to expect men to be both as though they were, about "cornutus" is, and has been for ages, an object of popular derision. It is, perhaps, and not unjustly supposed-to the honor of women be it spoken-that few good husbands and worthy honorable men are thus disgraced by the wickedness of their wives.

and as though they were not, exposed to the indurating environments of the world. When a woman argues it is hard that that which is expected from her sex is not also expected from the other, she should consider how much is expected from men which is not That we have left unnoticed one important expected from women. Assuredly if she yields element in the consideration of this question much she receives much in return. That chiv- of conjugal fidelity, as between the man and alrous acknowledgment of her weakness, which woman, will suggest itself to the majority of in civilized states of society, induces a man to our readers. The infidelity of the husband inpostpone his own safety to that of a woman-flicts no spurious children upon his wife.* If in small cases as in great to sacrifice every- a woman has no other privilege, she has that thing, from the ease of the moment to his very of knowing her own children. The weakness life, for the sake of one whom he may love of Mrs. Norton's reply to this argument would with his whole soul, or may not know even by seem to establish its validity. She says, that name is in itself no small exchange for the if the husband's infidelity does not inflict spurequirements of which we have spoken. It is rious children on his wife, it may inflict them not a matter of complaint with men, that if a on his neighbor. But that is a matter between ship is going to pieces on a rock, or is on fire man and man-not between man and woman. in the midst of the wide ocean, every woman And it is as between man and woman, that on board will be seen safely over the side of Mrs. Norton discusses, and we now discuss, the the doomed vessel before a single man takes subject. It is very true, that a man may to the boats. This may be regarded as an ex- squander what ought to be devoted to his wife treme illustration: but in a lesser degree such and legitimate offspring, upon spurious chilsacrifices are being continually made, and dren born out of his house; but if spurious there are few men who have not at some time children are born in his house, and regarded or other risked their own safety to secure that as his own, he lavishes both his money and his of a woman. If she, in the hour of danger, be affections upon them, and what is more, the incapacitated by fear-if her heart stand still law gives them his property-perhaps his and her limbs fail her, and she betray every whole property-at his death. There is no symptom of helpless terror, it is no disgrace confusion, as regards the woman's knowledge, to her to be thus affected. It is "natural"- of the true and false. Whether her offspring "womanly"-we love and admire her all the be legitimate or illegitimate, she knows it to same, and perhaps are the more tender and be her own. But a man, in this the tenderest assiduous in our ministrations from the very relation which humanity recognizes, may be knowledge of this infirmity. But one such the prey of a miserable delusion all his life. failure on the part of a man, and he is dis- The victim of injustice himself, he may ungraced for ever in the eyes of the world. Yet consciously be unjust to others, and hereditary he does not complain of the unfairness of his honors and property, or wealth acquired by destiny. He knows that being a man, he must years of self-denying industry, may be transsuffer as a man. He does not claim the privi- mitted to the offspring of a wanton and the lege of ranking with women. living evidence of his own dishonor.

Now all or very much of this is practically

From these considerations, it would appear that, viewing the question by the light of simple justice, as between the woman and the man, the latter may not unfairly lay claim to wherein the "great moralist" delivers his opinion There is a passage in Boswell's Life of Johnson, a larger amount of toleration, than he can ac- on this subject, which will recall itself to the recolcord to his wife, on the score of those particu- lection of some of our readers, "I (Boswell loquitur) lar offences which give the death-blow to the mentioned a dispute between a friend of mine and character of the latter. And in the very cir- his lady, concerning conjugal infidelity, which my cumstance of this destructiveness there resides the husband as in the wife. Johnson.-'Your friend friend had maintained was by no means so bad in another and a weighty argument which ought was in the right, sir. Between a man and his not to be forgotten in any candid discussion Maker, it is a different question. But between a of the subject. The reputation of a man re- man and his wife, a husband's infidelity is nothing. ceives a greater blow from the infidelity of his They are connected by children, by fortune, by wife than the fair fame of the wife receives ried women don't trouble themselves about infidelserious considerations of community. Wise marfrom the depravity of the husband. The wo-ity in their husbands.' Boswell. To be sure, man thus sinned against may be pitied, if anything so common be regarded as fit subject of pity: but the man is commonly sneered at and despised. Society is less tolerant of the victim than of the victimizer. The man who goes

there is a great difference between the offence of infidelity in a man and that of his wife.' Johnson. -The difference is boundless. The man imposes no bastards on his wife.'" We cannot add that we

adopt, without reservation, Johnson's idea of a

"" wise married woman."

