How Long to Read The Public Gaze and the Prying Eye :

How Long Does it Take to Read The Public Gaze and the Prying Eye :?

It takes the average reader 2 hours and 7 minutes to read The Public Gaze and the Prying Eye : by Jerome Nadelhaft

Assuming a reading speed of 250 words per minute. Learn more

Description

"It is difficult to define with precision what is and what is not extreme and repeated cruelty," an Illinois judge noted in 1882. Throughout the century, some courts acted in accordance with the words of an anonymous author of an 1831 piece in the Carolina Law Journal: "The indurance of partial suffering, from incompatibility of tempers, or vicious habits, among married people is an evil vastly less... than that which arises" from easy divorce. Judicially, for some courts the tone had been set by an often cited late eighteenth-century English case, Evans v. Evans. In a long drawn out judgment, Sir William Scott had declared: "the happiness of some individuals must be sacrificed to the greater and more general good." In New York in 1863 Hannah Solomon accused her husband of attempting to break her arm, of pulling a chair out from under her while she was holding her child, and of kicking her several times. The judge was not convinced she was telling the truth, but in the end he decided it really did not matter. If true, this "single instance" of cruelty "should receive the reprobation of every just person," but still, it ought to be forgiven. Husbands and wives "should bear long and patiently with each other." As Iowa Chief Justice Day put it in 1871, "married couples, for the good of their common offspring, the conservation of social order, and the maintenance of general morality, must bear with patience and composure the occasional disquietudes growing out of inharmonious tempers and dispositions." Ruling in an 1890 case which involved at least one act of violence, "outbursts of temper," an undescribed incident with a poker,"It is difficult to define with precision what is and what is not extreme and repeated cruelty," an Illinois judge noted in 1882, although for some judges it hardly mattered. Throughout the century, some courts, fortunately only a minority, acted in accordance with the words of an anonymous author of an 1831 piece in the Carolina Law Journal: "The indurance of partial suffering, from incompatibility of tempers, or vicious habits, among married people is an evil vastly less... than that which arises" from easy divorce. Judicially, for some courts the tone had been set by an often cited late eighteenth-century English case, Evans v. Evans. In a long drawn out judgment, Sir William Scott had declared: "the happiness of some individuals must be sacrificed to the greater and more general good." In New York in 1863 Hannah Solomon accused her husband of attempting to break her arm, of pulling a chair out from under her while she was holding her child, and of kicking her several times. The judge was not convinced she was telling the truth, but in the end he decided it really did not matter. If true, this "single instance" of cruelty "should receive the reprobation of every just person," but still, it ought to be forgiven. Husbands and wives "should bear long and patiently with each other." As Iowa Chief Justice Day put it in 1871, "married couples, for the good of their common offspring, the conservation of social order, and the maintenance of general morality, must bear with patience and composure the occasional disquietudes growing out of inharmonious tempers and dispositions." Ruling in an 1890 case which involved at least one act of violence, "outbursts of temper," an undescribed incident with a poker, the display of a pistol, and a broken promise not to drink, a New York Supreme Court overturned a lower court's grant of separation. It might well be disagreeable for a woman to continue an association with such a man, but "the necessity to endure... is one of the evils attending the marriage state."1 Or, as Sir William Scott had put it one hundred years earlier, marriage was "for better, for worse," to be "submitted to with patience" even when it "exhibit[s] a great deal of the misery that clouds human life."

How long is The Public Gaze and the Prying Eye :?

The Public Gaze and the Prying Eye : by Jerome Nadelhaft is 125 pages long, and a total of 31,875 words.

This makes it 42% the length of the average book. It also has 39% more words than the average book.

How Long Does it Take to Read The Public Gaze and the Prying Eye : Aloud?

The average oral reading speed is 183 words per minute. This means it takes 2 hours and 54 minutes to read The Public Gaze and the Prying Eye : aloud.

What Reading Level is The Public Gaze and the Prying Eye :?

The Public Gaze and the Prying Eye : is suitable for students ages 10 and up.

Note that there may be other factors that effect this rating besides length that are not factored in on this page. This may include things like complex language or sensitive topics not suitable for students of certain ages.

When deciding what to show young students always use your best judgement and consult a professional.

Where Can I Buy The Public Gaze and the Prying Eye :?

The Public Gaze and the Prying Eye : by Jerome Nadelhaft is sold by several retailers and bookshops. However, Read Time works with Amazon to provide an easier way to purchase books.

To buy The Public Gaze and the Prying Eye : by Jerome Nadelhaft on Amazon click the button below.