« AnteriorContinuar »
glance at him over his spectacles - a look which seemed to the all-important “wilt thou?" yet, neither mind to chill him to the very marrow. Ella, too, felt that nor heart consenting, Justice and Right will rescue the her replies had sealed the doom of her once dearly entrapped one, and put asunder those thus joined to. beloved. And well-grounded was the fear of the cul gether. Collins v. Collins, 2 Brewst. (Penn.) 575. Mere prit, the triumph of the accusers. Sufficient cause unwillingness, some degree of reluctance, a show of had the lawyers for the glances which said unmistak masculine modesty, a refusal to take the hand of the ably, “he's a goner;” and very bad on the bench for bride, holding his peace (perhaps his last until he gains that look which read, “you rascal, fifteen years of the quiet of the tomb), will not, however, enable the penal service for you.” For the law of the land at bashful swain to reconsider the matter after the justhat time said that a marriage not lawfully celebrated, tice or parson has performed the ceremony, even by reason of fraud having been practiced by one party though the presence of the parents of the bride and a on the other, was valid in favor of the innocent vic- conservator of the peace in charge of the good-man tim, and that a marriage was perfectly good even when may have somewhat overawed him. Jackson v. Winns, one of the parties had been married under a false 7 Wend. 47. And voluntarily taking up housekeeping, name, providing the other was not cognizant of the or going into board together, after the cause of intimideceit. King v. Wroxton, 4 B. & A. 640. Hence, Ella dation has been removed, will have the effect of makhaving proved her husband ignorant of her real name, ing perfectly good (so far as the law is concerned) a established the validity of the marriage, branded him marriage at first invalid, because brought about by as a bigamist, and severed the last hair that held the fraud or force. Hamstead y. Plaiston, 49 N. H. 84. sword of Justice pendant over his head, consigning And now let us approach the great question, will a him to ignominy, disgrace and servitude. Having done marriage, entered into with the entire concurrence of all this, you remember she determines, woman-like, those most deeply interested, be valid and binding if to rescue him ere the punishment, so richly deserved, all the rites and ceremonies, religious or otherwise, overtakes him. She conspires with his counsel; pro have been absent? This query touches the pockets of duces a statement written by herself before her wed all marriageable and marrying “forked radishes with ding, for Landon's perusal, explaining all about the heads fantastically carved,” whose business it is to change of name, and, on cross-examination, has an fee-handsomely or otherwise, as the spirit or circumattack of non-mi-ricardo, and will not swear that the stances may move them - the officiating priest or wretch at the bar had not read the paper on their magistrate. Nay, more, it affects the pockets of all marriage eve. On this peg is hung the argument that interested, for clothes, which Carlyle says give us inboth Eva and Landon had conspired to deceive the dividuality, distinction, social polity – which bare public, and had knowingly and willfully intermarried made men and women of us - which are threatening without due publication of bans and proper license, to make clothes-screens or scare-crows of us -cost and consequently the marriage was void. She was not | money, especially at such times. On this important Mrs. L., and Mr. L. had been free to wed when he point doctors (of the law) differ rather widely. Some met his second love.
writers have said “yea" and others "nay" to the Strange this may seem, but the law was good, pro question; while courts and judges have said "ditto" vided the marriage took place after the fourth year of
and “do" to either response. the reign of his majesty George the Fourth. If the Long since, Parsons — ample authority in such matwedding had been before that time it would have been ters, we must recognize in the name - said: "Marriage different, in the event of Landon's ignorance, as Miss being essential to the peace and harmony, and to the Mary Hodgkinson, who was married under the name virtues and improvement of civilized society (comfortof White, without any intention to mislead or with ing words, surely, to many a lonely heart), it has been, out misleading any one interested, found to her cost, in all well-regulated governments, among the first atwhen her union was declared invalid. Rex v. Tibshelf, tentions of civil magistrates to regulate marriage. 1 B. & A. 195.
