French and Oriental Love in a Harem

You will not, I trust, do me the wrong of believing that I, wavering in

my faith, intend forthwith to abandon the principles in which I was

brought up. But a subject so serious as the one I have been devoting

myself to, demands the most frank and honest examination. I will not

deliver a judgment; I will merely state the facts. Now it is an

established fact that the people who permit by their laws a plurality of

wives are, even at the present time, far more numerous than the

monogamists. Statistics prove that out of the thousand million

inhabitants of this globe, Christianity with all its sects, and Judaism

thrown in, does not number more than two hundred and sixty millions

according to Balbi, or two hundred and forty millions according to the

London Bible Society.

Since the remainder, consisting of Mahometans, Buddhists,

Fire-worshippers, and Idolaters, all practise polygamy more or less, it

follows that on this globe of ours, the monogamists constitute

one-fourth only of the whole population. Such is the naked, unadorned

truth!

Are we wrong? Are they right? It is not my business to decide this

point. Philosophers and theologians far more patient than I am, have

given it up as a bad job. Voltaire, with his subtle genius, settled the

question in his own characteristic fashion, by supposing that an

imaginary God had from the beginning decreed an inequality in this

matter, regulated by geographical situation, in these words:-"I shall draw a line from Mount Caucasus to Egypt, and from Egypt to

Mount Atlas; all men dwelling to the east of this line shall be

permitted to marry several wives, while those to the west of it shall

have one only."

And, as a matter of fact, it is so.

But having disposed of this important point, there remains a loftier

question for us to elucidate--one consisting entirely of sentiment. The

treatment of woman being our only objective, our present business is to

decide on which side of the line its character is the most respectful,

the most worthy and the most flattering towards her. Certainly our

doctrine is purer, our law more divine. Nevertheless, as sincere judges,

we ought, perhaps, to examine and see whether we do not transgress

against our absolute principles. And I must confess that I cannot now

approach this delicate question without some misgiving. In the judgment

of every tribunal, the case of polygamy is a hopelessly bad one. That I

am ready to admit; but might it not be urged against the other side that

in practice the court knows very well that the law is not observed? What

judge can be found, however austere, who has never offended against it?

To sum the matter up briefly (whispering low our confessions, if you

like), what man is there among us--I am not talking of Don Juans, who

catalogue their amours, nor of Lovelaces, but of ordinary men of say

thirty years old--who can remember how many mistresses he has had? What,

is this the monogamy we have been making such a flourish about?