If  the  adulterer  he  an  English  suhject,  hut  have  left
the  coimtry  hefore  the  hushand  has  had  an  opportu-
nity of  conmiencing  an  action,  the  House  wiU  expect
him^  in  that  case,  to  issue  an  outlawry  against  the  adul-
terer. Thus  in  Mr.  Howell's  C")  case,  where  the  adulterer
had  sailed  for  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope,  the  House  were
nevertheless  of  opinion,  that  an  outlawry  ought  to  have
been  issued;  taking  the  chance  that  the  party  might
perhaps  he  induced  to  enter  an  appearance;  and  the
proceedings  on  the  biU  were  allowed  to  stand  over  with  a
view  to  see  whether  the  petitioner  could  not  amend  his
case  in  this  respect  (^).
According  to  the  modem  practice  of  the  House,  it  is,
I  apprehend,  no  excuse  for  not  bringing  an  action,  that
the  adulterer  is  a  poor  man,  or  an  insolvent  debtor,  or
an  uncertificated  bankrupt,  from  whom  neither  damages
nor  costs  can  be  recovered  (*).  Thus,  in  Mr.  Kinnaird's(^)
case,  where  the  adulterer  was  a  Serjeant  in  the  Guards,
subsisting,  with  a  wife  and  family,  on  145.  7d.  a  week,
the  husband  nevertheless  proceeded  against  him,  and
obtained  a  verdict  for  50/.  damages.
The  legal  remedy,  in  short,  cannot,  under  any  state  of
circumstances,  be  repudiated  without  hazarding  the  impu-
tation of  negligence  or  coUusion.  It  seems  expedient,
therefore,  to  proceed  for  damages  in  every  case  where
the  adulterer  is  known,  and  within  the  reach  of  justice.
