Part 5

‘It has long been felt to be a defect in the English law that if a man deserted his wife without any cause or otherwise, she had no direct remedy against him in respect of the expense of her maintenance and the bringing up of the children (if any) of the marriage. In case the wife so deserted could carry on any business, or in any other way acquire the means of livelihood, she could obtain a protection order so early as the year 1858, long before the passing of the first Married Women’s Property Act. But if she were not so fortunately situated, and had no near relatives to whom she could look for assistance, she must go into the workhouse, and leave the poor-law officers to look after her husband. This has often been productive of great hardship, for it is no light thing for a woman delicately nurtured to become an inmate of the refuge for the destitute. But by an Act passed in the recent session, this defect has been remedied to a considerable extent in an easy and practical way. Thus, if an innocent woman has been deserted by her husband, she may have him summoned before any two justices of the peace in petty sessions or any stipendiary magistrate; and thereupon, if the justices or magistrate should be satisfied that the husband, being able wholly or in part to maintain his wife, or his wife and family, as the case may be, has wilfully refused or neglected so to do, and that he has deserted his wife, they or he may order that the husband pay to his wife such weekly sum not exceeding two pounds as may be considered to be in accordance with his means, taking also into account any means which the wife may have for the support of herself and family, if any. Power is given for the alteration of the order whenever it should appear to be necessary or just, in case of any alteration in the circumstances of the husband or of the wife. And any such order may be discharged on the application of the husband, if it should appear just to do so. Writers in some of the legal journals have expressed the opinion that this change in the law goes too far; but the present writer has long advocated such a change, and it appears to be altogether an improvement upon the previous state of the law in this respect.’

THE GREAT SPHINX.

An interesting work has been going on, under the direction of M. Maspéro, at the great Sphinx of Gizeh, which has been buried, all but the head, for centuries. M. Maspéro, while we write, had got down as far as the paws, on the right of which are a number of Greek inscriptions. The paws appear to be cut out of the solid stone, and afterwards built round with masonry, the surface of which is painted red with yellow additions. Bryant is of opinion that the Sphinx was originally a vast rock of different strata, which, from a shapeless mass, the Egyptians fashioned into an object of beauty and veneration. Although the excavators have now reached a lower level than Carglia and others, yet much remains to be done before the whole of this wondrous specimen of ancient art is entirely uncovered; for, if we are to believe Pliny’s statements, the head of the Sphinx was one hundred and two feet in circumference, and sixty-two feet high from the belly; whilst the body was one hundred and forty-three feet long, and was, moreover, supposed to be the sepulchre of King Amasis, who died 525 B.C. But, according to Herodotus, the body of this monarch was buried in the Temple of Sais; and on the defeat and death of his son by the Persians, it was taken from its tomb, brutally mangled, and then publicly burnt, to the horror of the Egyptian people. If the Sphinx is really found to be a solid rock, Pliny’s story of its having been a tomb falls to the ground. M. Maspéro has been working in layers of hard sand which has lain undisturbed for probably eighteen hundred years. This is found to be so close and hard, that it is more like solid stone than sand, and requires a great amount of labour to cut through. The work is, however, progressing with energy and determination, and it is to be hoped that it will not be suffered to stop abruptly for want of funds.

NOVEL USE OF ELECTRICITY.

Electric power has been applied in a very novel manner of late on the estate of the Marquis of Salisbury at Hatfield, where it has been in operation for some time past in various ways and works; but the last is perhaps the most peculiar of all. On one of the farms, ensilage has been stored in large quantities, a farm-building being turned into a silo for this purpose; and it being decided that the green food shall be ‘chaffed’ before placing it in the silo, a chaff-cutter has been erected about twenty feet above the ground. This machine is not only driven by electric power, but the same motor is employed to elevate the grass to the level of the chaff-cutter. This is done so effectually that about four tons of rough grass are raised and cut per hour. A sixteen-light ‘Brush’ machine is the generator, driven by a huge water-wheel, and both are on the banks of the river Lea, a mile and a half distant. The power is transmitted to one of Siemens’ type, specially constructed to work as a motor with the ‘Brush’ machine. Nor is this all, for the same electric power is ingeniously applied to work the ‘lifts’ in use at the many haystacks on the estate.

PICCIOLA.

[Count de Charney, when in prison, was led into a philosophical train of reflections by the sight of a flower which grew up between the flagstones of the prison court.]

Of all the flowers that deck the verdant knoll, And lift their snowy petals to the air, One spray has risen in my dungeon bare That breaks the sceptic chain that bound my soul, And makes me feel the might of God’s control. O flower of sweetness! thy frail form so fair Swept from my brow the cankering lines of care, And safe will lead me to the eternal goal. What hand but One could guard thy tender leaves From the fierce fury of the summer sun, When noonday hovers o’er my prison dun? ’Tis He that for my hapless fortune grieves! Blest flower! that drew me to the arms of God, With grateful tears I bathe thy dewy sod.

ROBERT W. CRYAN.

* * * * *

The Conductor of CHAMBERS’S JOURNAL begs to direct the attention of CONTRIBUTORS to the following notice:

_1st._ All communications should be addressed to the ‘Editor, 339 High Street, Edinburgh.’

_2d._ For its return in case of ineligibility, postage-stamps should accompany every manuscript.

_3d._ To secure their safe return if ineligible, ALL MANUSCRIPTS, whether accompanied by a letter of advice or otherwise, _should have the writer’s Name and Address written upon them_ IN FULL.

_4th._ Offerings of Verse should invariably be accompanied by a stamped and directed envelope.

_If the above rules are complied with, the Editor will do his best to insure the safe return of ineligible papers._

* * * * *

Printed and Published by W. & R. CHAMBERS, 47 Paternoster Row, LONDON, and 339 High Street, EDINBURGH.

* * * * *

_All Rights Reserved._