Current:

Leader (1850-1860), 9th July 1859, Edition 1 of 2, Page 819, Untitled Article

Page 819
Page 15
15 of 24

On this page

  • Text (4)
  • 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

      Vflliers . The success of the experiment is doubtfiilj and great anxieties are entertained for the conjugal prosperity of the barren Juliet and the sterile Romeo .

      Untitled Article

      MASTER OR MAN ? It is an old question in the world , winch is the greater—master or man . ? Whether the teacher as more important than the disciple , the doctor than thepatient , the borrower than the lender , the client or his counsellor , are all questions on which there is a great deal to be said on both sides . The answer given to any of them depends entirely upon the status of the person questioned . A bill of costs , we suspect , bears ah entirely different aspect , according as you are an attorney or a private individual . In the former case , you doubtless consider it a specimen of magnanimous liberality ; in the latter , you probably agree with us in

      stigmatising it as an instance of gross imposition . If we belonged to any particular trade or profession , -we should , perhaps , see good ground to alter our opinion , at least as far as our own particular trade -was concerned . But not doing so , we own that we incline to the side of the unprofessional public . We hold the popular , and , without doubt , erroneous belief , that the party who pays is more important than the party who is paid , and that the wishes of the latter should ultimately give place to the will ' of ' the former . If we order a shooting coat at our tailor ' s we do not expect , him to make us a frock coat , and should certainly decline to pay for it if he assured us he had done so because he considered it more suitable

      she could not endure the stigma that must necessarily rest upon her in the case of any compromise — Mrs . Swinfen resolutely refused any oifer at a settlement , and resolved to risk all upon the chances of a trial . The late Lord Chancellor—then Sir Frederick Thesiger—was retained in her defence . The trial took place at Stafford . At the end of the first day ' s proceedings ( a Saturday ) Lord Chelmsford conceived that the case was going unfavourably for his client , and recommended a compromise- —which he had reason to think would not be un-accepted on the opposite side . In spite of much pressure from her counsel and attorney , Mrs . and

      Swinfen declined to agree to this proposal , demanded , at any rate , time , for consideration . She consulted with her friends , and on the Sunday sent a telegram stating that she declined any attempt at a compromise . On the Monday morning ; , however , Lord Chelmsford received news which , in his opinion , would tell against his client ' s case , and without any direct permission from her attorney ; without , at his request , waiting the halfhour which must elapse before her arrival in court , arranged a compromise with the Opponent ' s counsel , which deprived his client of half her property , and affixed an indelible stigma on her reputation .

      The client proved to be a braver woman , or , perhaps , had her own cause more at heart than her counsel . She repudiated the compromise the moment it came to her knowledge . In spite of all kind of discouragement from the highest legal authorities , she obtained a new trial , and retrieved both her character and her fortune . Af ter the correctness of her opinion on the justice of her case ^ and the incorrectness of Lord Chelmsford ' s had been thus demonstrated , she brought an action—which was tried this week—against the

      ex-Lord Chancellor , to recover the costs which she had incurred by his negligence . This action , hi our opinion , she must have won , if her counsel , Mr , Kennedy , had not ruined his case by imputing against Lord Clleknsford charges of personal corruption and interested motives , which , were too obviously absurd to produce any but a negative effect with a jury acquainted with the high character borne of old by Sir Frederick Thesiger . Mrs . Swinfen has , indeed , throughout , been unfortunate in her choice of counsels .

