Litchfield enquirer., 1871-08-10


 dogma has grown up system of marriage which prevails in most Catholic countries, but which has reached its most distinctive development in France Under this sys ten young men and women have scarcely any intercourse with each other before marriage. Marriages are generally arranged from motives of convenience; but no sooner are the strange couple indissolably joined together than society is fully opened to them. They may conclude to love each other, which is very creditable and prob ably not so unusual as is generally sup posed, or, they may form intimate friend ships with persons of the opposite sex. characterized by sentiment, affection, or even love, without impropriety. We are not willing to attribute to these relations the general grossness which is more than insinuated by Mrs. Stowe and most ''good' English. There is much that is noble and touching in such a friendship as that of Madame Recamier and Chateautriand. Nev- ertheless, we consider the system unutter- ably bad. Its fundamental idea is that of strict keeping of the one sacred condi- tion of the marriage covenant to the neg lect of others of equalif not of greater in- portance. The shell of the institution is kept perfect, but it's substance is honey. combed with treason. Now we deprecate, equally with Mrs. Stowe, any ingrafting o1 the French system upon ours; but IS 1t not evident that the remedy she proposes-in' creased difficulty of divorce-is calculated to aggravate the disease?
 The opposite theory-Free Love, In fidel, or non- Christian, as it is variously stigmatized-is, to our thinking, far the less dangerous of the two. Its fundamen' tai idea is that pe,manence is an element of such inferior importance in the marriage contract, that it should be dissoluble at the pleasure of either party, when convinced that the more important conditions are not, or cannot be, performed. That such system would work practically to the dis advantage of the wife, as the weaker party, we readily agree. Tbat permanence is o1 the essence of the marriage relation is fact sufficiently obvious from nature without reference to religion. While we agree therefore, with Mrs. Stowe in considering Free Love grievous error we have no feal with her that it will ever become popular one. It is not rebellion against but Urea son within the marriage relation that is the besetting sin of our time. Noble and hon est as matrimony is, and indeed because il is noble and honest, it has some deadly.ene mics. Chief among these we would reckon vagrant sentiment and passion-the one pure and the other impure. Sentiment, being worship of something ideal rather than the love of something real, is apt to be des troyed by the descent from the poetry o1 courtship to the solid prose of matrimony' Yet susceptibility 10 sentiment may re- main and lead to subsequent outside at tachments of sentimental nature. If Mrs. Stowe will turn from the current French to the current British or American romance she will be surprised to find what large portion of their interest turns upon the fir. tations of married people. Now whether these take the higher form of sentiment ol the lower one of passion, they are all more o, less disloyal and reasonable in their na' ture. When the first goddess of an Amer. ican youth is married lady much olde, and wiser than himself, it is usually very harmless sentiment because it is too absurd to be improper; but out of the more seri ous entanglements of this nature arise the keenest miseries of married life. When these or other forms of misconduct take such aggravated shapes as if persisted in will inevitably ''defeat the purposes of the mar. riage relation, !" we hold that it is the duty of the aggrieved party to require the of fender to return to the performance of the duties of the marriage covenant. On failure so to do, the right of the innocent party tc demand g cancellation of contract per. sistently violated is unquestionable. The doctrine which would give the guilty par. ty the same right is evidently unsound and unjust. No sentiment not degenerated into passion, would stand the test of being brought face to face with the stern reality of separation. People are vastly mistaken who suppose that it is the coercion of law that keeps married people together. Even were that coercion withdrawn we doubt whether the number of separations would be greatly increased. It is not the way of social iniquity to face the light. It de- lights in the sbams. pretences, and con. sediments of the Catholic theory of mar riage, rather than in the bolder errors of the Free Lovers. That doctrine could never do much practical injury to any grade of society except perhaps that which is below public opinion. s
 If space permitted. and the attempt did not seem too presumptuous, we should like to draw a truer moral from Mrs. Stoweis story than she has done for herself. She has shown how tyrannous unchecked friv- olty is liable to become That every slave onlx xuonf fc or,norfuuitv k0 hoconno "a Q %uror4