Not P but Moby-Dick (73)

[Ian Livingston]

Seems to me the intention is to say that Mr Erskine argued that the woman
mr. A abandoned due to her meanness was free to any taker who took her, if
you take my meaning, indicating mr A had no claim to her. So, yes, Erskine
was defending the lady and gentleman B.

On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 1:48 AM Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:

> I would suggest that it means only that he agreed with the other side.
> Seems
> that Melville would have made it more exact in description if he was
> actually counsel...
>
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 3:22 AM Mike Jing <gravitys.rainbow.cn at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > From Chapter 89:
> >
> > Mr. Erskine was counsel for the defendants; Lord Ellenborough was the
> > judge. In the course of the defence, the witty Erskine went on to
> > illustrate his position, by alluding to a recent crim. con. case,
> wherein a
> > gentleman, after in vain trying to bridle his wife’s viciousness, had at
> > last abandoned her upon the seas of life; but in the course of years,
> > repenting of that step, he instituted an action to recover possession of
> > her. Erskine was on the other side; and he then supported it by saying,
> > that though the gentleman had originally harpooned the lady, and had once
> > had her fast, and only by reason of the great stress of her plunging
> > viciousness, had at last abandoned her; yet abandon her he did, so that
> she
> > became a loose-fish; and therefore when a subsequent gentleman
> re-harpooned
> > her, the lady then became that subsequent gentleman’s property, along
> with
> > whatever harpoon might have been found sticking in her.
> >
> > In saying "Erskine was on the other side", does it mean Erskine was
> > actually the defending lawyer in that other case, or only that he
> supported
> > the position of the other side?
> > --
> > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> >
> --
> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>