156] ANNUAL REGISTER, 1800. 



that, by the law of the land, he 

 cannot marry me after I have 

 violated my conjugal vow. What 

 must be the consequence then ? 

 Why, my situation must be miser- 

 able indeed, with this addition, that 

 none will pity me, because I could 

 not be ignorant of the consequences 

 of committing such a crime." 



The bishop of London said, that 

 retirement became women who had 

 yielded to the violence of appetite 

 and passion, or the arts of seduction, 

 more than scenes of gaiety ; for in 

 retirement they might be led to pe- 

 nitence, contrition, and remorse ; 

 which would be followed by the 

 most beneficial consequences, and 

 among others regain, in some mea- 

 sure, the countenance of the world. 



The bishop of Rochester, in a 

 long and learned speech, supported 

 the bill, replying to the principal 

 objections that had been brought 

 against it. In the first place, he 

 replied, with great animation, to 

 what had been advanced by lord 

 Carlisle, respecting the incapacity 

 of monks, ecclesiastical or legal, for 

 legislation, in certain cases, and 

 the vexatious frivolity, vanity, and 

 injustice of the ecclesiastical courts. 

 ^The bishop argued, at great 

 length, on the ground of the di- 

 vine law ; and shewed, from the 

 Scriptures, that the cohabitation of 

 a divorced adulteress with her se- 

 ducer, under colour of a marriage, 

 notwithstanding the connivance of 

 human laws, was gross adultery. It 

 was objected, that the present bill, 

 not taking away the husband's action 

 for damages, while it made the 

 adulterer liable to indictment, in 

 effect imposed a double punishment 

 for the same crime. This he con- 

 tended, was not any novelty in the 

 law of tliis country. That, how- 



ever, was a point on which he 

 spoke with diffidence, because it be- 

 lotiged to the learning of monks of 

 another order. But if he had de- 

 scribed the practice of the courts 

 erroneously, he hoped that the su- 

 perior of that other order, the noble 

 and learned lord on the woolsack, 

 would set him right. He had some- 

 times thought that it had been a 

 happy thing for the public, if no 

 bill of divorce had ever passed. But 

 the notorious prevalence of adul- 

 tery, in countries where divorce 

 was by no means to be had, seemed 

 to prove the contrary. On the 

 views and sentiments of what had 

 been called the " honourable se- 

 ducer," he could not but suppose 

 that the bill, if passed into a law, 

 would have a considerable effect. 

 He believed, indeed, that neither 

 this, nor any other bill possible to 

 be framed, would restrain the pas- 

 sions of the swinish seducer : but he 

 was confident that the swinish adul- 

 terer was a very rare character 

 among his countrymen. Bishop 

 Horsley, in conclusion of his speech, 

 said, " My lords, once more I con- 

 jure you to remember, that justice, 

 not compassion for the guilty, is 

 the great principle of legislation. 

 Yet, my lords, your compassion 

 may find worthy objects, I mean, 

 my lords, your merciful regards to 

 the illustrious suppliants prostrate 

 at this moment at your bar. — QHere 

 every lord turned his eyes to the 

 bar, imagining that some French 

 emigrants of high distinction, of both 

 sexes, had come to throw them- 

 selves on the compassion and pro- 

 tection of the British senate.] But 

 the bishop continued — "The sup- 

 pliants this moment at your bar, 

 are, conjugal felicity; domestic hap- 

 piness ; public manners ; the virtue 



