The Ashburton Guardian. Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. TUESDAY, APRIL 5, 1887. WOMEN'S RIGHTS.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1525, 5 April 1887, Page 2

The Ashburton Guardian. Magna est Veritas et Prævalebit. TUESDAY, APRIL 5, 1887. WOMEN'S RIGHTS.

imprisoned one month awaiting trial. , He felt that he should be wanting m humanity if he were to order her to be i imprisoned for one single hour beyond ( that time, and the sentence that he m- ' tended to pass was that she be impri- I soned for one half hour. No wonder that the occupants of the Court, despite the efforts of the officials to prevent the , outburst, loudly cheered the judicial an- , nouncement." In a case, such as the above, we say distinctly that the remedy of divorce ought to be m the woman's power ; and there are many cases of a like sort. We, therefore, sincerely hope that the attempt which was made two years ago to provide a means of redress m such cases will this year be reaewed, and with success.

While there will be wide differences ol opinion as to the desirableness of passing into law the Bill which is to be introduced at next session by Sir Julius Vogei to confer a universal womanhood franchise, there will we should think be an almost universal acceptance of the extension of thfi franchise to women who are property- owneis m their own right, and perhaps also to all those who entirely provide for their own maintenance. There will be some difficulty, no doubt, m defining such a limitation as the latter; and to give every nursegirl,housemaid and kitchenmaid a vote would bring about at election limes an invasion of the menage by a new class of " followers," m the shape of canvassers and electioneering agents, to the serious hindrance of the domestic machinery. Women who pay taxes have clearly as much right to have a say m the election of those who impose and spend those taxe& as have taxpayers of the other sex, and logically if a man is to have a vote on residential and manhood qualifications, on the ground that as a consumer of dutiable articles he also is a taxpayer, so also should the woman who earns her own livelihood, on precisely the same ground. But we do not think that a man's wife and grown up daughters should have a vote while residing m the same home, unless it can be shown that they are property-owners or providing for their own separate maintenance. But if the privileges of electors are to be accorded to women to the extent we have indicated, *>„ to those possessing property qualification, and those who are earning their own livelihood, then together with such an extension of the franchise canvassing at election times must be absolutely interdicted. Fancy every house being invaled by all sorts of people under the plea of canvassing the female inmates for their votes. The thing would be simply intolerable. But our immediate object m referring to the Women's Rights question is not to dilate upon Sir J. Vogel's Bill, but express the hope that while attention is turned m that direction, Mr Tole, Mr Samuel, and others, will take advantage of the opportunity to bring forward another question, m which the rights of womanhood are very distinctly and closely involved. We refer to the necessity for amendments m " The Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Act," which would allow of the dissolution of the marriage tie m cases of gross criminally and deliberate desertion. A recent celebrated case has shown that it is possible for a man, or woman either,to be sentenced to imprisonment for life for the foulest of crimes, and for the wife or husband, as the case may, be to be prevented from breaking the yoke. This surely should not be the case. Nor would we give the power of release from the marriage vows m cases of lite sentence only; thete are other cases which will readily occur to the reader m which justice demands that ih remedy of divorce should be available. One such is thus referred to m the following clipping which appeared m the Christchurch " Press " of Monday : — " The Judges m England occasionally set aside the law and take a common-sense view of things. Thus Mr Justice Hawkins the other day dis regarded the law of divorce, and practically held that bigamy is no crime when a woman commits it m selfdefence. The prisoner had married an habitual criminal when she was seventeen, and was deserted by him after her fust baby was born. He had never made any provision for her ; and m the interval?, when he was not m prison, he used to come back to her whenever she got a situation and compel her to keep him. She thereupon married her second husband, who undertook to protect her from the first, who was always threatening her. Husband No. i therefore . gave her into custody for bigamy. When all this was proved, Mr Justice Hawkins became very excited, and declared that he regretted exceedingly that the worn* o had feeco