Group read: Orley Farm by Anthony Trollope

Charlas75 Books Challenge for 2021

Únete a LibraryThing para publicar.

Group read: Orley Farm by Anthony Trollope

1lyzard
Ene 31, 2021, 4:59 pm




Orley Farm by Anthony Trollope (1862)

But by degrees he ceased to think of the woman and began to think of the client, as he was in duty bound to do. What was the real truth of all this? Was it possible that she should be alarmed in that way because a small country attorney had told his wife that he had found some old paper, and because the man had then gone off to Yorkshire? Nothing could be more natural than her anxiety, supposing her to be aware of some secret which would condemn her if discovered;---but nothing more unnatural if there were no such secret. And she must know! In her bosom, if in no other, must exist the knowledge whether or no that will were just. If that will were just, was it possible that she should now tremble so violently, seeing that its justice had been substantially proved in various courts of law? But if it were not just---if it were a forgery, a forgery made by her, or with her cognisance---and that now this truth was to be made known! How terrible would that be! But terrible is not the word which best describes the idea as it entered Mr Furnival's mind. How wonderful would it be; how wonderful would it all have been!...

2lyzard
Ene 31, 2021, 5:17 pm

Hello, and welcome to the group read of Anthony Trollope's 1862 novel, Orley Farm.

For the benefit of any newcomers, this is a project working through Trollope's standalone, lesser-known novels. We have already as a group considered his best-known works, the 'Barchester' and 'Palliser' series.

Orley Farm was Trollope's 11th novel and his follow-up to the great success of Framley Parsonage. Trollope's standing at this time can be judged by the fact that his first edition carried illustrations by John Everett Millais. Orley Farm was first issued, not in magazine-form, but as a standalone serial---running in monthly parts between March 1861 and October 1862, before appearing in book form.

Orley Farm didn't quite reach the heights of Framley Parsonage but it was another significant success for the author, who later called it his favourite amongst his novels.

It is a novel very much about the law and lawyers. As we have seen before, Trollope was exceedingly ambivalent on these subjects: he could admire a hard-working solicitor, but that a barrister was paid to argue a case regardless of its justice disturbed him. He felt that the English legal system generally had little to do with getting to the truth. In Orley Farm, he puts many of his own doubts into the mouth of Felix Graham, an unconventional lawyer.

However---no-one was more awake than Trollope to the literary possibilities of a courtroom drama. And in Orley Farm he has it both ways, placing at the heart of his narrative a dramatic trial that also allows him to illustrate exactly what he thought was wrong with the so-called "justice system".

3lyzard
Ene 31, 2021, 5:25 pm

Orley Farm has been constantly in print since its first publication, so hopefully no-one will have any trouble accessing a copy.

It is available in hard copy, via Kindle and other pay ebook formats, and free online at Project Gutenberg, the Internet Archive, the HathiTrust, and others.

(Best of all---there are no variant texts; whoo!)

Orley Farm was originally published in two volumes, as follows:

Volume I: Chapters I - XL
Volume II Chapters XLI - LXXX

80 chapters in total.

While, as I say, there were no text variants, there may well be layout or chapter-numbering variants: please let us know if this is the case for you.

This is quite a long novel so we will need to keep up a decent reading / discussion pace. I am going to suggest that we aim at 3 chapters per day, which will carry us to the end of February.

4lyzard
Editado: Ene 31, 2021, 5:34 pm

To participants in this group read, please keep the following guidelines in mind:

1. Whenever commenting, please start by listing the chapter to which you are referring in bold.

2. Be mindful of others: use spoiler tags if you have read the book before, or get ahead of other readers.

3. If you have not read this novel, DO NOT READ YOUR COPY'S INTRODUCTION BEFOREHAND; keep it for afterwards, so it can't spoil anything.

4. I also discourage reading foot- or endnotes if you have them, for they are not always spoiler-free. If you have a question, ask it here rather than access your notes.

For this reading of Orley Farm I would particularly emphasise #2: this is a bit more plot-dependent than many of Trollope's novels, so please be careful about your comments.

Above all, however, PLEASE SPEAK UP! Don't hesitate to ask questions or make comments, even if the point seems trivial to you. Trust me, if you're thinking something, probably someone else is too! The more on-thread discussion, the better the group read experience for everyone.

5lyzard
Editado: Feb 11, 2021, 4:34 pm

Cast of characters:

Sir Joseph Mason - late owner of Groby Park and Orley Farm
Mr Joseph Mason - his oldest son
Mrs Mason - his miserly wife

Lady Mason - Sir Joseph's second wife and widow
Lucius Mason - her son, Mr Mason's half-brother

Sir Peregrine Orme - an elderly baronet
Mrs Orme - his widowed daughter-in-law
Peregrine Orme - his grandson and heir

Judge Staveley
Lady Staveley - his wife
Augustus Staveley - their son, a lawyer
Madeline Staveley - their unmarried daughter
Isabella Arbuthnot - their married daughter
Marian Arbuthnot - the Staveleys' young granddaughter
Mrs Baker - the Staveleys' housekeeper / nurse

Felix Graham - a young barrister, a friend of Augustus Staveley

Samuel Dockwrath - an attorney
Miriam Dockwrath - formerly Mirian Usbech, his wife
Mr Usbech - her late father, Sir Joseph Mason's solicitor
Adams - Dockwrath's clerk

Mr Thomas Furnival - a barrister
Mrs Furnival - his wife
Miss Sophia Furnival - their daughter
Mr Crabwitz - Mr Furnival's clerk
Miss Martha Biggs - Mrs Furnival's friend

Mr Round - an elderly lawyer, once Mr Mason's representative
Mr Matthew Round - his son and colleague
Mr Crook - their colleague

John Kenneby - a clerk formerly employed by Mr Usbech
Mr Moulder - a commercial traveller

Orley Farm - a small property near London belonging to Lucius Mason
Groby Park - an estate in Yorkshire belonging to Mr Mason
The Cleeve - an estate belonging to Sir Peregrine Orme
Noningsby - the country house of the Staveley family

Hamworth - the village closest to Orley Farm and The Cleeve
Alston - a nearby town with the railway station and the local court

6lyzard
Ene 31, 2021, 5:33 pm

Okay, that will do.

Please 'sign in' and let us know if you will be participating (or even just lurking) in this group read.

And per >4 lyzard:, can I please also ask you to indicate whether this is a new read or a re-read for you?

7CDVicarage
Ene 31, 2021, 5:58 pm

I shall certainly be following this thread and I hope I shall be reading along, too. It is new to me but I never mind spoilers!

8thornton37814
Ene 31, 2021, 6:44 pm

I just read the summary of Orley Farm and decided to join along. I downloaded the free Kindle edition. I'll be mixing this in with another fiction read, short story collections, the Bible, devotional stuff, a non-fiction read, and an audio book. Most of those are not huge time-suckers per day, but we'll see whether the other fiction read or Trollope's book captures me most.

9kac522
Ene 31, 2021, 6:49 pm

I'll be following along--I read it last year, so may re-read sections as we go along.

10majkia
Ene 31, 2021, 6:53 pm

40 or 50 ! years ago, I was enthralled with Trollope and read all of Barchester Towers and of course my favorite, his Palliser series. Since then I've revisited some o his works.

I am unsure whether I've read Orley Farm before however. So I'll join and hope it is a new read rather than a re-read.

11drneutron
Ene 31, 2021, 7:20 pm

I’ve added this thread to the group wiki. Have fun!

12cbl_tn
Ene 31, 2021, 7:58 pm

I'll be reading the Kindle edition. It's a first read for me. 3 chapters a day sounds perfect.

13lyzard
Editado: Ene 31, 2021, 8:43 pm

>11 drneutron:

Thanks, Jim!

>7 CDVicarage:, >8 thornton37814:, >9 kac522:, >10 majkia:, >12 cbl_tn:

Welcome, Kerry, Lori, Kathy, Jean and Carrie!

>10 majkia:

It's a standalone about a disputed will, Jean, if that helps?

14NinieB
Ene 31, 2021, 9:01 pm

Yes, I'm happy to join in! Haven't borrowed a nice print volume but for now will make do with an ebook. I might switch to print at some point during the read.

As I think I've mentioned before, Liz, I read this a few years ago but am happy to re-read.

15souloftherose
Feb 1, 2021, 2:31 am

Thank you Liz for setting up the thread. I'm here and will be reading this one for the first time using the Oxford World's Classics edition. I read the first three chapters this morning.

16MissWatson
Feb 1, 2021, 4:29 am

Thanks for setting this up! I have a copy of the Oxford Classics edition lying around, I just need to finish something else first...

17lyzard
Feb 1, 2021, 5:25 am

>14 NinieB:

Welcome, Ninie! Yes, I'm working from an ebook too: not ideal, but we'll manage. :)

>15 souloftherose:

I'm so glad you could join us, Heather!

>16 MissWatson:

Thank you for joining in, Birgit. I'm sure you won't have any trouble catching up. :)

18Matke
Feb 1, 2021, 7:29 am

Here I am!

Three chapters per day sounds just right. I have the Oxford edition and a copy on kindle as well.

19lyzard
Feb 1, 2021, 3:49 pm

>19 lyzard:

Hi, Gail!

20lyzard
Editado: Feb 2, 2021, 4:56 pm

All right, then...

Chapter 1:

As I said up top, Orley Farm is a little more plot-point dependent than some of Trollope's novels. This is reflected in the way that he approaches his opening chapter, which offers quite a detailed back-story of events some twenty years in the past.

It is very important at the outset that we grasp the relationships between the characters. I have made a start on the character list up above (including place names, which I sometimes need a reminder for).

This chapter also outlines the details of the legal dispute over the ownership of Orley Farm. Having been told all his life that the farm would be part of his inheritance, Joseph Mason discovered upon his father's death that there was a codicil to the will, leaving the property instead to his half-brother, Lucius Mason, then only a toddler.

Mason brings suit, and Lady Mason must give testimony about the making of the codicil:

The body of the will was in the handwriting of the widow, as was also the codicil. It was stated by her at the trial that the words were dictated to her by Usbech in her husband's hearing, and that the document was then signed by her husband in the presence of them both, and also in the presence of two other persons---a young man employed by her husband as a clerk, and by a servant-maid. These two last, together with Mr Usbech, were the three witnesses whose names appeared in the codicil. There had been no secrets between Lady Mason and her husband as to his will. She had always, she said, endeavoured to induce him to leave Orley Farm to her child from the day of the child's birth, and had at last succeeded...

So the people involved here in addition to Sir Joseph and Lady Mason are Sir Joseph's attorney, Jonathan Usbech; his clerk John Kennaby; and a maidservant called Bridget Bolster.

Part of the problem is that Usbech has died - dies, indeed, before Sir Joseph - and cannot add his own testimony to the information about Sir Joseph's intentions.

Other than the baby Lucius, the other person to benefit under the codicil is Usbech's daughter, Miriam. This is one of the details that raises suspicion. Usbech's business is in poor condition and he personally cannot provide for Miriam.

On the other hand, there is testimony that at the time, Usbech was suffering gout and could not write. Hence the will and the codicil are both in Lady Mason's handwriting.

At this time matters are settled in favour of the young widow and her baby son:

Not half the evidence taken has been given here, but enough probably for our purposes. The will and codicil were confirmed, and Lady Mason continued to live at the farm. Her evidence was supposed to have been excellently given, and to have been conclusive. She had seen the signature, and written the codicil, and could explain the motive. She was a woman of high character, of great talent, and of repute in the neighbourhood; and, as the judge remarked, there could be no possible reason for doubting her word. Nothing also could be simpler or prettier than the evidence of Miriam Usbech, as to whose fate and destiny people at the time expressed much sympathy. That stupid young clerk was responsible for the only weak part of the matter; but if he proved nothing on one side, neither did he prove anything on the other...

Joseph Mason, however, is an angry, resentful, suspicious man; and the matter is not over...

21lyzard
Editado: Feb 2, 2021, 4:56 pm

The fictional Orley Farm is based upon the farmhouse property occupied by the Trollopes when Anthony was a boy, after his father's law career failed.

Chapter 1:

When first inhabited by him the house was not fitted for more than the requirements of an ordinary farmer, but he had gradually added to it and ornamented it till it was commodious, irregular, picturesque, and straggling. When he died, and during the occupation of his widow, it consisted of three buildings of various heights, attached to each other, and standing in a row.

The descriptions of the house and the illustration of "Orley Farm" by Millais at the beginning of this novel reflect Trollope's own childhood memories:




22lyzard
Editado: Feb 2, 2021, 4:56 pm

The linking detail in Chapter 1 that brings our story up-to-date is the brief history of Miriam Usbech.

After the deaths of Sir Joseph Mason and Jonathan Usbech, Miriam is taken in by Lady Mason. She subsequently rejects the advances of John Kenneby - who after his performance during the first trial is rather unkindly referred to throughout as "the stupid clerk" - and instead marries Samuel Dockwrath, an attorney.

As the couple are, um, "blessed" with sixteen* children, money is understandably an issue. Dockwrath accepts Lady Mason's assistance but he is the kind of man who bites the hand that feeds him.

The assistance offered includes the leasing of two fields for farming. This arrangement lasts until Lucius Mason comes of age and fully inherits his property, at which time, over his mother's advice, he makes moves to dispossess the Dockwraths in spite of their long holding of the property.

In doing so, he makes a dangerous enemy; or rather, Lady Mason does: Dockwrath's resentment of their need of her charity directs his anger at her, not Lucius:

Indeed, he himself had accepted a great favour with reference to the holding of those two fields, and had acknowledged as much when first he took them into his hands some sixteen or seventeen years back. But all that was forgotten now; and having held them for so long a period, he bitterly felt the loss, and resolved that it would ill become him as a man and an attorney to allow so deep an injury to pass unnoticed...

(*In one of Trollope's moments of carelessness, this number will later change.)

23lyzard
Editado: Feb 2, 2021, 4:57 pm

However, we are not quite done with back-story yet. Chapter 2 gives us Lady Mason's history.

Here we must understand that in marrying Sir Joseph, the then Mary Johnson distinctly married up. Her people were respectable, but they were still "in trade"; and her father went bankrupt.

Thus Lady Mason would have been perceived as "not a real lady", whatever her own conduct. This is important with respect to her relationships with her neighbours around Orley Farm, who are of a higher social standing the she, in spite of her title.

However, Lady Mason wins the respect of those neighbours with her courageous bearing through the trial and her modest and retiring conduct, once that ordeal is over.

At the outset of this chapter, Trollope makes a wry distinction regarding Lady Mason: being - gasp! - in her forties, she cannot be his heroine (and an appropriate ingenue will show herself in due course); but she is nevertheless his protagonist:

She was now forty-seven years of age, and had a son who had reached man's estate; and yet perhaps she had more of woman's beauty at this present time than when she stood at the altar with Sir Joseph Mason. The quietness and repose of her manner suited her years and her position; age had given fullness to her tall form; and the habitual sadness of her countenance was in fair accordance with her condition and character...

24cbl_tn
Feb 1, 2021, 6:15 pm

Liz, would you elaborate on this from the beginning of Chapter 3?

He (Sir Peregrine) was lord of the manor of Hamworth, and possessed seignorial rights, or rather the skeleton and remembrance of such rights within reference to a very large district of the country...

I have a vague notion of what this means, but I'd like more clarity!

25lyzard
Editado: Feb 2, 2021, 4:57 pm

The rest of Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 deal with the district around Orley Farm and Lady Mason's neighbours, particularly the Ormes.

Carrie's question in >24 cbl_tn: speaks to the character of Sir Peregrine Orme, the elderly baronet.

Basically it's the old feudal system. "Seignorial rights" is an expression dating back to Anglo-Saxon times and refers to the social arrangement of "nobles" and "peasants, under which a lord of the manor (as Sir Peregrine thinks of himself here) was the ruling power of a district. The peasants were legally subject to their lord, and required to pay him a contribution (or fief, hence "fiefdom") either by labouring on his land or, if they produced enough by working the land which they occupied - not owned - in money. In times of war, the lord of the manor could raise an army (personal or for the king) from amongst his peasants.

(At its worst one of the things "owned" by the lord of the manor was the virginity of his young female tenants. Peasants couldn't marry without the consent of their lord, and that was usually the price exacted for it.)

In return the lord would look after his people's general needs: build and maintain housing, provide food and medical care when needed, ensure a supply of fuel, etc.

In one form or another the seignorial system persisted in England through into the 18th century, when enclosure of common land began and increasing private ownership of land became the focus of new capitalistic economy.

But of course we need to note that Trollope says of Sir Peregrine only that he owns "the skeleton and remembrance of such rights". The implication is that he is an old-fashioned individual with a rather "feudal" view of his own position, which is out of place in the modern world. But though he is certainly very proud with strict ideas about birth and family, Sir Peregrine also represents the better face of the old system in terms of his own conduct and meeting his responsibilities---and as we shall see, his devotion to the people he cares for.

Conversely it is implied that even in these democratic times, the working people of the district tend to think of Sir Peregrine as their hereditary lord.

26thornton37814
Feb 2, 2021, 8:17 am

I'm going to have to read a double portion today as I didn't manage to read the first three chapters. I'm not reading the comments about them until I've read them though.

27thornton37814
Feb 2, 2021, 1:49 pm

I caught up with yesterday's reading during lunch. Having just read some medieval histories and historical fiction last year and last month, I recognized the feudal elements in the story.

Will move to chapters 4-6 this evening.

28lyzard
Feb 2, 2021, 4:39 pm

29lyzard
Editado: Feb 2, 2021, 4:58 pm

Chapters 4 and 5 move the narrative into the present: we find Lady Mason, under the guise of consulting Sire Peregrine about Lucius, recruiting him for her own cause.

The previous descriptions of Sir Peregrine and his social standing tend to this: Lady Mason understands very well what having the baronet's open support will mean to her.

However, there's an almost throwaway point made, or rather emphasised, here.

There's an irony about Lady Mason's use of desire for advice about her son as a smokescreen for her real purpose: if we didn't know it already, we will soon discover that Lucius Mason never listens to anyone about anything, no matter how often following his own judgement leads into trouble.

Among other things, he ignored his mother's advice about leaving his fields with the Dockwraths, who after all had had the management of them for some sixteen years.

    "But I will tell you the whole story, Sir Peregrine. It is not much, and perhaps after all may not be worth attention. You know the attorney in Hamworth who married Miriam Usbech?"
    "What, Samuel Dockwrath? Oh, yes; I know him well enough; and to tell the truth I do not think very well of him. Is he not a tenant of yours?"
    "Not at present." And then Lady Mason explained the manner in which the two fields had been taken out of the lawyer's hands by her son's order.
    "Ah! he was wrong there," said the baronet. "When a man has held land so long it should not be taken away from him except under pressing circumstances; that is if he pays his rent."
    "Mr Dockwrath did pay his rent, certainly; and now, I fear, he is determined to do all he can to injure us..."


So if Lucius had just listened to his mother this once instead of standing on "his rights", probably none of what follows would have happened.

There's a secondary irony here: Sir Peregrine's reaction to the Dockwraths' eviction is in terms of possession being nine-tenths of the law...which of course is the situation of the Masons with regard to Orley Farm, too.

30lyzard
Feb 2, 2021, 5:03 pm

As we often see with Trollope, Chapter VI introduces a raft of minor, semi-comic characters who are only tangentially involved with the main narrative (though Mr Moulder turns out to have a more direct connection, or his wife does).

Besides whatever humour we find in the interactions of the commercial travellers, this chapter also further delineates the character of Dockwrath: when he thinks he's entitled to something, large or small, he's like a dog with a bone:

    "Cold evening, sir, for the time of year," said Mr Moulder, walking up to the fireplace, and rolling the lumps of his forehead about in his attempt at a frown. In spite of his terrible burden of flesh, Mr Moulder could look angry on occasions, but he could only do so when he was angry. He was not gifted with a command of his facial muscles.
    "Yes," said Mr Dockwrath, not taking his eyes from off the Leeds and Halifax Chronicle. "It is coldish. Waiter, bring me a cigar."
    This was very provoking, as must be confessed. Mr. Moulder had not been prepared to take any step towards turning the gentleman out, though doubtless he might have done so had he chosen to exercise his prerogative. But he did expect that the gentleman would have acknowledged the weakness of his footing, by moving himself a little towards one side of the fire, and he did not expect that he would have presumed to smoke without asking whether the practice was held to be objectionable by the legal possessors of the room. Mr Dockwrath was free of any such pusillanimity...


31majkia
Feb 2, 2021, 5:51 pm

Is an attorney a commercial traveler?

32NinieB
Feb 2, 2021, 6:17 pm

>31 majkia: Liz will no doubt have more context for this, but not according to the OED:

commercial traveller n. (a) an agent for a manufacturer, wholesale trader, etc., who travels over a district, showing samples and soliciting orders

33NinieB
Feb 2, 2021, 6:20 pm

I have read through Chapter 15. What a good book--just as enjoyable the second time!

34thornton37814
Feb 2, 2021, 8:31 pm

I did make it through chapter 6 this evening. Enjoying it so far. I'm just wanting to look at all those land records, wills, and such!

35lyzard
Editado: Feb 2, 2021, 9:16 pm

>31 majkia:, >32 NinieB:

Basically a travelling salesman. A representative of a company who did sales business by working a circuit and offering goods either to shops, other businesses or households.

As a profession, it was more respectable in England than in America, I think. (No accompanying dirty jokes!)

Therefore no, an attorney would not be considered a "commercial" despite Dockwrath's lawyerly quibbling. :)

>33 NinieB:

I'm glad, Ninie!

>34 thornton37814:

Plenty of documents to keep you interested in this one, Lori! :)

36lyzard
Feb 2, 2021, 9:29 pm

Chapter 7 gives us Dockwrath's first meeting with Joseph Mason.

It is important here that we are quite clear about the point being made regarding all these documents. There's a bit of assumed knowledge here, so I think it's best if it's spelled out.

In the first place there is Sr Joseph Mason's will, which is *not* under dispute despite being in Lady Mason's handwriting. It is accepted that Mr Usbech could not write at the time because of his gout, and Lady Mason was writing to his and her husband's dictation.

It is the other two documents that are being disputed.

As Dockwrath points out here, on the 14th July a "deed of separation", that is, a legal document dissolving a partnership, was executed. This document is sometimes referred to in the text as the "partnership" deed or document. This was witnessed by Bridget Bolster (the maid) and John Kenneby (the stupid clerk).

However, 14th July is also the date of the codicil to Sir Joseph's will, which is also in Lady Mason's handwriting---and which was also witnessed by Bridget Bolster and John Kenneby.

As we have said, Mr Usbech died before Sir Joseph, and therefore his testimony was unavailable.

The question, therefore, is whether Bolster and Kenneby witnessed two documents that day---or ever.

This is where the first trial concerning the codicil fell apart: John Kenneby went to pieces on the stand, and the court believed Lady Mason's testimony regarding the creation and witnessing of these documents over Bridget Bolster's insistence that she only witnessed one document.

The suggestion raised here by Dockwrath is that Kenneby and Bolster did only witness one document, and that the codicil was forged by Lady Mason by copying the signatures on the partnership deed.

37lyzard
Editado: Feb 4, 2021, 12:05 am

Chapter 7 also introduces Joseph Mason of Groby Park, and describes the making of a very unpleasant partnership: one based upon a mutual desire for revenge. Though, should the charge brought be true, Mr Mason would have been deprived of the income from Orley Park for a full twenty years - and though course this is a large part of it - it is evident that this is a secondary consideration:

Mr Mason was not at his ease, though all idea of affecting any reserve before the attorney had left him. He was thinking how best he might confound and destroy the woman who had robbed him for so many years; who had defied him, got the better of him, and put him to terrible cost; who had vexed his spirit through his whole life, deprived him of content, and had been to him as a thorn ever present in a festering sore. He had always believed that she had defrauded him, but this belief had been qualified by the unbelief of others. It might have been, he had half thought, that the old man had signed the codicil in his dotage, having been cheated and bullied into it by the woman. There had been no day in her life on which he would not have ruined her, had it been in his power to do so. But now---now, new and grander ideas were breaking in upon his mind. Could it be possible that he might live to see her, not merely deprived of her ill-gained money, but standing in the dock as a felon to receive sentence for her terrible misdeeds? If that might be so, would he not receive great compensation for all that he had suffered?

And further, in Chapter 8:

    "D--- her! d--- her!" exclaimed the other, gnashing his teeth with concentrated wrath. "No punishment will be bad enough for her. Hanging would not be bad enough."
    "They can't hang her, Mr Mason," said Mr Dockwrath, almost frightened by the violence of his companion.
    "No; they have altered the laws, giving every encouragement to forgers, villains, and perjurers. But they can give her penal servitude for life. They must do it."
    "She is not convicted yet, you know."
    "D--- her!" repeated the owner of Groby Park again, as he thought of his twenty years of loss. Eight hundred a year for twenty years had been taken away from him; and he had been worsted before the world after a hard fight. "D--- her!" he continued to growl between his teeth. Mr Dockwrath when he had first heard his companion say how horrid and dreadful the affair was, had thought that Mr Mason was alluding to the condition in which the lady had placed herself by her assumed guilt. But it was of his own condition that he was speaking. The idea which shocked him was the thought of the treatment which he himself had undergone. The dreadful thing at which he shuddered was his own ill usage...


