to any higher education which they may wish toembrace has been permanently assured. As early as 1868 Edinburgh openedits courses in pharmacy to women. In 1895 there were already 264 dulyqualified female physicians in Great Britain. In many schools they areallowed to study with men, as at the College of Physicians and Surgeonsat Edinburgh; there are four medical schools for women only. We findwomen now actively engaged in agriculture, apiculture, poultry-keeping, horticulture; in library work and indexing; in stenography; in alltrades and professions. The year 1893 witnessed the first appointment ofwomen as factory inspectors, two being chosen that year in London and inGlasgow. Nottingham had chosen women as sanitary inspectors in 1892. Thus in about two decades woman has advanced farther than in thecombined ages which preceded. Before these very modern movements we maysay that the stage was the only profession which had offered them anyopportunity of earning their living in a dignified way. It seems that aMrs. Coleman, in 1656, was the first female to act on the stage inEngland; before that, all female parts had been taken by boys or youngmen. A Mrs. Sanderson played Desdemona in 1660 at the Clare MarketTheatre. In 1661, as we may see from Pepys' _Diary_ (Feb. 12, 1661), anactress was still a novelty; but within a few decades there were alreadymany famous ones. [Sidenote: Woman suffrage in England] We have seen that now woman has obtained practically all rights on a parwith men. There are still grave injustices, as in divorce; but thebattle is substantially won. One right still remains for her to win, theright, namely, to vote, not merely on issues such as education--thisprivilege she has had for some time--but on all political questions; andconnected with this is the right to hold political office. We mayfittingly close this chapter by a review of the history of the agitationfor woman suffrage. In the year 1797 Charles Fox remarked: "It has never been suggested inall the theories and projects of the most absurd speculation, that itwould be advisable to extend the elective suffrage to the female sex. "Yet five years before Mary Wollstonecraft had published her _Vindicationof the Rights of Women_. Presently the writings of Harriet Martineauupon political economy proved that women could really think on politics. We may say that the general public first began to think seriously on thematter after the epoch-making Reform Act of 1832. This celebratedmeasure admitted £10 householders to the right to vote and carefullyexcluded females; yet it marked a new era in the awakening of civicconsciousness: women had taken active part in the attendant campaigns;and the very fact that "male persons" needed now to be so specificallydesignated in the bill, whereas hitherto "persons" and "freeholders" hadbeen deemed sufficient, attests the recognition of a new factor inpolitical life. In 1865 John Stuart Mill was elected to Parliament. That able thinkerhad written on _The Subjection of Women_ and was ready to champion theirrights. A petition was prepared under the direction of women like Mrs. Bodichon and Miss Davies; and in 1867 Mill proposed in Parliament thatthe word _man_ be omitted from the People's Bill and _person_substituted. The amendment was rejected, 196 to 83. Nevertheless, the agitation was continued. The next year constitutionallawyers like Mr. Chisholm Anstey decided that women might be legallyentitled to vote; and 5000 of them applied to be registered. In a testcase brought before the Court of Common Pleas the verdict was adverse, on the ground that it was contrary to usage for women to vote. Thefight went on. Mr. Jacob Bright in 1870 introduced a "Bill to Remove theElectoral Disabilities of Women" and lost. In 1884 Mr. William Woodalltried again; he lost also, largely through the efforts of Gladstone; andthe same statesman was instrumental in killing another bill in 1892, when Mr. A. J. Balfour urged its passage. At the present day women in England cannot vote on great questions ofuniversal state policy nor can they hold great offices of state. Yettheir gains have been enormous, as I shall next demonstrate; and in thisconnection I shall also glance briefly at their vast strides in thecolonies. In 1850 Ontario gave all women school suffrage. In 1867 New South Walesgave them municipal suffrage. In 1869 England granted municipal suffrageto single women and widows; Victoria gave it to all women, married orsingle. In England in 1870 the Education Act, by which school boardswere created, gave women the same rights as men, both as regardselecting and being elected. In 1871 West Australia gave them municipalsuffrage; in 1878 New Zealand gave school suffrage. In 1880 SouthAustralia gave municipal suffrage. In 1881 widows and single womenobtained municipal suffrage in Scotland and Parliamentary suffrage onthe Isle of Man. Municipal suffrage was given by Ontario and Tasmania in1884 and by New Zealand and New Brunswick in 1886; by Nova Scotia andManitoba in 1887. In 1888 England gave women county suffrage and BritishColumbia and the North-West Territory gave them municipal suffrage. In1889 county suffrage was given the women of Scotland and municipalsuffrage to single women and widows in the Province of Quebec. In 1893New Zealand gave full suffrage. In 1894 parish and district suffrage wasgiven in England to women married and single, with power to elect and tobe elected to parish and district councils. In 1895 South Australia gavefull state suffrage to all women. In 1898 the women of Ireland weregiven the right to vote for all officers except members of Parliament. In 1900 West Australia granted full state suffrage to all. In 1902 fullnational suffrage was given all the women in federated Australia andfull state suffrage to those of New South Wales. In 1903 Tasmania gavefull state suffrage; in 1905 Queensland did the same; in 1908 Victoriafollowed. In 1907 England made women eligible as mayors, aldermen, andcounty and town councillors. In London, for example, at the present timewomen can vote for the 28 borough councils and 31 boards of guardians ofthe London City Council; they can also be themselves elected to these;be members of the central unemployed body or of the 23 districtcommittees, and can be co-opted to all other bodies, like the localpension committees. Women can be aldermen of the Council; and there isnothing to prevent one from holding even the office of chairman. At the present moment the cause of woman suffrage in England is beingfurthered chiefly by two organizations which differ in methods. TheNational Union of Women's Suffrage Societies has adopted the"constitutional" or peaceful policy; but the National Women's Social andPolitical Union is "militant" and coercive. SOURCES I. The English Statutes. Published by Authority during the VariousReigns. II. Studies in History and Jurisprudence: by James Bryce. OxfordUniversity Press, 1901. Pages 782-859 on "Marriage and Divorce. " III. History of English Law: by Frederick Pollock and Frederic Maitland. 2 vols. Cambridge University Press, 1898--second edition. IV. Commentaries on the Laws of England: by Sir William Blackstone. Withnotes selected from the editions of Archbold, Christian, Coleridge, etc. , and additional notes by George Sharswood, of the University ofPennsylvania. 2 vols. Philadelphia, 1860--Childs and Peterson, 602 ArchStreet. V. A History of Matrimonial Institutions, chiefly in England and theUnited States: by George Elliott Howard. 4 vols. The University ofChicago Press, 1904. VI. Social England: edited by H. D. Traill. 6 vols. G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1901. VII. Social Life in the Reign of Queen Anne, taken from originalsources: by John Ashton. London, Chatto and Windus, 1897. VIII. The Renaissance of Girls' Education in England: by Alice Zimmern. London, A. D. Innes and Co. , 1898. IX. Progress in Women's Education in the British Empire: edited by theCountess of Warwick. Being the Report of the Education Section, Victorian Era Exhibition, 1897. Longmans, Green, & Co. , 1898. X. Current Literature from the Earliest Times to the Present Day, references to which are noted as they occur. NOTES: [393] If a woman sentenced to execution declared she was pregnant, ajury of twelve matrons could be appointed on a writ _de venireinspiciendo_ to determine the truth of the matter; for she could not beexecuted if the infant was alive in the womb. The same jury determinedthe case of a widow who feigned herself with child in order to excludethe next heir and when she was suspected of trying to palm off asupposititious birth. But from all other jury duties women have alwaysbeen excluded "on account of the weakness of the sex"--_propter defectumsexus_. [394] Blackstone, i, ch. 16. [395] Reg. Brev. Orig. , f. 89: quod ipse praefatam A bene et honestetractabit et gubernabit, ac damnum vel malum aliquod eidem A de corporesuo, aliter quam ad virum suum ex causa regiminis et castigationisuxoris suae licite et rationabiliter pertinet, non faciet nec fieriprocurabit. [396] "Except in so far as he may lawfully and reasonably do so in orderto correct and chastise his wife. " [397] The learned commentator Christian adds a few more cases whereformerly the criminal law was harshly prejudiced against women. Thus:"By the Common Law, all women were denied the benefit of clergy; andtill the 3 and 4 _W. And M_. , c. 9 [William and Mary] they receivedsentence of death and might have been executed for the first offence insimple larceny, bigamy, manslaughter, etc. , however learned they were, merely because their sex precluded the possibility of their taking holyorders; though a man who could read was for the same crime subject onlyto burning in the hand and a few months' imprisonment. " [398] I Q. B. P. 671--in the Court of Appeal. [399] _Married Women's Property Act_, 45 and 46 V. , c. 75--Aug. 18, 1882. [400] Note this incident, from the _Westminister Review_, October, 1856:"A lady whose husband had been unsuccessful in business establishedherself as a milliner in Manchester. After some years of toil sherealised sufficient for the family to live upon comfortably, the husbandhaving done nothing meanwhile. They lived for a time in easycircumstances after she gave up business and then the husband died, _bequeathing all his wife's earnings to his own illegitimate children_. At the age of 62 she was compelled, in order to gain her bread, toreturn to business. " [401] For a full account of the elaborate machinery see Chitty's note toBlackstone, vol. I, p. 441, of Sharswood's edition. [402] _Holy Living, ch. 3, section I: Rules for Married Persons. _ [403] Boswell, vii, 288. Perhaps if the venerable Samuel had had thestatistics of venereal disease given by adulterous husbands to wives andchildren he might not have been so sure of his contention. [404] Quoted by Professor Thomas in the _American Magazine_, July, 1909. [405] See 20 and 21 V. , c. 85--Aug. 28. 1857. [406] See 7 Edw. , c. 12--Aug. 9, 1907--Matrimonial Causes Act, whichalso gives the court discretion in alimony. [407] Blackstone, iv, ch. 15. [408] 4 _and_ 5 _V. , c. _ 56, _s. _ 3. [409] The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885, 48 _and_ 49 _V. C. _ 69, section 5: "Any person who (1) unlawfully and carnally knows or attemptsto have unlawful carnal knowledge of any girl being of or above the ageof thirteen years and under the age of sixteen, or (2) unlawfully andcarnally knows or attempts to have carnal knowledge of any female idiotor imbecile woman or girl under circumstances which do not amount torape, but which prove that the offender knew at the time of thecommission of the offence that the woman or girl was an idiot orimbecile, shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and being convicted thereofshall be liable at the discretion of the Court to be imprisoned for anyterm not exceeding two years, with or without hard labour. " Section 4:"Any one who unlawfully and carnally knows any girl under the age ofthirteen shall be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof shall beliable to be kept in penal servitude for life. " Any one who merelyattempts it can be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years, withor without hard labour. CHAPTER VIII WOMEN'S RIGHTS IN THE UNITED STATES It has been my aim, in this short history of the growth of women'srights, to depict for the most part the strictly legal aspect of thematter; but from time to time I have interposed some typicalillustration of public opinion, in order to bring into greaterprominence the ferment that was going on or the misery which existedbehind the scenes. A history of legal processes might otherwise, fromthe coldness of the laws, give few hints of the conflicts of humanpassion which combined to set those processes in motion. Before Ipresent the history of the progress of women's rights in the UnitedStates, I shall place before the reader some extracts which are typicaland truly representative of the opposition which from the beginning ofthe agitation to the present day has voiced itself in all ranks of life. Let the reader bear carefully in mind that from 1837 to the beginning ofthe twentieth century such abuse as that which I shall quote as typicalwas hurled from ten thousand throats of men and women unceasingly; thatMrs. Stanton, Miss Anthony, and Mrs. Gage were hissed, insulted, andoffered physical violence by mobs in New York[410] and Boston to anextent inconceivable in this age; and that the marvellously unselfishlabour of such women as these whom I have mentioned and of men likeWendell Phillips is alone responsible for the improvement in the legalstatus of women, which I propose to trace in detail. Some expressions ofthe popular attitude follow: [Sidenote: Examples of opposition to women's rights. ] From a speech of the Rev. Knox-Little at the Church of St. Clements inPhiladelphia in 1880: "God made himself to be born of a woman tosanctify the virtue of endurance; loving submission is an attribute of awoman; men are logical, but women, lacking this quality, have anintricacy of thought. There are those who think women can be taughtlogic; this is a mistake. They can never by any power of educationarrive at the same mental status as that enjoyed by men, but they have aquickness of apprehension, which is usually called leaping atconclusions, that is astonishing. There, then, we have distinctivetraits of a woman, namely, endurance, loving submission, and quicknessof apprehension. Wifehood is the crowning glory of a woman. In it she isbound for all time. To her husband she owes the duty of unqualifiedobedience. There is no crime which a man can commit which justifies hiswife in leaving him or applying for that monstrous thing, divorce. Itis her duty to subject herself to him always, and no crime that he cancommit can justify her lack of obedience. If he be a bad or wicked man, she may gently remonstrate with him, but refuse him never. Let divorcebe anathema; curse it; curse this accursed thing, divorce; curse it, curse it! Think of the blessedness of having children. I am the fatherof many children and there have been those who have ventured to pity me. 'Keep your pity for yourself, ' I have replied, 'they never cost me asingle pang. ' In this matter let woman exercise that endurance andloving submission which, with intricacy of thought, are their onlycharacteristics. " From the Philadelphia _Public Ledger and Daily Transcript_, July 20, 1848: "Our Philadelphia ladies not only possess beauty, but they arecelebrated for discretion, modesty, and unfeigned diffidence, as well aswit, vivacity, and good nature. Who ever heard of a Philadelphia ladysetting up for a reformer or standing out for woman's rights, orassisting to _man_ the election grounds [_sic_], raise a regiment, command a legion, or address a jury? Our ladies glow with a higherambition. They soar to rule the hearts of their worshippers, and secureobedience by the sceptre of affection. .. . But all women are not asreasonable as ours of Philadelphia. The Boston ladies contend for therights of women. The New York girls aspire to mount the rostrum, to doall the voting, and, we suppose, all the fighting, too. .. . OurPhiladelphia girls object to fighting and holding office. They preferthe baby-jumper to the study of Coke and Lyttleton, and the ball-room tothe Palo Alto battle. They object to having a George Sand for Presidentof the United States; a Corinna for Governor; a Fanny Wright for Mayor;or a Mrs. Partington for Postmaster. .. . Women have enough influence overhuman affairs without being politicians. .. . A woman is nobody. A wife iseverything. A pretty girl is equal to ten thousand men, and a mother is, next to God, all powerful. .. . The ladies of Philadelphia, therefore, under the influence of the most 'sober second thoughts' are resolved tomaintain their rights as Wives, Belles, Virgins, and Mothers, and not asWomen. " From the "Editor's Table" of _Harper's New Monthly Magazine_, November, 1853: "Woman's Rights, or the movement that goes under that name, mayseem to some too trifling in itself and too much connected withludicrous associations to be made the subject of serious arguments. Ifnothing else, however, should give it consequence, it would demand ourearnest attention from its intimate connection with all the radical andinfidel movements of the day. A strange affinity seems to bind them alltogether. .. . But not to dwell on this remarkable connection--the claimof 'woman's rights' presents not only the common radical notion whichunderlies the whole class, but also a peculiar enormity of its own; insome respects more boldly infidel, or defiant both of nature andrevelation, than that which characterises any kindred measure. It isavowedly opposed to the most time-honoured proprieties of social life;it is opposed to nature; it is opposed to revelation. .. . This unblushingfemale Socialism defies alike apostles and prophets. In this respect nokindred movement is so decidedly infidel, so rancorously and avowedlyanti-biblical. "It is equally opposed to nature and the established order of societyfounded upon it. We do not intend to go into any physiological argument. There is one broad striking fact in the constitution of the humanspecies which ought to set the question at rest for ever. This is thefact of maternity. .. . From this there arise, in the first place, physical impediments which, during the best part of the female life, areabsolutely insurmountable, except at a sacrifice of almost everythingthat distinguishes the civilized human from the animal, or beastly, andsavage state. As a secondary, yet inevitably resulting consequence, there come domestic and social hindrances which still more completelydraw the line between the male and female duties. .. . Every attempt tobreak through them, therefore, must be pronounced as unnatural as it isirreligious and profane. .. . The most serious importance of this modern'woman's rights' doctrine is derived from its direct bearing upon themarriage institution. The blindest must see that such a change as isproposed in the relations and life of the sexes cannot leave eithermarriage or the family in their present state. It must vitally affect, and in time wholly sever, that oneness which has ever been at thefoundation of the marriage idea, from the primitive declaration inGenesis to the latest decision of the common law. This idea gone--and itis totally at war with the modern theory of 'woman's rights'--marriageis reduced to the nature of a contract simply. .. . That which has nohigher sanction than the will of the contracting parties, must, ofcourse, be at any time revocable by the same authority that firstcreated it. That which makes no change in the personal relations, thepersonal rights, the personal duties, is not the holy marriage _union_, but the unholy _alliance_ of concubinage. " In a speech of Senator George G. Vest, of Missouri, in the United StatesSenate, January 25, 1887, these: "I now propose to read from a pamphletsent to me by a lady. .. . She says to her own sex: 'After all, men workfor women; or, if they think they do not, it would leave them but sorrysatisfaction to abandon them to such existence as they could arrangewithout us. ' "Oh, how true that is, how true!" In 1890 a bill was introduced in the New York Senate to lower the "ageof consent"--the age at which a girl may legally consent to sexualintercourse--from 16 to 14. It failed. In 1892 the brothel keepers triedagain in the Assembly. The bill was about to be carried by universalconsent when the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, feeling theimportance of the measure, called for the individual yeas and nays, inorder that the constituents of the representatives might know how theirlegislators voted. The bill thereupon collapsed. In 1889 a motion wasmade in the Kansas Senate to lower the age of consent from 18 to _12_. But the public heard of it; protests flowed in; and under the pressureof these the law was allowed to remain as it was. Such are some typical examples of the warfare of the opposition to allthat pertains to advancing the status of women. As I review the progressof their rights, let the reader recollect that this opposition wasalways present, violent, loud, and often scurrilous. In tracing the history of women's rights in the United States my planwill be this: I shall first give a general review of the variousmovements connected with the subject; and I shall then lay before thereader a series of tables, wherein may be seen at a glance the status ofwomen to-day in the various States. [Sidenote: Single women. ] [Sidenote: History of agitation for women's rights. ] In our country, as in England, single women have at all times hadpractically the same legal rights as men; but by no means the samepolitical, social, educational, or professional privileges; as willappear more conclusively later on. We may say that the history of the agitation for women's rights beganwith the visit of Frances Wright to the United States in 1820. FrancesWright was a Scotchwoman, born at Dundee in 1797, and early exhibited akeen intellect on all the subjects which concern political and socialreform. For several years after 1820 she resided here and strove to makemen and women think anew on old traditional beliefs--more particularlyon theology, slavery, and the social degradation of women. The venomousdenunciations of press and pulpit attested the success of her efforts. In 1832 Lydia Maria Child published her _History of Woman_, a résumé ofthe status of women; and this was followed by numerous works andarticles, such as Margaret Fuller's, _The Great Lawsuit, or Man vs. Woman: Woman vs. Man_, and Eliza Farnham's _Woman and her Era_. Variouswomen lectured; such as Ernestine L. Rose--a Polish woman, banished forasserting her liberty. The question of women's rights received apowerful impetus at this period from the vast number of women who wereengaged in the anti-slavery agitation. Any research into the validity ofslavery perforce led the investigators to inquire into the justice ofthe enforced status of women; and the two causes were early united. Women like Angelina and Sarah Grimké and Lucretia Mott were pioneers innumerous anti-slavery conventions. But as soon as they dared to addressmeetings in which men were present, a tempest was precipitated; and in1840, at the annual meeting of the Anti-Slavery Association, the menrefused to serve on any committee in which any woman had a part;although it had been largely the contributions of women which weresustaining the cause. Affairs reached a climax in London, in 1840, atthe World's Anti-Slavery Convention. Delegates from all anti-slaveryorganisations were invited to take part; and several American societiessent women to represent them. These ladies were promptly denied anyshare in the proceedings by the English members, thanks mainly to theopposition of the clergy, who recollected with pious satisfaction thatSt. Paul permitted not a woman to teach. Thereupon Lucretia Mott andElizabeth Cady Stanton determined to hold a women's rights convention assoon as they returned to America; and thus a World's Anti-SlaveryConvention begat an issue equally large. Accordingly, the first Women's Rights Convention was held at SenecaFalls, New York, July 19-20, 1848. It was organised by _divorced wives, childless women, and sour old maids_, the gallant newspapers declared;that is, by Mrs. Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Mrs. Lucretia Mott, Mrs. McClintock, and other fearless women, who not only lived the purest andmost unselfish of domestic lives, but brought up many children besides. Great crowds attended. A _Declaration of Sentiments_ was moved andadopted; and as this exhibits the temper of the convention andillustrates the then prevailing status of women very clearly, I shallquote it: DECLARATION OF SENTIMENTS "When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for oneportion of the family of man to assume among the people of the earth aposition different from that which they have hitherto occupied, but oneto which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decentrespect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare thecauses which impel them to such a course. "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women arecreated equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certaininalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuitof happiness; that to secure these rights governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Wheneverany form of government becomes destructive of those ends, it is theright of those who suffer from it to refuse allegiance to it, and toinsist upon the institution of a new government, laying its foundationon such principles, and organising its powers in such form, as to themshall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not bechanged for light or transient causes; and accordingly all experiencehath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils aresufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to whichthey were accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce themunder absolute despotism, it is their duty to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been thepatient sufferance of the women under this government, and such is nowthe necessity which constrains them to demand the equal station to whichthey are entitled. "The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries andusurpations on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object theestablishment of an absolute tyranny over her. To prove this, let factsbe submitted to a candid world. "He has never permitted her to exercise her inalienable right to theelective franchise. "He has compelled her to submit to laws, in the formation of which shehad no voice. "He has withheld from her rights which are given to the most ignorantand degraded men--both natives and foreigners. "Having deprived her of this first right of a citizen, the electivefranchise, thereby leaving her without representation in the halls oflegislation, he has oppressed her on all sides. "He has made her, if married, in the eye of the law, civilly dead. "He has taken from her all right in property, even to the wages sheearns. "He has made her, morally, an irresponsible being, as she can commitmany crimes with impunity, provided they be done in the presence of herhusband. In the covenant of marriage, she is compelled to promiseobedience to her husband, he becoming, to all intents and purposes, hermaster--the law giving him power to deprive her of her liberty, and toadminister chastisement. "He has so framed the laws of divorce, as to what shall be the propercauses, and, in case of separation, to whom the guardianship of thechildren shall be given, as to be wholly regardless of the happiness ofwomen--the law in all cases going upon a false supposition of thesupremacy of man, and giving all power into his hands. "After depriving her of all rights as a married woman, if single, andthe owner of property, he has taxed her to support a government whichrecognises her only when her property can be made profitable to it. "He has monopolised nearly all the profitable employments, and fromthose she is permitted to follow she receives but a scanty remuneration. He closes against her all the avenues of wealth and distinction which heconsiders most honourable to himself. As a teacher of theology, medicine, or law, she is not known. "He has denied her the facilities for obtaining a thorough education, all colleges being closed against her. "He allows her in church, as well as state, but a subordinate position, claiming Apostolic authority for her exclusion from the ministry, and, with some exceptions, from any public participation in the