The Sun.
London, England, 1857-02-14 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF LORDS.-(YESTERDAT.)

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the wool-
sack at five o'clock.
The Eail of SHAFTESBURY presented a petition
from the working men of Clerkenwell, praying for mea-
sures in aid of emigration.

The Earl of DERBYCHINA gave notice that when the
papers relative to China were laid upon the table of
the house, he should make a substantive motion
thereon. Of course, until the papers were produced,
he could not state the nature of suoh motion.

THE BANK CHARTER.
The Noble EARL also expressed his regret at hear-
ing that the Government rote❑ded proposing a mea-
sure for the lenewal of the Bank Charter. He supposed

it was not intended to move the appointment of a com-
mittee of that house to inquire into the subject, nor was
he disposed to ask them to do so. In the years 1848-9
a committee sat upon the subject of the commercial dis-
tress that then existed, and made a valuable report,
which was still in the possession of the house. If it was
not the intention of her Majesty's Government to appoint
a committee of that house previous to the consideration
of the renewal of the Bank charter, he wished to know
whether there would be any objection to printing a li-
mited number of copies of that report for the use of their

lordships.
Earl GRANVILLE said there would not be the
slightest objection to reprinting the report to which the
noble earl alluded.

PROPERTY OF MARRIED WOMEN.
Lord BROUGHAM, in rising to call the attention of
the house to the rights of property of married women,
said that he could not abstain from expressing his great,
and, indeed, hardly to be expressed, gratification at an
important event which bad taken place in the House of
Commons since he had last addressed their lordships. In
the House of Commons a unanimous resolution had been
agreed to in favour of the establishment of a department
of public justice—a step about which he had never felt
any difficulty, although he knew that many persons had.
He had for years been urging upon Parliament in every
possible shape the absolute necessity for no longer being
without the inestimable benefit of such a department. In
adopting that resolution the House of Commons had acted
upon the recommendation of Lord Bacon, and he was glad
to hear that the house had been unanimous and hearty in
its approval of a department of justice. It might be said
that now there was every hope of so de,irable a consum-
mation being carried into effect by the Government, he
might withdraw from the position which, according to
a jocular remark of a noble and learned friend, be (Lord
Brougham) bad so long filed as " Ctiarg4 d'Affaires" of
that department.
Lord CAMPBELL was understood to suggest that
the noble and learned lord might be the First Minister
of Justice.