admitted, even by women who in theory pro- see what evil, which cannot practically be
test against it. The Johnsonian doctrine, held in check, can result from the legal equal-
that wise married women "will not trouble ization for which Mrs. Norton contends.-
themselves" about the infidelity of their hus- And when we bear in mind what has been
bands, may not be admissible without some
qualification. But truly says Mrs. Norton,
that a wise woman will forgive much, and that
chastity is not the only virtue :-

written above about the willingness of the wife to "condone" the natural tendency that there is to forgive inconstancy, when not attended with brutal violence and insult-w need not be under much apprehension that

"A man," she writes, "may yield to the temp-women, under any state of the law, will entation of passion, who yet at heart loves and re- deavor to divorce their husbands, except in spects his wife, and feels, after his delusion is cases of unendurable wrong. over, a real shame and repentance. Nor is want "If an English wife," says Mrs. Norton, of chastity the only sin in the world. A woman" be guilty of infidelity, her husband can diwho is a chaste wife may fill her husband's days vorce her so as to marry again; but she canwith unendurable bitterness; and a man who not divorce the husband, a vinculo, however has lapsed in the observance of the marriage profligate he may be." This, however, is not vows may, nevertheless, be a kindly husband and father, with whom reconcilement would be a safe exactly the state of the case, as she presently "No law-court," she continues," can and blessed generosity. If we add to these ad- shows. missions woman's natural lingering love for her divorce in England. A special Act of Parcompanion-love undeniable, indisputable-love liament annulling the marriage, is passed for evidenced each day even among the poor crea- each case. The House of Lords grants this turcs who come bruised and bleeding before the almost as a matter of course to the husband, police courts, refusing to give evidence in a but not to the wife. In only four instances calmer hour against the man, such evidence (two of which were cases of incest) has the would condemn to punishment; if we add the wife obtained a divorce to marry again. "In love of children, the dread of breaking the bond which shall perhaps help a step-mother into the Scotland," on the other hand, "the law has mother's vacated place; if we add the obvious power to divorce a vinculo, so as to enable interest, in almost every instance, which the wo- either party to marry again; and the right of man has to remain in her home; and the horror the wife to apply for such divorce is equal to most women must feel at the public exposure the right of the husband; that license for inand discussion of such wrongs, it is evident they constancy, taken out under the English law would not be so very eager to avail themselves, by the English husband-as one of the mascuin usual cases, of the extreme remedy." line gender, being utterly unknown to the Scottish Courts."

"But," adds Mrs. Norton, in this eloquent In England, the first step towards a divorce, letter to the Queen, “in unusual cases, in is an action for damages, on the part of the cases of the dreary, stormy, deserted life, husband, against the supposed paramour of when profligacy, personal violence, insult, and the wife. As in these proceedings, the wife oppression, fill up the measure of that wrong is "non-existent," and cannot appear by counwhich pardon cannot reach-why is there to scl to defend herself, the chances are that the be no rescue for the woman? why is such a whole case is prejudged against her, before man to be sheltered under the Lord Chancel- she has the power of saying a word in her lor's term of only a little profligate,' and own defence. It is true that her paramour 'condonation' supposed to be the only proper may defend her; but it is not his interest to notice of his conduct ?" In other words, why do so, except by showing that the husband are the laws of Divorce in England such as has offended against his wife, and does not they are? Why is the dissolution of the vinculum matrimonii so much more difficult on the plea of the wife than on the plea of the husband? In Scotland we know that the distinction is not maintained. Why does justice assume such different guises on the opposite sides of the Tweed?

enter Court "with clean hands." But so long as a money-value is set upon the love and fidelity of the woman, it is rather the policy of the defendant's counsel to make it appear that she was a bad than that she was a good wife. The tariff of damages is of course regulated in accordance with the supposed value The English law assumes that the two cases of the chattel of which the husband is deare not equal, that the infidelity of the wife prived, and it is the professional duty of the is a greater offence than the infidelity of the husband, both against the other consort and against society at large. And we think we have shown that it is so. But as sentence of divorce can only be pronounced by a competent tribunal, and that tribunal, whatever the law may be, will consist of men, we do not

defendant's counsel to make this chattel appear as valueless as he can. Now this, which is, we believe, peculiar to the English law, is an injustice at the very outset to the woman. Her character, her position, her very means of subsistence are at stake. She is virtually, though non-existent and unrecognized, on her