affairs ofthe church. "He has created a false public sentiment by giving to the world adifferent code of morals for men and women, by which moral delinquencieswhich exclude women from society are not only tolerated, but deemed oflittle account in man. "He has usurped the prerogative of Jehovah himself, claiming it as hisright to assign for her a sphere of action, when that belongs to herconscience and to her God. "He has endeavoured, in every way that he could, to destroy herconfidence in her own powers, to lessen her self-respect, and to makeher willing to lead a dependent and abject life. "Now, in view of this entire disfranchisement of one half the people ofthis country, their social and religious degradation; in view of theunjust laws above mentioned, and because women do feel themselvesaggrieved, oppressed, and fraudulently deprived of their most sacredrights, we insist that they have immediate admission to all the rightsand privileges which belong to them as citizens of the United States. "In entering upon the great work before us, we anticipate no smallamount of misconception, misrepresentation, and ridicule; but we shalluse every instrumentality within our power to effect our object. Weshall employ agents, circulate tracts, petition the State and Nationallegislatures, and endeavour to enlist the pulpit and press in ourbehalf. We hope this Convention will be followed by a series ofConventions embracing every part of the country. " Such was the defiance of the Women's Rights Convention in 1848; otherconventions were held, as at Rochester, in 1853, and at Albany in 1854;the movement extended quickly to other States and touched the quick ofpublic opinion. It bore its first good fruits in New York in 1848, whenthe Property Bill was passed. This law, amended in 1860, and entitled"An Act Concerning the Rights and Liabilities of Husband and Wife"(March 20, 1860), emancipated completely the wife, gave her full controlof her own property, allowed her to engage in all civil contracts orbusiness on her own responsibility, rendered her joint guardian of herchildren with her husband, and granted both husband and wife a one-thirdshare of one another's property in case of the decease of eitherpartner. Thus New York became the pioneer. The movement spread, as I havementioned, with amazing rapidity; but it was not so uniformlysuccessful. Conventions were held, for example, in Ohio, at Salem, April 19-20, 1850; at Akron, May 28-29, 1851; at Massillon on May 27, 1852. Nevertheless, in 1857, the Legislature of Ohio passed a billenacting that no married man should dispose of any personal propertywithout having first obtained the consent of his wife; the wife wasempowered, in case of a violation of this law, to commence a civil suitin her own name for the recovery of the property; and any married womanwhose husband deserted her or neglected to provide for his family was tobe entitled to his wages and to those of her minor children. A bill toextend suffrage to women was defeated, by a vote of 44 to 44; thepetition praying for its enactment had received 10, 000 signatures. The course of events as it has been described in New York and Ohio, ispractically the same in the case of the other States. The Civil Warrelegated these issues to a secondary place; but during that momentousconflict the heroism of Clara Barton on the battlefield and of thousandsof women like her paved the way for a reassertion of the rights of womanin the light of her unquestioned exertions and unselfish labours for hercountry in its crisis. After the war, attention began to be concentratedmore on the right to _vote_. By the Fourteenth Amendment the franchisewas at once given to negroes; but the insertion of the word _male_effectually barred any national recognition of woman's right to vote. Avigorous effort was made by the suffrage leaders to have _male_stricken from the amendment; but the effort was futile. Legislatorsthought that the black man's vote ought to be secured first; as the _NewYork Tribune_ (Dec. 12, 1866) puts it snugly: "We want to see the ballotput in the hands of the black without one day's delay added to the longpostponement of his just claim. When that is done, we shall be ready totake up the next question" (i. E. , woman's rights). The first Women's Rights Convention after the Civil War had been held inNew York City, May 10, 1866, and had presented an address to Congress. Such was the dauntless courage of the leaders, that Mrs. Stanton offeredherself as a candidate for Congress at the November elections, in orderto test the constitutional rights of a woman to run for office. Shereceived twenty-four votes. Six years later, on November I, 1872, Miss Susan B. Anthony did a farmore Audacious thing. She went to the polls and asked to be registered. The two Republican members of the board were won over by her expositionof the Fourteenth Amendment and agreed to receive her name, against theadvice of their Democratic colleague and a United States supervisor. Following Miss Anthony's example, some fifty other women of Rochesterregistered. Fourteen voted and were at once arrested under theenforcement act of Congress of May 31, 1870 (_section_ 19). The case ofMiss Anthony was argued, ably by her attorney; but she was adjudgedguilty. A _nolle prosequi_ was entered for the women who voted with her. Immediately after the decision in her case, the inspectors who hadregistered the women were put on trial because they "did knowingly andwillfully register as a voter of said District one Susan B. Anthony, she, said Susan B. Anthony, then and there not being entitled to beregistered as a voter of said District in that she, said Susan B. Anthony, was then and there a person of the female sex, contrary to theform of the statute of the United States of America in such case madeand provided, and against the peace of the United States of America andtheir dignity. " The defendants were ordered to pay each a fine oftwenty-five dollars and the costs of the prosecution; but the sentencewas revoked and an unconditional pardon given them by President Grant, in an order dated March 3, 1874. Miss Anthony was forced to pay herfine, in spite of an appeal to Congress. Such were the stirring times when the agitation for women's rights wasfirst brought to the fore as a national issue. Within a few years, various States, like New York and Kansas, put the question of equalsuffrage for women before its voters; they in general rejected themeasure. At present there are four States which give women completesuffrage and right to vote on all questions with the same privileges asmen, viz. , Wyoming (1869), Colorado (1893), Utah (1896), and Idaho(1896). In 1838 Kentucky gave school suffrage to widows with childrenof school age; in 1861 Kansas gave it to all women. School suffrage wasgranted all women in 1875 by Michigan and Minnesota, in 1876 byColorado, in 1878 by New Hampshire and Oregon, in 1879 by Massachusetts, in 1880 by New York and Vermont, in 1883 by Nebraska, in 1887 by Northand South Dakota, Montana, Arizona, and New Jersey. Kansas gavemunicipal suffrage in 1887; and Montana gave tax-paying women the rightto vote upon all questions submitted to the tax-payers. In 1891 Illinoisgranted school suffrage, as did Connecticut in 1893. Iowa gave bondsuffrage in 1894. In 1898 Minnesota gave women the right to vote forlibrary trustees, Delaware gave school suffrage to tax-paying women, andLouisiana gave tax-paying women the right to vote upon all questionssubmitted to the tax-payers. Wisconsin gave school suffrage in 1900. In1901 New York gave tax-paying women in all towns and villages of theState the right to vote on questions of local taxation; and the KansasLegislature voted down almost unanimously a proposal to repeal municipalsuffrage. In 1903 Kansas gave bond suffrage; and in 1907 the new Stateof Oklahoma continued school suffrage. In 1908 Michigan gave all womenwho pay taxes the right to vote upon questions of local taxation and thegranting of franchises. The history of the "age of legal consent" has an importance whichthrough prudery and a wilful ignorance of facts the public has neverfully realised. I shall have considerable to say of it later. It willsuffice for the moment to remark that until the decade preceding 1898the old Common Law period of ten, sometimes twelve, years was the basisof "age of consent" legislation in most States and in the Territoriesunder the jurisdiction of the national government. In 1885 the age inDelaware was _seven_. [Sidenote: Age of Legal consent. ] [Sidenote: The beginnings of higher education for women. ] The Puritans, burning with an unquenchable zeal for liberty, fled toAmerica in order to build a land of freedom and strike off theshackles of despotism. After they were comfortably settled, theyforthwith proceeded, with fine humour, to expel mistress Anne Hutchinsonfor venturing to speak in public, to hang superfluous old women forbeing witches, and to refuse women the right to an education. In 1684, when a question arose about admitting girls to the Hopkins School of NewHaven, it was decided that "all girls be excluded as improper andinconsistent with such a grammar school as ye law enjoins and as in theDesigns of this settlement. " "But, " remarks Professor Thomas, "certainsmall girls whose manners seem to have been neglected and who had thenatural curiosity of their sex, sat on the schoolhouse steps and heardthe boys recite, or learned to read and construe sentences from theirbrothers at home, and were occasionally admitted to school. " In the course of the next century the world moved a little; and in1789, when the public school system was established in Boston, girlswere admitted from April to October; but until 1825 they were allowed toattend primary schools only. In 1790 Gloucester voted that "two hours, or a proportional part of that time, be devoted to the instruction offemales. " In 1793 Plymouth accorded girls one hour of instruction daily. The first female seminary in the United States was opened by theMoravians in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, in 1749. It was unique. In 1803, of 48 academies or higher schools fitting for college in Massachusetts, only three were for girls, although a few others admitted both boys andgirls. The first instance of government aid for the systematic education ofwomen occurred in New York, in 1819. This was due to the influence of aremarkable woman. Mrs. Emma Willard had begun teaching in Connecticutand by extraordinary diligence mastered not only the usual subjects ofthe curriculum, but in addition botany, chemistry, mineralogy, astronomy, and the higher mathematics. She had, moreover, striven alwaysto introduce new subjects and new methods into her school, and with suchsuccess that Governor Clinton, of New York, invited her to that Stateand procured her a government subsidy. Her school was established firstat Watervliet, but soon moved to Troy. This seminary was the firstgirls' school in which the higher mathematics formed a part of thecourse; and the first public examination of a girl in geometry, in 1829, raised a storm of ridicule and indignation--the clergy, as usual, prophesying the speedy dissolution of all family bonds and therefore, asthey continued with remorseless logic, of the state itself. But Mrs. Willard continued her ways in spite of clerical disapproval andby-and-by projected a system of normal schools for the higher educationof teachers, and even suggested women as superintendents of publicschools. New York survived and does not even remember the names of thepatriots who fought a lonely woman so valiantly. The first female seminary to approach college rank was Mt. Holyoke, which was opened by Mary Lyon at South Hadley, Mass. , in 1836. Vassar, the next, dates from 1865; and Radcliffe, the much-abused "HarvardAnnex, " was instituted in 1879. These were the first collegesexclusively for women. Oberlin College had from its foundation, in 1833, admitted men and women on equal terms; although it took pains to expressits hearty disapproval of those women who, after graduation, had thetemerity to advocate political rights for women--rights which that sameOberlin insisted should be given the negro at once. In 1858, when SarahBurger and other women applied for admission to the University ofMichigan, their request was refused. [Sidenote: First women in medicine. ] It was hard enough for women to assert their rights to a highereducation; to enter a profession was almost impossible. Nevertheless, it was done. The pioneer in medicine was Harriet K. Hunt who practisedin Boston from 1822 to 1872 without a diploma; but in 1853 the Woman'sMedical College of Pennsylvania conferred upon her the degree of Doctorof Medicine. The first woman to receive a diploma from a college aftercompleting the regular course was Elizabeth Blackwell, who attained thatdistinction at Geneva, New York, in 1848. The first adequate woman'smedical institution was Miss Blackwell's New York Infirmary, charteredin 1854. In 1863, Dr. Zakrzewska, in co-operation with Lucy Goddard andEdnah D. Cheney, established the New England Hospital for Women andChildren, which aimed to provide women the medical aid of competentphysicians of their own sex, to assist educated women in the practicalstudy of medicine, and to train nurses for the care of the sick. [411] [Sidenote: In law. ] In law, it would seem that Mistress Brut practised in Baltimore as earlyas 1647; but after her the first woman lawyer in the United States wasArabella A. Mansfield, of Mt. Pleasant, Iowa. She was admitted to thebar in 1864. By 1879 women were allowed to plead before the SupremeCourt of the United States. [412] [Sidenote: In the ministry. ] Coming now to the consideration of the ministry, the first woman toattempt to assert a right to that profession was Anne Hutchinson, ofBoston, in 1634. She was promptly banished. Among the Friends and theShakers women like Lucretia Mott and Anne Lee preached; and among theprimitive Methodists and similar bodies women were always permitted toexhort; but the first regularly ordained woman in the United Statesappears to have been Rev. Antoinette Brown Blackwell, of theCongregational Church who was ordained in 1852. In 1864 Rev. OlympiaBrown settled as pastor of the parish at Weymouth Landing, inMassachusetts; and the Legislature acknowledged marriages solemnised bywomen as legal. Phebe Hanaford, Mary H. Graves, and Lorenza Haynes werethe first Massachusetts women to be ordained preachers of the Gospel;the latter was at one time chaplain of the Maine House ofRepresentatives. The best known woman in the ministry at the present dayis Rev. Anna Howard Shaw, a Methodist minister, president of theNational American Woman's Suffrage Association. [413] [Sidenote: As newspaper editors. ] Women have from very early times been exceedingly active in newspaperwork. Anna Franklin printed the first newspaper in Rhode Island, in1732; she was made official printer to the colony. When the founder ofthe _Mercury_, of Philadelphia, died in 1742, his widow, Mrs. CorneliaBradford, carried it on for many years with great success, just as Mrs. Zenger continued the _New York Weekly Journal_--the second newspaperstarted in New York--for years after the death of her husband. Anna K. Greene established the _Maryland Gazette_, the first paper in thatcolony, in 1767. Penelope Russell printed _The Censor_ in Boston, in1771. In fact, there was hardly a colony in which women were notactively engaged in printing. After the Revolution they were still moreactive. Mrs. Anne Royal edited _The Huntress_ for a quarter of acentury. Margaret Fuller ran _The Dial_, in Boston, in 1840 and numberedEmerson and William Channing among her contributors. From 1840 to 1849the mill girls of Lowell edited the _Lowell Offering_. These are but afew examples of what women have done in newspaper work. How veryinfluential they are to-day every one knows who is familiar with thearticles and editorial work appearing in newspapers and magazines; andthat women are very zealous reporters many people can attest withconsiderable vigour. [414] [Sidenote: Women in industry. ] The enormous part which women now play in industry and in all economicproduction is a concomitant of the factory system, specialised industry, and all that makes a highly elaborated and complex society. Before theintroduction of machine industry, and in the simple society of thecolonial days, women were no less a highly important factor in economicproduction; but not as wage earners. Their importance lay in the factthat spinning, weaving, brewing, cheese and butter making, and the likewere matters attended to by each household to supply its own wants; andthis was considered the peculiar sphere of the housewife. In 1840Harriet Martineau found only seven employments open to women in theUnited States, viz. , teaching, needlework, keeping boarders, working incotton mills and in book binderies, type-setting, and household service. I shall now present a series of fifty tables, by means of which thereader may see at a glance the status of women in all the States to-day. For convenience, I shall arrange the views alphabetically. TABLES SHOWING THE PRESENT STATUS OF WOMEN IN THE UNITED STATES. The right of "dower, " as used in these tables, refers to the widow'sright, under the Common Law, to the possession, for her life-time, ofone third of the real estate of which her husband was possessed infee-simple during the marriage. "Curtesy" is the right of the husband after his wife's death to the lifeuse of his wife's real estate, sometimes dependent on the birth ofchildren, sometimes not; and usually the absolute right to her wholepersonal estate. It must be remembered that the enforcement Of certain laws, particularly in regard to child labour, is extremely lax in many States. It will be noted also that an unscrupulous employer could find loopholesin some of the statutes. The reader can observe these things for himselfin his particular State. _Alabama_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 14. POPULATION: Male 916, 764; female 911, 933. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings and has full control of ownproperty; but she cannot mortgage her real and personal property oralienate it without husband's consent. Married women may execute willwithout concurrence of husband and may bar latter's right of curtesy. Husband may appoint guardian for children by will; but wife has custodyof them until they are fourteen. If a wife commits a crime inpartnership with her husband she cannot be punished (except for murderand treason). Husband is not required by law to support the family. DIVORCE: Absolute divorce is granted for incurable impotence, adultery, desertion for two years, imprisonment for two years or more, crimesagainst nature, habitual drunkenness after marriage; in favour ofhusband if wife was pregnant at time of marriage without his knowledgeor agency, in favour of wife for physical violence on part of husbandendangering life or health, or when there is reasonable apprehension ofsuch violence. Limited divorce is granted for cruelty in either of the parties or anyother cause which would justify absolute divorce, if the party desiresonly a divorce from bed and board. LABOUR LAWS: Women not allowed to work in mines. Children under 12 notpermitted to work in any factory. All employers of women must provideseats and must allow women to rest when not actively engaged. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Thereis no suffrage. Women not eligible for any elective office; they may benotaries public. There are 18 women in the ministry, 12 journalists, 1dentist, 3 lawyers, 16 doctors, 3 professors, 2 bankers, 5 saloonkeepers, 4 commercial travellers, 11 carpenters, etc. _Arizona_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 17. POPULATION: Male 71, 795; female 51, 136. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Husband controls wife's earnings. Wife has control ofproperty which she had before marriage. Wife may contract debts fornecessaries for herself and children upon credit of husband. She may sueand be sued and make contracts in her own name as regards her separateproperty, but must sue jointly with husband for personal injuries, anddamages recovered are community property and in his control. Father islegal guardian of minor children; at his death mother becomes guardianas long as she remains unmarried. DIVORCE: Absolute divorce for excesses, cruelty, or outrage, adultery, impotence, conviction for a felony, desertion for one year, neglect ofhusband to provide for one year, habitual intemperance; in favour ofhusband if wife was pregnant at time of marriage without his knowledgeor agency. There is no limited divorce; but when the husband wilfully abandons hiswife, she can maintain an action against him for permanent maintenanceand support. LABOUR LAWS: No woman or minor may work or give any exhibition in asaloon. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Women21 years old or more who are mothers or guardians of a child of schoolage are eligible to the office of school trustee and may vote for suchofficers. There are 12 women in the ministry, 1 dentist, 2 journalists, 4 lawyers, 4 doctors, 628 saloon keepers, 2 bankers, etc. _Arkansas_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 675, 312; female 636, 252. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. Dower exists, but notcurtesy. Wife may sell or transfer her separate real estate withouthusband's consent. Father is legal guardian of children, but cannotapprentice them or create testamentary guardianship for them withoutwife's consent. At husband's death wife may be guardian of persons ofchildren, but not of their property, unless derived from her. DIVORCE: Absolute or limited divorce for impotence, wilful desertion fora year, when husband or wife had a former wife or husband living at thetime of the marriage sought to be set aside, conviction for felony orother infamous crime, habitual drunkenness for one year, intolerableindignities, and adultery subsequent to marriage. LABOUR LAWS: Labour contracts of married women, approved by theirhusbands, are legal and binding. No woman may work in a mine. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. 13 women are ministers, 6 journalists, 9 lawyers, 39 doctors, 3 professors, 3 saloon keepers, 9 commercial travellers, etc. _California_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 820, 531; female 664, 522. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. Wife may dispose ofseparate property without husband's consent. In torts of a personalnature she must sue jointly with her husband. Husband is guardian ofminor children; wife becomes so at his death. Husband must provide forfamily. If husband has no property or is disabled, wife must support himand the family out of her property or earnings. DIVORCE: Absolute divorce for adultery, extreme cruelty, wilfuldesertion for one year, wilful neglect for one year, habitualintemperance for one year, conviction for felony. There are no statutory provisions for limited divorce. But when the wifehas any cause for action as provided in the code, she may, withoutapplying for a divorce, maintain an action against her husband forpermanent support and maintenance of herself or of herself and children. LABOUR LAWS: Sex shall be no disqualification for entering any business, vocation, or profession. Children under 16 may not be let out foracrobatic performances or any exhibition endangering life or morals. Anyone who sends a minor under the age of 18 to a saloon, gambling house, or brothel, is guilty of a misdemeanour. One day of rest each week mustbe given all employees. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. May be elected school trustees. May be notaries public. Thereare 201 women in the ministry, 52 dentists, 116 journalists, 60 lawyers, 522 doctors, 8 professors, 129 saloon keepers, 9 bankers, 23 commercialtravellers, etc. _Colorado_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 18. POPULATION: Male 295, 332; female 244, 368. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. No assignment of wages bya married man is valid without the consent of his wife. Neither dowernor curtesy obtains. Husband and wife have same rights in making wills. Wife can sue and be sued as if unmarried. She is joint guardian ofchildren with husband and has equal powers. Husband must support family. DIVORCE: Absolute divorce for impotence, when husband or wife had a wifeor husband living at time of marriage, adultery subsequent to marriage, wilful desertion for one year, cruelty (including the infliction ofmental suffering as well as physical violence), neglect to provide forone year, habitual drunkenness for one year, conviction for felony. There is no limited divorce. LABOUR LAWS: Eight hours the usual day's work. Children under 12 may notwork in mines; none under 14 may exhibit in saloons, variety theatres, or any place endangering morals. No female help may be sent to any placeof bad repute. Children under 14 may not be employed in mills orfactories. No woman may work underground in a mine. All employers ofwomen must provide seats. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Fullsuffrage. Women are eligible to all offices; 10 have served in theLegislature. There are 39 women in the ministry, 23 dentists, 28journalists, 17 lawyers, 172 doctors, 4 professors, 17 saloon keepers, 12 bankers, 8 commercial travellers, etc. _Connecticut_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 454, 294; female 454, 126. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. No dower or curtesy. Survivor gets one third of property. Wife controls own property. Wifeand husband joint guardians of children with equal powers. Husband mustsupport family. DIVORCE: Absolute divorce for adultery, fraudulent contract, wilfuldesertion for three years with total neglect of duty, seven years'absence when absent party is not heard from during that period, habitualintemperance, intolerable cruelty, sentence to imprisonment for life, any infamous crime involving a violation of conjugal duty and punishableby imprisonment. There is no limited divorce. LABOUR LAWS: No child under 12 may give exhibition endangering limbs ormorals. Employers of females may not send them to any place of badrepute. Eight hours is a day's work. Women employees must have seats torest. No woman shall be forced to labour more than ten hours a day. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS:Women have school suffrage and may be elected school trustees. There are45 women in the ministry, 6 dentists, 122 doctors, 1 professor, 28saloon keepers, 4 bankers, 13 commercial travellers, 14 carpenters, etc. _Delaware_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 18. POPULATION: Male 94, 158; female 90, 577. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. If there is a child orlawful issue of a child living, widow has a life interest in one thirdof the real estate and one third absolutely of the personal property. Ifthere is no child nor the descendant of a child living, widow has a lifeinterest in one half of the real estate and one half absolutely of thepersonal estate. If there are neither descendants nor kin of husband, she gets the entire real estate for her life, and all the personalestate absolutely. Father is legal guardian of children and he alone mayappoint a guardian at his death. Husband must support family. DIVORCE: Absolute divorce for adultery, desertion for three years, habitual drunkenness, impotence, extreme cruelty, conviction for felony, procurement of marriage by fraud for want of age, wilful neglect toprovide for three years. Limited divorce may be decreed, in the discretion of the court, for thelast two causes mentioned. LABOUR LAWS: All female employees must be provided with seats. Sundaylabour forbidden. No minor under 15 may be let out for any gymnastic orother exhibition endangering body or morals. Separate lunch, wash-rooms, etc. , for all women employees; the rooms must be kept reasonably heated. Using indecent or profane language towards a female employee is amisdemeanour. The governor must appoint a _female_ factory inspector whoshall see that these laws are enforced. Children under 14 may not workin mills and factories; and no child under 16 shall be forced to labourmore than nine hours daily. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Womenin Milford, Townsend, Wyoming, and Newark who pay a property tax mayvote for Town Commissioners. All such women in the State may vote forschool trustees. There are 4 women in the ministry, 3 dentists, 1journalist, 1 lawyer, 7 doctors, 8 saloon keepers, 1 commercialtraveller, 2 carpenters, etc. _District of Columbia_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT; 16. POPULATION: Male 132, 004; female 146, 714. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings and property, may be suedand sue, carry on business, etc. , as if unmarried. Husband and wife areequal guardians of children. Husband must furnish reasonable support ifhe have property. Both dower and curtesy obtain. DIVORCE: Absolute divorce for bigamy, insanity at time of marriage, impotence, adultery habitual drunkenness for three years, crueltreatment endangering life or health. Limited divorce for drunkenness, cruelty, and desertion. In case of absolute divorce, only the innocent party may remarry; butthe divorced parties may marry each other again. LABOUR LAWS: No child under 14 may be let out for any public exhibitionendangering body or morals. Seats must be provided for women employees. Employment agencies must not send applicants to places of bad repute. Children under 14 may not be employed in any factory, hotel, etc. ; butjudge of juvenile court may give dispensation to child between 12 and14. No girl under 16 may be bootblack or sell papers or any other warespublicly. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. Women may be notaries public and members of Board ofEducation. 17 women in the ministry, 7 dentists, 38 journalists, 23lawyers, 56 doctors, 18 saloon keepers, 1 banker, 7 commercialtravellers, 2 carpenters, etc. _Florida_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16 (but 10 practically, as penalty above 10 isinsignificant). POPULATION: Male 275, 246; female 253, 296. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings and owns separate estate;but cannot transfer her real or personal property without husband'sconsent. Dower prevails, but not curtesy. Wife may make a will as ifunmarried. Husband is legal guardian of children. Husband must supportfamily. DIVORCE: Absolute divorce for impotence, where the parties are withinthe degrees prohibited by the law, adultery, bigamy, extreme cruelty, habitual indulgence in violent and ungovernable temper, habitualintemperance, desertion for one year, if husband or wife has obtained adivorce elsewhere and if the applicant has been a citizen of Florida fortwo years. There is no limited divorce. But the wife may claim alimony, withoutapplying for a divorce, for any of these causes except bigamy. LABOUR LAWS: Ten hours legal day's work. Employers of women must provideseats. No child under 14 may be let out for any public exhibitionendangering body or morals. Sunday labour forbidden. No child under 12may be employed in any factory, or any place where intoxicating liquoris sold; and no child under 12 may labour more than nine hours a day. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. Women may be notaries public. 19 women in the ministry, 1dentist, 9 journalists, 4 lawyers, 21 doctors, 1 banker, 3 commercialtravellers, 6 carpenters, etc. _Georgia_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 10. POPULATION: Male 1, 103, 201; female 1, 113, 130. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings and own property. Dowerprevails, but not curtesy. Husband is legal guardian of children and athis death may appoint a guardian to the exclusion of his wife. Husbandmust support family. DIVORCE: Absolute divorce for intermarriage within the prohibiteddegrees of consanguinity and affinity, mental incapacity at time ofmarriage, impotence at time of marriage, force, menace, duress, or fraudin obtaining marriage, pregnancy of wife at time of marriage unknown tohusband, adultery, wilful desertion for three years, conviction for anoffence involving imprisonment for two years or longer. Absolute or limited divorce for cruelty or habitual intoxication. Limited divorce for any ground held sufficient in English courts priorto May 4, 1784. LABOUR LAWS: No boss or other superior in any factory shall inflictcorporal punishment on minor labourers. Seats must be provided forfemale employees. Sunday labour forbidden. No minors may be employed inbarrooms. To let out children for gymnastic exhibition or any indecentexhibition is a misdemeanour. Children under 12 may not work infactories. No child under 14 may work between 7 P. M. And 6 A. M. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. 33 women in the ministry, 2 dentists, 37 journalists, 6lawyers, 43 doctors, 4 professors, 2 saloon keepers, 4 bankers, 9commercial travellers, 10 carpenters, etc. _Idaho_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 18. POPULATION: Male 93, 367; female 68, 405. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Husband controls wife's earnings. Wife can securecontrol of own property only by going into court and showing that herhusband is mismanaging it. Husband is legal guardian of the children. DIVORCE: Absolute divorce for adultery, extreme cruelty, wilfuldesertion for one year, wilful neglect for one year, habitualintemperance for one year, conviction of felony, permanent insanity. There is no limited divorce. LABOUR LAWS: No Sunday labour. Children under 14 may not work in mine, factory, hotel, or be messenger; no child under 16 shall work more thannine hours per day; nor be let out for any exhibition or vocation whichendangers health or morals; nor ever be sent to any immoral resort orserve or handle intoxicating liquors. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Fullsuffrage. Women are eligible to all offices. 7 women are in theministry, 4 journalists, 2 lawyers, 15 doctors, 1 saloon keeper, 1commercial traveller, 1 carpenter, etc. _Illinois_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 2, 472, 782; female 2, 348, 768. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. Dower prevails. Wife hasfull disposal of property, can sue, etc. , as if unmarried. Wife andhusband are equal guardians of children. Wife is entitled to supportsuited to her condition in life; husband is entitled to same support outof her individual property. They are jointly liable for family expenses. DIVORCE: Absolute divorce for impotence, bigamy, adultery, wilfuldesertion for two years, habitual drunkenness for two years, attempt tomurder, extreme and repeated cruelty, conviction for felony or otherinfamous crime. No limited divorce; but married women living separate through no faultof their own have an action in equity for reasonable maintenance, ifthey so desire. LABOUR LAWS: No Sunday labour. No minor shall be allowed to sellindecent literature, etc. , nor be let out as acrobat or mendicant or forany immoral occupation. Eight hours a legal day's work. No person shallbe debarred from any occupation or profession on account of sex; butfemales shall not be required to work on streets or roads or serve onjuries. No child under 14 to be employed in any place where intoxicatingliquors are sold or in factory or bowling alley; and shall not labourmore than eight hours. No child under 16 shall engage in occupationsdangerous to life or morals; and no female under 16 shall engage in anyemployment which requires her to stand constantly. Seats must beprovided for all female employees. No woman shall work more than tenhours a day in stores and factories. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Womenhave school suffrage and are eligible to all school offices and can benotaries public. There are 292 women in the ministry, 117 dentists, 240journalists, 113 lawyers, 820 doctors, 31 professors, 196 saloonkeepers, 8 bankers, 101 commercial travellers, 24 carpenters, etc. _Indiana_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Males 1, 285, 404; females 1, 231, 058. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. No dower or curtesy. Wifemay sue in her own name for injuries, etc. Neither husband nor wife canalienate their separate real estate without each other's consent. A wifecan act as executor or administrator of an estate only with herhusband's consent. No married woman can become a surety for any person. Husband is guardian of children. DIVORCE: Absolute for adultery, impotency, desertion for two years, cruel and inhuman treatment, habitual drunkenness, neglect of husband toprovide for two years, conviction of an infamous crime. Limited divorce for adultery, desertion or neglect for six months, habitual cruelty or constant strife, gross and wanton neglect ofconjugal duty for six months. LABOUR LAWS: No child under 12 may work in a mine. Children under 15 maynot be let out for acrobatic or any immoral exhibition or to work in anyplace where liquor is sold. Seats must be provided for female employees. Eight hours a legal day's work. No female under 18 may work more thanten hours a day in any factory, laundry, renovating works, bakery, orprinting office; no woman shall be employed in any factory between 10P. M. And 6 A. M. Suitable dressing rooms must be provided and not lessthan sixty minutes given for the noonday meal. Sweatshops under strictsupervision of a State inspector. No woman may work in a mine. No Sundaylabour. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. Women may be notaries public. 130 women in the ministry, 34dentists, 79 journalists, 40 lawyers, 195 doctors, 6 professors, 27saloon keepers, 2 bankers, 44 commercial travellers, 7 carpenters, etc. _Indian Territory_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 208, 952; female 183, 108. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Husband controls wife's earnings. Dower is in forceand curtesy. Woman controls separate estate absolutely in practice; forthough at common law any money or property given her husband forinvestment becomes his, by statute it does not. Husband and wife areequal guardians of children. DIVORCE: Absolute or limited for impotence, wilful desertion for oneyear, bigamy, conviction for felony or other infamous crime, habitualdrunkenness for one year, cruel treatment endangering life, intolerableindignities, adultery, incurable insanity subsequent to marriage. LABOUR LAWS: No Sunday labour. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION; INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. 6 women in ministry, 1 dentist, 4 journalists, 13 doctors, 4professors, 1 banker, etc. _Iowa_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 15. POPULATION: Male 1, 156, 849; female 1, 075, 004. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. Any assignment of wagesmust have written consent of both husband and wife. No dower or curtesy;surviving husband or wife is entitled to one third in fee simple of bothreal and personal estate of other at his or her death. Wife controls ownproperty, can sue, etc. , as if single. Husband and wife are equalguardians of children. Support and education of family is chargeableequally on husband's and wife's property. DIVORCE: Absolute for adultery, wilful desertion for two years, conviction of felony after marriage, habitual drunkenness, inhumantreatment endangering life, pregnancy of wife at time of marriage byanother man, unless the husband have an illegitimate child livingunknown to wife. No limited divorce. Annulment for prohibited degrees, impotence, bigamy, insanity or idiocyat time of marriage. LABOUR LAWS: No female may be employed in any place where intoxicatingliquors are sold; Seats must be provided for female employees. Childrenunder 16 not to assist in operating dangerous machinery. No Sundaylabour. No person under 14 may work in a factory, mine, laundry, slaughter-house, store where more than eight persons are employed; nochild under 16 shall be employed in any vocation endangering life ormorals, nor shall work more than ten hours a day. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Womenhave bond suffrage and can vote on increase of taxes. They may serve asschool trustees and superintendents. 117 women in ministry, 52 dentists, 74 journalists, 53 lawyers, 260 doctors, 27 professors, 8 saloonkeepers, 11 bankers, 34 commercial travellers, 7 carpenters, etc. _Kansas_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 18. POPULATION: Male 768, 716; female 701, 779. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. Husband and wife are equalguardians of children. Wife controls her separate property, can sue, etc. , as if unmarried. Neither husband nor wife can convey or encumberreal estate without consent of other; nor dispose by will of more thanone half of the separate property without other's consent. If there areno children, the surviving husband or wife takes all the property, realand personal; if there are children, one half. Husband must supportfamily. DIVORCE: Absolute for bigamy, desertion for one year, adultery, impotency, when wife at time of marriage was pregnant by another thanher husband, extreme cruelty, fraudulent contract, habitualdrunkenness, gross neglect of duty, conviction and imprisonment forfelony subsequent to marriage. No limited divorce; but wife may obtain alimony without divorce for anycauses above mentioned. LABOUR LAWS: People employing children under 14 in acrobatic ormendicant occupations are guilty of a misdemeanour. No Sunday labour. Seats must be provided for female employees. No child under 14 may workin coal mine, nor in any factory or packing house. No child under 16 maywork at any occupation endangering body or morals. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Womenhave municipal, school, and bond suffrage. 63 women in ministry, 21dentists, 39 journalists, 43 lawyers, 190 doctors, 21 professors, 9saloon keepers, 7 bankers, 20 commercial travellers, 19 carpenters, etc. _Kentucky_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 12. POPULATION: Male 1, 090, 227; female 1, 056, 947. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Husband controls wife's earnings. Curtesy and dowerare equalised. After the death of either husband or wife, the survivoris given a life interest in one third of the realty of the deceased andan absolute estate in one half of the personalty. Wife controls herpersonal property, but cannot dispose of real estate without husband'sconsent; the husband can convey real estate without his wife'ssignature, but it is subject to her dower. Husband is legal guardian ofchildren. He must furnish support according to his condition, but if hehas only his wages there is no law to punish him for non-support. DIVORCE: Absolute to both husband and wife for impotence or inability tocopulate and for living apart for five consecutive years without anycohabitation. Also to the party not in fault for desertion for one year, adultery, condemnation for felony, concealment of any loathsome diseaseat time of marriage or contracting it afterwards, force, duress, orfraud in obtaining marriage, uniting with any creed or religious societyrequiring a renunciation of the marriage covenant or forbidding husbandand wife to cohabit. To the wife, when not in like fault, for confirmeddrunkenness of husband leading to neglect to provide, habitual behaviourby husband for six months indicating aversion to wife and causing herunhappiness, physical injury or attempt at it. To the husband for wife'spregnancy at time of marriage unknown to him, adultery of wife, or suchconduct as proves her to be unchaste without proof of adultery, andhabitual drunkenness of wife. Limited divorce for any of these causes or any other cause as the courtmay deem sufficient. LABOUR LAWS: Forbidden to let or employ any children under 16 in anyacrobatic or mendicant or immoral occupations. No Sunday labour. Nochild under 14 shall work in factory, mill, or mine unless said childshall have no other means of support. No child under 16 shall work morethan ten hours per day. Seats and suitable dressing-rooms must beprovided for female employees. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Inthe country districts any widow having a child of school age and anywidow or spinster having a ward of school age may vote for schooltrustees and school taxes. In Louisville, five third-class, and twentyor more fourth-class cities no woman has any vote. Women may be notariespublic. 39 women in ministry, 4 dentists, 21 journalists, 16 lawyers, 98doctors, 5 professors, 35 saloon keepers, 3 bankers, 20 commercialtravellers, 9 carpenters, etc. _Louisiana_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 694, 733; female 686, 892. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Husband controls wife's earnings. Wife cannot appearin court without her husband's consent, and needs this consent in allmatters connected with her separate estate. She may make her willwithout the authority of her husband. No woman can be a witness to atestament. No married woman can be executor without husband's consent. The dowry is given to the husband, for him to enjoy as long as themarriage shall last. Husband is legal guardian of children. DIVORCE: Absolute or limited for adultery, condemnation to an infamouspunishment, habitual and intolerable intemperance, insupportable excessor outrages, public defamation on the part of one of the married personstoward the other, desertion, attempted murder, proof of guilt of husbandor wife who has fled from justice when charged with an infamous offence. LABOUR LAWS: No female to be employed in any place where liquor is sold. No Sunday labour. No child under 15 to engage in any acrobatic ortheatrical public exhibition. Seats must be provided for femaleemployees, who are also to have at least thirty minutes for lunch. Nogirl under 14 may be employed in any mill or factory; and no woman shallbe worked more than ten hours a day. Seats, suitable dressing-rooms, andstairs must be provided. An inspector, male or female, is appointed. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS:Tax-paying women can vote on all questions of taxation. 14 women inministry, 4 dentists, 21 journalists, 8 lawyers, 25 doctors, 16professors, 31 saloon keepers, 2 bankers, 18 commercial travellers, 9carpenters, etc. _Maine_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 350, 995; female 343, 471. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings and has full control ofseparate property. Wife and husband are equal guardians of children. Ifthere is no will, the interest of the husband or wife in the real estateof the other is the same--one third absolutely, if there is issueliving, one half if there is no issue, the whole if there is neitherissue nor kindred. DIVORCE: Absolute for adultery, impotence, extreme cruelty, desertionfor three years, gross and confirmed habits of Intoxication whether fromliquors or drugs, cruel and abusive treatment, wilful neglect toprovide. No limited divorce. LABOUR LAWS: Ten hours a day the legal limit for female employees. Nochild under 14 may work in a factory. No Sunday labour. No child under16 may be employed in any acrobatic, mendicant, immoral, or dangerousoccupation. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. Women can be justices of the peace, town clerks, and registersof probate. They cannot be notaries public. 39 women in ministry, 4dentists, 33 journalists, 4 lawyers, 67 doctors, 1 professor, 3 bankers, 5 carpenters, etc. _Maryland_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 589, 275; female 598, 769. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. No assignment of wages tobe made without consent of both husband and wife. Wife controls separateproperty absolutely. Inheritance of property is the same for widow andwidower. Husband is legal guardian of children and must support family. DIVORCE: Absolute for impotence, any cause which by the laws of theState renders a marriage null and void _ab initio_, adultery, desertionfor three years, illicit sexual intercourse _of the woman before_marriage unknown to husband (_but the wife cannot obtain a divorce fromher husband if he has been guilty of such an offence_). Limited divorcefor cruelty, excessively vicious conduct, or desertion. In all caseswhere an absolute divorce is granted for adultery or abandonment, thecourt may decree that the guilty party shall not contract marriage withany other person during the lifetime of the other party. Annulment isgiven for bigamy or marriage within the prohibited degrees ofconsanguinity and affinity. LABOUR LAWS: Seats must be provided for female employees. No Sundaylabour. No child under 14 may be employed in any mendicant or acrobaticoccupation. No child under 8 may be employed in peddling. Women may notbe waitresses in any place where liquor is sold. Children under 12 maynot be employed in any business except in the counties, from June 1 toOct. 15, Ten hours a legal day's work. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. Women serve as notaries public. 35 women in ministry, 6dentists, 23 journalists, 6 lawyers, 87 doctors, 4 professors, 2bankers, 13 commercial travellers, 10 carpenters, etc. _Massachusetts_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 1, 367, 474; female 1, 437, 872. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings and has control of herseparate property subject only to the husband's interests. She can beexecutor, make contracts, etc. , as if unmarried. The husband is legalguardian of minor children; he may dispose of them and may appoint aguardian at his death. Husband must support family. In distributing theestate, no distinction is made between real and personal property. Thesurviving husband or wife takes one third, if deceased leaves childrenor their descendants; 5000 dollars and one half of the remaining estateif the deceased leaves no issue; and the whole, if deceased leaves nokin. This is taken absolutely and not for life. Curtesy and dower exist;but the old-time curtesy is cut down to a life-interest in one third, the same as dower; and in order to be entitled to dower or curtesy, thesurviving husband or wife must elect to take it in preference to theabove provisions. DIVORCE: Absolute for adultery, impotency, utter desertion for threeyears, gross and confirmed habits of intoxication, cruel and abusivetreatment, wilful neglect to provide, sentence to imprisonment for fiveyears. No limited divorce. LABOUR LAWS: No Sunday labour. Ten hours a legal day's work. No woman tolabour between 10 P. M. And 6 A. M. In any manufacturing establishment, nor between 6 P. M. And 6 A. M. In any textile works. No child under 14and no illiterate under 16 and over 14 may be employed in any factory ormercantile establishment. No child under 14 may be employed between 7P. M. And 6 A. M. , or during the time when the public schools are insession. Seats must be provided for females. No woman or young personshall be required to work more than six hours without thirty minutes forlunch. No child under 15 may engage in any gymnastic or theatricalexhibition. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Womenhave school suffrage. They may be justices of the peace. 188 women inministry, 38 dentists, 180 journalists, 47 lawyers, 729 doctors, 38professors, 8 saloon keepers, 3 bankers, 73 commercial travellers, 31carpenters, etc. _Michigan_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 1, 248, 905; female 1, 172, 077. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Husband controls wife's earnings. Dower prevails, butnot curtesy. When the wife has separate real estate, she controls it asif single. The husband cannot give full title to his real estate unlessthe wife joins so as to cut off her dower. Father is guardian of thechildren. Husband must support. DIVORCE: Absolute for adultery, impotence, imprisonment for three years, desertion for two years, habitual drunkenness, if husband or wife hasobtained a divorce in another State. Limited or absolute divorce at the discretion of the court for extremecruelty, desertion for two years, neglect to provide. LABOUR LAWS: No female may be employed in any place where liquor issold. Seats must be provided for female employees. Ten hours a legalday's work. No Sunday labour. No child under 16 may take part in anyacrobatic or mendicant or dangerous or immoral occupation, nor shall anyminor be given obscene literature to sell. No female under 21 may beemployed in any occupation endangering life, health, or morals. At leastforty-five minutes must be allowed for lunch. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Allwomen who pay taxes may vote upon questions of local taxation and thegranting of franchises. Parents and guardians have also school suffrage. Women serve as notaries public. 105 women in ministry, 17 dentists, 81journalists, 27 lawyers, 270 doctors, 26 professors, 23 saloon keepers, 13 bankers, 53 commercial travellers, 32 carpenters, etc. _Minnesota_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 932, 490; female 818, 904. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings, but cannot convey orencumber her separate real estate without husband's consent. No dower orcurtesy. If either husband or wife die intestate, the survivor, if thereis issue living, is entitled to the homestead for life and one third ofthe rest of the estate in fee simple. If there are no descendants, theentire estate goes absolutely to the survivor. Husband is guardian ofchildren and must support family. DIVORCE: Absolute for adultery, impotency, cruel and inhuman treatment, sentence to imprisonment after marriage, wilful desertion for one year, habitual drunkenness for one year. Limited divorce--to wife only--for cruel and inhuman treatment, on partof husband, or such conduct as may make it unsafe and improper for herto cohabit with him, desertion and neglect to provide. LABOUR LAWS: Children between 8 and 18 must be sent to school duringwhole period schools are in session, except in cases of unusual poverty. Ten hours a legal day's work. Seats must be provided for femaleemployees. No Sunday labour. No child under 18 may engage in anyoccupation between 6 P. M. And 7 A. M. ; nor in any mendicant, acrobatic, immoral, or dangerous business. No child under 14 may work in factory ormine. A _female_ factory inspector must be appointed. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Womenhave school suffrage and may vote for library trustees. 80 women inministry, 18 dentists, 75 journalists, 21 lawyers, 199 doctors, 16professors, 17 saloon keepers, 10 bankers, 46 commercial travellers, 8carpenters, etc. _Mississippi_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 10. POPULATION: Male 781, 451; female 769, 819. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Husband controls wife's earnings. He manages herseparate property, but must give an account of it annually. No dower orcurtesy. If husband or wife dies intestate, the entire estate goes tothe survivor; if there is issue, surviving husband or wife has a child'sshare of the estate. Each has equal rights in making a will. Father islegal guardian of children, but cannot deprive mother of custody oftheir persons. Husband must support. DIVORCE: Absolute for marriage within prohibited degrees, naturalimpotence, adultery, sentence to the penitentiary, wilful desertion fortwo years, habitual drunkenness or excessive use of drugs, habituallycruel treatment, pregnancy of wife at time of marriage unknown tohusband, bigamy, insanity, or idiocy when party applying did not know ofit. No limited divorce. The court may decree that the guilty party must notmarry again. LABOUR LAWS: No Sunday labour. There are no other laws. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Awoman as a free-holder or lease-holder may vote at a county election todecide as to the adoption or non-adoption of a law permitting stock torun at large. If a widow and the head of a family, she may vote onleasing certain portions of land in the township which are set apart forschool purposes. Widows in country districts may also vote for schooltrustees. Women cannot be notaries public. 13 women in ministry, 2dentists, 19 journalists, 4 lawyers, 16 doctors, 3 professors, 1 saloonkeeper, 3 bankers, 9 commercial travellers, 13 carpenters, etc. _Missouri_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 18. POPULATION: Male 1, 595, 710; female 1, 510, 955. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. Her separate property isliable for debts contracted by the husband for necessaries for thefamily. Wife can sue and be sued, make contracts, etc. , in her own name. She may hold real property under three different tenures: an equitableseparate estate created by certain technical words in the conveyance, and this she can dispose of without husband's consent; a legal separateestate, which she cannot convey without his joinder; and a common lawestate in fee, of which the husband is entitled to the rents andprofits. Dower and curtesy prevail. Husband is guardian of children andmust support. DIVORCE: Absolute for impotence, bigamy, adultery, desertion for oneyear, conviction for felony or infamous crime, habitual drunkenness forone year, cruel treatment endangering life or intolerable indignities, vagrancy of husband, pregnancy of wife at time of marriage unknown tohusband. No limited divorce. LABOUR LAWS: Seats must be provided for female employees. No woman maybe employed in any place where liquor is served except wife, daughter, mother, or sister of owner. No child under 14 to engage in anyacrobatic, mendicant, dangerous, or immoral occupation. No Sundaylabour. No female may work underground in a mine. Children between 8 and14 must go to school. No child under 14 may work in any theatre, concerthall, factory; but this applies only to cities with 10, 000 or moreinhabitants, No female may labour more than 54 hours a week. