Page images
PDF
EPUB

9. Enraptured by the pleasures of the sexual sentiment, and finding them naturally associated with, and only to be enjoyed in their highest perfection when associated with, a high and empassioned degree of benevolence and of sensibility to the beautiful; observing, too, that the strict regulations of indissoluble marriage are destructive of that freedom so essential to love, without which, sexual intercourse loses the greater part of its attractions; and that such restraints, sustained by law, make the parties the property of each other, and tend to transform them from mutual lovers, into obligated prostitutes,* the poets have undertaken, against the ascetics of whatever school, the defence of love, and of its free indulgence, at least so far as the men are concerned. It is they who have been the great champions of those forensic ideas, expounded in the preceding chapter, and, in general, the ardent opposers of the whole mystic-ascetic system. The modern dramatic poets especially have taken a very active part in this warfare; which sufficiently explains the horror with which ascetic moralists regard the modern Drama, and the hatred with which they pursue it.

10. It must be confessed, however, that, as respects the duty of chastity, the mystic-ascetic system, in point of equity, far surpasses the forensic codes. The view of chastity taken by the ascetic

* "How oft when pressed to marriage have I said, Curse on all laws but those which Love has made.

Love, free as air, at sight of human ties,

Spreads his light wings, and in a moment flies," &c., &c.

POPE'S Eloisa and Abelard.

mystics, has not allowed them to make any distinction between women and men. What they call lust, under which name they denounce every emotion of sexual desire, is as criminal in the one as in the other. Hence, among several other reasons already indicated, women, in general, have been led to regard with favor the mystic-ascetic code. Even the doctrine of that code with respect to divorces has been esteemed a boon by them. Sensible of the injustice with which they have ever been treated, they have regarded the system of indissoluble marriage as at least a partial security against the caprices of the men, giving them, in fact, a sort of property in their husbands; and they have reasonably dreaded, lest freedom of separation, if allowed, would be allowed as it hitherto always has been, only upon terms, which would assign all its advantages to the men, and all its evils to themselves.

CHAPTER VII.

MUTUAL DUTIES OF RELATIVES, FRIENDS, INFERIORS, SUPERIORS, ENEMIES, AND STRANGERS.

1. We have had occasion already, in the first part of this treatise, to explain what no theory of morals heretofore propounded even attempts to explain, why, in all forensic codes of morals, so many duties are required towards children, parents, near relations,

and intimate friends, beyond those required towards mere acquaintances or entire strangers. It does not seem necessary to add any thing here to what we have already said respecting the mutual duties of parents and children, and the rules according to which those duties are determined.* The practice of infanticide, allowed in so many communities, though a seeming, we have shown not to be a real, violation of those rules; since it has never been morally justified except as a means of escaping greater evils to the child, as well as to the parents; and the same may be said of a custom known to prevail in some savage tribes, which allows the children, under certain circumstances, to terminate the existence of their old and helpless parents.

The peculiar degree of power allowed to the father, and of veneration and service required from the child, as formerly among the Romans, and at present among the Chinese, ought rather to be looked upon as a political institution, and, as such, will be considered in the Theory of Politics.

2. The bond of relationship is observed to be of much less apparent strength and extent in civilized, than in barbarous communities. This appearance is owing not so much to any decrease in civilized communities of the force of the sentiment of benevolence towards relatives, as to its increase towards neighbours and fellow-men in general; whence, less distinction comes to be made on the mere ground of relationship.

* See Part I. Ch. 2, § 21 and 38.

3. The same observation applies also to all those limited forms of good will in which benevolence is restricted to a class, a caste, or a particular community or nation. It necessarily follows, that, as benevolence becomes more diffused, it is apt to be less concentrated. Bacon, in his Essays, observes, that "the best works, and of greatest merit for the public, have proceeded from the unmarried or childless men; which, both in affections and means, have married and endowed the public." Hence, too, we may understand why men whose philanthropy was unquestionable, have not always been models in the private relations of life. Rousseau sent his children to a foundling hospital and publicly justified the act; envious rumor has accused even the illustrious Howard of hard-heartedness towards his son; Bentham seems, sometimes, to have acted very strangely towards his friends.

4. The duties of Friendship have formed a favorite topic, especially with the ancient moralists. In modern times, as women have gradually risen towards equality, friendship and love have been more and more conjoined; and intimate friendships between men to which so many obstacles are opposed, and which are so liable to disruption, have been less cultivated.

The high standard of the duties of friendship, the strict obligation by which friends are thought to be bound to each other, depends upon the same considerations which regulate the duties of love. A man does not choose his parents, his children, his brothers, or his sisters; and family affection fre

quently encounters the obstacle of very disagreeable qualities and even very injurious conduct on the part of our relations. But our friends we do choose; and we choose them precisely for the reason that they are specially agreeable to us; that we find a pleasure in their society. This pleasure tends to increase as towards them the average force of our benevolence; and of course, to raise as towards them the standard of moral obligation.

The disposition to friendship enjoys a higher degree of moral approbation than the disposition to love. The sentiment of self-comparison is very apt to run counter to friendship; the powerful stimulus of sexual desire is absent; and hence the capacity for friendship is thought to require a greater degree of benevolence. Besides, it is a more expansive sentiA man may have several friends, and friends in several degrees; he is supposed able to love but

ment.

one woman.

5. For the same reason, violations of the duties of friendship are regarded with sterner condemnation, than breaches of the duties of love. The sexual sentiment which enters so considerably into the latter passion, is in its nature so capricious, and through satiety or disappointment is apt so suddenly to change its object, that according to the poets, Jupiter laughs at the breach of lovers' vows; and though often esteemed by, the suffering party, the deepest and most irremediable of injuries, and as such allowed great weight when regarded in the light of provocation, violations of the duty of a lover taken by themselves, and unattended by ag

« PreviousContinue »