And from this strain of sarcasm she turns to

trial; but she is not permitted to say a word Holyrood are triumphant Mesalinas. And on in her own defence. The matter is settled the decks of the emigrant vessels which crowd between the two men, as though it were one the harbor of Leith, groups of melancholy castwith which she has nothing to do. It need off husbands might be seen bidding reproachful not be said that if another woman steal her farewell to that inhospitable country where they only exist to be repudiated. life-partner, the damage which she has sustained is not triable by judge, or assessable by jury. There is no pecuniary_compensation by law established for her. That idea the argument and deduction, saying:world considers as simply too preposterous for The Scotch ladies will deny their guilt. The a moment's consideration. Doing or suffering will deny that the upper classes of their nation wrong, women are "non-existent." The law have proved themselves more immoral than the decrees that they cannot injure each other. upper classes in England. But they are contra There may be some compensation in this. dicted by the Lord Chancellor and the whol But, unhappily, it is compensation the advan- House of English Peers. That body of senaton tages of which are only experienced by the have pronounced that to permit women in Eng guilty. It is the perfection of the English law land to have the privilege accorded to the women that the only person for whom there is no immorality, and of multitudinous divorce. Now, of Scotland would be productive of the grossest protection is a virtuous and injured woman. to support that position, one of three things must Having thus had his sufferings appraised by be capable of proof. Either, having witnessed the a jury, the English gentleman carries his case effect of the divorce laws of Scotland, and perceiv to the House of Lords, where it is unctuously ing its women to be a nation of lost creatures, re-investigated by a knot of elderly Peers, English legislators refuse to copy these laws, lest revelling in the delicate disclosures of prying English women become as profligate as Scotch chamber-maids and suborned valets. If my women; or else (and this is a reason to be carefulLords are satisfied with the evidence, the billy considered) they fear to trust English women for the decree of divorce takes the shape of sisters are less likely to abuse; or lastly, the exwith a privilege which their colder Caledonian an Act of Parliament-is passed through all treme and universal profligacy of English husthe required stages, and the injured husband bands leads them to dread that if English women is as absolutely released a vinculo matrimonii could once obtain the same privilege of divorce as though his unhappy partner were silent in which is accorded to Scotch women, two English the grave. The process is, of course, an ex-women out of three would be immediately dispensive one, and therefore only open to the carded by their helpmates.

rich man: To the poor man, such a luxury is

inaccessible; and it is doubly inaccessible to The evil consequences of assimilating the the poor woman. Only four cases, says Mrs. English law to the Scotch, are mere creations Norton, are on record, of Bills passed at the suit of the brain. There is a perverseness in huof the wife, and two of these were cases of incest. man nature which renders a privilege accordNow all this is different in Scotland. The ed of less value than a privilege desired. wife is not legally non-existent. She has the That which we know we can do, we often do privilege of defending herself. She has the not care to do. We clamor loudly for liberty same right as the husband of suing for divorce, which we do not care to use, and often "reand the same facility of obtaining it. And gain our freedom with a sigh." Great lawyers what is the result? Is there less domestic are not always profound students of humanity. happiness on this side of the Tweed-are wo- If they were, we should have to weep over men continually putting off their husbands fewer legislative errors. Facility of divorce like last year's fashions? Mark the sarcasm would not necessarily produce frequency of with which Mrs. Norton replies to the ques-divorce. It has often been said, that if the

tion:

marriage contract were made like the lease of a house, renewable or not at the end of seven,

It is with timid reluctance that I permit my-fourteen, or twenty-one years, there are very self to allude to the social condition of that un- few who would avail themselves of the privi happy country (Scotland.) To all loyal minds lege of dissolving the bond. It is notorious, it must be matter for grave and sorrowful reflec- too, that among the lower classes, those contion, that whilst your Majesty is surrounded with nections which neither the Church has halfaithful wives and discreet ladies in London, lowed nor the Law sanctioned, and which, Windsor, and Osborne, the less cautious portion therefore, may be severed any day by either of the realm in which Balmoral is situated, is party, are frequently maintained in spite of plunged in the grossest immorality. England is virtuous, but Scotland is a hotbed of vice. It what would seem to be the strongest earthly is a land dedicated to Cupid. Statues of Venus inducements to dissolve them. They survive are set up in all the principal squares of Edin- mutual love and mutual kindness. Habit has burgh. The marriage-tie is a mere true lover's the force of a sacrament; and women cling The ladies who present themselves at with wonderful tenacity, even to the hand that

knot.

