f.

The book showed how far Harden-Hickey had strayed from the teachings
of the Jesuit College at Namur, and of the Church that had made him
"noble."

All of these two years had not been spent only in New York.
Harden-Hickey made excursions to California, to Mexico, and to Texas,
and in each of these places bought cattle ranches and mines. The money
to pay for these investments came from his father-in-law. But not
directly. Whenever he wanted money he asked his wife, or De la
Boissiere, who was a friend also of Flagler, to obtain it for him.

His attitude toward his father-in-law is difficult to explain. It is not
apparent that Flagler ever did anything which could justly offend him;
indeed, he always seems to have spoken of his son-in-law with tolerance,
and often with awe, as one would speak of a clever, wayward child. But
Harden-Hickey chose to regard Flagler as his enemy, as a sordid man
of business who could not understand the feelings and aspirations of a
genius and a gentleman.

Before Harden-Hickey married, the misunderstanding between his wife's
father and himself began. Because he thought Harden-Hickey was marrying
his daughter for her money, Flagler opposed the union. Consequently,
Harden-Hickey married Miss Flagler without "settlements," and for the
first few years supported her without aid from her father. But his
wife had been accustomed to a manner of living beyond the means of the
soldier of fortune, and soon his income, and then even his capital, was
exhausted. From her mother the baroness inherited a fortune. This was
in the hands of her father as executor. When his own money was gone,
Harden-Hickey endeavored to have the money belonging to his wife placed
to her credit, or to his. To this, it is said, Flagler, on the ground
that Harden-Hickey was not a man of business, while he was, objected,
and urged that he was, and that if it remained in his hands the money
would be better invested and better expended. It was the refusal of
Flagler to intrust Harden-Hickey with the care of his wife's money that
caused the breach between them.

As I have said, you cannot judge Harden-Hickey as you would a
contemporary. With the people among whom he was thrown, his ideas were
entirely out of joint. He should have lived in the days of "The Three
Musketeers." People who looked upon him as working for his own hand
entirely misunderstood him. He was absolutely honest, and as absolutely
without a sense of humor. To