Where the laws of any State have prescribed no reguIt may be a comfort to some in this world of trouble lations for the celebration of matrimony, a mutual to know that the employment of a sham clergyman or engagement to intermarry by parties competent to forged license will not render the service inoperative make such a contract would, in a moral view, be a when the innocent victim desires the noose to hold good marriage, and would impugu no law of the State. tight. Dormer v. Williams, 1 Curt. 870; Lane v. Good But when the civil government has established reguwin, 4 Q. B. 361.
lations for the due celebration of marriage, it is the Notwithstanding the widely-spread belief that matri duty as well as the interest of all citizens to conform monial alliances are made in heaven (which, if true, to such rules," Milford v. Worcester, 7 Mass. 48. Anmust cause heaven to be any thing but a place of rest, other Parsons (think not, gentle reader, that the exand almost require the presence in those realms of the pression is ungrammatical) says: "That in all Christian blest of some individuals that one would think might communities of which we have any knowledge, and, as well be kept out), among all Anglo-Saxon commu as we suppose, in all civilized countries, certain cerenities marriage is but a civil contract — like an agree monies are prescribed for the celebration of marriage, ment to build a house or make a bonnet; and the either by express law or by a usage which has the force essence of it consists in the consent freely given by a of law, and the question is, whether a mere consent of man and a woman able at the time to agree. Force or the parties, even with mutual promises, but without coercion used toward either party will invalidate the any use of or reference to any of these ceremonies, is affair. Stevenson V. Stevenson, 7 Phil. (Pa.) 386. It sufficient to constitute a valid marriage." 2 Parsons would be very unwise, therefore, for any young lady | on Contracts, 75. to make a dead set upon an eligible parte, and intimi- Whenever there is a ceremony, no particular form date him into matrimony by threatening imprison- of words and no particular actions or deeds are necesment and such like dire inflictions, for, though the sary. A simple nod of the head or bob of a curtesy lips of the timid and frightened male murmur assent ' in response to the fatal query will be as efficacious and as binding upon the nodder or the bobber as the most nor, in fact, any formality, except the agreement sonorous "I do," or simpering “yes,” accompanied by itself, is essential to the validity of a marriage. Any Sir Charles Grandison bows and ritualistio genuflex | agreement made in the present tense between persons ions. People v. Taylor, 1 Metc. (N. P.) 190.
of opposite sexes, capable of contracting, whereby A gentleman, hailing from Boston, whom we have they assume toward each other the marital relation, is before quoted, and who claims for himself great knowl an actual marriage. It need not be in writing, nor edge on this and kindred subjects, says he never knew need any witness be present. And it may be proved of any case in which a mere agreement to marry, with as any other contract; and when proved to the satisno formality and no compliance with any law or usage faction of a court of justice, it constitutes a lawful regulating marriage, has actually been permitted to marriage. Bissell v. Bissell, supra; Van Tuyl v. Van give both parties and their children all the rights and Tuyl, 8 Abb. N. Y. Pr. (N. S.) 5. The services of lay them under the obligations and liabilities, civil and both priest and magistrate may be dispensed with. criminal, of a legal union. 2 Parsons on Contracts, 79. Wright v. Wright, 48 How. Pr. 1. Out in Mississippi, His next sentence, however, is an admission that too, it has been decided that to constitute a legal union some recent decisions of the courts seem to tend nothing more is needed than that, in language which strongly in the direction which he disapproves. To both of the contracting parties understand - be it some of these cases we will refer.
