life? Why didn't you say so at once, Sir. . . . Do you consider a misrepresentation of that kind a mere trifle? . . . . In spite of the fact that you have solemnly sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? . . . . Very well, Sir, I will take your answer. Now, just look at this letter of yours. (Your lordship has a copy of the correspondence. . . . Yes, it is all admitted, my lord.) I'll read it to you. (Reads it.) Now, Sir, is it the fact that you ever actually consulted the gentleman who enjoys the distinction of being astrologer to your family upon your marriage with the plaintiff? Be careful what you say. . . . And did he ever forbid you to contract such an alliance? . . . Then was there a word of truth in all that? . . . . I thought as much. Let me read you another letter. (He reads.) Here, you see, you make quite another excuse. You are already married, and can only offer the plaintiff the position of a rival wife, or "sateen" as you call it. Have you ever contracted an infant marriage in India? . . . Oh, that is true, is it? But why, when you were paying these attentions to the plaintiff, did it never occur to you to mention the fact that you were a married man? . . . . "You don't know?" May it not have been because you were a widower? Was your infant wife alive or dead when you wrote this letter? . . . . Then why did you write of her as if she were alive? . . . . I quite believe that—but why
