Page:English laws for women in the nineteenth century.djvu/42

30  {which I return) are no less absurd, than contemptible; and you could not hesitate one instant in rejecting them. They must think you have lost your brains, when they call on you to subsist by them, if they think you are fool enough to be gulled or bullied into such terms." Mr Norton, however, soon proved what measures are at an English husband's disposal, whose wife; demurs to any terms he chooses to impose. Those who. saw their own advantage in our quarrel, advised him to make Lord Melbourne an object of attack; and under our mercantile law of "Damages," Mr Norton saw his advantage in adopting the suggestion. Lord Erskine; in one of his divorce cases, had obtained a verdict of 7000l.; (a sum which, in that particular case, was said to involve the whole fortune of the defendant) and Sir W. Follett did his, best to emulate Lord Erskine, in urging this main, object on the jury. He repeated in every; form, his argument for aggravated compensation to his client,. Sometimes he put it as a simple and; inevitable legai result,—"If you are satisfied {as satisfied. I think you must be, of the' facts stated), it remains for you to consider what you will give." Sometimes with a skilful and business-like allusion to the wealth which made a large sum-a natural and proper award,—"Of course," he says. Of course, the position of the parties in this, case, the rank of one of the parties, and the mode in which they lived being considered, it is for you. Gentlemen,, under all circumstances, to say what may appear to you a proper amount of ." Sometimes, as an evidence of the wrong sustained, and the degree of that wrong,—"The amount of ,—though not as a personal compensation,—must be considered in the result." Sometimes, as an appeal to the passions and sympathies of the jurymen; saying of Lord Melbourne,—"His rank is an aggravation—his age is an aggravation—and the hollow pretence of his being a friend of the plaintiff, is a still greater aggravation.&hellip; It is then for you to say what  you will give." Sometimes, with a sort of admonition to the jury to prove their own strictness of