Lord BROUGHAM said the duties of such an officer
would be so onerous, so important, that, even were he
not determined never to take any office at his mature
age, he would not venture to assume the responsibilities
of such a department. Happily, all difficulty would give
way to the acknowledged importance of the subject, and
he bad little doubt that they would soon Fee the creation
of that department. However, until the arrival of a
Minister of Justice, his own duties as Charge d'Affaires
of that department could not be said to be entirely
abolished. He would proceed to the special subject
which he had to bring under their lordships'
notice that evening—the grievances of married
women, especially in respect to their property. He
bad presented a petition signed by 2,000 of their fellow
countrywomen, of all classes—some earning wages by
daily work, some with property, the gift of friends or
deceased relatives, and some earning incomes, often
large, by the exercise of industry, of admirable genius
as authoresses, artists in painting and sculpture, and the
names of several such distinguished persons gave weight
to the prayer of that petition. It must be remembered
that by the law as it stood at present those earnings
might be eotirely abstracted from those whose Ja,bours
had procured them, and were capable of being vested,
without a moment's delay or one word of warning, in their
husbands, that the earnings would be—not the wife's who
by her labour, skill, or genius had gained them, but her
husband's—he who had no share in earning them, and
who might be as worthless as she who bad worked
for them was undoubtedly meritorious. That was the
law of England. To show tee grievous hardships which
might and did occur, he would mention a case which
he had heard from a noble lord in the house, of a
woman industrious, and he was assured a good woman,
who bad married a good-for-nothing fellow. She sepa-
rated from [him and took to shoemaking, in which, by
her industry and frugality, she managed to scrape to-
gether 201. or 301., when her husband, who had not
only deserted her, but lived with another woman, hear-
ing tbat his wife had saved money, for a moment quitted
his paramour, rushed upon the capital his wife had ac-
cumulated, and not only took that, but also collected all
the debts due to her, and then, leaving her again to
starve, returned to his mistress. Then there was a case
which had come to his own knowledge, in which be had
heard the statement of the party, had made inquiries,
and was perfectly convinced of the accuracy of the
statement A gentlewoman had been deserted by ber
husband, who went to the gold m:nes of Australia with
another woman, and left the wife totally unprovided
for. Being well educated, she kept a school, and
succeeded, after a year or two, in
establishing a
flourishing seminary, and he was informed that
t
no one could better merit success than she did. Inhe meantime, however, the husband's mining specu-
lations having proved unsuccessful, he returned to this
country, instantly rushed upon that other mine which his
wife had opened, and not only seirsd the gold which she
had accumulated, but broke up the school by selling the
furniture and collecting the debts;
having done which
he left his wife again and returned to his paramour. It
was not to be denied that such cases were extreme cases,
but nevertheless they were such as might happen to
any one. He could refer to cases which were of more
frequent occurrence. It would be observed that those
grievances chiefly affected the middle and humbler
classes. The husband's right to defraud his wife, for
fraud it must be called, might not always be carried to
the extent as in the cases which he had mentioned, but
the common case was of a woman married to a drunken,
idle good-for-nothing, who, not choosing to work
himself preferred to live at his wife'© expense. Their
lordships had only to go into any great manufacturing
town in Lancashire in order to see the consequence of
the law as it at present stood. He was told that there
would be found besieging the door where the workworaen
were receiving their weekly wages the husbands of these
women, who were obtaining, not by soft violence, but in
many cases by severe pressure,lthe money which they
had just received at the pay-table. It was said that an
alteration of the law would have a tendency to beget
quarrels, but those who would go to Oldham, to which
town his information more particularly applied, and there
see the husbands lying in wait for the money of their
wives, would see that the present law was far from ex-
empting married couples from the incident of quarrels.
At a meeting of the Law Amendment Society in June,
presided over by that most honourable and useful public
man, Sir J. Pakington, a detailed statement was made
by a manufacturer (Mr. Musgrave, as we understood)
employing a large number of work women, earning from
20s. to 40s. a-week, many of whom, he said, were sought
in marriage by men who designed to live idle upon the
wages earned by their wives. This manufactures gave
ten different instances of the truth of his state-
ment, and added that the women whose wages were
thus taken from them were suffered to go disreputably
ragged, while their children were miserably provided for.
The evil being apparent, the question was as to the
remedy. The testimony of these poor women was de-
cisive as to the existence of the evil, although they might
not all agree as to the remedy, or be the best judges of
what ought to be done for their relief. The general
opinion was in favour of doing for those women who
alnawdieddidinfotersptaetre-
smoanrr: i
we dh
owoudi
ehr
wtsettlementsl
lw. h ;Ittf
Itthme
the law made a will for him, and so it was suggested
that when parties married without making a marriage
settlement, the law, following the analogy of wills, should
make a settlement for them. If parties chose to make a
settlement fur themselves before marriage, and to.tie up
their property, then the law need not interfere.
Otherwise let the woman obtain her property as a
fame sole, with the provision that the husband should
not be liable to her debts either before marriage or
during coverture, and following in all respects the
analogy of the feme sole. (A Noble Lord.—The
children ?] The children should be maintained by both
hwisifew,atshte
ehwliafew iheiini Using e
greater part of the
equally liable with the
United States. Both lawyers and laymen agreed that it
bad answered perfectly, and they laughed at the idea of
its tending to produce quarrels. There was some little
husband and
T
doubt as to a wife's right to her own earnings in France;
but there was no doubt as to her right to her real pro-
perty, and there was no material difference with regard
to the rights enjoyed by a wife between the French and
English law. But the remedies given to the wife in
France were much superior to those given to her in this
country. Not only had ehe a right to apply for a sepci•