The Sun.
London, England, 1830-04-03 00:00:00

on all hands. Yet the law says, no degree of mis-
conduct on the part of the wife shall entitle the
husband to riddance from his worthless partner. '1 he
Aristocracy, knowing the facility with which they
could set aside the law in their own case, have looked
on the distress of their inferiors with the sort of joy
which Lucretius ascribes to the man who, secure on
land, looks on a vessel buffeted about in a storm.
They have the sort of feeling towards their inferiors
which Smollett, in one of his novels, ascribes to the
better sort of French, who, when two peasants were
engaged in a combat, ordered pails full of cold
water to be thrown on them, to show their con-
tempt for both the parties. But, good God !
it is quite a different thing when the feelings
of families are concerned !—the feelings of high
families. This is the first time we have made any
observations on this case, because we hate, above
all things, any interference with private life. We
cannot therefore, charge ourselves with having in
any way stimulated the opposition which has been
made to the Bill. The above remarks as to the
consequences which may flow from such an oppo-
sition are quite distinct from the opposition itself.
If the higher ranks of this country knew how much
a distinction like that which they arrogate to them-
selves in the case of marriage inspires their inferiors
with jealousy and dislike for them, they would be
eager to renounce it. Its existence is at once a
proof of a cold-blooded selfishness, which deservedly
deprives them of all sympathy with them in

their own distress. How much more enviable is

the condition of those who have a place in the
regard of their fellow-citizens,- than those who,
by their conduct, surround themselves with people
who may exclaim, in the language of the King of
Israel, " I also will laugh at your calamity; I will
mock when your fear cometh; when your fear
cometh as desolation, and your destruction cometh
as a whirh‘ind ; when distress and anguish come
upon you." The law is either good or had ; if it is
bad for the rich it is bad for the poor; if it is good
for the poor it is good for the rich ; and for the latter
. .

to seek to exempt themselves from it by a private
Act, is justly making themselves objects of hatred to
the community at large, who are justified in return-
ing scorn for scorn, and indifference for indifference.
Yez those cold-blooded Aristocrats have been for
centuries relieving themselves, without ever for a
moment bestowing a consideration on their inferiors,

or thinking that they also have families and feelings.
When the object is to preserve a partridge they are
ready to load the Statute Book with Acts, but equal
justice is quite another affair ! The only way to
reach the hearts of the higher ranks of this
country is through their own sufferings. An
anecdote is told of the late William Nicholson,
the philosopher, which is somewhat to the point here.
One of his sons, a boy, was amusing himself with
running a needle through black beetles. The father
took the needle and run it pretty deep into the boy's
thumb, by which he was led to the reflection that
black beetles might feel as well as himself. The
people have an additional ground for complaining of
the conduct of the Aristocracy. By the law of this
country at one time, adultery was a crime, as it is
still in Scotland, where it is even punishable with
death. But as adultery is par excellence the crime
of the higher ranks, they who have leisure for in-
trigue found penal consequences inconvenient. While
they thus sought to extend their own liberty to do
wrong, and while they thus exempted themselves
from punishment, corrupting, of course, their inferiors
by their example, they have less title to be relieved
by divorce from marriage than any other class. The
middle and lower classes in every country are hos-
tile to licentiousness, and a law making adultery a
crime would be popular. Yet they—the grand cor-
ruptors—are to have all laws to yield to them;
while the people whom they corrupt are to be with-
out remedy. In the examination last night, some
of the Members seemed anxious to establish the
point so happily expressed by Ariosto, according to
the version of Harrington
But bee't some woman breaks chaste wedlock's laws,
And leaves her husband, and becomes unchaste,
Yet commonly it is not without cause,
She sees her man in sin his substance waste;
She feels that he his love from her withdraws. _
And hath on some (perhaps) less worthy placed.
Who strikes with sword, the scabbard him may strike,
And sure love craveth love, like asketh like.
Indeed in their behalf agree would I
That all wives that adultery do commit,
Should by a law condemned be to die,
If so their husbands guiltless be of it;
But if that men unpunished walk awry,
Doubtless In sense and reason 'tis not fit,
The weaker sex should for this sin be vext,
Do as you would be done to, saith the text."

