sary," he said, "that for the welfare of France, women shall take the place of men and perform duties which have hitherto been considered outside their sphere." The Union Fraternelle des Femmes at once began pressing Parliament for the removal from the statute books of the requirement for "maritale autorisation." And not long ago the Chamber of Deputies passed the bill granting to married women for the period of the war, permission to demand from the courts the right to do without this legal formality. Italy in 1917 completely swept away this same ancient restriction. The bill introduced by the Italian Minister of Justice, Signer Sacchi, abrogated not only maritale autorisation, but "every other law which in the field of civil and commercial rights curtails the capacities of Italian women." Speaking for the measure in Parliament, Signer Sacchi declared it an "act of justice—of reparation almost, to which women have now more right than ever."
But these civil disabilities have not been limited to Latin countries. You may find them anywhere as a hang-over from past ages. It is simply the natural corollary to that old doctrine of coverture that the acts of the dependent person should lack authority before the law. Even in the State of Washington, a wife may not sue alone in a court of law to recover personal damages: her husband must join with her in the suit. Everywhere in the professions and in business, woman's progress has been blocked because the courts, looking into the law books, found the status of this person in question.