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. Women may be notaries public. 138 women in ministry, 32dentists, 87 journalists, 61 lawyers, 303 doctors, 17 professors, 44saloon keepers, 30 bankers, 37 commercial travellers, 15 carpenters, etc. _Montana_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 149, 842; female 93, 487. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. There is dower, but notcurtesy. Wife controls separate property. Husband is guardian ofchildren and must furnish support; but wife must help, if necessary. Herpersonal property is subject to debts incurred for family expenses. DIVORCE: Absolute for adultery, extreme cruelty, wilful desertion, wilful neglect, habitual intemperance, conviction of felony. No limited divorce; but wife may have an action for permanentmaintenance, at discretion of court, even though absolute divorce isdenied. LABOUR LAWS: Children under 16 may not be employed in mines. Childrenbetween 8 and 14 must go to school. No child under 16 may take part inany acrobatic, mendicant, or wandering occupation. No Sunday labour. Nochild under 16 may work in mill, factory, railroad, in any place wheremachinery is operated, or in any messenger company. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Womenmay vote for school trustees. Those owning property may vote on allquestions submitted to tax-payers. They cannot be notaries public. 22women in ministry, 3 dentists, 6 journalists, 3 lawyers, 16 doctors, 7saloon keepers, 2 commercial travellers, 2 carpenters, etc. _Nebraska_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 18. POPULATION: Male 564, 592; female 501, 708. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings and separate property. Bothdower and curtesy prevail; but wife can mortgage or sell her real estatewithout husband's consent and without regard for his right of curtesy. He can do the same with his separate property, but subject to her dower. Husband and wife are equal guardians of the children. Husband mustprovide; but wife's separate property can be levied on for necessariesfurnished the family, if husband has no property. Wife is not "next ofkin" and cannot sue, for example, for damages to a minor child, eventhough she is divorced and has custody of children. DIVORCE: Absolute for adultery, impotence, imprisonment for threeyears, desertion for two years, habitual drunkenness, imprisonment forlife, extreme cruelty, neglect to provide. Limited divorce also for last three causes. Annulment for bigamy, whenone party is white and other has one fourth or more negro blood, insanity or idiocy at time of marriage, consanguinity, obtainingmarriage by fraud or force, when there has been no subsequentcohabitation. LABOUR LAWS: Children must go to school between 7 and 15. Ten hours alegal day's labour. Sunday labour forbidden. Females to be employedbetween 6 A. M. And 10 P. M. Seats must be provided. No child under 14 maybe employed in any place where liquor is sold, factory, hotel, laundry, messenger work. No child under 14 may be employed at all during schoolterm. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Womenwho are mothers of children of school age or who are assessed on real orpersonal property have school suffrage; but they cannot vote for Stateor county superintendents or county supervisors. Women act as notariespublic. 95 women in ministry, 16 dentists, 35 journalists, 23 lawyers, 134 doctors, 11 professors, 10 saloon keepers, 15 commercial travellers, 12 carpenters, etc. _Nevada_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 14. POPULATION: Male 25, 603; female 16, 732. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. She may control herseparate property, if a list of it is filed with the county recorder, but unless it is kept constantly inventoried and recorded, it becomescommunity property. The community property, both real and personal, isunder absolute control of husband and at wife's death it all belongs tohim. On death of the husband, wife is entitled to half of it. A wife'searnings are hers if her husband has allowed her to appropriate them toher own use, when they are regarded as a gift from him to her. Husbandis legal guardian of children. Husband must provide; but there is nopenalty if he does not. DIVORCE: Absolute for impotence, adultery since marriage remainingunforgiven, wilful desertion for one year, conviction for felony orinfamous crime, habitual drunkenness which incapacitates party fromcontributing his or her share to support of family, extreme cruelty, wilful neglect to provide for one year. No limited divorce. LABOUR LAWS: There are none dealing with women and children. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. Women cannot serve as notaries public. 2 women in ministry, 4dentists, 1 journalist, 1 lawyer, 6 doctors, 5 saloon keepers. _New Hampshire_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 205, 379; female 206, 209. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. Dower and curtesy prevail. Wife can sue and be sued and make contracts without husband's consent. Husband is legal guardian of children, and must provide. DIVORCE: Absolute for impotence, adultery, extreme cruelty, imprisonmentfor one year, treatment seriously injuring health or endangering reason, absence for three years without being heard from, habitual drunkennessfor three years, joining any religious sect which believes relation ofhusband and wife unlawful, desertion for three years with neglect toprovide. No limited divorce. LABOUR LAWS: No child under 12 may be employed in any factory, nor anychild under 14 while schools are in session. Nine hours and fortyminutes the legal limit for female labour per day. No child under 14shall engage in any acrobatic exhibition or in the selling of obsceneliterature. No Sunday labour. Seats must be provided for femaleemployees. No female may sell or serve liquor. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS. Womenhave school suffrage. They may be notaries public. 25 women in ministry, 3 dentists, 12 journalists, 2 lawyers, 61 doctors, 3 professors, 9saloon keepers 6 commercial travellers, 5 carpenters, etc. _New Jersey_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 941, 760; female 941, 909. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. Dower and curtesy prevail. She has full disposal of her personal property by will; but must gethusband's consent to convey or encumber her separate estate. Husband isguardian of children. Husband must furnish support; but wife mustcontribute, if he is unable. DIVORCE: Absolute for bigamy, marriage within prohibited degrees, adultery, wilful desertion for two years, impotence. Limited divorce for extreme cruelty. In case of desertion and neglect to provide, wife has an action forsupport. LABOUR LAWS: Seats must be provided for female employees. Hours forlabour must be from 7 A. M. To 12 M. And from 1 P. M. To 6 P. M. , except infruit canning and glass factories. Sunday labour forbidden. No childunder 18 may engage in any acrobatic, immoral, or mendicant occupation. No child under 15 may engage in any vocation unless he or she shall haveattended school within twelve months immediately preceding. No childunder 14 may work in a factory. No female employee shall be sent to anyplace of bad repute. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS:Women in villages and country districts have school suffrage. They maybe notaries public. 87 women in ministry, 19 dentists, 45 journalists, 23 lawyers, 176 doctors, 4 professors, 208 saloon keepers, 4 bankers, 11commercial travellers, 12 carpenters, etc. _New Mexico_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 14. POPULATION: Male 104, 228; female 91, 082. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. Curtesy prevails. Neitherhusband nor wife can convey real property without consent of other. Husband is legal guardian of children, but is not required by law tosupport the family. DIVORCE: Absolute for adultery, cruel treatment, desertion, impotency, neglect to provide, habitual drunkenness, conviction for felony andimprisonment subsequent to marriage, pregnancy of wife at time ofmarriage unknown to husband. No limited divorce. But when husband and wife have permanentlyseparated, wife has an action for support. LABOUR LAWS: No Sunday labour. There are no other laws relating to womenand children. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. Women may be notaries public. 10 women in ministry, 2dentists, 5 doctors, 3 professors, 2 saloon keepers, 1 commercialtraveller, 3 carpenters, etc. _New York_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 18. (Trials may be held privately, and it isalmost impossible to secure a conviction. ) POPULATION: Male 3, 614, 780; female 3, 654, 114. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. Dower and curtesy prevail. Wife holds separate property free from control of husband. Both husbandand wife can make wills without knowledge or consent of other. Wife canmortgage or convey her whole estate without husband's consent; he can dothis with his personal property; but not with his real estate. Husbandand wife are equal guardians of the children. Husband must provide. DIVORCE: Absolute for adultery only. Limited for cruelty, conduct rendering cohabitation unsafe or improper, desertion, neglect to provide. Court refuses to allow party guilty of adultery to marry again, but maymodify this after five years if conduct of defendant has been uniformlygood. Adultery is now a crime in New York. LABOUR LAWS: No child under 16 may take part in any acrobatic, mendicant, theatrical, wandering, dangerous, or immoral occupation. Children must attend school between 8 and 16. No child under 14 may beemployed in any occupation during school term. Eight hours a day's work. Seats must be provided for female employees. No child under 14 may workin a factory. Female labour is confined between 6 A. M. And 9 P. M. , andmust not exceed 10 hours. No girl under 16 shall sell papers orperiodicals in any public place. Female employment agencies may not sendapplicant to any place of bad repute. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS:Tax-paying women in towns and villages may vote on questions of localtaxation. Parents and widows with children have school suffrage in townsand villages. Women may be notaries public. 511 women in ministry, 108dentists, 365 journalists, 124 lawyers, 103 commercial travellers, 925doctors, 49 professors, 348 saloon keepers, 81 bankers, 84 carpenters, etc. _North Carolina_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 14. POPULATION: Male 938, 677; female 955, 133. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. Dower and curtesy prevail. Wife controls separate property. Wife is not bound by a contract unlesshusband joins in writing. In actions against her he must be served withthe suit. Wife cannot be sole trader without husband's written consent. Husband is legal guardian of children, and must provide. DIVORCE: Absolute for adultery, impotence, pregnancy of wife at time ofmarriage unknown to husband. Limited for desertion, turning partner maliciously out of doors, crueltreatment endangering life, intolerable indignities, habitualdrunkenness. Wife has an action for separate maintenance if husband neglects toprovide or is a drunkard or spendthrift. LABOUR LAWS: No Sunday labour. No child under 12 may be employed infactory, except oyster canning concerns which pay for opening oysters bythe bushel. No person under 18 shall be required to labour more than 66hours per week. No child under 12 shall work in a mine. No boy or girlunder 14 shall work in a factory between 8 P. M. And 5 A. M. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. Women cannot be notaries public. 25 women in ministry, 6journalists, 22 doctors, 2 professors, 2 saloon keepers, 3 bankers, 4commercial travellers, 6 carpenters, etc. _North Dakota_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 18. POPULATION: Male 177, 493; female 141, 653. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings and separate propertyabsolutely. Dower and curtesy do not prevail; if husband or wife diesintestate, survivor takes one half of the estate, if there is only onechild living or the lawful issue of one child; if there are more, survivor gets one third. If husband is unable to support family, wifemust maintain him and the children. Husband is guardian of children. DIVORCE: Absolute for adultery, extreme cruelty, wilful desertion forone year, wilful neglect for one year, habitual intemperance for oneyear, conviction of felony. No limited divorce. LABOUR LAWS: Children under 12 may not work in mines, factories, orworkshops. Children must go to school between 8 and 14, unless they havealready been taught adequately and poverty compels them to work. NoSunday labour. No woman under 18 shall labour more then ten hours perday. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Womenhave school suffrage and are eligible to all school offices. They may benotaries public. 15 women in ministry, 5 dentists, 2 journalists, 6lawyers, 15 doctors, 1 professor, 1 commercial traveller, 4 carpenters, etc. _Ohio_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 2, 102, 655; female 2, 054, 890. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Husband controls wife's earnings, but wife controlsseparate property. Either husband or wife on the death of the other isentitled to one third of the real estate for life. Husband is legalguardian of children, and must provide; but if he is unable, wife mustassist. DIVORCE: Absolute for bigamy, desertion for three years, adultery, impotence, extreme cruelty, fraudulent contract, any gross neglect ofduty, habitual drunkenness for three years, imprisonment inpenitentiary, procurement of divorce in another State. No limiteddivorce; but wife has an action for alimony without divorce foradultery, any gross neglect of duty, desertion, separation on account ofill treatment by husband, habitual drunkenness, sentence andimprisonment in penitentiary. LABOUR LAWS: No child under 14 may work in a mine. Children must go toschool between 8 and 14. Seats and suitable toilet rooms must beprovided for female employees. No child under 14 may be employed in anyestablishment or take part in any acrobatic, mendicant, dangerous, orimmoral vocation. Hours for girls under 18 confined between 6 A. M. And 7P. M. , nor may they work more than ten hours per day. No Sunday labour. No labour agency shall send any female to an immoral resort. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Womenmay vote for members of boards of education, but not for Statecommissioner nor on bonds and appropriations. They cannot be notaries. 206 women in ministry, 40 dentists, 151 journalists, 66 lawyers, 451doctors, 26 professors, 337 saloon keepers, 15 bankers, 62 commercialtravellers, 31 carpenters, etc. _Oklahoma_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 214, 359; female 182, 972. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings and separate propertyabsolutely. If husband or wife dies intestate, leaving one child orlawful issue of child, survivor receives one third of the estate;otherwise one half. If there are no kin, survivor takes all. Husband isguardian of children, and is expected to provide; but law assigns nopenalty if he does not. DIVORCE: Absolute for bigamy, desertion for one year, impotence, pregnancy of wife at time of marriage by other than husband, extremecruelty, fraudulent contract, habitual drunkenness, gross neglect ofduty, conviction and imprisonment for felony after marriage. Wife may have an action for separate maintenance for any of these causeswithout applying for divorce. LABOUR LAWS: No children under 15 may be employed in any occupationinjurious to body or morals. No Sunday labour. Ten hours per day legallabour for children under 14. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS:Women may vote for school trustees. They may be notaries public. 29women in ministry, 1 dentist, 5 journalists, 5 lawyers, 26 doctors, 1professor, 4 commercial travellers, 3 carpenters, etc. _Oregon_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 232, 985; female 183, 972. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. By registering as a soletrader, she can carry on business in her own name. Civil disabilitiesare same for husband and wife except as to voting and holding office. Ifhusband or wife dies intestate, and there are no descendants living, survivor takes whole estate. If there is issue living, the widowreceives one half of husband's real estate and one half of his personalproperty. The widower takes a life interest in all the wife's realestate, whether there are children or not and all her personal propertyabsolutely if there are no descendants living; otherwise one half. Husband and wife are equal guardians of children. Husband must provide. DIVORCE: Absolute for impotency, adultery, conviction for felony, habitual drunkenness for one year, wilful desertion for one year, crueltreatment or indignities making life burdensome. No limited divorce. Annulment if either party is one fourth negro orMongolian blood. LABOUR LAWS: No Sunday labour. No child under 14 shall work in factory, mill, mine, telegraph, telephone, or public messenger service; and nochild under 14 shall be employed at all during school session. Attendance at school compulsory between 8 and 14. Hours of work forchildren under 16 to be confined between 7 A. M. And 6 P. M. Seats must beprovided for female employees. Ten hours a day the legal limit forfemale labour. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Womenhaving property in school districts have school suffrage and may beelected school trustees. They may be notaries. 40 women in ministry, 15dentists, 17 journalists, 8 lawyers, 82 doctors, 7 professors, 5 saloonkeepers, 10 bankers, 18 commercial travellers, 7 carpenters, etc. _Pennsylvania_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 3, 204, 541; female 3, 097, 574. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. Dower and curtesy prevail. Wife cannot mortgage separate estate without husband's consent; cannotsue or be sued or contract without his consent; and in order to carry onbusiness in her own name must secure special permission from the court. Husband is legal guardian of children, and must provide. DIVORCE: Absolute for impotence, bigamy, adultery, desertion for twoyears, cruelty or intolerable indignities, marriage within prohibiteddegrees of consanguinity or affinity, fraud, conviction for felony formore than two years, lunacy for ten years. Limited divorce for desertion, turning wife out of doors, cruelty, adultery. LABOUR LAWS: Seats must be provided for female employees. Employment offemales in mines forbidden. Children under 18 may not engage in anymendicant occupations; those under 15 may not exhibit in any place whereliquor is sold nor take part in any acrobatic or immoral vocation. Sunday labour forbidden. No female may work in bakery or macaroni orother establishment more than twelve hours per day. Children must go toschool between 8 and 16. No child under 16 may work in any anthracitecoal mine. No child under 14 shall be employed in any establishment. Onehour must be allowed for lunch. No employment bureau shall send anyfemale to an immoral resort. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. 290 women in ministry, 73 dentists, 125 journalists, 73lawyers, 601 doctors, 38 professors, 183 saloon keepers, 17 bankers, 44commercial travellers, 40 carpenters, etc. _Rhode Island_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 210, 516; female 218, 040. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings and separate estate, subject to husband's right to curtesy. Curtesy and dower both prevail. Husband is legal guardian of children and must provide. DIVORCE: Absolute or limited for marriages originally void by law, conviction for crime involving loss of civil status, when either partymay be presumed to be naturally dead from absence, etc. , impotence, adultery, desertion for any time at discretion of court, continueddrunkenness, neglect to provide, any gross misbehaviour. LABOUR LAWS: No child under 13 may be employed except during vacation. No child under 15 may be employed unless he or she has schoolcertificate. No child under 14 to work in factory. Hours of labour forchildren under 16 confined between 6 A. M. And 8 P. M. Seats must beprovided for all female employees. No child under 16 shall be employedin any acrobatic, mendicant, dangerous, or immoral occupation. Hours forfemale labour confined to ten. Sunday labour forbidden. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. 24 women in ministry, 5 dentists, 7 journalists, 3 lawyers, 56doctors, 2 saloon keepers, 5 commercial travellers, 6 carpenters, etc. _South Carolina_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 14. POPULATION: Male 664, 895; female 675, 421. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings and separate estateabsolutely. Dower prevails, but not curtesy. Husband is legal guardianof children, and is required to provide, but law as it stands offersmany loopholes. DIVORCE: There are no divorce laws in South Carolina. LABOUR LAWS: Seats must be provided for female employees. Sunday labourforbidden. No child under 12 to work in factory, mill, or textileestablishment, except in cases of extreme poverty duly attested; allsuch labour to be confined between 6 A. M. And 8 P. M. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. Women cannot be notaries. 17 women in ministry, 1 dentist, 6journalists, 3 lawyers, 17 doctors, 13 professors, 3 saloon keepers, 2commercial travellers, 13 carpenters, etc. _South Dakota_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Male 216, 164; female 185, 406. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings and controls separateestate. Joint real estate can be conveyed only by signature of bothhusband and wife, but husband can dispose of joint personal propertywithout wife's consent. In order to control her separate property, wifemust keep it recorded in the office of the county register. No dowerand no curtesy. Survivor gets one half of estate, if there is one childor issue of child; otherwise one third; unless there are neitherchildren nor kin, when survivor takes all. On the death of an unmarriedchild, father inherits all its property. If he is dead and there are noother children, mother succeeds; but if there are brothers and sisters, she inherits a child's share. Husband is guardian and must support; butif he is infirm, wife must do so. DIVORCE: Absolute for adultery, extreme cruelty, wilful desertion orneglect or habitual intemperance for one year, conviction of felony. No limited divorce. Party guilty of adultery cannot marry any other, except the innocentparty, until death of latter. LABOUR LAWS: Sunday labour forbidden. No woman under 18 may labour morethan ten hours a day. No child under 15 may work in mine, hotel, laundry, factory, elevator, bowling alley, or any place where liquor issold. No child under 15 shall be employed at all while schools are insession. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Womencan vote for school trustees. They may be notaries. 29 women inministry, 3 dentists, 4 journalists, 12 lawyers, 24 doctors, 7professors, 3 saloon keepers, 3 commercial travellers, etc. _Tennessee_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 18. POPULATION: Male 1, 021, 224; female 999, 392. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Husband controls wife's earnings, and wife can donothing with her separate estate without his consent. Dower and curtesyprevail. Husband has right to all rents and profits of wife's estate. Nolaw requires husband to provide. Husband is guardian of children. DIVORCE: Absolute for impotence, bigamy, adultery, desertion for twoyears, conviction for felony, attempted murder, pregnancy of woman attime of marriage without knowledge of husband, habitual drunkenness. Limited for wife only for cruel treatment by husband or intolerableindignities, and desertion or refusal to provide. Party guilty of adultery cannot marry person with whom adultery has beencommitted during life of former partner. LABOUR LAWS: No Sunday labour. No child under 14 may be employed infactory, workshop, or mine. Seats must be provided for female employees. Hours for labour of women confined to 60 per week. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. 30 women in ministry, 1 dentist, 19 journalists, 14 lawyers, 48 doctors, 9 professors, 6 saloon keepers, 4 bankers, 16 commercialtravellers, 6 carpenters, etc. _Texas_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 15. POPULATION: Male 1, 578, 900; female 1, 469, 810. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Husband controls wife's earnings and wife can donothing with her separate property without his consent. No dower orcurtesy. Husband and wife succeed equally to each other's estate. Husband is guardian of children and may be required to provide out ofhis wife's estate. DIVORCE: Absolute for excesses or outrages; in favour of husband whenwife is taken in adultery or has deserted him for three years; in favourof wife, if husband has deserted her for three years or has abandonedher and lives in adultery with another woman. In favour of eitherhusband or wife on conviction for felony. No limited divorce. LABOUR LAWS: No Sunday labour. No child under 12 may be employed in anyestablishment using machinery. No females shall be employed in any placewhere liquor is sold except immediate members of owner's family. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. Women can be notaries. 50 women in ministry, 12 dentists, 51journalists, 17 lawyers, 100 doctors, 3 professors, 26 saloon keepers, 18 bankers, 29 commercial travellers, 12 carpenters, etc. _Utah_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 18. POPULATION: Male 141, 687; female 135, 062. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. No dower or curtesy. Husband and wife succeed equally to each other's estate at death. Womancontrols separate estate absolutely. Husband is legal guardian ofchildren. There is no penalty for non-support. DIVORCE: Absolute for impotence, adultery, desertion for one year, neglect to provide, habitual drunkenness, conviction of felony, crueltreatment causing bodily injury or mental distress, permanent insanity. No limited divorce; but wife has an action for separate maintenance incase of desertion or neglect to provide on part of husband. LABOUR LAWS: No females may work in mines. No Sunday labour. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Fullsuffrage; therefore all offices are open to women. 20 women in ministry, 5 dentists, 7 journalists, 1 lawyer, 34 doctors, 2 saloon keepers, 1banker, 3 commercial travellers, 1 carpenter, etc. _Vermont_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 16. POPULATION: Males 175, 138; females 168, 503. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings and controls separateproperty. No dower or curtesy. Husband and wife have same powers ofmutual inheritance, except that widower does not take his wife'spersonal property. Husband is guardian of children and must support. DIVORCE: Absolute or limited for adultery, sentence to hard labour, intolerable severity, desertion for three years, neglect to provide, absence for seven years without being heard from. LABOUR LAWS: No child under 16 to be employed after 8 P. M. No childunder 12 may work in mill, factory, railroad, quarry, or messengerservice. No female shall be employed in barrooms. No Sunday labour. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Womenhave school suffrage. They may be notaries. 17 women in ministry, 3dentists, 15 journalists, 21 doctors, 1 professor, 2 saloon keepers, 11commercial travellers, 3 carpenters, etc. _Virginia_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 14. POPULATION: Male 925, 897; female 928, 287. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings and separate propertyabsolutely. Dower and curtesy prevail. Husband is guardian of childrenand must support. DIVORCE: Absolute for adultery, impotence, sentence to penitentiary, conviction of an infamous offence prior to marriage without knowledge ofother party, desertion for three years, pregnancy of wife at time ofmarriage or previous prostitution without knowledge of husband. Limited for cruelty, reasonable apprehension of bodily hurt, desertion. LABOUR LAWS: Seats must be provided for female employees. Hours offemale labour confined to ten. No child under 12 may work in factory ormine; no child under 14 shall work between 6 P. M. And 7 A. M. No childunder 14 shall be hired for any mendicant, acrobatic, dangerous, orimmoral occupation. No Sunday labour. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL, AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. 37 women in ministry, 1 dentist, 12 journalists, 7 lawyers, 32doctors, 20 professors, 19 saloon keepers, 13 commercial travellers, 9carpenters, etc. _Washington_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 18. POPULATION: Male 304, 178; female 213, 925. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings and controls separateestate; but control of community property is vested absolutely in thehusband; this includes everything acquired after marriage by the jointor separate efforts of either. Husband and wife have equal rights ofinheritance to one another's estate; but are not equal guardians of thechildren, as husband can exclude wife by will. Support of the family ischargeable upon the property of both husband or wife, or either of them. No dower or curtesy. DIVORCE: Absolute for any cause deemed by court sufficient, when courtis satisfied that parties can no longer live together, fraudulentcontract, adultery, impotence, desertion for one year, cruel treatment, habitual drunkenness, neglect to provide, imprisonment. No limited divorce. LABOUR LAWS: No female may be employed in a mine. Every profession andoccupation open to women, but they may not hold public office. No Sundaylabour. Females shall not be employed in any place where liquor is sold. Seats must be provided for female employees. Hours limited to ten. Nochild under 14 shall labour in factory, mill, or workshop except atdiscretion of juvenile judge. Children must go to school between 8 and15. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Womenhave school and bond suffrage, but cannot vote for State or countysuperintendents. 38 women in ministry, 7 dentists, 13 journalists, 13lawyers, 62 doctors, 3 professors, 8 saloon keepers, 1 banker, 8commercial travellers, etc. _West Virginia_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 14. POPULATION: Male 499, 242; female 459, 558. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings, but cannot sell orencumber her separate property without husband's consent. Husband islegal guardian and must provide. Dower and curtesy prevail. DIVORCE: Absolute for adultery, impotence, imprisonment in penitentiary, conviction of an infamous offence before marriage, desertion for threeyears, pregnancy of wife at time of marriage or prostitution beforewithout knowledge of husband, in favour of wife when husband wasnotoriously a licentious person before marriage without her knowledge. Limited for cruelty, reasonable apprehension of bodily hurt, desertion, habitual drunkenness. LABOUR LAWS: No Sunday labour. No child under 12 may work in factory ormill and no child under 14 shall be employed during school session. Nochild under 15 may be employed in any mendicant, acrobatic, immoral, ordangerous occupation, nor in any place where liquor is sold. Seats mustbe provided for female employees. No female may work in mine. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Nosuffrage. Women cannot be notaries. 26 women in ministry, 4 dentists, 4journalists, 4 lawyers, 18 doctors, 4 professors, 9 saloon keepers, 2bankers, 3 commercial travellers, 2 carpenters, etc. _Wisconsin_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 18. POPULATION: Male 1, 067, 562; female 1, 001, 480. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings. Assignment of wages ofhusband must have wife's written consent. Wife controls separateproperty absolutely. Dower and curtesy prevail. Husband is guardian ofchildren and must provide. DIVORCE: Absolute for impotence, adultery, sentence to imprisonment forthree years prior to marriage. Limited or absolute for desertion for oneyear, cruelty, habitual drunkenness, neglect to provide, conduct ofhusband rendering it improper or unsafe for wife to live with him. LABOUR LAWS: Female labour confined to eight hours per day. No childunder 14 may work in factory, workshop, bowling alley, or mine. Childrenbetween 14 and 16 must get permission from juvenile judge. No childunder 16 shall be employed on dangerous machinery. None under 14 shalltake part in theatrical or circus exhibition as musician unlessaccompanied on tours by parent or guardian. Authorities shall in allcases determine whether occupation is dangerous or immoral for childrenunder 14. No Sunday labour. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Womenhave school suffrage. They may be notaries. 65 women in ministry, 24dentists, 32 journalists, 23 lawyers, 154 doctors, 12 professors, 143saloon keepers, 2 bankers, 27 commercial travellers, 9 carpenters, etc. _Wyoming_ AGE OF LEGAL CONSENT: 21. POPULATION: Male 58, 184; female 34, 347. HUSBAND AND WIFE: Wife controls own earnings and separate propertyabsolutely. Neither dower nor curtesy prevail. Husband and wife havesame rights of mutual inheritance. Husband is legal guardian ofchildren, but there is no penalty if he does not provide. DIVORCE: Absolute for adultery, impotence, conviction for felony, desertion for one year, habitual drunkenness, extreme cruelty, neglectto provide for one year, intolerable indignities, vagrancy of husband, conviction of felony prior to marriage unknown to other party, pregnancyof wife at time of marriage unknown to husband. No limited divorce. LABOUR LAWS: No female shall work in mine. Acrobatic, mendicant, dangerous, or immoral occupations forbidden to children under 14. NoSunday labour. Seats must be provided for female employees. SUFFRAGE, POLITICAL CONDITION, INDUSTRIAL AND PROFESSIONAL STATUS: Fullsuffrage. Women are eligible for all offices. 2 women in ministry, 2journalists, 12 doctors, 1 professor, no saloon keepers, lawyers, ordentists, 2 carpenters, etc. In studying these tables, it should be remembered that new laws arebeing made constantly; and that the census of 1910 will give figureswhich as soon as they appear must supersede those of 1900. SOURCES I. The Statutes of the Several States, from earliest times to thepresent day. Published by Authority. II. All newspapers and periodicals. III. The Census Reports, especially the various separate reports such asthat on "Marriage and Divorce"; and the Reports of the Commissioner ofLabour. IV. The History of Woman Suffrage: edited by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, Matilda Joslyn Gage, and Ida Husted Harper, 4 vols. [First two published by Fowler and Wells, New York, 1881 and 1882; lasttwo by Susan B. Anthony, Rochester, 1887 and 1902. ] V. The Encyclopedia of Social Reforms: edited by William D. P. Bliss, with the Co-operation of many Specialists. Funk and Wagnalls, New Yorkand London, 1898. NOTES: [410] See, for example, the account in the _New York Tribune_, Sept. 8, 9, and 12, 1853, of what happened at the Women's Rights Convention atthat time. [411] In 1900 there were 7399 female physicians and surgeons in theUnited States, and 808 female dentists. [412] In 1900 there were 1049 women lawyers in the United States. Theabove statements are from Bliss, _Encyc_. , p. 1291. [413] In 1900 there were 3405 women clergy in the United States. [414] In 1900 there were 2193 women journalists in the United States. This does not, of course, include women reporters and the like. CHAPTER IX GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS It is twenty-three centuries since Plato gave to the world hismagnificent treatise on the State. The dream of the Greek philosopher ofequal rights for all intelligent citizens, among whom he includes women, has in large part been realised; but much is yet wanting to bringsociety to the standard of the Ideal Republic. In not a few States ofthe world the conditions affecting property rights are inequitable; inall but very few States woman is still barred from the field of politicsand from the legitimate rights of citizenship; and the day seems fardistant when the States possessing a representative government will beprepared to accept the woman citizen as eligible for administrativepositions. It will, therefore, be my purpose in this chapter first to consider fiveof the most serious objections to the granting of equal suffrage, thatis to say, to the concession to women of full citizens' rights under thelaw. It will be found that these objections are based on a presumedinferiority of women to men in various respects. I shall giveconsideration next in order to the question of the inferiority orsuperiority of one sex over the other. In view, furthermore, of the newferment in thought in modern society, it will be useful to analysecertain habits of mind and to indicate the necessity for a readjustmentof old beliefs in the light of recent evolution. I shall conclude myhistory with a suggestion for definite reforms which, I believe, must bebrought about, whether equal suffrage is granted or not, before womencan attain their maximum of efficiency. The opposition to the granting of equal suffrage is, as I have said, based mainly upon five classes of contentions: I. The theological. II. The physiological. III. The social or political. IV. The intellectual. V. The moral. A consideration and an analysis of these five classes of objections willconstitute a summary of the relations of woman to the community, and mayalso serve as a guide or suggestion to the possibility of a legitimatedevelopment, in the near future, of her rights as a citizen. I. The theological argument is based upon the distinctly evil conceptionof woman, presented in _Genesis_, as the cause of misery in this worldand upon the subordinate position assigned to her by Paul and Peter. Christ himself has left us no teachings on the subject. The Hebrew andOriental creed of woman's sphere permeated the West as Christianityexpanded and forced to extinction the Roman principle of equality. Onlywithin fifty years, has the female sex regained the rights enjoyed bywomen under the law of the Empire seventeen centuries ago. The Apostolictheory of complete subordination gained strength with each succeedingage. I have already cited instances of ecclesiastical vehemence. As afinal example I may recall that when, early in the nineteenth century, chloroform was first used to help women in childbirth, a number ofProtestant divines denounced the practice as a sin against the Creator, who had expressly commanded that woman should bring forth in sorrow andtribulation. Yet times have so far changed within two decades that thetheological argument is practically obsolete among Protestants, althoughit is still influential in the Roman Catholic Church, which holds fastto the doctrine laid down by the Apostles. We may say, however, that ofall the objections, the theological has, in practice, the least weightamong the bulk of the population. The word _obey_ in the clericalformula _love, honour, and obey_ provokes a smile. II. The physiological argument is more powerful. Its supporters assertthat the constitution of woman is too delicate, too finely wrought tocompete with man in his chosen fields. The physiological argument makesits appearance most persistently in the statement that woman should haveno vote because she could not defend her property or her country intime of war. In reply to this some partisans of equal suffrage havethought it necessary to prove that women are physically equal in allrespects to men. But the issues between nations which in the centuriespast it had been believed could be adjusted only by war, by being foughtout (not, of course, to any logical conclusion, but to a result whichshowed simply that one party was stronger than the other), are now, inthe great majority of cases, determined by the more reasonable, the morecivilised, method of arbitration. As a matter of fact, the cause of woman's rights will suffer no harm bya frank admission that women are not, in general, the peers of men inbrute force. The very nature of the female sex, subjected, as it is, tofunctional strains from which the male is free, is sufficient toinvalidate such a claim. A refutation of the physiological objection toequal suffrage is, however, not hard to find. Even in war, as it ispractised to-day, physical force is of little significance compared withstrategy which is a product of the intellect. In a naval battle forinstance, ships no longer engage at close range, where it is possiblefor the crew of one to board the opposing ship and engage in hand tohand conflict with the enemy; machinery turns the guns and even loadsthem; the whole fight is simply a contest between trained gunners, whomust depend for success on cool mathematical computation. Nevertheless, it is true that under stress or the need of making alivelihood women in many instances do show physical endurance equal tothat of men. Women who are expert ballet dancers and those who areskilled acrobats can hardly be termed physiological weaklings. InBerlin, you may see women staggering along with huge loads on theirbacks; in Munich, women are street-cleaners and hod-carriers; on theisland of Capri, the trunk of the tourist is lifted by two men onto theshoulder of a woman, who carries it up the steep road to the village. Inthis country many women are forced to do hard bodily labour ten hours aday in sweat-shops. In all countries and in all ages there have beenexamples of women who, disguised as men, have fought side by side withthe male and with equal efficiency. The case of Joan of Arc will at onceoccur to the reader; and those who are curious about this subject may, by consulting the records of our Civil War, find exciting material inthe story of "Belle Boyd, " "Frank Miller, " and "Major Cushman. "[415] Doubtless women are stronger physically than they were a half-centuryago, when it was considered unladylike to exercise. If you will read thenovels of that time, you will find that the heroine faints on theslightest provocation or weeps copiously, like Amelia in _Vanity Fair_, whenever the situation demands a grain of will-power or ofcommon-sense. But to-day women seldom faint or weep in literature; theyplay tennis or row. When, in 1844, Pauline Wright Davis lectured onphysiology before women in America and displayed the manikin, some ofher auditors dropped their veils, some ran from the room, and someactually became unconscious, because their sense of delicacy was put toso sharp a test. It should be borne in mind, in connection with the contention that theprivileges of a citizen ought to be accorded only to those persons whoare physically capable of helping to defend the community by force, thatno such principle is applied in fixing the existing qualifications formale citizenship. A large number of the voters of every community are, on the ground either of advanced years or of invalidism, physicallydisqualified for service as soldiers, sailors, or policemen. This groupof citizens includes a very large proportion of the thinking power ofthe community. No intelligently directed state would, however, beprepared to deprive itself of the counsels, of the active politicalco-operation, and of the service from time to time in the responsibilityof office, of men of the type of Gladstone (at the age of seventy-five), of John Stuart Mill (always a physical weakling), of Washington (servingas President after he was sixty), on the ground that these citizens wereno longer capable of carrying muskets in the ranks. Any classification of citizens, any privileges extended to voters, ought, of course, to be arrived at on a consistent and impartialprinciple. Further, under the conditions obtaining in this twentieth century, governments, whether of nations, of states, or of cities, are carried onnot by force but by opinion. In the earlier history of mankind, eachfamily was called upon to maintain its existence by physical force. Thefamilies the members of which (female as well as male) were not strongenough to fight for their existence were crushed out. Par into the latercenturies, issues between individuals were adjusted by the decision ofarms. Up to within a very recent date, it may be admitted that issuesbetween nations could be settled only by war. It is, however, at thistime the accepted principle of representative government in allcommunities that matters of policy are determined by the expression ofopinion, that is by means of the votes given by the majority of itscitizens. It is by intelligence and not by brute force that the world isnow being ruled, and with the growth of intelligence and a betterunderstanding of the principles of government, it is in order not onlyon the grounds of justice but for the best interests of the state towiden the foundations of representative government, so as to makeavailable for voting and for official responsibilities all theintelligence that is comprised within the community. This is in myjudgment the most conclusive reply to the objection that the physicalweakness of woman unfits her for citizenship. III. According to the social or political argument, if woman is givenequal rights with man, the basis of family life, and hence thefoundation of the state itself, is undermined, as a house dividedagainst itself cannot stand. It is said that (1) there must be some oneauthority in a household and that this should be the man; (2) woman willneglect the home if she is left free to enter politics or a profession;(3) politics will degrade her; (4) when independent and self-assertingshe will lose her influence over man; and (5) most women do not want tovote or to enter politics. It is astonishing with what vehemence men will base arguments on puretheory and speculation, while they wilfully close their eyes to anyfacts which may contradict their assumptions. It is inconceivable to acertain type of mind that a husband and wife can differ on politicalquestions and may yet maintain an even harmony, while their love abatesnot one whit. In the four States where women vote--Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, and Idaho--there is no more divorce than in other States; and anyone who has travelled in these communities can attest that no domesticunhappiness results from the suffrage. Nor does it in New Zealand. It is said that there must be some one supreme authority; but thisdepends on the view taken of marriage. Under the old Common Law, thepersonality of the wife was merged completely in that of her husband;marriage was an absolute despotism. Under the Canon Law, woman is man'sobedient and unquestioning subject; marriage is a benevolent despotism. To-day people are more inclined to look upon matrimony as a partnershipof equal duties, rights, and privileges. Sophocles argued in one of his tragedies that children belong entirelyto the father, that the mother can assert no valid claim for anything. Lawyers have found this logic excellent; and the records are full ofinstances of children being taken from a hard-working mother in order tobe handed over to a drunken father who wants their wages for hissupport. It is no longer so in most states. Civilisation has advanced sofar, that the pains of bringing forth and raising children areacknowledged to give the mother a right almost equal to that of thefather to determine all that concerns the child. There is some reason, therefore, for believing that she should have a voice also in passingupon laws which may make or undo for ever the welfare of the boys andgirls for whom she struggles during the years that they are growing tomanhood and womanhood. Men are for the greater part so engrossed inbusiness that on certain questions they are far less competent to be"authorities" than women. Against stupid pedagogy, against red-tape, against the policy that morality must never interfere with businessprinciples, against civic dirtiness, against brothel and saloon, womenare more active than men, because they see more clearly how vitally theinterests of their children are affected by these evil conditions. Wherever women vote, these questions are to the fore. Closely connected with the "one authority" argument is the oldcontention, so often resorted to and relied upon, that women, if theyare permitted to vote, will neglect the home, and that, if theprofessions are opened to them, they will find these too absorbinglyattractive. Much weight should, however, be given to the great power ofthe domestic instinct implanted in the nature of woman. In the Stateswhere women vote and are eligible for political offices, there are fewerunmarried women in proportion to the population than in States wherethey have no such rights. The great leaders of the woman suffragemovement from Mrs. Stanton to Mrs. Snowden have in their home circle ledlives as beautiful and have raised families as large and as wellequipped morally and intellectually as those who are content to sit bythe fire and spin. Thus far I have argued from the orthodox view, that matrimony ought tobe the goal of every woman's ambition. But if a woman wishes to remainsingle and devote herself exclusively to the realisation of some ideal, it is hard to see why she should not. Men who take this course areeulogised for their noble self-sacrifice in immolating themselves forthe advancement of the cause of civilisation; women who do precisely thesame thing are sometimes unthinkingly spoken of in terms of contempt orwith that complacent pity which is far worse. It is difficult for us torealise adequately what talented women like Rosa Bonheur had to undergobecause of this curious attitude of humanity. "The home is woman's sphere. " This shibboleth is the logical result ofthe attitude mentioned. Doubtless, the home is woman's sphere; but thehome includes all that pertains to it--city, politics and taxes, lawsrelating to the protection of minors, municipal rottenness which maycorrupt children, schools and playgrounds and museums which may educatethem. Few doctrines have been productive of more pain than the "woman'ssphere" argument. It is this which has, for a thousand years, made theunmarried woman, the _Old Maid_, the butt of the contemptible jibes ofChristian society, whereof you will find no parallel in pagan antiquity. Dramatic writers have held her up to ridicule on the stage on account ofthe peculiarities of character which are naturally acquired when aperson is isolated from participation in the activities of life. It isthe doctrine which has made women glad to marry drunkards and rakes, tobring forth children tainted with the sins of their fathers, and tosuffer hell on earth rather than incur the ridicule of the Christiangentleman who may, without incurring the protest of society, remainunmarried and sow an unlimited quantity of wild oats. It is thisdoctrine which was indirectly responsible for the hanging and burning ofeccentric old women on the charge that they were witches. As men found adivine sanction for keeping women in subjection, so in those days ofsuperstition did they blaspheme their Creator by digging out of the OldTestament, as a justification for their brutality, the text, "Thou shaltnot suffer a witch to live. " "Politics will degrade women"--this naïve confession that politics arerotten is a fairly strong argument that some good influence is needed tomake them cleaner. Generally speaking, it is difficult to imagine howpolitics could be made any worse. If a woman cannot go to the polls orhold office without being insulted by rowdies, her vote will be potentto elect officials who should be able to secure for the community astandard of reasonable civilisation. There is no case in which moresentimentality is wasted. Lovely woman is urged not to allow her beauty, her gentleness, her tender submissiveness to become the butt of thelounger at the street corner; and in most instances lovely woman, likethe celebrated Maître Corbeau, is cajoled effectively. Meanwhile thebrothel and the sweat-shop continue on their prosperous way. By acurious inconsistency, man will permit woman to help him out of apolitical dilemma and will then suavely remark that suffrage willdegrade her. During the Civil War, Anna Dickinson by her remarkable lectureentitled, "The National Crisis" saved New Hampshire and Connecticut forthe Republicans; Anna Carroll not only gave such a crushing rejoinder toBreckinridge's secession speech that the government printed anddistributed it, but she also, as is now generally believed, planned thecampaign which led to the fall of Forts Henry and Donelson and openedthe Mississippi to Vicksburg. How many men realise these facts? The theory that politics degrade women will not find much support insuch States as Colorado and Wyoming. Here, where equal suffrage obtains, women have been treated with uniform courtesy at the polls; they haveeven been elected to legislatures with no diminution of theirwomanliness; and the House of Wyoming long ago made a special resolutionof its approval of equal rights and attested the beneficial results thathave followed the extension of the suffrage to women. [416] Judge Lindseyof Colorado has said that his election, and consequent power to work outhis great reforms in juvenile delinquency, was due to the backing ofwomen at a time when men, for "business reasons, " were averse to extendtheir aid. "No one would dare to propose its repeal [i. E. , the repeal ofequal suffrage], and if left to the men of the State any proposition torevoke the rights bestowed on women would be overwhelmingly defeated. "Experience in Colorado and elsewhere has shown that any important moralissue will bring out the women voters in great force; but after electionthey are content to resume their domestic duties; and they have shown nogreat desire for political office. [417] Before I leave the discussion as to whether politics degrade women, itwill not be out of place to consider the question whether certain womenmay not, if they have a vote, degrade politics. Of such women there aretwo classes--the immoral and the merely ignorant. As to the former, muchfear has been expressed that they would be the very agents forunscrupulous politicians to use at the polls. Exact data on this matterare not available. I shall content myself with quoting a statement byMrs. Ida Husted Harper[418]: "That 'immoral' class, " said Mrs. Harper, "is a bogey that has nevermaterialised in States where women have the suffrage. Those women don'tvote. Indeed, Denver's experience has been interesting in that respect. When equal suffrage was first granted, women of that class werecompelled by the police to register. It was a question of doing as thepolice said, of course, or being arrested. The women did not want tovote. They don't go under their real names; they have no fixedresidence, and so on. Anyway, the last thing they wanted was to beregistered voters. "But the corrupt political element needed their vote, and were after it, through the police. These women actually appealed to a large woman'spolitical club to use its influence to keep the police from forcing themto register. A committee was appointed; it was found that the story wastrue; coercion was stopped, and the women's vote turned out the chief ofpolice who attempted it. There is now no coercion, and this class simplypays no attention to politics at all. " The doubling of the number of ignorant voters by giving all women alikethe ballot would be a more serious affair. A remedy for that, however, lies in making an educational test a necessary qualification for allvoters. In this connection the remarks of Mr. G. H. Putnam aresuggestive[419]: "If I were a citizen of Massachusetts or of any Statewhich, like Massachusetts, possesses such educational qualification, Ishould be an active worker for the cause of equal suffrage. As a citizenof New York who has during the last fifty years done his share of workin the attempt to improve municipal conditions, I am forced to theconclusion that it will be wiser to endure for a further period theinconsistency, the stupidity, and the injustice of the disfranchisementof thousands of intelligent women voters rather than to accept theburden of an increase in the mass of unintelligent voters. The firststep toward 'equal suffrage' will, in my judgment, be a fight for aneducational qualification for all voters. " Those who maintain that when women are independent and self-asserting, they will lose their influence over men, assume that we view thingsto-day as they did a century ago and that the thoughts of men are notwidened with the progress of the suns. The woman who can share theaspirations, the thoughts, the complete life of a man, who canunderstand his work thoroughly and support him with the sympathy born ofperfect comprehension, will exert a far vaster influence over him thanthe milk-and-water ideal who was advised "to smile when her husbandsmiled, to frown when he frowned, and to be discreetly silent when theconversation turned on subjects of importance. " It is a good thing forwomen to be self-asserting and independent. There is and always has beena class of men who, like Mr. Murdstone, are amenable to justice andreason only when they know that their proposed victim can at any timebreak the chains with which they would bind her. This brings us to the last of the social or political arguments, viz. , "Most women do not want to vote. "[420] Precisely the same argument hasbeen used by slave owners from time immemorial--the slaves do not wishto be free. As Professor Thomas writes[421]: "Certainly the negroes ofVirginia did not greatly desire freedom before the idea was developed byagitation from the outside, and many of them resented this outsideinterference. 