The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-09-08


such an attack, at such a time, upon young ana
loving wife, at the prospect OF losing whom he mad
tainted some weeks before, and whom he had treated
with an at least uncOmplained Of affection up
to that moment? It ought to take great deal OF OF
evidence to verify so unlikely fact, first stated
forty years after 1t occurred.
Comparing it with contemporaneous history, we
una the letters of Byron to his friend Moore, VINO
had advised him against marrying Miss Millbank,
written within week after this occurrence ana lO-
filled with many expressions of love, afIection and
satisfaction with his wife, These were not written
Tor any purpose Of defense by Byron, or Win tne
expectation OF meeting the public eye but are appa.
rent transcripts OF his condition Of mind TO MS m0sC
Ih nate m nIlend at the very time IL may oe peruS-
slDe 10 quote q sentence or two from them.
- Inc nrst business letter written at HanaDy WHERE
tne unhappy wedding Journey terminated, wioaln ,s
Lady Byron as alghtng from the carriage in an att-
t9de and with face Of despair, with traces OF tears
aIter having been told that "she had married ~ a
devl" and he really seemed, If the statement Is
tTue to have begun acting well his part-wrtsen 10
MT moore, has this postscript -,
Lady Byron is easily well. How are Mrs. Moore
anu anu Joe Atkinsons graces? Moores chioreh) We
must present our women TO one another" -
Again, in a letter written nine days afterward on
Jan: 49, fifteen days after marriage, Byron SAYS
. so, you want to know about mlady anu me -
like Bell (his wlfe) as well as you do (or
old, yon villain Bessy-and that is or was) saying
Again, ten days afterward, on the I'd of February,
he says =
"My spouse and agree to-and in--admration.
swift says no wise ever married; but, Tor a
fool, think it the most ambrosal of all possible
future states. still think one ought to marry upon
lease; but am very sure should renew mine at the
expiration though next term were for ninety ana
nine years.
We are not left, however, without Byron's account
OF the journey; ana If the fact which is therein stated
is true, then the narration of Lady Byron of what
TOOK place in that carriage is simply Impossible. In
| ms conversations with Captain Parry, which were
published more than forty years ago, and have re-
| NAMED unCOntTadiCted to this time, Lord Byron
| speaks of it as follows:-
"After the ordeal was over we set Off for a coun-
try-seat of Sir Raph's LADY b. s father), and was
surprised at the arrangements for the journey, and
| somewhat out of humOr, to find the ady's maid
stuck between me and my bride. 1T was rather too
early to assume the husband so was forced to sub
init, but it was not with very good grace. have
been accused of saying, on getting into the carriage,
that had married Lady Byron out of Spite and be-
| cause she had refused me twice. Though was for
moment yeXed at her prudery, or whatever you
may choose to call it, if | had made so uncayalier,
| not to say brutal, speech, | am convinced Lady
Byron would instantly have left the carriage to
| and the maid. She had spirit enough to have done
so, and would properly have resented the atIront.
| Our honeymoon was not all sunshine; it had its
Clouds"
speech attributed to Lord Byron in its length and
| breadth, is impossible. If she were not, how did
| the version of the story get in circulation that he
said to Lady Byron that he had married her out of
| spite? And why has not that version of the story
been contradicted before, Byron having put his for
ward more than forty years ago? Ihere is little in
Cidental evidence showing that the lady's maid was
present, IN one of his letters to Moore, dated March
s, 1915, which would seem to be conclusive upon this
.'Bell is in health and unvaried good humor and
behavior. But we are all in the agOnes of packing
and parting; and suppose by this time Tomorrow,
| shall be stuck in the chariot with my chin upon u
| bandbOX. have prepared however, another car
rage for the abigail, and all the trumpery which
| wives carry along with them
one at the beginning of a wedding tour might easily
| be imagined to be VeXatiOnS, for it is to he hoped
nobody hut Byron has had any experience in that
direction; and in balancing probabilities, which is
more likely that Byron might in veXaton have said
to his Wife, in reference TO this proceeding of his
mother-in-law, who did it:-"Iou had power to have
saved me from this annoyance. One would suppose
| that your mother, madam, thought you had married
.1aN1 thnt gnftn
| to his disadvantage, ana the version given which
Mrs. Stowe recites; or that to young and loving
wife, in her maids presence, he burst forth in the
brutal manner alleged? In the interest of manhood
and human naturewe are constrained to believe the
Mrs Stowe AYERS that "duripg all this time an
other gui tier and more damning memory over
shadowed the wedding hour" thus plainly leaving
us to infer that the connection between Byron ana
his sister had been going on long previously to this
time. Yet we md, from the very letter which we
have quoted, that the packing and journeying was
to take the newly-married pair to Colonel Leighs,
the house of the husband OF Augusta there to remain
until the 18th of March Could it be possible that
man thus writing to his most intimate friend about
his new wife, was taking her to the house of his Bis
teT's husband for the purpose OF ncestuOuS Connec
tiOn with that sister?
How did Lady Byron learn that this connection
had been going on for nearly year before her mar
Tage? ? What valid excuse can she give for remain
ing in the house where this pollution present, as
she claims, for two years-One year longer than she
actually did How could woman of the high
purity of character of Lady Byron live in the house.
Mrs. Stowe declares Slle Qlu, Tor more than
year dwOl, as a cloak and accomplice of such in
fanny How, under such circumstances can the
declaration of Mrs. Stowe that she did not leave her
husband at last, but 'driven" from him. be true?
For the sake of 'pure womanwood'-nay, for the
sake of human nature itself-ought not Lady Byron
to have hed from such a house as she would
have fed from SOdom and not looked back, and not
have been driven from it, even if her views of the
duties of wife would not permit her to denounce
the crimes therein perpetrated? She did not hesi-
tate to denounce other women less guilty. For,
finding in ByrOn's desk the correspondence of a
married woman, she sent it TO the injured husband.
Why was she less thoughtful in regard to her
brOther-in-law, Colonel Leigh? And yet Mrs. Stowe
makes it merit in Lady Byron that she said in
such a house until driven from it by Byron.
| We are further called upon to believe that she
maintained "Child of sin" which we are to infer
was the child of Augusta by her brother. Now here
is something tangible, because we are told the child
| lived to q very considerable age. Why have we not
heard the story Of this child before? Mrs Leigh had
other children by her husband. Why it not pos
| sibe that her husband was the father OF this ?
| Would it not have been more than possible for so
| bad woman as its mother 10 have so claimed its
| parentage to shield her own reputation? How came
either Byron or Mrs. Leigh to put themselves in the
power OF his wife by leaving the fruit and ''damnng
proof" of their sin in the possession OF Lady Byron
| when there was so ready a means of Conceament
| Above all, why should not Mrs. stowe have spoken
| out plainly? Does she mean TO say this 'Chid of
| sin" was Mrs Leighs or not?
I.e do not here advert to the remarkable sense of
| SIuty to herself or the world which induced Lady
| Byron to foster such child, born under such CIR
| Cumstances The Christian spirit of forgiveness
which this shows is almost TOO lovely for EARTH espe
cially taken in connection with the story of Mrs.
| Stowe that Lady Augusta finally died in Lady
Byrons arms. She seems to have forgiven every
body concerned in these transactions, innocent or
guilty save the one most needing it--her husband.
TO him she is impacable even after death.
Could il be possible that Byron should write letters
demanding reasons Tor a separation when he had
driven his wife away for deadly guilty reason winch
| he knew too well Of?
That correspondence Byron desired TO nave pun