Is it I? A book for every man.

by Horatio Robinson Storer

Other cases undoubtedly exist, where, for proved and patent unfaithfulness upon the part of one of the parties, it is rendered impossible for the other to remain conjoined in wedlock. I would not palliate such wickedness as adultery, but would merely state, from studying such cases,—for they fall within the scope of my observation both as a teacher and an expert,—that at times the offender has been actuated by motives of jealousy or of revenge: fancying himself or herself sinned against in this same identical manner, the false step has been taken as an offset, just as in many instances the husband has gone from home and astray, because he honestly thought that his wife had deliberately ceased to love him, while she, poor creature, pining for him at heart, was yet compelled to deny him her favors, on account of bodily suffering that perhaps he himself had occasioned.

There are still other causes of divorce. Their importance is so great, and the subject so closely concerns every citizen, that I have no hesitation in being even more explicit. In many cases the charge of infidelity is rested upon the communication, or supposed communication of infectious disease from one of the parties to the other. Often the charge is true, often it is false, at least so far as the imputation of sinful conduct is concerned. I disbelieve the statement so often made, that either one or the other of the two forms of specific disease has been occasioned, in the adult, by other than by sexual contact. The allegations as to water closets, soiled linen, &c., it has irreverently been remarked, should be allowed weight only in the cases of clergymen, or others supposed by their position to be above the scandalous practices of the every day world. There is no doubt that to children such disease has been communicated by suckling an unclean wet nurse, or by her using to bathe it the foul rags with which she had cleansed her own sores. In the case of adults, however, there are certain mistakes that can be made, that indeed have been made, and have plunged families into the deepest distress, the suspected party being wholly innocent. One of these errors depends upon the fact that the primary lesion of the most dreadful disease of unchastity may escape even the most careful scrutiny, or from its insignificant appearance may be considered of trifling importance. The disease being inheritable, may yet not be evinced in husband or wife save as tainting their children, the unmistakable signs of such taint being familiar to every physician, and upon this discovery of infidelity, it may be attributed to the wrong party. Another source of error is, that the other result of unfaithfulness may be simulated by the effects of peculiar irritations, or of the chastest congress under certain circumstances. Of this fact there is not the slightest doubt.

Where none of these causes exist, the fire that consumes the bonds of marriage as tow, is kindled from a spark, the veriest trifle in itself, some unkind or careless word or look, perhaps unnoticed even by the offender. This spark, through our own innate perversity, for I contend that here as elsewhere, in sexual relations, the fault lies generally with the man, or through the malicious or ill-judged meddling of third parties, is fanned into flame, and then the work is done: a separation, with or without the formality of a legal divorce, becomes but too often inevitable, or if not carrying matters to this extent, perhaps for the sake of the children, the parties still live together, united in semblance, but in reality living the most dreary of prison lives, each virtually changed to a foe.

For these sad experiences is there no remedy? Some would find it in legislation, and would so extend the legal grounds for divorce that it might become a relief or a luxury within the reach of every one. To this, however, there are many grave objections of such importance that they must everywhere be acknowledged; enumerating some of them, I shall not attempt to present them all, for my remarks upon this subject are not intended to be exhaustive, but are only collateral to the general inquiry we have been pursuing.

First. Were divorces made more common, there would be far more children and invalid women thrown upon other persons than their legitimate owners for support, that is to say, upon the community. The long and bitter trials that take place between parents for the custody of their children, do not always rest upon parental affection; they are sometimes based upon spite or revenge.

Secondly. The weaknesses and evil passions of mankind are only controlled, to a great degree, by the existence of law, to thwart which is attended by personal detriment. Remove or relax the statutes, and an inducement, as it were, is held out to baseness and to crime. “The saints,” said the wise observer I have already quoted, “are all in heaven.” We are all of us mortal, and prone to selfishness, to retort when irritated, to fly into passion when retorted to. There is too much reason to believe that were divorces possible wherever, at one time or another, they have been longed for, scarce a house on earth would stand. The test would be too much for poor human nature. If he would challenge this assertion, let every man first ask himself “Is it I?”, and then he may look into the mysteries of the circle of neighbors surrounding him.

It has very truly been said that every person in this world bears his cross, and that in every house there is a skeleton. The closet may be adroitly concealed, and its door may be kept closed, but though the dry bones never rattle, though indeed they drop into dust, yet the knowledge that they are surely there, robs home life to many of half or of all its charm. In the little chafes and ills, the disappointments and sorrows of married life, the rule of safety is to bear and forbear, recollecting that every really chivalrous or whole-hearted man should, seek, as the stronger, to bear more than an even half of the natural burden.

Thirdly. Were divorces more common, or more readily obtained, the very foundation of all society and civil government would be uprooted. The stability of the state rests upon that of the elements of which it is composed. When these return to chaos, or dissolve themselves into the thinnest air, the commonwealth itself must prove a bubble, collapsing as soon as pricked by circumstance.

And, fourthly. To seek peace and mental quiet through a divorce is, as a general thing, but cowardice. To encourage them is, therefore, to offer a premium for pusillanimity. Were marriages, or rather engagements, contracted less hastily, and never, as is sometimes confessed, from curiosity, coquetry, or for fun, much, very much evil and suffering would be prevented. Men and women are often but the silliest of children, playing with each other’s hearts as though they were toys, and sowing for themselves and for each other a harvest of life-long misery. I am writing no homily. I am stating what every man who reads this knows to be the fact, and there is not a single one of us, however happy his present relation, who has not some careless, or rude, or positively unkind word or act to regret, possibly to bitterly repent himself of. We may well excuse women for the witching, though sometimes galling, arts they practise on us, for it is but a part of their charm. Let us, however, never excuse ourselves for inflicting hurt upon them, or disaster. If carelessly done, it should be sincerely regretted. No gentleman could commit such an act with malice aforethought.

Were these the rules of life generally followed, and were they all embodied in the single line, “To err is human, to forgive divine,” divorces would no more be thought of, and we should taste even in this world that best of refreshments, the sweet sleep of the just.