Your imaginations, madam, replied the doctor, are too quick for language; you conjecture too soon what you do not wait to hear, and reason upon suppositions which cannot be allowed you.
When I mentioned my reflections upon human misery, I was far from concluding your ladyship miserable, compared with the rest of mankind; and though contemplating the abstracted idea of possible felicity, I thought that even you might be produced as an instance that it is not attainable in this world, I did not impute the imperfection of your state to wickedness, but intended to observe, that though even virtue be added to external advantages, there will yet be something wanting to happiness.
Whoever sees you, madam, will immediately say, that nothing can hinder you from being the happiest of mortals, but want of power to understand your own advantages. And whoever is admitted to your conversation, will be convinced that you enjoy all that intellectual excellence can confer; yet I see you harassed with innumerable terrors and perplexities, which never disturb the peace of poverty or ignorance.
I cannot discover, said Arabella, how poverty or ignorance can be privileged from casualty or violence; from the ravisher, the robber, or the enemy. I should hope rather that if wealth and knowledge can give nothing else, they at least confer judgment to foresee danger, and power to oppose it.
They are not indeed, returned the doctor, secured against real misfortunes, but they are happily defended from wild imaginations: they do not suspect what cannot happen, nor figure ravishers at a distance, and leap into rivers to escape them.
Do you suppose then, said Arabella, that I was frighted without cause?
It is certain, madam, replied he, that no injury was intended you.
Disingenuity, sir, said Arabella, does not become a clergyman—I think too well of your understanding to imagine your fallacy deceives yourself: why then should you hope that it will deceive me?
The laws of conference require that the terms of the question and answer be the same.
I ask, if I had not cause to be frighted? Why then am I answered, that no injury was intended?