New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-03-23
IYRITER,Y WIVES.

There was one thing very sure; she did MT
think she would ever have a literary man
{" Tor husband!" Poor young woman! Ac-
cording to her light and her experience, she was
right. PerlHps her notion Of what constitutes
literary man was Il little confused, and she
did not comprehend that even as there is a
variety OF character among cOrdwainers and
carpenters and thinkers and tailors and all
other men o. handicraft, so all tie pliers of
pens and wastcr5 OF ink and OF midnight oil,
are not trimmed by way of training after q
Procrustean method. al sorts go ID make up
the miscellaneous guild. II includes genius
without wisdom and wisdom without genius,
and n quite unsubstantial success sometimes
germinatcs into dreadfully substantial vanity.
Bat men of letters, we beg permission to say
are not as matter of course fretful, cGnccited,
and arrogant, nor do they invariably nag their
wives, quarrel with their breakfasts, fuss about
the beds in which they are to sleep, neglect
their families and make themselves generally
and particularly insufferab!e. On the other
hand, il may be observed that Il cOal-heaver
or railway navy, who never penned
stanza when he should have been shoveling,
may be betrayed when in q high state of beer
into shaking his fist at his trembling spouse
and making us much of a muss as if he
were in the constant habit of contributing
poetry to the monthly magazines and had
risen to be the life and light of three or four
Lecture Bureaus. He is none the less nor the
more a brute and bully because the police
man makes short work of him, while his fate
consigns him to the promiscuous ranks Of OBJ
scure and inglOrious blacksuardS. Certainly
it is to his credit that he IS coarse and cruel
without the agQravation of theory, and teazes
his wife and scarcs his children in accordance
with no philosophical discovery. There is no
human prctension more repulslve, no sham
harder for the good naturod to eXtenuate than
thin lacker of false refinement, for it Is
like the varnish which brings out the obscure
color of picture, and is never at the COM
mand of small soul and an uncertain
temper Even a really great man like Rous-
seau is merely ridiculous in his moods and
tantrums; nor do we think that Lord Byron
cuts very honorable figure in the story of
his short domestic life. "Do L disturb you,
byron 2" said my Lady. "Damnablyw an
swered his Lordship, exactly as fuddled pOr-
ter might under the circumstances. 1t
wouldn't be pretty in poet; it wouldn't be
pretty in o porter, but in neither case would
genus prompt such brutal reply.
There is nobody in the least acquainted with
the minor history of literature who does not
know that its professors have frequently been
excellent husbands and fathers in spite of tho
lrritabilty which, since the time of Horace,
has been attributed at least to the poets. IL
has been nothing unusual for distinguished
writer's to marry women of no remarkable
literary cultivation, and to De very much their
humble servants to the end of the matrimonial
career. There is no evidence that Shakes
pearc was other than good husband to his
elderly consort; Milton with his austere tenn
nerament should never have married at all !;
the prettie5t letters in the world are those
which poor Steele used to send to his lady
Addison in his domestic relations was the tor
mented party, and many time he must have
cursed the folly which sent him to the
peerage for hclpmate. In modern days,
we find Wordsworth happily married; Southey
devoted to his first wife, who was
far from being literary woman Moore, eX-
ceedingly fond of his Bessie" though he was
n little given to mcandering, as became the
minstrel of love and wine Shelley, after his
first unfortunate marriage, extremely fortunate
in his second nuptals Goodwin, with very
wrong and absurd theories Of marriage, an ex
cellent husband while the domestic happiness
OF many literary men still living is known to
all who are interested In such matters. The