It is evident that Mason is a dangerous adversary, and that Lady Mason is aware of this we see in her tactic of seeking powerful friends.

38lyzard
Feb 4, 2021, 12:06 am

It is very clear from the outset that Joseph Mason is not a very pleasant person; and indeed, I don't think we meet anyone along the way who has a good word to say for him.

Nevertheless, we might question whether anyone deserves what Mason gets by way of domesticity...

Chapter 8

And the covers were removed, John taking them from the table with a magnificent action of his arm which I am inclined to think was not innocent of irony. On the dish before the master of the house,---a large dish which must I fancy have been selected by the cook with some similar attempt at sarcasm,---there reposed three scraps, as to the nature of which Mr Dockwrath, though he looked hard at them, was unable to enlighten himself. But Mr Mason knew them well, as he now placed his eyes on them for the third time. They were old enemies of his, and his brow again became black as he looked at them. The scraps in fact consisted of two drumsticks of a fowl and some indescribable bone out of the back of the same...

39lyzard
Editado: Feb 4, 2021, 5:00 pm

Chapters 10 - 13 introduce the Furnivals.

Mr Furnival, a barrister, is a man who has risen in the world---unfortunately for Mrs Furnival leaving her behind him, socially. This was a not uncommon occurrence given the structuring of Victorian society; and though Trollope obviously thinks her tactics aren't very wise, he shows a surprising degree of sympathy with the aggrieved Mrs Furnival as she refuses to take her wrongs lying down---or silently. This is absolutely not the usual image of the submissive Victorian wife.

Trollope may side with Mrs Furnival here because of his own views on hard work and happiness, which he applies to the couple's early struggles.

Mr Furnival was involved as a young man in the first trial about Orley Farm, and is now consulted again by Lady Mason.

Trollope here begins what will become a major aspect of this novel, an examination of the moral compromise in the conduct of the law, something he found very troubling.

Mr Furnival is perfectly willing to contemplate the possibility of Lady Mason's guilt, and is anything but horrified by the thought:

Could it be possible that she, soft, beautiful, graceful as she was now, all but a girl as she had then been, could have done it, unaided,---by herself?---that she could have sat down in the still hour of the night, with that old man on one side and her baby in his cradle on the other, and forged that will, signatures and all, in such a manner as to have carried her point for twenty years,---so skilfully as to have baffled lawyers and jurymen and resisted the eager greed of her cheated kinsman? If so, was it not all wonderful! Had not she been a woman worthy of wonder!

But of course, no such thoughts are spoken out loud. On the contrary, Mr Furnival must advise without being so unprofessional as even to hint at such a possibility, let alone invite frank discussion. As Trollope rather sardonically puts it:

In the ordinary intercourse of the world when one man seeks advice from another, he who is consulted demands in the first place that he shall be put in possession of all the circumstances of the case. How else will it be possible that he should give advice? But in matters of law it is different. If I, having committed a crime, were to confess my criminality to the gentleman engaged to defend me, might he not be called on to say: "Then, O my friend, confess it also to the judge; and so let justice be done. Ruat cælum, and the rest of it?" But who would pay a lawyer for counsel such as that?

("Fīat jūstitia ruat cælum" = Let justice be done though the heavens fall)

Though of course, poor Mrs Furnival is quite right about the influence of Lady Mason's physical attractions upon her husband. And while she is quite wrong to assign any guilt - in this respect - to Lady Mason, she is at least perfectly aware that those attractions are an important aspect of gaining the assistance she needs.

40lyzard
Feb 4, 2021, 4:58 pm

These chapters also begin the inevitable gathering in Orley Farm of a group of young people at romantic cross-purposes.

We have already met young Peregrine Orme; here we see more of Lucius Mason, Lady Mason's rather humourless and self-satisfied son, and Sophia Furnival, the only child of the barrister and his wife---the latter definitely not Trollope's promised heroine:

    Sophia Furnival was, as I have said, a clever, attractive girl, handsome, well-read, able to hold her own with the old as well as with the young, capable of hiding her vanity if she had any, mild and gentle to girls less gifted, animated in conversation, and yet possessing an eye that could fall softly to the ground, as a woman's eye always should fall upon occasions.
    Nevertheless she was not altogether charming...


She is, rather, there to provide contrast with Trollope's preferred "type".

41NinieB
Feb 4, 2021, 8:15 pm

>39 lyzard: Thanks for the note on "Ruat cælum"--I should have asked because I had no idea what that meant!

42lyzard
Feb 4, 2021, 9:49 pm

>41 NinieB:

There's quite a bit of casual Latin in this one. That quote is particularly important, of course.

43NinieB
Feb 4, 2021, 10:45 pm

>42 lyzard: Now I see my problem. My ebook has the misspelling cœlum, which didn't support useful Googling. There's a entire Wikipedia page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_justitia_ruat_caelum

44lyzard
Feb 5, 2021, 1:42 am

>43 NinieB:

Of course I'd rather you asked here anyway. :D

45Matke
Feb 5, 2021, 8:22 am

I’ve been keeping up, but must read a double set today.

>40 lyzard: Goodness. After that list of attributes one wonders why Trollope would prefer a different sort of woman or girl.

Did anyone else notice that the second Mrs. Mason was 45 years younger than her husband?

And yes, Joseph Mason is certainly receiving his just desserts. (I’ll show myself out.)

46lyzard
Editado: Feb 6, 2021, 3:58 pm

Sorry, people! - yesterday went a bit kerflooey. I'll try to catch up some extra chapters today.

>45 Matke:

As we shall learn, too much head and not enough heart for Trollope's liking. She's a calculator not a lover.

Yes, Trollope doesn't dwell on it but the back-story isn't very pleasant.

:D

47lyzard
Editado: Feb 6, 2021, 4:07 pm

In Chapter 14 we find the relationship between the Masons and the Ormes changing---at least in some respects.

Lady Mason begins to form a friendship with Mrs Orme, which she had previously resisted; Lucius, however, doesn't fare quite so well with Sir Peregrine, or vice-versa.

This is interestingly presented because Lucius is actually in the right here (we would feel so, though the "seigniorial" Sir Peregrine might not), but what we come away with is a sense of how difficult a person he is to be around. Difficult because he is right but tactless with it:

    "But some little knowledge---some experience is perhaps desirable before any great outlay is made."
    "Yes; some little knowledge is necessary,---and some great knowledge would be desirable if it were accessible;---but it is not, as I take it."
    "Long years, perhaps, devoted to such pursuits---"
    "Yes, Sir Peregrine; I know what you are going to say. Experience no doubt will teach something. A man who has walked thirty miles a day for thirty years will probably know what sort of shoes will best suit his feet, and perhaps also the kind of food that will best support him through such exertion; but there is very little chance of his inventing any quicker mode of travelling."
    "But he will have earned his wages honestly," said Sir Peregrine, almost angrily. In his heart he was very angry, for he did not love to be interrupted.
    "Oh, yes; and if that were sufficient we might all walk our thirty miles a day. But some of us must earn wages for other people, or the world will make no progress. Civilisation, as I take it, consists in efforts made not for oneself but for others."
    "If you won't take any more wine we will join the ladies," said the baronet.

48souloftherose
Feb 6, 2021, 4:10 pm

>39 lyzard: 'If so, was it not all wonderful! Had not she been a woman worthy of wonder!'

This read is reminding me a bit of Lady Audley's Secret and like LAS I'm finding myself cheering on Lady Mason.

49lyzard
Editado: Feb 6, 2021, 4:43 pm

And in Chapter 15, we see that Lady Mason is right in her feeling that she may need "friends" to see her through her difficulties: she learns now that Dockwrath has been busy:

    "I am glad to see you have got promotion," said the old lady, looking out at Lady Mason's little phaeton on the gravel sweep which divided Mrs Arkwright's house from the street. For Mrs Arkwright's house was Mount Pleasant Villa, and therefore was entitled to a sweep.
    "It was a present from Lucius," said the other, "and as such must be used. But I shall never feel myself at home in my own carriage."
    "It is quite proper, my dear Lady Mason, quite proper. With his income and with yours I do not wonder that he insists upon it. It is quite proper, and just at the present moment peculiarly so."
    Lady Mason did not understand this; but she would probably have passed it by without understanding it, had she not thought that there was some expression more than ordinary in Mrs Arkwright's face. "Why peculiarly so at the present moment?" she said.
    "Because it shows that this foolish report which is going about has no foundation. People won't believe it for a moment when they see you out and about, and happy-like."
    "What rumour, Mrs Arkwright?" And Lady Mason's heart sunk within her as she asked the question. She felt at once to what it must allude, though she had conceived no idea as yet that there was any rumour on the subject. Indeed, during the last forty-eight hours, since she had left the chambers of Mr Furnival, she had been more at ease within herself than during the previous days which had elapsed subsequent to the ill-omened visit made to her by Miriam Dockwrath. It had seemed to her that Mr Furnival anticipated no danger, and his manner and words had almost given her confidence. But now,---now that a public rumour was spoken of, her heart was as low again as ever.
    "Sure, haven't you heard?" said Mrs Arkwright. "Well, I wouldn't be the first to tell you, only that I know that there is no truth in it..."


This business about Lady Mason's carriage is obliquely informative about her back-story too. A carriage was one of the Victorian markers of status and success: you'd made it when you could call for your own carriage. Lady Mason's discomfort with Lucius' gift is another indicator of how she grew up and her relatively low personal social status; as she has previously resisted intimacy with the Ormes, she has resisted "putting herself forward" by using a carriage.

Another Victorian touch emerges in Lady Mason's subsequent conversation with Lucius: the pernicious idea that the main purpose of female existence was to make things pleasant for men:

But she met him at dinner with a smiling face. He loved to see her smile, and often told her so, almost upbraiding her when she would look sad. Why should she be sad, seeing that she had everything that a woman could desire? Her mind was burdened with no heavy thoughts as to feeding coming multitudes. She had no contests to wage with the desultory chemists of the age. His purpose was to work hard during the hours of the day,---hard also during many hours of the night; and it was becoming that his mother should greet him softly during his few intervals of idleness. He told her so, in some words not badly chosen for such telling; and she, loving mother that she was, strove valiantly to obey him.

The more we learn of Lady Mason's history, the crueler that remark seems.

Anyway, Luicius soon learns that his mother does have something to make her sad---and it immediately obvious that for all his good intentions of lifting her burdens, he's more likely to make them much, much heavier:

    "I shall go to him to-morrow," said Lucius, very sternly.
    "No, no; you must not do that. You must promise me that you will not do that."
    "But I shall. You cannot suppose that I shall allow such a man as that to tamper with my name without noticing it! It is my business now."
    "No, Lucius. The attack will be against me rather than you;---that is, if an attack be made. I have told you because I do not like to have a secret from you."
    "Of course you have told me. If you are attacked who should defend you, if I do not?"


50lyzard
Feb 6, 2021, 4:41 pm

>48 souloftherose:

Ha! - yes. :D

Actually that comment ties to something Trollope says later in the novel, which I must remember to come back to at the appropriate time.

51lyzard
Editado: Feb 6, 2021, 5:02 pm

Orley Farm up to now has been very much about laying out its plot and introducing its characters, but as I said at the outset this novel finds Trollope examining the state of the British justice system and being worried about what he sees. Increasing this examination will become the focus of the novel with Lady Mason's situation as its fulcrum.

We might feel that Trollope's objections are correct but impractical---which is how the other characters react to the stance of Felix Graham, a young attorney who will show up presently, into whose mouth Trollope puts his own concerns.

(This is a subject that Trollope only became more concerned with over time, as those of you who have read Phineas Redux would know.)

In Chapter 16, Trollope introduces the legal firm of Round and Crook; and though they are well-respected with a reputation for honesty - we can almost hear Trollope's qualification here, as lawyers go - he still feels compelled to say this:

    Old Mr Round might now be said to be ornamental and communicative. He was a hale man of nearly seventy, who thought a great deal of his peaches up at Isleworth, who came to the office five times a week---not doing very much hard work, and who took the largest share in the profits. Mr Round senior had enjoyed the reputation of being a sound, honourable man, but was now considered by some to be not quite sharp enough for the practice of the present day.
    Mr Crook had usually done the dirty work of the firm, having been originally a managing clerk; and he still did the same---in a small way. He had been the man to exact penalties, look after costs, and attend to any criminal business, or business partly criminal in its nature, which might chance find its way to them...


But even so, there is a sliding scale of "dirtiness", as we see when young Mr Matthew Round is confronted by Samuel Dockwrath:

    "As I understand it, our client has referred you to us. If you have anything to say, we are ready to hear it. If you have anything to show, we are ready to look at it. If you have nothing to say, and nothing to show---"
    "Ah, but I have; only---"
    "Only you want us to make it worth your while. We might as well have the truth at once. Is not that about it?"
    "I want to see my way, of course."
    "Exactly. And now, Mr Dockwrath, I must make you understand that we don't do business in that way."


BTW both Mr Rounds will play a part in the succeeding narrative and it is important to be alert to which Mr Round is being referred to at any given time. (Mr Furnival usually deals with Mr Round Sr.)

52cbl_tn
Feb 6, 2021, 5:27 pm

>51 lyzard: I had wondered if Felix was speaking for Trollope so I'm glad for the confirmation.

53cbl_tn
Feb 7, 2021, 10:33 am

In chapter 19, Judge Staveley's wife is proud of her husband's status as a "puisne judge". This seems to have been a royal appointment ("made by the late king when he chose her husband"). I'm unfamiliar with the term "puisne" and I'm curious about this position/status.

54lyzard
Editado: Feb 7, 2021, 4:35 pm

>53 cbl_tn:

Jumping ahead a bit to answer Carrie's question:

Chapter 19

But she thought most of all of her husband, who in her eyes was the perfection of all manly virtues. She had made up her mind that the position of a puisne judge in England was the highest which could fall to the lot of any mere mortal. To become a Lord Chancellor, or a Lord Chief Justice, or a Chief Baron, a man must dabble with Parliament, politics, and dirt; but the bench-fellows of these politicians were selected for their wisdom, high conduct, knowledge, and discretion. Of all such selections, that made by the late king when he chose her husband, was the one which had done most honour to England, and had been in all its results most beneficial to Englishmen. Such was her creed with reference to domestic matters.

This is a joke of sorts because "puisne judge" meant one who had not achieved any higher honours: specifically not "a Lord Chancellor, or a Lord Chief Justice, or a Chief Baron". Lady Staveley has turned this around in her head to make it a compliment to her husband, as if his lack of promotion meant that he was "purer" than his higher colleagues. Likewise, all judges were technically appointed by the monarch (that is, signed off on), not just Judge Staveley.

This does not mean that Judge Staveley was not well-placed and respected in his profession: he would have been a successful barrister and experienced on the assize circuit before being appointed at that level.

"Puisne", by the way, is or was pronounced "puny", meaning "minor": I gather it's one of those words undergoing pronunciation drift, perhaps to make it less of a seeming insult. There was some reform of the British judicial system about fifteen years after Trollope wrote Orley Farm, so that a "puisne judge" is now specifically a Justice of the High Court.

55lyzard
Feb 7, 2021, 4:36 pm

Following on from that---

Is everyone here clear on the British assize system, or would you like me to explain a bit how that worked?

56lyzard
Editado: Feb 7, 2021, 4:47 pm

Now jumping back:

Chapter 17 outlines for us the details of the original trial involving Orley Farm and the codicil to Sir Joseph's will.

Here we find Mr Furnival in consultation with old Mr Round---though note that it was Mr Crook, who does the firm's "dirty work", who actually represented Mr Mason.

Mr Mason will later become convinced that Round and Crook are in league with Mr Furnival, and while that is not true, we see that the conduct of lawyers amongst themselves might give that impression to a lay person.

The lawyers, of course, are looking at the case not as a matter of justice, but what it's worthwhile pursuing in the courts: the observation that Mr Matthew is "too sharp" implies that he might be willing to fight on past the sensible point of legal surrender---as his father and Mr Crook were not:

    "I will tell you how you can oblige me, Mr Round."
    "Do tell me; I am sure I shall be very happy."
    "Look into this matter yourself, and talk it over with Mr Mason before you allow anything to be done. It is not that I doubt your son's discretion. Indeed we all know what an exceedingly good man of business he is."
    "Matthew is sharp enough," said the prosperous father.
    "But then young men are apt to be too sharp. I don't know whether you remember the case about that Orley Farm, Mr Round."
    "As well as if it were yesterday," said the attorney.
    "Then you must recollect how thoroughly you were convinced that your client had not a leg to stand upon."
    "It was I that insisted that he should not carry it before the Chancellor. Crook had the general management of those cases then, and would have gone on; but I said, no. I would not see my client's money wasted in such a wild-goose chase. In the first place the property was not worth it; and in the next place there was nothing to impugn the will. If I remember right it all turned on whether an old man who had signed as witness was well enough to write his name."
    "That was the point."
    "And I think it was shown that he had himself signed a receipt on that very day---or the day after, or the day before. It was something of that kind."
    "Exactly; those were the facts..."

57lyzard
Editado: Feb 7, 2021, 5:01 pm

Chapters 17 and 18 also deal with the legal conference which some of our characters attend; the point of all this is chiefly to illustrate the difference in function and attitude between the British and Continental justice systems at this time, by way of highlighting some of Trollope's own concerns about the latter.

These chapters introduce Felix Graham, an unconventional young barrister---"unconventional" because it worries him that the justice system seems to him to have very little to do with justice, still less with establishing the truth.

Of course, with an attitude like that he's not going to get anywhere as a lawyer, and so his friends and colleagues keep telling him:

But here, as at Oxford, he would not labour on the same terms with other men, or make himself subject to the same conventional rules; and therefore it seemed only too probable that he might win no prize. He had ideas of his own that men should pursue their labours without special conventional regulations, but should be guided in their work by the general great rules of the world,---such for instance as those given in the commandments:---Thou shalt not bear false witness; Thou shalt not steal; and others. His notions no doubt were great, and perhaps were good; but hitherto they had not led him to much pecuniary success in his profession. A sort of a name he had obtained, but it was not a name sweet in the ears of practising attorneys...

Meanwhile, Chapters 18 and 19 introduce the Staveley family, who we have already heard a bit about courtesy of Carrie's question: Judge Staveley, who to a point is unconventional in his own thinking, as we shall see; his devoted wife, Lady Staveley; and their children, Mrs Arbuthnot, Augustus, and Madeline.

Felix Graham is a friend and colleague of Augustus, also a lawyer, and through him a visitor at the Staveleys' country house, Noningsby.

The argument between Felix and Augustus in Chapter 19 is very interesting. Felix is perhaps theoretically right in what he says, or a lot of it; but like Augustus we can hardly imagine how you would go about reforming the system to work as he, Felix, conceives it should work; and in that respect his demand for removal of the legal protection of the accused is a bit disturbing.

As we have said, Trollope puts a lot of his own ideas into Felix's mouth here:

    "You mean to assert that our whole system is bad, and rotten, and unjust?"
    "I mean to say that I think so."
    "And yet we consider ourselves the greatest people in the world,---or at any rate the honestest."
    "I think we are; but laws and their management have nothing to do with making people honest. Good laws won't make people honest, nor bad laws dishonest."
    "But a people who are dishonest in one trade will probably be dishonest in others. Now, you go so far as to say that all English lawyers are rogues."
    "I have never said so. I believe your father to be as honest a man as ever breathed."
    "Thank you, sir," and Staveley lifted his hat.
    "And I would fain hope that I am an honest man myself."
    "Ah, but you don't make money by it."
    "What I do mean is this, that from our love of precedent and ceremony and old usages, we have retained a system which contains many of the barbarities of the feudal times, and also many of its lies. We try our culprit as we did in the old days of the ordeal. If luck will carry him through the hot ploughshares, we let him escape though we know him to be guilty. We give him the advantage of every technicality, and teach him to lie in his own defence, if nature has not sufficiently so taught him already."
    "You mean as to his plea of not guilty."
    "No, I don't; that is little or nothing. We ask him whether or no he confesses his guilt in a foolish way, tending to induce him to deny it; but that is not much. Guilt seldom will confess as long as a chance remains. But we teach him to lie, or rather we lie for him during the whole ceremony of his trial. We think it merciful to give him chances of escape, and hunt him as we do a fox, in obedience to certain laws framed for his protection."
    "And should he have no protection?"
    "None certainly, as a guilty man; none which may tend towards the concealing of his guilt. Till that be ascertained, proclaimed, and made apparent, every man's hand should be against him."
    "But if he is innocent?"
    "Therefore let him be tried with every possible care..."


And of course---this throwaway exchange in the middle of it:

    "And I would fain hope that I am an honest man myself."
    "Ah, but you don't make money by it."


58lyzard
Feb 7, 2021, 5:09 pm

Chapter 19 also makes it clear who Trollope's heroine will be---in contrast to his disapproving description of Sophia Furnival: Madeline has what it is implied Sophia does not, "the instinct of a woman":

At present she was very slight, and appeared to be almost too tall for her form. She was indeed above the average height of women, and from her brother encountered some ridicule on this head; but not the less were all her movements soft, graceful, and fawnlike as should be those of a young girl. She was still at this time a child in heart and spirit, and could have played as a child had not the instinct of a woman taught to her the expediency of a staid demeanour. There is nothing among the wonders of womanhood more wonderful than this, that the young mind and young heart,---hearts and minds young as youth can make them, and in their natures as gay,---can assume the gravity and discretion of threescore years and maintain it successfully before all comers. And this is done, not as a lesson that has been taught, but as the result of an instinct implanted from the birth...

{*rolls eyes*}

It was a pity almost that she should ever have become grave, because with her it was her smile that was so lovely. She smiled with her whole face. There was at such moments a peculiar laughing light in her gray eyes, which inspired one with an earnest desire to be in her confidence; she smiled with her soft cheek, the light tints of which would become a shade more pink from the excitement, as they softly rippled into dimples; she smiled with her forehead which would catch the light from her eyes and arch itself in its glory; but above all she smiled with her mouth, just showing, but hardly showing, the beauty of the pearls within. I never saw the face of a woman whose mouth was equal in pure beauty, in beauty that was expressive of feeling, to that of Madeline Staveley...

Excuse me if I prefer Lady Mason. I won't say Sophia Furnival... :D

59cbl_tn
Feb 7, 2021, 5:25 pm

>54 lyzard: Thanks, Liz! Interesting pronunciation!

>55 lyzard: My impression is that the assizes are similar to the US circuit courts of the 18th and 19th centuries, but I may be completely mistaken about that.

60lyzard
Feb 8, 2021, 12:28 am

>59 cbl_tn:

Yes, quite similar. Country areas didn't have permanently sitting courts: they would have a nominated town where, every few months, all the criminal matters that had accumulated since the last assize were dealt with one after the other.

So-called circuit judges, of which Judge Staveley is one, would go from place to place and hear a whole series of cases over days and weeks.

Of course this meant that if someone was arrested, they could sit in a cell for months, or they could be on trial in a few days, according to when the next assize started.

We'll see more of this system later on.

61souloftherose
Feb 8, 2021, 2:57 pm

>58 lyzard: {*rolls eyes*}

Yes! Thank you - hard eye roll from me at that section too.

>60 lyzard: Thanks for the background info - that was sort of what I'd thought they were.

62lyzard
Feb 8, 2021, 4:24 pm

>61 souloftherose:

Men and their peculiar ideas about women, amiright?? :D

63lyzard
Editado: Feb 8, 2021, 4:40 pm

Chapter 20 finds Lucius Mason once again thinking he knows better than everyone else: in particular he ignores his mother's pleas to let the gossip pass and confronts Mr Dockwrath.

Of course Lucius never stood a chance:

    "I have come here to ask of you," said Lucius, "whether it be true that you are spreading these reports about the town with reference to Lady Mason. If you are a man you will tell me the truth."
    "Well; I rather think I am a man."
    "It is necessary that Lady Mason should be protected from such infamous falsehoods, and it may be necessary to bring the matter into a court of law---"
    "You may be quite easy about that, Mr Mason. It will be necessary."
    "As it may be necessary, I wish to know whether you will acknowledge that these reports have come from you?"
    "You want me to give evidence against myself. Well, for once in a way I don't mind if I do. The reports have come from me. Now, is that manly?" And Mr Dockwrath, as he spoke, pushed his hat somewhat off his nose, and looked steadily across into the face of his opponent.
    Lucius Mason was too young for the task which he had undertaken, and allowed himself to be disconcerted. He had expected that the lawyer would deny the charge, and was prepared for what he would say and do in such a case; but now he was not prepared...


