A68107:2456
Of domesticall duties eight treatises. I. An exposition of that part of Scripture out of which domesticall duties are raised. ... VIII. Duties of masters. By William Gouge.
London: printed by John Haviland for William Bladen, 1622London: printed by Iohn Haviland for William Bladen, 1622
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Answ. This example being grounded upon a law (as we showed *before) it doth not only declare what may be done, but also what ought to be done. And if a wife be bound to have her husbands consent for doing of a thing, by consequence it followeth that she is bound from doing it, without her husbands consent.
Answ. This example being grounded vpon a law (as we shewed *before) it doth not only declare what may be done, but also what ought to be done. And if a wife be bound to haue her husbands consent for doing of a thing, by consequence it followeth that she is bound from doing it, without her husbands consent.
2. Answ. They that except against this reason taken from example, use themselves the like reason in other points, as the examples of Abigail, Joanna, and Susanna for the contrary.
2. Answ. They that except against this reason taken from example, vse themselues the like reason in other points, as the examples of Abigail, Ioanna, and Susanna for the contrarie.
2. Object. In the Shunemites example there was more then a merciful relief of the Prophet, namely bringing him into the house to diet and to lodge, wherein the husband must have a chief stroke.
2. Obiect. In the Shunemites example there was more then a mercifull releefe of the Prophet, namely bringing him into the house to diet and to lodge, wherein the husband must haue a chiefe stroake.
Answ. The word of God maketh not that difference betwixt relieving and entertaining: it extendeth a wives subjection to every thing: wherefore the husband hath a chief stroke as well in the one, as in the other.
Answ. The word of God maketh not that difference betwixt releeuing and entertaining: it extendeth a wiues subiection to euery thing: wherefore the husband hath a chiefe stroake as well in the one, as in the other.
A third reason is taken from the law of a wives vow: whereby 1in general is implied, that a wife might not make a vow ⟨p. 295⟩without her husbands consent: whence it followeth as an argument taken from the greater to the less, that she may not dispose the goods without his consent. Yea, bthe Law further expressly saith, that though she hath vowed, yet her husband hath power to disannul her vow. Note here, how the Lord will rather depart from his own right (as I may so speak) then have that order which he hath appointed betwixt man and woman broken. The Lords right, was to have what was vowed to him performed: the order which he appointed, was to have the wife subject to her husband: rather then the wife should do that which the husband would not have done, the Lord remitted a wives vow in case her husband would not consent to have it performed. Now then I demand, is the disposing of goods a greater matter then the performing of a vow? or hath a wife in these days more liberty then in former? if she have, by what law? was there ever under the Law a straiter charge laid upon wives then this, Let wives be subject to their husbands in every thing.
A third reason is taken from the law of a wiues vow: whereby 1in generall is implied, that a wife might not make a vow ⟨p. 295⟩without her husbands consent: whence it followeth as an argument taken from the greater to the lesse, that she may not dispose the goods without his consent. Yea, bthe Law further expresly saith, that though she hath vowed, yet her husband hath power to disanull her vow. Note here, how the Lord will rather depart from his owne right (as I may so speake) then haue that order which he hath appointed betwixt man and woman broken. The Lords right, was to haue what was vowed to him performed: the order which he appointed, was to haue the wife subiect to her husband: rather then the wife should doe that which the husband would not haue done, the Lord remitted a wiues vow in case her husband would not consent to haue it performed. Now then I demand, is the disposing of goods a greater matter then the performing of a vow? or hath a wife in these dayes more libertie then in former? if she haue, by what law? was there euer vnder the Law a straiter charge laid vpon wiues then this, Let wiues be subiect to their husbands in euerie thing.
Answ. The Scripture by particular Laws and examples teacheth directions for other cases like to them: and arguments drawn by just and necessary consequence, are counted as sound as express testimonies. Whereas it is said, that this particular in question is not expressly decided, I take the reason thereof to be this, that in former times they so well marked the extent of the general law of a wives subjection, as they made no question of doing this or other like things without their husbands consent. Neither did good wives take that liberty, neither had they any patrons of such liberty.
Answ. The Scripture by particular Lawes and examples teacheth directions for other cases like to them: and arguments drawne by iust and necessarie consequence, are counted as sound as expresse testimonies. Whereas it is said, that this particular in question is not expresly decided, I take the reason thereof to be this, that in former times they so well marked the extent of the generall law of a wiues subiection, as they made no question of doing this or other like things without their husbands consent. Neither did good wiues take that libertie, neither had they any patrons of such libertie.
