The Question of Female Citizenship

The interview of Female Citizenship Catherine Tupper In the early 1800s a young valet by the name of James Martin was denied by the lower court when he claimed that his deceased arrives property in the United States was confiscated from his family. afterwards being denied for an appeal in the lower court, James appealed his decision to the dogmatic Judicial Court. The problem at conflict in this case was whether or not James mother, Anna, was defined as a feme-covert or as a citizen of The United States. This court case was called Martin v. Massachusetts.According to the Source, in eighteenth-century Anglo-America a unify women, by law, was known as a feme-covert. A woman considered a feme-covert was completely covered by her husband and had no recognized well-grounded identity. She had no objurgate to buy, sell or own property singly of her husband. In the case of Martin v. Massachusetts, the plaintiff James Martin presented the f bend that his late mother left the United S tates because his father did. In other words, Anna had no natural selection due to the feme-covert law which states that the man speaks and acts for the wife.The argument made by the ter-tenants was that Anna had the right to stay and claim citizenship due to the fact that all of the land possess by her husband was indeed hers because it was passed down by her father. In the end, the despotic Judicial Court of Massachusetts ruled that Anna Martin was bound by her uniting vows and had to follow her husband to England. The court reversed the confiscation and the land was returned to the Martin family. collectable to the fact that the confiscation of Anna Martins property was reversed, the justices stated that women could not act independently of her husband in political or economic matters.