******

    "Mr Dockwrath," said Lucius, "you are a mean, low, vile scoundrel."
    "Very well, sir. Adams, just take a note of that. Don't mind what Mr Orme said. I can easily excuse him. He'll know the truth before long, and then he'll beg my pardon."
    "I'll take my oath I look upon you as the greatest miscreant that ever I met," said Peregrine, who was of course bound to support his friend.
    "You'll change your mind, Mr Orme, before long, and then you'll find that you have met a worse miscreant than I am. Did you put down those words, Adams?"
    "Them as Mr Mason spoke? Yes; I've got them down."
    "Read them," said the master.
    And the clerk read them, "Mr Dockwrath, you are a mean, low, vile scoundrel."


:D

Though of course it's not funny when Lucius takes his own humiliation out on his mother.

HOWEVER---in the wake of Trollope's obvious rhapsodising about Madeline Staveley and her instinctive feminine virtues in >58 lyzard:, it is extremely interesting to note his far shrewder depiction of Lady Mason here, as she considers the weaponry at her disposal:

    "If you wish it, I will see Mr Furnival."
    Lady Mason did not wish that, but she was obliged so far to yield as to say that he might do so if he would. Her wish was that he should bear it all and say nothing. It was not that she was indifferent to good repute among her neighbours, or that she was careless as to what the apothecaries and attorneys said of her; but it was easier for her to bear the evil than to combat it. The Ormes and the Furnivals would support her. They and such-like persons would acknowledge her weakness, and would know that from her would not be expected such loud outbursting indignation as might be expected from a man. She had calculated the strength of her own weakness, and thought that she might still be supported by that,---if only her son would so permit.


In other words---she going to rely upon stereotypical thinking about women...

64cbl_tn
Feb 8, 2021, 4:40 pm

Chapters 22 & 23

I know I'm a bit ahead of things, but after finishing today's chapters, I just want to say that I think Felix should have spent Christmas at Groby Park instead of Noningsby. A good dose of reality might have him adjusting his theories!

65lyzard
Feb 8, 2021, 4:45 pm

>63 lyzard:

I wouldn't even wish Christmas at Groby Park on Samuel Dockwrath!

Actually...let me think about that...

66lyzard
Feb 8, 2021, 5:03 pm

Yes, it is Christmas time for our characters, though not everyone is celebrating.

Chapter 21 deals with the growing estrangement between Mr and Mrs Furnival. She's not entirely wrong in what she is thinking about her husband and Lady Mason - not wrong about him - in fact, right enough for guilt to be a factor in his exasperation and his decision to spend Christmas away from home.

Chapter 22 shows us Christmas at Noningsby amongst the Staveleys, where Felix Graham and Sophia Furnival are also present, in addition to Mr Furnival.

Here we discover a growing connection between Felix and Madeline.

And may I just say that I agree totally with Felix's views on Christmas?---or any enforced socialisation. :D

    "But the peculiar conviviality of the day is so ponderous! Its roast-beefiness oppresses one so thoroughly from the first moment of one's waking, to the last ineffectual effort at a bit of fried pudding for supper!"
    "But you need not eat fried pudding for supper. Indeed, here, I am afraid, you will not have any supper offered you at all."
    "No; not to me individually, under that name. I might also manage to guard my own self under any such offers. But there is always the flavour of the sweetmeat, in the air,---of all the sweetmeats edible and non-edible."
    "You begrudge the children their snap-dragon. That's what it all means, Mr Graham."
    "No; I deny it; unpremeditated snap-dragon is dear to my soul; and I could expend myself in blindman's buff."
    "You shall then, after dinner; for of course you know that we all dine early."
    "But blindman's buff at three, with snap-dragon at a quarter to four---charades at five, with wine and sweet cake at half-past six, is ponderous. And that's our mistake..."


Chapter 23 gives us Christmas at Groby Park. 'Nuff said!

Chapter 24, meanwhile, reveals to us that Trollope is being less self-indulgent with respect to his comic characters like Mr Moulder than it seems at first: we learn here that John Kenneby, the "stupid clerk" whose garbled evidence contributed so much to the decision in the first Orley Farm trial, is Moulder's brother-in-law---though the fact that Kenneby is, in effect, on the same side as Samuel Dockwrather wins him no supporters;

    It was at last decided that John Kenneby should go both to Hamworth and to Bedford Row, but that he should go to Hamworth first. Moulder would have counselled him to have gone to neither, but Snengkeld remarked that there were too many at work to let the matter sleep, and John himself observed that "anyways he hadn't done anything to be ashamed of."
    "Then go," said Moulder at last, "only don't say more than you are obliged to."
    "I does not like these business talkings on Christmas night," said Mrs Moulder, when the matter was arranged.
    "What can one do?" asked Moulder.
    "It's a tempting of Providence in my mind," said Kantwise, as he replenished his glass, and turned his eyes up to the ceiling.
    "Now that's gammon," said Moulder. And then there arose among them a long and animated discussion on matters theological...


67lyzard
Feb 9, 2021, 5:04 pm

Across Chapters 25 and 26, we find the legal storm clouds gathering for Lady Mason.

Mr Furnival learns from Mr Round - Matthew, the younger - that Mr Mason intends not only making another legal effort to obtain possession of Orley Farm, but means to bring criminal charges against her.

The conversation between the two lawyers sums up the point of contention:

    "You see," said Matthew Round, when that visit was nearly brought to a close, "that we are pressed very hard to go on with this, and if we do not, somebody else will."
    "Nevertheless, if I were you, I should decline," said Mr Furnival.
    "You're looking to your client, not to ours, sir," said the attorney. "The fact is that the whole case is very queer. It was proved on the last trial that Bolster and Kenneby were witnesses to a deed on the 14th of July, and that was all that was proved. Now we can prove that they were on that day witnesses to another deed. Were they witnesses to two?"
    "Why should they not be?"
    "That is for us to see. We have written to them both to come up to us, and in order that we might be quite on the square I thought it right to tell you."
    "Thank you; yes; I cannot complain of you. And what form do you think that your proceedings will take?"
    "Joseph Mason talks of indicting her for---forgery," said the attorney, pausing a moment before he dared to pronounce the dread word.
    "Indict her for forgery!" said Furnival, with a start. And yet the idea was one which had been for some days present to his mind's eye...


Indeed, Mr Furnival has begun to contemplate the thought of Lady Mason's guilt. Trollope here begins to dissect out what he considered one of the questionable aspects of criminal law practice, that barristers could and would fight a case in which they not merely had no faith, but do it with the goal of getting guilty people off:

In that cause which he had once battled he was always ready to do battle, without reference to any professional consideration of triumph or profit. It was to this feeling of loyalty that he had owed much of his success in life. And in such a case as this it may be supposed that that feeling would be strong. But then such a feeling presumed a case in which he could sympathise---in which he could believe. Would it be well that he should allow himself to feel the same interest in this case, to maintain respecting it the same personal anxiety, if he ceased to believe in it? He did ask himself the question, and he finally answered it in the affirmative. He had beaten Joseph Mason once in a good stand-up fight; and having done so, having thus made the matter his own, it was necessary to his comfort that he should beat him again, if another fight were to be fought. Lady Mason was his client, and all the associations of his life taught him to be true to her as such.

All of this begs the still relevant question of how far the "best defence you can afford" should be - and should be allowed to be - taken.

However, we immediately get a lesson in the difference between theory and practice when Mr Furnival tries to explain matters to Sir Peregrine.

We also see that Sir Peregrine's view of the world is rendered in unrealistic and impractical shades of black and white:

    "Good heavens! Do you mean to say that an innocent person can under such circumstances be in danger in this country?"
    "An innocent person, Sir Peregrine, may be in danger of very great annoyance, and also of very great delay in proving that innocence. Innocent people have died under the weight of such charges. We must remember that she is a woman, and therefore weaker than you or I."
    "Yes, yes; but still--- You do not say that you think she can be in any real danger?" It seemed, from the tone of the old man's voice, as though he were almost angry with Mr Furnival for supposing that such could be the case. "And you intend to tell her all this?" he asked.
    "I fear that, as her friend, neither you nor I will be warranted in keeping her altogether in the dark. Think what her feelings would be if she were summoned before a magistrate without any preparation!"
    "No magistrate would listen to such a charge," said Sir Peregrine.
    "In that he must be guided by the evidence."
    "I would sooner throw up my commission than lend myself in any way to a proceeding so iniquitous."
    This was all very well, and the existence of such a feeling showed great generosity, and perhaps also poetic chivalry on the part of Sir Peregrine Orme; but it was not the way of the world, and so Mr Furnival was obliged to explain...


The fact that at his time of life, Sir Peregrine can still hold such naive views, speaks very much to the cosseted privilege that comes with his social standing.

68lyzard
Feb 9, 2021, 5:13 pm

On the other hand, these chapters also highlight the new positivity in Lady Mason's life, after she is "taken up" by Sire Peregrine and Mrs Orme.

In the latter, Lady Mason finds the first real friend of her adult life: here again the isolation and narrowness of her existence is particularly emphasised, in the desperate gratitude of Lady Mason---not just because she understands how important to her is the Ormes' support, although that certainly enters into it:

Chapter 25

    "I do hope they are happy," said Mrs Orme, when the two ladies were together in the drawing-room. "They have a very nice party at Noningsby."
    "Your boy will be happy, I'm sure," said Lady Mason.
    "And why not Lucius also?"
    It was sweet in Lady Mason's ear to hear her son called by his Christian name. All these increasing signs of interest and intimacy were sweet, but especially any which signified some favour shown to her son. "This trouble weighs heavy on him," she replied. "It is only natural that he should feel it."
    "Papa does not seem to think much of it," said Mrs Orme. "If I were you, I would strive to forget it."
    "I do strive," said the other; and then she took the hand which Mrs Orme had stretched out to her, and that lady got up and kissed her.
    "Dearest friend," said Mrs Orme, "if we can comfort you we will."


Meanwhile, we know that Sir Peregrine is very taken with Lady Mason's beauty and gentleness; and once Mr Furnival succeeds in pounding into his head Her true situation, he allows an extraordinary thought he has been toying with already to come to the forefront:

Chapter 26

    "I am better now," she said, raising herself quickly to her feet when a few seconds had passed. "I am better now," and she stood erect before him. "By God's mercy I will endure it; I think I can endure it now."
    "If I can lighten the load---"
    "You have lightened it---of half its weight; but, Sir Peregrine, I will leave this---"
    "Leave this! go away from The Cleeve!"
    "Yes; I will not destroy the comfort of your home by the wretchedness of my position. I will not---"
    "Lady Mason, my house is altogether at your service. If you will be led by me in this matter, you will not leave it till this cloud shall have passed by you. You will be better to be alone now;" and then before she could answer him further, he led her to the door. She felt that it was better for her to be alone, and she hastened up the stairs to her own chamber.
    "And why should I not?" said Sir Peregrine to himself, as he again walked the length of the library...

69NinieB
Feb 9, 2021, 10:11 pm

>57 lyzard: I have two questions from Chapter 18 (I've let myself get behind, sorry.)

1. Felix Graham made himself notorious for his unpopular religious views at Oxford. What were those views?
2. "If luck will carry him through the hot ploughshares, we let him escape though we know him to be guilty." I know ploughshares is a reference to peace (in contrast with swords), but that's not helping me out here. What does this mean?

70lyzard
Feb 10, 2021, 4:01 am

>69 NinieB:

No worries. :)

Well, there are no specifics given but if we think back to The Bertrams we might remember how George had to give up his fellowship because of his writings discussing science and religion.

We can imagine that Felix also holds unorthodox opinions: there's no sign of irreligion in his attendance at church on Christmas day, but any questioning of orthodoxy or even an over-broad tolerance might have seen him fall foul of the authorities.

"Hot ploughshares" is a reference to a particular kind of trial by ordeal. In medieval times people would attempt to prove their innocence by walking a certain distance over ploughshares that had been fired to red heat.

Felix is comparing the conduct of criminal trials in England to trial by ordeal: actual guilt or innocence has nothing to do with it, merely the defendant's ability to survive the ordeal.

71NinieB
Feb 10, 2021, 8:07 am

>70 lyzard: Thanks, I knew you would know the answers!

72lyzard
Feb 10, 2021, 5:24 pm

Chapter 27 deals predominantly with the increasing romantic entanglements of the novel's younger characters; it also expands upon the personality of Lucius Mason, which is a difficult one and not the sort that Trollope approved---very serious, very prickly, and rather too self-satisfied; although the major criticism comes here:

His feelings were good and honest, and kindly too in their way; but tenderness of heart was not his weakness. I should wrong him if I were to say that he was hard-hearted, but he flattered himself that he was just-hearted, which sometimes is nearly the same—as had been the case with his father before him, and was now the case with his half-brother Joseph.

It is interesting, though - even as she coolly toggles between the two young men - that Trollope makes Sophia Furnival's preference for Lucius over Augustus Staveley a compliment to her discernment: whatever she may choose to do, she prefers Lucius' substance to Augustus' flimsiness.

And there is another triangle developing, with Madeline Staveley between Felix Graham and Peregrine Orme. Though the latter is in many ways Trollope's idea of what a young man of the gentry should be, still Madeline too prefers Felix's stronger character.

73lyzard
Editado: Feb 10, 2021, 5:36 pm

Well...you didn't think we were going to escape without a hunting chapter or two, did you??

I must say, though, I find this particular interlude weird: to my eyes it is almost a litany of why you wouldn't want to spend your time hunting (besides, you know, the obvious reasons), rather than an advertisement for it as a pastime.

At any rate, Chapter 29 finds Felix coming to grief, and Peregrine coming to his rescue---with Trollope finding much to commend in both young men, in their conduct through this accident:

No man could have less surgical knowledge than Peregrine Orme, but nevertheless he was such a man as one would like to have with him if one came to grief in such a way. He was cheery and up-hearted, but at the same time gentle and even thoughtful. His voice was pleasant and his touch could be soft. For many years afterwards Felix remembered how that sherry had been held to his lips, and how the young heir of The Cleeve had knelt behind him in his red coat, supporting him as he became weary with waiting, and saying pleasant words to him through the whole. Felix Graham was a man who would remember such things.

In Peregrine's case, however, it is rather a matter of no good deed going unpunished, with this serious accident revealing Madeline's feelings both to herself and others:

Madeline, as she saw the wounded man carefully laid on the back seat of the carriage, almost wished that she could have her mother's place that she might support him. Would they be careful enough with him? Would they remember how terrible must be the pain of that motion to one so hurt as he was? And then she looked into his face as he was made to lean back, and she saw that he still smiled. Felix Graham was by no means a handsome man; I should hardly sin against the truth if I were to say that he was ugly. But Madeline, as she looked at him now lying there utterly without colour but always with that smile on his countenance, thought that no face to her liking had ever been more gracious...

And while Peregrine's conduct with regard to Felix has been exemplary, we can hardly commend either his timing or his common sense in choosing the aftermath of the accident for his proposal:

Chapter 30

And then another event happened which forced her to look into her own heart. Peregrine Orme did make his proposal. He waited patiently during those two or three days in which the doctor's visits were frequent, feeling that he could not talk about himself while any sense of danger pervaded the house. But then at last a morning came on which the surgeon declared that he need not call again till the morrow; and Felix himself, when the medical back was turned, suggested that it might as well be to-morrow week. He began also to scold his friends, and look bright about the eyes, and drink his glass of sherry in a pleasant dinner-table fashion, not as if he were swallowing his physic. And Peregrine, when he saw all this, resolved that the moment had come for the doing of his deed of danger. The time would soon come at which he must leave Noningsby, and he would not leave Noningsby till he had learned his fate...

On the other hand:

Chapter 31

    "Is that Miss Staveley, Mrs Baker?"
    "Yes, sure. Come, my dear, he's got his dressing-gown on, and you may just come to the door and ask him how he does."
    "I am very glad to hear that you are so much better, Mr Graham," said Madeline, standing in the doorway with averted eyes, and speaking with a voice so low that it only just reached his ears.
    "Thank you, Miss Staveley; I shall never know how to express what I feel for you all."
    "And there's none of 'em have been more anxious about you than she, I can tell you; and none of 'em ain't kinder-hearteder," said Mrs Baker.
    "I hope you will be up soon and be able to come down to the drawing-room," said Madeline. And then she did glance round, and for a moment saw the light of his eye as he sat upright in the bed. He was still pale and thin, or at least she fancied so, and her heart trembled within her as she thought of the danger he had passed.
    "I do so long to be able to talk to you again; all the others come and visit me, but I have only heard the sounds of your footsteps as you pass by."
    "And yet she always walks like a mouse," said Mrs Baker.
    "But I have always heard them," he said.

74majkia
Feb 10, 2021, 6:54 pm

EEp. I'm never gonna catch up...

75cbl_tn
Feb 10, 2021, 6:55 pm

I just knew there would be a hunting scene!

76lyzard
Feb 10, 2021, 8:13 pm

>74 majkia:

Never mind, Jean, take your time if you have to. Just be careful of spoilers if you're coming here.

>75 cbl_tn:

:D

77MissWatson
Feb 11, 2021, 3:33 am

I have caught up as far as chapter XX and I have one question regarding Chapter 18 where we meet Felix and Augustus who "had nearly succeeded in getting the Newdegate". Is is some sort of college prize?

78lyzard
Feb 11, 2021, 6:04 am

>77 MissWatson:

It's a prestigious prize given for poetry composition at Oxford. It was founded around 1800, I think, and is still awarded.

79MissWatson
Feb 11, 2021, 7:11 am

>78 lyzard: Thanks!
Trollope is spending a lot of time and space introducing his various characters, it is hard to get an idea of who is going to be important for the plot.

80lyzard
Feb 11, 2021, 7:30 am

>79 MissWatson:

You're right. There's a reason for it but I'll get into that later. :)

81lyzard
Feb 11, 2021, 5:02 pm

Chapter 32 brings us back to the main narrative.

We find Mr Crabwitz, Mr Furnival's senior clerk, doing some undercover work in Hamworth, trying to take Samuel Dockwrath's measure---and not liking what he finds. He realises that Dockwrath's personal animus towards Lady Mason means that there is no hope of dissuading him from pursuing the case:

    "And I tell you what; young Mason,---that's the son of the widow of the old man who made the will---"
    "Or rather who did not make it, as you say."
    "Yes, yes; he made the will; but he did not make the codicil---and that young Mason has no more right to the property than you have."
    "Hasn't he now?"
    "No; and I can prove it too."
    "Well; the general opinion in the profession is that Lady Mason will stand her ground and hold her own. I don't know what the points are myself, but I have heard it discussed, and that is certainly what people think."
    "Then people will find that they are very much mistaken."
    "I was talking to one of Round's young men about it, and I fancy they are not very sanguine."
    "I do not care a fig for Round or his young men. It would be quite as well for Joseph Mason if Round and Crook gave up the matter altogether. It lies in a nutshell, and the truth must come out whatever Round and Crook may choose to say. And I'll tell you more---old Furnival, big a man as he thinks himself, cannot save her."
    "Has he anything to do with it?" asked Mr Cooke.
    "Yes; the sly old fox. My belief is that only for him she'd give up the battle, and be down on her marrow-bones asking for mercy."
    "She'd have little chance of mercy, from what I hear of Joseph Mason."
    "She'd have to give up the property of course. And even then I don't know whether he'd let her off. By heavens! he couldn't let her off unless I chose."


Now, we've heard plenty so far about John Kenneby and his uncertain testimony; but now we meet the other witness, Bridget Bolster, who (as her name would suggest) is a very different proposition.

We also see that, although Dockwrath's suspicion that Round and Crook are in cahoots with Mr Furnival and/or secretly working for Lady Mason is not correct, they are not enjoying their side of the business. They don't like the case, and they certainly don't like the company:

    "I think Mr Dockwrath should hear her story," said Mr Mason.
    "He certainly will not do so in this house or in conjunction with me. In what capacity should he be present, Mr Mason?"
    "As one of Mr Mason's legal advisers," said Dockwrath.
    "If you are to be one of them, Messrs. Round and Crook cannot be the others. I think I explained that to you before. It now remains for Mr Mason to say whether he wishes to employ our firm in this matter or not. And I can tell him fairly," Mr Round added this after a slight pause, "that we shall be rather pleased than otherwise if he will put the case into other hands."
    "Of course I wish you to conduct it," said Mr Mason, who, with all his bitterness against the present holders of Orley Farm, was afraid of throwing himself into the hands of Dockwrath. He was not an ignorant man, and he knew that the firm of Round and Crook bore a high reputation before the world.
    "Then," said Round, "I must do my business in accordance with my own views of what is right. I have reason to believe that no one has yet tampered with this woman," and as he spoke he looked hard at Dockwrath, "though probably attempts may have been made."
    "I don't know who should tamper with her," said Dockwrath, "unless it be Lady Mason---whom I must say you seem very anxious to protect."


But though Mr Round would obviously be glad of an excuse to drop the case, when questioned Bridget is quite certain of her evidence:

    "She is a remarkably clear-headed woman, and apparently does remember a great deal. But her remembrance chiefly and most strongly goes to this---that she witnessed only one deed."
    "She can prove that, can she?" said Mason, and the tone of his voice was loudly triumphant.
    "She declares that she never signed but one deed in the whole of her life---either on that day or on any other; and over and beyond this she says now---now that I have explained to her what that other deed might have been---that old Mr Usbech told her that it was about a partnership."
    "He did, did he?" said Dockwrath, rising from his chair and clapping his hands. "Very well. I don't think we shall want more than that, Mr Mason."
    There was a tone of triumph in the man's voice, and a look of gratified malice in his countenance which disgusted Mr Round and irritated him almost beyond his power of endurance. It was quite true that he would much have preferred to find that the woman's evidence was in favour of Lady Mason. He would have been glad to learn that she actually had witnessed the two deeds on the same day. His tone would have been triumphant, and his face gratified, had he returned to the room with such tidings. His feelings were all on that side, though his duty lay on the other. He had almost expected that it would be so. As it was, he was prepared to go on with his duty, but he was not prepared to endure the insolence of Mr Dockwrath. There was a look of joy also about Mr. Mason which added to his annoyance. It might be just and necessary to prosecute that unfortunate woman at Orley Farm, but he could not gloat over such work...


82lyzard
Editado: Feb 11, 2021, 5:08 pm

NOW---

Before we move on to the next subplot, can I please get a show of hands from whoever was along for the group read of Maria Edgeworth's Belinda?

(If you were, you probably might know why I'm asking!)

:D

83NinieB
Feb 11, 2021, 5:05 pm

>82 lyzard: *showing hand*
But I'm not making the connection.

84lyzard
Feb 11, 2021, 5:08 pm

>83 NinieB:

That's okay, I've adjusted the previous post! :D

85cbl_tn
Feb 11, 2021, 7:06 pm

>82 lyzard: *Raises hand.* I believe I've already made the connection. It has been mentioned that Felix Graham has already chosen a bride whom he is grooming to become his ideal wife.

86lyzard
Feb 11, 2021, 8:01 pm

>85 cbl_tn:

Correct! :)

87NinieB
Feb 11, 2021, 9:38 pm

If I concentrate I can remember the plot of Belinda . . . then wisps of Evelina and fragments of Emmeline start to clog up the mental picture . . . .

88MissWatson
Feb 12, 2021, 4:02 am

No, I haven't.

89lyzard
Feb 12, 2021, 3:44 pm

>87 NinieB:

:D

>83 NinieB:, >85 cbl_tn:, >88 MissWatson:

It's all good, just checking how much background I needed to add here.

90lyzard
Feb 12, 2021, 4:04 pm

In Chapter 33 we get the details of a situation alluded to previously, with Felix Graham having made himself responsibly for a girl in difficult circumstances, with the idea of marriage in the future.

I brought up Belinda here because when we did the group read there, we stopped to consider the social theories of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, many of which were a positive influence in the very materialistic and selfish 18th century, but one of which was extremely damaging---although no less influential.

Briefly, in his 1783 work, Emile; or, On Education, Rousseau proposed the idea of men "educating wives" for themselves. In this he didn't mean actually giving them an education - on the contrary - he meant isolating a young girl from the "corrupting" influence of society and raising her in isolation to be what the man wanted in a wife---which he believed meant the girl should be "passive and weak" and "moulded to please man".

In various ways this idea persisted through 18th century literature. Often we encounter the situation of a young woman raised in the country who is found to be morally and intellectually superior to her city sisters, and therefore appealing to the hero. Occasionally too the entire idea of a wife being "raised" for a particular man appeared---and while there were a few examples of men following Rosseau's lead here, it was far more common to find a female author attacking the idea in its entirety.

Mary Wollstonecraft, in her A Vindication Of The Rights Of Women, was particularly savage; and a number of female authors, including Edgeworth in Belinda, either mocked the idea or highlighted its cruelty and selfishness.

