The Express.
London, England, 1859-02-07 00:00:00

SEATO V. KEATS AND MONTWITM..-THE LAW OP

In this cams the petitienm, Mr. ex-Sheriff ileats, had pro-
ceeded mama his wife fora divorce, on the ground el adul-
tery ooeusitted with a Spaniard, eased Mosilmaam. The
adultery had beta Meninx I, but the wife bed plaided condo-
nation ; end • jury had found the issue against her. A rule
Wei for • new trial had, bowie bees oldebeid es the
grocuid of miedireetke and of the ierdict baths spinet the
evideaus In the comes of the trial it wee proved that the
husband had Weigle letters to a relative of his wile, in
which be spoke 'LW& Koala as having bath deeply injured,
MI et the petition se leaven berm flied without hie sanction.
Ile mead be • rammelliaties, end was soundly going to his
wile with her relative for thet purpose ; but on the way be
celled su his legal dithers, who showed him the widows
whisk bad been lathe by • coutakeekam at Dublin. la
cesesquence of this he brake off the negotiations; bat
• short time afterwards he voluntarily renewed them—le
met hie wife, shook hands with her, sad mid that they would
understand ea, Li other better in future; but thot they "must
not revert to the past. Sr C. Cresswell charged the jury
that tremors. would not amount to eondonaiion iu low,
unless it was accompanied by an intestka ea the part of the
aggrieved pm tv to remise the ,Raeder to the poevion he or
she had occupiol before committing the offence. Mr. sad
Mrs. Keen. bad never actually lived together after the Inter-
view just mint. al. and the jury therdore negatived the
plea of the respondent.
Mr. Phinn, Q.C., Dr. Addams, Q.C., and Mr. Hilted; sp.
peened for Mr. Keats; Dr. Phillituore, Q.C., end Mr. Tring
for the reepoodect.
Mr. Plums now showed cease spinet the rake, sad m-
inuted that there could be no cuedunation la law tulles.
there was actual ee.mbiteitioa. If, however, it was held that
coeduestion might be effected by weeds, the kernel counsel
further contend d that the language of Mr. Ewe wee not
au®. ieutly explicit to bar his right to • divorce.
Dr. Phillincyre, contra, white admitting that the ore had
never before arieen in the courts, claimed all entheritien to
favour of his mopoaii ion, to the effect that condonation, which
was an act of the mind, might be prated by words alone.
He Woo argued that the decries laid down by Sir C. Creme
well, name 'y, that to effect mandonati n there mute be such
a blotting out of the odors as Mr oral the °Melding peaty
to the pectin the had forfeited by her mhcoaduet, wee
abouluts'y novel and without precedent. Even If the learned
edge's dictum were stunt, tee Language of the petitkmer,
both is his letters and in the interview he had had with the
r. spondee., ind reed an obviate intention to replace Lee In
the petition of a wife.
The Lord Chancellor, in r.,:vhig Judgment, maid the point
which they Mel now to decide was or of 'contiderable
portauce. It wee admitted that the ecclesiastical reports did
net throw any light upon the terheicel meaning of the mod
" condocatices," bemuse, es Sir C. Creeewell had very
properly stated in his summing up, the judges of the spiri-
tual courts were responsible for the law as well as for the facts.
The wiestion of what constituted legal forgiveouis had thus
never emus to be argued before them, it bring amassed that
they were already so well arguainied with the kw beating
upon the point that It was uuseeemery to diem's. it be.ors
them. When the Jades Ordinary raid that condonation
enseunted to • biettieg out of the offence, he could not be
=Vto have us, d the teem in its literal sense; for ea
ence committed mull sot, strictly 'raise. be
blotted out by man et all. What the learned judge really
want was, of course, that the offence should no tenger be me
membered &Oust the offender, and that the effeeder should no
burger he melted with the elinseenebees of her °fleece. In
this ones they had the very highest authority for
the re of the term—"l, eves 1. am He that
bketeth out thy 'reopen colons for Mier own rake,
end will sot !muenster thy sirs"—(lealsh, cliff., 26.)
The wand part of the I. must judge's delleiti n completely
expleised the pirate; for the keeled judge and that toe-
deviation was such a blot. ing out of the offence as reworad
the wife to her ft ruler beitioa. On the one ode it was con-
Seeded that that detinitim was imectuate, hermits it exchided
condonation by words; in !tenser to which it was sifted that
se verbal oondoneune waesulticaret makes fidiesed by semi
cobabitation. It would be useeis to ere- rt to the climatic
authors or to Sthebes f r the sensing of the word, because
it was well knee n that the signification of a Orme was Me.
qutetly changed by the lapel of time. The b &rued civilian
conteeded that if an hens. d husband wage to sty to his wife,
" I 1 tarive you, Mu I will never see you n 'hat
w.,uld amount to coneioweiun ; but It such a proposition were
for one momett somatic!, there was no sort of at,ince to
which adulterer,, hustsuras anti wives awl their friends would
neat neon in order to es rset • few momentous words from
the party ageri.v. d; mid it was *my to cone ice that a sud-
den impu'ise of tart. n, en elec.. of importunity, or a
re 'mutt of weskit.... might induce the injured par:y to let
till an espteasion which would for ever hereafter Lar his
right to the remedy irov.dd for him by the
law. Nothing, in feet, could be more nature'
than that • te bag of comp...ion fur oae with
whom a maa might have pereed many happy years,
should find its vent in expressioes which might by seine on
and pleaded is her, shim the pa re in from whom they bad
tamped bad really sever for tun moment thought of our-
rendering his legal remedy. A huelned nigh' be quite de.
trained never to lite aguia with the woman who had
wronged hire, and yet might be IMAM. to lighten by words
of forgiveness the Iced of d. spair by which he might fanny
she w.e weighed down. The counsel for the respondent had
&Mooed on • phtees of Lord St well namely, " that it was
not fitting that a man thou'd be allowed to roc fire debt
which he had rob:mod ;" and had contendeJ that If a has-
bead teepee his wi'o, he yielded up his eight to sue for •
divorce, although he might not Intend to restore her to her
fetter position. But that wee pressing the analogy too
ILr. Tie position of an adulteress wee rather that of •
.per.
we who had warn d • peesl7 than of one that ow, t 1 a debt.
She had in tact incurred the forfeiture of har right to insist oa
cohabitation with her humbled. Haight be very mute se the