Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1856-07-05

If real estate. he has u life interest in it. If she
earn anything, he may take it from her. If she
be libeled or injured IN any way, she has no right
to sue at the law for redress. She can make no
contract. Virtually she is an outlaw, and all for
no fault of her own. And in action Of Grim. con-,
the wife, though the party most deeply interested,
can have no voice and no hearing. The husband
may take n verdict by agreement with the defend
ant, and thus blast the character of his wife by
collision. This had been done in cases in which
the innocence of the wife had been afterward put
beyond the possibility of doubt. The case Of
Lord Byron, though not quoted by Lord Lyndhurst
illustrates n portion Of his structures. Being sepa-
rated from his wife in about a year after mar
riage, Mr.. Moore tells us, if we are not mistaken,
that he did not Intend at first to take any portion
of Lady Byron's property for his own use. But
beirg much pressed for money, he did finally, and
pretty soon, resort to it, and drew, we think, g.
600 per dnnum from her resources, for his purpOs-
es and those of his fair Italian friends.
Lord Lyndhurst claimed for women an equal
right to be divorced from their husbands for
sufficient cause, that men had to be IivOr-
ced from their wives. And he would extend
the causes of divorce beyond the single ofense Of
conjugal infdelity. Gross cruelty, and other caus-
es, could not be enumerated, but which ought t. be
sufficient to call for this relief, should be added, at
the discretion Of a competent tribunal. lie cited
the law of Scotland, where divorce, MS well as
matrimony, is on a totally different footing from
what obtains in England, and its operation, 70
show that the ill effects which were feared from a
more humane law Oh this subject were merely IL
lusory. lie might also have quoted that of this
country, in most of the States of which the lew of
divorce stands much as he would make it in Eng
land, and we apprehend that the marriage relation
is as much respected, and the law Of divorce as
little abused, as in any country whatever. vi
course, we speak only of the civilized parts of the
country. How it may be in the barbarian regions
of Slavery. where marriage is prohibited to more
than half the inhabitants, we cannot affirm. Lord
Brougham seconded the motion. He recitcd sew
eral cases of extreme hardship, and proceeded to
say; at was superfluOus and impertinent to dwell
a minute longer on these gross injustices, crueltics,
and inhumanities, which were %practiced upon
married women under the present law. Unless
some redress were afforded, we must be content to
be held ny to mankind as pretending to live in a
civilized country, while really living under q sys-
tenn more barbarous and inconsistent with itself
than existed in any other part of the world
Lord Redesdale was apprehensive of evil from too
great facilities being allowed for divorces, while
he admitted the demand for some redress. The
Earl of Aberdeen was only opposed to the REFER
ence by the fear of prolonging the present system.
He maintained the excellence of the working of
the Scotch system of marriage and divorce, and
affirmed that the Scotch law making acknowledge
ment of marriage before witnesses, followed by
cohabition, a lawful marriage, was founded in rea-
son and justice.
The law was finally referred to the Select Com.
mittee asked for. The Times, we see, fears that it
may rest there, and never behold the light of day
again. But we think not. Lord Lyndhurst hav-
ing pledged himself to tho principle of this reform
and having thus set forth its justice and necessity,
we think that he will not let it die in silence. 1t
is 4 pleasant sight to see q veteran lawyer like
Lord Lyndhurst, and one that has always stood
firmly for the good old things against the things
that are new-to see such an one taking the initia-
tive in such a measure of legal and social reform.
lie could not do better for his own fame than to
connect his memory with the abolition of those
relics of barbarism, and the equalization CT the
legal rights of women and of men in these most
important particulars. Lord Lyndhurst is now in
his eighty-ffty year, and yet there is no voice lis
tened to with more attention, and the opinion Of
no one is of greater weight in tho Lords and with
the people than his. He has survived the old par
tisan bitterness which his persistent Toryism ex
cited in the hearts of multitudes yearniug for bet
ter things than they found. Inaeed, he has almost
survived parties, for the rallying of men in and
out of Parliament. under certain leaders, can hard
ly be called parties in the old Fox and Pitt or Wei
lington ard Grey sense of the term. He belongs
as it were to history, while he is still as promp
and as able to play his part on the present scene
as ever. Witness his speech, a year ago, on the
conduct of Austria in the Russian War. But
great legal reform like this, which touches socia
life and domestic happiness at so many points, i
one that most fifty becomes a public man Of fit,
years standing. He could not more GRACEFUL,
round his long life of public service than by
work of wise humanity like this.