Page:English laws for women in the nineteenth century.djvu/56

44 ''clique of lawyers and friends, and under their influence, who keep your person and your mind imprisoned. Put your jailors to the test. Let them answer the accusations in my letter, and let them answer this additional charge. You are accused {not by me) of having intended to procure a Magistracy for a gentleman for a compensation in money. Ask your lawyers and the friends who influence them, if this charge were proved, whether you would be allowed to sit on the judgment seat''.' "L. S."

To these adjurations Lord Harrington Received no more satisfactory reply from Mr Norton, than the following careless allusion in a letter on the general subject of our quarrel.

"As regards the 'on dits,' stated in yours, this does not appear to be the time to enter upon that refutation of them which I should otherwise court an opportunity of obtaining. "Ever yours, "G.C. Norton." April, 14th, 1836.

Mr Norton did not, however, seem to build with certainty on the chance of refutation; for his next step was to request an interview with Sir James Graham (who was related to me by my mother's side), and inform him that he admitted his lawyers could prove nothing amiss in my conduct, and that, therefore, he was willing to come to such terms of separation as could be agreed upon. Sir James Graham demanded, as a preliminary to all negociation [sic], a written retractation [sic] of the slanders against me. What was Mr Norton's reply? That he believed them? No: but that "if he retracted what was said of me, would my family contradict what was said of him, as otherwise he would be left in his wife's power?"

Sir James Graham would not discuss this condition, but left Mr Norton to his reflections, promising to see him again. The painful scandal was supposed to be ended, and Lord Harrington wrote thus to congratulate me:—