New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-11-10
MR.. COUNSELOR BRADY ON MORAL
RESTRAINT FOR WOMEN.
To tie Editor Of The ". Y. TyiSpse.

| ny suggestions in the Woodman case. My proses-
sonsl Efforts have frequently been criticised and some
times censured In Jour columns, as In those Of other
| public journals And, yet this is the first tins ever
addressed lire to editor in reference to such CON
meDts. have always been entirely wlif that what
said or did in Couts OF Justice should examined
| with the create 81 free dom. And would no. de-
part from my usual TO such alters but for
tie fact tina, you alluded to me 10 injection with
certain suppo.ed heresies about Womsn's Right"
| and the authority Of msp, which / never adopted
Though make professions of notable galsutry
and csnrot DO st of that chvalc devotion to the fair
EEK for which oil editors justly Distinguished
would OF like to fulfilled the Alarming prophecy Of
my brother Busted, who declared in Co the other
! day, that when the women heard my notions about
"norsl restraint they would exclude me both from
matrinory end omnibuses. shudder at such doom,
for am not boy in years, the cold weather i.
! irg. and / bate railroad cars
did not coy, never thought, and entirely deny
that husband ito use your language" at liberty
to lock up bis wife whenever he may think necessary
or find it for his interest according 10 his inclina
tic to do co." did not mean by moral restrain
what you call Incarceration in a private Lunstic
Asylum" fully subscribe to the doctrines Of your
article. They conform TO the law and to the decision
of Judge Roosevelt, who avowed that if itappeared
that Mrs. Woodman sane ard under restraint, be
would set her at bery Whatever might be the conse-
quepces. You say that "The husband msy un-
"doubtedly Rave his habeas corpus to recover tse
possession of bis wifes person when II is Illegally de-
tanned fom him &" Permit ure 10 refer you 10 case
in the first volume of Duers Superior Court Reports at
page 700, where you viii find opinion from that
eminent Judge and Reporter, in which the whole law
81 bahe he
and wife is deliberately and elegantly stated. You
will there find also that during the brilliant career
Of Lord Manifold the Court Of King Bench on habeas
corpus made orders compelling reluctant wife to
"reuIp TO the houae and submit the authority of her
husband" But as Judge Duer remarks, that as
"suredy is not at this day the Law Of Englacd" 1t
10 certainly true that by the strict rules Of law wife
who u, Justly deprived of her liberty by her husband
NAV be set at large habeas corpus even although
she ayow her intention TO seek ct the society nf
paramour.
But suggested to Judge Roosevelt, and now sub
NIT to you that it is very interesting, ard, in jurs-
prudence undetermined question whether moral re-
strart amounting TO interruption of absolute freedom
Of will or Of entire personal liberty, may not in some
cases be applied without such restraint furnishing
cause for judicial interference.
If wife were dangerously i'll, ha brain irrtsted by
disease her system agtsted and although she
were perfectly zane should b., indispensable for her
phy steal and mental health for her to remain at home
suppose society would consider 1t the duty of her
husband to guard her from exposure to danger,
or to DEATH If she should, while in the stae have
described influenced by within caprice, persist 10
going a. road and wandering through the storm to
distant point would gentle restraint imposed upon her
warrant Judge in opening the doors and letting her
depsrt7 If brother fourd his sister, person Of
very feeble intellect, though not in law non compos
mentis-under the fascinating control OF notorious
hbertine and resolved to abandon herself to his prod
gate embraces would restraint Upon her perverted
viii exercised by the brother 10 withhold the sister
from itfaDy ard ruin, be such as the law would re.
| move?
Now do not assert that the vie or sister might
not, in such as have suppo'ed, be judicialy
declared free TO do as she pleased. But called to est
in such case counsel for the husband or brother
would certainly use my utmott capacity to prevent
| such 40 adjudication. And when was employed to
aid in returning TO the home of her parents woman
whose msfortunes seemed to deserve commiseration,
never occurred TO that any honorable usa OF fair
srpumentto secure such result coGld subject me to
an imputation Of severity toward woman. There was
| a difficulty 10 our Gaze Of no small embarrassment.
Mrs. Woodman was not underth roof of her husband
II might therefore well be adjudged that this circum-
starce would have prevented the application to her
case Of the principle for which proposed 10 contend,
| even if that principle were right 10 Itself. buy
| counsel do not decide cases. They do not always
| know what the law is, Worse than that, they cannot
tell what Judges may declare it to be. We mud the
Judges abroeating modifying old rules, aud IN
Producing ew ruler, all the time We cannot ioresee
what view Of case may ultimately be sdoped' sao
| IL
This uncertainty is to omit no argument ct oil reason
able which being hororably employed, may fairy
secure the favorable result Of our csuse. do not
subscribe to the memorable and often repeated OBJ
.ervation Of Lord Broughsm, q, to the Advocates
privilege or drty but claim the right in any legal
controversy to present for my client every digestion
| which may be decenty ard iLteligen.ly advanced In
| grave discussion.
You perceive. therefore, that my views Of the Law
in its ordinary application entirely agree with yours
and That have only desigoei suggesting, in conuec'
ton with the general rules yea have sisted, eKcsp-
tora cases which have net ye. jadicialy rsceived
either eaIcion or dsfavor. ask, therefore, to be
set night with the womeE readers Of The TRlRUSr
| who may feel an interest n what publicly say
| or do if any such there be do not like TO be re-
earded as crusty ard cruel bachelor, ready TO imi
tate the grim tyrsnts who, the stories of childhood
informed us sometimes went go far - to devour fair
ls6ee and at other times immersed them in dungeons,
or kept them from the blessed daylight by the sopli-
suce of bolts bars ard 81 ikles. Like yourself, l
| would prefer hist women should erjoy the largest
liberty consistent with the preservation Of the public
morals ard know any pressure or restraint more
Objectionable than hat which pare fondness empOy
in er folding an object Of honorable love in the en-
brace of kind and lawful protector