WRITERS' WIVES.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2038, 16 July 1875, Page 2

WRITERS' WIVES.

There is nobody in the least acquainted with the minor history of .literature who docs not know that- its professors hare frequently been excellent husbands and fathers, in spite of the irritability which, since the time of Horace/ .lias been attributed at leapt to the poet?: "It has been .nothing unusual for distinguished writer! to marry women of no Remarkable literary cultivation, and to be very much their' humble (Servants toithe end:of the- nvitri-' monial career. There is no evidence that; ■ Shakespeare. was other than a good has* iband to his elderly consort; Milton, ,with hia 1 austere* -temperament^should never have married at all; the prettiest,, letters^iri the world are those -which fodi* iSteele used to send to his lady; Addison, in his domdstic : relational was Hhe tor* 1'" mented party, and many, a time .he must. have cursed l;the folly.-: wKicfi -sentn him to the, peerage for a helpmate. In mbdern.jdays'w'e firid Words worth* hap? y pily married; Southey devoted- to his first wife, who was far from being 5 a* literary, woman ;_.Moore, exceedingly, fond 'of his Bessie,*' though he was a little :giyen. to meandering, as became the'mins«} trel of love and wine;- Shelley, after his" first .unfortunate - marriage, fortnnatc'in his second nuptials; Godwin, .with very, wrong an.d absurd :theories of marriage,. an excellent. husband ; while - the domestic .happiness of many literary.' men still living is known to all who are" interested^ in such matters. The felicity :r of hearth' and home depends to a great extent upon good sense; and, notwithstanding all public prejudices to the contrary, we believe that genuine genius seldom lacks a large measure of that quality. ..Nobody un-, derstands his own foiblefcand weaknesses; ~ if happily he may fall into them, better than the man of letters. He may, like., the rest of mankind, be wayward and" erratic; his gifts, however great;/hara" brought him no immunity from tempj*^ tions and from errors to which all are e^\ posed; he is usually in the public eyo, his every action vigilantly watched ,£nd remorsely "criticised; but those who suppose that he does not experience ,the ; , repentance, the chagrin,--and-the^ regret"* which are the lot of meaner natures, know nothing of the-problem, which they under* |take to solve, "nor of the'character which they, are swift to censure, while above <ili 'they are ignorant of -that'dtviae which, vaunteth not itself and is not puffed up. i If. the liteVaVy/'chahfcter is to be sternly judged, we insist that it ought to be according to its: best^example*/> iNobody confounds the great cqmmander at the U«ad of a'nifrmy with the crowd of cooks, sutlers, grooms,.and_plunderers,,ia, the rear. Such an example we may venture to allude to. The wife of Sir Walter Scott wa3 one-of-the simplests£" womankind. It is not at all certain thati ;she ever in thY least comprehended ttie^ .^character of-that glory which hia Ability, Jjhis untiring industry, and his great \ igenial nature hid brought- to.the gentleman _whtf' was Ijardly mows than 4 an jobscure Edinburgh writer when" uq jmarried her. Thoqgh. she said things lalmost childish before his great company, ;the baronet never £qv a>moment lqit Bw ierjuanimity, but : wa« jrespcctfui, as ■ loving, and. tender, toward* ? .her as if she had the genius .of. Sappho* jaud the learning of Anna Comnena. The 'record of her death, written in hjs diary jwhen his fortunes were shattered and the jproud man was looking bankruptcy in the • face and sternly defying it, is. a terriblypathetic disclosure of desolation "and |afeonyl M ., H e' loved her;though /she, was % ' pot a/genius—perhapsVif shelnad'ibeen,'. 1 'such, he might, not have, loved her, at. a l^,It would have been a bold thing stoffpealf^ disrespect&iliy of Lady Scot^ in' tho presence o!f he^ husband?' 1 Bui !| thyii perhaps the author of Wavcrly was not a genius.—New York Tribune.