“I fear my brother is forcing on this marriage.”

Srish Chandra mused a while; then said, “I cannot understand this at all.  What do you say?  Shall I write to Nagendra?”

Kamal Mani assented.  Srish made a grimace, but he wrote the letter.

Nagendra’s reply was as follows:—­

“Do not despise me, brother.  Yet what is the use of such a petition; the despicable must be despised.  I must effect this marriage.  Should all the world abandon me I must do it, otherwise I shall go mad:  I am not far short of it now.  After this there seems nothing more to be said.  You will perceive it is useless to try to turn me from it; but if you have anything to say I am ready to argue with you.  If any one says that widow-marriage is contrary to religion, I will give him Vidya Sagar’s essay to read.  When so learned a teacher affirms that widow-marriage is approved by the Shastras, who can contradict?  And if you say that though allowed by the Shastras it is not countenanced by society, that if I carry out this marriage I shall be excluded from society, the answer is, ’Who in Govindpur can exclude me from society?  In a place where I constitute society, who is there to banish me?’ Nevertheless, for your sakes I will effect the marriage secretly; no one shall know anything about it.  You will not make the foregoing objections; you will say a double marriage is contrary to morals.  Brother, how do you know that it is opposed to morality?  You have learned this from the English; it was not held so in India formerly.  Are the English infallible?  They have taken this idea from the law of Moses;[14] but we do not hold Moses’ law to be the word of God, therefore why should we say that for a man to marry two wives is immoral?  You will say if a man may marry two wives why should not a woman have two husbands?  The answer is, if a woman had two husbands certain evils would follow which would not result from a man’s having two wives.  If a woman has two husbands the children have no protector; should there be uncertainty about the father, society would be much disordered; but no such uncertainty arises when a man has two wives.  Many other such objections might be pointed out.  Whatever is injurious to the many is contrary to morals.  If you think a man’s having two wives opposed to morality, point out in what way it is injurious to the majority.  You will instance to me discord in the family.  I will give you a reason:  I am childless.  If I die my family name will become extinct; if I marry I may expect children:  is this unreasonable?  The final objection—­Surja Mukhi:  Why do I distress a loving wife with a rival?  The answer is, Surja Mukhi is not troubled by this marriage:  she herself suggested it; she prepared me for it; she is zealous for it.  What objection then remains? and why should I be blamed?”

[Footnote 14:  The writer is mistaken in supposing that the Christian doctrine of monogamy is derived from the Mosaic law.]