Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1859-04-25

ly coast, family in heaven But when the
adulterer puts his young wife asunder from
her husband, her child is cut off from all kim
dred fellowship, the companionship and protec-
ton OF a brother of the same blood can never
be hers. No sister of the same blood can ever
share her sorrow or her joy. Alone thence
forth she must journey through life, bowed
down with mothers shame. The crime of
adultery belongs to the class known in law as
NAHUM IN se-evil in itself. We can easily per-
celye why in holy writ it is pronounced to be
one which admits of no ransom and no recon-
pense. We can perceive why it is denounced
IN every book of the Old and New Testament
by every holy lawgiver, prophet and saint
we can understand why it is twice forbidden in
the tenth commandment and why Jehovah
himself from the tabernacle in the midst of the
congregation declared that whosoever commit
eth adultery with his neighbors wife shall sure
ly be put to death.
When man has obtained such power over
anothers wife that he can not only entice her
from her husbands house, but separate her
from her child for the purpose of guilt, it
shows that by some means he has acquired such
an unearthly mystery over the woman's body
and soul that there is no chance of saving her
while he lives; and the only hope of her sal
walton is that Gods swift vengeance shall over
take him. The sacred glow of well-placed do
nestle affections, no man knows better than
your Honor, grows brighter and brighter, as
years advance The faithful couple, whose
hands are joined in holy wedlock, find their
hearts drawn closer to each other as they de-
scend the hill of life to sleep together at its
foot. But lawess love is short-liyed as it is
criminal, and the "neighbor's wife," so hotly
pursued by trampling down every human feel
ing and divine law, is speedily supplanted by
the object of some further lust And then the
wiz 70 L. r.
mon prostitution, and swept through misera-
bic life and horrible death to the gates of
hell, unless husbands arm shall save her.
VINO, seeing this thing would not exclaim to
the unhappy husband, "Hasten hasten hast
en- to save the mother of your child Al
though she is lost as a wife, rescue her from
the horrid adulterer, and may the Lord watch
over home and family, guide the bullet and
direct the stroke p
Here the audience broke into unrestrained
bursts Of applause, which the officers of the
court vainly endeaYored to check Mr. S.
continued i
And when she is delivered who will not
reckon the salvation of that young mother
cheaply purchased by the adulterer's blood
aye, the blood OF Key was shed to save one
mother from that horrible fate, which, on that
Sabbath-day, hung over this prisoners wife,
and the mother OF his child.
upon the question OF adultery as justiica-
ton for homicide, the counsel quoted judicial
decisions in this country and England He
cited the English case of Manning, a married
man, who, entering his house one day, found
his wife in the arms of a neighbor, in the act
OF adultery. The husband snatched up pts.
tol and struck blow over the adulterer's head,
and killed him on the spot, and for this was ar
ralgned as prisoner for murder. AS an Eng
lishman, it was his birthright to have the act
passed upon by a jury of his countrymen, and
his guilt or innocence determined by them in
accordance with the common law. But this
was in the dark day of judicial tyranny and
corrupton,th the days when jurors were fined and
sent to Jail for refusing to find verdicts against
their conscience, in accordance with the charge
ofthe Court the age Of adultery and corrup-
ton. The palace was filled with harots, and
thronged with adulterers and addresses. The
Judges were the panderers, partakers and pro-
tectorS OF the corruption of the age, and the
same court which adjudged the husband to be
felon for Staying an adulterer on his bed, and
sent to prison for refusing to find verdict
in accordance with its Instructions. 1t was
the same court that hunted Quakers, Catholics,
and non-contormists to death the same court
which prosecuted John Howe and Richard
Baxter, and which sent to the pillory and
prison John Bunyan for preaching the gospel
to the poor. This was the state of the laws
and social life at the time the principle was in
Toduced into the common law of England
that to Kill an adulterer in the act is a crime.
The doctrine on which this prosecution rests
is founded on the Manning case But it is
also to be observed that from the day in which
that case was decided to the present hour, no
husband has been punished in England for
taking the life of an adulterer.
The counsel proceeded to argue that in the
fhrnn ons4.. II
North Carolina and South Carolina Reports
there were distinct questions at issue; and
that the cases OF slaves did not govern or APP
ply to this case. The American common law
on the subject was shown by several cases in
which the slayer of the seducer was acquitted
When, he asked, did the adulterous doctrine
of Charles Second prevail in America Not
where the stars and stripes wave not even
where the royal banner Of Enel floats. For
1t was not long since, in Canada, a husband
had followed his wife's seducer from city to
city, till he found and slew him. And there
the doctrine of Charles Second was repealed,
and the man was instantly acquitted. By the
American law the husband is always present
by his wife. His arm is always by her side.
His wing is ever over her. The consent ofthe
wife cannot in any degree affect the adulterer's
guilt and if he be slain in the act it is iustitia
be homicide.
The counsel passed to the question of what
constituted the act. 1t was the doctrine of
Mannings case that the wife could not only
consent to the act, but the husband, if he came
in the dark, could not lay his hands on the
adulterer until he Lit the candle and saw his
shame. And then, if he slew the adulterer, he
must have the fellow brandings on his hands
The object was to erect before the husband
the gallows and the branding iron, so that the
courtierS and corrupt men of the age might
pursue with impunity the wives and daughters
OF the people. Hence they demand that not
only the wife should not consent, but the hus-
band should see his wife. But it is the fact of
adultery that constitutes the guilt of the ind-
vidual and the justification of the husband
That fact is to be manifested according to the
same rules Of evidence applied to other facts.
The counsel stated as his last proposition,
that the wife's consent could not shield the
adulterer she being incapable by law of CON
sentng to any intraction of her husbands
marital rights and in the absence of any con
sent on his part every violation of his wife's
chastity, is in the contemplation of law forci-
BILE, and rlay be treated as an act of violence
and force on his wite's person. And it follows
that the right of the husband to resist that
force is clear and undoubted on the highest
principles of law. 1t is not an act of revenge
or of lawiess violence. 1t is based on the
same ground as the right of selfdefence. The
man is not bound to wait till the mortal blow
is about to be given, but any movement to-
ward the foul purpose plainly justified him in
the right of selt-defence, and in staying the
assailant on the spot.
The theory of our case is, that here was a
man living in constant state of adultery with
the prisoners wife, man who was daily by