Untitled - Electric Scotland

1856-60] THE DIVORCE BILL 211
fact which became the subject of constant criticism both
in the Law Courts and in Parliament.
In a case, for example, tried before Mr. Justice Maule,
the prisoner, a poor man, being convicted of bigamy, was
called upon to say why sentence should not be passed upon
him. He said,
"
My wife was unfaithful : she robbed me,
and ran away with another man, and I thought I might
take another wife." The reply of the learned judge was :
u Prisoner at the bar, you were entirely mistaken. The
law in its wisdom points out a means by which you
might have rid yourself
from further association with a
woman who had dishonoured you. But you
did not
think proper to adopt it. I will tell you what that pro
cess is. You ought to have brought
4
an action for
criminal conversation. That action would have been tried
before one of Her Majesty s judges at the assizes. That
might have cost you money, and you say that you are a
poor working man. But that is not the fault of the law.
You might perhaps have obtained a verdict with damages
against the defendant, who was not unlikely to turn out
a pauper. But so jealous is the law (which you ought to
know is the perfection of reason) of the sanctity of the
marriage tie, that in accomplishing all this you would
only have fulfilled the lighter portion of your duty. With
your verdict in your hand you
should have instituted a
suit in the Ecclesiastical Court for a divorce l
et thoro? Having got that divorce, you
a mensd
should have
petitioned the House of Lords for a
*
divorce a vinculol
and should have appeared by counsel at the bar of their
Lordships House. Then, if the Bill passed,
have gone down to the House of Commons ;
it would
the same
evidence would possibly be repeated there : and if the
Royal assent had been given, after that you might have
married again. The whole proceeding would probably 7