But as we see here, the idea persisted, at least in literary form: and here, just over 100 years after Rousseau put his theory forward, we find that Felix Graham's social theories have led him to remove a girl called Mary Snow from her drunken, abusive father, under a promise of educating and then marrying her.

Here, via Trollope, we have the less common example of a male author---not criticising so much as simply showing how foolish such an idea was. It is noticeable, however, that the whole thing is viewed from the man's point of view---"How am I going to get myself out of this?" When female authors dealt with this situation, it was almost invariably in the framework of, "What will happen to this girl if the man changes his mind?"

91lyzard
Feb 12, 2021, 6:41 pm

Anyhoo---

The opening of Chapter 33 spells out for us which version of this situation is on the cards:

In speaking of the character and antecedents of Felix Graham I have said that he was moulding a wife for himself. The idea of a wife thus moulded to fit a man's own grooves, and educated to suit matrimonial purposes according to the exact views of the future husband was by no means original with him. Other men have moulded their wives, but I do not know that as a rule the practice has been found to answer. It is open, in the first place, to this objection,---that the moulder does not generally conceive such idea very early in life, and the idea when conceived must necessarily be carried out on a young subject. Such a plan is the result of much deliberate thought, and has generally arisen from long observation, on the part of the thinker, of the unhappiness arising from marriages in which there has been no moulding...

Ew.

He's right, though, that was the idea.

But of course, by the time we are properly introduced to Mary Snow - "three or four years into her noviciate" - one aspect of her story is already self-evident: Felix has met Madeline Stavely.

It is also self-evident that Trollope is going to let Felix off pretty lightly here, in spite of the commitment he has made to Mary in writing: though she is willing to marry him, and attracted by the thought of being a gentleman's wife, she doesn't really care for him any more than he really cares for her; and that Felix has a romantic rival:

"Angel of light!" it began, "but cold as your own fair name." Poor Mary thought it was very nice and very sweet, and though she was so much afraid of it that she almost wished it away, yet she read it a score of times. Stolen pleasures always are sweet. She had not cared to read those two lines from her own betrothed lord above once, or at the most twice; and yet they had been written by a good man,---a man superlatively good to her, and written too with considerable pain...

92lyzard
Feb 12, 2021, 7:19 pm

In Chapter 34, Trollope's disapproval of much of Britain's legal system finds a more concrete form of expression, via the introduction of Mr Chaffanbrass.

We have (some of us!) seen Mr Chaffanbrass before: he first appears in The Three Clerks, where he defends Alaric Tudor. Trollope there expresses at some length his deep ambivalence over how criminal trials are conducted---and how barristers conducted themselves. Mr Chaffabrass' great talent is bullying and confusing witnesses who are trying to tell the truth.

It is likely, however, that many of us encountered Mr Chaffanbrass for the first time in Phineas Redux, where he defends Phineas against his murder charge, which is one reason Phineas emerges from his experience feeling "soiled".

The very fact that Mr Furnival decides to consult Mr Chaffanbrass speaks to his growing concern about Lady Mason's case, with his own unspoken doubts being reinforced by what Mr Crabwitz says upon his return from Hamworth:

    "But I'll tell you what it is, Mr. Furnival--- I suppose I may speak my mind."
    "Oh, yes! But remember this, Crabwitz; Lady Mason is no more in danger of losing the property than you are. It is a most vexatious thing, but there can be no doubt as to what the result will be."
    "Well, Mr. Furnival,---I don't know."
    "In such matters, I am tolerably well able to form an opinion."
    "Oh, certainly!"
    "And that's my opinion. Now I shall be very glad to hear yours."
    "My opinion is this, Mr Furnival, that Sir Joseph never made that codicil."
    "And what makes you think so?"
    "The whole course of the evidence. It's quite clear there was another deed executed that day, and witnessed by Bolster and Kenneby. Had there been two documents for them to witness, they would have remembered it so soon after the occurrence."
    "Well, Crabwitz, I differ from you,---differ from you in toto. But keep your opinion to yourself, that's all. I've no doubt you did the best for us you could down at Hamworth, and I'm much obliged to you. You'll find we've got our hands quite full again,---almost too full." Then he turned round to his table, and to the papers upon it; whereupon, Crabwitz took the hint, and left the room.
    But when he had gone, Mr. Furnival again raised his eyes from the papers on the table, and leaning back in his chair, gave himself up to further consideration of the Orley Farm case. Crabwitz he knew was a sharp, clever man, and now the opinion formed by Crabwitz, after having seen this Hamworth attorney, tallied with his own opinion. Yes; it was his own opinion...


And Mr Furnival's opinion leads him immediately to consult Mr Chaffanbrass:

    "Well, Furnival, and what can I do for you?" he said, as soon as the member for the Essex Marshes was seated opposite to him. "It isn't often that the light of your countenance shines so far east as this. Somebody must be in trouble, I suppose?"
    "Somebody is in trouble," said Mr Furnival; and then he began to tell his story. Mr Chaffanbrass listened almost in silence throughout. Now and then he asked a question by a word or two, expressing no opinion whatever as he did so; but he was satisfied to leave the talking altogether in the hands of his visitor till the whole tale was told. "Ah," he said then, "a clever woman!"


By the way---

Just in case it isn't clear to everyone, "Chaffanbrass" is another of Trollope's comic names, though a bit more subtle than most:

"Chaff" has a double meaning: it was a word meaning "refuse" or "rubbish": but it was also a slang term to mean to tease someone, often in an unkind way.

"Brass", meanwhile, was slang for "nerve"---as in, "You've got a nerve!"

93lyzard
Feb 12, 2021, 7:25 pm

We should also note Mr Chaffanbrass's opinion of Felix Graham; of course Trollope means it as a compliment:

Chapter 34

    And then the matter was again discussed between them, and it was agreed that a third counsel would be wanting. "Felix Graham is very much interested in the case," said Mr Furnival, "and is as firmly convinced of her innocence as---as I am." And he managed to look his ally in the face and to keep his countenance firmly.
    "Ah," said Mr Chaffanbrass. "But what if he should happen to change his opinion about his own client?"
    "We could prevent that, I think."
    "I'm not so sure. And then he'd throw her over as sure as your name's Furnival."
    "I hardly think he'd do that."
    "I believe he'd do anything." And Mr Chaffanbrass was quite moved to enthusiasm. "I've heard that man talk more nonsense about the profession in one hour, than I ever heard before since I first put a cotton gown on my back. He does not understand the nature of the duty which a professional man owes to his client."
    "But he'd work well if he had a case at heart himself. I don't like him, but he is clever."
    "You can do as you like, of course. I shall be out of my ground down at Alston, and of course I don't care who takes the fag of the work. But I tell you this fairly;---if he does go into the case and then turns against us or drops it,—I shall turn against him and drop into him."
    "Heaven help him in such a case as that!" And then these two great luminaries of the law shook hands and parted.

94lyzard
Feb 12, 2021, 7:37 pm

Meanwhile, Sir Peregrine has worked himself to the point of declaring what was in his thoughts behind the oblique phrase, "Why should I not?"

Chapter 35

    "Yes; we know her now," he said. "And believe me in this, Edith; no knowledge obtained of a friend in happiness is at all equal to that which is obtained in sorrow. Had Lady Mason been prosperous, had she never become subject to the malice and avarice of wicked people, I should never have loved her as I do love her."
    "Nor should I, father."
    "She is a cruelly ill-used woman, and a woman worthy of the kindest usage. I am an old man now, but it has never before been my lot to be so anxious for a fellow-creature as I am for her. It is dreadful to think that innocence in this country should be subject to such attacks."
    "Indeed it is; but you do not think that there is any danger?"
    This was all very well, and showed that Mrs Orme's mind was well disposed towards the woman whom he loved. But he had known that before, and he began to feel that he was not approaching the object which he had in view. "Edith," at last he said abruptly, "I love her with my whole heart. I would fain make her---my wife."


And he immediately follows through:

    What more is there to be told. Of course she accepted him. As far as I can see into such affairs no alternative was allowed to her. She also was not a wise woman at all points. She was one whose feelings were sometimes too many for her, and whose feelings on this occasion had been much too many for her. Had she been able to throw aside from her his offer, she would have done so; but she had felt that she was not able. "If you wish it, Sir Peregrine," she said at last.
    "And can you love an old man?" he had asked. Old men sometimes will ask questions such as these. She did not answer him, but stood by his side; and, then again he kissed her, and was happy.
    He resolved from that moment that Lady Mason should no longer be regarded as the widow of a city knight, but as the wife elect of a country baronet. Whatever ridicule he might incur in this matter, he would incur at once. Men and women had dared to speak of her cruelly, and they should now learn that any such future speech would be spoken of one who was exclusively his property. Let any who chose to be speakers under such circumstances look to it. He had devoted himself to her that he might be her knight and bear her scatheless through the fury of this battle. With God's help he would put on his armour at once for that fight. Let them who would now injure her look to it. As soon as might be she should bear his name; but all the world should know at once what was her right to claim his protection. He had never been a coward, and he would not now be guilty of the cowardice of hiding his intentions. If there were those who chose to smile at the old man's fancy, let them smile. There would be many, he knew, who would not understand an old man's honour and an old man's chivalry...


Some of this may see over the top, so it's important to reiterate the extent of the social gap that exists between the Ormes and Lady Mason---she being "from trade", and the widow of a self-made man. No-one much cared what a "city knight" like Sir Joseph chose to do, but a baronet of ancient bloodlines and unblemished family reputation is another matter.

(Meanwhile, some of us might be contemplating the fact that the age-gap here is "only" 35 years, as opposed to the 45 of Lady Mason's first marriage...)

95kac522
Editado: Feb 13, 2021, 3:45 am

>82 lyzard: Catching up....I totally missed that connection between the 2 books. It seemed more important to the plot in Belinda; I had completely forgotten about it here.

The only thing I could come up with is that both Lady Delacour and Lady Mason have "secrets", although they are very different types and handled in different ways.

96lyzard
Feb 13, 2021, 4:18 pm

>95 kac522:

Oh, yes, much more important; I'll touch on that presently.

True! :)

97lyzard
Editado: Feb 13, 2021, 4:40 pm

Chapters 36 and 37 deal with the fallout from the announcement that Sir Peregrine and Lady Mason are engaged. Everyone is appalled, and not least the two young men most involved.

What is interesting here is that it is the often-unreasonable Lucius who takes a clearer view of the situation: as much as he disapproves, he grasps immediately why and how this has come about from his mother's point of view; whereas Peregrine cannot see any further than his grandfather's "disgrace":

    "It seems to me that it is for her and you to prevent this."
    "No; it is for your mother to prevent it. Only think of it, Mason. He is over seventy, and, as he says himself, he will not burden the estate with a new jointure. Why should she do it?"
    "You are wronging her there. It is no affair of money. She is not going to marry him for what she can get."
    "Then why should she do it?"
    "Because he tells her. These troubles about the lawsuit have turned her head, and she has put herself entirely into his hands. I think she is wrong. I could have protected her from all this evil, and would have done so. I could have done more, I think, than Sir Peregrine can do. But she has thought otherwise, and I do not know that I can help it."
"But will you speak to her? Will make her perceive that she is injuring a family that is treating her with kindness?"
    "If she will come here I will speak to her. I cannot do it there. I cannot go down to your grandfather's house with such an object as that."
    "All the world will turn against her if she marries him," said Peregrine. And then there was silence between them for a moment or two.
    "It seems to me," said Lucius at last, "that you wrong my mother very much in this matter, and lay all the blame where but the smallest part of the blame is deserved. She has no idea of money in her mind, or any thought of pecuniary advantage. She is moved solely by what your grandfather has said to her,---and by an insane dread of some coming evil which she thinks may be lessened by his assistance. You are in the house with them, and can speak to him,---and if you please to her also. I do not see that I can do either."


In fact, I think that is *the* most reasonable thing Lucius Mason says and does in the entire novel. The pity is that he can't be reasonable face-to-face with his mother.

Peregrine, on the other hand, is being completely unreasonable - and rather sulky - yet it is he who brings Lady Mason to the point of calling off the engagement by his brusque insistence that it will end in Sir Peregrine being---not criticised, but laughed at:

    I am not sure whether Lucius Mason, with all his cleverness, could have put the matter much better, or have used a style of oratory more efficacious to the end in view. Peregrine had drawn his picture with a coarse pencil, but he had drawn it strongly, and with graphic effect. And then he paused; not with self-confidence, or as giving his companion time to see how great had been his art, but in want of words, and somewhat confused by the strength of his own thoughts. So he got up and poked the fire, turning his back to it, and then sat down again. "It is such a deuce of a thing, Lady Mason," he said, "that you must not be angry with me for speaking out."
    "Oh, Mr Orme, I am not angry, and I do not know what to say to you."
    "Why don't you speak to Lucius?"
    "What could he say more than you have said? Dear Mr Orme, I would not injure him,---your grandfather, I mean,---for all that the world holds."
    "You will injure him;---in the eyes of all his friends."
    "Then I will not do it. I will go to him, and beg him that it may not be so. I will tell him that I cannot. Anything will be better than bringing him to sorrow or disgrace."
    "By Jove! but will you really?" Peregrine was startled and almost frightened at the effect of his own eloquence. What would the baronet say when he learned that he had been talked out of his wife by his grandson?

98MissWatson
Feb 14, 2021, 6:58 am

>92 lyzard: Is Dockwrath also intended as a comic name, alluding to the dock in a court? And I noticed that in chapter XXXII the number of Dockwrath's children has been reduced to 14 instead of the earlier 16...

99Matke
Editado: Feb 14, 2021, 3:17 pm

>94 lyzard: “one who was exclusively his property”: like a fine hunter or even, perhaps, like an excellent wine cellar.

I understand her, mostly. And I guess I understand him, too, but the whole situation is repellent.

So, age difference. If she were 20, her first husband would have been 65 at the time of marriage. And this well-meaning man would have been 55.

Do such things happen today? Sure, but they usually involve veritable oceans of money; typically the woman is much more of an independent actor in the agreement. Imagine living in a time when all of this seems, if not completely a good idea, certainly within acceptable boundaries.

100souloftherose
Feb 14, 2021, 12:03 pm

>68 lyzard: I got behind this week so have just finished Chapter XXVI. I was struck by how isolated some of the other female characters seem to be as well - Mrs Furnival (who doesn't seem to have anyone other than Miss Biggs) and Mrs Moulder who has her brother and Mrs Hubbles four or five times a year. Even Mrs Orme seems to be fairly secluded. Whereas the men pop into and out of chambers, travel and visit all the time.

101lyzard
Editado: Feb 14, 2021, 4:20 pm

>98 MissWatson:

I would think probably so.

Yes, that's a little Trollope "moment". :)

>99 Matke:

And that was the reality of the time---which impinges also upon Heather's point in >100 souloftherose:.

The trophy wife situation certainly still exists, although perhaps on a more voluntary basis, and not usually with such an outrageous age gap, though it does happen. (Anna Nicole Smith? She was still in her 20s when she married, he was 89 I think.)

We understand, though, that poor little Mary Johnson wasn't given much say in the matter, between her parents and Sir Joseph (she will have something to say about that herself a bit later); and though her decision with respect to Sir Peregrine is "voluntary" in one sense, the different pressures operating on her leave her without much choice.

>100 souloftherose:

Which was also the reality of the time.

You put me in mind of something here, with reference to Can You Forgive Her?:

When we did that group read, some people didn't understand why Alice was resistant to marrying John Grey, whose idea of life at that time was to live quietly in the country. It's THIS: for a woman, "quietly" could mean "literally seeing no-one", depending on what the structure of the neighbourhood was.

Yes, for a woman living anywhere but particularly in the country, life could be terribly lonely. If you didn't happen to have the "right sort" of neighbours, you were expected to keep yourself to yourself.

It is interesting here that, without comment, Trollope gives us three isolated women---and you're quite right, four if we count Mrs Moulder, though perversely she seems a little better off! Each of them is isolated for different reasons, but the result is the same. Mrs Furnival is suffering from another common female difficulty: her husband has climbed the social ladder and left her behind; she has no friends at their new social level, which is one reason she's so desperate about him. Mrs Orme has basically immolated herself for Sir Peregrine's sake - remember, she was only married a year before she was widowed - but she suffers from a lack of appropriate neighbours---Lady Mason *not* being considered appropriate. And Lady Mason, conversely, has recognised her own inappropriateness and also isolated herself all these years---until this crisis forced her to change her ways.

And this in turn is one reason why Mrs Orme and Lady Mason form such an intense friendship: each of them is the only friend - literally - that they have ever had.

102lyzard
Editado: Feb 14, 2021, 4:57 pm

In Chapter 38 we get a very awkward scene between Sir Peregrine and Mr Furnival---the latter's professional practicality clashing with the former's insistence that truth and goodness must necessarily prevail.

That Trollope intends us to see Sir Peregrine's views as hopelessly naive tells us what he thought of the justice system:

Mr Furnival, not altogether successfully, endeavoured to throw dust into the baronet's eyes, declaring that in a combat with the devil one must use the devil's weapons. He assured Sir Peregrine that he had given the matter his most matured and indeed most painful professional consideration; there were unfortunate circumstances which required peculiar care; it was a matter which would depend entirely on the evidence of one or two persons who might be suborned; and in such a case it would be well to trust to those who knew how to break down and crush a lying witness. In such work as that Slow and Bideawhile would be innocent and ignorant as babes. As to breaking down and crushing a witness anxious to speak the truth, Mr Furnival at that time said nothing...

Sir Peregrine is finally brought to confess his plans with respect to Lady Mason---and we understand immediately that this has damaged her cause with her barrister, not for the reasons everyone else disapproves, but because he finds her leaning on a man other than himself.

As we have said, Mrs Furnival may be unwise in her tactics, but she is absolutely right with regard to her husband's unadmitted motives.

103lyzard
Feb 14, 2021, 4:53 pm

Meanwhile, in Chapter 39 the romantic cross-purposes continue at Noningsby, with Lady Staveley beset on all sides by unwanted courtships, and Felix Graham puzzling over letters from Mary Snow and Mrs Thomas.

We're not given much reason to have a good opinion of Augustus' shrewdness, but he hits the mark here:

    "There seems something---something almost frightful to me," said Felix gravely, "in the idea of marrying a girl in a few months' time, who now, at so late a period of our engagement, writes to me in that sort of cold, formal way."
    "It's the proper moulded-wife style, you may depend," said Augustus.


******

Augustus sat for a while silent, for he did feel that the matter was serious. The case as he looked at it stood thus:---His friend Graham had made a very foolish bargain, from which he would probably be glad to escape, though he could not now bring himself to say as much. But this bargain, bad for him, would probably be very good for the young lady. The young lady, having no shilling of her own, and no merits of birth or early breeding to assist her outlook in the world, might probably regard her ready-made engagement to a clever, kind-hearted, high-spirited man, as an advantage not readily to be abandoned. Staveley, as a sincere friend, was very anxious that the match should be broken off; but he could not bring himself to tell Graham that he thought that the young lady would so wish. According to his idea the young lady must undergo a certain amount of disappointment, and receive a certain amount of compensation. Graham had been very foolish, and must pay for his folly. But in preparing to do so, it would be better that he should see and acknowledge the whole truth of the matter.

Though of course, Augustus gets a bit more than he bargained for when this discussion of what Felix ought to do leads to a confession of his feelings for Madeline:

Augustus Staveley hardly knew what he ought to say. He was not prepared to tell his friend that he was the very brother-in-law for whose connection he would be desirous. Such a marriage for Madeline, even should Madeline desire it, would not be advantageous. When Augustus told Graham that he had gifts of nature which made him equal to any lady, he did not include his own sister. And yet the idea of acquiescing in his friend's sudden departure was very painful to him. "There can be no reason why you should not stay up here, you know," at last he said;---and in so saying he pronounced an absolute verdict against poor Felix...

104lyzard
Feb 14, 2021, 5:07 pm

Speaking of Mr Furnival's unadmitted motives:

Chapter 40

And then he thought of the woman herself, and his spirit within him became very bitter. Had any one told him that he was jealous of the preference shown by his client to Sir Peregrine, he would have fumed with anger, and thought that he was fuming justly. But such was in truth the case. Though he believed her to have been guilty of this thing, though he believed her to be now guilty of the worse offence of dragging the baronet to his ruin, still he was jealous of her regard. Had she been content to lean upon him, to trust to him as her great and only necessary friend, he could have forgiven all else, and placed at her service the full force of his professional power,---even though by doing so he might have lowered himself in men's minds. And what reward did he expect? None. He had formed no idea that the woman would become his mistress. All that was as obscure before his mind's eye, as though she had been nineteen and he five-and-twenty...

All of which contributes to a terrible scene between the Furnivals:

    Even then she had intended to be affectionate,---had so intended at the first commencement of her address. She had no wish to be a war goddess. But he had assisted her attempt at love by no gentle word, by no gentle look, by no gentle motion. "I have this to say," she replied; "you are disgracing both yourself and me, and I will not remain in this house to be a witness to it."
    "Then you may go out of the house." These words, be it remembered, were uttered not by the man himself, but by the spirit of port wine within the man.
    "Tom, do you say that;---after all?"
    "By heavens I do say it! I'll not be told in my own drawing-room, even by you, that I am disgracing myself."
    "Then why do you go after that woman down to Hamworth? All the world is talking of you. At your age too! You ought to be ashamed of yourself."
    "I can't stand this," said he, getting up and throwing the book from him right across the drawing-room floor; "and, by heavens! I won't stand it."
    "Then why do you do it, sir?"
    "Kitty, I believe the devil must have entered into you to drive you mad."
    "Oh, oh, oh! very well, sir. The devil in the shape of drink and lust has entered into you. But you may understand this; I---will---not---consent to live with you while such deeds as these are being done." And then without waiting for another word, she stormed out of the room.


This is pretty remarkable stuff, actually. We might question whether Trollope would have allowed himself to write this way of a woman in the same situation but a higher social standing.

105lyzard
Feb 14, 2021, 5:07 pm

But in spite of all this, Mr Furnival is drawn into another chambers encounter with Lady Mason, who has accepted by now that she cannot marry Sir Peregrine, but is desperate to retain the support of both him and Mr Furnival.

Desperate indeed:

Chapter 41

    She sat down again, and leaning both her arms upon the table, hid her face within her hands. He was now standing, and for the moment did not speak to her. Indeed he could not bring himself to break the silence, for he saw her tears, and could still hear the violence of her sobs. And then she was the first to speak. "If it were not for him," she said, raising her head, "I could bear it all. What will he do? what will he do?"
    "You mean," said Mr Furnival, speaking very slowly, "if the---verdict---should go against us."
    "It will go against us," she said. "Will it not?---tell me the truth. You are so clever, you must know. Tell me how it will go. Is there anything I can do to save him?" And she took hold of his arm with both her hands, and looked up eagerly---oh, with such terrible eagerness!---into his face.
    Would it not have been natural now that he should have asked her to tell him the truth? And yet he did not dare to ask her. He thought that he knew it. He felt sure,---almost sure, that he could look into her very heart, and read there the whole of her secret. But still there was a doubt,---enough of doubt to make him wish to ask the question. Nevertheless he did not ask it.
    "Mr Furnival," she said; and as she spoke there was a hardness came over the soft lines of her feminine face; a look of courage which amounted almost to ferocity, a look which at the moment recalled to his mind, as though it were but yesterday, the attitude and countenance she had borne as she stood in the witness-box at that other trial, now so many years since,---that attitude and countenance which had impressed the whole court with so high an idea of her courage. "Mr Furnival, weak as I am, I could bear to die here on the spot,---now---if I could only save him from this agony. It is not for myself I suffer." And then the terrible idea occurred to him that she might attempt to compass her escape by death. But he did not know her. That would have been no escape for her son...

106MissWatson
Feb 15, 2021, 5:18 am

What I find surprising this far is that we are mostly concerned with the doings of the elder generation: lots of middle-aged people who are allowed feelings of love or jealousy or just courting, as in John Kenneby and his widow...

107majkia
Editado: Feb 15, 2021, 12:43 pm

>106 MissWatson: Indeed. The younger generation has been mostly left to its own devices as we concentrate on their elders.

What a horrible world for women Trollope depicts. I suppose for wealthier women, at least the ones who've married well, it isn't too bad, most of the time. Yet even for them (syphillis as barely mentioned here).

The picture of Lady Mason keeling to her son, really grates. Bad enough to bow and scrape to a husband, but to a son as well... argh.

108lyzard
Editado: Feb 15, 2021, 3:55 pm

As Birgit touches upon in 106, Chapters 42 and 43 deal with John Kenneby being off with his old love and then on with his new.

Poor Miriam!

