That a woman should lose her faraily name by marrying, isa relie of linies when she was held to be an inferior creature to men. The present century has done a great deal to establish her equallty, aml in aome respecta woman herself has proved her superiority to rata. However the supreine court of Kansas, perhaps not carin; partlcularly tor the one fuer or the other, but desirie to show its supreme comiuon sense in all cases, has wist ly üee'ulril tliat when a woman inarries, slie need not take the name of lier hiKhiKwl unióos kjho iriuifs t. Wi? fake this to mean th it the husband may adopt tlic wife's name if lie so choose ; or, the decisión ought to imply that permission, out of kindnrss to the human family, since so many of its members are - dened with names that render appeal to legislatures necesary to obtain relief. But the state of Kansas alone can not do justice to the whole United States, aiul it is to be prayed that all may follow itá beneliceut example, and give men and women an equal opportunlty of choosing a more ciiphonious cofTnoincn tlinn was tlirust npon them in less auspicious times.