Update ttx

convert-anystyle-data/anystyle/10.1111_1467-6478.00057.ttx

@@ -66,22 +66,7 @@ blank         |
 meta          | © Blackwell Publishers Ltd 1997
 text          | for women. The overwhelming significance of the interests of corporate
               | capital, particularly the role of financial institutions, has exerted pressure to
-              | retain the presumption of indivisibility.
-              | I will begin with a fraud case, for it reveals how widespread are assumptions
-              | of wifely passivity. In Mercantile Mutual Life Insurance v. Gosper,50 the
-              | husband forged the wife’s signature to increase substantially the mortgage
-              | over her home. A cheque was drawn in favour of the wife and paid into a
-              | company controlled by her husband. The sum was then withdrawn by him.
-              | The fraud on the wife came to light only on the death of the husband.
-              | While two of the three judges agreed that the wife’s equitable interest
-              | should be enforced as a result of the forgery, the derisory way in which the
-              | wife was treated by the insurance company, the law firm, and the bank (all
-              | of which had unquestioningly accepted the authority of the husband)
-              | highlights the fragility of active citizenship for wives. The husband, a
-              | barrister, was automatically assigned active citizenship status. The wife, even
-              | though she was the registered owner of the property, was assigned no status
-              | other than that of the passive subject, that is, ‘his wife’.51 Kirby P. was the
-              | one judge to question this assignation:
+              | (text omitted for legal reasons)
               | One can see at work in the facts of this case the remnants of an attitude to a wife, as a
               | mere extension of the husband’s property and financial interests. (p. 35)
 blank         |