Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

lications of the day, but the specimens already given will doubtless be found sufficient for the purpose. Two from our heap, however, we feel in duty bound to give, not because they are very different from the rest we have garnered, but because they are fair samples of a style often adopted by the Benedicks and Beatrices of the London Journal. One is from a lady and the other from a gentleman. Let us take the lady first :

AGENORIA says that she has natural golden-brown hair, fair oval face, laughing mischievous eyes, dark arched eyebrows, roguish expres. sion of countenance, is eighteen, ladylike, sensible, merry, good-natured, highly respectable, and has good expectations. She longs to be married to a tall, studious, benevolent, affectionate, well-principled gentleman, who would think it a pleasure to instruct and assist her endeavours to obtain a thorough knowledge of English, French, and drawing; and in return she would try to be an apt pupil, and a loving and obedient wife.

The pseudonyms adopted by these young ladies are often provokingly funny: sometimes loving hearts take the name of a favourite heroine, whose virtues and temptations, joys and sorrows, are at the time attracting their attention in the Journal; but sometimes they take higher flights, and in attempting high-sounding names they have heard, succeed in inventing others, just as the old chemists, in trying to discover the philosopher's stone, found things much more valuable ---with the difference, of course, that the new titles are only valuable to future writers of the fiction believed in most by the fair correspondents. Agenoria requires a good deal, but her effort is of the weakest compared with that of our next friend, who, provided he had a big stick, would prove himself a true hero-say on a box of eggs :

L. S. W., twenty-one, dark, and considered handsome, lithe in figure, of the medium height, and of a good family, would like to receive the carte-de-visite of a young lady, a blond preferred. He is shortly going abroad, probably to Mexico, or some of the republics adjacent, where he intends to make a name and fortune. He is very ambitious, and intends joining an army where there is active service. He wants a wife who would encourage his plans and undertakings. One who would

share with him the toils of a camp life, or who would rule in Courts. One who would receive homage from the savage tribes of Northern and Central America, or would maintain her husband's position as an officer and gentleman of honour both at home and at Court. He is of a very loving disposition, though rather hasty, and to a lady who would do as he wished he would be an affectionate, loving husband, companion, and protector.

That matrimonial clubs or agencies are still in existence is shown by a case tried quite recently before Sir James Hannen in the Divorce Court-a wife's petition for a judicial separation on the ground of her husband's cruelty. The counsel for the petitioner stated that she was a lady of property, residing in Liverpool, and that the respondent was a clerk in a firm in the same town. He was a member of a Matrimonial Club, whose object was to secure for its members wives with good fortunes; and as an instance of what kind of alliances result from the interference of these establishments, we give some of the evidence. The respondent, whose chief object was to get money, was very violent on finding soon after the marriage that his wife had not nearly so much as he had anticipated. He was guilty of drunkenness and assaults, and treated his wife in a very brutal manner. The petitioner said that her father died on Christmas Day, 1866. On his death she had an income of £400 for her separate use. She made the acquaintance of the respondent some two or three years before, and he was at that time a clerk in a firm of shipbrokers. At the marriage no settlement was made; but a few days after the respondent asked for any papers she might have. She gave him them. She had £675 in a building society, and he wrote out a form that she signed, and the money was transferred to him. He often said that £400 per annum was a very paltry sum, and that if he had a few thousands he could go into business. Petitioner's mother had a considerable sum, and her name being the same, had led the defendant into the error of marrying a woman with only a "paltry £400 a year," instead of a lot of ready money. Soon after