'In general, in the whole western Sahara desert, slavesare as much astonished to be told that their relation to their owners iswrong and that they ought to break it, as boys amongst us would be to betold that their relation to their fathers was wrong and ought to bebroken. ' And it is reported from eastern Borneo that a white man couldhire no natives for wages. 'They thought it degrading to work for wages, but if he would buy them, they would work for him. '" It is akin to theold contention of despots that when their subjects are fit for freedom, they will make them free; but nobody has ever seen such a time. Reform of evil conditions does not come from below; leaders with visionsof the future must point the way. I once heard of a very respectablelady of Boston who exclaimed indignantly against certain proposedchanges in child labour laws in North Carolina, where she owned sharesin a cotton mill. She maintained that the children who worked at thelooms ten hours a day expressed no discontent; it kept them off thestreets; and the operators, in the kindness of their hearts, hadactually had the looms made especially to accommodate conveniently thediminutive size of the little workers. Some people might, with greatprofit to themselves, read Plato's superb allegory of the men in thecave. The fact that various women's associations have been instituted inopposition to the extension of woman suffrage--as in Boston and NewYork--is no argument for depriving all women of the franchise. If thewomen who compose these societies do not care to vote, they do not needto; but they have no right to deprive of their rights those who do sodesire. It is said that good women will not go to the polls; yet thereare in every large city hundreds of respectable males who disdain tovote. A woman is more likely to have a sense of duty to vote than a man. It is the old cry, "Don't disturb the old order of things. If you makeus think for ourselves, we shall be so unhappy. " So Galileo was broughtto trial, so Anne Hutchinson was banished; and so persecuted they theprophets before them. IV. Another argument that is made much of is the intellectualinferiority of woman. For ages women were allowed nor higher educationthan reading, writing, and simple arithmetic, often not even these; yetElizabeth Barrett Browning, George Sand, George Eliot, HarrietMartineau, Jane Austen, and some scores of others did work which showedthem to be the peers of any minds of their day. And if no woman canjustly claim to have attained an eminence such as that of Shakespeare inletters or of Darwin in science, we may question whether Shakespearewould have been Shakespeare or Darwin Darwin if the society whichsurrounded them had insisted that it was a sin for them to use theirminds and that they should not presume to meddle with knowledge. When agirl for the first time in America took a public examination ingeometry, in 1829, men wagged their heads gravely and prophesied thespeedy dissolution of family and state. To the list of women whose service for their fellows would have beenlost if the old-time barriers had been maintained, may be added the nameof the late Dr. Mary Putnam Jacobi. Mary Putnam secured her preliminarymedical education in the early '60's, and found herself keenly troubledand dissatisfied at the inadequacy of the facilities extended to womenfor the study of medicine. She insisted that if women practitioners wereto be, as she expressed it, "turned loose" upon the community withlicense to practise, they should, not only as a matter of justice tothemselves but of protection for the women and children whose lives theywould have in their hands, be properly qualified. At the time in question, the medical profession took the ground thatwomen might enjoy the benefit of a little medical education but theywere denied the facilities for any thorough training or for any researchwork. Mary Putnam secured her graduate degree from the great medicalschool of the University of Paris, being the first woman who had beenadmitted to the school since the fourteenth century. Returning after sixyears of thorough training, she did much during the remaining years ofher life to secure and to maintain for women physicians the highestpossible standard of training and of practice. It was natural that withthis experience of the requirement of equal facilities for women in herown work, she should always have been a believer in the extension ofequal facilities for any citizen's work for which, after experience, women might be found qualified. She was, therefore, an ardent advocateof equal suffrage. One needs but recall the admirable intellectual work of women to-day towonder at the imbecility of those who assert that women areintellectually the inferiors of men. Madame Curie in science, MissTarbell in political and economic history, Miss Jane Addams insociological writings and practice, the Rev. Anna Howard Shaw in theministry, Mrs. Hetty Green in business, are a few examples of womenwhose mental ability ought to bring a blush to the Old Guard. Mrs. Harriman and Mrs. Sage, who manage properties of many millions, aredenied the privilege of voting in regard to the expenditure of theirtaxes; but every ignorant immigrant can cast a vote, thanks to thedoctrine that the political acumen of a man, however degraded, issuperior to that of a woman, however great her genius--an admirableobedience to the saw in Ecclesiasticus that the badness of men is betterthan the goodness of women. Let me quote again from Professor Thomas:"The men have said that women are not intelligent enough to vote, butthe women have replied that more of honesty than of intelligence isneeded in politics at present, and that women certainly do not representthe most ignorant portion of the population. They claim that voting is arelatively simple matter anyway, that political freedom 'is nothing butthe control of those who do make politics their business by those who donot, ' and that they have enough intelligence 'to decide whether they areproperly governed, and whom they will be governed by. ' They point outalso that already, without the ballot, they are instructing men how tovote and teaching them how to run a city; that women have to journey tothe legislature at every session to instruct members and committees atlegislative hearings, and that it is absurd that women who are capableof instructing men how to vote should not be allowed to vote themselves. To the suggestion that they would vote like their husbands and that sothere would be no change in the political situation, women admit thatthey would sometimes vote like their husbands, because their husbandssometimes vote right; but ex-Chief-Justice Fisher of Wyoming says: 'Whenthe Republicans nominate a bad man and the Democrats a good one, theRepublican women do not hesitate a moment to "scratch" the bad andsubstitute the good. It is just so with the Democrats; hence we almostalways have a mixture of office-holders. I have seen the effects offemale suffrage, and, instead of being a means of encouragement to fraudand corruption, it tends greatly to purify elections and to promotebetter government. ' Now, 'scratching' is the most difficult feature ofthe art of voting, and if women have mastered this, they are doing verywell. Furthermore, the English suffragettes have completelyoutgeneralled the professional politicians. They discovered that nocause can get recognition in politics unless it is brought to theattention, and that John Bull in particular will not begin to payattention 'until, you stand on your head to talk to him. ' They regrettedto do this, but in doing it they secured the attention and interest ofall England. They then followed a relentless policy of opposing theelection of any candidate of the party in power. The Liberal men hadbeen playing with the Liberal women, promising support and then laughingthe matter off. But they are now reduced to an appeal to the maternalinstinct of the women. They say it is unloving of them to oppose theirown kind. Politics is a poor game, but this is politics. " V. The last objection I would call the _moral_. It embraces sucharguments as, that woman is too impulsive, too easily swayed by heremotions to hold responsible positions, that the world is very evil andslippery, and that she must therefore constantly have man to protecther--a pious duty, which he avows solemnly it has ever been his specialdelight to perform. The preceding pages are a commentary on the mannerin which man has discharged this duty. In Delaware, for instance, theage of legal consent was until 1889 seven years. The institution ofChivalry, to take another example, is usually praised for the highestimation and protection it secured for women; yet any one who has readits literature knows that, in practice, it did nothing of the sort. Thenoble lord who was so gallant to his lady love--who, by the way, wasfrequently the wife of another man--had very little scruple aboutseducing a maid of low degree. The same gallantry is conspicuous in theLetters of Lord Chesterfield, beneath whose unctuous courtesy the beastof sensuality is always leering. In the past the main function of woman outside of the rearing ofchildren has been to satisfy the carnal appetite of man, to prepare hisfood, to minister to his physical comfort; she was barred fromparticipation in the intellectual. In order to hold her to these bonds aDivine Sanction was sought. The Mohammedan found it in the Koran; theChristian, in the Bible--just as slavery was justified repeatedly fromthe story of Ham, just as the Stuarts and the Bourbons believed firmlythat they were the special favourites of God. Strangely enough, men who are so sensitive about the moral welfare ofwomen will visit a dance hall where women are degraded nightly, and willallow their daughters to marry "reformed" rakes. Men will not permit anymention of sexual matters in their homes, and will let their childrenget their information on the street; and all for the very simple reasonthat they are afraid the truth will hurt, will make people think. Menhave been remarkably sensitive about having women speak in public fortheir rights; but they watch with zest a woman screaming nonsense on thestage. It is quite possible that many women are swayed too easily by theiremotions. We must recollect, however, that for some thousands of yearswoman has been carefully drilled to believe that she is an emotionalcreature. If a dozen people conspire to tell a man that he is lookingbadly, it is not unlikely that he will feel ill. Certainly FlorenceNightingale and Clara Barton exhibited no lack of firmness on theshambles of battlefields; and there are few men living who cannot recallinstances of women who have, in the face of disaster and evil fortune, shown a steady perseverance and will-power in earning a living forthemselves and their children that men have not surpassed. Having in the preceding pages considered the five capital objections tothe concession of equal suffrage, I shall now, in accordance with myplan, say something of the much-mooted question of the superiority orinferiority of one sex to the other. It might be concluded from theforegoing account that I see little difference in the aptitudes andpowers of the sexes physically, morally, or intellectually. That doesnot necessarily follow. It is possible to conceive of each sex as thecomplement of the other; and between complements there can be noquestion either of superiority or of inferiority. The great historian ofEuropean Morals has analysed the constitutional differences of the sexesas he conceived them; and I may quote his remarks as pertinent to mytheme. Lecky writes as follows[422]: "Physically, men have the indisputable superiority in strength, andwomen in beauty. Intellectually, a certain inferiority of the female sexcan hardly be denied when we remember how almost exclusively theforemost places in every department of science, literature, and art havebeen occupied by men, how infinitesimally small is the number of womenwho have shown in any form the very highest order of genius, how many ofthe greatest men have achieved their greatness in defiance of the mostadverse circumstances, and how completely women have failed in obtainingthe first position, even in music or painting, for the cultivation ofwhich their circumstances would appear most propitious. It is asimpossible to find a female Raphael, or a female Handel, as a femaleShakespeare or Newton. Women are intellectually more desultory andvolatile than men; they are more occupied with particular instances thanwith general principles; they judge rather by intuitive perceptions thanby deliberate reasoning or past experience. They are, however, usuallysuperior to men in nimbleness and rapidity of thought, and in the giftof tact or the power of seizing speedily and faithfully the finerinflections of feeling, and they have therefore often attained verygreat eminence as conversationalists, as letter-writers, as actresses, and as novelists. "Morally, the general superiority of women over men is, I think, unquestionable. If we take the somewhat coarse and inadequate criterionof police statistics, we find that, while the male and femalepopulations are nearly the same in number, the crimes committed by menare usually rather more than five times as numerous as those committedby women; and although it may be justly observed that men, as thestronger sex, and the sex upon whom the burden of supporting the familyis thrown, have more temptations than women, it must be remembered, onthe other hand, that extreme poverty which verges upon starvation ismost common among women, whose means of livelihood are most restricted, and whose earnings are smallest and most precarious. Self-sacrifice isthe most conspicuous element of a virtuous and religious character, andit is certainly far less common among men than among women, whose wholelives are usually spent in yielding to the will and consulting thepleasures of another. There are two great departments of virtue: theimpulsive, or that which springs spontaneously from the emotions, andthe deliberative, or that which is performed in obedience to the senseof duty; and in both of these I imagine women are superior to men. Theirsensibility is greater, they are more chaste both in thought and act, more tender to the erring, more compassionate to the suffering, moreaffectionate to all about them. .. . In active courage women are inferiorto men. In the courage of endurance they are commonly theirsuperiors. .. . In the ethic of intellect they are decidedly inferior. Torepeat an expression I have already employed, women very rarely lovetruth, though they love passionately what they call 'the truth' oropinions they have received from others, and hate vehemently those whodiffer from them. They are little capable of impartiality or doubt;their thinking is chiefly a mode of feeling; though very generous intheir acts, they are rarely generous in their opinions. .. . They are lesscapable than men of perceiving qualifying circumstances, of admittingthe existence of elements of good in systems to which they are opposed, of distinguishing the personal character of an opponent from theopinions he maintains. Men lean most to justice, and women to mercy. Menare most addicted to intemperance and brutality, women to frivolity andjealousy. Men excel in energy, self-reliance, perseverance, andmagnanimity, women in humility, gentleness, modesty, and endurance. .. . Their religious or devotional realisations are incontestably morevivid. .. . But though more intense, the sympathies of women are commonlyless wide than those of men. Their imaginations individualise more, their affections are, in consequence, concentrated rather on leadersthan on causes. .. . In politics, their enthusiasm is more naturallyloyalty than patriotism. In history, they are even more inclined thanmen to dwell exclusively upon biographical incidents or characteristicsas distinguished from the march of general causes. " Experience, by which alone mankind has ever learned or can learn, willshow how far the characteristics enumerated by Lecky are innate and howfar they have been acquired in the course of ages by certain habits ofbelief and education. The securing of citizens' rights for woman will of necessity depend onthe attitude of society. There may be numerous laws for her relief onthe statute books; but if society frowns on her appearance in court, itwill be only in exceptional cases that she will appeal to the courts. Toone who is familiar with the records of daily life a hundred years agothere is little doubt that conjugal infidelity on the part of thehusband was more flagrant then than it is to-day; but there wereinfinitely fewer divorces. The reason for this is simply that publicsentiment on the subject has changed. A century ago, a divorced womancould do nothing; the wife was exhorted to bear her husband's faultswith meekness; and the expansion of industry had not yet opened to herthat opportunity of making her own living which she now possesses in ahundred ways. Women were entirely dependent on men; and the men knew it. To-day they are not so sure. The old conception of woman's position was subjection, based on mentaland physical inferiority and supported by Biblical arguments. The newerconception is that of a complement, in which neither inferiority norsuperiority finds place. The old conception was based, like everyinstitution of the times, on fear. Men were warned against heresy bybeing reminded of the tortures of hell fire; against crime by appealingto their dread of the gallows. Between the death of Anne and the reignof George III one hundred and eighty-eight capital offences were addedto the penal code; and crime at once increased to an amazing degree. Ina system that is founded on fear, when once that fear is removed--as itinevitably will be with the growth of enlightenment--there remains nobasis of action, no incentive to good. It has been tried for centuriesand has yielded only Star Chambers and Spanish Inquisitions. It is timethat we try a new method. An appeal to the sense of _fair play_, anappeal to the sense of duty and of natural affection may yieldimmeasurably superior results. It has been my experience and personalobservation that the standard of honour in our non-sectarian schools, where the _fair play_ spirit is most insisted on, is vastly greater thanit was in the old sectarian institutions where boys were told morning, noon, and night that they would go to hell if they did not behave. The new spirit is not going to be accepted at once by society. Theremust first be some wailing and much gnashing of teeth; and the monster, custom, which all sense doth eat, will still for a time be antagonisticas it has been in the past. "In no society has life ever been completelycontrolled by the reason, " remarks Professor Thomas, "but mainly by theinstincts and the habits and the customs growing out of these. Speakingin a general way, it may be said that all conduct both of men andanimals tends to be right rather than wrong. They do not know why theybehave in such and such ways, but their ancestors behaved in those waysand survival is the guaranty that the behaviour was good. We must admitthat within the scope of their lives the animals behave with almostunerring propriety. Their behaviour is simple and unvarying, but theymake fewer mistakes than ourselves. The difficulty in their conditionis, that having little power of changing their behaviour they havelittle chance of improvement. Now, in human societies, and already amonggregarious animals, one of the main conditions of survival was commonsentiment and behaviour. So long as defence of life and preying onoutsiders were main concerns of society, unanimity and conformity hadthe same value which still attaches to military discipline in warfareand to team work in our sports. Morality therefore became identifiedwith uniformity. It was actually better to work upon some system, however bad, than to work on none at all, and early society had no placefor the dissenter. Changes did take place, for man had the power ofcommunicating his experiences through speech and the same power ofimitation which we show in the adoption of fashions, but these changestook place with almost imperceptible slowness, or if they did not, those who proposed them were considered sinners and punished with deathor obloquy. "And it has never made any difference how bad the existing order ofthings might be. Those who attempted to reform it were always viewedwith suspicion. Consequently our practices usually run some decades orcenturies behind our theories and history is even full of cases wherethe theory was thoroughly dead from the standpoint of reason before itbegan to do its work in society. A determined attitude of resistance tochange may therefore be classed almost with the instincts, for it is nota response to the reason alone, but is very powerfully bound up with theemotions which have their seat in the spinal cord. "It is true that this adhesion to custom is more absolute andastonishing in the lower races and in the less educated classes, but itwould be difficult to point out a single case in history where a newdoctrine has not been met with bitter resistance. We justly regardlearning and freedom of thought and investigation as precious, and wepopularly think of Luther and the Reformation as standing at thebeginning of the movement toward these, but Luther himself had no faithin 'the light of reason' and he hated as heartily as any papal dogmatistthe 'new learning' of Erasmus and Hutten. .. . We are even forced torealise that the law of habit continues to do its perfect work in astrangely resentful or apathetic manner even when there is no moralissue at stake. .. . Up to the year 1816, the best device for theapplication of electricity to telegraphy had involved a separate wirefor each letter of the alphabet, but in that year Francis Ronaldsconstructed a successful line making use of a single wire. Realising theimportance of his invention, he attempted to get the British governmentto take it up, but was informed that 'telegraphs of any kind are nowwholly unnecessary, and no other than the one in use will be adopted. '" The reader will doubtless be able to add from his own experience andobservation examples which will support Professor Thomas's admirableaccount of the power of custom. Among many barbarous tribes certainfoods, like eggs, are _taboo_; no one knows why they should not beeaten; but tradition says their use produces bad results, and one whopresumes to taste them is put to death. To-day, we believe ourselvesrather highly civilised; but the least observation of society mustcompel us to acknowledge that _taboo_ is still a vital power in amultitude of matters. There is a still more forcible opposition to a recasting of the statusof women by those men who have beheld no complete regeneration ofsociety through the extension of the franchise in four of our States. Curiously oblivious of the fact that partial regeneration through theinstrumentality of women is something attained, they take this as aworking argument for the uselessness of extending the suffrage. Theypoint to other evils that have followed and tell you that if this is theresult of the emancipation of women, they will have none of it. Forexample, there can be no doubt that one may see from time to time thepseudo-intellectual woman. She affects an interest in literature, attends lectures on Browning and Emerson, shows an academic interest inslum work, and presents, on the whole, a selfishness or an egotism whichrepels. There never has been a revolution in society, however beneficialeventually, which did not bring at least some evil in its train. Icannot do better in this connection than to quote Lord Macaulay'ssplendid words (from the essay on Milton): "If it were possible that apeople, brought up under an intolerant and arbitrary system, couldsubvert that system without acts of cruelty and folly, half theobjections to despotic power would be removed. We should, in that case, be compelled to acknowledge that it at least produces no perniciouseffects on the intellectual and moral character of a people. We deplorethe outrages which accompany revolutions. But the more violent theoutrages, the more assured we feel that a revolution was necessary. Theviolence of these outrages will always be proportioned to the ferocityand ignorance of the people; and the ferocity and ignorance of thepeople will be proportioned to the oppression and degradation underwhich they have been accustomed to live. Thus it was in our civil war. The rulers in the church and state reaped only what they had sown. Theyhad prohibited free discussion--they had done their best to keep thepeople unacquainted with their duties and their rights. The retributionwas just and natural. If they suffered from popular ignorance, it wasbecause they had themselves taken away the key to knowledge. If theywere assailed with blind fury, it was because they had exacted anequally blind submission. "It is the character of such revolutions that we always see the worst ofthem at first. Till men have been for some time free, they know not howto use their freedom. The natives of wine-countries are always sober. Inclimates where wine is a rarity, intemperance abounds. A newly-liberatedpeople may be compared to a northern army encamped on the Rhine or theXeres. It is said that when soldiers in such a situation first findthemselves able to indulge without restraint in such a rare andexpensive luxury, nothing is to be seen but intoxication. Soon, however, plenty teaches discretion; and after wine has been for a few monthstheir daily fare, they become more temperate than they had ever been intheir own country. In the same manner, the final and permanent fruits ofliberty are wisdom, moderation, and mercy. Its immediate effects areoften atrocious crimes, conflicting errors, skepticism on points themost clear, dogmatism on points the most mysterious. It is just at thiscrisis that its enemies love to exhibit it. They pull down thescaffolding from the half-finished edifice; they point to the flyingdust, the falling bricks, the comfortless rooms, the frightfulirregularity of the whole appearance; and then ask in scorn where thepromised splendour and comfort are to be found? If such miserablesophisms were to prevail, there never would be a good house or a goodgovernment in the world. .. . There is only one cure for the evils whichnewly acquired freedom produces--and that cure is freedom. When aprisoner leaves his cell, he cannot bear the light of day--he is unableto discriminate colours or to recognise faces. But the remedy is not toremand him into his dungeon, but to accustom him to the rays of the sun. The blaze of truth and liberty may at first dazzle and bewilder nationswhich have become half-blind in the house of bondage. But let them gazeon, and they will soon be able to bear it. In a few years men learn toreason. The extreme violence of opinion subsides. Hostile theoriescorrect each other. The scattered elements of truth cease to conflict, and begin to coalesce. And at length a system of justice and order iseduced out of the chaos. "Many politicians of our time are in the habit of laying it down as aself-evident proposition, that no people ought to be free till they arefit to use their freedom. The maxim is worthy of the fool in the oldstory, who resolved not to go into the water till he had learnt to swim. If men are to wait for liberty till they become wise and good inslavery, they may indeed wait for ever. " The speedy dissolution of family and state was prophesied by men whenfirst a girl took a public examination in