Originally women were taken by force, or regularly sold by 388. For their father to the husband. Until a late period in European position history the father had the power to dispose of his daughter English in marriage at his own will and pleasure, without any regard to hers. The Church, indeed, was so far faithful to a better morality as to require a formal "yes" from the woman at the marriage ceremony; but there was nothing to show that the consent was other than compulsory, and it was practically impossible for the girl to refuse compliance if the father persevered, except, perhaps, when she might obtain the protection of religion by a determined resolution to take monastic vows.

"lord" d

After marriage the man had anciently (but this was anterior The hus to Christianity) the power of life and death over his wife. called th She could invoke no law against him; he was her sole tribunal his wife and law. For a long time he could repudiate her, but she had no corresponding power in regard to him. By the old laws of England the husband was called the lord of the wife; he was literally regarded as her sovereign, inasmuch as the murder of a man by his wife was called treason (petty as distinguished from high treason), and was more cruelly avenged than was usually the case with high treason, for the penalty was burning to death.

to her

Because these various enormities have fallen into disuse Woman bond ser (for most of them were never formally abolished, or not until they had long ceased to be practiced), men suppose that husband all is now as it should be in regard to the marriage contract; and we are continually told that civilization and Christianity have restored to the woman her just rights. Meanwhile the wife is the actual bond servant of her husband; no less so, as far as legal obligation goes, than slaves commonly so called. She vows a lifelong obedience to him at the altar, and is held to it all through her life by law. Casuists may say that the obligation of obedience stops short of participation in crime, but it certainly extends to everything else.

She can do no act whatever but by his permission, at least The hus tacit. She can acquire no property but for him; the instant secures

it becomes hers even if by inheritance it becomes ipse facto

his wife's

Husband and

wife are ee person" in law

The power

476

Readings in Modern European History

of England is worse than that of slaves in the laws of ma
countries; by the Roman law, for example, a slave mig
have his peculium, which, to a certain extent, the law gua
anteed to him for his exclusive use. The higher classes
this country have given an analogous advantage to the
women, through special contracts setting aside the law, b
conditions of pin money, etc.; since, parental feeling bein
stronger with fathers than the class feeling of their own sex,
father generally prefers his own daughter to a son-in-law wh
is a stranger to him. By means of settlements the rich usuall
contrive to withdraw the whole or part of the inherited prop
erty of the wife from the absolute control of the husband
but they do not succeed in keeping it under her own control
the utmost they can do only prevents the husband from
squandering it, at the same time debarring the rightful owne
from its use. The property itself is out of the reach of both
. . . In the immense majority of cases there is no settlement,
and the absorption of all rights, all property, as well as all
freedom of action, is complete.

ee

The two are called one person in law," for the purpose one of inferring that whatever is hers is his, but the parallel inference is never drawn, that whatever is his is hers; the maxim is not applied against the man, except to make him responsible to third parties for her acts, as a master is for the acts of his slaves or of his cattle. I am far from pretending that wives are, in general, no better treated than slaves; but no slave is a slave to the same lengths, and in so full a sense of the word, as a wife is. Hardly any slave, except one immediately attached to the master's person, is a slave at all hours and all minutes; in general he has, like a soldier, his fixed task, and when it is done, or when he is off duty, he disposes, within certain limits, of his own time, and has a family life into which the master rarely intrudes.

the children

of

While she is held in this worst description of slavery as to husband over her own person, what is her position in regard to the children in whom she and her master have a joint interest? They are by law his children. He alone has any legal rights over them. Not one act can she do towards or in relation to them excent

by delegation from him. Even after he is dead she is not their
legal guardian, unless he by will has made her so. He could
even send them away from her, and deprive her of the means
of seeing or corresponding with them, until this power was in
some degree restricted by Serjeant Talfourd's Act.

almost

impossib

This is her legal state, and from this state she has no Separati
means of withdrawing herself. If she leaves her husband, she
can take nothing with her, neither her children nor anything
which is rightfully her own. If he chooses, he can compel
her to return, by law or by physical force; or he may content
himself with seizing for his own use anything which she may
earn, or which may be given to her by her relations. It is
only legal separation by a decree of a court of justice, which
entitles her to live apart, without being forced back into the
custody of an exasperated jailer, or which empowers her to
apply any earnings to her own use without fear that a man
whom perhaps she has not seen for twenty years will pounce
upon her some day and carry all off. This legal separation,
until lately, the courts of justice would only give at an expense
which made it inaccessible to any one out of the higher ranks.
Even now it is only given in cases of desertion or of the
extreme of cruelty; and yet complaints are made every day
that it is granted too easily.