the marriage he took to drinking, and was violent in his language. The latter, the petitioner believed, arose from his being disappointed at the smallness of her fortune. She found a letter of a very immoral character addressed to her husband. She was much annoyed, and sent the letter to the office. When the respondent returned he brought a friend with him, and used most violent language. After the friend had gone to bed the respondent pulled her on to the floor, bit her in the neck, ground her beads into powder, and bit a piece out of a glass. This latter act, it must be admitted, is a rather novel way of showing disappointment, even in matters like these. The friend was at once called for, and assisted to hold the disappointed man down. In August 1870 defendant tore a piece of skin from her arm. He had been drinking for some time, and tried to prevent her seeing her mother, who only lived a few hundred yards away. The mother was doubtless a sore point with him. He said that once a month was often enough to see her, but witness went more frequently. The family doctor saw the injuries which she sustained. In the same month the respondent called her very foul names, and threatened to strangle her and throw her out of the window. His threats were so violent that she never expected to see the morning. On one occasion he came home drunk, and partook of three large bottles of champagne. This would be a dangerous experiment for a sober man to make in these degenerate days. Afterwards he fell backwards, and she had to stay with him all night. In March 1871 she went to her mother's to tea, and when she returned he used very bad language, and made all sorts of charges about her conduct, which were false. When sober, he said she ought not to take any notice of this. Her first child was born in 1870, and her medical adviser told her to go away. She was anxious to take the child with her, which her husband would not allow, and during her absence he sent it from home. On hearing of this she at once returned, and he refused to tell her where

the child was, until she wrote a letter which he forced her to write. On a Sunday after this he returned home drunk, and when she remonstrated with him, he said that he was not half drunk, but soon would be so. He then took the decanters out of the cupboard, and threw them at her. This was, to say the least, eccentric, as a means to the end of drunkenness. She was so frightened at his conduct that she had to seek protection amongst neighbours. On the 20th of December witness was in the house alone with respondent, who threatened to kill her, stating that he often wished to do so, and now that they were alone there was a good opportunity. He then got hold of the carving-knife, and stood over her with it. He then said that would not do, but a pistol or razor would. Corroborative evidence as to the violence was given by the doctor who attended the petitioner, and noticed bruises on her; and by a servant who formerly lived with the parties to the suit. His lordship granted a decree of judicial separation, with costs, the wife to have the custody of the child. Marriage for money and money alone, without any consideration as to whether the contracting persons are at all suited to each other, is almost bound to end in unpleasantness, more especially when the fortune-hunter finds that he has married the daughter instead of the mother, and has only a "paltry £400 a year” and a little ready money to subsist on.

There is at the present time in London a weekly newspaper specially devoted to the interests of those who wish to marry or to give in marriage, and as the copy we have before us under date May 9, 1874, is numbered 214, and is full of advertisements all referring to the holy state of matrimony, it is to be presumed that the supply is caused by a most undoubted demand for an organ of intercommunication between kindred souls which scorn to be trammelled by ordinary social restrictions, or to which conventionalities can bring no balm. Love is a fierce flame, and people who feel it burning within them, and know no

object on whom to bestow the priceless blessing, are apt to try any short cut that offers itself, instead of biding their time and going the ordinary slow-coach road which lumbering old-fashioned etiquette suggests. Therefore we take up our paper with interest, and receive with pleasure the intimation that it is "a weekly journal devoted to the promotion of marriage and conjugal felicity." We say pleasure advisedly, for most editors would have been satisfied to promote marriage, and have let the subsequent felicity look after itself. We must admit that we fail to find any further reference to the future happiness of couples in our copy; perhaps it is to be secured by a regular supply of the newspaper, so that those already done for may see how the remaining lovers are getting on. On the front page there are ten "rules and regulations" to be complied with by advertisers, the most important of which seems to be that "bona fide notices from ladies and gentlemen desirous of marrying will be inserted at the rate of twelve stamps per forty words," with a reduction by taking a quantity, and that "all introductions are given on the understanding that the lady and gentleman shall each pay a fee to the editor within a month after marriage." Why these are called rules and regulations we don't pretend to know. The editor also offers, as one of the rules, to give advice on the subject of courtship or marriage, by which it would appear that he has had an extended experience of both. Yet this supposition is hardly borne out by a request-also one of the ten regulations-for contributions "calculated to enlighten the public mind in reference to marriage and other kindred subjects." Maybe, great as is the editor's own knowledge of marriage "and other kindred subjects," he cannot write equal to the demands of such a topic. Certainly he and his advertisers have the most original ideas of both orthography and syntax. Maybe also, the "address to the public," which adds to the front-page glories,

« AnteriorContinuar »