The daily telegram. [volume] (Clarksburg, W. Va.) 1901-1926, 1903-10-12
DOES LOVE. ENDURE7

A Virginia woman married man who
suicided week afterward, and, after
@idowhood of three days, she married
another man. The two wedding cere-
monies were but twelve days apart. The
first husband left her and shuffed off
this mortal coil because he thought she
loved the man she married later She
may have worn widows weeds, but they
scarcely got well sprouted.
One deduction from the incident is
that neither will have an easy con.
science. Another is the woman was fool,
ish to let her husband find out so soon
that she loved another. Still another
is that the second husband ought to
have sized up the infdelity of the woman
he loved and had more self-respoct than
to marry her after all that had hap
pened. Still another thought is that the
fellow who suicided was almost justi-
fled in dis rash act, if he really loved
the woman, and there can be no doubt
of that or he would not have taken his
life. But another thought is, and forci-
bic it is, why he should have suicidcd
after he married. Usually, the man
would die for the woman before he mar.
ries, but seldom afterward. One has FIRE.
quently heard the lovers remark and
many, perhaps all, have made it, a
would die for you" but who ever hears
it after marriageH And yet this is not
meant to substantiate the oft.repeated
charge that marriage is failure The
man who suicided probably assured the
woman that he would die for her, but he
did not He died because he did not have
her, as he thought he ought to. OF
course, he is to blame for taking his life,
but it is she who is more to blame, be.
cause she should not have married HIM
if she did not love him, and after she
did marry him, she should have been
content to forget the other flame and
abide by her act.
The second husband, however, must
have a peculiar and not an enviable, up.
probation of the situation. Her act III
marrying the other fellow ought to have
been disgusting enough to him to turn
him against her. The fact that she
would consent to become his bride with
in three days after such tragic end
OF the man to whom she had given her
hand and heart, so far as the world was
concerned, ought to have doubly disgust
ed him.
In addition to this, that she should
drive her husband to such an end by
disclosing her love for another ought to
have had an effect on the second husband
that would have driven him from her.
and, again, the man whose love seems
not to have had first place with the
woman and was not strong enough to
win her as against another shows his
weakness and his incapability of true
love, when he takes to himself the OBJ.
jcct Of his affections under such circum-,
stances. That both will suffer from the
incident there is scarcely doubt and
that marriage in their case will be a,
failure is almost a foregone conclusion
But the question arises, was there anyl
love in this case? The situation. rea.
soned out, shows there was not. II the,
woman loved him and he loved her, the
natural conclusion on account of thcir,
marriage later, they would have mar
ried in the first place, unless there were
some extraordinary extenuating circum.
stances. Since they did not, the conclu.
sion is that there was no love, or that
it was not mutual, and not being mutual
there was no affinity. Such being the
case, why should there be affinity now,
since the woman by her first act showed
clearly to the man that There was not
sufficient mutually between them to
cause her to be true to him or to be at.
tracted to him as against all others?
Later, if she found out that he was more
to her than the one she married, why
should he have remained the same? Did
not that affinity which was reall theirs
to begin with, if they loved one another,
cease after she deserted one and married
the otherf If not, then there are today
men loving other mems wives, and wives
loving other men, and yet they dare not
permit this love to become an affinity.
In other words. If the woman is to be