English, Irish or Dutch — or in words declaratory of A man and a woman, in New York State, were en their intention, they accept one another as husband gaged to be married. The former entertained the and wife, and if the words used do not, in their ordinotion that wedding ceremonies were vanities of vani- nary meaning or common use, “conclude matrimony," ties, empty show, vain delusions, unnecessary ex- yet if the man and woman intend marriage, and their penses, in fact he did not believe in them, and intent is sufficiently manifest, they become inseparaexpressed the desire that his lady-love would forego bly welded together until, as Samuel Smetes says, illthe performance, especially as the marriage without cooked joints and ill-boiled potatoes, calling in the aid them would, to his mind, be all sufficient. The fair of a divorce court, put them asunder. Their consent to one hesitated - the pomps and vanities of this wicked enter into the holy state may be expressed either in world and the flesh pots of Egypt had strong hold on writing or orally. Dickenson v. Brown, 49 Miss. 357; her. But at last she gave way to his wishes, and Rundle v. Pegram, id. 751. named the day which was to see these twain made one | So, in Pennsylvania, words in the present tense (one flesh. On that eveutful hour they went out riding
sees now, what one perhaps never saw before, the adtogether in a carriage, and while rolling smoothly vantage of the study of grammar) uttered for the puralong the gent produced a ring, and, placing it upon pose of effecting a matrimonial alliance, is all that is the lady's finger, said: “This is your wedding ring; required. No particular form of solemnization before weare married.” She received the circlet of gold as officials of either Church or State is needed. Commonthe sign of wedlock. He then further remarked: wealth v. Stamp, 53 Penn. St. 132. The law among the "We are married; I will live with you and take care dwellers in Alabama is similar, to all intents and purof you all the days of my life, as my wife." She made poses. Campbell v. Gullatt, 43 Ala. 57. In Michigan, no objection to the pleasant programme thus sketched too, if persons agree to take each other for husband out for her future course, and together they drove to and wife, for better, for worse, at once, without any a house where he had previously engaged board for pomp or ceremony, or show, or with any pomp, cere"himself and wife.” There they lived together for mony or show, that may be pleasing to human nature, over a month, he treating her and speaking to her and and from thenceforth live together, the Gordian knot of her as his wife. Soon — sad to relate – a change is fairly tied, only Death or some other heartless came o'er the spirit of their dreams. We seek not to divorcer can cut it. Hutchins v. Kimmell, 31 Mich. 127. lay blame at the door of either, but a divorce was People who quote Latin, and know a little more of sought for, and the Supreme Court of the State held that classic tongue than “e pluribus unum," "exceland decided that this simple and uncommon marriage sior," "sine qua non," "compos mentis," " et cætera," was perfectly valid. Bissell v. Bissell, 55 Barb. 325. and agree in the correctness of the law, as stated in
On the other hand, once upon a time in Scotland, these last-mentioned cases, express the principle enunafter a family supper, at which, we may assume, toddy ciated in them, with the aid of their little Latinity, as was not absent, one of the party, a jolly bachelor, put follows: Marriages made per verba de presenti, vel per & ring on the finger of a daughter of the house, a verba de futuro cum copula, are lawful. And this being maiden bright and fair, saying to her, “Maggie, you | interpreted means, that a marriage contract entered are my wife before heaven; so help me, oh God!”. into by words siguifying the intention of having a The two kissed, the lady modestly exclaiming, “Oh, wedding then and there, and the couple immediately Major !” The banqueters then drank the very good separating, and one entered into by words expressive health of the happy couple, and forthwith bedded of a determination to bave a marriage some day or them, according to an old Scotch custom. In course other, followed by the parties dwelling together in of time the question arose, was Maggie the wife of the amity, are as valid and as binding as if made in the Major? The Court of Sessions said she was, but the | presence of the church. final court of appeal in the kingdom took the liberty | It has, however, been expressly held in Maryland, of reversing that decision, and saying that she was that some religious ceremony must be added to the not, upon the ground that it appeared clear to them civil contract. Denison v. Denison, 35 Md. 361. Ou that no real marriage was then intended, although the the Pacific coast the contract must be declared before ultimate maturing of matrimony was hoped for and a person duly authorized to take such declarations, and confidently anticipated by poor Maggie and her in the presence of a couple of wituesses. Holmes v. friends. Stewart v. Robertson, 2 H. L. (Sc.) 494. Holmes, Abb. U. S. 555. And a Massachusetts judge
It seems pretty clear, however, that in the State of said that a marriage which was merely the effect of a New York no religious form or ceremony of any kind, ' mutual engagement between the parties, or solemnized by any one not legally empowered to do so, is not the trial and upon motion in arrest of judgment, the valid, nor is it entitled to the incidents of a marriage Chief Justice and Mellor, J., agreed that it was not duly performed. Milford v. Worcester, 7 Mass. 48. In necessary to set out any parts of the objectionable England no wedding is perfect unless made in the publication, but it was sufficient to identify it by title presence and with the intervention of a minister in and designate it as a whole; and also, that, under the holy orders, or other person authorized by statute; indictment averring intention, the verdict was good, and so it is in Canada.
