The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-07-06

rights have been respected: but English
conservatism has been proof against the
innovations of modern progress. me ne
reditary legislators of England have hardly
merited Adam Smiths sarcasm that the in
stitution Of primogeniture produces only
one fool in a family. Rank has ordinarily
sons have had the pick OF the handsomest.
richest and possibly the best educated
women. and young noblemen have had not
only social prestige. but also the response
bility of the maintenance Of large estates
thrust upon them. There are black sheep In
the flock. but the English peerage. as a
whole. has not been lacking in intellect.
character and administrative capacity. IL
has also been one of the most cautious,
prudent and sagacious legislative bodies.
The House of Lords would have been swept
away by political revolution or organized
agitation long ago If it's leaders had not
exercised self-restraint and either modi1ed
or surrendered their exclusive privileges
before there was any loud cutlery against
them. In a country not remarkable for nex-
Utility of either mind or practice, the his
tory OF the House of Lords has been an OBJ
jecf lesson of adaptability. Ordinarily the
hereditary legislators remain in the back
ground. ~listless spectators of the work OF
the Commons. When a Tory government Is
In power the upper house is hardly more
than a machine for registering the meas
ures enacted by the Commons. The de-
ceased wife's sister marriage bill Is almost
the only question that fills the benches.
Only once during the last generation has
there been a full muster. This was when
wi = OlAit Xix OAA ~
out That was a muster which alarmed the
wise men among the peers. They said. I'M
der their breath. that there must never be
another exhibition OF this kind.
HI EARL'S RECORD.
The pobIeman with a charge OF bigamy
hanging over him is not so appalling as a
mob of titled legislators massed from their
private estates and rural pleasures for the
purpose of overwhelming the will of the
electorate OF the United Kingdom. Earl
Russell. however, with his honored name
and his restrospect of matrimonial rela-
tons and adventures, is an object lesson I'm
the deterioration Of the titled class. Did
Tory lords will probably be grateful TO Sir
Franklin Washington If they can be spared
the necessity of disposing of this bigamy
case. During the last three years there has
been n series OF discreditable litigations la
which the earl has been concerned. Nine
months after his first marriage Countess
Russell instituted divorce proceedings. but
the earl was acquitted OF alleged acts of
cruelty. subsequently she brought suit for
restitution OF c~onjugal rights. and the earl
obtained judicial separation on the GROUND
mat she was guilty OF legal cruelty In max
Ing criminal charges against him. The
lower court decided in his favor and the
Court OF Appeal dismissed both petitions.
and its judgment was sustained on a fresh
appeal TO the House of Lords. Earl Russell
meanwhile had sued his mother-in-law
LADY Selma Scott. for criminal libel. and
Countess Russell subsequently appeared at
n provincial theater In "A Runaway Girl"
and was a performer in a London music
hall when the earl telegraphed 10 the Times
from Nevada the advertisement of his mar
riage with Mrs. Summerville, after each
had obtained an American divorce. The
rnal hearing OF the bigamy case. III IL comes
before the House of Lords. viii render a
once honored name notorious, and will do
much 10 impair the prestige of the privi-
legged class. Incidentally IL will also direct
the worlds attention to the incongruities
and anomalies Of the American law of mar
rage and divorce. and possibly will hasten
an urgently needed reform in the unifica-
ton OF state statutes in the Union.