The Express.
London, England, 1867-12-30 00:00:00

LATEST INTELLIGENCE.

AND MARRI AGNS.

The Journal des Nbats contains the following
comment on a portion of the speech made by
Marshal Niel in the Corps lAgialatif last week :

If the official position of the Minister of War did not
absolutely forbid the supposition, we should have been
tempted into the belief that there was an ironical
meaning in the manner in which he spoke of the
soldiers who are to form part of the reserve.
We most take literally, therefore, the opinion expressed
by Marshal Niel—that young men who are exempted from
military service on account of physical infirmities are
good enough to make pretty fair husbands. Doubtless
there are exceptional cases of this kind, and more than
one instance is to be found of them, but still it is to be
feared that the larger portion of marriageable women have
not the same indulgence for the one-eyed, the one-armed,
the humpbacked and the gap-toothed, &c.—an indulgent*
which is only the result of a mild philosophy. To al sure
• man can be happy with one arm or one leg, and it is not
absolutely necessary that he should have two eyes to see
clearly if the eye he has is sound. The instance
of Marshal de Raman suggests itself as a confirmation,
on many points, of the theory of Marshal Niel,
for the former knew not the luxury of having his corporal
machinery all right, and, no doubt, he would consider it
a superfluity to possess two eyes two arms and two legs ;
since, having pretty well but the half of these luxuries,
and being, moreover, eighty years of age, he did not
fear to marry. But everyone is not possessed of
the courage or moderation of Marshal de Ransom,
and it cannot be expected that all one-armed
or one-eyed persons should be heroes. Besides they are
not all marshals of France, and therefore are not in a posi-
tion to dazzle eyes which might be inclined to try too
minutely their physical imperfections. Marshal Niel
would not certainly have written the graceful poem, "Love's
Young Dream," nor any of the romances founded onthe old
theme of " • well-matched pair," and which speak of "love
in marriage." He cannot be reproached with having
desired to inspire young girls with romantic ideas. His
speech at all events will not produce this effect, and the
reading of it may be recommended as a wholesome refri-
gerant to maidens who are too much inclined to reverie and
poetic mysticism. But perhaps it may be dangerous from
a different point of view. In a period when materialism is
so much talked about the considerations of Marshal

Niel, without perhaps his knowing it, incline to the most
positive materialism, and, if we mart speak out, we wa-
fer we have never seen marriage thin reduced to • simple
question of the reproduction of the human species.
Can • oneearmed, a oneeyed young man produee healthy
children? Yes, says science. The question is then
settled, and what have young girls to complain of! Such
is the meaning of the argument of Marshal Niel. It
simply makes of man a reproductive animal. But, then,
what becomes of the moral aspect of the question!
What! for Christians so devoted to the national
religion, as M. Thies says,—for these zealous
defender of the Papacy—la marriage degraded to •
mere physical union, and are we the persons to be accused
of propagating materialist ideas and denying the rights of
the soul and mind? But even from the exclusive point of
view adopted by Marshal Niel, objections might bettrged,
and physiologists, as well es spiritualists, would not quite
accept his theory.