Chapter 42

    And it was opened by Miriam herself. He knew her instantly in spite of all the change. He knew her, but the whole course of his feelings were altered at the moment, and his blood was made to run the other way. And she knew him too. "La, John," she said, "who'd have thought of seeing you?" And she shifted the baby whom she carried from one arm to the other as she gave him her hand in token of welcome.
    "It is a long time since we met," he said. He felt hardly any temptation now to call her Miriam. Indeed it would have seemed altogether in opposition to the common order of things to do so. She was no longer Miriam, but the maternal Dockwrath;---the mother of that long string of dirty children whom he saw gathered in the passage behind her. He had known as a fact that she had all the children, but the fact had not made the proper impression on his mind till he had seen them...


...though perhaps he was better off just nursing his idealised memories:

Chapter 43

Mrs Smiley was a firm set, healthy-looking woman of—about forty. She had large, dark, glassy eyes, which were bright without sparkling. Her cheeks were very red, having a fixed settled colour that never altered with circumstances. Her black wiry hair was ended in short crisp curls, which sat close to her head. It almost collected like a wig, but the hair was in truth her own. Her mouth was small, and her lips thin, and they gave to her face a look of sharpness that was not quite agreeable. Nevertheless she was not a bad-looking woman, and with such advantages as two hundred a year and the wardrobe which Mrs Moulder had described, was no doubt entitled to look for a second husband...

109lyzard
Editado: Feb 15, 2021, 3:57 pm

>106 MissWatson:

I think Trollope always had a tendency that way - there are various comments in many of his novels about his older characters' deep but unshown emotions - but there was publishing pressure to focus on the younger generation. However, the structure of this novel allowed him, not to shift, but to multiply his echoing romantic - or "romantic" - subplots with a greater emphasis on the elders.

>107 majkia:

For the realism of the depiction we can be grateful; for the lack of any sense of pushback, not so much.

Survival tactics learned early, I would imagine. :(

110lyzard
Feb 15, 2021, 4:05 pm

Chapter 44

    "Were we to be separated after what has past, the world would say that I---I had thought you guilty of this crime."
    "I must bear all that." And now she stood before him, not looking him in the face, but with her face turned down towards the ground, and speaking hardly above her breath.
    "By heavens, no; not whilst I can stand by your side. Not whilst I have strength left to support you and thrust the lie down the throat of such a wretch as Joseph Mason. No, Mary, go back to Edith and tell her that you have tried it, but that there is no escape for you." And then he smiled at her. His smile at times could be very pleasant!
    But she did not smile as she answered him. "Sir Peregrine," she said; and she endeavoured to raise her face to his but failed.
    "Well, my love."
    "Sir Peregrine, I am guilty."
    "Guilty! Guilty of what?" he said, startled rather than instructed by her words.
    "Guilty of all this with which they charge me..."

111lyzard
Feb 15, 2021, 4:05 pm

Thank goodness! - now we can finally talk normally! :D

112lyzard
Editado: Feb 15, 2021, 4:19 pm

Chapter 45

I venture to think, I may almost say to hope, that Lady Mason's confession at the end of the last chapter will not have taken anybody by surprise. If such surprise be felt I must have told my tale badly. I do not like such revulsions of feeling with regard to my characters as surprises of this nature must generate...

I had a good laugh when Heather commented in >48 souloftherose: that she was being put in mind of Lady Audley's Secret.

As we have touched upon in other contexts, Trollope disapproved very much of the "sensation novel" that was so popular at this time, the works of Wilkie Collins and Mary Elizabeth Braddon being the best known examples; he basically says why in that quote. He felt that stories that depended upon shocks and surprises and taking the reader off-guard more or less violated the trust between author and reader. In fact Trollope as we have seen sometimes goes to the other extreme, almost telling his readers how his novels are going to end. Perhaps he didn't grasp that many readers liked being shocked and surprised.

(I think Trollope would have been horrified if he had known how completely mystery and detective fiction, the offspring of the sensation novel, would come to dominate English fiction.)

Of course the joke here is that Lady Audley's Secret was published the same year as Orley Farm and was that year's runaway best-seller...which I'm sure exasperated Trollope very much. :D

In his presentation of Lady Mason, we can see that Trollope treats his readers very much as he treats his characters: he has us start out assuming that on the basis of her character and standing, she is innocent---and then lets the possibility, then probability, of her guilt creep up on us.

This handling of the main subplot dictates the structure of Orley Farm: obviously Trollope wanted his revelation at approximately the novel's halfway point, which meant that he had to surround and support his main thread with quite a lot of other material, not all of it strictly necessary---like the Mary Snow subplot.

However---from this point, with the reader now in on its secret, Orley Farm almost becomes a different book---not a satire, exactly, although there is plenty of satirical material (much of it courtesy of Mr Moulder), but a fairly savage deconstruction of the English criminal justice system.

113MissWatson
Feb 16, 2021, 2:59 am

I am ahead a bit and I agree, now that the secret is out in the open, things are different.

114cbl_tn
Feb 16, 2021, 6:19 am

>112 lyzard: I hoped it wasn't true but feared it was. I like Lady Mason and I can't say that of most of the other characters.

115kac522
Feb 16, 2021, 11:52 am

Completely off-topic--this article made me think of dear Plantagenet Palliser:

https://www.npr.org/2021/02/15/968146708/u-k-and-ireland-celebrate-50-years-sinc...

Plus there's a link to a handy conversion chart, for those of us befuddled by the old system.

116thornton37814
Feb 16, 2021, 2:53 pm

I'm not liking most of the characters. The novel itself isn't doing much for me either--but at 3 chapters/day, I can tolerate it.

117lyzard
Feb 16, 2021, 3:50 pm

>115 kac522:

Ha! - yes indeed, thank you for that. :D

118lyzard
Feb 16, 2021, 3:53 pm

>113 MissWatson:

Yes, it's like Trollope let himself off his leash, I think.

>114 cbl_tn:

I think most of that was intentional, for later purposes.

>116 thornton37814:

Sorry to hear that, Lori, though I would suggest that overall, this book isn't really about the characters. As we've said it alters its approach from this point, though I guess whether you like it any better remains to be seen. :)

119lyzard
Feb 16, 2021, 3:59 pm

In respect of our future direction, there are another couple of pertinent quotes from Chapter 45:

But to him at this present moment the part most frightful was his and her present position. What should he do for her? How should he counsel her? In what way so act that he might best assist her without compromising that high sense of right and wrong which in him was a second nature. He felt at the moment that he would still give his last shilling to rescue her,---only that there was the property! Let the heavens fall, justice must be done there. Even a wretch such as Joseph Mason must have that which was clearly his own.

******

He, when he attempted to give counsel in the matter, had utterly failed. He had not known what to suggest, nor could she say what it might be wisest for them all to do; but on one point her mind had been at once resolved. The woman who had once been her friend, whom she had learned to love, should not leave the house without some sympathy and womanly care. The guilt was very bad; yes, it was terrible; she acknowledged that it was a thing to be thought of only with shuddering. But the guilt of twenty years ago did not strike her senses so vividly as the abject misery of the present day. There was no pity in her bosom for Mr Joseph Mason when she heard the story, but she was full of pity for her who had committed the crime.

120lyzard
Feb 16, 2021, 4:24 pm

In terms of the crime itself---this touches on the points made up-thread, in >99 Matke:, >100 souloftherose:, >101 lyzard:

So Sir Joseph Mason didn't stop at "buying" a pretty young woman---having done so, he didn't even have the decency to provide properly for her and their son but was content for them to drop back into obscurity and possible poverty.

This, I think, is why there is that passing allusion to Lady Mason's brother in Chapter 2:

The father did not survive the disgrace of his bankruptcy, and the mother in process of time settled herself with her son in one of the Lancashire manufacturing towns, where John Johnson raised his head in business to some moderate altitude...

Presumably he would have ended up having to take in his sister and her baby, regardless of his own circumstances.

Trollope got into some trouble for making Lady Mason sympathetic in her crime, although in terms of how the narrative unfolds, that's the point.

But as is said repeatedly, it was never about herself: it was always about her baby---who has grown up into the last person in the world to appreciate or even understand her desperate gesture.

121MissWatson
Feb 17, 2021, 3:21 am

>120 lyzard: But as is said repeatedly, it was never about herself: it was always about her baby---who has grown up into the last person in the world to appreciate or even understand her desperate gesture.

That is a very bleak outlook.

Another thing that strikes me is the frequent mention of Mr Furnival's drinking habits. Usually it's the lower classes who drink beyond their capacity. The only other novel I can recall right now where a member of the upper classes was depicted as such a drunkard is The Tenant of Wildfell Hall. Or is memory deceiving me?

122lyzard
Feb 17, 2021, 4:31 pm

>121 MissWatson:

That's a large part of Lady Mason's terror, though: not just that she will be found out, but that Lucius will know. We don't argue with his morals but his inflexibility and what Lady Mason calls "hardness" makes that as frightening a prospect for her as jail.

It was not something that was commonly depicted, no---or anyway, not in a serious way. That is even reflected in the example you give: The Tenant Of Wildfell Hall is about, not just drunkenness, but alcoholism---but it was written some twenty years before Orley Farm, in the early years of Victoria's reign, before standards had tightened up and the indulgences of the Regency and post-Regency eras were still widespread. Even so the book was heavily criticised for its subject matter, though it was dealing in a serious way with a serious problem.

Mr Furnival's over-indulgence here is all-too familiar---drinking to the point, not of drunkenness, but of bad temper and a loss of self-control.

You're right, though, that this wasn't often acknowledged in the writing of the time. More common is how Trollope echoes that subplot when dealing with Mr Moulder, whose own over-indulgence is treated in a more "comic" way, though it is no less unpleasant for his wife.

123lyzard
Editado: Feb 17, 2021, 4:42 pm

Having dropped his bombshell, Trollope steps back and allows some relief in the form of a return to Noningsby.

There is a nice touch here in the background to the Staveleys' own marriage. As we saw during The Bertrams, Trollope thought modern couples were too inclined to demand too much of marriage (in the material sense), and disinclined to make a leap of faith about the future.

Yet for all Lady Staveley's hostility to Felix Graham as a suitor for Madeline, we learn here that Mr Staveley, as he was then, was no more than a poor struggling young barrister when she married him---and we know from any number of Trollope's novels how he approved of young women who "made up their mind and bided" about their young men:

Chapter 47

    "I was living with my lady's mother, as maid to the young ladies. There was four of 'em, and I dressed 'em all---God bless 'em. They've all got husbands now and grown families---only there ain't one among 'em equal to our Miss Madeline, though there's some of 'em much richer. When my lady married him,---the judge, you know,---he was the poorest of the lot. They didn't think so much of him when he came a-courting in those days."
    "He was only a practising barrister then."
    "Oh yes; he knew well how to practise, for Miss Isabella---as she was then---very soon made up her mind about him. Laws, Mr Graham, she used to tell me everything in them days. They didn't want her to have nothing to say to Mr Staveley at first; but she made up her mind, and though she wasn't one of them as has many words, like Miss Furnival down there, there was no turning her."
    "Did she marry at last against their wish?"
    "Oh dear, no; nothing of that sort. She wasn't one of them flighty ones neither. She just made up her own mind and bided. And now I don't know whether she hasn't done about the best of 'em all..."


We are also given a very interesting - and in its time almost radical - take on parenting:

Many of my readers, and especially those who are old and wise,---if I chance to have any such,---will be inclined to think that the judge behaved foolishly in thus cross-questioning his daughter on a matter, which, if it were expedient that it should die away, would die away the more easily the less it were talked about. But the judge was an odd man in many of the theories of his life. One of them, with reference to his children, was very odd, and altogether opposed to the usual practice of the world. It was this,—that they should be allowed, as far as was practicable, to do what they liked. Now the general opinion of the world is certainly quite the reverse---namely this, that children, as long as they are under the control of their parents, should be hindered and prevented in those things to which they are most inclined. Of course the world in general, in carrying out this practice, excuses it by an assertion,---made to themselves or others,---that children customarily like those things which they ought not to like. But the judge had an idea quite opposed to this. Children, he said, if properly trained would like those things which were good for them. Now it may be that he thought his daughter had been properly trained.

124lyzard
Editado: Feb 17, 2021, 5:05 pm

Chapter 48 brings the Staveley circle much more decisively into the novel's main plot.

As intimated earlier, Felix is invited to become part of Lady Mason's defense team, and learns what charge is to be brought against her:

    "It has now been decided on the part of Joseph Mason,---the husband's eldest son, who is endeavouring to get the property,---that she shall be indicted for perjury."
    "For perjury!"
    "Yes; and in doing that, regarding the matter from his point of view, they are not deficient in judgment."
    "But how could she have been guilty of perjury?"
    "In swearing that she had been present when her husband and the three witnesses executed the deed. If they have any ground to stand on---and I believe they have none whatever, but if they have, they would much more easily get a verdict against her on that point than on a charge of forgery. Supposing it to be the fact that her husband never executed such a deed, it would be manifest that she must have sworn falsely in swearing that she saw him do so."
    "Why, yes; one would say so."
    "But that would afford by no means conclusive evidence that she had forged the surreptitious deed herself."
    "It would be strong presumptive evidence that she was cognizant of the forgery."
    "Perhaps so,---but uncorroborated would hardly bring a verdict after such a lapse of years. And then moreover a prosecution for forgery, if unsuccessful, would produce more painful feeling. Whether successful or unsuccessful it would do so. Bail could not be taken in the first instance, and such a prosecution would create a stronger feeling that the poor lady was being persecuted."


This passage suggests that Round and Crook are giving Mr Mason shrewder legal advice than he deserves.

Earlier we heard Mr Mason expressing his anger and disappointment that forgery was no longer a capital charge. In fact over the 19th century a whole raft of capital charges, which had been introduced as law over the 18th century when Britain adopted capitalism, had been rolled back---not exactly because people thought the death penalty was wrong, bur rather because juries stopped convicting in such cases, regardless of the evident guilt of the defendant. The feeling that execution for property crimes was an excessive punishment took hold amongst the public well before the government and the judicial system would acknowledge it.

Now we learn that it isn't even forgery that Lady Mason is going to be charged with---a secondary recognition that it will be no easy task to get a conviction of any kind against a woman of her social standing and (we might as well bite this bullet, because it's a large part of the Sir Peregrine / Mr Furnival situation) physical attractiveness.

Consequently Lady Mason is to be charged with perjury, which was considered a far lesser crime, though still one that carried a prison term---as the best hope of securing a conviction in what is self-evidently going to be an unpopular case.

And this brings us to an important point that Trollope makes throughout the novel---one which is absolutely still relevant to our legal systems today---the fact that, in spite of how trial-by-jury is "supposed" to work, juries are just as likely to respond to personalities as they are to the evidence.

The fact that Lady Mason is nice and charming and attractive, and that Mr Mason is a thoroughly unpleasant human being, shouldn't have anything to do with the outcome of the case; but...

125majkia
Feb 17, 2021, 6:37 pm

I once served on the jury of a murder trial. Half the jurors had their minds made up before the evidence was even presented based on judgements of the defendant and the victim. Victim white, guy on trial black. It was a horrible experience.

I'm right there with Trollope.

126japaul22
Feb 17, 2021, 7:29 pm

I've not read any posts except for the introductory ones, but I'm going to jump in on this group read. I somehow missed that it was happening and I always love these Trollope reads. I'll make it my primary book and see it I can catch up. If not, I'll enjoy the commentary anyway as I get there!

127lyzard
Feb 17, 2021, 8:36 pm

>125 majkia:

Me too. I have a real problem with the whole trial-by-jury concept and that is one major reason why. I'm sorry you went through that.

>126 japaul22:

Welcome, Jennifer, it's great to see you here! Please do join in but don't worry too much about catching up. :)

128lyzard
Feb 18, 2021, 4:51 pm

The next few chapters deal very much in disappointment and unhappiness.

In Chapter 49 we have Mrs Furnival taking the extraordinary step of leaving home and husband, after finding out that Mr Furnival and Lady Mason have met in his chambers for a second time. In Chapter 51 she takes the still more extraordinary step of travelling down to Hamworth to confront Lady Mason; fortunately, she encounters Mrs Orme instead.

Meanwhile, Chapter 50 finds Peregrine Orme pursuing his futile courtship of Madeline---though it falls to Lady Staveley to head him off.

Peregrine's visit brings matters to a crisis at Noningsby, with Lady Staveley forced to capitulate over Madeline's preference for Felix Graham:

Chapter 52

    "I cannot understand Madeline," Lady Staveley went on, not caring overmuch about Felix Graham's acquirements.
    "Well, my dear, I think the key to her choice is this, that she has judged not with her eyes, but with her ears, or rather with her understanding. Had she accepted Mr Orme, I as a father should of course have been well satisfied. He is, I have no doubt, a fine young fellow, and will make a good husband some day."
    "Oh, excellent!" said her ladyship; "and The Cleeve is only seven miles."
    "But I must acknowledge that I cannot feel angry with Madeline."
    "Angry! no, not angry. Who would be angry with the poor child?"
    "Indeed, I am somewhat proud of her. It seems to me that she prefers mind to matter, which is a great deal to say for a young lady."
    "Matter!" exclaimed Lady Staveley, who could not but feel that the term, as applied to such a young man as Peregrine Orme, was very opprobrious.
    "Wit and intellect and power of expression have gone further with her than good looks and rank and worldly prosperity. If that be so, and I believe it is, I cannot but love her the better for it."
    "So do I love her, as much as any mother can love her daughter."
    "Of course you do." And the judge kissed his wife.
    "And I like wit and genius and all that sort of thing."
    "Otherwise you would have not taken me, my dear."
    "You were the handsomest man of your day. That's why I fell in love with you."
    "The compliment is a very poor one," said the judge.


129lyzard
Feb 18, 2021, 4:57 pm

While all this is unfolding, we also learn that the legal machinery is in motion, to bring Lady Mason to trial:

Chapter 51

    On that day Samuel Dockwrath had gone to London, but before starting he had made known to his wife with fiendish glee that it had been at last decided by all the persons concerned that Lady Mason should be charged with perjury, and tried for that offense.
    "You don't mean to say that the judges have said so?" asked poor Miriam.
    "I do mean to say that all the judges in England could not save her from having to stand her trial, and it is my belief that all the lawyers in the land cannot save her from conviction. I wonder whether she ever thinks now of those fields which she took away from me!"

130lyzard
Editado: Feb 18, 2021, 5:21 pm

Samuel Dockwrath will repeatedly accuse Round and Crook of secretly working in Lady Mason's favour, and while that isn't strictly true, we might yet raise our eyebrows over the degree of co-operation between the two legal teams involved in what we might call "Mason vs Mason":

Chapter 53

Lady Mason remained at The Cleeve for something more than a week after that day on which she made her confession, during which time she was fully committed to take her trial at the next assizes at Alston on an indictment for perjury. This was done in a manner that astonished even herself by the absence of all publicity or outward scandal. The matter was arranged between Mr Matthew Round and Mr Solomon Aram, and was so arranged in accordance with Mr Furnival's wishes...

Then we get this fascinating outside glimpse of the matter:

Mr Dockwrath made one or two attempts to get up a scene, and to rouse a feeling of public anger against the lady who was to be tried; but the magistrates put him down. They also seemed to be fully impressed with a sense of Lady Mason's innocence in the teeth of the evidence which was given against her. This was the general feeling on the minds of all people,---except of those who knew most about her. There was an idea that affairs had so been managed by Mr Joseph Mason and Mr Dockwrath that another trial was necessary, but that the unfortunate victim of Mr Mason's cupidity and Mr Dockwrath's malice would be washed white as snow when the day of that trial came. The chief performers on the present occasion were Round and Aram, and a stranger to such proceedings would have said that they were acting in concert. Mr Round pressed for the indictment, and brought forward in a very short way the evidence of Bolster and Torrington. Mr Aram said that his client was advised to reserve her defence, and was prepared with bail to any amount. Mr Round advised the magistrates that reasonable bail should be taken, and then the matter was settled...

And of course this is indeed very much a matter of Mr Mason's cupidity and Mr Dockwrath's malice...but that doesn't make them - legally - wrong...though we can see how the very tactics they are employing are undermining their own case; we can argue whether or not this should be so.

Meanwhile we should note the double meanings and silent communications going on between Lady Mason and her legal team. Not one of them has said anything overt, yet they understand each other perfectly.

This is a fundamental point in criminal law: what should an attorney do who knows his/her client is guilty? Should the right of the accused to the best defense possible override the question of guilt and innocence?

    "I am delighted to have the honour of making your acquaintance," said Mr Aram.
    Lady Mason essayed to mutter some word; but no word was audible, nor was any necessary. "I have no doubt," continued the attorney, "that we shall pull through this little difficulty without any ultimate damage whatsoever. In the mean time it is of course disagreeable to a lady of your distinction." And then he made another bow. "We are peculiarly happy in having such a tower of strength as Mr Furnival," and then he bowed to the barrister.
    "And my old friend Mr Chaffanbrass is another tower of strength. Eh, Mr Furnival?" And so the introduction was over.
    Lady Mason had quite understood Mr. Furnival;---had understood both his words and his face, when he told her how indispensable it was that she should have full confidence in this attorney. He had meant that she should tell him all. She must bring herself to confess everything to this absolute stranger. And then---for the first time---she felt sure that Mr. Furnival had guessed her secret. He also knew it, but it would not suit him that any one should know that he knew it!

131lyzard
Editado: Feb 18, 2021, 5:50 pm

I think we should stop here and consider Trollope's depiction of Solomon Aram.

Unfortunately antisemitism was a prevailing thing in English literature at this time---and would remain so for another sixty years. Trollope himself was occasionally guilty of falling back upon ugly stereotypes; and yet here we find him rejecting those stereotypes, in this odd little passage---or seeming to reject them:

Chapter 53

Mr Solomon Aram was not, in outward appearance, such a man as Lady Mason, Sir Peregrine Orme, or others quite ignorant in such matters would have expected. He was not a dirty old Jew with a hooked nose and an imperfect pronunciation of English consonants. Mr Chaffanbrass, the barrister, bore more resemblance to a Jew of that ancient type. Mr Solomon Aram was a good-looking man about forty, perhaps rather over-dressed, but bearing about him no other sign of vulgarity...

Is this in fact a rejection? - or is he saying that Mr Aram is more deceitful for not appearing Jewish?

I am thinking here of the Ferdinand Lopez subplot in The Prime Minister, in which Lopez is not overtly Jewish, but it is repeatedly implied that he is of Jewish descent and concealing the fact, which is treated as much worse, much more false and deceptive. It's an ugly piece of writing, and all the more so because Lopez himself never says anything, its all authorial implication.

I'm really not sure what to make of this.

On the other hand---in context I think we do know what to make of this:

...in the absence of such previous knowledge he might have been taken for as good a Christian as any other attorney.

132majkia
Feb 19, 2021, 11:09 am

>131 lyzard: With that one statement Trollope undoes all his own words regarding Aram and really surprised me after reading the earlier parts of the chapter.

Altho Trollope repeatedly will write something remarkably forward thinking (many regarding women and their limited legal standing ) and surprise me with it. Then, there's that last. Sigh. He's trying, so maybe we should give him a few props.

133lyzard
Feb 20, 2021, 5:52 pm

>132 majkia:

I know: it's like he sees the problem, can't quite commit to tackling it, and then retreats further back than he was in the first place. It's incredibly frustrating.

134lyzard
Feb 20, 2021, 6:17 pm

With Lady Mason committed to stand trial for perjury, Trollope again steps back to catch us up on his other subplots.

It has been evident for some time that Trollope intends to let Felix Graham off very lightly with respect to Mary Snow, and he does so by providing a romantic rival, as we see in Chapter 54 and Chapter 57.

From one perspective, Mary seems to have done quite well for herself in Albert Fitzallen:

    "Oh, sir, very well," said Albert. The street in which they were standing was desolate, and the young man was able to assume a look of decided hostility without encountering any other eyes than those of his rival. "If you have anything to say to me, sir, I am quite prepared to listen to you---to listen to you, and to answer you. I have heard your name mentioned by Miss Snow." And Albert Fitzallen stood his ground as though he were at once going to cover himself with his pistol arm.
    "Yes, I know you have. Mary has told me what has passed between you. You may regard me, Mr Fitzallen, as Mary's best and surest friend."
    "I know you have been a friend to her; I am aware of that. But, Mr Graham, if you will allow me to say so, friendship is one thing, and the warm love of a devoted bosom is another."
    "Quite so," said Felix.
    "A woman's heart is a treasure not to be bought by any efforts of friendship," said Fitzallen.
    "I fully agree with you there," said Graham.


---but on the other hand the way that the two young men settle Mary's future between them is a bit disturbing.

Then, too, though she does not love Felix, Mary has been promised that she will be a gentleman's wife with all that entailed in Victorian society---and this is also taken away from her a bit too easily.

