Page:The Legal Subjection of Men.djvu/47

 support this with philosophy, but what did raise his ire was her threat to prosecute him if he did not maintain her, against which he sought—and naturally obtained—protection. The fickle young woman is evidently still unconversant with the rules of the game. Perhaps when she has tried as many husbands as Mr. Baker has married wives, she will know better. Really it is getting time to mete out equal treatment to masculine and feminine offenders."—Daily Chronicle, May 21, 1896.

No crime is too abominable to be imputed by a wife, with absolute impunity, against a husband. More precise details need not be given, as recent instances will occur to the public mind of notorious and infamous ill-usage of a husband in this way by a heartless and vindictive woman. But the Public Prosecutor is silent when the false accusation is brought by one of the privileged sex. Prosecutions of women for perjury in a divorce suit are unknown.

And, be it observed, this privilege extends to all female friends or hirelings of the wife. These persons are allowed to accuse, with elaborately-prepared details of corroboration, the husband of the woman litigant of committing adultery with themselves. They are never punished. An obliging maiden sister—to help her married sister to procure divorce and confiscation of property against a troublesome husband—swears that the husband committed adultery with herself, the wife's sister! The judge and jury find this story a concocted lie. The infamous perjurer is not punished—is not even prosecuted. Obliging maid servants every day come forward to allege their own or some other woman's "immoral relations" with the victim husband. No one ever dreams of prosecuting them. It would be waste of time and money—as no jury would convict.