ceremony, and the impediments are much fewer than either in England or abroad. We might therefore imagine that engagements made in haste might soon be repented of, and eventually disregarded, and that, if liberty were given, numerous cases would occur. The very contrary, however, is the fact. It is universally allowed that there is no kingdom where married persons appear so fully to value domestic happiness, and to cling to each other with such undeviating affection, and where family attachments are so strong.

"Another argument which has been repeatedly advanced by those who object to any change in the present system, is this,-that if a complete divorce be granted in case one of the parties is convicted of adul. tery, a boon is granted to the adulterer. It is said, the individual who is guilty of adultery must be wearied of the existing union, and must be anxious for a new one, and therefore will delight in the prospect of freedom.

"To this I answer [he might have said that the adulterer does not need this boon, for he already has it, whilst the injured wife is neglected] that it may probably happen, that in many cases the guilty party will desire the dissolution of the marriage; but I contend that neither the wishes nor antipathies of the guilty party are to be regarded. The legislature does not interfere in compliance with the caprice of the guilty, but on the plea of the innocent. Should the adulterer be thus benefitted, the advantage he obtains is only incidental to the relief granted to the other. Surely, the Legislature is not to be prevented from granting justice and relief to those who have a

right to it, through a fear lest in so doing it should meet the wishes of the undeserving.

"By declaring divorce for adultery to be a complete dissolution of the marriage, and not merely a ground of separation, the Legislature has an opportunity of doing an act of justice to those who are now aggrieved by being bound by the marriage tie after the sentence of divorce has been pronounced.

On the general worthlessness of English law on this great subject, an excellent article in "The Dispatch" makes the following observations.

"From a regulation of the intercourse of the sexes proceeds all the happiness or all the miseries of human life. How, then, stands the case in our country?

"A man with a very large sum of money may get a divorce from the houses of parliament, and may marry again. A man with a smaller, but considerable sum of money, may get, from the ecclesiastical courts, a half divorce, which relieves him merely from his wife's debts, but does not enable him to enter into another matrimonial connexion. A man with no money, or an insufficient sum, can have no divorce at all. In short, in this most enlightened country, the whole subject of divorce is divested by the clergy [strange to tell!] of all religion and virtue, and made simply a question of capacity to pay.

"Of course, the majority of the people must be poor; an immense majority must be too destitute to afford such enormous expenses; and hence the bulk of society, in these kingdoms, are out of the pale of the law... On such an important subject as marriage, the law ought solely to consult the greatest good of the greatest number. Here, we find the directly

opposite principle: the law is made for the conveni. ence of the few, whilst it entirely excludes the necessities of the many.

"Divorce, by act of parliament, is perhaps, the worst stain upon our national character. Is divorce good or bad? If the former, give it to all whose case requires it if the latter, bestow it upon none. At present, it is but a mere sale of a licence for vice . . . A divorce bill is simply a form, in which, for the sake of money, our legislators set aside-what they declare to be the law of God [whenever it is asked for by the poor man who cannot pay, or by the helpless woman!] A divorce bill is merely a question of rank and money. In any honest and sensible mind, the mention of such a bill raises only ideas of the villany of law.

"Our ecclesiastical courts are the object of ridicule throughout Europe. . . Government would alter the law; but the moment they wish to reform an ecclesiastical court, they are overwhelmed with the cry of The Church in danger!""

The consequence of this is, that there have, of late years been many instances of married people who had agreed to part, going from England to reside in Scotland, that they might be considered as inhabitants of that country, and therefore entitled to divorce in the same manner as if they had been natives.

During the past year, the tribunals of Prussia have pronounced three thousand two hundred and ninety. one divorces. As the suits amounted to three thousand eight hundred and eighty-eight, only five hundred and ninety-seven (scarcely one sixth) were unsuccessful. In France, the average is one divorce out of one hundred and eighty-four marriages. In England, the

annual average of parliamentary divorces is about two and a half!-Those who know that human nature is every where nearly the same, and who at the same time know aught of England, are aware that in this case the apparent differences are equalized by undi. vorced but miserable couples, and by an extensive system of infidelity, concubinage and prostitution, which are ten thousand times more injurious to human hap. piness than reasonable divorce.

Certain classes have, moreover, their sale of wives, of which the following is an example, from the Lancaster Herald.

"Sale of a wife at Carlisle.-The inhabitants of this city lately witnessed the sale of a wife by her hus. band, Joseph Thompson, who resides in a small village about three miles distant, and rents a farm of about forty-two or forty-four acres. She was a spruce, lively, buxom damsel, apparently not exceeding twentytwo years of age, and appeared to feel a pleasure at the exchange she was about to make. They had no children during their union, and that, with some family disputes, caused them by mutual agreement to come to the resolution of finally parting. Accordingly, the bellman was sent round to give public notice of the sale, which was to take place at twelve o'clock; and this announcement attracted the notice of thousands. She appeared above the crowd, standing on a large oak chair, surrounded by many of her friends, with a rope or halter, made of straw, round her neck, being dressed in rather a fashionable country style, and appearing to some advantage. The husband, who was also standing in an elevated position near her, proceeded to put her up for sale, and spoke nearly as

follows:-Gentlemen, I have to offer to your notice my wife, Mary Anne Thompson, otherwise Williamson, whom I mean to sell to the highest and fairest bidder. It is her wish as well as mine to part for ever. I took her for my comfort, and the good of my house, but she has become my tormentor and a domestic curse, &c. &c. &c. Now I have shown you her faults and failings, I will explain her qualifications and goodness. She can read fashionable novels and milk cows; she can laugh and weep with the same ease that you could take a glass of ale; she can make butter, and scold the maid; she can sing Moore's melodies, and plait her frills and caps; she cannot make rum, gin, or whisky, but she is a good judge of their quality from long experience in tasting them, I therefore offer her, with all her perfections and imperfections, for the sum of fifty shillings.'-After an hour or two, she was purchased by Henry Mears, a pensioner, for the sum of twenty shillings and a Newfoundland dog. The happy pair immediately left town together, amidst the shouts and huzzas of the multitude, in which they were joined by Thompson, who, with the greatest good-humour imaginable, proceeded to put the halter, which his wife had taken off, round the neck of his Newfoundland dog, and then proceeded to the first public house, where he spent the remainder of the day."

"These," says a London Paper, commenting upon them, "are usually entitled disgraceful occurrences— and disgraceful they certainly are to the state of our law, which affords redress for the grievances of an unfortunate match, only to the rich, who can purchase relief by means of an act of parliament or a suit at