If a wife committed theft, burglary or other offenses in the company or
presence of her husband, the law presumed that she acted under
compulsion and held her not guilty, but this presumption did not extend
to cases of murder or treason, and it might always be overcome by proof
that she acted independently. The exception in cases of murder or
treason, we are informed, was not alone because of the magnitude of the
crimes, but rather on account of "the husband having broken through the
most sacred tie of social community by rebellion against the state, had
no right to that obedience from a wife which he himself, as a subject,
had forgotten to pay."

[Sidenote: Murder of wife.]

[Sidenote: Murder of husband.]

If a man murdered his wife it was as if he had murdered a stranger, and
he might avail himself of the benefit of clergy, and secure immunity
from punishment, provided he could read, but women were denied all
benefit of clergy because of their sex, and because they "were not
called upon to read." If a wife killed her husband it was a much more
serious offense, he being her lord, and she was guilty of treason and
subject to the same punishment as if she had killed the king.

[Sidenote: Petit treason.]

In cases of petit treason the penalty depended upon the sex of the
criminal, men being sentenced to be drawn and hanged, while women were
drawn and burnt alive.