On this page

• Text (3)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

  • 

    Untitled Article

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    to bribeyit mil be as difficult to keep the two apacfc a&M "they were Eyraums and Thiabe . S& ? William Molesworth can only argue thai th ^ collective bribery , more precarious fchafc the individual bribery , will be opea to large capitalists aloaev and wijl be less inviting fckan tire present plan . It may have that fceitidency , but it may also set going a new syatem of Tinderstaaadings , and may open to the invention of the cleverest political elass in thecountry new plans for arranging : the *

    electiofffi of Bftembeua-with money in . their purses . If the body politic is corrapt , the product of that tody politic -will be corrupt ; if the dasa-which furoishea candidates is . wil 3 ing t *> 3 > usehft 80 seats by a ^ eeies- of politick smug- ' ^ j lirig ' , tb « a at all events therfe is a matffcet for ihe illicit aale of « eata . If the electoral class js-coarrupt , there is no reason why the electoral -daas should not be Tepreseoted by ^ sorrup t members . To prevent it by caetigatk > n or « eeresyvmll' be i&eifectu&L There are * j&oX fl iiwo , methods of euriiigsueh a condition of the body politic , ^ hoe i » , by infusing healthier JfVUIhdffc « l .. tfl mm It'iil I llW ' afl It T \ AJsAtlA W ^ JVS * TlA . >^ 7 rw «> k ^ L ^ .. &l * ** » mvavdtc majj Lfv ? vivww ?

    c jkF&vn * Wj |>« unfc' vu « v ^ n u ^ ^^ vuc ' other by setting an example , making a com- ; j nenoemWt j in letwrning to ^^ a more patriotic : ton © = of mbral feeling . , It is assumed in--deedj , nritih' the gTosseat injaiatice , that the ¦ n « fi ^ 4 aHiMHi ^^ iB ^ y ^ ipvi » a * frr < v « lfl not diflfer "from the ren&uacliiBed , Aoi that they would be a ^ open *<* bribery * Even : if it were so , fehOr ^ Aiffictd < Jy of tho briber would be increased byrextendin ^ the field of bribery . The man wJ ^ aifiii&lit , ^^ n&d' > ilTfaiUnSusiilt > to furocuce * the money Jfrr jpmv

    TfthramgHtfiFen ^ fehdiifwnd . Bufcthere is , indeed , nofrthe ^ flligbtetfit proof thiatihe ^ unenfraiichised > elase share the corruption of the electoral classv 33 iey are upon * he whole infinitely less ^ comaseeeia ]^ and io uoi , to so great an eitent ^ partici pate in the -vices of the trading spirit . { 3 ? hey hasp * tproyect on numberless occasions a greater-poetical sagacity , which is id itself » con 5 ecfcive of iowr vice ; bub-also a mace ipatriotic and generous regard for public interesfcB above their ovm . There is a &r

    greater prrobabilifcy of purifying the elected body by infusing new blood aato the electoral body . While-therfranchise is a trust , as Lord Palmerston calls it ,- —a privilege as the electors : caH it , it ^ possesses a marketable value . Uender it general , and by the very act the exercise of the franchise becomes in itself a national and not a class business . We heairtil y agree wibb , Sir "William Moleeworth , therefore , that the argument of Lord Palmerston is impotent , except as a strong argument , drawn from the practical state of things , in favour of a national franchise .

    The claim for the ballot , however , rests upon two grounds , which we regard as perfectly iuuesistiblei In the first place , we have great respect for those " reformers whose only reluctance to adopt a national franchise originates with tdmidity , who desire to reform % degrees , but wish to exhaust remedial measures before taking 4 hat laat step . We hare respect for them , because amongst them are many who have really acted with a perfectly single mind , disinterestedly and bravely , at a time when it wlis not easy to be either disinterested or brave . The ballot ia

    the last quiver in their arrow , and \ re would willingly let them have ifca flight . It is the last attempt to remedy the evils of the present electoral system , without fundamentally altering that system . Lot it be tried . But there is another reason still more conclusive —the electoral classes wish to have the

    ballot , and tho ' unenfranchised classes also wish to have it . This is quite sufficient . One speaker said that tho only ground for conceding a measure of the kind would be its tendency to elevate tho people ; hut we conceive that tho people themselves must bo judges of their own self-elevation . The

    multitude , whether enfranchised of unenfranchised , desire the ballot ; and there is no reason for refusing compliance with their desire except the naked fact that the multitude retain , in their hands neither influence nor power to enforce their wish . A . disr > armed and disfranchised people * the ^ English public must suffer its will to go for nothing ; and the Home Secretary can dismiss one of the moat distinct claims ever pub forth by the EfigMsh ipublie for arranging the- way of their own voting in the manner that they yneh themselves , with a jaunty tissue elf transparent sophistries .

    Untitled Article

    TSHE © IVORGE DJ 2 BATE . Ix * foolisbztssa were not vary hard of dymg , we anight reckon that eooiparativaely few years will pass before the moralist will contrast our social condition in matrimonial affairs with the debate in the House of Lords on Tuesday last . Htmitrht b © supposed from _ " _ 90 _ . 49 _ X i .