although the jury specially found that while the book Whether there is a ceremony or not, intention being was of the averred tendency the defendants were an all-important ingredient in this as in all contracts, guiltless of corrupt motives in the publication” (p. it follows, notwithstanding novels and sensational 267). stories to the contrary, that a marriage ceremony per Who promoted the prosecution was & question informed in jest does not make the pair husband and volved in doubt; aud Chief-Justice Cockburn (p. 255) wife, even though a genuine J. P., who did not know remarked in his charge: “I should very much like to whether he was tying the nuptial knot in joke or in know who are the authorities prosecuting, because earnest, officiated at the ceremony. McClary v. Terry, that has not transpired. The solicitor-general tells us 21 N. J. Eq. 225.
it may have been the magistracy. I do not believe it. Ladies, to whom appertain the privilege of “naming I, however, concur with him that however ill-advised the day," may choose any one of the seven for pub. | may be this prosecution, here it is. t Every man has licly assuming a new patronymio. Some question, it | a right, even if he is only a detective policeman, to is true, has arisen as to whether a celebration of mar- put the criminal law of the land into motion, if he riage on Sunday is a violation of law; but it is gen thinks he has ground for so doing; so long as the goverally believed by lawyers that matrimony may be ernment of this country thinks proper to have the adlawfully entered into on that sacred day. The reasons ministration of justice defective in that, which from why are various; it is either because the frequency of this place I say, is an essential necessity with a view the thing has in some measure protected it by usage, to its proper administration, and I mean the office of and the consequence of an opposite view would be a public prosecutor. But we have the case here, and disastrous, or because the contract of marriage is in however much we may deplore the rashness which set the nature of a continuing contract, and may be re- | this prosecution going, we must deal with it as though garded as made every succeeding day as long as the it had the sanction of the crown, which I do not think parties live together (2 Parsons on Contracts); or, it has, although the solicitor-general appears to conand this applies chiefly to New York State, as civil duct it." contracts -- and matrimony is such - made for a law At the calling of the cause for trial (removed by ful purpose, and not tending to disturb the public
certiorari from the Central Criminal Court) the defendpeace and quiet, are valid and enforceable, although ants - throughout acting as their own counsel, and made on Sunday; so are marriages, unless it can be without any attorney or solicitor being at their sides — made out that they are contracts tending to disturb | moved to 'quash, upon the ground of insufficiency; the public peace and quiet. Some marriages undoubt but the court ruled that it would not, even before plea, edly have that tendency, and so we would advise some hear at Nisi Prius such a motion which ought to be ladies to be careful when they get married.
made by preliminary motion at Chambers. Two of R. VASHON ROGERS. the special jury being excused their places were sup
plied by talesmen – "an usher being sent for a comTHE LAW OF OBSCENE LITERATURE. mon juryman to make up the twelve" (p. 4). A SHORT-HAND report of the recent trial of Sir Hardinge Gifford, the solicitor-general, opened A Charles Bradlaugh and Anne Besant, in the the case for the crown in a speech which occupied Queen's Bench, before Lord Chief-Justice Cock seventeen octavo pages, although alternated with burn and a jury, for an obscene libel, has now been much interlocutory dialogue with bench and the published at London in a neat volume of 325 pages. defendants in the nature of comment, query, or It presents, to the American lawyer, many features of dissent. His complaint of obscenity was against a novel interest as well as precedent, and for the first volume originally written forty years ago by Dr. time is given by its pages a comprehensive definition Knowlton, of Boston, and entitled “Fruits of Philosoof obscene publication. The indictment was for a phy," and now republished by the defendants, to be misdemeanor, as well at common law as under the 14 sold at six pence per copy, not as a medical book, but & 15 Vict., c. 100, one of the Lord Campbell's acts. | indiscriminately and as a popular one, until it bad One of the counts may be valuable as a precedent, and | attained a circulation of over an hundred thousand we subjoin it in a note,* premising that both during
book, called "Fruits of Philosophy," thereby contaminat* The jurors for our lady the Queen, upon their oaths,
ing, vitlating and corrupting the morals as well of youth as present that C. B. and A. B. unlawfully and wickedly de
of other liege subjects of our said lady the Queen, and vising and contriving and intending as much as in them
bringing the said liege subjects to a state of wickedness, lay to vitiate and corrupt the morals as well of youth as lewdness, debauchery and immorality in contempt of our of divers other liege subjects of our said lady the Queen, said lady the Queen and her laws, to the evil and pernicious and to incite and encourage the said liege subjects to in
example of all others in the like case offending and against decent. obscene. unnatural and immoral practices and the peace of our sald lady the Queen, her crown and dig. bring them to a state of wickedness, lewdness and de
nity. bauchery, therefore, to wit, on the 24th day of March, A. D. + These observations were evidently made because the 1877, in the city of London and within the jurisdiction of effect of the authorities taking up the challenge to prose. the Central Criminal Court, unlawfully, wickedly, know cute was to run up the circulation from a few to over an ingly, willfully and designedly did print, publish, sell and | hundred thousand coples, If the profits of the defendutter a certain indecent, lewd, althy and obscene libel, to | ants were, say 3d. per copy, they netted some twelve hunwit, a certain indecent, lewd, althy, bawdy and obscene | dred pounds by the operation.
