Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 5.djvu/291

 REVIEIVS 277

and that one was the husband, has been superseded by far-reaching statutory enactments, which place the wife, as far as property capacity is concerned, substantially on a par with the husband. It is true that the wife still holds a position subordinate to her husband in her rela- tion to the children of the marriage. Mrs. McCulloch describes the miseries resulting to Mrs. Lex and her children from the exercise by Mr. Lex of his legal rights as the head of the family. The picture is a harrowing one, and the author is careful to show the legal justifica- tion of every abuse of marital and parental authority on the part of Mr. Lex by references to statutes and decisions of Illinois. Conced- ing the statements of law to be correct in every point, it would not follow that the author has made out her case. Marriage is a commu- nity relation in which there can be no majority rule. In case of disa- greement between father and mother as to the exercise of parental rights, the law must either support the authority of one or undertake to decide for itself. Our law, like that of all other countries, recog- nizes the superior authority of the father, interfering only in cases of gross abuse. It is difficult to see how it could assume any other posi- tion. The only other alternative would be to accord the supreme authority to the mother, and we have not come to that point yet. The old common law was unjust, in that it ignored the rights of the mother entirely ; but equity modified the harshness of this rule from an early date, and it is now the tendency of the courts to dtny any absolute right of parental control, and to check the abuse of parental power, where the welfare of the child requires it. Naturally, however, such power of interference will not be exercised except in extreme cases. This principle operates in favor of the mother as well as in favor of the child. It will not and cannot remove the possibility of hardship and injustice within certain limits. Mrs. McCulloch has shown the possible abuse of the power of the father under the law ; she might have equally shown the possibility of greater abuses of the power of both parents over their children ; but would she therefore argue that the parental power should be altogether abolished ? The two cases seem to be entirely parallel. It is, however, not to be denied that the law is capable of improvement in minor particulars, and the author has done well to call attention to some anomalies and unjustifi- able relics of the past, as, e. g., the barbarous theory of the action for seduction. The book is well written, and will undoubtedly find many readers who do not otherwise care for legal literature.

Ernst Freund.