geometry; whenever women havebeen given complete control of their own property; when they have beenreceived into the professions and industries; and now in like mannerpeople dread the condition of things that they imagine might follow ifwomen are given the right to vote and to hold office. We may wellbelieve, with Lecky, that there are "certain eternal moral landmarkswhich never can be removed. " But no matter what our views may be of thedestinies, characteristics, functions, or limitations of the sex, certain reforms are indispensable before woman and, through her, familylife can reach their highest development. Of these reforms I shall speakbriefly and with them close my history. I. The double standard of morality for the sexes must gradually beabolished. [423] Of all the sad commentaries on Christian nations noneis so pathetic or so tragical as the fact that for nineteen centuriesmen have been tacitly and openly allowed, at least before marriage, unrestrained liberty to indulge in sexual vice and intemperance, whileone false step on the part of the woman has condemned her to socialobloquy and, frequently, to a life on the street. This strange system, ablasphemy against the Christ who suffered death in order to purify theearth, has had its defenders not merely among the uneducated who do notthink, but even among the most acute intellects. The philosopher Humejustifies it by commenting on the vastly greater consequences attendanton vice in women than in men; divines like Jeremy Taylor have encouragedit by urging women meekly to bear the sins of their husbands. Thissubject is one of the great _taboos_ in modern society. Let me exhortthe reader to go to any physician and get from him the statistics ofgonorrhea and syphilis which he has met in his practice; let him learnof the children born blind and of wives rendered invalid for lifebecause their husbands once sowed a crop of wild oats with the sanctionof society; let him read the Report of the Committee of Fifteen in NewYork (G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1902) on _The Social Evil_, the records of theWatch and Ward Society in Boston, or the recent report of the specialjury in New York which investigated the "White Slave Traffic. "[424] The plain facts are not pleasant. A system which has been in vogue fromthe beginning of history cannot be changed in a decade; but the desiredstate of things will be more speedily achieved and immediate good willbe accomplished by three reforms which may be begun at once--have begun, in fact. In the first place, the "age of legal consent" should beuniformly twenty-one. In most States to-day it is fourteen orsixteen. [425] To the ordinary mind it is a self-evident proposition thata girl of those ages, the slippery period of puberty, can but seldomrealise what she is doing when she submits herself to the lust ofscoundrels. But the minds of legislators pass understanding; and when, afew years ago, a woman in the Legislature of Colorado proposed to havethe age of consent raised from sixteen to twenty-one, such a storm ofprotest came from her male colleagues that the measure had to beabandoned. In the second place the public should be made betteracquainted with the facts of prostitution. When people once realisethoroughly what sickness and social ulcers result from the presence inthe city of New York of 100, 000 debauched women (and the estimate isconservative)--when they begin to reflect that their children must growup in such surroundings, then perhaps they will question the expediencyof the double standard of morality and will insist that what is wrongfor a woman is wrong for a man. It is a fact, to be borne carefully inmind, that the vast majority of prostitutes begin their career below theage of _eighteen_ and usually at the instigation of adult _men_, whotake advantage of their ignorance or of their poverty. If the miserableThaw trial did nothing else, it at least once more called publicattention to conditions which every intelligent man knows have existedfor years. Something can also be done by statute. New York has madeadultery a crime; and the State of Washington requires a physicalexamination of the parties before marriage. In the third place, physicians should take more pains to educate men to the knowledge that acontinent life is not a detriment to health--the contrary belief beingmore widely spread than is usually suspected. II. In the training of women, care should be taken to impress upon themthat they are not toys or spoiled children, but fellow-citizens, devotedto the common task of advancing the ideals of the nation to their goal. The woman's cause is man's; they rise or sink Together, dwarf'd or godlike, bond or free: If she be small, slight-natured, miserable, How shall men grow? TENNYSON, _The Princess_. A Being breathing thoughtful breath, A Traveller between life and death; The reason firm, the temperate will, Endurance, foresight, strength, and skill; A perfect Woman, nobly planned, To warn, to comfort, and command; And yet a Spirit still, and bright With something of an angel light. WORDSWORTH. Towards a higher conception of their duties, women are steadilyadvancing. It often happens that the history of words will give a hintof the progress of civilisation. Such a story is told by the use of_lady_ and _woman_. Not many decades ago the use of the word _woman_ inreferring to respectable members of the sex was interpreted as a lack ofcourtesy. To-day, women prefer to be called _women_. III. Women should be given the full right to enter any profession orbusiness which they may desire. As John Stuart Mill says: "The proper sphere for any human being is the highest sphere that beingis capable of attaining; and this cannot be ascertained without completeliberty of choice. " "We are, as always, in a period of transition, " remarks Mr. Björkman, [426] "the old forms are falling away from us on every side. Concerning the new ones we are still uncertain and divided. Whetherwoman shall vote or not, is not the main issue. She will do so sooner orlater if it suits her. No, the imperative question confronting us isthis: What are we to do that her life once more may be full and usefulas it used to be? That question cannot be answered by anybody butherself. Furthermore, it can only be answered on the basis of actualexperience. And urged onward by her never-failing power of intuition, woman has for once taken to experimenting. She has, if you please, become temporarily catabolic. But it means merely that she is seekingfor new means to fulfil her nature, not for ways of violating it. Andthe best thing--nay, the only thing--man can do to help her is to standaside and keep his faith, both in her and in life. Whether it be thefranchise, or the running of railroads, or public offices, that hereager hands and still more eager soul should happen to reach out for, hemust give her free way. All she wants is to find herself, and for thispurpose she must try everything that once was foreign to her being: thetrial over, she will instinctively and unfailingly pick out the rightnew things to do, and will do them. " The opening up of professions and industries to woman has been ofincalculable benefit to her. Of old the unmarried woman could do littleexcept sit by the fire and spin or make clothing for the South SeaIslanders. Her limited activities caused a corresponding influence onher character. People who have nothing to do will naturally find anoutlet for their superfluous energy in gossip and all the petty thingsof life; if isolated from a share in what the world is doing, they willno less naturally develop eccentricities of character and will grow oldprematurely. To-day, by being allowed a part in civic and nationalmovements, women can "get out of themselves"--a powerful therapeuticagent. Mrs. Ella Young, a woman of sixty, was last year madeSuperintendent of the great Public School System of Chicago. FräuleinAnna Heinrichsdorff is the first woman in Germany to get an engineer'sdiploma, very recently bestowed upon her; an "excellent" mark was givenFräulein Heinrichsdorff in every part of her examination by the BerlinPolytechnic Institute. Miss Jean Gordon, the only factory inspector inLouisiana, is at present waging a strong fight against the attempt toexempt "first-class" theatres from the child-labour law. Mrs. NellieUpham, of Colorado, is President and General Manager of the Gold DivideMining, Milling, and Tunnel Company of Colorado and directs 300 workmen. These are a few examples out of some thousands of what woman isdoing. [427] And yet there are men who do not believe she should doanything but wash dishes and scrub. Much more serious is the glaring discrepancy in the wages paid to menand to women. For doing precisely the same work as a man and often doingit better, woman receives a much lower wage. The reasons are severaland specious. We are told that men have families to support, that womendo not have such expensive tastes as men, that they are incapable ofdoing as much as men, that by granting them equal wages one of theinducements to marry is removed. These arguments are generally used withthe greatest gravity by bachelors. If men have families to support, women by the hundreds support brothers and sisters and weak parents. That they are incapable of doing as much sounds unconvincing to one whohas seen the work of sweat-shops. The argument that men have moreexpensive tastes to satisfy is too feeble to deserve attention. Finally, when men argue that women should be forced to marry by giving themsmaller wages, they are simply reverting to the time-honoured idea thatthe goal of every women's ambition should be fixed as matrimony. If thelow wages of women produced no further consequence, one might dismissthe matter as not of essential importance; but inadequate pay has beenfound too frequently to be a direct cause of prostitution. No girl canwell keep body and soul together on four dollars a week and somebusiness managers have been known to inform their women employees withfrankness that a "gentleman friend" is a necessary adjunct to a limitedincome. The women who suffer most from low wages are probably the teachers inour primary schools. They start usually on a salary of about threehundred and fifty dollars a year. For this each teacher performs all theminute labour and bears all the nervous strain of instructing sixtypupils six and a half hours a day and of correcting dozens of papers farinto the night. And when crime increases or the pupils are notuniversally successful in business, the school teacher has the addedpleasure of getting blamed for it, being told that she ought to havetrained them better. These facts lend some colour to Mark Twain's sagereflection that God at first made idiots--that was for practice; thenhe made school boards. One of the most interesting examples of recent evolution in theindustrial status of women is the decision of the Supreme Court ofIllinois in the so-called Ritchie Case. The last Legislature of Illinoispassed a law limiting to ten hours the working day of women in factoriesand stores. Now, as far back as 1893, the Legislature had passed asimilar law limiting woman's labour to _eight_ hours; but the SupremeCourt in 1895 declared it unconstitutional on the ground that it was anarbitrary and unreasonable interference with the right of women tocontract for the sale of their labour. When, therefore, this year aten-hour bill was tried, W. C. Ritchie, who had secured the nullificationof the act of 1893, again protested. The decision of the Court, renderedApril 21, 1910, is an excellent proof of the great advance made withintwo decades in the position of women. Reversing completely its judgmentof 1895, the Court left far behind it mere technicalities of law andfound a sanction for its change of front in the experience of humanityand of common sense. These are its conclusions: "It is known to all men, and of what we know as men we cannot profess tobe ignorant as judges: "That woman's physical structure and the performance of maternalfunctions place her at a great disadvantage in the battle of life. "That while a man can work for more than ten hours a day without injuryto himself, a woman, especially when the burdens of motherhood are uponher, cannot. "That while a man can work standing upon his feet for more than tenhours a day, day after day, without injury to himself, a woman cannot. "That to require a woman to stand upon her feet for more than ten hoursin any one day and to perform severe manual labour while thus standinghas the effect of impairing her health. "And as weakly and sickly women cannot be the mothers of vigorouschildren, it is of the greatest importance to the public that the Statetake such measures as may be necessary to protect its women from theconsequences produced by long-continued manual labour in thoseoccupations which tend to break them down physically. "It would seem obvious, therefore, that legislation which limits thenumber of hours which women shall be permitted to work to ten hours in asingle day in such employments as are carried on in mechanicalestablishments, factories, and laundries would tend to preserve thehealth of women and assure the production of vigorous offspring by themand would conduce directly to the health, morals, and general welfare ofthe public, and that such legislation would fall clearly within thepolice powers of the State. " IV. All phenomena that concern family life should be carefully studiedand their bearing on the state ascertained as exactly as possible. There is no subject, for example, from which such wild conclusions aredrawn as the matter of divorce. The average moralist, but moreparticularly the clergy, seeing the fairly astonishing increase indivorce during the last decade, jump to the conclusion that family lifeis decadent and immorality flagrantly on the increase. They point to theindubitable fact that a century ago divorces were insignificant innumber; and they infer that morality was then on a much higher levelthan it is now. Such alarmists neglect certain elementary facts. Theflippant manner in which marriage is treated by the Restorationdramatists and by novelists of the 18th century, the callous sexualmorality revealed in diaries and in the conversations of men likeJohnson alone are sufficient to suggest the need of a readjustment ofone's view regarding the standard of morality in the past. A century agoit was the duty of a gentleman to drink to excess; and it was presumedthat a guest had not enjoyed his dinner unless he was at leastcomfortably the worse for liquor. This view of drunkenness is admirablydepicted in Dickens's _Pickwick Papers_, where intoxication is treatedthroughout as something merely humorous. There were just as many unhappy marriages formerly in proportion to thepopulation as there are to-day; but the wife was held effectually fromapplication for a divorce not only by rigid laws but by the sentiment ofsociety, which ostracised a divorced woman, and furthermore by her lackof means and of opportunity for earning an independent livelihood. To-day women are not inclined to tolerate a husband who is brutal ordebauched. Alarmists make a mistake when they place too much emphasis onthe seeming triviality of the reasons, justifying their course, whichwives advance when applying for a separation. For example, the phrase"incompatibility of temperament" is in a great number of cases merely aeuphemism for something much worse. The clergy will counsel a woman tobear with what they call Christian resignation a husband addicted todrink or scarred by the diseases that are a consequence of sin. Abstractly considered, this may conceivably be good advice. But viewedin a common-sense way it is the duty of a woman to reflect on theconsequences of conceiving children from such a man; and the researchesof physicians will furnish her with incontrovertible facts regarding theimpaired health of the offspring of such a union. A law which wouldpermit of no divorce under such conditions, instead of benefiting thestate, would injure it in its most vital asset--healthy children, thecoming citizens. Doubtless the divorce laws in many States are too lax. But sweeping generalities based on theory will not remedy matters. Divorce may simply be a symptom, not a disease; a revolt against unjustconditions; and the way to do away with divorce or reduce the frequencyof it is to remedy the evil social conditions which, in a great manyinstances, are responsible. The fact is, the institution of marriage is going through a crisis. Theold view that marriage is a complete merging of the wife in the husbandand that the latter is absolute monarch of his home is being questioned. When a man with this idea and a woman with a far different one marry, there is likely to be a clash. Marriage as a real partnership based onequality of goods and of interests finds an increasing number ofadvocates. There is great reason to believe that the issue will be onlyfor the good and that from doubt and revolt a more enduring ideal willarise, based on a sure foundation of perfect understanding. NOTES: [415] See an excellent article on "The American Woman" by Miss Ida M. Tarbell, in the _American Magazine_ for April, 1910. [416] In 1893. "Be it resolved by the Second Legislature of the State ofWyoming: "That the possession and exercise of suffrage by the women of Wyomingfor the past quarter of a century has wrought no harm and has done greatgood in many ways; that it has largely aided in banishing crime, pauperism, and vice from this State, and that without any violent andoppressive legislation, " etc. [417] Women in Colorado have been of greatest service in establishingthe following laws: 1--Establishing a State Home for dependent children, three of the fivemembers of the board to be women. 2--Requiring that at least three of the six members of the countyvisitors shall be women. 3--Making mothers joint guardians of their children with the fathers. 4--Raising the age of protection for girls to 18 years. 5--Establishing a State Industrial School for girls. There had long beenone for boys, but the women could not get one for girls until they hadthe vote. 6--Removing the emblems from the Australian ballots. This is a little, indirect step toward educational qualifications for voting. 7--Establishing the indeterminate sentence for prisoners. 8--Requiring one physician on the board of the Insane Asylum to be awoman. 9--Establishing truant schools. 10--Making better provision for the care of the feeble-minded. 11--For tree preservation. 12--For the inspection of private eleemosynary institutions by the StateBoard of Charities. 13--Various steps toward prevention of cruelty to animals. 14--Providing that foreign life and accident insurance companies, whensued, must pay the costs. 15--Establishing a juvenile court. 16--Making education compulsory for all children between the ages of 8and 16, except those who are ill or those who are 14 and have completedthe eighth grade, or those whose parents need their help and support. 17--Making the mother and father joint heirs of a deceased child. 18--Providing for union high schools. 19--Establishing a State travelling library commission. 20--Providing that any person employing a child under 14 in any mine, mill, or factory be punished by imprisonment in addition to a fine. 21--Requiring the joint signature of the husband and wife to a mortgageof a homestead. 22--Forbidding the insuring of the lives of children under 10. 23--Forbidding children of 16 or under to work more than six hours a dayin any mill, factory, or other occupation that may be unhealthful. 24--Making it a criminal offence to contribute to the delinquency ofchildren--the parental responsibility act. 25--Making it a misdemeanour to fail to support aged or infirm parents. 26--Providing that no woman shall work more than eight hours a day atwork requiring her to be on her feet. 27--Restricting the time for shooting doves. 28--Abolishing the binding out of girls committed to the IndustrialSchool until the age of 21. 29--A pure food law in harmony with the national law. [418] In the _Boston Herald_ for June 4, 1910. [419] Quoted in the _New York Times_ of Jan. 9, 1910. [420] See, for example, Lyman Abbott in the _Outlook_ for Feb. 19, 1910. [421] _American Magazine_, July, 1909. [422] _History of European Morals_, vol. Ii, pp. 379 and following. NewYork, D. Appleton & Co. , 1869. [423] Note, for example, that in Maryland a man can get a divorce if hiswife has had sexual intercourse before marriage; _but a wife cannot geta divorce from her husband if he has been guilty of the same thing_. InTexas, adultery on the part of the wife entitles the husband to adivorce; but the wife can obtain divorce from her husband only if he has_abandoned_ her and _lived_ in adultery with another woman. [424] On Jan. 12, 1910, a bill was introduced in the House ofRepresentatives to check the "White Slave Traffic" by providing apenalty of ten years' imprisonment and a fine of five thousand dollarsfor any one who engages in it. [425] In some it is even lower; _ten_ in Georgia and Mississippi forexample. [426] In _Collier's Weekly_, Feb. 5, 1910. [427] Note what the officers of the Chicago Juvenile ProtectiveAssociation, many of whom are women, accomplished in 1909-1910. Thesewomen are fighting the agencies which make for juvenile crime mostly andeach officer has a specified "beat" to patrol. Last year their workamounted to the following: Complaints of selling liquors to minors investigated 295Complaints of selling tobacco to minors investigated 52Complaints of selling obscene postcards investigated 49Complaints of poolrooms investigated 203Complaints of dance halls investigated 92Five and ten cent theatres visited 1, 013Penny arcades visited 67Saloons visited 735Relief visits 174Cases referred to relief organisations 374Legal aid cases referred 105Referred to Visiting Nurses' Association 7Housing cases referred 51Applications for work referred 264Placed in hospitals 103Sent to dispensaries 192Children placed in homes 240Slot machines removed 223Work found for men 57Work found for women 81Work found for boys 84Work found for girls 90Visits to ice-cream parlors 356Visits to candy stores 805 VISITS TO COURTS Juvenile 451Municipal 1, 809Criminal 211County 86Grand Jury 26Conferences with state or city officials 1, 244 PROSECUTIONS Cases of abandonment 99Assault and battery 8Contributing to delinquency and dependency of children 232Crimes against children 12Disorderly conduct 141Immoral dancing 4Intoxicating liquors 33Juvenile Court cases 78Larceny 4Tobacco 10Sale of cocaine 4Other cases 110Total prosecutions 738 RESULTSConvictions 311Settled out of court 100Nolle pros, or nonsuit 52Dismissed 93Acquittals 50Pending 92 -----Total complaints received 5, 047 CHAPTER X FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS In the four years intervening since this book was first written, theprogress of equal rights for women has been so rapid that the summary onpages 175-235 is now largely obsolete; but it is useful for comparison. In the United States at present (August, 1914), Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Idaho, Washington, California, Oregon, Kansas, Arizona, and Alaska havegranted full suffrage to women. In the following States the voters willpass upon the question in the autumn of 1914: Montana, Nevada, NorthDakota, South Dakota, Missouri, Nebraska, and Ohio, the last three byinitiative petition. In New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Iowa, New York, andMassachusetts a constitutional amendment for equal suffrage has passedone legislature and must pass another before being submitted to thepeople. The advance has been world-wide. Thus, in 1910 the Gaekwar ofBaroda in India allowed the women of his dominions a vote in municipalelections, and Bosnia bestowed the parliamentary suffrage on women whoowned a certain amount of real estate; Norway in 1913 and Iceland in1914 were won to full suffrage. The following table presents aconvenient historical summary of the progress in political rights: On July 2, 1776, two days before the Declaration of Independence wassigned, New Jersey, in her first State constitution, en-franchised thewomen by changing the words of her provincial charter from "Malefreeholders worth £50" to "_all inhabitants_ worth £50, " and for 31years the women of that State voted. GAINS IN EQUAL SUFFRAGE Eighty years ago women could not vote anywhere, except to a very limitedextent in Sweden and in a few other places in the Old World. TIME PLACE KIND OF SUFFRAGE 1838 Kentucky School suffrage to widows with children of school age. 1850 Ontario School suffrage, women married and single. 1861 Kansas School suffrage. 1867 New South Wales Municipal suffrage. 1869 England Municipal suffrage, single women and widows. Victoria Municipal suffrage, married and single women. Wyoming Full suffrage. 1871 West Australia Municipal suffrage. 1875 Michigan School suffrage. Minnesota Do. 1876 Colorado Do. 1877 New Zealand Do. 1878 New Hampshire Do. Oregon Do. 1879 Massachusetts Do. 1880 New York Do. Vermont Do. South Australia Municipal suffrage. 1881 Scotland Municipal suffrage to the single women and widows. Isle of Man Parliamentary suffrage. 1883 Nebraska School suffrage. 1884 Ontario Municipal suffrage. Tasmania Do. 1886 New Zealand Do. New Brunswick Do. 1887 Kansas Do. Nova Scotia Do. Manitoba Do. North Dakota School suffrage. South Dakota Do. TIME PLACE KIND OF SUFFRAGE 1887 Montana . . . . . . . School suffrage Arizona . . . . . . . Do. New Jersey . . . . . Do. Montana . . . . . . . Tax-paying suffrage. 1888 England . . . . . . . County suffrage. British Columbia. . . Municipal Suffrage. Northwest Territory . Do. 1889 Scotland. . . . . . . County suffrage. Province of Quebec. . Municipal suffrage, single women and widows. 1891 Illinois. . . . . . . School suffrage. 1893 Connecticut . . . . . Do. Colorado. . . . . . . Full suffrage. New Zealand . . . . . Do. 1894 Ohio. . . . . . . . . School suffrage. Iowa. . . . . . . . . Bond suffrage. England . . . . . . . Parish and district suffrage, married and single women. 1895 South Australia . . . Full State suffrage. 1896 Utah. . . . . . . . . Full suffrage. Idaho . . . . . . . . Do. 1898 Ireland . . . . . . . All offices except members of Parliament. Minnesota . . . . . . Library trustees. Delaware. . . . . . . School suffrage to tax-paying women. France. . . . . . . . Women engaged in commerce can vote for judges of the tribunal of commerce. Louisiana . . . . . . Tax-paying suffrage. 1900 Wisconsin . . . . . . School suffrage. West Australia. . . . Full State suffrage. 1901 New York. . . . . . . Tax-paying suffrage; local taxation in all towns and villages of the State. Norway. . . . . . . . Municipal suffrage. 1902 Australia . . . . . . Full suffrage. New South Wales . . . Full State suffrage. 1903 Kansas. . . . . . . . Bond suffrage. Tasmania. . . . . . . Full State suffrage. 1905 Queensland. . . . . . Do. 1906 Finland . . . . . . . Full suffrage; eligible for all offices. 1907 Norway. . . . . . . . Full parliamentary suffrage to the 300, 000 women who already had municipal suffrage. Sweden. . . . . . . . Eligible to municipal offices. Denmark . . . . . . . Can vote for members of boards of public charities and serve on such boards. England . . . . . . . Eligible as mayors, aldermen, and county and town councilors. Oklahoma. . . . . . . New State continued school suffrage for women. 1908 Michigan. . . . . . . Taxpayers to vote on question of local taxation and granting of franchises. Denmark . . . . . . . Women who are taxpayers or wives of taxpayers vote for all offices except members of Parliament. Victoria. . . . . . . Full State suffrage. 1909 Belgium . . . . . . . Can vote for members of the conseils des prudhommes, and also eligible. Province of Voralberg Single women and widows paying taxes (Austrian Tyrol) were given a vote. Ginter Park, VA . . . Tax-paying women, a vote on all municipal questions. 1910 Washington. . . . . . Full suffrage. New Mexico. . . . . . School suffrage. TIME PLACE KIND OF SUFFRAGE 1910 Norway. . . . . . . . Municipal suffrage made universal. Three-fifths of the women had it before. Bosnia. . . . . . . . Parliamentary vote to women owning a certain amount of real estate. Diet of the Crown . . Suffrage to the women of its capital city Prince of Krain Laibach. (Austria) India (Gaekwar of . . Women in his dominions vote in municipal Baroda) elections. Wurttemberg . . . . . Women engaged in agriculture vote for Kingdom of members of the chamber of agriculture; also eligible. New York. . . . . . . Women in all towns, villages and third-class cities vote on bonding propositions. 1911 California. . . . . . Full suffrage. Honduras. . . . . . . Municipal suffrage in capital city, Belize. Iceland . . . . . . . Parliamentary suffrage for women over 25 years. 