“They had ignorantly done something (I forget what) in the town, which barely brought them within the operation of the law. Every human institution (Justice included) will stretch a little, if you only pull it the right way.” (94)
This quote from the Moonstone seems to sum up high society, both then and now, in a nutshell. If you have the right amount of money, or the right connections, you can essentially get away with anything. The fact that this line appears in a story about something being stolen, and then (presumably) found, leading (again, presumably) to the arrest of the perpetrator, is kind of ironic. Is this not a detective story? Do those not strive to uphold, and even champion, justice and the law?
According to “Jane Eyre”, Victorians took the law pretty seriously, too; Rochester hid and secretly cared for Bertha because it was illegal to divorce an insane person back then. He had massive respect for the law and morality, as did Jane, since neither of them really pursued the potential relationship between them until Bertha was out of the picture. Even in the other books we read (“Tale of Two Cities”, most notably) the law and justice (however warped that latter ideal may end up being) were central pillars of the stories, and were pivotal in driving them forward.
So why, then, does “The Moonstone” seem to treat it with such triviality? It could be because, in this case, nearly everyone is related to high society in some way. Nearly all of our central characters have some sort of upper-class affiliation, because otherwise, how would they even know anything about the moonstone? Previously, most of our characters have either been middle-class, or lower-class (with most of them coming from the former). The law is harsher to them. It’s not as harsh to the upper class because, as the quote above states, the law will easily bend if you pull it in the right way; in other words, if you have the connections, you’re above the law.
Could this be a criticism of Victorian high society. with a pompous and arrogant statement such as this in a story that (again, presumably) ends with the triumph of the law? That seems to be the likely answer. But what if the person who stole the moonstone actually gets away with it? Then what does this quote imply? What does it mean for society’s relationship with the law? Does it strengthen it, weaken it, or invalidate it completely? I don’t know how the story ends, so I can’t really say. But what I can say is that I hope it ends with the thief getting away with it, because then “The Moonstone” and its concept of law and justice suddenly stands in a stark and very intriguing contrast to everything else we’ve read thus far.
Wow. I’d never considered this but you’re so right. You’ve posed a question about whether the thief gets away with it or not, which is interesting. What could be more interesting (and I have also not finished the books so I can’t say either) is if the thief or orchestrator of the theft is of lower class status than our protagonists, what are the legal implications based on your idea about how the legal system and class are interrelated? What would it mean if the orchestrate is a member of the family? What would it mean if the orchestrator is not English (i.e. one of the Indians)? I think you could go a lot of places even if someone is caught at the end because this notion of class and law is so well articulated across so many novels (as you’ve pointed out).
These are interesting points – I hadn’t thought about how the law plays into these texts before. I do want to push back against one of your arguments – when you say that Jane and Mr. Rochester never pursued a relationship until Bertha was out of the picture, doesn’t this contradict a huge part of the story? Mr. Rochester knew the whole time Bertha was up in the attic and that he was still legally bound to her – he even asked Jane to marry him without her knowing that! To me, that’s not a characteristic of morality. That being said, I can agree that Jane was being lawful … she didn’t know that he was married or that there was a woman in the attic. I also agree with how trivial the law is in The Moonstone… now that you say it, I think this could be argued as a form of criticism against Victorian high society. Overall, this was a really neat connection – even though I disagree with some of the parts about Jane and Rochester, I LOVE this idea of the law being put into question, and how it plays (or doesn’t) roles in each social class.
I really like how you’re grappling with the concept of law and justice in The Moonstone, for justice being served underpins the entire plot of the novel. However, I wouldn’t necessarily align the text of the Moonstone itself with Mr. Betteredge. Aside from being a character within the novel and not entirely above suspicion for the theft, he has already demonstrated himself as unreliable by expressing some pretty sexist views. Perhaps Mr. Betteredge holds the law in such low regard because he doesn’t have long for this world and because of his high class he doesn’t rely on it. Mr. Betteredge may simply be a fatalist who is cynical of the law’s ability.
I would check out Cierra’s post on ‘The Power of the Private Police.’ Sergeant Cuff personifies the law, yet he is alienated by most of the characters. Rather than the quote from Mr. Betteredge, I think Cuff’s treatment strongly demonstrates how the characters treat the law with distrust and unease. The law seems to intrude on them as an unwelcome influence that undermines the power of the household space. High-class houses maintain their own laws, and Sergeant Cuff and his justice threatens this.
Perhaps this is a detective story in that we must act outside the law, and even justice, in order to find truth.
I think this is really interesting, especially when I think about Rosanna Spearman’s involvement in the theft of the Moonstone. By now, we know that she is innocent of all charges. She did not even participate in the sketchy diamond trading for Rachel, as Sargeant Cuff suspected. And yet, she is still dead. Why is she dead? I would argue that she is dead because she was so bold as to fall in love with a nobleman, and was then punished by committing suicide. Rosanna went against social norms, and fell in love with someone who could never love her back. As a result, she becomes so depressed that she takes her own life.
On the other hand, we have have members of the upper class going about their everyday lives even when they seem guilty of a huge crime. Rachel saw Franklin Blake steal the Moonstone with her very own eyes, and yet says nothing! I definitely think this ties in with the point that you make, Alex. Definitely striking, concerning, and something to think about! Honestly this is still so relevant today in so many ways.