Felix's punishment, such as it is, is having to confront Mary's ghastly father: we understand why he was moved to take Mary away from him in the first place; though putting a promise of marriage in writing seems a reckless step for any lawyer to take, even one as idealistic as Felix:

    "And what the deuce, sir, is your full approbation to me? Whose child is she, I should like to know? Look here, Mr Gorm; perhaps you forget that you wrote me this letter when I allowed you to have the charge of that young girl?" And he took out from his breast a very greasy pocket-book, and displayed to Felix his own much-worn letter,---holding it, however, at a distance, so that it should not be torn from his hands by any sudden raid. "Do you think, sir, I would have given up my child if I didn't know she was to be married respectable? My child is as dear to me as another man's."
    "I hope she is. And you are a very lucky fellow to have her so well provided for. I've told you all I've got to say, and now you may go."
    "Mr Gorm!"
    "I've nothing more to say; and if I had, I would not say it to you now. Your child shall be taken care of."
    "That's what I call pretty cool on the part of any gen'leman. And you're to break your word,---a regular breach of promise, and nothing ain't to come of it! I'll tell you what, Mr Gorm, you'll find that something will come of it..."


Mr Snow is quite right about the breach of promise---and a letter like that is exactly the kind of evidence that juries ate up in such cases.

But nothing does come of it, and Felix is allowed to wash his hands of the situation.

135lyzard
Feb 20, 2021, 6:34 pm

Meanwhile, Mr and Mrs Furnival have patched things up; and Sophia is back home at last---where she is followed by Lucius Mason.

Trollope of course doesn't like Sophia---but as we often see when he is handling his "bad" characters, he has a lot of fun teasing out the workings of her mind, and illustrating the gap between what she thinks and what she says:

Chapter 55

    "And you heard perhaps of her--- I hardly know how to tell you, if you have not heard it."
    "If you mean about Sir Peregrine, I have heard of that."
    "Of course you have. All the world has heard of it." And Lucius Mason got up and walked about the room holding his hand to his brow. "All the world are talking about it. Miss Furnival, you have never known what it is to blush for a parent."
    Miss Furnival at the moment felt a sincere hope that Mr. Mason might never hear of Mrs Furnival's visit to the neighbourhood of Orange Street and of the causes which led to it, and by no means thought it necessary to ask for her friend's sympathy on that subject. "No," said she, "I never have..."


Trollope as we have seen uses Felix Graham to criticise the criminal justice system from the inside, and here he uses Lucius to the same purpose from the outside: his criticism here is one also made very strongly in Phineas Redux, where even needing a lawyer makes Phineas feel "soiled":

    "Miss Furnival, I sometimes think that my mother will hardly have strength to sustain the trial. She is so depressed that I almost fear her mind will give way; and the worst of it is that I am altogether unable to comfort her."
    "Surely that at present should specially be your task."
    "I cannot do it. What should I say to her? I think that she is wrong in what she is doing; thoroughly, absolutely wrong. She has got about her a parcel of lawyers. I beg your pardon, Miss Furnival, but you know I do not mean such as your father."
    "But has not he advised it?"
    "If so I cannot but think he is wrong. They are the very scum of the gaols; men who live by rescuing felons from the punishment they deserve. What can my mother require of such services as theirs? It is they that frighten her and make her dread all manner of evils. Why should a woman who knows herself to be good and just fear anything that the law can do to her?"


Though of course in this case, there is a terrible cruelty underlying the irony of Lucius' views.

136MissWatson
Feb 21, 2021, 10:44 am

>134 lyzard: I think this is the bit that bothers me most: that we are never given a full explanation where Felix got this ridiculous notion in the first place, and that everything is settled so quickly and painlessly for him.

137lyzard
Editado: Feb 21, 2021, 3:29 pm

>136 MissWatson:

Perhaps it was meant to show Felix as idealistic / naive in his personal life as in his career? I guess the point is that it wasn't undertaken in a selfish spirit, as this moulding-a-wife-business usually was: he did mean to help Mary, and on that basis can be let off the hook.

(Though of course it's also about padding the first half of the novel...)

138lyzard
Feb 21, 2021, 3:44 pm

Things get serious again in Chapter 58

    "It will be very terrible to all if she be condemned," said Sir Peregrine.
    "Very terrible! But Mr Furnival---"
    "Edith, if it comes to that, she will be condemned. Mr Furnival is a lawyer and will not say so; but from his countenance, when he speaks of her, I know that he expects it!"
    "Oh, father, do not say so."
    "But if it is so--- My love, what is the purport of these courts of law if it be not to discover the truth, and make it plain to the light of day?" Poor Sir Peregrine! His innocence in this respect was perhaps beautiful, but it was very simple. Mr. Aram, could he have been induced to speak out his mind plainly, would have expressed, probably, a different opinion.
    "But she escaped before," said Mrs. Orme, who was clearly at present on the same side with Mr Aram.


It is interesting that Mrs Orme is allowed to have a dash of the Solomon Arams about her, though of course she is excused as focusing upon the spiritual rather than the material outcome of the situation.

Sir Peregrine's naivete, on the other hand, is beyond impractical: it carries him to Mr Round and ends, in effect, in him telling the prosecution that she is guilty:

    "If I have said anything that I ought not to have said---" began Sir Peregrine.
    "Allow me for one moment," continued Mr Round. "The fault is mine, if there be a fault, as I should have explained to you that the matter could hardly be discussed with propriety between us."
    "Mr Round, I offer you my apology from the bottom of my heart."
    "No, Sir Peregrine. You shall offer me no apology, nor will I accept any. I know no words strong enough to convey to you my esteem and respect for your character."
    "Sir!"
    "But I will ask you to listen to me for a moment. If any compromise be contemplated, it should be arranged by the advice of Mr Furnival and of Mr Chaffanbrass, and the terms should be settled between Mr Aram and my son. But I cannot myself say that I see any possibility of such a result. It is not however for me to advise. If on that matter you wish for advice, I think that you had better see Mr Furnival."
    "Ah!" said Sir Peregrine, telling more and more of the story by every utterance he made.
    "And now it only remains for me to assure you once more that the words which have been spoken in this room shall be as though they had not been spoken."

139lyzard
Editado: Feb 21, 2021, 3:48 pm

Chapter 58 also contains this remarkable paragraph, which I think deserves consideration in its own right---being in essence this novel's manifesto:

We may say that all the persons most concerned were convinced, or nearly convinced, of Lady Mason's guilt. Among her own friends Mr Furnival had no doubt of it, and Mr Chaffanbrass and Mr Aram but very little; whereas Sir Peregrine and Mrs Orme of course had none. On the other side Mr Mason and Mr Dockwrath were both fully sure of the truth, and the two Rounds, father and son, were quite of the same mind. And yet, except with Dockwrath and Sir Peregrine, the most honest and the most dishonest of the lot, the opinion was that she would escape. These were five lawyers concerned, not one of whom gave to the course of justice credit that it would ascertain the truth, and not one of whom wished that the truth should be ascertained. Surely had they been honest-minded in their profession they would all have so wished;---have so wished, or else have abstained from all professional intercourse in the matter. I cannot understand how any gentleman can be willing to use his intellect for the propagation of untruth, and to be paid for so using it. As to Mr Chaffanbrass and Mr Solomon Aram,---to them the escape of a criminal under their auspices would of course be a matter of triumph. To such work for many years had they applied their sharp intellects and legal knowledge. But of Mr Furnival;---what shall we say of him?

140lyzard
Feb 21, 2021, 4:05 pm

And I think that paragraph needs to be set against this one, from Chapter 60:

"Yes, he is clever enough," repeated the judge, "clever enough; and of high principles and an honest purpose. The fault which people find with him is this,---that he is not practical. He won't take the world as he finds it. If he can mend it, well and good; we all ought to do something to mend it; but while we are mending it we must live in it."

And it is a fact that all Felix does over the course of this novel is demonstrate how unfit he is for the profession he has undertaken---as that profession and the world both stand.

The question here is whether we are to take Judge Staveley's view as Trollope's own, or whether Trollope was siding more with Felix.

Or both. We've seen Trollope's own ambivalence. He can admire Felix Graham and castigate the conduct of his other lawyers; yet he was suspicious of reformers and often criticised or satirised them too (thinking all the way back to John Bold in The Warden, and that novel's unkind sketch of Charles Dickens, who Trollope obviously thought should stick to his writing).

In fact it isn't quite clear how he thought the world was to be mended, or who was to do the mending. Perhaps he just sat back on the comfortable thought, "In God's good time."

141japaul22
Feb 21, 2021, 4:38 pm

I'm following along as I get there after my late start. I'm up to Chapter 31.

This book grabbed me right away. I really enjoy all the characters (though I agree with >79 MissWatson: that it's a little hard to figure out which characters will be most important). I like that there are multiple generations that I'm interested in. It feels like a more complete and mature book than some of the early ones we've been reading.

142japaul22
Feb 21, 2021, 7:30 pm

And then in Chapter 31 we have that situation that pops up so many times in Trollope's books. I was struck when Lady Stavely says to Madeline, talking about her proposal from Peregrine Orme.
"It would have been a great misfortune if you had loved him before you had reason to know that he loved you . . . "

That unfortunate "rule" for young women just never goes away, does it . . .

143lyzard
Feb 22, 2021, 4:49 am

>141 japaul22:

It's interesting watching his writing develop!

>142 japaul22:

Well, the theory was that when a man told a woman he loved her, she'd fall in love with him out of gratitude---no muss, no fuss. :D

I found that example particularly weird in context because we know that (i) Lady Staveley married against her parents' wishes, (ii) Madeline never gave Peregrine any sort of thought, and (iii) she did fall in love with Felix before she had reason to think he loved her.

You'd hope that its use here was meant to highlight how silly it was but there's no real sign of that, is there?

144NinieB
Feb 22, 2021, 7:24 am

>143 lyzard: Well, "Do as I say, don't do as I do" has been many mothers' mantra. And Lady Staveley is already warning Madeleine off Felix at this point, isn't she?

I thought Madeleine was put in a difficult situation here because if all Lady Staveley's advice is followed, she shouldn't have any feelings for a young man until he proposes to her, but at the same time, if he's the right sort of young man, and he does propose, she has to either say yes or give him reason to hope so that she has time to fall in love. Or am I missing something?

145majkia
Feb 22, 2021, 7:39 am

>143 lyzard:, >144 NinieB:
When Madeline says she doesn't care about money, to marry Felix, this is a young girl who's never known a moment of 'want'. So I can certainly understand her mother's worry about her marrying someone without money, as she must certainly be far more aware of poverty than her daughter's insulated life could know.

146NinieB
Feb 22, 2021, 7:45 am

>145 majkia: Yes, Madeline is a complete innocent, and Lady Staveley's right to worry about her. But it seems Lady Staveley is also concerned about Felix's social status compared with Peregrine's.

147lyzard
Editado: Feb 22, 2021, 5:27 pm

Yes, it's very much 'Do as I say' etc., though it later appears that the future Judge Staveley was never unorthodox, just poor.

Though the current Lady Staveley might consider that unorthodox enough. :)

Certainly Madeline is an innocent, but this is one of those conversations where no-one says outright exactly what they mean, and her not caring about money is rather a way of saying she won't be influenced by Peregrine being heir to a baronetcy and an estate.

She also managed a decisive 'no', chiefly because she had not discussed anything with her mother beforehand and was therefore free to act without instruction.

We can see that Lady Staveley only wants what's best for Madeline, but she's influenced by Peregrine's standing, certainly---but also the thought of having her daughter for a neighbour (which might be either good or bad for that daughter!).

148lyzard
Feb 22, 2021, 5:40 pm

Chapter 60 offers an interesting analysis Lady Mason's state of mind, including the tacit admission that she is not sorry for what she did, only that she got caught.

In fact, one of the most interesting things about Orley Farm is how it makes nonsense of the idea that women can't keep a secret; though I doubt that was Trollope's intention.

Trollope I think shies away from the full implications of Lady Mason's crime: that she did this thing - did it so well that the experts couldn't tell - lived with it for twenty years - and presumably would have lived with it for another twenty, if only Lucius' officiousness hadn't led him to take back his rented fields from Samuel Dockwrath.

He also shies away from really bringing Lady Mason "out into the open", as it were; as if he's a bit scared of his own creation. He lets us see her thought the gauze of Mrs Orme's attempt to understand her:

In these days Mrs Orme became gradually aware that hitherto she had comprehended but little of Lady Mason's character. There was a power of endurance about her, and a courage that was almost awful to the mind of the weaker, softer, and better woman. Lady Mason, during her sojourn at The Cleeve, had seemed almost to sink under her misfortune; nor had there been any hypocrisy, any pretence in her apparent misery. She had been very wretched;---as wretched a human creature, we may say, as any crawling God's earth at that time. But she had borne her load, and, bearing it, had gone about her work, still striving with desperate courage as the ground on which she trod continued to give way beneath her feet, inch by inch. They had known and pitied her misery; they had loved her for misery---as it is in the nature of such people to do;---but they had little known how great had been the cause for it. They had sympathised with the female weakness which had succumbed when there was hardly any necessity for succumbing. Had they then known all, they would have wondered at the strength which made a struggle possible under such circumstances.

This is where the sensation novels had it all over mainstream fiction, though no doubt it was one more reason why Trollope disapproved of the genre: those books are full of women using their femininity as a smokescreen while they commit outrageous acts in cold blood, and often get away with them because the male characters can't wrap their heads around it. :D

This, however, is very like what we get in the sensation novels, the moment of justification:

    "You can never understand what was my childhood, and how my young years were passed. I never loved anything but him;---that is, till I knew you, and---and---" But instead of finishing her sentence she pointed down towards The Cleeve. "How, then, can I tell him? Mrs Orme, I would let them pull me to pieces, bit by bit, if in that way I could save him."
    "Not in that way," said Mrs Orme; "not in that way."
    But Lady Mason went on pouring forth the pent-up feelings of her bosom, not regarding the faint words of her companion. "Till he lay in my arms I had loved nothing. From my earliest years I had been taught to love money, wealth, and property; but as to myself the teachings had never come home to me. When they bade me marry the old man because he was rich, I obeyed them,---not caring for his riches, but knowing that it behoved me to relieve them of the burden of my support. He was kinder to me than they had been, and I did for him the best I could. But his money and his wealth were little to me. He told me over and over again that when he died I should have the means to live, and that was enough. I would not pretend to him that I cared for the grandeur of his children who despised me. But then came my baby, and the world was all altered for me. What could I do for the only thing that I had ever called my own? Money and riches they had told me were everything."
    "But they had told you wrong," said Mrs Orme, as she wiped the tears from her eyes.
    "They had told me falsely. I had heard nothing but falsehoods from my youth upwards," she answered fiercely. "For myself I had not cared for these things; but why should not he have money and riches and land? His father had them to give over and above what had already made those sons and daughters so rich and proud. Why should not this other child also be his father's heir? Was he not as well born as they? was he not as fair a child? What did Rebekah do, Mrs Orme? Did she not do worse; and did it not all go well with her? Why should my boy be an Ishmael? Why should I be treated as the bondwoman, and see my little one perish of thirst in this world's wilderness?"


149lyzard
Feb 22, 2021, 6:03 pm

After the depiction of Lady Mason's state of mind, we get quite an abrupt tone shift in Chapter 61: irony takes over as Trollope depicts the outside world's view of Mason vs Mason:

The younger world of barristers was clearly of opinion that Lady Mason was innocent; but a portion, an unhappy portion, was inclined to fear, that, in spite of her innocence, she would be found guilty. The elder world of barristers was not, perhaps, so demonstrative, but in that world the belief in her innocence was not so strong, and the fear of her condemnation much stronger. The attorneys, as a rule, regarded her as guilty. To the policeman's mind every man not a policeman is a guilty being, and the attorneys perhaps share something of this feeling. But the attorneys to a man expected to see her acquitted. Great was their faith in Mr Furnival; great their faith in Solomon Aram; but greater than in all was their faith in Mr Chaffanbrass. If Mr Chaffanbrass could not pull her through, with a prescription of twenty years on her side, things must be very much altered indeed in our English criminal court. To the outer world, that portion of the world which had nothing to do with the administration of the law, the idea of Lady Mason having been guilty seemed preposterous. Of course she was innocent, and of course she would be found to be innocent. And of course, also, that Joseph Mason of Groby Park was, and would be found to be, the meanest, the lowest, the most rapacious of mankind.

And it is here that Mr Moulder comes into his own, becoming Trollope's satirical mouthpiece in his criticisms of the justice system:

    "Unfair!" said Moulder. "It's the fairest thing that is. It's the bulwark of the British Constitution."
    "What! being badgered and browbeat?" asked Kenneby, who was thinking within himself that if this were so he did not care if he lived somewhere beyond the protection of that blessed Ægis.
    "Trial by jury is," said Moulder. "And how can you have trial by jury if the witnesses are not to be cross-questioned?"
    To this position no one was at the moment ready to give an answer, and Mr Moulder enjoyed a triumph over his audience. That he lived in a happy and blessed country Moulder was well aware, and with those blessings he did not wish any one to tamper. "Mother," said a fastidious child to his parent, "the bread is gritty and the butter tastes of turnips." "Turnips indeed,---and gritty!" said the mother. "Is it not a great thing to have bread and butter at all?" I own that my sympathies are with the child. Bread and butter is a great thing; but I would have it of the best if that be possible...


This tone continues in Chapter 62, where we find Mr Chaffanbrass and Mr Aram hashing over their case:

And then the special attributes of Kenneby and Bridget Bolster were discussed between them, and it was manifest that Aram knew with great accuracy the characters of the persons with whom he had to deal. That Kenneby might be made to say almost anything was taken for granted. With him there would be very great scope for that peculiar skill with which Mr. Chaffanbrass was so wonderfully gifted. In the hands of Mr. Chaffanbrass it was not improbable that Kenneby might be made to swear that he had signed two, three, four---any number of documents on that fourteenth of July, although he had before sworn that he had only signed one. Mr Chaffanbrass indeed might probably make him say anything that he pleased. Had Kenneby been unsupported the case would have been made safe,---so said Mr Solomon Aram,---by leaving Kenneby in the hands of Mr. Chaffanbrass. But then Bridget Bolster was supposed to be a witness of altogether a different class of character. To induce her to say exactly the reverse of that which she intended to say might, no doubt, be within the power of man. Mr Aram thought that it would be within the power of Mr Chaffanbrass. He thought, however, that it would as certainly be beyond the power of Mr Furnival; and when the great man lying on the sofa mentioned the name of Mr Felix Graham, Mr Aram merely smiled...

******

    "I'm quite indifferent. If the memory of either of these two persons is doubtful,---and after twenty years it may be so,---Mr Furnival will discover it."
    "Then on the whole I'm disposed to think that I'd let him take the man."
    "Just as you please, Aram. That is, if he's satisfied also."
    "I'm not going to have my client overthrown, you know," said Aram. "And then you'll take Dockwrath also, of course. I don't know that it will have much effect upon the case, but I shall like to see Dockwrath in your hands; I shall indeed."


Wouldn't we all??

BUT---

    "I suppose you know nothing about the panel down there, eh?" said Chaffanbrass.
    "Well, I have made some inquiries; but I don't think there's anything especial to know;---nothing that matters. If I were you, Mr Chaffanbrass, I wouldn't have any Hamworth people on the jury..."


150lyzard
Editado: Feb 22, 2021, 6:10 pm

By Mr Aram's smile in Chapter 62, we are understand that Felix Graham is the worst and most incompetent sort of barrister---which is to say, an honest man:

But, as the day grew nigh, a shadow of unbelief, a dim passing shade---a shade which would pass, and then return, and then pass again---flitted also across the mind of Felix Graham. His theory had been, and still was, that those two witnesses, Kenneby and Bolster, were suborned by Dockwrath to swear falsely. He had commenced by looking at the matter with a full confidence in his client's innocence, a confidence which had come from the outer world, from his social convictions, and the knowledge which he had of the confidence of others. Then it had been necessary for him to reconcile the stories which Kenneby and Bolster were prepared to tell with this strong confidence, and he could only do so by believing that they were both false and had been thus suborned. But what if they were not false? What if he were judging them wrongfully? I do not say that he had ceased to believe in Lady Mason; but a shadow of doubt would occasionally cross his mind, and give to the whole affair an aspect which to him was very tragical...

But if Felix isn't enjoying his situation, he's making things impossible for his colleagues:

    What was Mr Furnival to say? Mr Chaffanbrass and Mr. Aram had asked no such question. Mr Round had asked no such question when he had discussed the whole matter confidentially with him. It was a sort of question never put to professional men, and one which Felix Graham should not have asked. Nevertheless it must be answered.
    "Eh?" he said.
    "I suppose we may take it for granted that Lady Mason is really innocent,---that is, free from all falsehood or fraud in this matter?"
    "Really innocent! Oh yes; I presume we take that for granted, as a matter of course."
    "But you yourself, Mr Furnival; you have no doubt about it? You have been concerned in this matter from the beginning, and therefore I have no hesitation in asking you."
    But that was exactly the reason why he should have hesitated! At least so Mr Furnival thought. "Who; I? No; I have no doubt; none in the least," said he. And thus the lie, which he had been trying to avoid, was at last told...


I think Felix needs to start thinking about another line of work (maybe stick with the writing we heard about in Chapter 58).

151MissWatson
Feb 23, 2021, 3:16 am

>148 lyzard: ... those books are full of women using their femininity as a smokescreen while they commit outrageous acts in cold blood, and often get away with them because the male characters can't wrap their heads around it.
And I am sure that explains their runaway success with the female readership. For all the lurid plots and the conventional endings, for some limited time at least women could see what they were capable of.

>147 lyzard: having her daughter for a neighbour
Of course, this is the time of railways, but large distances surely would have meant less contact. It could mean never seeing a daughter again if the husband took her to the colonies.

152lyzard
Editado: Feb 23, 2021, 4:04 pm

>151 MissWatson:

Well, in some cases the conventional ending is a bit of a smokescreen too: Wilkie Collins in particular used to get away with not punishing his transgressing women as you would expect---which is to say, by allowing them to resume conventionality, rather than casting them out.

It is interesting, though, that this genre emerged at the very heights of Victorianism.

Oh, for sure: there's nothing wrong with dreaming about keeping your daughter close, but pushing for a marriage on that basis is questionable.

The district in which Noningsby is situated is only about 25 miles from London, after all, and easily accessible by train (when the trial starts, most of the lawyers commute), so geographically the threat isn't so very terrible.

ETA: Here, at the start of Chapter 64: As Alston was so near to London, Sir Richard, Mr Furnival, Mr Chaffanbrass, and others, were able to go up and down by train...

153lyzard
Editado: Feb 23, 2021, 4:01 pm

Trollope - not having embraced sensation literature - obviously felt he was taking a big risk with a heroine - or anti-heroine - like Lady Mason, as we see from his descriptions of her as the trial approaches.

He may have believed it, or he may have felt obliged to say it---

Chapter 63

O reader, have you ever known what it is to rouse yourself and go out to the world on your daily business, when all the inner man has revolted against work, when a day of rest has seemed to you to be worth a year of life? If she could have rested now, it would have been worth many years of life,---worth all her life. She longed for rest,---to be able to lay aside the terrible fatigue of being ever on the watch. From the burden of that necessity she had never been free since her crime had been first committed. She had never known true rest. She had not once trusted herself to sleep without the feeling that her first waking thought would be one of horror, as the remembrance of her position came upon her. In every word she spoke, in every trifling action of her life, it was necessary that she should ask herself how that word and action might tell upon her chances of escape. She had striven to be true and honest,---true and honest with the exception of that one deed. But that one deed had communicated its poison to her whole life. Truth and honesty,---fair, unblemished truth and open-handed, fearless honesty,---had been impossible to her...

---but I don't buy it. She's being punished now, in the inevitability of Lucius finding out, but as for being punished from the moment of her action--- I think after the initial terror of being caught, once she was confident she'd gotten away with it Lady Mason would have picked up the threads of her normal life. She may well have resolved to be "extra good" going forward as a kind of cosmic compensation, and that would have become habit, but I don't believe in her twenty years of daily torment (not without it showing in her physically, which we know it doesn't). I think, rather, she'd probably almost forgotten about it until Lucius decided to take his fields back from Dockwrath---and THAT would have brought it all back.

Of course conventional morality insists that you can't sin without being punished by your conscience, but the reality is (as anyone who watches true-crime shows would know) people often do the most appalling things and then just go on as if nothing happened.

154lyzard
Editado: Feb 23, 2021, 9:58 pm

In Chapter 64 the trial finally begins---although first we find ourselves dealing with some very strange bedfellows.

Dammit, Trollope, you just couldn't help yourself, could you??

