LETTER X
MR. LOVELACE, TO JOHN BELFORD, ESQ.FRIDAY, JUNE 2.
Notwithstanding my studied-for politeness and complaisance for some dayspast; and though I have wanted courage to throw the mask quite aside; yetI have made the dear creature more than once look about her, by the warm,though decent expression of my passion. I have brought her to own, thatI am more than indifferent with her: but as to LOVE, which I pressed herto acknowledge, what need of acknowledgments of that sort, when a womanconsents to marrying?--And once repulsing me with displeasure, the proofof true love I was vowing for her, was RESPECT, not FREEDOM. Andoffering to defend myself, she told me, that all the conception she hadbeen able to form of a faulty passion, was, that it must demonstrateitself as mine sought to do.
I endeavoured to justify my passion, by laying over-delicacy at her door.Over-delicacy, she said, was not my fault, if it were her's. She mustplainly tell me, that I appeared to her incapable of distinguishing whatwere the requisites of a pure mind. Perhaps, had the libertinepresumption to imagine, that there was no difference in heart, nor anybut what proceeded from difference of education and custom, between thepure and impure--and yet custom alone, as she observed, if I did sothink, would make a second nature, as well in good as in bad habits.
***
I have just now been called to account for some innocent liberties whichI thought myself entitled to take before the women; as they suppose us tobe married, and now within view of consummation.
I took the lecture very hardly; and with impatience wished for the happyday and hour when I might call her all my own, and meet with no checkfrom a niceness that had no example.
She looked at me with a bashful kind of contempt. I thought it contempt,and required the reason for it; not being conscious of offence, as I toldher.
This is not the first time, Mr. Lovelace, said she, that I have had causeto be displeased with you, when you, perhaps, have not thought yourselfexceptionable.--But, Sir, let me tell you, that the married state, in myeye, is a state of purity, and [I think she told me] not oflicentiousness; so, at least, I understood her.
Marriage-purity, Jack!--Very comical, 'faith--yet, sweet dears, half thefemale world ready to run away with a rake, because he is a rake; and forno other reason; nay, every other reason against their choice of such aone.
But have not you and I, Belford, seen young wives, who would be thoughtmodest! and, when maids, were fantastically shy; permit freedoms inpublic from their uxorious husbands, which have shown, that both of themhave forgotten what belongs either to prudence or decency? while everymodest eye has sunk under the shameless effrontery, and every modest facebeen covered with blushes for those who could not blush.
I once, upon such an occasion, proposed to a circle of a dozen, thusscandalized, to withdraw; since they must needs see that as well thelady, as the gentleman, wanted to be in private. This motion had itseffect upon the amorous pair; and I was applauded for the check given totheir licentiousness.
But, upon another occasion of this sort, I acted a little more incharacter. For I ventured to make an attempt upon a bride, which Ishould not have had the courage to make, had not the unblushingpassiveness with which she received her fond husband's public toyings(looking round her with triumph rather than with shame, upon every ladypresent) incited my curiosity to know if the same complacency might notbe shown to a private friend. 'Tis true, I was in honour obliged to keepthe secret. But I never saw the turtles bill afterwards, but I thoughtof number two to the same female; and in my heart thanked the fondhusband for the lesson he had taught his wife.
From what I have said, thou wilt see, that I approve of my beloved'sexception to public loves. That, I hope, is all the charming iciclemeans by marriage-purity, but to return.
From the whole of what I have mentioned to have passed between my belovedand me, thou wilt gather, that I have not been a mere dangler, a Hickman,in the passed days, though not absolutely active, and a Lovelace.
The dear creature now considers herself as my wife-elect. The unsaddenedheart, no longer prudish, will not now, I hope, give the sable turn toevery address of the man she dislikes not. And yet she must keep up somuch reserve, as will justify past inflexibilities. 'Many and many apretty soul would yield, were she not afraid that the man she favouredwould think the worse of her for it.' That is also a part of the rake'screed. But should she resent ever so strongly, she cannot now break withme; since, if she does, there will be an end of the familyreconciliation; and that in a way highly discreditable to herself.
SATURDAY, JUNE 3.
Just returned from Doctors Commons. I have been endeavouring to get alicense. Very true, Jack. I have the mortification to find adifficulty, as the lady is of rank and fortune, and as there is noconsent of father or next friend, in obtaining this all-fetteringinstrument.
I made report of this difficulty. 'It is very right,' she says, 'thatsuch difficulties should be made.'--But not to a man of my known fortune,surely, Jack, though the woman were the daughter of a duke.
I asked, if she approved of the settlements? She said, she had comparedthem with my mother's, and had no objection to them. She had written toMiss Howe upon the subject, she owned; and to inform her of our presentsituation.*
* As this letter of the Lady to Miss Howe contains no new matter, butwhat may be collected from one of those of Mr. Lovelace, it is omitted.
***
Just now, in high good humour, my beloved returned me the draughts of thesettlements: a copy of which I have sent to Captain Tomlinson. Shecomplimented me, 'that she never had any doubt of my honour in cases ofthis nature.'
In matters between man and man nobody ever had, thou knowest.
I had need, thou wilt say, to have some good qualities.
Great faults and great virtues are often found in the same person. Innothing very bad, but as to women: and did not one of them begin withme.*
* See Vol. I. Letter XXXI.
We have held, that women have no souls. I am a very Turk in this point,and willing to believe they have not. And if so, to whom shall I beaccountable for what I do to them? Nay, if souls they have, as there isno sex in ethereals, nor need of any, what plea can a lady hold ofinjuries done her in her lady-state, when there is an end of herlady-ship?