rules can never apply to indefinite circumstances--and I deprecate
punishment upon the man of my choice, freeing him, as I solemnly do, from
the charge of seduction.]

"I did not put myself into a situation to justify a charge of adultery,
till I had, from conviction, shaken off the fetters which bound me to Mr.
Venables.--While I lived with him, I defy the voice of calumny to sully
what is termed the fair fame of woman.--Neglected by my husband, I never
encouraged a lover; and preserved with scrupulous care, what is termed my
honour, at the expence of my peace, till he, who should have been its
guardian, laid traps to ensnare me. From that moment I believed myself,
in the sight of heaven, free--and no power on earth shall force me to
renounce my resolution."

The judge, in summing up the evidence, alluded to "the fallacy of letting
women plead their feelings, as an excuse for the violation of the
marriage-vow. For his part, he had always determined to oppose all
innovation, and the new-fangled notions which incroached on the good old
rules of conduct. We did not want French principles in public or private
life--and, if women were allowed to plead their feelings, as an excuse or
palliation of infidelity, it was opening a flood-gate for immorality.
What virtuous woman thought of her feelings?--It was her duty to love and
obey the man chosen by her parents and relations, who were qualified by
their experience to judge better for her, than she could for herself. As
to the charges brought against the husband, they were vague, supported by
no witnesses, excepting that of imprisonment in a private mad-house. The
proofs of an insanity in the family, might render that however a prudent
measure; and indeed the conduct of the lady did not appear that of a
person of sane mind. Still such a mode of proceeding could not be
justified, and might perhaps entitle the lady [in another court] to a
sentence of separation from bed and board, during the joint lives of the
parties; but he hoped that no Englishman would legalize adultery, by
enabling the adulteress to enrich her seducer. Too many restrictions
could not be thrown in the way of divorces, if we wished to maintain the
sanctity of marriage; and, though they might bear a little hard on a few,
very few individuals, it was evidently for the good of the whole."

CONCLUSION,

BY THE EDITOR.

VERY few hints exist respecting the plan of the remainder of the work. I
find only