smites them, and kiss the feet that treads them good masters, and that thousands of slaves
in the dust. The drunken, ruffianly, cruel would not practically demand their freedom if
paramour is tolerated and forgiven. Let him it were to be legally declared. The legal
do what he may in his bestial violence-let remedy ought still to exist. The principle is
him, after every conceivable outrage, drive the same, whatever the practice may be. We
her, shivering with terror and cold, into the all like to know that we may do things which
cruel strects, and how often does it happen we never do. The sense of liberty, general
that she returns to him again with all the or particular, is pleasant in itself; and we do
ardor and trustingness of a first love. Are not know when we may not turn it to account.
women, who will bear so much, who will for- We cannot imagine any practical evil that
give so much-who will do anything rather would result from improving the condition of
than forsake an unhallowed connection, not to women, in as far as it is affected by the laws
be trusted with the privilege of divorcing of divorce. The facilities of which we speak
themselves from their lawful husbands and would only be grasped at in cases, when it
dissolving that solemn contract which is typi- would be a grievous wrong to withhold them.
cal of the union of Christ and the Church? "Now with respect," writes Mrs. Norton,
Is such a privilege one that would be lightly" to the condition and effect of the laws for
used? The poor lost creatures of whom we women in Scotland, it came out incidentally
have spoken, who have a home only upon suf- in the debate on the Marriage Bill, that the
ferance, whose children are entitled only to total amount of all the divorces in that mis-
their names, do not monopolize the womanly guided country during the last five years, only
constancy of the world. If they are slow to averaged twenty in all classes; and this was not
dissolve a connection, which the law does not stated in defence of Scotch morality, but as a
recognize, and which may be broken any hour means of calculating what might be expected in
of the day by a simple effort of the will, are England under a new system. In Scotland,
we to believe that the lawful wedded wife, then, though the right of divorce be equal, and
with a rightful home, and children bearing her the process so easy, that even if the party ac
husband's name, will eagerly seek for opportu- cused left the kingdom, he or she could still be
nities of discarding the companion of years proceeded against by what was then termed
and launching into a new and doubtful fu- "edictal citation," (or reading the citation
ture? Is not such a supposition opposed to aloud at the market-cross of Edinburgh, and
all our knowlege of woman's nature and our the pier and shore of Leith,) an average of
experience of woman's conduct? Is it not twenty couples only availed themselves of the
rather to be believed that whatever facilities law, the existence of which so alarms English
of separation the law may afford, the influ- legislators." But leaving all speculations on
ence of old associations, the tender love which the subject-all reference to human nature
she bears towards her children, her unwil- and the laws of the affections-let us see what
lingness to cloud their future by placing them is the ascertained fact, what the result of ac-
before the world as the offspring of divorced tual experience in our own unhappy country.
parents, her natural abhorrence of notoriety, The fact which Mrs. Norton here intends to
her doubts of greater happiness in her new convey is not very clearly stated. We pre-
lot, and, peradventure, even the hope of bet-sume that she means to speak of the annual
ter times to come in her old home is it not average of divorces granted. It appears from
rather, we say, to be believed that these in- a Parliamentary return, issued in 1844, that
fluences will be stronger than any liberty of in the four preceding years there had been a
divorce which the law can accord to her, total of 169 suits instituted in Scotland, or
and that she will hope on and suffer on to rather more than forty a year. Is there any-
the end of her days? Truly, yes; save in thing so formidable in this? In England and
and for such cases no one Wales, during, the same period, 162 suits were
denies that there ought to be a ready reme- instituted. Given then the population on each
dy. The argument is, that if divorce were side of the Tweed, a plain rule-of-three sum
to be more readily obtained, the number of will show us the probable number of suits un-
suits instituted would render the legal facility der the suggested assimilation of the law.
a crying evil, and that if use were not made And let those who are fearful of extending
of this facility it could not be wanted. To these facilities to women, consider again and
this we answer, that women, except in cases again, that let the law be what it may, it will
of grievous, long-continued and complicated still be administered by men. If a legal tri-
wrong, will not rush to the emancipating tribu-bunal were vested in England with the power
nal; but it does not follow on that account of dissolving marriages upon suits instituted
that such a tribunal ought not to exist. It either by the husband or the wife, it would
would be no valid argument against the aboli- still be left to the men composing that tribunal
tion of slavery, even if ill-treatment were to decide whether the wrongs pleaded and
much rarer than it is, that there are many proved by the woman were sufficient to enti-

