For
its final chapters The Law of Divorce
returns to the main plot and Roland’s desperate situation with two wives. At
last, there is some plot development.
Walter
Dunraven, Harriet’s seducer arrives at the chateau garden in the disguise of a
Capuchin monk (a nod to Gothic tradition perhaps). He begs Harriet to leave
Roland: “Come and live with me again, Harry, and let us be regularly spliced.”
(The Law of Divorce, Chapter 21)
Lizzy’s
and Scipio’s relationship goes through a minor crisis when Scipio figures out
the true state of Roland’s matrimony and suspects that Lizzy is deliberately
deceiving him about it (The Law of
Divorce, Chapters 22-23).
Roland
informs Harriet has he has finally decided to leave Catherine, sell all his
property in England, and sail for America with her (The Law of Divorce, Chapter 24).
The
final denouement is triggered when Roland and Harriet are woken up by an
intruder in the night:
“The
visage of Mademoiselle Cyr — for she it was who had been prompted by vicious
curiosity to secrete herself in the Els- mere's chamber — was almost too
monstrous to be described.” (Ibid.)
Mlle
Cyr provides the excuse for Roland and Harriet, with their children and Lizzy to
flee the chateau. Meanwhile, Roland
is descending into depression as the stress caused by his matrimonial situation
grows unbearable:
“In
his desponding moments black melancholy fell upon his spirit, like a pall ; the
proud form of the avenging Catherine alone appeared, like a remorseless fury,
amid the darkness, and all time and space was filled by one omnipotent
Adversary, employed in planning and working his utter misery and ruin.” (The Law of Divorce, Chapter 26)
Roland
and Harriet reach a railway carriage on their way to Le Havre. At Rouen Catherine
climbs on board with lawyer Mr Scruples and his wife. (Ibid.) Catherine has come to intercept Roland’s
flight:
“She
arose also, seized Roland by the collar, thrust him violently back in his seat,
and, in an imperious tone, said, "Sit still, Sir. You will try in vain to
escape.” (Ibid.)
Harriet
and Catherine have a vicious argument. It is uncommon to find such an aggressive
exchange of words among Victorian ladies in fiction. Once Catherine has
made the moral case and reminded Harriet in detail that she is a fallen woman, Mr Scruples takes over
and presents the legal view:
“Now
the question at issue between yourself and Mrs. Elsmere is wholly independent
of any of those religious considerations on which you seem to lay so much
stress. It has nothing whatever to do with the law of nature, the law of
conscience, or the law of God. … It resolves itself simply into this — What
says the law of England ?” (Ibid.)
Mr
Scruples quotes the law: “Now in the 49th clause of the Bill entitled ' An Act
to amend ' — merely to amend observe, not to alter in any essential points — '
the law relating to Divorce and Matrimonial Causes in England,' passed in the
year 1857, liberty to re-marry is expressly given to the divorced parties, ' as
if the prior marriage had been dissolved by death.' In the eye of the law,
therefore, you are dead as regards Mr. Elsmere, and he is legally no more to
you than the dust and bones in a coffin.” (Ibid.)
According
to Maurice Swabey’s commentary on the Act, published in 1857, the relevant
article is 57, not 49:
Once
Mr Scruples has lain down the law, Roland goes mad and Catherine leads him
away.
What
is the moral of the story? The cruel law of divorce triumphs but leaves victims
with broken hearts and minds in its wake? So it would seem, but the wrapping up of the tale in the final chapters suggests something different.
Scipio
turns out to be a son of a German prince and a merchant’s daughter (he is another hidden child with a false name but well cared-for from a distance).
Harriet dies gracefully. Roland recovers and reconciles himself to his marriage
with Catherine. The final dramatic scene belongs to Walter Dunraven – he dies
with a truly melodramatic final speech. In the end, only the adulterers die, and everyone else lives if
not happily at least relatively contentedly ever after. The Law of Divorce examines the implications of the English divorce
law, but in the final judgment Catherine and the English law prevail.
The Law of Divorceis an uncommonly continental novel. It is set in France and contains long
digression into (at the time) recent European history. These are tedious but they do contrast Roland’s
individual position with that of the European nations. There is a struggle for
freedom and self-determinacy on both levels, individual and national.
The language in The Law of Divorce is dramatic, engaging and entertaining when the characters are allowed to speak their minds (see Catherine letting it rip below). There are long polemical speeches; some, about the Catholic view on matrimony (in chapters 7, 8,
9) or the role of the state (chapter 20) are not good reading at all. Others however are
passionate, melodramatic pleas full of romance or menace: for example, Lizzy’s attempt
to persuade Roland to flee to America (chapter 12), Catherine’s outbursts (The Law of Divorce, Chapters 8, 13, 26) and Walter Dunraven’s
final speech (chapter 29).
Characters in The Law of Divorce
remain flat: Roland is the weak-willed hero, Harriet the clinging romantic
heroine; Walter Dunraven is the villain and Scipio the brave, intellectual
freedom fighter. The behave entirely within their type. Roland is a contrived character, but only because the narrator seeks to explain his 'unmanly' weakness (The Law of Divorce, Chapters 4, 20) and thereby turns him into an artificial construct. Catherine has the best lines. Here she is in full flow addressing Roland:
“You
monster and impersonation of selfishness ! It is nothing to you to have ruined
me, to have made me miserable for life, to have blighted all my prospects, to
have made me a thousand fold more desolate than a widow, before the honeymoon
is past!” (The Law of Divorce,
Chapter 13)
And
she has a go at Harriet:
“Propriety
and modesty you trampled underfoot. You defied public opinion. You stifled the
voice of con science. You mocked at justice and judgment. You disported
yourself with meretricious wantonness. You contaminated all you touched. You
caused scandal whithersoever you went, and spread pestilence wherever you
dwelt. You pierced your husband's soul with anguish; you made him prematurely a
widower, and your children motherless. You brought dishonour on your family,
and infamy on your name. You have ruined yourself, and now, if you could, you
would ruin me." (The Law of Divorce,
Chapter 26)
Catherine
is a harridan and a villainess. She
bribes servants and has them spy on Roland and Harriet. She is also a powerful and intelligent woman
who has been abandoned on her honeymoon. Throughout the novel,
Catherine relies solidly on the British law and the British establishment for her
support. She confides in the British Ambassador, she employs a British lawyer. Catherine is the most
interesting character in the novel.
The overall structure of the novel makes sense and is easy to follow, but the Graduate of Oxford struggles with composition. There is nothing wrong with including tales of Italian Resurgence in a novel about English divorce as long as it is clear to the reader how these tales contribute to the main theme of the novel. This is lacking. The narrative is also broken by characters’ backstories
which do not seem to contribute much to the main story (chapter 11 and most
lengthily chapters 15-17) and by anecdotal episodes which have tenuous
links to the main plot (chapters 10, 18, 23, 25). A more skilful writer
would have woven these into the narrative to produce a more integrated and satisfying reading experience. The Law of Divorce
is a clunky, lumpy novel. It is a very good example of bad composition.
