l rights of women are, at all times, as zealously
guarded as they would be if women had votes to give to those who
watch over their interests.

Suffer me, sir, in defense of my skepticism on this point, to lay
before you and this Convention, an item from my legislative
recollection.

It will be thirteen years next winter, since I reported from a
seat just over the way, a change in the then existing law of
descent. At that time the widow of an intestate dying without
children, was entitled, under ordinary circumstances, to dower in
her husband's real estate, and one-third of his personal
property. The change proposed was to give her one-third of the
real estate of her husband absolutely, and two-thirds of his
personal property--far too little, indeed; but yet as great an
innovation as we thought we could carry. This law remained in
force until 1841. How stands it now? The widow of an intestate,
in case there be no children, and in case there be father, or
mother, or brother, or sister of the husband, is heir to no part
whatever of her deceased husband's real estate; she is entitled
to dower only, of one-third of his estate. I ask you whether your
hearts do not revolt at the idea, that when the husband is
carried to his long home, his widow shall see snatched from her,
by an inhuman law, the very property her watchful care had mainly
contributed to increase and keep together?

Yet this idea, revolting as it is, is carried out in all its
unmitigated rigor, by the statute to which I have just referred.
Out of a yearly rental of a hundred and fifty dollars, the widow
of an intestate rarely becomes entitled to more than fifty. The
other hundred dollars goes--whither? To the husband's father or
mother? Yes, if they survive! But if they are dead, what then? A
brother-in-law or a sister-in-law takes it, or the husband's
uncle, or his aunt, or his cousin! Do husbands toil through a
life-time to support their aunts, and uncles, and cousins? If but
a single cousin's child, a babe of six months, survive, to that
infant goes a hundred dollars of the rental, and to the widow
fifty. Can injustice go beyond this? What think you of a law like
that, on the statute book of a civilized and a Christian land?
When the husband's sustaining arm is laid in the