CHAPTER IV.

MAINTENANCE, RESPECT, AND INSTRUCTION.

I now proceed to mention another duty of the husband, which, though it be not commonly considered in that light, is however absolutely necessary to his fulfilling his part of the marriage engagement, and answering the great design of it. What I intend is, the taking care of the family substance, in which the wife has a common right;' that it be neither reduced by carelessness and mismanagement on the one hand, nor squandered away in excesses of sensuality and luxury on the other. For it can

never be imagined that any woman in her senses would voluntarily surrender herself up, so entirely to the power and will of a husband, as that, whenever he pleased, he might throw all affairs into confusion, and reduce her and her children to want and misery. The very nature of the marriage contract itself, which was designed for mutual support and comfort, amounts to the same as a direct stipulation to the contrary: and especially if the wife had a fortune of her own, on which she might have lived with ease and independence, and which was entrusted to the

husband's management, that he might preserve and improve it. In this case, I say, especially the conduct which I am now censuring, is not merely indiscretion or riot, but a flagrant act of infidelity.

The next branch of the husband's duty is to defend his wife against injury to her person, insult to her honour, and to the utmost of his power likewise, against wrong to her character, and unnecessary vexation and disquietude to her mind. For her person is, in a manner, his own person; her honour, his honour; and his peace of mind is, or at least should be, inseparably connected with hers. And I have before observed that St. Paul has urged this in such terms, as if he thought it an office so indispensably incumbent on the husband, that he ought to discharge it though at the hazard of his life. Scarce any thing less can be implied in these words: "husbands love your wives, even as Christ loved the church and gave himself for it.”*

Again, husbands should always treat their wives with a becoming respect, a respect suited to their rank, and the office they bear in the family; that neither their persons, nor the authority with which they are by nature invested, may grow contemptible. Besides, women are * Eph. v. 25.

more sensible of neglects, more strict and nice with respect to outward decencies, and points of honourable regard; and therefore, will feel more strongly every slight, which they imagine is offered to them, as well as resent it more deeply. Upon which account, St. Peter seems to have recommended this conduct, both on the principles of nature and Christianity, in the following passage: "likewise, ye husbands, give honour unto the wife, as to the weaker vessel; and as being heirs together of the grace of life."*

Mutual instruction also, as far as there are abilities and opportunities for it, is another branch of conjugal duty. But I have thought proper to introduce it among the husband's obligations, because St. Paul appears to have taken it for granted that it would, in general, be an office more peculiarly belonging to him; when he says, in opposition to women's asking questions, and disputing publicly in religious assemblies: "let the wives learn of their husbands at home."† And as for the points of instruction, they are only the plain essential principles of true religion; not topics for wrangling, and to feed a wild intemperate zeal, which are inconsistent with the native modesty, and utterly deface all the graces of the female sex, and the knowledge that will best

* 1 Pet. iii. 7.

+ 1 Cor. xiv. 35.

subserve the purposes of family order and good economy, and support at the same time that it adds a lustre to the social and domestic virtues.

Further, the husband is bound to allow his wife a decent and honourable accommodation, according to their rank and circumstances. She has a right not only to all the necessaries, but to all the conveniences, comforts, ornaments of person, etc. that are suited to her station and degree in life. And there are, I think, but two limitations that can here be admitted. The first is, that what the wife requires must be real conveniences, and real elegances, and not the accesses of luxury and vanity; which false taste, the more it is indulged, is found by experience, to be more and more insatiable. The other limitation is, that no such ostentation or expense can reasonably be desired, or reasonably consented to, as would hurt the interests of the family in general. Within these bounds, it will have the air of tyranny to deny; beyond, it would be cruelty to grant.

The last thing that I mentioned was the duty of husbands in not separating from their wives, but for reasons which virtually dissolve the contract itself, as being inconsistent with the very nature and end of it. This I thought it necessary just to hint at, because though divorces are

generally regulated in all well-established societies, separations are not. And the husband has this step more in his power, as the common property is more immediately vested in him; and if he be of a singular or variable, of a proud or too resentful, temper, will, upon this very account, have stronger temptations to commit this enormity.

But I choose not to enlarge on this topic, because enough has been said by writers, who have treated of it more professedly, than falls within my general design; and that I may not be thought so invidious, by censoriousness and illnature, as to have in my view any particular

cases.