I must now remark upon some other effects of the same system. First, the restriction of intercourse between the sexes before marriage renders indispensable, to some, the facility of divorce; for it would be unjust for a man who finds himself disappointed in his expectations of a wife, whom he has never before seen, not to be enabled to put her away. Secondly, it sometimes renders indispensable the licence of polygamy; for a man who finds his first wife unsuited to him may not be able to divorce her without reducing her to want; and the licence of polygamy becomes as necessary in this case as that of divorce in another. Thirdly, the liberty of polygamy renders the facility of divorce more desirable for the happiness of women; since, when a man has two or more wives, and one of them is dissatisfied with her situation, he is enabled to liberate her. Fourthly, the licence of divorce often acts as a check upon that of polygamy; for the fear of being obliged, by the influence of his first wife, or by that of her relations, to divorce her if he take a second, often prevents a man from doing this. Thus both these licences are required by the most important principle of the constitution of Muslim society, and each is productive of some moral benefit. In considering the question of their expediency, we should also remember that barrenness is much more common in hot climates than in those which are temperate. The Christian scheme is plainly opposed to polygamy; but as to divorce, some have contended that it only forbids putting away a wife against her will, unless for one cause.[275] Christians are often most unjust in their condemnation of Muslim laws and tenets, and especially condemn those which agree with the Mosaic code and the practices of holy men; such as polygamy (which Moḥammad _limited_), divorce, war for the defence of religion, purifications, and even minor matters.[276] Moḥammad endeavoured to remove one of the chief causes of polygamy and divorce, by recommending that a man should see a woman whom he proposed to take as his wife.[277] We might imagine that he could have made these practices less common than they now are, and always have been, among his followers, had he given more licence, allowing the man to enjoy a limited association with the object of his choice in the presence of her female or male relations (the former of whom might be veiled), without infringing further the general law of the separation of the sexes. But he saw that such liberty would very seldom, if ever, be allowed: scarcely any parents among the Arabs, except those of the lower classes, permit the little licence which he recommended. Instead of condemning him for allowing a plurality of wives, I think we should be more reasonable if we commended him for diminishing and restricting the number. I think, too, that as Moses allowed his people for the hardness of their hearts to put away their wives, and God denounced not polygamy