24 JULY 1847, Page 14

THE REAL "PROTECTION OF FEMALES."

THE progress of a wiser humanity on the subject of social ques- tions is strikingly shown in the verdicts which juries give in ac- tions for two classes of injury to women—for seduction and breach of promise of marriage. In both kinds of actions, juries, with increasing steadiness of perseverance, award large damages— large as compared with what would formerly have been thought reasonable. The better reason, however, lies with the present practice • and it is well to strengthen the practice by upholding the enlightened juries with approval. The two kinds of cases do not rest exactly on the same grounds. The requirements of equity in the instance of breach of promise are clear. A promise to marry is like any other civil bargain, with the difference that it affects the prospects of a whole life. Certain injuries cannot be remedied, and they are often the severest. No amount of damages could have consoled Julia of Verona for the loss of her beloved Proteus,—pitiful rascal as every reader of Shakspere may think him. Disappointment at losing a promised fortune, though it may be bitter, is scarcely a fit subject for compensation, inasninch as the gift of a fortune is not a thing necessarily implied in marriage. The proper object of compensa- tion is implied by the nature of the injury so far as it is the breach of a civil bargain. When a woman accepts a promise of marriage she usually waives all prospects of settlement in life that may lie in other quarters—other suitors receive no encourage- ment, and the property in her affections is reserved to the pro- miser. That is the quid pro quo ; and it is often a very large /aid for a very worthless quo. If the courtship lasts a long time —and in a case reported this week it lasted for ten years—the lady consents, on the faith of the bargain, not only to waive op- portunities that she might otherwise have, but probably to pass without using a single opportunity in that part of her life when her attractions are in the fullest flower. Whether the courtship lasts a long time or a short, she becomes a deserted woman.tt "leav- ings," and obnoxious to that cowardly contempt which prevails with the common run of people for all who have been slighted. Hence, her prospects of settlement elsewhere are seriously and obviously damaged. The endeavour of compensation should be as nearly as possible to pleat her in statu quo. That cannot, of course actually be done ; but an approximation to equity can be made. If the /ecru:rise-breaker is compelled to give her the minimum of income which as his wife she might have expecte4 not only is she secured a fragment of the bargain which he le- fuses to fulfil, but by giving The possession of some litttke.tneaW3 the law in a degree restores her attractiveness-

".Desexte at mulls gueutuil Amplexusct °peal Wilt."

In the case of seduction, the justice of compensation is not so palpable; but we think that on inquiry it proves to be quite sound. " Volenti non fit injuria must be taken with a qualit- cation : willingness must be accepted as being limited to that which the willing party really understands. In cases of seduc- tion there is a remarkable inversion of natural justice : the worldly experience of the man usually much exceeds that of the woman, while the evil consequences to her are altogether in ex- cess of any risk which he may run ; in the great majority of cases, the victim is quite ignorant of what she incurs; the man it is that knows the consequences, the woman that endures them. Now, the worst consequences—the degradation, the loss of social position and of opportunities for worldly advantage—are penalties decreed by the will of society.. Society, therefore, would be quite right to see that its penalty does not fall on one alone of the of- fenders, and that one probably the more innocent ; it has a per- fect right to enact, by its juries, that if the immediate responsi- bility is to be fastened on the woman, her accomplice shall be re- quired to aid her in sustaining the burden.

It is a pity, however, that the law should come before juries in so confused and imperfect a state. The woman, the party in- jured, has no direct claim for damages ; but they can only be ex- tracted from the seducer by virtue of a legal fiction, under favour of which a parent may sue for damages to compensate the pre- sumed loss of a daughter's "services." Now that is a question wholly beside the justice of the case, and it is only by a kind of stretching of the law that juries can really attain to a substantial justice. This they endeavour to do ; but the task of virtually re- modelling the law in that way ought not to be imposed upon them. The law itself might very equitably presume that the seducer intended to bear his due share of the responsibility, and that if he neglected to do so he had practically committed a breach of implied compact.

ft may be said, we know, that to recognize a direct claim would be a premium to vice, by removing part of the penalty on seduction. A saying very partially true, and very generally false. Exactly as it mitigated the punishment for one, such a law would entail responsibility on another ; it would operate as a check on seducers, and a powerful one—for all deceivers of women are mean men. The prospect of having to pay heavily for their " successes " would convert many Don Juana into Scipios. And be it remembered, that in appealing to the motives of the seducer, the law would act at once upon the first offender. Such a re- sponsibility, indeed, would do more real good in any single county than a bill like Mr. Spooner's is likely to effect all over the kingdom.