Not being imbued with our author's prejudices, I really want to know more about Solomon Aram. There's an intelligence and sensitivity operating here that seems very much at odds with the general conception of the character:

    Her heart almost sank within her as the carriage drove away. She would be alone till she reached Orley Farm, and there she would take up not only Lady Mason, but Mr Aram also. How would it be with them in that small carriage while Mr. Aram was sitting opposite to them? Mrs Orme by no means regretted this act of kindness which she was doing, but she began to feel that the task was not a light one. As to Mr Aram's presence in the carriage, she need have been under no uneasiness. He understood very well when his presence was desirable, and also when it was not desirable.
    When she arrived at the door of Orley Farm house she found Mr Aram waiting there to receive her. "I am sorry to say," said he, raising his hat, "that Lady Mason's son is to accompany us."
    "She did not tell me," said Mrs Orme, not understanding why this should make him sorry.
    "It was arranged between them last night, and it is very unfortunate. I cannot explain this to her; but perhaps---"
    "Why is it unfortunate, sir?"
    "Things will be said which---which---which would drive me mad if they were said about my mother." And immediately there was a touch of sympathy between the high-bred lady and the Old Bailey Jew lawyer.
    "Yes, yes," said Mrs Orme. "It will be dreadful."
    "And then if they find her guilty! It may be so, you know. And how is he to sit there and hear the judge's charge;---and then the verdict, and the sentence. If he is there he cannot escape. I'll tell you what, Mrs Orme; he should not be there at all..."

155lyzard
Editado: Feb 23, 2021, 4:37 pm

I haven't said much about the first edition illustrations, beyond drawing your attention to the rather autobiographical sketch of the farmhouse given at the beginning of Orley Farm, but this one of the courtroom warrants attention:


Chapter 64

Mrs Orme and Lady Mason soon found themselves seated on a bench, with a slight standing desk before them, much as though they were seated in a narrow pew. Up above them, on the same seat, were the three barristers employed on Lady Mason's behalf; nearest to the judge was Mr Furnival; then came Felix Graham, and below him sat Mr Chaffanbrass, somewhat out of the line of precedence, in order that he might more easily avail himself of the services of Mr Aram. Lucius found himself placed next to Mr. Chaffanbrass, and his mother sat between him and Mrs Orme. On the bench below them, immediately facing a large table which was placed in the centre of the court, sat Mr Aram and his clerk...




How many lawyers can you fit in one courtroom? :D

I have a question, though: is that meant to be Mr Aram bottom left? Because if so, it would seem that Millais ignored Trollope's description of him as not fitting the Jewish stereotype...

156lyzard
Feb 23, 2021, 4:41 pm

And again---this is not a woman who has spent twenty years wracked by daily guilt. It's not a woman who is even sorry:

Chapter 64

    Never had her clothes been better made, or worn with a better grace; but they were all black, from her bonnet-ribbon down to her boot, and were put on without any attempt at finery or smartness. As regards dress, she had never looked better than she did now; and Mr Furnival, when his eye caught her as she turned her head round towards the judge, was startled by the grace of her appearance. Her face was very pale, and somewhat hard; but no one on looking at it could say that it was the countenance of a woman overcome either by sorrow or by crime. She was perfect mistress of herself, and as she looked round the court, not with defiant gaze, but with eyes half raised, and a look of modest but yet conscious intelligence, those around her hardly dared to think that she could be guilty.
    As she thus looked her gaze fell on one face that she had not seen for years, and their eyes met. It was the face of Joseph Mason of Groby, who sat opposite to her; and as she looked at him her own countenance did not quail for a moment. Her own countenance did not quail; but his eyes fell gradually down, and when he raised them again she had averted her face...

157majkia
Editado: Feb 23, 2021, 6:25 pm

Given that she and her son would have been out on the streets with almost nothing if she hadn't forged the deed, I can't see why she should feel all that guilty. Her husband ought (given Victorian sensibilities) to have made certain his wife and child were provided for. We don't have any indication he meant to do anything of the sort. Or did I miss that?

158lyzard
Editado: Feb 23, 2021, 9:31 pm

>157 majkia:

We have the reverse, that she begged him to make provision - not for her, but for Lucius - but he stuck to his previous plan of "keeping the estate together", and not separating Orley Farm from Groby Park.

Chapter 60

"Was he not his son as much as that other one; and had I not deserved of him that he should do this thing for me?" And again "Never once did I ask of him any favour for myself from the day that I gave myself to him, because he had been good to my father and mother. Up to the very hour of his death I never asked him to spend a shilling on my own account. But I asked him to do this thing for his child..."

Presumably there would have been some sort of legacy but with the bulk of the income tied up in the two properties, not much. Not enough for Lucius to be raised as a gentleman, and given a gentleman's education.

159lyzard
Feb 23, 2021, 10:01 pm

Jennifer pointed out in >142 japaul22: the pernicious "rule" about young women not falling in love first.

This novel really does make nonsense of it, though it doesn't seem like Trollope realised it. :D

Chapter 65

    "But you told me that you loved him."
    "So I do, mamma."
    "And he told your papa that he was desperately in love with you."
    "I don't know, mamma."
    "But he did;---your papa told me so, and that's why he asked him to come down here again. He never would have done it without."
    Madeline had her own idea about this, believing that her father had thought more of her wants in the matter than he had of those of Felix Graham; but as to this she said nothing. "Nevertheless, mamma, you must not say that to any one," she answered. "Mr Graham has never spoken to me,---not a word. I should of course have told you had he done so."

160lyzard
Editado: Feb 23, 2021, 10:16 pm

Although Felix is at Noningsby as Madeline's suitor, he's also there as one of Lady Mason's barristers---to his increasing discomfort.

The dinner-table conversation between Felix and Judge Stavely is very interesting. We might be inclined to wonder how a man as idealistic (read: impractical) in some ways nevertheless rose above personal poverty to become a successful barrister and then a judge; to the point of scolding Felix about his impracticality.

Chapter 65

    At last he contrived to bring the conversation round from the Birmingham congress to the affairs of his new client; and indeed he contrived to do so in spite of the judge, who was not particularly anxious to speak on the subject. "After all that we said and did at Birmingham, it is odd that I should so soon find myself joined with Mr Furnival."
    "Not at all odd. Of course you must take up your profession as others have taken it up before you. Very many young men dream of a Themis fit for Utopia. You have slept somewhat longer than others, and your dreams have been more vivid."
    "And now I wake to find myself leagued with the Empson and Dudley of our latter-day law courts."
    "Fie, Graham, fie. Do not allow yourself to speak in that tone of men whom you know to be zealous advocates, and whom you do not know to be dishonest opponents."
    "It is they and such as they that make so many in these days feel the need of some Utopia..."


For those of you who may not know, Richard Empson and Edmund Dudley are known to history as Henry VIII's "hatchet men": they did the king's legal dirty work, exploiting all of his privileges for profit---raising huge sums for the royal treasury by selling everything from appointments to office up to judicial pardons (it is probably the latter Felix is thinking of).

While still speaking politely, there probably wasn't anything much nastier he could have said about Mr Chaffanbrass and Mr Aram.

161lyzard
Editado: Feb 24, 2021, 4:11 pm

Meanwhile, Trollope provides some ironic contrast to the straightforwardness and sincerity of Madeline and Felix, in the manoeuvring of Sophia Furnival with regard to her "engagement" to Lucius Mason and her desire to keep Augustus Staveley on a string, just in case.

There is an extra note of cruelty here, as it isn't just a case of a young woman negotiating between "offers", but rather Sophia's preference for Lucius set against the possibility of him losing his property: something Lucius himself has not the faintest idea about:

Chapter 66

Lucius, like an honest man, had proposed to go at once to Mr Furnival when he was accepted; but to this Sophia had objected, "The peculiar position in which my father stands to your mother at the present moment," said she, "would make it very difficult for him to give you an answer now." Lucius did not quite understand the reasoning, but he yielded. It did not occur to him for a moment that either Mr or Miss Furnival could doubt the validity of his title to the Orley Farm property...

162lyzard
Editado: Feb 24, 2021, 4:20 pm

And likewise, he allows Mr Moulder to play Greek chorus over the true nature of the trial, in his recall of a court case he was involved in many years before:

Chapter 67

    "They can't do anything to one if one do one's best?" said Kenneby, who was sitting apart from the table while the others were eating.
    "Of course they can't," said Dockwrath, who wished to inspirit the witnesses on his own side.
    "It ain't what they do, but what they say," said Moulder; "and then everybody is looking at you. I remember a case when I was young on the road; it was at Nottingham. There had been some sugars delivered, and the rats had got at it. I'm blessed if they didn't ask me backwards and forwards so often that I forgot whether they was seconds or thirds, though I'd sold the goods myself. And then the lawyer said he'd have me prosecuted for perjury. Well, I was that frightened, I could not stand in the box. I ain't so green now by a good deal."
    "I'm sure you're not, Mr Moulder," said Bridget, who well understood the class to which Moulder belonged.
    "After that I met that lawyer in the street, and was ashamed to look him in the face. I'm blessed if he didn't come up and shake hands with me, and tell me that he knew all along that his client hadn't a leg to stand on. Now I call that beautiful."


However, the chapter takes a more serious turn when it switches to the mindset of Joseph Mason---who once again is placed in the disturbing position of being simultaneously completely intolerable and completely right:

And why had not Round and Crook found this out when the matter was before investigated? Why had they prevented him from appealing to the Lord Chancellor when, through their own carelessness, the matter had gone against him in the inferior court? And why did they now, even in these latter days, when they were driven to reopen the case by the clearness of the evidence submitted to them,---why did they even now wound his ears, irritate his temper, and oppose the warmest feelings of his heart by expressing pity for this wicked criminal, whom it was their bounden duty to prosecute to the very utmost? Was it not by their fault that Orley Farm had been lost to him for the last twenty years? And yet young Round had told him, with the utmost composure, that it would be useless for him to look for any of those moneys which should have accrued to him during all those years!

Samuel Dockwrath's thoughts are also on revenge: his own particular version of revenge:

And the nature and extent of Mr Dockwrath's reward had been already settled. When Lucius Mason should be expelled from Orley Farm with ignominy, he, Dockwrath, should become the tenant. The very rent was settled with the understanding that it should be remitted for the first year. It would be pleasant to him to have back his two fields in this way;---his two fields, and something else beyond! It may be remembered that Lucius Mason had once gone to his office insulting him. It would now be his turn to visit Lucius Mason at his domicile. He was disposed to think that such visit would be made by him with more effect than had attended that other...

163lyzard
Feb 24, 2021, 4:47 pm

But after this (mostly) easing of the tension, the trial finally begins.

Though I think it creates its own problems in some respects, we see here why Trollope chose to structure Orley Farm the way he did: it allows for the triumph of irony, as his various threads come together in the courtroom.

We need to note the way Trollope handles all the different perspectives here, and all the different degrees of knowledge about the ins and outs of the case: he shifts seamlessly between the public, the prosecution, the defense, and other interested parties.

The overriding point, as we have said all along, is the gulf between the theoretical functioning of the courts as a site of truth and justice, and the reality of manoeuvring, self-interest, and a determination to muddy the waters as much as possible---in order to avoid anything even resembling truth and justice.

164lyzard
Editado: Feb 24, 2021, 5:04 pm

A significant part of the way in which Trollope makes his point is the gulf in conduct between Felix Graham and Mr Chaffanbrass. In a detached way, we're not left in any doubt about who is the "better" barrister; but we are invited to ponder what that "better" consists of:

Chapter 68

To every word that was spoken Felix Graham gave all his mind. While Mr Chaffanbrass sat fidgeting, or reading, or dreaming, caring nothing for all that his learned brother might say, Graham listened to every fact that was stated, and to every surmise that was propounded. To him the absolute truth in this affair was matter of great moment, but yet he felt that he dreaded to know the truth. Would it not be better for him that he should not know it? But yet he listened, and his active mind, intent on the various points as they were evolved, would not restrain itself from forming opinions. With all his ears he listened, and as he did so Mr Chaffanbrass, amidst his dreaming, reading, and fidgeting, kept an attentive eye upon him. To him it was a matter of course that Lady Mason should be guilty. Had she not been guilty, he, Mr Chaffanbrass, would not have been required. Mr Chaffanbrass well understood that the defence of injured innocence was no part of his mission...

******

And then Mr Chaffanbrass, as he sat down, looked up to the jury with an expression of countenance which was in itself worth any fee that could be paid to him for that day's work. His face spoke as plain as a face could speak, and what his face said was this: "After that, gentlemen of the jury, very little more can be necessary. You now see the motives of our opponents, and the way in which those motives have been allowed to act. We, who are altogether upon the square in what we are doing, desire nothing more than that." All which Mr Chaffanbrass said by his look, his shrug, and his gesture, much more eloquently than he could have done by the use of any words.

******

And, moreover, Graham had listened with all his mind to the cross-examination of Dockwrath, and he was filled with disgust---with disgust, not so much at the part played by the attorney as at that played by the barrister. As Graham regarded the matter, what had the iniquities and greed of Dockwrath to do with it?... All that Chaffanbrass had done or attempted was to prove that Dockwrath had had his own end to serve. Who had ever doubted it? But not a word had been said, not a spark of evidence elicited, to show that the man had used a falsehood to further those views of his. Of all this the mind of Felix Graham had been full; and now, as he rose to take his own share of the work, his wit was at work rather in opposition to Lady Mason than on her behalf...

******

Graham, as he rose to his work, saw that Mr Chaffanbrass had fixed his eye upon him, and his courage rose the higher within him as he felt the gaze of the man whom he so much disliked. Was it within the compass of his heart to bully an old man because such a one as Chaffanbrass desired it of him? By heaven, no!

******

Chapter 69

Then as he passed out in the company of Mr Furnival and Mr Chaffanbrass, the latter looked at him with a scorn which he did not know how to return...

The issues raised here are no less relevant today than they were in 1862. Felix is an honest man; Mr Chaffanbrass is not: but really, which of them would we want defending us if we were in legal trouble?

HOWEVER---

Perhaps the most typical Trollope touch here is that while he is laying out for us the contradictions of the situation, and inviting the reader to sympathise with Felix and be disgusted with Mr Charranbrass - and the system that created him - as an author he simultaneously invites us to take pleasure in Chaffanbrass's handling of Samuel Dockwrath (as indeed he did in The Three Clerks, with Chaffanbrass's smackdown of Undy Scott):

    "You were turned out from those two fields when young Mason came home from Germany?"
    "I was."
    "You immediately went to work and discovered this document?"
    "I did."
    "You put up Joseph Mason to this trial?"
    "I told him my opinion."
    "Exactly. And if the result be successful, you are to be put in possession of the land."
    "I shall become Mr Mason's tenant at Orley Farm."
    "Yes, you will become Mr Mason's tenant at Orley Farm. Upon my word, Mr Dockwrath, you have made my work to-day uncommonly easy for me,---uncommonly easy. I don't know that I have anything else to ask you..."

165kac522
Feb 24, 2021, 7:23 pm

>152 lyzard: the mindset of Joseph Mason---who once again is placed in the disturbing position of being simultaneously completely intolerable and completely right

So true, Liz, so true.

166lyzard
Feb 24, 2021, 9:54 pm

>165 kac522:

Legally right, that is. Not so much his violent revenge fantasies. :D

And this is another of the things we're still dealing with. You hear defense attorneys say, "I didn't put my client on the stand because I thought the jury wouldn't like them." It shouldn't matter whether the jury likes them. But it does.

167lyzard
Editado: Feb 25, 2021, 5:06 pm

After a mostly tension-relieving Chapter 69 - attempts at Noningsby to be social despite two interdicted topics of conversion - in Chapter 70 we spend two two very unpleasant evenings at The Cleeve and at Orley Farm.

I like this juxtapositoning of observations:

    "And there will be two days more you say?"
    "So said Aram, the attorney."
    "God help her;---may God help her! It would be very dreadful for a man, but for a woman the burden is insupportable."


******

...Lady Mason was apparently much the more collected of the two, and seemed to take all Mr Aram's courtesies as though they were a matter of course. There she sat, still with her veil up, and though all those who had been assembled there during the day turned their eyes upon her as they passed out, she bore it all without quailing. It was not that she returned their gaze, or affected an effrontery in her conduct; but she was able to endure it without showing that she suffered as she did so...

This time Peregrine is effectively made Trollope's mouthpiece regarding the conduct of the case:

    "And you, Perry, what do you think?"
    "I, sir! Well, I was altogether on her side till I heard Sir Richard Leatherham."
    "And then---?"
    "Then I did not know what to think. I suppose it's all right; but one never can understand what those lawyers are at. When Mr Chaffanbrass got up to examine Dockwrath, he seemed to be just as confident on his side as the other fellow had been on the other side...


By this time even Peregrine understands that Lady Mason is guilty. There is only one person left who doesn't believe it; and Trollope treats poor Lucius with a blending of irony and sympathy:

Lucius Mason spent his evening alone; and though he had as yet heard none of the truth, his mind was not at ease, nor was he happy at heart. Though he had no idea of his mother's guilt, he did conceive that after this trial it would be impossible that they should remain at Orley Farm. His mother's intended marriage with Sir Peregrine, and then the manner in which that engagement had been broken off; the course of the trial, and its celebrity; the enmity of Dockwrath; and lastly, his own inability to place himself on terms of friendship with those people who were still his mother's nearest friends, made him feel that in any event it would be well for them to change their residence...

168lyzard
Editado: Feb 25, 2021, 5:26 pm

Chapter 71 is given over to the examination - and cross-examination - of John Kenneby and Bridget Bolster.

As we have commented upon before, her and in The Three Clerks, be he ever so disapproving of their real-life conduct Trollope is fully awake to the dramatic and humorous possibilities of a courtroom scene:

    "I tried to speak the truth, sir."
    "You tried to speak the truth? But do you mean to say that you failed?"
    "No, I don't think I failed."
    "When, therefore, you told the jury that you were nearly sure that you had witnessed three signatures of Sir Joseph's in one day, that was truth?"
    "I don't think I ever did."
    "Ever did what?"
    "Witness three papers in one day."
    "You don't think you ever did?"
    "I might have done, to be sure."
    "But then, at that trial, about twelve months after the man's death, you were nearly sure you had done so."
    "Was I?"
    "So you told the jury."
    "Then I did, sir."
    "Then you did what?"


The annihilation of John Kenneby by Mr Furnival is one thing - even Felix could have accomplished that, we feel, if he could have brought himself to undertake it - but the battle between Bridget and Mr Chaffenbrass is something else:

It may be explained that Mr. Chaffanbrass had altogether altered his intention and the very plan of his campaign with reference to this witness, as soon as he saw what was her nature and disposition. He discovered very early in the affair that he could not force her to contradict herself and reduce her own evidence to nothing, as Furnival had done with the man. Nothing would flurry this woman, or force her to utter words of which she herself did not know the meaning. The more he might persevere in such an attempt, the more dogged and steady she would become. He therefore soon gave that up. He had already given it up when he threatened to accuse her of perjury, and resolved that as he could not shake her he would shake the confidence which the jury might place in her. He could not make a fool of her, and therefore he would make her out to be a rogue...

But as so often will Trollope, perhaps the most effective passage here is his depiction of the state of Mr Furnival's mind at this time. We've seen this before, many times: he is at his best as a writer when depicting people whose actions he disapproves and whose motives are mixed. The suggestion that lawyers - the better kind - can do what they do because they can convince themselves of their client's innocence is an interesting psychological touch. But of course what he does chiefly - what Mr Chaffanbrass acknowledges in that last clause - is show that there is still considerable moral distance between the two barristers:

And then Mr Furnival arose. The reader is acquainted with the state of his mind on the subject of this trial. The enthusiasm on behalf of Lady Mason, which had been aroused by his belief in her innocence, by his old friendship, by his ancient adherence to her cause, and by his admiration for her beauty, had now greatly faded. It had faded much when he found himself obliged to call in such fellow-labourers as Chaffanbrass and Aram, and had all but perished when he learned from contact with them to regard her guilt as certain. But, nevertheless, now that he was there, the old fire returned to him. He had wished twenty times that he had been able to shake the matter from him and leave his old client in the hands of her new advisers. It would be better for her, he had said to himself. But on this day---on these three days---seeing that he had not shaken the matter off, he rose to his work as though he still loved her, as though all his mind was still intent on preserving that ill-gotten inheritance for her son. It may almost be doubted whether at moments during these three days he did not again persuade himself that she was an injured woman. Aram, as may be remembered, had felt misgivings as to Mr Furnival's powers for such cross-examination; but Chaffanbrass had never doubted it. He knew that Mr Furnival could do as much as himself in that way; the difference being this,---that Mr Furnival could do something else besides...

We will see what Mr Furnival can really do in the following chapter.

169lyzard
Editado: Feb 25, 2021, 5:36 pm

Of course the really fascinating thing is how excellent a job of forgery Lady Mason achieved!---

Chapter 71

    "Did you write that?"
    "I can't say, sir."
    "Will you swear that you wrote either?"
    "I did write one once."
    "Don't prevaricate with me, woman. Were either of those signatures there written by you?"
    "I suppose that one was."
    "Will you swear that you wrote either the one or the other?"
    "I'll swear I did write one, once."
    "Will you swear you wrote one of those you have before you? You can read, can't you?"
    "Oh yes, I can read."
    "Then look at them." Again she turned her eyes on them for half a moment. "Will you swear that you wrote either of those?"
    "Not if there's another anywhere else," said Bridget, at last.
    "Another anywhere else," said Chaffanbrass, repeating her words; "what do you mean by another?"
    "If you've got another that anybody else has done, I won't say which of the three is mine."


---a point unemphasised here, but which Mr Furnival will make outrageous mileage with in his closing address to the jury.

170lyzard
Feb 25, 2021, 5:40 pm

I could quote Chapter 72 almost in its entirety.

I really think this is one of Trollope's most remarkable passages of writing. As I said in >168 lyzard:, the way that he can divorce himself from his own position and put himself wholly within the consciousness of a character whose conduct he disapproves is remarkable---and all the more so here because effectively he has Mr Furnival doing the same thing: divorcing himself from what he knows about Lady Mason and delivering a speech full of righteous indignation and the vindication of injured innocence.

171lyzard
Editado: Feb 25, 2021, 11:37 pm

Okay. I think we do have to quote this. It's effectively Trollope's manifesto for this novel:

Chapter 72

And yet as he sat down he knew that she had been guilty! To his ear her guilt had never been confessed; but yet he knew that it was so, and, knowing that, he had been able to speak as though her innocence were a thing of course. That those witnesses had spoken truth he also knew, and yet he had been able to hold them up to the execration of all around them as though they had committed the worst of crimes from the foulest of motives! And more than this, stranger than this, worse than this,---when the legal world knew---as the legal world soon did know---that all this had been so, the legal world found no fault with Mr Furnival, conceiving that he had done his duty by his client in a manner becoming an English barrister and an English gentleman.

172lyzard
Editado: Feb 26, 2021, 12:00 am

Lucius Mason isn't presented in a very sympathetic manner in this novel - far less so than his mother, for all her sins - but it is impossible not to feel for him in Chapter 73.

There is a brutal emotional whiplash here, from his post-court sense of triumph and vindication, to the moment when, in order to keep him away from the courtroom while the verdict is delivered, Mrs Orme tells him the truth:

"I cannot understand why all that should not have been said before, and said in a manner to have been as convincing as it was to-day... An occasion should have been made," said Lucius. "It is monstrous that my mother should have been subjected to this accusation for months and that no one till now should have spoken out to show how impossible it is that she should have been guilty."

******

Lucius, with more cheerfulness about him than he had shown for months past, remained below to give orders for their supper. It had been a joy to him to hear Joseph Mason and Dockwrath exposed, and to listen to those words which had so clearly told the truth as to his mother's history. All that torrent of indignant eloquence had been to him an enumeration of the simple facts,---of the facts as he knew them to be,---of the facts as they would now be made plain to all the world. At last the day had come when the cloud would be blown away. He, looking down from the height of his superior intellect on the folly of those below him, had been indignant at the great delay;---but that he would now forgive...

******

    "Mr Mason---" And then again she stopped herself.
    How was she to speak this horrible word?
    "Is it anything about the trial?" He was now beginning to be frightened, feeling that something terrible was coming; but still of the absolute truth he had no suspicion.
    "Oh! Mr. Mason, if it were possible that I could spare you I would do so. If there were any escape,---any way in which it might be avoided."
    "What is it?" said he. And now his voice was hoarse and low, for a feeling of fear had come upon him. "I am a man and can bear it, whatever it is."
    "You must be a man then, for it is very terrible. Mr Mason, that will, you know---"
    "You mean the codicil?"
    "The will that gave you the property---"
    "Yes."
    "It was not done by your father..."

173lyzard
Feb 26, 2021, 12:08 am

The other interesting thing here is Mrs Orme.

On one hand she's one of Trollope's annoyingly perfect "feminine" women, existing only to make life better for her men.

But like Lady Mason, when push comes to shove she displays an amazing courage and endurance. In fact, her strength of character through this is even more unexpected, because her life since her widowhood has been - you would think - an enervating combination of social isolation and pampering. She has barely had to lift a hand for herself for twenty years. And yet from somewhere she finds the independence and determination to champion Lady Mason and, finally, even to take on the appalling task of telling Lucius the truth.

