On this page
- Departments (1)
-
Text (5)
-
THE LEADER. [No. 315, Saturday,
-
3Citrrnttm.
-
»-^?^if?»^
-
of the woman represented. Of course, men...
-
HOURS WITH THE MYSTICS. Hours with the M...
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
The Leader. [No. 315, Saturday,
THE LEADER . [ No . 315 , Saturday ,
3citrrnttm.
3 Citrrnttm .
»-^?^If?»^
» - ^?^ if ?»^
Of The Woman Represented. Of Course, Men...
of the woman represented . Of course , men write in less highflown strain wlien they write elsewhere than in the three-volume pages ; but , for the most nnrt flip , fintirm is still kev » t ur > . thev shirk the realitv . and tnit forward « n
The Laws concerning women , like all other laws , were made l > y men , and xt is not surprising that the men should Lave made them with special reference to themselves . Justice to themselves , as a first principle , lias been their object ; justice to women coining only second . This is so obvious that it has rarely been denied . It is denied , however , and plausibly , by a very able and temperate writer in Blackwood this month , who says : — We have small faith , for oar own part , in what is called class legislation , aad smallest faith of all in that species of class legislation which could make the man an intentional and voluntary oppressor of the woman . Tliis idea , that the two portions of humankind are natural antagonists to each other , is , to our thinking , at the very outset , a monstrous and unnatural idea . The very man wlo made the laws which send " women sobbing out of sight , " had not only a wife , whom -we may cbaritably suppose lie -was glad of a legal argument for tyrannising - over , but doubtless such thing 3 as sisters and daug hters , whom he could have no desire to subject to the tvranny of other men . There is no man in existence so utterly separated from on « -half of his fellow-creatures as to be able to legislate against them in the interests of his own sex . No official character whatever can make so absurd and artificial a distinction . Let us vindicate , in the first instance , the law and the law-maker . It is possible that the poor -may legislate against the make such Detween
" ideal" ( and snch an'ideal ! ) . Now we know few things more piquant than the contrast between the private talk of these novelists and their " ofiicial opinion ; " the one is as false as the other , but the one is , at any rale , believed in . We must not however , be seduced into an essay , especially as this very agreeable paper in Fraser , to which we allude , does not touch on the subject at all , but merely sketches the general style of treatment Love receives in the novels of Charlotte Smith , Ann of Swansea , Regina Roche , Fielding , the Minerva Press , antl the novels of our own day . It , happily , indicates the " conventional" nature of the expression . Man , indeed , is a rigid conventionalist in hats , shirt-collars , beard , and morals . Fie hates nonconformity . The despotism of what is ' established' vexes all independent minds by the absurdity with which it insists on conformity . As an agreeable writer in Tait says this month in . his " Tangled Talk , " the world ever exclaims : — " Do what you please , only call it by the same name that we do—then , we will let you alone , but not till then . " The -world will pardon a thousand irregularities , even gross vices , much sooner than it will forgive a life the key note of which is pitched a . little too high for its own tastes . Live as grovelling a life as you
rich , or the rich against the poor , but to an antagonism men and women is against all reason and all nature . The point is certainly well put ; but considering that the writer lias little faith ia tlie palpable fact of the rich making laws in favour of themselves against the poor , our readers will not , perhaps , have much confidence in his argument . He appears to us to confound two very different things , namely , a predominance of the tendency to do justice to themselves , on the part of lawmakers , with a conscious and deliberate perpetration of injustice to others . The Irishman ' s reciprocity , which was " all on one side , " is a reciprocity very discernible in law-making . We need not suppose the injustice to be deiberate . We have only to consider the natural tendency of < egoism actuating all hitman , beings , and we shall . then explain the discrepancies of justice . This writer is more cogent when he comes to details . He sees clearly and states forcibly the difficulties of the case : — . The justice whicli means an equal division of rights lias no place between those two persons -whom natural policy as well as Divine institution teach us to consider as one . It seems a barsh saying , but it is a true one—Justice cannot be done between them :-their rierhtB are not to be divided ; they are beyond the reach