Thus, for instance, Miss Steele, who did not
seem at first inclined to be very communicative,
was led, step by step, to give the following singu-
lar evidence :

"Have you ever conversed with him (Lord E.) on the
subject of Lady Eilenborough's conduct ?—Yes ; I have
told him that some of Lady Ellenborough's associates
were very bad indeed.—Can you tell ns who were the per-
sons you thus designated as being bad associates for Lady
Ellenborough?"

This was a dangerous question. Partridge ob-
serves, that though a man firing into a crowd can
only shout one person, yet as no one knows that he
may not be that person,every one takes to his heels.
A sense of personal safety therefore, as well as
Christian charity, might produce the instantaneous
cry of " No, no." The question was not pressed.
" Were the persons you spoke of in this language gen-

tlemen or ladies?—Both gentlemen and ladies. Were
they acquaintances of Lord or of Lady Ellenborough ?
I don't know. Were they introduced to the house
by Lord Ellenborough 2—Yes, they were of course in-
troduced by Lord Ellenborough. Were those persons
ladies and gentlemen moving in that circle of society in
which Lord and Lady Ellenborough were accustomed to
move?—They were. Did you caution Lord Ellenbo-
rough against the permitting his Lady to associate with
these ladies ?—I cannot say it was a caution ; I warned
him about these ladies and gentlemen, but I ca'nt
mention names.—(Hear, hear.)—Were these associates
unknown to Lady Ellenborough as Miss Digby ?—Certainly.
What reason had you to warn Lord Ellenborough against
these persons as associates of his Lady ?—I had no par-
ticular reason ; I merely knew them by report as profli-
gate men. What did Lord Ellenborough say tvlien you
cautioned him 2-1 cannot say I cautioned him ; I merely
warned him. What did be say ?—I do not recollect what
be said ; he laughed. Did you laugh, too?—No, I was
serious. Did you say any thing more ?—No, I meant it
as a warning to Lord Ellenborough ; and finding it was
not taken as I anticipated, I did not repeat it. . .
Were the persons to whom you allude la-
dies and gentlemen of rank and station in society ?
Yes they were. Were they persons of a rank usually
seen at places of public amusement?—Yes. They
were not persons rejected by society, or refused admittance
in respectable houses ?—They were persons not rejected at
houses called respectable.—(A laugh.)—Did you allude
to any particular individuals when you cautioned Lord
Ellenborough ?—Yes, I alluded to one individual—a lady
whose society I disapproved Were you not consi-
dered to be rather strict in your principles when
you made these complaints? Were you not considered
to be rather strict in your principles when you made these
complaints ? Perhaps I was. Were not the persons to
whom you objected received into the best English society
in London ?—They were received into the fashionable so-
ciety of London.—(Hear, and a laugh.)"
Sir Henry Hardinge, who put the questions,
having for object to show that the best English so-
ciety was not strict, and that to object to the so-
ciety of good society because it was profligate, was
being rather too strict, had rather a ticklish busi-
ness on his hands. It certainly is very hard that
Lord Ellcnborough should be the scape-goat for all
the sin of good society. Sir Henry's standard of
the best society reminds us of a description of Hell,
in a witty author, who, in distributing punishments
to the various classes, observes, that "the great
Lords, the makers of beds apart, are constrained to
sleep with their wives, arid to be the fathers of their
own children." The evidence is to be printed, and
the consideration of the question is adjourned.—
Chrontele.

The country is indebted to Mr. Peel for his per-
severing and successful labours to consolidate our
criminal law, and to mitigate its sanguinary severity
without impairing its efficiency,—labours which
have given simplicity and precision to a great body
of our statutes, by clearing their useful enactments
from the legislative rubbish with which they were
surrounded,-..which have made a knowledge of