Trollope of course puts it all in terms of her religious faith; but I wonder if he was a bit scared of having two characters so thoroughly repudiate the conventional notion of "feminine weakness"?

174majkia
Feb 26, 2021, 9:42 am

Yeah, Trollope continually says things like women can't endure whatever. He just can't bring himself to admit women are strong too.

Also, during the trial, I was astonished no one brought up the fortunate appearance of paperwork to back Dockwrath's claims. Why didn't the infamous trio of grand lawyers go after Dockwrath as possibly doing the forging? They never take him on at all.

175cbl_tn
Feb 26, 2021, 10:05 am

>174 majkia: Also, during the trial, I was astonished no one brought up the fortunate appearance of paperwork to back Dockwrath's claims. Why didn't the infamous trio of grand lawyers go after Dockwrath as possibly doing the forging? They never take him on at all.

Yes, that was my thought as well!

176lyzard
Feb 26, 2021, 4:36 pm

>174 majkia:, >175 cbl_tn:

He does sort of imply it, when he highlights how remarkable it was that Dockwrath just happened to find exactly what he was looking for. But I think he could have been blunter in his questioning---for example, how come he had the papers in his possession for twenty years but didn't notice anything wrong with them until three days after he got evicted? :)

It may be, though, that he was afraid of what else Dockwrath might have known or found out from Miriam which, since he was not a witness at the first trial, was not on the record.

I also think there was too much independent evidence about the provenance of the other two documents, that is, the will and the deed of separation---some of it from the first trial, and some via the testimony of Mr Torrington (the witness Felix wouldn't bully).

Mr Chaffanbrass did what he could there by forcing Bridget Bolster to *not* swear it was her signature on the latter.

The codicil, too, was on the record from the first trial, so it couldn't have been tampered with. And of course it is the fact that the codicil - and consequently Lady Mason's testimony - was accepted during the first trial that is the strongest point in its favour.

177lyzard
Feb 26, 2021, 5:39 pm

In Chapter 74 Trollope allows a little relief from the misery, with Felix finally finding an opportunity to propose to Madeline---sort of:

    "Miss Staveley," he said, "in asking you to see me alone, I have made a great venture. I am indeed risking all that I most value." And then he paused, as though he expected that she would speak. But she still kept her eyes upon the ground, and still stood silent before him. "I cannot but think you must guess my purpose," he said, "though I acknowledge that I have had nothing that can warrant me in hoping for a favourable answer. There is my hand; if you can take it you need not doubt that you have my heart with it." And then he held out to her his broad, right hand.
    Madeline still stood silent before him and still fixed her eyes upon the ground, but very slowly she raised her little hand and allowed her soft slight fingers to rest upon his open palm. It was as though she thus affixed her legal signature and seal to the deed of gift...


:D

But he also gets this in, via Augustus, which (for all that Felix has been his mouthpiece with regard to the legal system) I think we may view as his take upon life in general:

    "Now, as for myself, I confess I'm not nearly so magnanimous as my father, and, for Mad's sake, I do hope you will get rid of your vagaries. An income, I know, is a very commonplace sort of thing; but when a man has a family there are comforts attached to it."
    "I am at any rate willing to work," said Graham somewhat moodily.
    "Yes, if you may work exactly in your own way. But men in the world can't do that. A man, as I take it, must through life allow himself to be governed by the united wisdom of others around him. He cannot take upon himself to judge as to every step by his own lights. If he does, he will be dead before he has made up his mind as to the preliminaries."

178lyzard
Feb 26, 2021, 5:48 pm

...but soon enough we return to Lady Mason, whose punishment for her misdeeds is fully underway:

Chapter 75

    "I told her that you would come to her this morning."
    "And what shall I say? I would not condemn my own mother; but how can I not condemn her?"
    "Tell her at once that you will forgive her."
    "But it will be a lie. I have not forgiven her. I loved my mother and esteemed her as a pure and excellent woman. I was proud of my mother. How can I forgive her for having destroyed such feelings as those?"
    "There should be nothing that a son would not forgive his mother."
    "Ah! that is so easily spoken. Men talk of forgiveness when their anger rankles deepest in their hearts. In the course of years I shall forgive her. I hope I shall. But to say that I can forgive her now would be a farce..."


I'm kind of in sympathy with Lucius here. The notion that forgiveness is a quick and/or easy thing, let alone a matter of course, is a platitude, not a reality.

I'm interested in this, though:

    "And has not she suffered herself? Is not her heart broken?"
    "I have been thinking of that all night. I cannot understand how she should have lived for the last six months. "


Yes, the last six months. It doesn't occur to Lucius that, as Trollope asserts, his mother has been wracked with guilt for the past twenty years---because he's seen no sign of any such thing. I think Trollope felt obliged to say that but like Mrs Orme's idea of forgiveness, it's all a bit of a platitude.

I think there's a subtle admission of that too, in the scene between Lady Mason and Lucius:

It would have been almost better for her that he should have upbraided her for her wickedness. She would then have fallen again prostrate before him, if not in body at least in spirit, and her weakness would have stood for her in place of strength. But now it was necessary that she should hear his words and bear his looks,---bear them like a heavy burden on her back without absolutely sinking. It had been that necessity of bearing and never absolutely sinking which, during years past, had so tried and tested the strength of her heart and soul. Seeing that she had not sunk, we may say that her strength had been very wonderful.

179lyzard
Editado: Feb 26, 2021, 6:04 pm

Chapter 75 continues with the conclusion of the trial, with the delivery of the verdict.

It is also Trollope's last chance for a few more shots at the court system and the men who work in it.

I think this rolling withdrawal of Lady Mason's forces is one of the most painful bits of the novel---though it is interesting and, I think, intended as praise that Solomon Aram sticks it out to the end:

    "His lordship's charge was very good---very good, indeed," said Mr Aram.
    "Was it?" asked Peregrine.
    "And very much in our favour," continued the attorney.
    "You think then," said Mrs. Orme, looking up into his face, "you think that---" But she did not know how to go on with her question.
    "Yes, I do. I think we shall have a verdict; I do, indeed. I would not say so before Lady Mason if my opinion was not very strong. The jury may disagree. That is not improbable. But I cannot anticipate that the verdict will be against us."
    There was some comfort in this; but how wretched was the nature of the comfort! Did not the attorney, in every word which he spoke, declare his own conviction of his client's guilt. Even Peregrine Orme could not say out boldly that he felt sure of an acquittal because no other verdict could be justly given. And then why was not Mr Furnival there, taking his friend by the hand and congratulating her that her troubles were so nearly over? Mr Furnival at this time did not come near her; and had he done so, what could he have said to her?
    He and Sir Richard Leatherham left the court together, and the latter went at once back to London without waiting to hear the verdict. Mr Chaffanbrass also, and Felix Graham retired from the scene of their labours...


On the other hand, Trollope takes this opportunity for a final pot-shot at Mr Chaffanbrass:

As Felix Graham took his place next to Chaffanbrass, the old lawyer scowled at him, turning his red old savage eyes first on him and then from him, growling the while, so that the whole court might notice it. The legal portion of the court did notice it and were much amused. "Good morning, Mr Chaffanbrass," said Graham quite aloud as he took his seat; and then Chaffanbrass growled again. Considering the lights with which he had been lightened, there was a species of honesty about Mr Chaffanbrass which certainly deserved praise. He was always true to the man whose money he had taken, and gave to his customer, with all the power at his command, that assistance which he had professed to sell. But we may give the same praise to the hired bravo who goes through with truth and courage the task which he has undertaken. I knew an assassin in Ireland who professed that during twelve years of practice in Tipperary he had never failed when he had once engaged himself. For truth and honesty to their customers---which are great virtues---I would bracket that man and Mr Chaffanbrass together.

That said---I don't know that Trollope isn't paying a reluctant compliment here:

    "Mr Graham," said the ancient hero of the Old Bailey, "you are too great for this kind of work I take it. If I were you, I would keep out of it for the future."
    "I am very much of the same way of thinking, Mr Chaffanbrass," said the other.
    "If a man undertakes a duty, he should do it. That's my opinion, though I confess it's a little old fashioned; especially if he takes money for it, Mr Graham." And then the old man glowered at him with his fierce eyes, and nodded his head and went on...


As for the verdict---well, we are hardly in any doubt, are we?---

    But it was not fated that Lady Mason should be sent away from the court in doubt. At eight o'clock Mr Aram came to them, hot with haste, and told them that the jury had sent for the judge. The judge had gone home to his dinner, but would return to court at once when he heard that the jury had agreed.
    "And must we go into court again?" said Mrs Orme.
    "Lady Mason must do so."
    "Then of course I shall go with her. Are you ready now, dear?"
    Lady Mason was unable to speak, but she signified that she was ready, and then they went into court. The jury were already in the box, and as the two ladies took their seats, the judge entered. But few of the gas-lights were lit, so that they in the court could hardly see each other, and the remaining ceremony did not take five minutes.
    "Not guilty, my lord," said the foreman. Then the verdict was recorded, and the judge went back to his dinner. Joseph Mason and Dockwrath were present and heard the verdict. I will leave the reader to imagine with what an appetite they returned to their chamber...


It's a terrible thing, no doubt, but who feels sorry for Joseph Mason? :D

180lyzard
Editado: Feb 28, 2021, 4:47 pm

And of course Trollope's crowning irony in Orley Farm is that no sooner has the verdict been delivered than everyone finds out it was wrong:

Chapter 76

...tidings of the decision to which the jury had come went through the country very quickly. There is a telegraphic wire for such tidings which has been very long in use, and which, though always used, is as yet but very little understood. How is it that information will spread itself quicker than men can travel, and make its way like water into all parts of the world? It was known all through the country that night that Lady Mason was acquitted; and before the next night it was as well known that she had acknowledged her guilt by giving up the property.

It is made very clear, however, that Lady Mason will not escape punishment---less again from her own conscience, though Trollope presses that point, than from Lucius "doing his duty"---chilling words!

    "And he bore it manfully."
    "He was very stern."
    "Yes;---and he will be stern. Poor soul!---I pity her from my very heart. But he will not desert her; he will do his duty by her."
    "I am sure he will. In that respect he is a good young man."
    "Yes, my dear. He is one of those who seem by nature created to bear adversity. No trouble or sorrow would I think crush him. But had prosperity come to him, it would have made him odious to all around him..."


I think that's pretty shrewd from Sir Peregrine, although I'm not sure it is intended as a swipe at Lady Mason for thinking she could "elevate him above his station", as the noxious 19th century phrase went: is he suggesting that Lucius would have been better off being raised in trade in the mean streets of Manchester? All very well for the "feudal" Sir Peregrine to say so!

On the other hand I am sure that Lucius has not stopped to contemplate what his life would have been if his mother hadn't intervened:

    As she gave him her hand, she spoke a few words to him. "My last request to you, Mr Mason, is to beg that you will be tender to your mother."
    "I will do my best, Mrs Orme."
    "All her sufferings and your own, have come from her great love for you."
    "That I know and feel, but had her ambition for me been less it would have been better for both of us."


To call it "ambition" is unthinkingly cruel, though we can appreciate that he's hardly yet in a position to consider the finer points of the situation.

On the other hand, we see in Chapter 79 that poor Lady Mason thoroughly understands what the nature of her punishment is to be:

Then she thought once more of her stern but just son, and as she bowed her head and kissed the rod, she prayed that her release might come to her soon...

181lyzard
Editado: Feb 28, 2021, 4:58 pm

The remaining chapters are concerned with the tying up of our loose ends: Sophia Furnival wriggling out of any commitment to Lucius, but failing to secure Augustus instead; John Kenneby failing to escape Mrs Smiley; Peregrine running away from his failure with Madeline; and conversely things being made easy for Madeline and Felix.

Looking at that we see that despite our obligatory lovebirds, "failure" is very much a theme here.

I think in light of our earlier conversations about the position of women in general and the nature of Lady Mason's marriage in particular, we should take note of this:

Chapter 79

"I have known but little love. He---Sir Joseph---was my master rather than my husband. He was a good master, and I served him truly---except in that one thing. But I never loved him..."

On the other hand - to conclude upon a cheerier note, and "justice" or not - Trollope positively invites us to enjoy the mutually assured destruction of Mr Mason and Samuel Dockwrath.

One final irony---and keep in mind that all of this happened because Lucius Mason insisted on taking possession of his rented-out fields: Dockwrath is certainly in the right when he claims to have a binding contract regarding his tenancy of Orley Farm. However---

    And then came his great fight with Dockwrath, which in the end ruined the Hamworth attorney, and cost Mr Mason more money than he ever liked to confess. Dockwrath claimed to be put in possession of Orley Farm at an exceedingly moderate rent, as to the terms of which he was prepared to prove that Mr Mason had already entered into a contract with him. Mr Mason utterly ignored such contract, and contended that the words contained in a certain note produced by Dockwrath amounted only to a proposition to let him the land in the event of certain circumstances and results---which circumstances and results never took place.
    This lawsuit Mr Joseph Mason did win, and Mr Samuel Dockwrath was, as I have said, ruined. What the attorney did to make it necessary that he should leave Hamworth I do not know; but Miriam, his wife, is now the mistress of that lodging-house to which her own mahogany furniture was so ruthlessly removed...


182lyzard
Feb 28, 2021, 5:12 pm

Done!

Thank you all for joining in. Final thoughts?

For myself, I find that Orley Farm is more of a "message" novel than we're used to with Trollope, and that the characters tend to be subservient to that message. I think this particularly hurts the novel in re-read, when you are aware in advance how much of the supporting material is there to be just that---rather than, as Trollope more commonly does, being used to echo and comment upon the central plot.

To go back to an earlier point, I keep imagining this book as a sensation novel: presumably in that case the revelation about Lady Mason would have been held back until after the verdict; and i doubt that she would then have been guilted into giving up her claim (though possibly punished in some other way). But Trollope wanted his readers to know the truth before the trial so that this knowledge informs the conduct everyone concerned, particularly of course Lady Mason's lawyers.

And it must be said that the points that Trollope makes are absolutely correct and no less so now than when he wrote the novel. The outcome of any given trial still has too little to do with truth and justice, and too much to do with the personalities involved and who can assemble the better legal team.

(We must conclude that Felix never did succeed in reforming the legal system!)

183cbl_tn
Feb 28, 2021, 5:24 pm

>182 lyzard: For myself, I find that Orley Farm is more of a "message" novel than we're used to with Trollope, and that the characters tend to be subservient to that message.

I agree. I particularly felt this with Lucius. He is talked about much more than he is present in the novel, and for all his importance to the plot, I felt like he was more of a caricature than a character.

184majkia
Feb 28, 2021, 8:21 pm

Lucius is, certainly, completely (or close) self-centered. I don't remember him ever showing sympathy or empathy toward anyone, including his mother. He thinks it's all about him. I feel sorry for her stuck depending on him, as I certainly see him having no interest in her feelings or needs. He'll provide her the basics and expect her to be content.

All of course, IMHO.

185NinieB
Feb 28, 2021, 10:12 pm

I'm way behind... but tomorrow I will be able to borrow a nice print copy, which I think will encourage me to finish up. Way too much screen time recently.

186NinieB
Mar 1, 2021, 1:18 pm

>185 NinieB: I picked up my print copy. It is 155 years old and includes the Millais illustrations.

187lyzard
Mar 1, 2021, 4:06 pm

>183 cbl_tn:, >184 majkia:

I wouldn't call Lucius a caricature but he is certainly rather one-dimensional. However, as we have touched on, Trollope wants him incapable of understanding - let alone empathising with - his mother's action. To become his "duty" is ultimately her punishment. Any greater depth or breadth of character would work against that.

We might hope that once he becomes an "outcast" he begins to understand what his mother was trying to save him from, but I doubt it.

188lyzard
Mar 1, 2021, 4:06 pm

>185 NinieB:, >186 NinieB:

That's amazing, Ninie!

Are you able to post some pics?

189NinieB
Mar 1, 2021, 5:49 pm

Here's the spine and the frontispiece.



190majkia
Mar 1, 2021, 7:08 pm

oh that's lovely

191CDVicarage
Mar 2, 2021, 4:09 am

There is an ebook available from Project Gutenberg which includes these illustrations - it's huge!

192MissWatson
Mar 2, 2021, 4:29 am

>189 NinieB: Oh, that is lovely! It almost makes me forget that I didn't really love this book as much as the others I've read so far. I agree with the others that Lucius was particularly one-dimensional.

So, what's up next?

193thornton37814
Mar 2, 2021, 2:36 pm

I was really awful and got behind on the thread. I did stick to my 3 chapters a day, finishing on the 27th.

194lyzard
Mar 2, 2021, 9:25 pm

>189 NinieB:

That's great, Ninie, thanks! :)

>192 MissWatson:

This might be a case of 'be careful what you pray for': next up would be The Struggles Of Brown, Jones And Robinson, one of the truly forgotten Trollopes, although also one he always expressed a fondness for.

I'll certainly be reading it; happy to run a group if there's enough interest? :)

>193 thornton37814:

No worries at all, Lori, thanks for sticking with it!

196NinieB
Mar 2, 2021, 11:06 pm

>194 lyzard: Yep, I'm in for BJR. Got my own copy already.

197NinieB
Mar 2, 2021, 11:08 pm

>189 NinieB: Apparently Millais visited Trollope's boyhood home, which he used as the model for Orley Farm above.

198MissWatson
Mar 3, 2021, 4:01 am

>194 lyzard: Oh, I'm game and found a copy at OpenLibrary for download.

199lyzard
Mar 3, 2021, 4:17 am

>195 cbl_tn:, >196 NinieB:, >198 MissWatson:

Oh my goodness! I guess I'd better pencil that in. :D

>197 NinieB:

Yes! - so there was an autobiographical element to all the geography of the novel. :)

200majkia
Mar 3, 2021, 6:42 am

Kindle has a copy free, so I'm in.

201NinieB
Mar 3, 2021, 6:26 pm

>199 lyzard: You're a gem, Liz.

202MissWatson
Mar 4, 2021, 3:53 am

Yes, thank you so much, Liz!

203kac522
Mar 4, 2021, 10:55 am

>182 lyzard: For myself, I find that Orley Farm is more of a "message" novel than we're used to with Trollope, and that the characters tend to be subservient to that message. I think this particularly hurts the novel in re-read, when you are aware in advance how much of the supporting material is there to be just that---rather than, as Trollope more commonly does, being used to echo and comment upon the central plot.

This is true. I read the novel last year, and I enjoyed it. Although I didn't re-read now, I did follow along with all your comments, and I can see how a full re-read would would be disappointing character-wise, although I did enjoy re-visiting some of the legal twists & turns.

The only character I enjoyed (and remembered well) was Mrs. Orme, who seemed to be Mediator-in-Chief. She was (to me) the most thoughtful and kind character, without being over-the-top sweet.

I read SBJR last year, and my only comment at this point will be that it's the most un-Trollope-y work of his that I've read, if that makes any sense.

Thanks again Liz for leading us through AT's world.

204lyzard
Editado: Mar 4, 2021, 4:02 pm

Okay! - The Struggles Of Brown, Jones And Robinson is definitely a goer, then! :)

When we might do that will depend upon how I end up organising the next Virago group read: I will post back here when I can say something more definite, but maybe June or July?

205lyzard
Mar 4, 2021, 3:32 pm

>201 NinieB:, >202 MissWatson:, >203 kac522:

Thank you all for your participation and continued interest. :)

>203 kac522:

Yes, fair comments, Kathy.

I read SBJR last year, and my only comment at this point will be that it's the most un-Trollope-y work of his that I've read

:D

206majkia
Mar 4, 2021, 3:42 pm

And it's a wrap. :) Thanks for a great group read, Liz.

207japaul22
Mar 6, 2021, 5:08 pm

I've finished this and really enjoyed all of the comments along the way. I quite liked this one. While I agree that the characters were there to serve the message, I really thought it was an interesting situation and I was invested in finding out how it all worked out. Lady Mason didn't get a ton of sympathy from me since I was thinking all along about the 20 years she apparently didn't feel much guilt. I did feel for Lucius Mason, even without him being very sympathetic. I admired that he accepted the situation, gave up the property, and moved on without wallowing.

I must have missed why Mrs. Orme and Lady Mason weren't friends before, being such close neighbors. Mrs. Orme herself was a bit "too good to be true" for me to be interested in her.

I actually really liked Mrs. Furnival! I felt for her, getting to middle age and having a husband uninterested in her. Her daughter, though . . .

I also was interested in the trial and the dilemma of all defense lawyers that still exists today - providing the best defense for a client regardless of their guilt or innocence.

Thanks for prompting me to read this! I'll see where I am in my other reading plans when the group read of The Struggles Of Brown, Jones And Robinson comes up.

208lyzard
Mar 6, 2021, 6:52 pm

>207 japaul22:

I think you've put your finger on those points where Trollope gets trapped by his plot (and social beliefs).

We don't believe that Lady Mason spent twenty years feeling guilty, but he's never going to admit that.

Also, he's never going to let her off the hook despite the not-guilty verdict. Therefore Lucius has to be unyielding and unsympathetic because he becomes his mother's punishment, and any softening on his part would dissipate that.

It is mentioned early that Lady Mason rejected Mrs Orme's overtures of friendship and remained a mere formal visitor. This is an example of her relentlessly "correct" behaviour over those twenty years, remembering her own "low" birth and never presuming---even though she was condemning herself to solitude. (Condemning Mrs Orme, too, but she may not have thought of that.) She only allows herself to respond when she becomes desperate for support.

I think Mrs Orme had to be perfect to excuse her championing of Lady Mason, as if a lesser woman would have agreed with Sir Peregrine about the danger of contamination. The interesting point is that Trollope clearly felt it needed to be excused (so presumably he also agreed). He was always fond of the expression, You can't touch pitch... but it really gets a workout here.

Mrs Furnival is interesting because it isn't quite clear whether he approves or disapproves her behaviour---which is a facet of his allowing her to behave like that in the first place on account of her own lower social standing: a woman of higher birth would certainly have been condemned. We may feel he doesn't slam Mr Furnival as hard as he should. :)

All of the legal stuff is still relevant which is why the novel is still relevant. Have we got to the point where we don't worry about these issues?

I hope you can join us: please let us know if you have a preferred slot.

209japaul22
Mar 6, 2021, 8:08 pm

>208 lyzard: It is mentioned early that Lady Mason rejected Mrs Orme's overtures of friendship and remained a mere formal visitor. This is an example of her relentlessly "correct" behaviour over those twenty years, remembering her own "low" birth and never presuming---even though she was condemning herself to solitude. (Condemning Mrs Orme, too, but she may not have thought of that.) She only allows herself to respond when she becomes desperate for support.

Is there any thought that Lady Mason was purposefully seeking out support knowing that powerful, well-respected friends would be an asset? I don't think Trollope writes it that way, but I think a different author would.

210lyzard
Editado: Mar 7, 2021, 12:48 am

>209 japaul22:

Yes, definitely (though of course I can't remember where off the top of my head): she finally responds to Mrs Orme's overtures precisely because of how respected she and Sir Peregrine are in the district, she knows that associating with them will put the weight of public opinion on her side (until she goes too far, by getting engaged).

211japaul22
Mar 7, 2021, 8:19 am

>210 lyzard: I think that, particularly because Mrs. Orme is the one who comments most frequently on Lady Mason's character, this possibility that Lady Mason cunningly seeks out her powerful neighbors because of their sway in the community gets sort of lost. I mean, I do think that Lady Mason valued Mrs. Orme's support and friendship once she had it, but I'm still deeply suspicious of her motives in the beginning. And I just can't buy her actually loving the elderly Sir Peregrine. But that is probably my modern bias.

212lyzard
Mar 7, 2021, 4:13 pm

>211 japaul22:

I don't know if "cunning" is the right word: she recognises her situation and takes steps to defend herself. Certainly she is aware of how she appeals as a woman to both Mr Furnival and Sir Peregrine but she's using the only weapon at her disposal. I mean, she doesn't choose womanly wiles over some other approach, it's all she has.

(I must finally remember to mention something that occurred to me a few times on the way through: there is never any talk of payment for Mr Furnival's services---nor can we imagine a scene wherein he tries to "send in his bill" as does Dockwrath with Mr Mason! Lady Mason is consistent in referring to Mr Furnival as her "friend" and consulting him under that title; and while "friend" had a broader meaning then than it does now, it is indicative I think of how she's handling him through her crisis.)

As for Sir Peregrine, I think we need to keep in mind that this is a woman who has had no love at all in her life. (Her most significant emotional relationship is with Lucius, and, well...) And we're not talking passion or sex but rather a profound gratitude and admiration for his kindness and generosity. It isn't what we usually think of as "love" but I don't think she's being insincere.

But no-one knows her the way Mrs Orme gets to: once the barrier is down she sees her more clearly than anyone else has the opportunity to do, and even allowing for Mrs Orme's charity and positivity, I think we can accept her reading of what's there (or could have been if things were different).