and happiness lie at the foundation of all other virtues and enjoyments, home is the sacred spot that should be the most carefully guarded and protected by all the provisions it is possible for legislation to throw around it, and how has it been?
The whole history of jurisprudence does not furnish another such a paradox as the assumption that a usurpation of her rights is the highest blessing and the greatest protection that can be accorded to woman by the supreme majesty of the law. Peruse the decisions of eminent lawgivers, and note the universal approbation with which she has been consigned to the most abject despotism under the plea of protection.
A learned judge in New York once said, "That we often see acts of tyranny and cruelty exercised by the husband towards the person of the wife, of which the law takes no cognizance, and yet, no man of wisdom and reflection can doubt the propriety of the rule which gives to the husband the control and custody of the wife." "It is the price which female wants and weakness must pay for their supply and protection." Magnanimous man!
The whole force of public opinion on this subject is founded on a series of contradictions, absurdities and falsehoods, so palpable, that when driven to the strong hold of defence, it cannot show the least vestige of a principle to justify it, and resorts to that most effeminate of all devices, flattery.
It begins by quoting Scripture from Genesis to St. Paul to show that woman through her sinfulness and weakness is the vassal of man, and needs his benefi-