please , and stick to les lienseances , and you will pass muster . Live the hie of an angel with the least bit of a < protestinff air , or anything that ean be construed into it , and the very first deflection from the beaten track , though it should "be made in the fear of highest heaven and with bleeding feet , will be treated w orse than a -vice . The most correct and thoughtful liver I ever knew told me that ever since lie could remember , he had had his inferiors in character , and occasionally bis inferiors in capacity , preaching virtue to him . I believe the case is common . The same writer says : — A book might be written xipon the curiosities of criticism . In a review of Ml * Longfellow ' s " Hiawatha , " in . a serial of character aad long-standing , it is made a fatal objection against the poem that the Supreme is represented as smoking a pipe ! In a recent number of the " Leisure Hour , " Juliet ' s suggestion about cutting up Romeo into little stars (" Romeo and Juliet , " act iii . scene 2 ) , which is referred to by Emerson , is quoted as one of that great American ' s unintelligible vagaries ! In another magazine , Gerald Massey was charged the other day with stealing from JK , B . Browning the \ vord 3 , " The . Lord had need of her . " ( tiee Luke , six . 34 . ) In the same article , the obvious expression—"¦{ Strength and Beauty hand-in-band , " must needs be traced to Shelley , as if it could not be found in . a thousand other place , ? , and as if it were not a perfectly natural phrase whicli anybody is at liberty to use .
of all ordinary principles of equity . In the event of a disjunction between the father , and the mother , the wife and the husband , you must choose which of them you shall be just to ; for it is impossible to do justice to both . For it ia not the question of the wife ' s earnings or the wife ' s property which lies nearest the hearfe of this controversy : there are the children—living witnesses of the -undividableness of the parents . You give their custody to the husband . It is a grievous and sore injustice to the mother who bore them . But let us alter the case . Let the wife have the little ones , and how does the question stand ? The ground is changed , b-ut the principle is the same . Still injustice ^ hard , unnatural , and pitiless ; still \ vrong , grievous and inexcusable . The native right of father and of mother is as equal as it is inseparable , and we see no mode of deciding between them , save that expedient of King Solomon ' s , which i t would be hard to put iu practice . Tlio law is unjust in tliis particular . What else can the law be ? True , it might choose the wife , the weaker of the two , as the object of its favour , but that would not be less unjust ; and while we are totally at a loss to comprehend how a husband could separate his children from their mother , it is quite as difficult , by all the principles of natural justice , to understand how these same children could be taken froin . their father by means of the wife . Where is the justice?—which is the arrangement of equity ? If we admit the principle of selecting one of the parties for special consideration , there is no more to be said upon the subject , for the husband ' s rights are quite as valid as those of the wife ; but abstract justice iu thiB matter , which is the most important of all , ia a clear impossibility . * * * The law can secure to the separated woman au unquestionable right to her own earnings ; but the law cannot secure to her her children . Nature has not made Kiut 4-ltstii * « fw 1 rt nAaanoann (* Xnf \ Vtoa ns \ 4 < . fvi ^ mrt ¥ r \ \~\\ o mntlifir n anrtrMnl nTiri lio /> nlmi » uvu fc uf jl « w uav i « k * ¦/ w mh
Even more amusing than such specimens of ignorance are the abundant specimens of lofty assumption which many periodical critics display . At the very moment they are betraying to every knowing reader the extremely imperfect knowledge they have of the subject , their language is that of men who have nothing to learn . Here is a sample , front-the New Quarterly Review , taken from a notice of a chapter on German Literature in Alison' ' s History of Europe : — Goethe of course occupies a prominent place on the list . This is not the place to enter on a disquisition of Goethe ' s merits as an author . N ~ o one wTio has not read his works could benefit by the few remarks that our spaco allows us to nitiko , and ttey would be needless to othera . We agree with the opinion given of tbe character of his writings , which in spite of his great powers , aiford unequivocal proofs that he was both selfish and sensual . Pray observe the high hand with which the writer carries his ignorance , tlie compassionate allusion to those who have not read Goethe ' s works , coming from one who cannot even spell Goethe ' s name , and who docs not know that the two dots he has placed over the e make that e a superfluity . Gotke , is the same as Goethe ; but Goethe is a word to which the German language cannot accommodate itself . After betraying himself thus , the unconscious writer , with the same unhesitating confidence , pronounces Goethe to have been " both selfish and sensual . " Qui trompe-t-on ici ?
