Mr. MORRILL. Yes; such as may be inflicted by a broomstick or the like. Now, we have legislated against that principle of the common law as a barbarity, and a married woman has a right to be exempt in my country from such flagellations, from that authority of the lord of creation. We have established a right, a civil right, and she is independent of him. I know it is in contravention of the principle of the common law. Following in that line somewhat we have just such provisions as these in our State and in most of the States of NewEngland, and I believe in NewYork, which contravene some of the principles of the common law; that is, we have come to the conclusion in our region of the country that there is no reason in the world why the property of a woman should not be secured to her and her heirs against the profligacy or arbitrary control of her husband; That is just what the 1st section of I. this bill that a woman who has property in her own right shall hold it in her own right and may convey it in her own right. If the hus band has her confidence, and is a worthy man, and the property is secured, she may give him authority to convey it, to deal with it, occupy it, possess it, manage it. That is provided for in the 2nd section of this bill. That is what the 1st 2 sections of this bill mean, and nothing more. The 3rd section provides that in case she holds her property separate, as provided in the 1st section of the bill, she may defend it; she may bring a suit at law in her own name or jointly with her husband. The 4th section provides that hereafter when any man shall marry his property shall be exempt from any and all liability for debts or contracts of his wife made or contracted before marriage. Thus you see that while we protect the rights of the wife, we do not really opPress the husband. The husband has his rights. He is not to be chargeable with the debts of his wife contracted before mar riage. The principle of the common law sad dles him, I believe, with all the debts of the wife. If he married her, he married her obligations, her liabilities, her debts, and all her incumbrances. This bill, therefore, is just to him. While it is just to the wife, it is just to the husband. That is all there is in the 4th section. The next section is the one to which I understand the honorable Senator most to object, that the husband cannot inherit her property. Is that really a grievance? Why; sir, it is secured to her s her heirs.