together in her breast, as she looked at the poor little creature, dwarfed both in body and mind, uneducated, indigent, and exceedingly childish, standing shivering in her ragged pinafore, to be judged as a “woman” who had given the consent of a mature will to the immoral act, and as she thought of the tenderness of the law to the man—with all his advantages of age, education, manner, position, money, and experience of life,—who had ruined that child. I have here indicated the weak point in English law. The same want of justice appears in the law which, till lately, made marriage the confiscation of all the wife’s earnings, and is further exhibited in the disgracefully slight punishment inflicted for assaults on women and children.[91] Blackstone says,[92] “It is a remarkable omission in the law of England which, with such scrupulous solicitude, guards the rights of individuals, and secures the morals and good order of the community, that it should have afforded so little protection to female chastity. It is true that it has defended it from force and violence, but it has left it exposed to perhaps greater danger from the artifices and solicitations of seduction. In no case whatsoever, unless she has had a promise of marriage, can a woman herself obtain any reparation for the injury she has sustained from the seducer of her virtue. And even where her weakness and credulity have been imposed upon by the most solemn promises of marriage, unless they have been overheard or made in writing, she cannot recover any compensation, being incapable of giving evidence in her own cause. Nor can a parent maintain any action against the person who has done this wrong to his family, and to his honour and happiness, but by stating and proving that, from the consequences of the seduction, his daughter is less able to assist him as a servant, or that the seducer was a trespasser on his premises. Hence no action can be maintained which is not attended with the loss of service or an injury to property. Therefore in that action for seduction which is in most general use, the father must prove that his daughter actually assisted in some degree, however inconsiderable, in the housewifery of his family, and that she has been rendered less serviceable to him by her pregnancy; or the action might be sustained upon the evidence of a consumption or any other disorder contracted by the daughter in consequence of her seduction, or of her shame and sorrow for the loss of her honour. It is immaterial what is the age of the girl; but it is necessary that she should be living in and considered part of her father’s family. Another action for seduction is a common action for trespass, which may be brought when the seducer has illegally entered the father’s house; in which action the debauching his daughter may be stated as an aggravation of the trespass. But these are the only actions which have been extended, by the modern ingenuity of the courts, to