We might have expected, from a superficial view of the facts, that there
would have been no difficulty either on the side of her father. Mr.
Wortley died one of the richest commoners in England; was of the first
standing in society, of good family, and he had apparently, therefore,
money to settle and station to offer to his bride. And he did offer both.
He was ready to settle an ample sum on Lady Mary, both as his wife and
as his widow, and was anxious that, if they married, they should live
in a manner suitable to her rank and his prospects. But nevertheless
there was a difficulty. The _Tatler_ had recently favoured its readers
with dissertations upon social ethics not altogether dissimilar to those
with which the _Saturday Review_ frequently instructs its readers. One
of these dissertations contained an elaborate exposure of the folly of
settling your estate upon your unborn children. The arguments were of
a sort very easily imaginable. ‘Why,’ it was said, ‘should you give
away that which you have to a person whom you do not know; whom you may
never see; whom you may not like when you do see; who may be undutiful,
unpleasant, or idiotic? Why, too, should each generation surrender its
due control over the next? When the family estate is settled, men of the
world know that the father’s control is gone, for disinterested filial
affection is an unfrequent though doubtless possible virtue; but so long
as _property_ is in suspense, all expectants will be attentive to those
who have it in their power to give or not to give it.’ These arguments
had converted Mr. Wortley, who is said even to have contributed notes
for the article, and they seem to have converted Lady Mary also. She
was to have her money, and the most plain-spoken young ladies do not
commonly care to argue much about the future provision for their possible
children; the subject is always delicate and a little frightful, and on
the whole, must be left to themselves. But Lord Dorchester, her father,
felt it his duty to be firm. It is an old saying, that ‘you never know
where a man’s conscience may turn up,’ and the advent of ethical feeling
was in this case even unusually beyond calculation. Lord Dorchester had
never been an anxious father, and was not now going to be a liberal
father. He had never cared much about Lady Mary, except in so far as he
could himself gain _éclat_ by exhibiting her youthful beauty, and he
was not now at her marriage about to do at all more than was necessary
and decent in his station. It was not therefore apparently probable
that he would be irritatingly obstinate respecting the income of his
daughter’s children. He was so, however. He deemed it a duty to see
that ‘_his_ grandchild never should be a beggar,’ and, for what reason
does not so clearly appear, wished that his eldest male grandchild
should be immensely richer than all his other grandchildren. The old
feudal aristocrat, often in modern Europe so curiously disguised in the
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account