Talk:Criminal conversation

Venues

The article states that cases These suits were conducted at the Court of the King's Bench in Westminster Hall but there were certainly also cases held at assizes: see for example the case of Waterhouse vs Colonel Berkeley, Malcolm Hall (2008). Murders & Misdemeanours in Gloucestershire 1820-1829. Amberley Publishing. pp. 21–31. ISBN 978-1-84868-046-3. Cusop Dingle (talk) 17:24, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Wives were their husbands' property??

This is in the article:

It was based upon compensation for the husband's loss of property rights in his wife, the wife being regarded as his chattel.[1] Historically a wife could not sue her husband for adultery, as he could not be her chattel if she was already his.

[1] Black's Law Dictionary, 4th ed. 1957.

This seems like it knows what is talking about as it uses legal jargon. But I am sure husbands having "property rights" in their wives not true, or at least a twisting of words of how they were used at the time. The reference doesn't give a page number. I found a copy of Black's Law Dictionary 4th Edition online, and this is all it has to say about "criminal conversation":

CRIM. CON. An abbreviation for "criminal conversation," of very frequent use, denoting adultery. Rash v. Pratt, 111 A. 225, 228, 1 W.W.Harr.,

Del., 18; Hargraves v. Ballou, 47 R.I. 186, 131 A.

643, 645.

The term in its general and comprehensive sense, is synonymous with "adultery" ; but in its more limited and

technical signification it may be defined as adultery in the

aspect of a tort. Turner v. Heavrin, 182 Ky. 65, 206 S.W.

23, 4 A.L.R. 562.

CRIMINAL:

Criminal conversation

Defilement of the marriage bed, sexual intercourse of an outsider with husband or wife, or a

breaking down of the covenant of fidelity. Young

v. Young, 236 Ala. 627, 184 So. 187, 190, 191. Adultery, considered in its aspect of a civil injury to

the husband entitling him to damages; the tort

of debauching or seducing of a wife. Often abbreviated to crim. con.

CONVERSATION. Manner of living; habits of

life; conduct; as in the phrase "chaste life and

conversation." Bradshaw v. People, 153 Ill. 156,

38 N.E. 652. Criminal conversation means seduction of another man's wife, considered as an

actionable injury to the husband. Prettyman v.

Williamson, 1 Pennewill (Del.) 224, 39 A. 731;

Crocker v. Crocker, C.C.Mass., 98 F. 702.

INJURY:

Personal injury. A hurt or damage done to a

man's person, such as a cut or bruise, a broken

limb, or the like, as distinguished from an injury

to his property or his reputation. The phrase

is chiefly used in connection with actions of tort

for negligence. Norris v. Grove, 100 Mich. 256,

58 N.W. 1006; State v. Clayborne, 14 Wash. 622,

45 P. 303. But the term is also used (chiefly in

statutes) in a much wider sense, and as including

any injury which is an invasion of personal rights,

and in this signification it may include such injuries as libel or slander, criminal conversation

with a wife, seduction of a daughter, and mental

suffering. McDonald v. Brown, 23 R.I. 546, 51 A.

213, 58 L.R.A. 768, 91 Am.St.Rep. 659.

LEGENITA. A fine for criminal conversation

with a woman. Whart.Lex. See Legruita.

So the reference doesn't support what it is supposed to. Count Truthstein (talk) 18:12, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

I just changed it. Why would anyone not? I mean whenever i see something that is not in the cite given I change it to match the cite. Have I acted inappropriately?Winfredtheforth (talk) 17:46, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Worsely v. Bisset

The article states that Sir Richard Worsely lost his crim. con. suit against George Bisset. This isn't correct.

The jury did find that crim. con. had occurred; Lady Worsely's lawyers admitted it. But rather than the £20,000 that Richard claimed, the jury awarded him one shilling (12 pence). Technically, he won, but his reputation was destroyed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.116.134.107 (talk) 15:51, 24 October 2015 (UTC)