extreme cases

tle her to a divorce. A man's view of the that it is a disgrace to the English law, that case would still be taken. We are not pre- such total and absolute release from conjugal pared to say that it would be an unjust one. bonds, as will render the injured wife misIt would be unjust if it were to be based upon tress not only of her property, but her actions, the supposition, that what is an unpardonable is not obtainable without the aid of an Act of offence against the man is an unpardonable Parliament. offence against the woman: and that what on And this brings us to Mrs. Morton's second the other hand constitutes a ground for di- plaint.-A married woman, though neither vorce against the man is also a sufficient plea protected nor supported by her husband, is, for a divorce against the woman. Each is en- according to English law, so absolutely nontitled to plead certain exemptions and immu- existent, that neither what is given to her by nities on the score of sex; and a just tribu- others, nor what she earns for herself, is her nal not regarding man and woman as mere own. Now there are two sides, even to this "parties" to a suit-legal abstractions, as it question of property. There are "compensawere fleshless, bloodless, passionless-will make tions" in the relative conditions of the husfor each its proper allowances, and take care band and the wife, with respect to money, as that there shall be due compensation. Nature to other less substantial blessings. The hus and Society have alike ordained these com- band is emphatically the "bread-finder." He pensations. Why should they not also be or- is commonly the stay of the house. Even the dained by the Law? English law compels him to support his wife It may be said that, practically, the Law and children. In most cases his whole life is does recognize them, but only in a very devoted to this one duty. It is right that it partial manner. It makes differences and dis- should be so. It is as clearly God's curse upon tinctions, rather than awards compensations; man, that he should earn his bread by the and the balance is assuredly against the wo-sweat of his brow, as it is God's curse upon man. It may be just, for reasons which we woman, that she should bring forth children have already stated, to regard infidelity in the in sorrow. But man being the bread-finder, husband as an offence less grave than infidelity it is just that he should be the purse-holder. in the wife; and we believe that, if the power The responsibility of maintenance is his. The of divorce were transferred to a competent le- odium of failure is his. The danger is his. gal tribunal, it would seldom or never dissolve The penalty is his. In these respects the law the vinculum matrimonii on the simple ground recognizes the "non-existence" of the woman. of matrimonial infidelity on the part of the A man may be sent to prison to expiate the husband; but when that infidelity is of a gross extravagance of his wife. He is responsible and open character, when the wife is not for debts which he does not contract. He may merely the passive recipient of wrong, but is be punished for excesses of expenditure against actively insulted and outraged; when the hus- which he may have remonstrated. He may band ceases not only to cherish, but to protect have a weak, self-indulgent, extravagant wife his wife; when his superior strength is put one, perhaps, of dissolute, drunken habits, forth, not for but against her; when he fulfils from whom, if he be not a rich man, he cannot in no sense the duties of a husband, but stands extricate himself; but still he is compelled to over her simply as a tyrant*-we do assert support her, still he is responsible for her debts, still he must pay the penalty of her of

We All this is clearly, to use the expressive

*Take, for example, such a case as the follow-fences. ing, which has recently been made public. give it in the words of an earnest-minded weekly Journalist, (the Leader):-"A gentleman of property is married to a lady of good connections, and been true. Let the reader picture to himself a lady of some attractions, but his desire for an heir is not living in a country house in Ireland, and subjected gratified. He appears to be an attached husband, to treatment of this kind-her husband calumniatand certainly the lady is an attached wife. She is ing her, her own friends believing him, her serattentive to the household, and watches over his vants conspiring against her, the butler insolently' interests as carefully as if he were not himself cap- and alarmingly invading her very bedroom at tious and niggardly. Suddenly, however, he brings night. The lady actually goes mad; and being forward a story that she is too familiar with one of mad, confesses that her husband's story is true.the grooms; that she has proceeded to the last fa- The untruth of the tale is proved by the circummiliarities, and has even made herself notorious in stantial statement of one servant, and by a number the stable-yard! This statement accompanied by of facts collected elsewhere, which are incompatvery circumstantial details, is told to her father, ible with the story. A judgment of the Ecclesiasand is believed! The lady indignantly denies the tical Court, however, has pronounced a divorce a calumny. Other servants are set to watch or to mensa et toro; and the husband's way to a bill in persecute her; the butler, taking advantage of her Parliament appears to be clear. Such is the story position, to become a suitor on his own account.-told in a pamphlet by Mr. John Paget, the barrister The husband, told this fact, does not appear to dis-acting on behalf of the lady in the case of Talbot believe it, but does not remove the butler. Per-v. Talbot."" Now, if this poor lady should recover haps if the butler had succeeded, it would have her reason, and the story here stated be proved, been as useful as if the story about the groom had what will be the remedy for her?