ompted by
sinister motives and a false pride, as that of wealth, honor, and social
position. They do not consult the law of suitability, but that of
availability. They think that wealth and family distinction will compensate
for the absence of all moral and amiable qualities, that if outward
circumstances are favorable, there need not be inward adaptation of
character. Hence they will dictate to their children, make their marriage
alliance a mere business matter, and demand implicit obedience on the
penalty of expulsion from the parental home, and disinheritance forever.
They are thus willing to prostitute the domestic peace and happiness of
their offspring to the gratification of their own sordid and inordinate
lust for gain and empty distinction.

Who does not perceive and acknowledge the evil of such a course? It
involves unfeeling despotism on the one hand, and a servile obedience on
the other. The affections are abused; the idea and sacredness of marriage
are left out of view; the conditions of domestic felicity are not met. All
is supremely selfish; the power exercised is arbitrary; the submission is
slavish and demoralizing; the obedience involuntary and degrading; and the
result of it all is, an outrage against nature, against marriage, and
against God.

On the other hand, the interference of the parent should be persuasive, and
the obedience of the child, voluntary. The parent should reason with and
counsel the child; and seek by mild and affectionate means to secure
obedience to his advice. And if the child then persist in his own course,
the parent, we think, has discharged his duty, and the responsibility will
rest upon the child. He should not expel and disinherit him, and thus add
the hard-heartedness of the parent to the folly and perversity of the
child. He should love him still, and seek by parental tenderness to
alleviate the sad fruits of filial recklessness. Parents should so train
their children in the nursery and parlor, by instilling in them correct
principles of judgment in the choice of a companion, as to secure them ever
after from an imprudent choice. Here is the place to begin. Parents too
often omit this duty, until alas, it is too late.

We have now seen that the parent has no right to destroy the domestic
happiness of a child by uniting him forcibly in wedlock to one for whom he
has no true affection. On the other hand, the child should pay due
deference to the parent's moral suasion, an