Page:English laws for women in the nineteenth century.djvu/138

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

126


had said to Ms sister, 'It would he for her children's sake.' I found, even while making this angry complaint, and while endeavouring to come to terms, he retained certain pocket-books, and MS. memoranda of Mrs Norton's, in case, if the negotiation went off, he might find in these "journals something on which to ground some accusation against her, in the ecclesiastical or other courts! I read with amazement the series of letters which Mr Norton had previously addressed to his wife, and in which he signs himself 'Greenacre.' I showed those letters to the late Lord Wynford. I said, if Mrs Norton had been my sister, I would have made them public: and I consider she showed great forbearance and consideration in not making them public, when Mr Norton advertised her in the papers. Mr Norton admitted to me his firm belief of his wife's innocence of the charge he had brought against her and Lord Melbourne; and these letters of his, expressly exculpated her from all blame, and endearingly entreated her to return and live with him again. I then certainly changed my opinion. I thought Mr Norton had done Ms wife the most cruel injury a man could inflict, and that he was bound to make every sacrifice and reparation in his power. I saw no earthly reason why her children should be withheld from her, and required him to write immediately to Scotland (where the children then were) to have them sent to London forthwith. In my presence, and at my dictation, he wrote a letter to that effect and sealed it. I posted it myself, and thought all was settled, as the sole stipulation made by Mrs Norton was the return of her children; but Mr Norton "'was base enough to write a second letter, unknown to me, to forbid their coming; an come they did not. As soon as I discovered "this act of treachery and breach of faith, I threw up my office of mediator. I remonstrated in severe terms with Mr Norton, and my intercourse with him ceased. The question of Mrs Norton's allowance was not entered upon, as my interference terminated at this point. I deem it, however, the simplest justice to Mrs Norton to say, "that I found her frank and straightforward throughout; acting strictly up to this sentence in her first letter to me—'Heartily, and as God is my judge, I desire to make what peace is possible between me and my husband, in spite of the past.' She left her interests entirely in my hands; threw no obstacle in my path; and never once swerved from the promise to abide by whatever terms I should lay down. With Mr Norton (though he had appointed me to act) I found the exact reverse. He abused his wife and Ms wife's family; he shuffled about the mis-statements he could not deny; he would be bound neither by his verbal promise nor his written pledge; and after a correspondence, which began in November, and did not end till January, all effort at arrangement was given up. On a calm review of these circumstances, it can scarcely be wondered at, that I utterly changed my opinion, and that the advice I gave 'to the writer of the Greenacre