copies. His preliminary view of the scope of the book The Lord Chief-Justice. “I don't wish to interrupt was better digested by the Chief Justice in the charge you, but that is going too far." (p. 260), “that the evils of over population shall be rem- | Mrs. B. “Is it putting it a little too strong?". edied by persons after they have married by recourse to Lord Chief Justice. “You are wrong. The quesartificial means to prevent the procreation of a numer- tion is whether the book is obscene. Not whether ous offspring; also, those consequent evils, especially to there may be intermediary passages that are not. The the poorer classes, which the production of a too nu jury must look at the scope and effect of the whole merous offspring is certain to bring about." The | book which the indictment charges as a whole." propositions of the solicitor-general are included in Mrs. B. I am much obliged to you, my lord. Then the after-rulings, but they were elaborated with con- gentlemen, read the whole preface, and judge of any siderable skill in an endeavor to show the jury that part which will tend to produce obscenity, taken as a the circumstances of the publication made indubita-whole." bly obscene what, if issued as a restricted scientific A suggestion being made about adjournment, the book, would not have been objectionable. He traced court said: “We must go on I think for another half the publication to the defendants by evidence in a hour, unless Mrs. B. feels exhausted;" but she pluckbriefly technical manner and rested. Indeed, they ily replied: “Oh, no, I can go on.' Then the Chiefhad by a note to the city authorities - the publication Justice observes: “We well sit another half hour.” being within old London limits - admitted issue and The bench afterward interrupts with a question circulation of the book; and challenged arrest, in or- about statistics, and Mrs. Besant returning to them der to have an early test case. However, by motions readily, resumes the thread of her argument. At a to quash and in arrest of judgment, as well as by later stage becoming ironical upon the solicitor-genmany dilatory observations during trial, the accused eral, she observed : “He put it to you that he read the seem to have repented of their bravado and to court extract with a large amount of pain. I do not quite a technical instead of absolute acquittal.
know why he should, then, have read it at all, as each There was a brief cross-examination of the detective of you have a copy. The extreme delicacy of the (who was the testis pro forma legis) in order to elicit learned counsel might have excused him from a task that the authorities (city or in Home office) were not interested prosecutors. This was a point addressed to The court interposes with: “The learned solicitorthe jury, as if to say, "we ask you to doubt obscenity general is not here, and I think you must be just to when the parent vindicators of law are loth to openly him. He was rather challenged to read them." assume the responsibility of saying they believe in Mrs. B. “Do you think I ought to be gentle with our guilt and in the impolicy of our act."
him, my lord, as he is absent?” (Laughter.) It was agreed that each juryman should have a copy Lord Chief-Justice. “What I said was that you must of the impounded pamphlet; and that it should be be just to him." considered in evidence as if read, the point as to in Mrs. B. I will not press the point, as he is not here. sufficiency of declaration by mere title in the indict I do feel the position is especially painful for him, bement being of course not prejudiced.
