Mr. Justice David J. Brewer, writing for a
unanimous Court:
{1} It is the law of Oregon that
women, whether married or single, have equal contractual and
personal rights with men. . . . The wife can deal not only
with her separate property, acquired from whatever source, in
the same manner as her husband can with property belonging to
him, but that she may make contracts and incur liabilities,
and the same may be enforced against her, the same as if she
were a femme sole. There is now no residuum of civil
disability resting upon her which is not recognized as
existing against the husband. . . . It thus
appears that, putting to one side the elective franchise, in
the matter of personal and contractual rights, they stand on
the same plane as the other sex. . . .
{2} [Nevertheless,]
that woman's physical structure and the performance of
maternal functions place her at a disadvantage in the struggle
for subsistence is obvious. This is especially true when the
burdens of motherhood are upon her. Even when they are not, by
abundant testimony of the medical fraternity, continuance for
a long time on her feet at work, repeating this from day to
day, tends to injurious effects upon the body, and, as healthy
mothers are essential to vigorous offspring, the physical
wellbeing of woman becomes an object of public interest and
care in order to preserve the strength and vigor of the race.
{3} Still again, history discloses the
fact that woman has always been dependent upon man. He
established his control at the outset by superior physical
strength, and this control in various forms, with diminishing
intensity, has continued to the present. As minors, though not
to the same extent, she has been looked upon in the courts as
needing especial care that her rights may be preserved.
Education was long denied her, and while now the doors of the
schoolroom are opened and her opportunities for acquiring
knowledge are great, yet, even with that and the consequent
increase of capacity for business affairs, it is still true
that, in the struggle for subsistence, she is not an equal
competitor with her brother. Though limitations upon personal
and contractual rights may be removed by legislation, there is
that in her disposition and habits of life which will operate
against a full assertion of those rights. She will still be
where some legislation to protect her seems necessary to secure
a real equality of right. Doubtless there are individual
exceptions, and there are many respects in which she has an
advantage over him; but, looking at it from the viewpoint of the
effort to maintain an independent position in life, she is not
upon an equality. Differentiated by these matters from the other
sex, she is properly placed in a class by herself, and
legislation designed for her protection may be sustained even
when like legislation is not necessary for men, and could not be
sustained. It is impossible to close one's eyes to the fact that
she still looks to her brother, and depends upon him. Even
though all restrictions on political, personal, and contractual
rights were taken away, and she stood, so far as statutes are
concerned, upon an absolutely equal plane with him, it would
still be true that she is so constituted that she will rest upon
and look to him for protection; that her physical structure and
a proper discharge of her maternal functions -- having in view
not merely her own health, but the wellbeing of the race --
justify legislation to protect her from the greed, as well as
the passion, of man. The limitations which this statute places
upon her contractual powers, upon her right to agree with her
employer as to the time she shall labor, are not imposed solely
for her benefit, but also largely for the benefit of all. Many
words cannot make this plainer. The two sexes differ in
structure of body, in the functions to be performed by each, in
the amount of physical strength, in the capacity for
long-continued labor, particularly when done standing, the
influence of vigorous health upon the future wellbeing of the
race, the self-reliance which enables one to assert full rights,
and in the capacity to maintain the struggle for subsistence.
This difference justifies a difference in legislation, and
upholds that which is designed to compensate for some of the
burdens which rest upon her.
