A Quote by Harriet Hanson Robinson

The common law of this state held man and wife to be one person, but that person was the husband. — © Harriet Hanson Robinson
The common law of this state held man and wife to be one person, but that person was the husband.
the Law has made the man and wife one person, and that one person the husband!
When facing a child, I become a child. When facing an elderly person, or a husband, or a wife, in my heart, I too am an elderly person, husband, or a wife. While I am talking with a person, in my heart, nothing exists except that person.
The legal theory is, that marriage makes the husband and wife one person, and that person is the husband.
As to adultery, let it be held disgraceful, in general, for any man or woman to be found in any way unfaithful when they are married, and called husband and wife. If during the time of bearing children anything of the sort occur, let the guilty person be punished with a loss of privileges in proportion to the offense.
By marriage the husband and wife are one person in law, that is, the very being or legal existence of the woman is suspended during marriage.
When two people marry they become in the eyes of the law one person, and that one person is the husband.
It's a very confusing experience living as a woman in Japan. If your husband is white-collar, the wife is blue. Even if you marry a person of status, the wife inevitably remains a rung below.
Just as a husband cannot be indulgent of adultery in his wife, so also God cannot and will not endure infidelity in us. What would we think of a man or woman who does not experience jealous feelings when another person approaches his or her spouse and threatens to win his or her affection? We would regard such a person as deficient in moral character and lacking in true love.
The prince exults whomever he selects as his consort, but the queen, rather than elevating the subject of her choice, humiliates him as a man. By all that is right, a man is not intended to be the husband of his wife, but a woman is to be her husband's wife.
A person with a robust personality appears capable of doing anything. This is what the common man lacks. This is the dividing factor, the difference between the hero and the common man.
By the English common law, her husband was her lord and master. He had the custody of her person, and of her minor children. He could 'punish her with astick no bigger than his thumb,' and she could not complain against him.
All of the services commonly thought to require the State-from the coining of money to police protection to the development of law in defense of the rights of person and property-can be and have been supplied far more efficiently and certainly more morally by private persons. The State is in no sense required by the nature of man; quite the contrary.
A man cannot speak to his son, but as a father; to his wife, but as a husband; to his enemy, but upon terms: whereas a friend may speak, as the case requires, and not as it sorteth with the person.
I love my kids, I'm a proud father, a happy husband, and all of that. I live my life with my wife as a normal person, and that's that.
Consider: what could be more American than the principle that every person is to be held accountable for his or her crimes only? Could anything be more un-American than the Second Commandment's warning that "I Yahweh, thy God, am a jealous god, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation."? Not even the Common Law would have hung a man because his grandfather had stolen a horse!
I think everybody has the ability to fall in love with a man or with a woman or a white person or a black person or a Jewish person or a Protestant person or whatever.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!