fons diftinguifhed for understanding, fuccefsful in life, refpected by the Public, and dear to one another; or, on the other, thofe hateful brawls which by and bye produce an advertisement in the newspapers, "Whereas Sarah, the wife of the fubfcriber, has eloped from his bed and board," &c. If we would treat of this matter with propriety, we muft confider how it ftands among the bulk of mankind. The propofition, then, I mean to establish is, that there is much lefs unhappiness in the matrimonial state than is often apprehended, and indeed as much real comfort as there is any ground to expect.

To fupport this truth I obferve, that taking mankind throughout, we find much more fatisfaction and cheerfulness in the married than in the fingle. In proportion to their numbers, I think of those that are grown up to maturer years, or paft the meridian of life, there is a much greater degree of peevishnefs and difcontent, whimficalnefs and pecu. liarity, in the last than in the first. The profpect of continuing fingle to the end of life, narrows the mind, and clofes the heart. I knew an inftance of a gentleman of good estate, who lived fingle till he was past forty, and he was efteemed by all his neighbours, not only frugal but mean in fome parts of his conduct. This fame perfon afterwards marrying, and having children, every body obferved that he became liberal and open-hearted on the change, when one would have thought he had a ftronger motive than before to fave and hoard up. On this a neighbour of his made a remark, as a philofopher, that every ultimate paffion is ftronger

than an intermediate one; that a fingle perfon loves wealth immediately, and on its own account; whereas a parent can scarcely help preferring his children before it, and valuing it only for their fakes.

This leads me to observe, that marriage must be the fource of happiness, as being the immediate caufe of many other relations the most interesting and delightful. I cannot eafily figure to myself any man who does not look upon it as the first of earthly bleffings to have children, to be the objects of attachment and care when they are young, and to inherit his name and fubftance when he himself muft, in the courfe of nature, go off the stage. Does not this very circumftance give unfpeakable dignity to each parent in the other's eye, and ferve to increase and confirm that union, which youthful paffion and lefs durable motives firft occafioned to take place? I rather chufe to mention this argument, because neither exalted understandings, nor, elegance of manners, are neceffary to give it force. It is felt by the peafant as well as by the prince ; and, if we believe fome obfervers on human life, its influence is not lefs, but greater, in the lower than in the higher ranks.

Before I proceed to any further remarks, I must fay a few words to prevent or remove a deception which very probably leads many into error on this fubject. It is no other than a man's fupposing what would not give him happiness cannot give it to another. Because, perhaps, there are few married wo men, whofe perfons, converfation, manners and conduct, are altogether to his tafte, he takes upon. him to conclude that the husbands, in these nume

rous inftances, muft lead a miferable life.

Is it

needful to say any thing to fhew the fallacy of this? The tastes and difpofitions of men are as various as their faces; and therefore what is difpleafing to one may be, not barely tolerable, but agreeable to another. I have known a husband delighted with his wife's fluency and poignancy of fpeech, in fcolding her fervants, and another who was not able to bear the least noise of the kind with patience.

Having obviated this mistake, it will be proper to observe, that through all the lower and middle ranks of life, there is generally a good measure of matrimonial or domeftic comfort, when their circumftances are easy, or their estate growing. This is eafily accounted for, not only from their being free from one of the most usual causes of peevishnefs and discontent, but because the affairs of a family are very seldom in a thriving state, unless both contribute their fhare of diligence; fo that they have not only a common happiness to share, but a joint merit in procuring it. Men may talk in raptures of youth and beauty, wit and sprightliness, and an hundred other shining qualities; but after seven years cohabitation, not one of them is to be compared to good family management, which is feen at every meal, and felt every hour in the husband's purfe. To this, however, I must apply the caution given above. Such a wife may not appear quite killing to a stranger on a visit. There are a few diftinguished examples of women of the first-rate under standings, who have all the elegance of court breeding in the parlour, and all the frugality and activity of a farmer's wife in the kitchen; but I have not

found this to be the cafe in general. I learned from

a certain author many years ago, that " a great care of household affairs generally fpoils the free, careless air of a fine lady," and I have seen no reason to difbelieve it fince.

Once more, fo far as I have been able to form a judgment, wherever there is a great and confeffed fuperiority of understanding on one fide, with fome good nature on the other, there is domeftic peace. It is of little confequence whether the fuperiority be on the fide of the man or woman, provided the ground of it be manifeft. The fierceft contentions are generally where the just title to command is not quite clear. I am fenfible I may bring a little ridicule upon myself here. It will be alleged that I have clearly established the right of female authority over that fpecies of hufbands known by the name of hen-peckt. But I beg that the nature of my position may be attentively confidered. I have faid, "Wherever there is a great and confeffed fuperiority of understanding." Should not a man comply with reason, when offered by his wife, as well as any body else? or ought he to be against reafon, because his wife is for it? I therefore take the liberty of refcuing from the number of hen-peckt, those who ask the advice, and follow the direction of their wives in most cafes, becaufe they are really better than any they could give themselves-referving those only under the old denomination, who through fear are fubject, not to reason, but to paffion and ill-humour. I fhall conclude this obfervation with faying, for the honour of the female fex, that I have known a greater number of inftances of

just and amiable conduct, in case of a great inequality of judgment, when the advantage was on the fide of the woman, than when it was on the fide of the man. I have known many women of judgment and prudence, who carried it with the highest reípect and decency to weak and capricious hufbands; but not many men of diftinguished abilities, who did not betray, if not contempt, at least great indifference towards weak or trifling wives.

Some other things I had intended to offer upon this fubject, but as the letter has been drawn out to a greater length than I expected, and they will come in with at least equal propriety under other maxims, I conclude at present.

3. I

LETTER II.

Tis by far the fafest and most promising way to marry with a perfon nearly equal in rank, and perhaps in age; but if there is to be a difference, the risk is much greater when a man marries below his rank, than when a woman defcends from hers.

The first part of this maxim has been in substance advanced by many writers, and therefore little will need to be faid upon it. I must, however, explain its meaning, which is not always clearly comprehended. By equality in rank must be understood equality, not in fortune, but in education, tafte, and habits of life. I do not call it inequality, when a gentleman of eftate marries a lady who has been VOL. VIII. U