MARRIAGE SETTLEMENTS AND DIVORCE.
"Two elopements chronicled in a single week, both by ladies in the highest circles of society," drew upon the Timee' about the middle of last month, a little shower of letters, moralizing the tale. "The impression is gaining ground," says the first writer, " that the mothers and wives of England are not what they were." We are not aware of any such "impression." If some persons are startled at the disclosures of the new Divorce Court, it only shows how dull they were to evidence which existed though there was no court to bring it into ; while now the same persons exaggerate the conclusion to be drawn from the evidence. The mothers and wives are obviously better than they Were a cen- tury ago, or earlier—every reflex of society shows a more refined feeling, and less licence ; though perhaps, pan i passu, authorized
opinion has been modified in the sense popularly balled " liberal." In other words, there is less breach of law, and more charity for error. So much for the wanton slander on " the mothers and wives of England." The writer traces the part of the evil which peculiarly pains him to the settlements made on women of fortune at the time of their marriage. Women, he argues, are too much protected against their future husbands-
" But of late years our practice in matters matrimonial has been all in one direction, and that in the direction of making our wives as independent of their husbands as possible. It seems to be tacitly assumed that unmarried men are all on the look out for heiresses whose fortunes they have every in- tention of squandering, and that the rule is for men in every branch of com- merce and every profession to become bankrupt and bring their wives and families to beggary. Hence the fashion is for the wife to be defended on all sides. Husbands are scoundrels and spendthrifts—therefore their wives must be made independent of their rascality ; and so that the wife is made sure, the husband must shift for himself and take his chance ; his wife is never extravagant, never self-indulgent, never has milliners' bills, never fails in her duty to her spouse or her babes. I wish with all my heart this were the true state of the case, but recent revelations give the lie to these assumptions."
And the remedy he proposes is a legal restriction on the power of making settlements. 'I, for one, protest against its being legally possible for a woman to desert her husband and carry her fortune with her. I protest against its being legally possible for a man to be left in old age dependent on his children's bounty." This is "free trade" certainly,—on one side. The suitor is to be free to settle his money if he pleases, but not the bride ! It is not probable that the law will impose any restraint on the discretion of parents and guardians ; particularly as the bridegroom has the power, if he shrinks from the fate so plaintively drawn by "A Sufferer," of retracting when he finds that he is not to have hold of the money as well as the bride. In a very interesting tale, L'Histoire d'un Paurre Jean Homme, a favoured bridegroom ex- ercises that right ; and "A Sufferer" will find the tale done into really choice English, as if for his information and guidance.
"Another Sufferer" climes in, with a general argument to sustain the husband's cause :—
" The power which a woman thus obtains is too great. The natural order of things and the relation of the parties are reversed by such an arrange- ment. The wife is virtually independent of the husband, and that feeling of reliance by the weaker vessel upon the stronger which is the foundation of all confidence is first impaired and then destroyed."
Now, as if to verify the practical bearing of these redamations, a case has just been discussed and settled in the Divorce Court. A wife accuses her husband of adultery with various women, in- cluding one of her own servants, and of cruelty, in various acts of rigour and of personal assault, with boxes on the ear, and on one occasion a violent pushing along a public street. The plea of the husband is remarkable. The adultery is admitted, except that alleged with the servant ; but the answer to the cruelty is, that it is all a fabrication, with such a description of the wife, her untruthfulness and triviality, as makes one wonder that the hus- band can desire to prevent such a wife from leaving him. For, by the latest form of' law, a wife cannot obtain a complete divorce for adultery alone ; she must also prove desertion or cruelty. Far be it from us to impute motives ; we only observe the effect of the course taken in court by the husband's counsel. To admit the adultery was to entitle the wife to a judicial separation, but to disprove the adultery was to refuse a complete divorce ; which would have retracted one-third of the wife's fortune settled on the husband at the marriage. It is remarkable that the adultery specially denied was that with the lady's servant ; but, if we are not mistaken, it has been ruled that the adultery, of the husband with a woman under the conjugal roof is " cruelty ; " so that to have been held guilty of that particular adultery would have involved cruelty as well. The jury affirmed the evidence on both charges. The husband in this ease is deprived of such a provision for old age as "the weaker vessel" was bound to leave him.
It is true that in this instance the violator of the marriage vow was the husband; but perhaps we may a draw solace for "A Sufferer" from the reflection which that case suggests. Another of the cor- respondents, "A Lawyer," confirms the policy of irrevocable settlements.
"In the course of a legal experience of nearly forty years, I have seen a very large number of cases of privately-arranged separation between husband and wife. In every clue but one the wife had a provision independent of her husband; and in almost every case, the wife was the chief wrongdoer."
Most lawyers and men of the world will allow that for one woman who deviates from the matrimonial compact there are fifty men who do so. Now if the money hold is so conducive to fidelity in the ease of women,—not the more mercenary sex,—perhaps a more complete dependence of the husband may check the larger aberrant tendencies on that side ; and, if loss of settlements were to follow upon infidelity, gentlemen who seldom beat their wives might be made to pause before they allow themselves the other licence. To effect this, it would only be necessary to grant complete divorce for adultery on the husband's side. Strict reasonera, indeed, may tell us that the argument thus stated would only justify an extension of sink right of.divorce to women of property.
Previous page
