Chapter Chronology

Quiz for Seeking the American Promise: ’A Purse of Her Own: Petitioning for the Right to Own Property’

Select the best answer for each question. Click the “submit” button for each question to turn in your work.

Question

1. Under the laws of coverture, a married woman in antebellum America did not have the right to control

A.
B.
C.
D.
Correct. The answer is c. In the early Republic, coverture laws dictated that married men had full control over their wives. Married women were denied control over their families’ finances, including not just income their husbands earned, but also their own inheritance, any gifts they received, and any income they earned while married. Coverture laws severely limited married women’s economic rights.
Incorrect. The answer is c. In the early Republic, coverture laws dictated that married men had full control over their wives. Married women were denied control over their families’ finances, including not just income their husbands earned, but also their own inheritance, any gifts they received, and any income they earned while married. Coverture laws severely limited married women’s economic rights.

Question

2. What motivated many traditionalists to change their minds about women and property in the late 1830s, and push state legislatures to change the laws to give married women rights over the property they brought into their marriages?

A.
B.
C.
D.
Correct. The answer is d. The financial panics in 1837 and 1839 caused many American families to file for bankruptcy. Men who had accrued heavy debts found themselves besieged by creditors demanding repayment, which threatened to leave families in desperate poverty. By changing the state laws to protect wives’ inherited property from their husbands’ control, men could shield their families from complete financial ruin because creditors could no longer take their wives’ inheritance. This story illustrates how improvements to women’s legal standing sometimes occurred because of motives unrelated to increasing female equality.
Incorrect. The answer is d. The financial panics in 1837 and 1839 caused many American families to file for bankruptcy. Men who had accrued heavy debts found themselves besieged by creditors demanding repayment, which threatened to leave families in desperate poverty. By changing the state laws to protect wives’ inherited property from their husbands’ control, men could shield their families from complete financial ruin because creditors could no longer take their wives’ inheritance. This story illustrates how improvements to women’s legal standing sometimes occurred because of motives unrelated to increasing female equality.

Question

3. Why did Ernestine Rose argue that the 1848 New York state law, which gave married women control over the property they brought into their marriages, was insufficient?

A.
B.
C.
D.
Correct. The answer is b. Rose applauded the 1848 New York law giving married women rights over their inherited property, but as she argued at every women’s rights convention until 1860, the law was insufficient because it did not provide women with any control over the wages they earned while they were married. Without control over their wages, married women could never be truly economically independent, as Rose wanted them to be.
Incorrect. The answer is b. Rose applauded the 1848 New York law giving married women rights over their inherited property, but as she argued at every women’s rights convention until 1860, the law was insufficient because it did not provide women with any control over the wages they earned while they were married. Without control over their wages, married women could never be truly economically independent, as Rose wanted them to be.

Question

4. Why were Ernestine Rose and Susan B. Anthony particularly worried about poor wives?

A.
B.
C.
D.
Correct. The answer is c. Rose and Anthony worried that without economic independence—without, as Anthony put it, “a purse of her own”—a poor wife would be vulnerable to becoming trapped in a marriage with a man who could not financially support his wife and children. Wealthier women would at least be provided for, even if they were still legally required to depend on their husbands financially, but the same assurance was not possible for poor wives.
Incorrect. The answer is c. Rose and Anthony worried that without economic independence—without, as Anthony put it, “a purse of her own”—a poor wife would be vulnerable to becoming trapped in a marriage with a man who could not financially support his wife and children. Wealthier women would at least be provided for, even if they were still legally required to depend on their husbands financially, but the same assurance was not possible for poor wives.

Question

5. What might Ernestine Rose have argued is the connection between women’s economic rights and women’s equality?

A.
B.
C.
D.
Correct. The answer is a. Ernestine Rose fought for women’s economic rights—such as the right of married women to control their inherited property and their income—because she believed that economic independence was crucial to women’s equality. As her compatriot Susan B. Anthony said, “women’s utter dependence on man” was a “great evil,” and in order to be equal and free, every woman “must have a purse of her own.”
Incorrect. The answer is a. Ernestine Rose fought for women’s economic rights—such as the right of married women to control their inherited property and their income—because she believed that economic independence was crucial to women’s equality. As her compatriot Susan B. Anthony said, “women’s utter dependence on man” was a “great evil,” and in order to be equal and free, every woman “must have a purse of her own.”