The Express.
London, England, 1853-03-31 00:00:00

A FEMALE WORD ON THE LAW OF

DIVORCE.

TO THI lIDITOR OP TIII EIPFITSB.

Stet,—Is it too much to hope that in your influen-
tial journal—the unflinching advocate of popular rights—
the vote, of a woman may be allowed to protest against
several unjust and iniquitous clauses contained in the
'• Report of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into
the Law of Divorce ?"
The clauses to which I would draw attention ere the fol-
lowing, via.—" That divorces a vinculo shall be allowed
for adultery, and for adultery only"—" That divorces
a vinculo shall only be granted on the suit of the husband,
and not (as a general rule) on the suit of the wife"—" That
the wife, however, may also apply for divorce a stinted(' in
cases of aggravated enormity ; such as incest or bigamy."
Now, sir, I wish to inquire why, if a man is to be allowed
to rid himself by an inexpensive process, of an unfaithful
wife, a woman IS not in like manner to be freed from an
unfaithful husband ? The answer no doubt will be, that
infidelity on the part of a wife is more detrimental to the good
order and well-being of society than the same aims on the
put of a husband, inasmuch as illegitimate children might
be introduced by au unfaithful wife into a family, and
brought up by a deceived husband as his own.
This is the only argument that has ever been seriously ad-
vanced to sanction the difference made in the treatment of un-
faithful wives and hust•ands. But not to dwell on the very
rare instances in which such a deception could be sueeeufully
maintained, I will merely remark that the Christian law,
which we all profess to follow, recognises no such distine
tions, and that the commandments of God are held to be
equally binding on the one sex as on the other.
Our legislators may talk of unchristianising the country
by the admission of a few Jews to parliament, but could a
whole parliament of " Jews, Turks, or Infidels," do more
to uncbristianise a nation than the enactment of a law which
plainly asserts that there is one set of duties fur men and
another for women ?—and is, therefore completely at va-
riance with the teaching of the Divine Founder of our re-
ligion.
In the dark ages, when a man's life was valued accord-
ing to his rank, when serfs were little better than beasts of
burden, woman, being the weaker "animal," was treated
as all weak creatures are, i.e. kept for use or pleasure, and
denied all rights. It was therefore not extraordinary that
in those times laws respecting marriage, such as now dig-
grace our statute book, should have been enacted; but that
in the present age, when " liberty " is the universal cry,
when "equal Justice to all men " is the proud bout of
Englishmen, such shameful differences between the
two sexes should be re-enacted, would make one doubt
the sincerity of those who raise their voices for social and
religious freedom; for we see that where they due be
tyrants, they are so.
Aa a body, it is my firm belief that English women (and
in the term I would include our sisters in Scotland and
Ireland) are more virtuous than any other women in the
world. And when we reflect on the matter, we may, per-
haps, be surprised to think they are so, considering the
example that is set them by the so-called nobler sex. While
the mother and daughters of a family are strictly attentive
to their religious duties, modest and scrupulously correct
in their conduct, the brothers (and, sad to say, occasion-
ally the father of the family) are the very reverse. Even
a mother is scarcely tolerated if she inquire into the mode
of life of her sons. " Women have no busiaeu to know
the private histories of young men's lives." What, then
have women only souls to be saved ; or, have men some se-
cret dispensation for practising with impunity vices which
in women are held to be the destruction of both soul end
body Listen to the reproofs of a pious clergyman to a
poor girl who has lapsed from virtue. Does he not enlarge
on the enormity of her guilt, and place before her terrified
mind the awful picture of eternal condemnation, utterly
forgetting his own career at college and the life he led in
his own wild youth ? Does net even the guilty father—
tenfold more guilty because he has broken a solemn en-
gagement—does not ho coat off and utterly disown the
daughter who has "disgraced" him, or the wife who has
been led into vice by his bad example, or who has reta-
liated on him the miseries he has caused her

Would I desire then that my countrywomen should him
impunity to sin ? God forbid. I desire to see them con-
tinue virtuous and religious, as they are; but at the same
time I claim for them equal justice, and I claim for them
this justice from men, until the advancement of society
permits them to have a voice in the enactment of laws,
some of which (like that I have brought under your no-
tice) so deeply affect their interests.
Berwick. March 26.

SPORTING.

C. R.