es--to her person--to her children; but, in marriage, she is
robbed by law of all and every natural and civil right. Kent
further says: 'The disability of the wife to contract, so as to
bind herself, arises not from want of discretion, but because she
has entered into an indissoluble connection by which she is placed
under the power and protection of her husband.' She is possessed of
certain rights until she is married; then all are suspended, to
revive, again, the moment the breath goes out of the husband's
body. (See 'Cowen's Treatise,' vol. 2, p. 709.)

"If the contract be equal, whence come the terms 'marital power,'
'marital rights,' 'obedience and restraint,' 'dominion and
control,' 'power and protection,' etc., etc.? Many cases are
stated, showing the exercise of a most questionable power over the
wife, sustained by the courts. (See 'Bishop on Divorce,' p. 489.)

"The laws on divorce are quite as unequal as those on marriage;
yea, far more so. The advantages seem to be all on one side and the
penalties on the other. In case of divorce, if the husband be not
the guilty party, the wife goes out of the partnership penniless.
(Kent, vol. 2, p. 33; 'Bishop on Divorce,' p. 492.)

"In New York, and some other States, the wife of the guilty husband
can now sue for a divorce in her own name, and the costs come out
of the husband's estate; but, in the majority of the States, she is
still compelled to sue in the name of another, as she has no means
for paying costs, even though she may have brought her thousands
into the partnership. 'The allowance to the innocent wife of _ad
interim_ alimony and money to sustain the suit, is not regarded as
a strict right in her, but of sound discretion in the court.'
('Bishop on Divorce,' p. 581.)

"'Many jurists,' says Kent, 'are of opinion that the adultery of
the husband ought not to be noticed or made subject to the same
animadversions as that of the wife, because it is not evidence of
such entire depravity nor equally injurious in its effects upon the
morals, good order, and happiness of the domestic life.
Montesquieu, Pothier, and Dr. Taylor all insist that the cases of
husband and wife ought to be distinguished, and that the violation
of the marriage vow, on the part of the wife, is the most
mischievou