      We the more regret this , as we look on Mrs . Swinfen as an ill-used woman . Lord Chelmsford would never have treated any one , except a client , with such a disregard of their own wishes ; and no client , we are ashamed to say , would have been treated in such a manner , except a woman . We were once acquainted with a lady of great power of character , who , on requesting her trustee , to inform her how he had invested her property , was told by him that it was no business of hers . To this the lady replied , with reason , " It may not be nay business , but it is my money . " Now , if Lord Chebusford had ever heard this story and borne it in mind , it would have been better both for himself and his client . The client who pays the costs should , after all , be judge of his own interests .

      for our somewhat emaciated figure . Ifwebuy a packet of tea at our grocer ' s , forfamily _ use , at 3 s . a pound , we do not anticipate that he will send us home the best gunpowder , at 9 s . a pound , because he considers it better for our digestion , as our complexion shows that we are prone to bile . If we go to a dentist ' s to have a decayed tooth stopped , we should certainly not ( pay him if he pulled out our tvfQ froniftdeth to save the others from decay ; and , in ^ he same way , if we employ a lawyer to defend an action , ive do not expect that he will make a compromise instead , which we could have done better for ourselves , with a great saving both of

      expense and dignity . The legal profession entertain a different impression . A client is their chattel , to be done what seems good with in their own sig ht . A passenger by the Manchester express trains mig ht as reasonably expect that the rate of speed would be lessened on his application to the guard ; a child in the arms of a Margate bathing-woman might as well appeal to the mercy of his attendant against prolonged immersion ; a victim in the jaws of a

      lion might as well remonstrate against the sharpness of his captor ' s teeth as a client , once in the clutches of his lawyer , appeal to his personal independence . Let all would-be litigants note this fact , When you go to law you give xip freedom of will as thoroughly as if" you adopted Calvinistic principles . Your purse is not your own , for your lawyer can and will draw upon it indefinitely ; your character is not your own , for they can and will compromise it without your consent .

      Mrs . Swinfcu has had occasion to learn this truth . Her experience may serve as a war ning to others . Into the merits of her case we have no wish to enter . Whether she was right or wrong has nothing to do with the facts that wo have to comment on . These facts lie in a nutshell . About four years ago Mrs . Swin / on came into possession of a property of some 2 , 0001 . a year . This ' property was left her by her father-in-law , whose death oocurred a fow weeks after her husband ' s , the

      natural and acknowledged heir to the paternal property . Upon the husband ' s death old Mr . Swinfon , being in infirm health , made , a will leaving to his ilaughter-in-law the property which Would naturally have belonged to her as his son ' s wife . Upou the father ' s death , shortly after making this will , the lieirs-at-law attempted to upset the disposition of the property ,- on the ground that the will had beon obtained' by improper means after the testator was incapable of exorcising his judgment . Mrs . Swinfon , fortunately for herself , enjoyed that right of possession which gives proverbially nine-tenths or the law . Her opponents ( and this la a point worth noting ) would have boon glad enough to compromise the matter . Fx-oin some oauBe- —whether it was simply unwillingness to part vritik what eho considered her just duo , or whether

      Untitled Article

      WHAT SHOULD WE LEARN" P This very important question is considered and answered , in a careful and scientific manner , in the proaont number . of tho Westminster Review . * The writer begins by adverting to tho facts , that in tho order of time " decoration precedes dresa , " that knowledge wliich brings applause " is always pre * forred to that . " which , conduces to personal well being 1 ; " and refers these and similar facts to the principle that " tho eluof social weed" has ever boom * * the control of individuals" At t ] xo some time he recognises tho fact that our instincts and impulses provide for setf-preservation , and

      there-3 Eb , 485 ; July 9 > 1659 . ] THE X ^ B ^ BEB , 819 ^^ b ^ mM ^^^ gmjJMWSMP ^^^ OEMCT ^ WWMI ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ¦ ¦¦ — i » ¦¦ n . —— i ,. , ¦ ¦ . —— ¦ ¦ . - ^—i . ^ m^—^—^— . .. _ . , . ¦'_»¦ ' ' _ _