cause if he does not get a verdict against a woman, it Then the co-defendant, Mrs. Besant, opened the makes the position of a learned counsel very painful." case on her own behalf. Her photograph is prefixed [Another laugh.) to the report, and it shows a remarkably handsome, Lord Chief Justice. “You have gone through this intellectual and modest woman of about thirty, slight long, and I must say very able address, up to the presbuilt and graceful. She is authoress of various pamph ent, without saying any thing that could be regarded lets and tracts upon woman's rights and civil and as painful or offensive to any one." religious liberty, with decided atheistical views, also Mrs. B. “And I will try to do so to the end. My of a biography of (Miss Martineau's idol) Auguste feelings toward the solicitor shall be more charitable Comte, with an inclusive resumé of his positivism, than his were to me, for he accused me of some of the adapted for the general reader. Certainly no one can vilest things a woman can do. Perhaps by not too read Mrs. Besant's opening speech (several hours in roughly defending myself against him, I shall make two days being occupied, and its report consuming my case the stronger.” pages 27-151 of the report) or her summing up, with Mrs. B. then resumed her address precisely at the out agreeing that in even logic, as well as in lucid disconnected point of illustration. A question soon statement, in ornate style, in tact, and clear arrange arose that is often raised at Nisi Prius, particularly in ment, she not only surpassed her co-defendant (who cases where insanity is discussed. Mrs. Besant offers has been heard in this country as a lecturer) but ex Tristam Shandy to the jury to read a' passage; when celled the solicitor-general. She spoke eloquently the solicitor-general intervenes with: “I am reluctant and fluently, with only occasional reference to her to interpose, my lord, but I must take your judgment notes. If any one were ungallant enough to hint that whether or not such passages ought to be read." The these may have emanated from others, it will be a full Lord Chief-Justice, after lunch, ruled: “I have been answer to point to those critical tests of original abil consulting with my learned brothers, and they agree ity - interruptions and catechism from the bench, with me I am bound to reject every publication, as which were full and occurred repeatedly. She was evidence, but that I cannot prevent the defendant from instant as well as apt with her replies. Early in her | committing a passage to memory and reciting it as opening she asserts, “I now come to the Philosophical part of her speech, nor from reading the book as if reProem. I do not agree with it; but I say there is not citing from memory. But the book is not evidence, a single syllable which even the solicitor-general can and need not to be proved, nor must it be handed to twist into indecenoy, and I hold that in order to con- | the jury." vict on this indictment you must take the whole book Accordingly, throughout her speech, extracts were to be obscene.”
read out of all manner of popular books, from the
Bible, and Jeremy Taylor to Fielding, and newspapers; (in People v. Gardner, 6 N. Y., and in the case of exand in order to illustrate what may be called the text Mayor Hall's Impeachment, N. P.), viz. : “That infracof Mrs. Besant's speeches: “When the whole scope, tion of law, even with good intention, or without any effect and aim of a book is to produce laudable results, intention at all, was an indictable and punishable ofthe fact that passages of it are couched in coarse fense,” and thus, to a large extent, qualifying the language, or with indelicate reference, cannot make it remarks of Mr. Bishop (in his treatises) about the obscene, nor is that obscene which meets with general necessary concurrence of mens rea et corpus rea in popular toleration.”
every criminal offense. It is impossible to read the report of the trial with On the argument for arrest of judgment, the rbeout arriving at the opinion that the prosecution al torical foncing between Mrs. Besant and the Lord lowed too much range to a theory of defense which Chief-Justice, as well as Mr. Justice Weller, was as was really fallacious. Neither the solicitor-general | adroit on her part as upon their own. Eventually nor the court seem to have emphasized the plain and and we do not cite the case of the widow and the un. narrow proposition, viz, : That inasmuch as the prose just judge — they had to admit that it was a nice ques. cution of species has the sole object of copulation, and tion for the Appellate Court whether the indictment the latter without the wish of species, was mere pas was good. sion, a book that was published for indiscriminate There was important ruling on the frequently circulation, and to show how nature, as well as the mooted question of surplusage, and the court (p. 284) laws of physiology and morals could be defied, and how thus excellently expresses the doctrine: “The indictto promote passion; and in illustrative language, that ment is not badly drawn if something is put in that was indelicate and coarse, is an obscene publication might have been left out altogether. If it is useful as published.