    tnat debate , perhaps , that the sole thing which haunts the marriage liome is the dearness of * he law proceedings connected with divdrce , or th » cttmbeasooie and exclusive natufe ^ of theju ^ iBdictaion ; that , at all events , the ' first wanty . according to ^ the Lord Chan * cellor and the Beexs who debated on both

    mdes , is atbetter procedure at law in matters of divorce . Not an . ex £ eBsiDn < of the divorce law ; no , that is left exactly as it was . . Dtaroree is to be gtoated for one cause-alone , * as if these © were- only one cause which rendered it just and necessary . The future student of our social morals who shall choose to look back upon the ugly picture , , willibe surprised to see us surrounded by causes which render the 4 wartikiuan « e of the

    marriage bond an outrage oo . common justice and decency , . and yet' to discover that we , in the midst of it all , ' could see one alone . That we are blind is not bjecause the causes are invisible r some'of them are flagrant in the police records of ? the- day , in ; many forms of aifcrocious ctrueli ^; but , passing , from the police courts to the marriage courts , our'Studentwill learn that treatment which makes the blood run cold

    with horror at the mere story , is refined down in the statements of civilians until * they have great difficulty ia retaining a perception of cruelty at all . The most revolting excess of brutality may not amount to Xl legal cruelty . " In these courts they do not discuss questions between man and man , or man and woman , with the living creatures before them ; they only in part discuss the question with their own living tongues . In a corresponding

    spirit , they treat the coses not as matters upon which the tranquillity , and the welfare , and the life of their fellow-creatures hang , iDut as abstractions depending entirelyupon mere technical or philological constructions of ancient books and almost as antiquated judgments . It is the studvr of the profession to exclude the sens < 3 of the feelings—which are the very life and Bubstanee of the matter in question ; they oarry on great portion of each discussion b v sitting apart and writing

    quaint articles to each other . If you see a case proceeding in . a court of law , —where the parties are brought forward ,- —wherewitnessea tell their feelings as well as the facts , —where judge and jury cannot help themselves from laughing or from weeping , —you will see that with much absurdity , much technical perversity , much denial of justice , still , in the main , the strong feelings of our naiture have their sway , or if they are thwarted , the law that tliwarbs them at least extorts its own

    amendment . Put the man and woman into the marriage court , —let the lawyers talk about them like men as well as antiquurianB ,

    and something of tbe flesh and blood © f tike matter will be taken into the account of gus * tiee ; and law will begin to perceive , after its long dream over the pandects , that warily there are things to be consulted bosides antique texts , or tbo ^ unintelligible usages of obscure courts . The smallest approach towards reetkig th © judgment of this question upon reafitiea , rather than abstractions and assumptions , is

    a genuine step towards a more searching reform . At present the lawyers lo © k not at the TeaJiities , but at the facts generally re * fleeted find : studiously distorted in a medisBval mirror .. Society itself breaks the \ mr by wholesale , and breaks it with impunity , so long as it manages to keep outside of the ^ Kcospeet which that mirror * t&kes in . A man may be < aB brutal as he pleases , -until he com * mi&s legal cruelty—cruelty that is which caa

    be reflected in the mediaeval mirror . He may be totally faithless to the law of marriage , and we suppose that a large proportion of husbands are so ; but if his wife breaks the law in one particular manner , then , and thea alone , the penalty descends not upon hius , but upon her . We have been accosed of exaggerating thecaae of infraction , but let us point to the argument agamst relaxtti ^ the strictness of the divorce law ; which wa »^ used by ILordi Ohancelor ^ ranworth .

    < m& ( ba& nc » t proposed ^ cdmmiBsicwxeTs-liaa not recommended , that the wife should have thesarae remedy on account of the adultery of the husband as was ^ iven to the busband pa account of the adultery of th « wife EEe knew tha * primft facie tTife seemed a tery unjust distinction , but let lihelrlordships observe what it would lead to if adultery < on the part of the blisbftnd were to eptitle 3 um > to a divorce . If he wished to obtain a divorc ^ he would

    only have to multiply acts of adultery ja order to attain bis object . It was the fact that a husband scarcely lost caste at all , or , at any rate , only to a very slight degree , l ) y committing adidtery , while i&ie wife whacommitted that offence entirely lost her station in sopiety , and , although in point of morality and religion , the criminalfcy were the same , if adultery on the part of the linsband was made the ground of divorce a profligate husband might get lid of his wife when he pleased . "

    So Lord Chancellor Cranworth objects to dissolve the bon . d of marriage , if the bosband commit the same offence as that which annuls the marriage for a wife , because the offence is so common that it ceases to be regarded as an offence , and lie dares not trust men with the opportunity of committing it in order to escape trom their obligation . We hear sometimes t > f men who publicly commit

    a larceny or an assault , in . order to get into prison , that they may be saved from starvation ; but nobody proposes to shut the doous of prisons , lest starving men should enter in such numbers as to constitute themselves a burden on the state . Yet so it is with husbands at large . Lord Craaworth tells us so . ; and as to women—look at our streets , look down the areas of our houses : let us recollect

    that in practice and in fact ,, among the customs of our country , marriage appears to have as its accompaniment and complement thaffc hideous institute called " prostitution . " In marriage-law affairs half of our practice consists in . the flagrant breach of the law , and the other half in a very indifferent attainment of its genuine objects .

    It is on the ruass of presumption and indirect legislation , which compose the larger half of the law , that tho hardship and mischief of the present law rest . In past times , when views of morality werfc totally different from our own , men presumed thab certain things were necessary to proper conduct iav life . The men ^ ho laid down those regulations could not obtain obedience in thenown day ; but , by one of" the strangest perversities in our social hitstory , fcUoy havo handod down the impracticable morals of fcho middle ages to secure obedience at a time when the grounds of those rules a » c denied .

    Untitled Article

    ¦* mm THE LEADER . LS * tu * i * a y >

    Untitled Article

    * In tliifl paper , a « in others , wo shall utmally employ tho word "divorce" to moan divorco A vinculo malrivwnii —• release from tho bond of marriage ; mid " separation" for tho divorce k mensd et thoro—divorce from bed and bourd .

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), June 17, 1854, page 566, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2043/page/14/