Surely if a woman is denied any lot in life but that of
being the personal body servant of a despot, and is dependent
for everything upon the chance of finding one who may be
disposed to make a favorite of her instead of merely a drudge,
it is a very cruel aggravation of her fate that she should be
allowed to try this chance only once. The natural sequel and
corollary from this state of things would be, that since her all
in life depends upon obtaining a good master, she should be
allowed to change again and again until she finds one. .
Its refusal completes the assimilation of the wife to the slave,

...

and the slave under not the mildest form of slavery; for in some slave codes the slave could, under certain circumstances of ill usuage, legally compel the master to sell him.

had been the result of

If the authority of men over women, when first established,

The position different modes of constituting the government of society of woman not if, after trying various other modes of social organization, considerations the government of women over men, equality between th two, and such mixed and divided modes of government a might be invented, it had been decided, on the testimon

determined by

of reason

389. Extracts from More's

Utopia

of experience, that the mode in which women are wholl under the rule of men, having no share at all in public con cerns, and each in private being under the legal obligation o obedience to the man with whom she has associated he destiny, was the arrangement most conducive to the happi ness and well-being of both, its general adoption might ther be fairly thought to be some evidence that, at the time when it was adopted, it was the best; though even then the considerations which recommended it may, like so many other primeval social facts of the greatest importance, have subsequently, in the course of ages, ceased to exist.

Section 109. The War against Poverty

During the past three or four hundred years men of sympathetic and humane spirit, impressed by the poverty and misery of a great portion of their fellow-creatures, have imagined ideal societies where poverty and degradation could not exist. Among these ideal commonwealths, that of Sir Thomas More is one of the most celebrated. In his little work, bearing the name Utopia (derived from a Greek word meaning "Nowhere"), printed in 1516, he describes a land where plenty and happiness abounded and where the chief sources of the misery of Europe did not exist. The following extract is from the chapter on the industries and manner of life of the Utopians.

The chief and almost the only business of the magistrates is to care that no man may live idle, but that every one may follow his trade diligently; vet they do not wear themselves out

with perpetual toil from morning to night, as if they were beasts A six-hou
of burden, which, although it is a heavy slavery, is none the less working-d
in Utopia
everywhere the common course of life for mechanics except
in Utopia. But the Utopians, dividing the day and night into
twenty-four hours, appoint six of these for work, three of which
are before dinner and three after. They then sup, and at eight
o'clock counting from noon, go to bed and sleep eight hours.
The rest of the time besides that taken up in work, eating, and
sleeping is left to every man's discretion; yet they are not to
abuse that interval in luxury and idleness, but must employ it
in some proper exercise according to their various inclinations,
which is, for the most part, reading. It is quite common to
have public lectures every morning before daybreak, at which
none are obliged to appear except those who are marked out
for literature, and yet a great many, both men and women of
all ranks, go to hear lectures of one sort or another, according
to their inclinations.

But if others that are not made for contemplation choose Diversion
rather to employ themselves at that time in their trades, as
in Utopia
many of them do, they are not hindered, but rather commended
as men that take care to serve their country. After supper they
spend an hour in some diversion, in summer in their gardens,
in winter in the halls where they eat, where they entertain one
another with music or discourse. They do not so much as
know dice or any such foolish and mischievous games. They
have, however, two sorts of games not unlike our chess.

under the

But the time appointed for labor is to be narrowly examined, The num otherwise you may imagine that since there are only six hours of idle pe appointed for work, the people may fall under a scarcity of the system th necessary provisions. But it is so far from being true that this existing time is not sufficient for supplying every one with plenty of all England things either necessary or convenient that it is rather too much; and this you will easily apprehend if you consider how great a part of all other nations is quite idle. First, women generally do little, who are half mankind; and if some few women are diligent, their husbands are idle. Then consider the great com

pany of idle priests and of these that are called religious men 1