The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1868-07-11 00:00:00

• k

tourlyiby 0115erber.

SATURDAY, JULY 11, MS.

MARRIAGE OR CELIBACY?

The Leaden 7'.'kewp7, has been, and h., ease-
sing or disgusting. as the eerie may be, its
readers, by furniyiiing, them with hat-dies of let-
ters on this sehjeet. it is one which correspon-
dents of the rims a veer or two ago ent-riel
upon with warmth. Much the seine argue!
were mil then as 110 W, md it is jest for this
reason that we refer to the matter. To marry
or not to marry ? there is a questian
under a variety of eiremnstances, has been put
from time immemorial ; and we believe that at
this moment the question remains unanswered.
from the simple impossibility of giving a defi-
nite answer, which shall he strictly accordant
with the principles of truth, to a genend ques-
tion—a question, in feet, which is hut a nucleus
of questions. How difficult it is to give a de-
cisive answer to the general qnery we may be
reminded oy recalling the remarks of Socrates,
that whether a into married or whether he re-
mained single, he would be sure to regret it.
Thit; eminent philosopher, if history speaks
tree, had ample reason to regret having married
Xantippe, who led him a wretched life, and was
about :to unfit a wife for a philosopher as it Mall
could well have hail. But for the philoaoplier,
with this expirience, to leave on record that hail
he a married he would have regretted it, illus-
trates the puzzling difficulty of laying down a
general rule.
Bat as the subject is now attracting a good
deal of attention, and is one of permanent inte-
rest, jest let my look at the pro and 0 oi of these
correspondents. The reckoning up of initivid-
al expenses, and the attempt to put oneself for-
went as a model and guide for expenditnre,
which 13 a common feature of this correspond-
ence, is of very little value. Individual circum-
stances differ materially, and marriage is sn im-
portant an event that the whole current of
existence is naturally affected. A great reason
this for caution and prudenoe ; and it is a pity,
therefore, that tithe:. people's experience will not
serve us instead of nor own, hut It certainly will
not. And of moan!, little value is the dictato-
rial Resumption of authority that ifollie writers
effect ; for here, again, is attempted the lilpsurit•
ity of general rules founded on individual expe-
rience. But when it is attempted to enforce a
general rule that would bo productive of widely
spread immorality, and this on profeased indi-
vidual experience, we may well doubt whether it
is not a crime to put forth such views. One
writer tries to philoaophiae on the question in a
profeen,l spirit, hut it seems to us that he only
sinks into a quagmire. We can easily reckon
up the value of his philosophy, however, by
taking his conelusion first. He says, By the
ail of John Stead Mill's Economy'
I have come paiefully to the conclusion that, In
a highly civilised state, it happy marriage—that
is a marriage free from the moan dread of abso-
lute want—is an impossibility for all but the
rich. For the ordinary daily workers—such as
the great body of the community consists of—
there is no such thing as marriage with com-
fort."

If this is the result of John Stuart Mill's
philosophy, Heaven preserve us from such
" philosophy." But it is not, we are persuaded,
the legitimate result of Mr. Mill's teachings.
44 Solon Smitr," who has come to this horrible
isclesion, cannot point to anything that Mr.
Mill maintains which will bear out 'the odious
assertion that a happy marriago is an impossi-
bility for all but the rieh. The !nail-brained
disciple, quoting his master, tells us that Mr.
Mill says that when early marriages and large
families are looked upon with the same abhor-
rence and contempt as excessive drunkenness,
we Hilly hops for existence upon easier terms,
but not before. This is pat strongly enough ;
hat the disciple carries out the doctrine far
beyond the teacher. What is an " early marri-
age '' is 011 C of the many points of this contro-
versy that admits of endless argument ; bust it
I is to be hoped that such it proposition as happy
I marriages being ininossible for ordinarily daily
I workers would be started in no circle withont
being immediately and contemptuously crushed. •
! The writer who elaborately attempt: to support
this proposition, makes his position ail the more
. contemptible when he tells us his eiretunstances.
I have arrived at the age of 32," he says, " and
ir am still unmarried, and have never proposed.
I My earnings have averaged the magic sum of
.t3do for some years past." And yet with £3OO
it year, end a prospect of no diminution at all
events, this man thinks that there is no such
thing as a happy marriage unless he bee one rich.
And what is " rich ? " °As difficult to decide as
to answer the question—what is "early " in rela-
tion to marriage, or rather what is the right
poriod of life when people should marry, if at
all. All such questions are alf..cted by an variety
of circumstances that all the correspondence in
the world cannot reduce to a code of laws or it
guide for action. It seems as if there would
ever be two great parties —in tboory—those who
depreciate marriage finless with !Honey, a settle.
uncut, a good position and good prospects ; and
those wrio advocate early marriages on moral,
and even economical grounds. But there is
endless inconsistency in the theory and practice
of these elaaves. and no wonder, for, happily,
1 marriage is not yet nneonneeted with love, and
love is a tyrant that enslaves philosophers and
ordinary mortals.
We believe that anyone who carefully reads
all this correspondence, and who studiously
reads all the pro and is on the early marriage
question, provided he be a man of sense a ho had
studied tho subject before, will in all probability
be 4' of the same opinion still, so far as the
i»wer of laying down i rule of action forothers
is eoncernad. Let every man be persuaded in
Itie own wind. The plainest practical advice is