[ 17 ]
I put the Caſe that the Woman, brought the whole Fortune, becauſe many Men make no Scruple to marry a Woman they don't Love, for the Sake of her Money; it may therefore be ſupoſed, that Women of Fortune, are more liable to Injuries of that Kind than any other Part of the Sex.
I ſhall now proceed to conſider the Unreaſonableneſs of thoſe Laws, which diveſt a Woman of all Property in her Children.
As the Law of God gives the Huſband the ſupream Command in his Family, 'tis juſt that he ſhould have the Diſpoſal of the Children ſo long as he is in being. But at his Death that Power ſeems to devolve upon the Wife. She is then the only natural Governor and Guardian of her Children.
I believe there are no Creatures (except of the human Species) where the Male and Female are neceſſarily concerned in bringing up their joint Offſpring; one Parent being ſufficient to provide for, and protect them. Nature has not therefore impreſt the ſame Inſtinct on both Sexes, but left the Offſpring to the Care of one of them: And amongſt thoſe Creatures where neither Parent is neceſſary, there is no Acknowledgment of the Offſpring on either ſide.
But in the human Species paternal and maternal Care and Affection are found in
