of protection, maintenance, position and what not, for a _quo_ of
the various services that may be conveniently epitomized in the
phrase _de mensa et thoro_. The other, the only possible
existence for two beings whose passionate, mutual attraction
demands the perfect fusion of their two existences into a common
life. Now to this passionate attraction I have never become,
and, having no temperament (thank Heaven!), shall never become, a
party. Before the turbulence therein involved I stand affrighted
as I do before London or the deep sea. I once read an epitaph in
a German churchyard: "I will awake, O Christ, when thou callest
me; but let me sleep awhile, for I am very weary." Has the human
soul ever so poignantly expressed its craving for quietude? I
fancy I should have been a heart's friend of that dead man, who,
like myself, loved the cool and quiet shadow, and was not allowed
to enjoy it in this world. I may not get the calm I desire, but
at any rate my existence shall not be turned upside down by mad
passion for a woman. As for the social-contract aspect of
marriage, I want no better housekeeper than Antoinette; and my
dining-table having no guests does not need a lady to grace its
foot; I have no _a priori_ craving to add to the population. "If
children were brought into the world by an act of pure reason
alone," says Schopenhauer, "would the human race continue to
exist? Would not a man rather have so much sympathy with the
coming generation as to spare it the burden of existence? or at
any rate not take it upon himself to impose that burden upon it
in cold blood?" By bringing children into the world by means of
a marriage of convenience I should be imposing the burden of
existence upon them in cold blood. I agree with Schopenhauer.

And the dreadful bond of such a marriage! To have in the closest