enough for the purpose, the useful part is not corThat both Mrs. Besant and Mr. Bradlaugh were al | rupted by the useless part." lowed to open and sum up, would seem to establish a I During the argument of the motion in arrest of precedent that such a course is a wise discretion to judgment, Mr. Solicitor-General cited a case on the extend to two joint defendants who have precisely the law of obscenity from 2 Sargent & Rawle (Comm. same line of defense.
v. Sharples), and the court interposed parenthetically: The lady unquestionably exhausted the capabilities “Decisions of the American courts are always to be of the latter, and her speech was so much better than highly respected by us” (p. 298). From all which ocwas that of her associate, both in logic and oratorical curred during the arguments that followed the verdict, mould, that it may be said the discretion of silence on and before judgments entered, it is clear that the court his part would have been the wisest.
were disposed to postpone sentence until after the apThe court stopped Mr. Bradlaugh when he com- | peal, and in any event to impose only technical terms. menced to comment to the jury upon what the daily But that “gift-o'-gab werry gallopin,” which Cockney press bad that morning said, and would not (p. 169) Sam Weller ascribed to provincial Job Trotter, mastpermit him to correct its erroneous statements.
ered Mr. Bradlaugh, and on the Sunday evening followThe defense examined as witnesses Miss Alice ing the verdict, he bad a meeting of over fifteen hunVickery, M. D., who produced certificates as a chemist dre persons at a shilling (or 25 cts.) per head, to celefrom the Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, brate the finding of the jury in acquitting of express inand as mid-wife from the London Lying-in Hospital, as tention. In the course of her speech at this gathering, well as Obstetrical Society, and Dr. Drysdale, a dis- | Mrs. Besant made a point of the Lord Chief Justice betinguished London savan, and Henry G. Bohn, the ing at heart in their favor, and referred to a letter writgreat publisher. The direct examination of the one ten to her by one of the jury, to the effect that he did lady by the other was well handled, and the rapport | not concur in the verdict as announced (N. B. there as perfect as if they had rehearsed it for the stage, al was no poll demanded). Mr. Bradlaugh proclaimed in though it is evident that much of it was pièce de in another speech, that the sale of the books would conconstance. Dr. Drysdale created some merriment by tinue, and a large number were actually sold about the asking if advice against copulation in any manner ball during the meeting. These facts having been prowas prosecutable, inasmuch as that went to the root of moted to the court by affidavit, it is evident from the over-population. During his examination (p. 222) a report (p. 317) that Sir John Cockburn was nettled, and ruling was had that he might read from previously he declared that the law had been set at defiance by prepared memoranda (per Lord Chief-Justice Cock the defendants, and the case must now be dealt with burn), “if put down freshly and from memory." as a grave and aggravated one. The sentence imposed
Mr. Bohn's examination went to the point that he was (as in the case of Col. Valentine Baker) six months had for many years published for popular circulation, imprisonment without labor, and a fine of $200, with physiological works containing statements parallel to additional recognizances of peace, etc. Mr. Bradlaugh those in the indicted pamphlet; such as De la Motte asked: “Would your lordship entertain an application Ligniac's Physical Essay on Man and Woman in a to stay execution of sentence?” The Chief Justice state of Marriage, and published with plates, and forty promptly said: “Certainly not." But being, it is to be editions of Venette's Tableau de l'amour conjugale. presumed, asided by his associates, he as quietly added :
In addition to the charge we have mentioned re “On consideration, if you will pledge yourselves not specting the scope of the book, the Chief-Justice also to circulate until the decision of the Court of Appeal, said (p. 261): “Although the intention here is not un we will.” This course was adopted, and it is underduly to convey illicit knowledge, and gratify prurient stood that the appeal will be argued in November by and libidinous thougbts, still if the effect of this book Mrs. Besant. Certainly the advocates of women's is to excite and create thoughts of a demoralizing rights have in this trial a formidable precedent. The character to the mind of the reader, the work is open lady not only successfully contended against the maxim to the condemnation asked for at your hands." The respecting the fool-client, but appears to have made charge substantially followed the rulings of our courts' no mistake beyond omitting the demand of a poll