ff / Gt UXXSjaL m ^ JLU IJUOavOaui ¦ ^| wv * jljiuj * » v >* - * ** mjt * v >*> w *»* a > «*« - *^* X m »« claim . It is hard , but it ia true . The law might confer upon her the right to bereave her husband of this dearest possession , aa it now gives him the right to bereave her ; but the law can only , by so doing , favour one unfair claim to the disadvantage of another ; for in this matter right and justice a . v & impossible . But every one has felt this grand difficulty of the children , a difficulty which no legislation can remove . There are , however , numerous cases where it does not intervene . If no affection , if no interest , if none © f the old links of habit are strong enough to make a continuance of the marriage endurable , Legislation ought to permit its being discontinued without the frightful inj ustice which at present falls on the woman . We are by no means disposed , to join in the cry against the tyranny" of men , in this matter . We believe flic intlilaw tne reluctance 01 to ui arise
justice or e s ana men auer cm , , miuniy , from the profound ignorance of women which is unhappily prevalent among men , and which is betrayed whenever they open their lips on the subject . And this ignorance is the more obstructive because it is traditional , consequently gains no enlightenment from experience . Men , who have lived long and seen much of women , talk , for the most part , lilte schoolboys , mid what they talk they think .
Nor is what is written about women much wiser , although diametrically opposite in tone . A delightful article in Fraser , on the " Treatment of Lovo in , Novels , " suggests this reflection . JEvcry one knows tlio impossible nonsense , which passes for the language of love , and for accurate representation of female character ia Novels , with rare exceptions : how highflown , unreal , unbelievcd in ia the sentiment they express , how utterly factitious the nature
Hours With The Mystics. Hours With The M...
HOURS WITH THE MYSTICS . Hours with the Mystics . A Contribution to the History of Religions Opinion . By Robert Alfred Vaughan , D . A . 2 volumes . < J . W . Parker ami Son . Rmiely is deep and extensive erudition clothed in elegant literature . Your learned writers are apt to be writers whom it is laborious to rend . But the two qualities of learning and style are united in these volumes . Mr . Vauu ; liiin has obviously great sympathy ' with Mysticism , or he would not have- " lived laborious days" studying anil reproducing the opinions of the Mystics ; but the obscurity , the caprice , the odd jostling of arguments with fniicii's , the tangential mode of reasoning , and the fervour of enthusiasm , which clmnio' tcrise mystical writings , avo not even traceable in these volumes . The stjle is singularly lucid , and quite remarkable for the novelty and variety of its
illustrations , drawn from books and from nature . Wliy did ho writo about the Mystics , unless impelled thereto by some secret affinity ? The affinity wo suspect to have been moral rathrr than intellectual . lie docs not share the mystical errors ; ho docs not even accept the mystical method . The whole intellectual process seems to hii « a mistaken and inarticulate effort ; but the thought which it tried to articulate , the impulse whioh made men Mystics , that indeed seems to him of vital importance : —
In the roligiouH hi . itory of ulinont ovory ago and country , wo moot with u _ « crtain olatsB of tnindu , impatient of aiero uoromonla 1 forms and toohniou . 1 < Jinl inutmnH , who liuve plondod tho cause of tho heart nguiimt iirofioription , and yioUhul Ui * 'ii » - boIvoh to tho moHt vohomont impulHori of tho noul , in ita longing to oBufipu from tho tiign to tho thing BigniAod—from tho human to tho divino . Tho wtory ol" nucU an ambition , with its diwastoi-H and itH gloried , will not bo doumuil , hy llllV thoughtful niind , los » worthy of rooord than tho curoor of a oomquoror . Throng"
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), April 5, 1856, page 16, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_05041856/page/16/
-