OCR Text |
Show EDITORIAL: Exploding Feminie Wrath ! i Indignant women of Utah have turned their ire upon the State legislature, and if signs mean anything, that honorable body is in for a bad time. The j fuse was lighted when word i reached the ears of Salt Lake women that a bill curbing pro- perty ownership rights of mar- i ried women was in the hands of the sifting committee up on Capitol Hill. Today that bill has left the ! sifting committee, been given a ! number and introduced into the Senate. In its entirety Senate Bill 200 is not meeting stiff feminine re- ; sistance, but Section 40-2-11 of 1 the controversial bill which pro vides that personal property and ' other things of value acquired by S a husband and wife shall be com- i munity property, and that the husband shall have complete management and control thereof, ' stands fair to blow the honorable I senate seats right out of the Cap- I itol. ! There is nothing ambiguous I about the wording of Section 40- 2-11, the intent is clear even if the reasons for its introduction are not. ; Here is what righteously in- i cignant Utah women are oppos- i iiig: I 'On and after the effective date of this act all property, including in-cluding moneys, credits, book ac-; ac-; counts, and other things of value, i n-axeafter acquired during mar- ; dage as a result of the industry, ! labor, or management of either husband or wife, or both together, togeth-er, and while they are residents of or domiciled in the State of Utah and not living separate and apart under a separation agree-i agree-i ment in writing or decree of court, shall be community property pro-perty and each spouse shall have a vested one-half interest therein; there-in; provided, however, . . . The husband shall have the management manage-ment and control of such community com-munity property with absolute i power of disposition, other than testamentary disposition of the wife's interest, as he has of his I separate estate; provided, how- i ever that he cannot make a gift i of such community property or ; d'srcose of the same without a i ..U'.able consideration, or sell, I convey, or encumber the furni- j tvre, furnishings, household ar ticles, or fittings of the home, or : the clothing or wearing apparel ! of the wife or minor children without the written consent of j the wife." In substance, the wife is given complete management of household house-hold furnishings, and the clothing cloth-ing that she and all minor children chil-dren might wear, under the terms of Section 40-2-11. J Since 1898, when Utah reached reach-ed the end of its turbulent his-'tory, his-'tory, and joined the union of I I states, women have enjoyed i 1 equal rights with men. The state I was one of the first to recognize 1 voting, individual, and property rights for women certain grants to which loyal Utahns have a ways pointed with pride. Presumably it will not be necessary nec-essary for fair thinking, justice , loving men to fight Section 40-2-11 of Senate Bill 200. In view j of the inherent wrath of women who are prone to venting their anger upon those who might question their hard earned rights, Utah males might find it advisable advis-able to stand quietly by until1 the thing blows over or is blown i up. . . Evidence of the flaming anger 1 ignited by the bill is found in the utterances of certain prominent Utah women. Judge Reva Back Bosone.has this to say: "This bill would set women right back to the time of an old English property pro-perty law a man and wife were one and he was the one. Ifs me- Idieval and ridiculous. If a woman wo-man can earn a living, the money mon-ey should be hers. Married women wo-men in Utah always have enjoyed en-joyed the same legal- rights as single ones. We still want those rights. We're not ready to sell out for a pot of gold, so called. What might be saved in taxes by this community bill is negligible compared with what we should lose." And says Mrs. Edmund P. Evans, chairman of the judiciary committee of the Women's State Legislative council of Utah: "This bill is the most .vicious legislature. Women are righteously right-eously angered." Thus it goes. Utah's legislature may have considered bills of a blacker character, but surely it has never considered one more unfair. Unfair Un-fair to both the men and women of the state. Certainly every day life is filled with enough complexities com-plexities without three of our state Senators adding more by declaring open warfare between the sexes. And though we admire ad-mire the lawmakers' courage, we cannot but brand it fool hardy. (The editor was not clubbed into writing this.) |