2. Object. The case of a wives disposing goods is unlike to that of vows, because vows are voluntary, but disposing goods, as a work of mercy, is necessary.
2. Obiect. The case of a wiues disposing goods is vnlike to that of vowes, because vowes are voluntarie, but disposing goods, as a worke of mercie, is necessarie.
Answ. Though it were a voluntary thing to make, or not to make a vow: yet a vow being made, it was not in the power of the party that made it, not to perform it: it was a cnecessary duty to perform a vow, even expressly commanded. As ⟨p. 296⟩for the pretended work of mercy, I will 2hereafter show, that a wife is not necessarily tied thereunto.
Answ. Though it were a voluntarie thing to make, or not to make a vow: yet a vow being made, it was not in the power of the partie that made it, not to performe it: it was a cnecessarie dutie to performe a vow, euen expresly commanded. As ⟨p. 296⟩for the pretended worke of mercie, I will 2hereafter shew, that a wife is not necessarily tied thereunto.
A fourth is taken from the laws of men whereunto we are subject, and which we must obey even for conscience sake, so far as they thwart not Gods Law, which in this case they do not, as the reasons before gathered out of Gods word do show.
A fourth is taken from the lawes of men whereunto we are subiect, and which we must obey euen for conscience sake, so farre as they thwart not Gods Law, which in this case they doe not, as the reasons before gathered out of Gods word doe shew.
Now our Law saith, that aevery gift, grant, or disposition of goods, lands, or other thing whatsoever made by a woman 2covert, and all and every obligation and feoffment made by her, and recovery suffered, if they be done without her husbands consent, are void. Yea, bif she do wrong to another, she hath not any thing to make satisfaction during coverture: either her husband must do it, or by imprisonment of her person must it be done. And cthough she have inheritance of her own, yet can she not grant any annuity out of it during her coverture, without her husband: if any deed be made to that purpose without his consent, or in her name alone, it is void in law. Yea, dif there be debate between the husband and his wife, whereby certain lands of the husbands be assigned to the wife with his consent, if out of such lands she grant an annuity to a stranger, the grant is void. And eif he covenant to give her yearly such and such apparel, she cannot dispose it as she list without his consent, but only use and wear it her self. fNeither can she lease her own land for years, for life, &c. if she do, it is void, and the Lessee entering by force thereof, is a Disseisor to the husband, and Trespassor. And gif she sell any thing, the sale is void, except she be a merchant, where by the custom she is enabled to merchandise. Finally, hshe cannot make executors without the consent of her husband, nor a devise, or will. iIf she make a will, and thereby devise her own inheritance, and her husband die, and she after die without any new publication of it, it is of no force, because it was void at first. These and many other like cases which might be alleged evidently show that by law a wife hath not
Now our Law saith, that aeuerie gift, grant, or disposition of goods, lands, or other thing whatsoeuer made by a woman 2couert, and all and euerie obligation and feoffment made by her, and recouerie suffered, if they be done without her husbands consent, are void. Yea, bif she doe wrong to another, she hath not any thing to make satisfaction during couerture: either her husband must doe it, or by imprisonment of her person must it be done. And cthough she haue inheritance of her owne, yet can she not grant any annuitie out of it during her couerture, without her husband: if any deed be made to that purpose without his consent, or in her name alone, it is void in law. Yea, dif there be debate betweene the husband and his wife, whereby certaine lands of the husbands be assigned to the wife with his consent, if out of such lands she grant an annuitie to a stranger, the grant is void. And eif he couenant to giue her yeerely such and such apparell, she cannot dispose it as she list without his consent, but only vse and weare it her selfe. fNeither can she lease her owne land for yeeres, for life, &c. if she doe, it is void, and the Lessee entring by force thereof, is a Disseisor to the husband, and Trespassor. And gif she sell any thing, the sale is void, except she be a merchant, where by the custome she is enabled to merchandize. Finally, hshe cannot make executors without the consent of her husband, nor a deuise, or will. iIf she make a will, and thereby deuise her owne inheritance, and her husband die, and she after die without any new publication of it, it is of no force, because it was void at first. These and many other like cases which might be alleaged euidently shew that by law a wife hath not ⟨p. 297⟩power of her selfe, without her husband, to dispose the common goods of the familie.
