SCOFFING AT MARRIAGE.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 2623, 4 May 1889, Page 1 (Supplement)

SCOFFING AT MARRIAGE.

Tiie unseemly discussion which a certain class of newspapers liave been making it conspicuous feature in their columns of Lite of the question '■ Is Marriage a Failure?''is simply a breaking out of the old and nauseous social malady of " free loyp." Icis amazing that any editor who has any regard for the reputability of his journal, or any respect for the welfare of society, should countenance the discussion of so grave a theme in the reckless and flippant style and mauuer iu \Hiich it is treated by the class of shal low iconoclastic writers who, in then anxiety to air their immoral sophistications, delight to exhibit their contempt for those things and institutions which reasonable ami good men deem too sacred to be assailable, The man or woman who seriously asks the question "Is marriage a failure?" is obviously disqualified by lack of either virtuous or proper experience, or of intelligent or thoughtful conviction, from answeriug or even discussing tho question at all, the very asking of it being almost proof positive that the one asking it is of the affirmative way of thinking, and that he or she is of the affirmative way of thinking b°cauio of experiences, observations, or theories that are at least superficial, but more probably the resultants of individual folly or viciousness of a depraved nature. A married lifo that has proved a fail ire because the parties of tho contract have had neither sense enough, mutual forbearance enough, or morality enough to bo faithful to its obligations, is not a just sample of the marital institution, is not a fair illustration of modern domesticity, is not an exponent of tha averago family conditions of civilised society. It is exceptional and abnormal. A true man and true woman entering into tho relatious of man arid wife with a rational deliberation, with genuine affection, and with high and pure motives, do not find marriage a failure. They know what they are about beforo entering into the intimate and saore<| partnership. It is on their part not a matter of impulse, of emotion, of money, nor of passion, but of mutual reciproc;U affection, guided and consummated by the dictates of reason and of a thoughtful anticipation of ail the possibilities and contingencies that are involved in the

-oleum contract. Such matches are made in heaven, and are heavenly in their lifelong continuance, and extend beyond this life into heaven itself. Marriage is a failure only when the man or the woman is a failure in his manhood or her womanhood. It is never a failure when the man and the woman are true to themselves and true to each other. It is never a failure when true love and honour are the links of unity. It is never a failure where good sense and good principle lead to and control the relationship. It is very rarely a failure in any event where children are its fruitage, and the family altar is the centre of daily sauctifiuation. Those who sneer and mock at marriage are not God's people ; they are not of those who are the best development of modern civilisation ; they are not examples either of social morality or sound sense. They are the froth and scum that il-jat and bnbble 011 the surface of social life. They are the people of unbridled passions, sensual and selfish instincts, or shallow minds. They are not the mauy, but the wild and reckless few. As a rule, marriage is not a failure, but quite the reverse. When it proves a failure it is an exception to the rule, just as cranks, idiots, lunatics, and moral lepers are exceptional developments of human svolution.—Chicago Journal.