      The Divorce Courts

      * ^ * views by the number of divorces applied for . Admitting that the . number already granted falls short of the number wiiich probably will be granted whenthe court is fully up to its work , it must be remembered that the long delay of this relief has caused many more applications for divorce in the first year of its existence than the probable average of such applications annually hereafter , if eithei the number of applications , nor of divorces , ai present , can be considered a fair indication of the number in future . A better criterion is to be found in Scotland , where divorce has long been easilj obtained , and where , as Lord Brougham stated , seventeen divorces-in the year is the average among 3 , 000 , 000 , people . Taking the population of England and" Wales at 19 , 500 , 000 , this proportion

      would give amongst them 110 divorces in the year . We may estimate roughly the married couples in this population at 2 , 500 , 000 ; so that there would be on this proportion one divorce per annum to every 24 , 000 couples . We may further suppose that each marriage will last twenty years , which will give with this number of divorces one marriage dissolved to every . 1 , 140 contracted . This is not a very alarming proportion , and there are circumstances connected with the population of Scotland , such as a " great disparity between the sexes in some counties , " which , combined with the facility of contracting , as well as dissolving , marriage , incline us to believe that the number of divorceswith the utmost facility of divorce—would not be so greafc in England as in Scotland .

      Legislation on this subject , as on all others , has proceeded from the upper classes , and there is abundant reason for believing that their ideas concerning conjugal fidelity and their practices are not ' . fair representations of those of the bulk of the community . For the males amongst them to have a . number of mistresses , and the females a number of lovers , were , not many ages ago , avowed practises , while the continued union of one man with one woman was the custom of the multitude . We

      may extend the remark , and affirm that amongst the multitude , in all ages and in all times , monogamy has been the rule , and whenever polygamy has prevailed it has been of necessity confined to the upper ten thousand . JNot adopting the views of libertines as a fair representation of what is likely to happen generally , each man ' s experience will bear us outin saying that conjugal fidelity is the rule , and infidelity the rare exception in life . And this rule being founded not merely in our manners but on great natural facts , will continue to be the rule though a divorce could be obtained for a shilling at every county court in the kingdom .

      liike all questions of legislation by a class for universal social interests , this question is of great importance , and we may not venture into all its depths on an accidental discussion of amending our divorce courts . But , as Lord . Brougham has suggested that the Attorney-General , or some public officer , should watch the proceedings in divorce cases in the interest of the public , we must remind him that marriage and divorce concern only the individuals who ore parties to them . The public are only witnesses to the contract or to the separation , and they con only become partners in is alarmed

      THE DIVORCE COURTS . TpB Legislature succeeds too seldom in conferring benefit on the public not to make it desirable that every success should bo noticed . Two years ago it established a court to enable the multitude to obtain divorces when needed , a privilege which before could only bo obtained by an Act of Parliament and a very heavy purse . The Aot was an extension of freedom . It enabled persons to do what the law alone prohibited then ! from doing ; and every reader of newspapers is aware that it has "been readily and largely taken advantage of . In fifteen months , ended last March , in

      which tho Act has been in operation , as many divorces have been granted ns the Parliament granted in tho course of two centuries . In ono day nine were granted ; tho Parliament did not pass ns many divorce Acts in two years . In the fifteen months 37 divorces have been granted ; 288 petitions have been presented for dissolution of marriage ; and 105 for judicial separation . In fact , tho court has beon so extremely useful that it has been overwhelmed with business . It has upwards of 100 applications for divorce under consideration , and is now especially brought under the notice of tho public by a proposition in larliament to increase the number of judges , and make it still more useful * To the original measure and the proposed oxtension there nre many opponents , who justify tneir

      either by destroying its sanctity . Ho for the public morals . He still practically believes that the more freedom people , have the worse use they will make of it . ¦ At the bottom of his apprehensions and his precautions lies tho old distrust of human nature continually preached by those who , though they always blunder and fail , have no distrust in themselves . The noble lord , too , would have _ more lengthened proceedings ; he would mnko divorce more costly for tho benefit of tho profession , tnougu it might be productive of increased scandal to thecommunity .

      Untitled Article

      * No . xxal ., July , 1859 .

  • Citation
    • Leader (1850-1860), July 9, 1859, page 819, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2302/page/15/