1912 Oregon. . . . . . . . Full suffrage. Arizona . . . . . . . Do. Kansas. . . . . . . . Do. 1913 Alaska. . . . . . . . Do. Norway. . . . . . . . Do. Illinois. . . . . . . Suffrage for statutory officials (including presidential electors and municipal officers). 1914 Iceland . . . . . . . Full suffrage. In the United States the struggle for the franchise has entered nationalpolitics, a sure sign of its widening scope. The demand for equalsuffrage was embodied in the platform of the Progressive Party inAugust, 1912. This marks an advance over Col. Roosevelt's earlier view, expressed in the _Outlook_ of February 3, 1912, when he said: "I believein woman's suffrage wherever the women want it. Where they do not wantit, the suffrage should not be forced upon them. " When the newadministration assumed office in March, 1913, the friends of suffrageworked to secure a constitutional amendment which should make votes forwomen universal in the United States. The inauguration ceremonies weremarred by an attack of hoodlums on the suffrage contingent of theparade. Mr. Hobson in the House denounced the outrage and mentioned thecase of a young lady, the daughter of one of his friends, who wasinsulted by a ruffian who climbed upon the float where she was. Mr. Mann, the Republican minority leader, remarked in reply that herdaughter ought to have been at home. Commenting on this dialogue, _Collier's Weekly_ of April 5, 1913, recalled the boast inscribed byRameses III of Egypt on his monuments, twelve hundred years beforeChrist: "To unprotected women there is freedom to wander through thewhole country wheresoever they list without apprehending danger. " If oneworks this out chronologically, said the editor, Mr. Mann belongssomewhere back in the Stone Age. In the Senate an active committee onwoman suffrage was formed under the chairmanship of Mr. Thomas, ofColorado. The vote on the proposed new amendment was taken in the Senateon March 19, 1914, and it was rejected, [428] 35 to 34, two-thirds beingnecessary before the measure could be submitted to the States forratification. In the House Mr. Underwood, Democratic minority leader, took the stand that suffrage was purely a State issue. Mr. Heflin ofAlabama was particularly vigorous in denunciation of votes for women. Hesaid[429]: "I do not believe that there is a red-blooded man in the world who inhis heart really believes in woman suffrage. I think that every man whofavours it ought to be made to wear a dress. Talk about taxation withoutrepresentation! Do you say that the young man who is of age does notrepresent his mother? Do you say that the young man who pledges at thealtar to love, cherish, and protect his wife, does not represent her andhis children when he votes? When the Christ of God came into this worldto die for the sins of humanity, did he not die for all, males andfemales? What sort of foolish stuff are you trying to inject into thistariff debate?. .. There are trusts and monopolies of every kind, andthese little feminine fellows are crawling around here talking aboutwoman suffrage. I have seen them here in this Capitol. The suffragetteand a little henpecked fellow crawling along beside her; that is herhusband. She is a suffragette, and he is a mortal suffering yet. " Mr. Falconer of Washington rose in reply. He remarked:[430] "I want to observe that the mental operation of the average woman in theState of Washington, as compared to the ossified brain operation of thegentleman from Alabama, would make him look like a mangy kitten in atiger fight. The average woman in the State of Washington knows moreabout social economics and political economy in one minute than thegentleman from Alabama has demonstrated to the members of this Housethat he knows in five minutes. " On February 2, 1914, a delegation of women called upon President Wilsonto ascertain his views. The President refused to commit himself. He wasnot at liberty, he said, to urge upon Congress policies which had notthe endorsement of his party's platform; and as the representative ofhis party he was under obligations not to promulgate or intimate hisindividual convictions. On February 3, 1914, the Democrats of the Housein caucus, pursuant to a resolution of Mr. Heflin, refused to create awoman suffrage committee. So the constitutional amendment was quitelost. In the following July Mr. Bryan suddenly issued a strong appealfor equal suffrage in the _Commoner_. Among his arguments were these: "As man and woman are co-tenants of the earth and must work out theirdestiny together, the presumption is on the side of equality oftreatment in all that pertains to their joint life and itsopportunities. The burden of proof is on those who claim for one anadvantage over the other in determining the conditions under which bothshall live. This claim has not been established in the matter ofsuffrage. On the contrary, the objections raised to woman suffrageappear to me to be invalid, while the arguments advanced in support ofthe proposition are, in my judgment, convincing. " "Without minimising other arguments advanced in support of the extendingof suffrage to woman, I place the emphasis upon the mother's right to avoice in molding the environment which shall surround her children--anenvironment which operates powerfully in determining whether heroffspring will crown her latter years with joy or 'bring down her grayhairs in sorrow to the grave. ' "For a time I was imprest by the suggestion that the question should beleft to the women to decide--a majority to determine whether thefranchise should be extended to woman; but I find myself less and lessdisposed to indorse this test. .. . Why should any mother be denied theuse of the franchise to safeguard the welfare of her child merelybecause another mother may not view her duty in the same light?" The change in the status of women has been significant not only in thepolitical field, but also in every other direction. A brief survey ofthe legislation of various States in the past year, 1913, reveals themanifold measures already adopted for the further protection of womenand indicates the trend of laws in the near future. Acts were passed inArkansas, Kansas, Missouri, New Mexico, and Ohio to punish the seductionof girls and women for commercialised vice, the laws being known as"White Slave Acts"; laws for the abatement of disorderly houses werepassed in California, Minnesota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Washington;Oregon decreed that male applicants for a marriage license must producea physician's certificate showing freedom from certain diseases; and itauthorised the sterilisation of habitual criminals and degenerates. Thenecessity of inculcating chastity in the newer generation, whetherthrough the teaching of sex hygiene in the schools or in some otherform, was widely discussed throughout the country. Mothers' pensionswere granted by fourteen States; minimum wage boards were established bythree; and three passed laws for the punishment of family desertion, insuch wise that the family of the offender should receive a certain dailysum from the State while he worked off his sentence. Tennessee removedthe disability of married women arising from coverture. Ten Statesfurther limited the hours of labour for women in certain industries, thetendency being to fix the limit at fifty-four or fifty-eight hours aweek with a maximum of nine or ten in any one day. The hours of labourof children and the age at which they are allowed to work were largelyrestricted. A National Children's Bureau, under the charge of Miss JuliaLathrope, has been created at Washington; and Mrs. J. Borden Harrimanwas appointed to the Industrial Relations Commission. The minuteness andthoroughness of modern legislation for the protection of women may berealised by noting that in 1913 alone New York passed laws that no girlunder sixteen shall in any city of the first, second, or third classsell newspapers or magazines or shine shoes in any street or publicplace; that separate wash rooms and dressing rooms must be provided infactories where more than ten women are employed; that whenever anemployer requires a physical examination, the employee, if a female, candemand a physician of her own sex; that the manufacture or repair for afactory of any article of food, dolls' clothing, and children's apparelin a tenement house be prohibited except by special permit of the LaborCommission; that the State Industrial Board be authorised to makespecial rules and regulations for dangerous employments; and that theemployment of women in canning establishments be strictly limitedaccording to prescribed hours. The unmistakable trend of legislation in the United States is towardscomplete equality of the sexes in all moral, social, industrial, professional, and political activities. In England the House of Commons rejected parliamentary suffrage forwomen. Incensed at the repeated chicanery of politicians whoalternately made and evaded their promises, a group of suffragettesknown as the "militants" resorted to open violence. When arrested fordamaging property, they went on a "hunger strike, " refusing allnourishment. This greatly embarrassed the government, which in 1913devised the so-called "Cat and Mouse Act, " whereby those who are indesperate straits through their refusal to eat are released temporarilyand conditionally, but can be rearrested summarily for failure to complywith the terms of their parole. The weakness in the attitude of themilitant suffragettes is their senseless destruction of all kinds ofproperty and the constant danger to which they subject innocent peopleby their outrages. If they would confine themselves to making lifeunpleasant for those who have so often broken their pledges, they couldstand on surer ground. The English are commonly regarded as an orderlypeople, especially by themselves. Nevertheless, it is true that hardlyany great reform has been achieved in England without violence. The menof England did not secure the abolition of the "rotten-borough" systemand extensive manhood suffrage until, in 1831, they smashed the windowsof the Duke of Wellington's house, burned the castle of the Duke ofNewcastle, and destroyed the Bishop's palace at Bristol. In 1839 atNewport twenty chartists were shot in an attempt to seize the town; theywere attempting to secure reforms like the abolition of propertyqualifications for members of Parliament. The English obtained thepermanent tenure of their "immemorial rights" only by beheading one kingand banishing another. In our own country, the Boston Tea Party was atypical "militant outrage, " generally regarded as a fine piece ofpatriotism. If the tradition of England is such that violence must be apreliminary to all final persuasion, perhaps censure of the militantscan find some mitigation in that fact. Some things move very slowly inEngland. In 1909 a commission was appointed to consider reform indivorce. Under the English law a husband can secure a divorce forinfidelity, but a woman must, in addition to adultery, prove aggravatedcruelty. This is humorously called "British fair play. " In November, 1912, the majority of the commission recommended that this inequality beremoved and that the sexes be placed on an equal footing; and that inaddition to infidelity, now the only cause for divorce allowed, completeseparation be also granted for desertion for three years, incurableinsanity, and incurable habitual drunkenness. The majority, ninecommissioners, found that the present stringent restrictions andcostliness of divorce are productive of immorality and illicitrelations, particularly among the poorer classes. The majority reportwas opposed by the three minority members, the Archbishop of York, SirWilliam Anson, and Sir Lewis Dibdin, representing the EstablishedChurch of England and the Roman Catholic Church. Thus far, Parliamenthas not yet acted and the old law is still in force. On the Continent, with the exception of a few places like Finland, themovement for equal suffrage, while earnestly pressed by a few, is notyet concentrated. Women have won their rights to higher education andare admitted to the universities. They can usually enter business andmost of the professions. Inequities of civil rights are gradually beingswept away. For example, in Germany a married woman has complete controlof her property, but only if she specifically provided for it in themarriage contract; many German women are ignorant that they possess sucha right. The Germans may be divided into two classes: the caste whichrules, largely Prussian, militaristic, and bureaucratic; and that which, although desirous of more republican institutions and potentiallycapable of liberal views, is constrained to obey the first or rulingclass. This upper class is not friendly to the modern women's-rightsmovement. Perhaps it has read too much Schopenhauer. This amiablephilosopher, whose own mother could not endure living with him, has thisto say of women[431]: "A woman who is perfectly truthful and does not dissemble, is perhaps animpossibility. In a court of justice women are more often found guiltyof perjury than men. .. . Women are directly adapted to act as the nursesand educators of our early childhood, for the simple reason that theythemselves are childish, foolish, and shortsighted. .. . Women are andremain, taken altogether, the most thorough and incurable Philistines;and because of the extremely absurd arrangement which allows them toshare the position and title of their husbands they are a constantstimulus to his ignoble ambitions. .. . Where are there any realmonogamists? We all live, at any rate for a time, and the majority of usalways, in polygamy. .. . It is men who make the money, and not women;therefore women are neither justified in having unconditional possessionof it nor capable of administering it. .. . That woman is by natureintended to obey, is shown by the fact that every woman who is placed inthe unnatural position of absolute independence at once attaches herselfto some kind of man, by whom she is controlled and governed; that isbecause she requires a master. If she is young, the man is a lover; ifshe is old, a priest. " Essentially the opinion of Schopenhauer is that of the Prussian rulingclass to-day. It is indisputable that in Germany, as elsewhere on theContinent, chastity in men outside of marriage is not expected, nor isthe wife allowed to inquire into her husband's past. The bureaucraticGerman expects his wife to attend to his domestic comforts; he does notconsult her in politics. The natural result when the masculine elementhas not counterchecks is bullying and coarseness. To find thecoarseness, the reader can consult the stories in papers like the_Berliner Tageblatt_ and much of the current drama; to observe thebullying, he will have to see it for himself, if he doubts it. This isnot an indictment of the whole German people; it is an indictment of themilitaristic-bureaucratic ruling class, which, persuaded of its divineinspiration and intolerant of criticism, [432] has plunged the countryinto a devastating war. It is not unlikely that the end of the conflictwill mark also the overthrow of the Hohenzollern dynasty. The spirit ofthe Germans of 1848, who labored unsuccessfully to make their country arepublic, may awake again and realise its dreams. In concluding thischapter, I wish to enlarge somewhat upon the philosophy of suffrage asexhibited in the preceding chapter. The "woman's sphere" argument isstill being worked overtime by anti-suffrage societies, whose membersrather inconsistently leave their "sphere, " the home, to harangue inpublic and buttonhole legislators to vote against the franchise forwomen. "A woman's place, " says the sage Hennessy, "is in th' home, darning her husband's childher. I mean----" "I know what ye mean, " saysMr. Dooley. "'Tis a favrite argument iv mine whin I can't think ivannything to say. " A century ago, the home was the woman's sphere. To-day the man has deliberately dragged her out of it to work for him infactory and store because he can secure her labor more cheaply than thatof men and is, besides, safer in abusing her when she has no directvoice in legislation. Are the manufacturers willing to send their1, 300, 000 female employees back to their "sphere"? If they are not, butdesire their labor, they ought in fairness to allow them the privilegesof workmen--that is, of citizens, participating actively in thepolitical, social, and economic development of the country. As women enter more largely into every profession and business, certainresults will inevitably follow. We shall see first of all what pursuitsare particularly adapted to them and which ones are not. It has alreadybecome apparent that as telephone and typewriter operators women, as aclass, are better fitted than men. They have, in general, greaterpatience for details and quickness of perception in these fields. Similarly, in architecture some have already achieved conspicuoussuccess. One who has observed the insufficient closet space in modernapartments and kitchenettes with the icebox in front of the stove, isinclined to wish that male architects would consult their mothers orwives more freely. In law and medicine results are not yet clear. Weshall presently possess more extensive data in all fields for surerconclusions. A second result may be, that many women, instead of leaving the home, will be forced back into it. This movement will be accelerated if thegranting of equal pay for equal work and a universal application of theminimum wage take place. There are a great number of positions, especially those where personality is not a vital factor, whereemployers will prefer women when they can pay them less; but if theymust give equal pay, they will choose men. Hence the tendency of themovements mentioned is to throw certain classes of women back into thehome. The home of the future, however, will have lost much of thedrudgery and monotony once associated with it. The ingeniouslabor-saving devices, like the breadmixer, the fireless cooker, thevacuum cleaner, and the electric iron, the propagation of scientificknowledge in the rearing of children, and wider outlets for outsideinterests, will tend to make domestic life an exact science, aprofession as important and attractive as any other. The home is not necessarily every woman's sphere and neither ismotherhood. Neither is it every woman's congenital duty to make herselfattractive to men. The "woman's pages" of newspapers, filled withgratuitous advice on these subjects, never tell men that their duty isfatherhood or that they should make themselves attractive or that theirsphere is also the home. Until these one-sided points of view areadjusted to a more reasonable basis, we shall not reach anunderstanding. They are as unjust as the farmer who ploughs with a steamplow and lets his wife cart water from a distant well instead ofproviding convenient plumbing. Women who are fitted for motherhood and have a talent for it can enterit with advantage. There is a talent for motherhood exactly as there isfor other things. Other women have genius which can be of greatestservice to the community in other ways. They should have opportunity tofind their sphere. If this is "Feminism, " it is also simple justice. Onereason that we are at sea in some of the problems of the women's-rightsmovement, is that the history of women has been mainly written by men. The question of motherhood, the sexual life of women, and the positionof women as it has been or is likely to be affected by their sexualcharacteristics, must be more exactly ascertained before definiteconclusions can be reached. At present there is too much that we don'tknow. We need more scientific investigations of the type of Mr. HavelockEllis's admirable _Studies in the Psychology of Sex_[433] and less ofpseudo-scientific lucubrations like Otto Weininger's _Sex andCharacter_. When human society has rid itself of the bogies andnightmares, superstitions and prejudices, which have borne upon it withcrushing force, it will be in a better position to construct an idealsystem of government. Meanwhile experiments are and must be made. Womansuffrage is not necessarily a reform; it is a necessary step inevolution. One venerable bogey I wish to dispose of before I close. It is that theRoman Empire was ruined and collapsed because the increasing libertygiven to women and the equality granted the sexes under the Empireproduced immorality that destroyed the State. The trouble with Rome wasthat it failed to grasp the fundamentals of economic law. Slavery, theconcentration of land in a few hands, and the theory that all taxationhas for its end the enriching of a select few, were the fallacies which, in the last analysis, caused the collapse of the Roman Empire. Theluxury, immorality, and race-suicide which are popularly conceived tohave been the immediate causes of Rome's decline and fall, were inreality the logical results, the inevitable attendant phenomena of apolitical system based on a false hypothesis. For when wealth wasconcentrated in a few hands, when there was no all-embracing populareducation, all incentives to thrift, to private initiative, and hence tothe development of the sturdy moral qualities which thrift andinitiative cause and are the product of, were stifled. A nation canreach its maximum power only when, through the harmonious cooperationof all its parts, the initiative and talents of every individual havefree scope, untrammeled by special privilege, to reach that sphere forwhich nature has designed him or her. NOTE: The official organ of the National American Woman SuffrageAssociation is _The Woman's Journal_, published weekly. The headquartersare at 505 Fifth Avenue, New York City. England has two organisations which differ in methods. The NationalUnion of Women's Suffrage Societies has adopted the constitutional orpeaceful policy; it publishes _The Common Cause_, a weekly, at 2 RobertStreet, Adelphi, W. C. , London. The "militant" branch of suffragettesforms the National Women's Social and Political Union, and its weeklypaper is _Votes for Women_, Lincoln's Inn House, Kingsway, W. C. The International Woman Suffrage Alliance issues the _Jus Suffragii_monthly at 62 Kruiskade, Rotterdam. A good source from which to obtain the present status of women in Europeis the _Englishwoman's Year Book and Directory for 1914_, published byAdam and Charles Black. NOTES: [428] Twenty-six senators did not vote. The question of negro suffragecomplicated the matter with Southern senators. Mr. Williams ofMississippi wished to limit the franchise to "white citizens"; but hisamendment was voted down. The list of senators voting for and againstthe woman suffrage amendment appears on page 5472 of the CongressionalRecord, March 19, 1914. The debate is contained in pages 5454-5472. Senator Tillman of South Carolina inserted a vicious attack on northernwomen by the late Albert Bledsoe, who advised them to "cut their hairshort, and their petticoats, too, and enter a la bloomer the ring ofpolitical prizefighters. " Bledsoe's article will be found in the Record, July 28, 1913, 3115-3119. [429] Record, May 6, 1913, 1221-1222. [430] Record, May 6, 1913, 1222. [431] Essays of Schopenhauer. Translated by Mrs. Rudolf Dircks Pages64-79. [432] Any criticism of the Kaiser leads to arrest. The most vigorouschecks to Bourbon rule come from the Socialists, who in 1912 polled4, 250, 300 votes. But as the Kaiser, as King of Prussia, controls amajority of votes in the Bundesrath, or Federal Council, can dissolvethe Reichstag, or House of Representatives, at any time with the consentof the Bundesrath, has sole power to appoint the chancellor, and is lordsupreme of the army and navy, anything like real popular government isfar off. [433] Philadelphia, 1906. The F. A. Davis Company. INDEX A Adultery, under Roman Law, laws modified by Justinian, among Germanic peoples, see also under various States. Age of Consent, under English Law, in the United States, see also under various States. Alabama, Apostles, teachings about women, Arizona, Arkansas, Attainder, bills of, in Roman Empire, laws of Arcadius, Honorius, and Constantine, of Pope Innocent III. B Breach of Promise, under Roman Law, modification by Constantine, by Justinian, Business, woman in, under Roman Empire, in England, in the United States see also under each State C California, Chastisement, right of husband to chastise wife under English Law, Christ, teachings about women, Colorado, Connecticut, Consent of women to marriage, under Roman Law, opinions of Church Fathers, enactments of Christian Emperors, Crimes against women, under Roman Law, among Germanic peoples, under English Law, Curtesy, defined, under English Law, see also under various States. Custom, power of, D Delaware, Discrepancy in wages paid to women, District of Columbia, Divorce, under Roman Law; modified by Theodosius and Valentinian; by Justinian; by Justin; among Germanic peoples; under Canon Law; under English Law; general considerations; see also under various States. Double standard of moralityDower, defined; right of, in English Law; see also under different States. Dowry, under Roman Law; among ancient Gauls; among Germanic peoples E Education, rights of women to an, under Roman Empire; in England; in the United States F Fathers of the Church, their commands concerning womenFlorida G GeorgiaGifts between husband and wife, under Roman Law; changes by JustinianGuardian, decay of power of, under Roman LawGuardians, women as, under Roman Law; laws modified by Justinian; see also under various States. Guardianship under Roman Law; among Germanic peoples, H Husband and wife, under Roman Law; among Germanic peoples; under Canon Law; under English Law; see also under various States I IdahoIllinois; Ritchie case, Indian TerritoryIndianaInheritance rights of women, under Roman Law; modified by Justinian; among Germanic peoples; under English LawIntellectual inferiority of women, argument discussedIowa J Jewish ideas about women K KansasKentucky L Lecky, analysis of character of womenLouisiana M Macaulay on the effects of freedomMaineMarriage, women in, under Roman Law; opinions of Church Fathers; among ancient Gauls and Germans; among Germanic peoples; under Canon Law; under English Law; modern changes in views of; see also under various States. MarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesotaMississippiMissouriMontanaMoral argument against suffrage N NebraskaNevadaNew HampshireNew JerseyNew MexicoNew YorkNorth CarolinaNorth Dakota O OhioOklahomaOld Maid, treatment of, by ChristiansOregon P Partiality of Roman Law to womenPennsylvaniaPhysiological argument against suffragePolitical or social argument against suffragePower of father, under Roman Law; under early Christians; among Germanic peoples; under English LawProfessions, women in, in England; in United States, and see under various States; need of opening all, to womenProperty rights of married women, under Roman Law; among Germanic peoples; under English Law; of widows and single women, under Roman Law; among Germanic peoples; under EnglishLaw, in the United States, Protection of property of children under Roman Law, R Respect for women, among Romans, among ancient Germans, Rhode Island, Ritchie case in Illinois, Roman Catholic Church, attitude to women, S Second marriages, opinions of Church Fathers concerning, Legislation of Christian Emperors, Slaves, women, under Roman Law, among Germanic peoples, under Canon Law, South Carolina, South Dakota, Suffrage, woman, in England, in the United States, see also under various States. Suits, women engaging in, under Roman Law, T Tennessee, Texas, Theological argument against women's rights, Training of women for higher ideals, U Utah, V Vermont, Vestal Virgins, Virginia, W Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Women: see under _Divorce, Dowry, Marriage, Husband and Wife_, etc. Wyoming, INDEX TO SUPPLEMENTARY CHAPTER A Advance of equal suffrage, chronological tables, Amendment, constitutional, for suffrage; rejected by Senate; and by House B Bryan, favours suffrage C Cat and Mouse Act D Divorce, proposals for reform defeated in England E Europe, general status of women's rights in F Falconer, Congressman, reply to HeflinFeminism G Germany, position of women in H Heflin, Congressman, speech on suffrage J Journals, official, of various women's organisations L Legislation, most recent examples of, for protection of women M Mann, Congressman, remarks on suffrage paradeMilitant suffragettes R Roman Empire, assumption that its fall was due to liberty allowed womenRoosevelt, opinion on suffrage S Schopenhauer, remarks on nature of womenSphere, woman's sphere argument T Tendencies and results of women's rights movement W Wilson, President, position on suffrage