Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1875-12-31
FnEDERlcKsBURG, Va, Dec. 30, 1875
THE DISCARDED LOVER.

A Discarded Lover thus tells his grief 10
Mark Twain, and asks his advice II loved,
and still love, the beautiful Edwitha, and in.
tend to marry her. Yet, during my tempo
rary absence at Benlcia, last week, alas she
married Jones. / my happiness to be thus
blasted for life Have l DO redress?"
ANSWER OF course you have. ALI the
law, written aud unwrittco, is ou your side.
TIE intention aod not the act constitutes crime
-iu other words, constitutes the deed. If you
call your bosom friend fool, apd intend it for
40 insult, ii IS au insult; but if you do it play
fully, aud meaning 20 insult, it is not 90 Insult
If You discharge pistol accidentally, land kill
Iii u, you can 90 tree, tor you have done no
murder; but if you try to kill man, and
maniiestly intend to kill him, but fail utterly
to do it, the law still holds that the intention
constituted the crime, and you are guilty of
murder Ergo, if you had married Edwitha
accidentally, and really without tntcudtng to
do it, you would not actually be married t, her
at all, because tho act of marriage could not be
complete without the intention. And ergo, in
the strict spirit of the law, since you deliberate
ly intended to marry Edwltha, and didn't do
it, you are married to her all the same-bc-
cause, as | said before, the Mtentios constitutes
the crime. 1t is as clear As uay that Edwitha
is your wife, and your redress lies in taking a
cnb and mutlaiog Jones as much us you
can. Any mau has ght to protect his wife from
the advances ofother men. But you have anoth-
cr aIteroatlve-you were married to Eiwtha
FIRST, because Of your deliberate intention, and
now you Can prosecute her for bigamy, 10 sub.
srquently marrying JOncs. But there is an
other phase IN this complicated case: You in
tended t. marry Edw,ha, and, consequently,
according to law, she Is your wife-ihere is no
,h,f- bat. rs ,
and if she nerer intended TO marry you, YOU are
not her husband OF course. Ergo, in marry
ing Jones she was guilty Of bigamy, because
she was the wife of another lnau at the time
which is all very well as far as it goes but,
then, don't you see, she had no other husband
when she married Jones, and consequently,
she was not guilty of bigamy. Now, according
to this view OF the case, Joues married a
Sptaster, who was ,otdo,o at the same time,
aud another mao 5 a0ite at the same time, and
yet who had no husband aud neucr had one
and never had any intention of getting mar
rlcd, and, therefore, oil COURSE, never had been
married. and by the same reasoning you are
bachelor. because you have never been any
ones husband aud married man because
you have wife living; and to all intents and
purposes ,1td0Vcr, because you have been
deprived OF t.,at wife; aud consummate ass
for going off to Beuicia in the first place, while
things we're so mixed And by this time |
have got myself SO tangled up in the intrica-
ccs Of the extraordinary case that shall have
to give up all further attempt to advise you
l might get confused, and fail to make myself
understood. | think | could take up the ar
gumeut where | left off, and, BY following it
closely awhile, perhaps could prove to your
satisfaction either that you never existed at
all, or that you are dead now, and consequent
ly don't need the falthless Elwitha; | think l
could do that. if it would afford you any COM
fort.