JOHN WESLEY AND HIS WIFE.

Auckland Star, Volume XXVI, Issue 265, 14 November 1885, Page 3

JOHN WESLEY AND HIS WIFE.

A Remonstrance from a Relative,

Mr Edward Vazeille Stocks, referring to the letter of John Wesley to hia wife, which we published a short time ago, objects that though it boars "many internal evidences of authenticity," yet the "remarks thereon cast an unfair, not to say falae, colouring on the character of the lady—a direct maternal ancestor of my own—whose memory is held in reverential respect by her descendants." Here is a portion of Mr Stocks's explanation:—There can be no doubt that the union of Mr Wesley with Mrs Vazeille wns ill-assorted and unhappy. That Mrs Vazoille was the widow of a gentleman whosedevotion to, and love (Jr, her were very warm, is made evident by the tone of an original letter from him to her in my possession, and now before me, in which he addresses her thua—"My dearest," and sayß . . . " 1 desire thee to make thyself easy ■' (during his temporary and unexpected absence), "and livo well and keep thyself well," and, after giving htr some general directions, concludes with these words, "I am, with sincerest and healthy {sic) affection, thy husband, Anthony Vazeille," being in strong contrast with 11ib liaid epistle published by you. Her firet man Inge had been full of happiness from the simple cause that it was a union of two loving, .sympathetic hearts, whereas thoie is abundant evidence to show that her subsequent weJding was the outcomo of motives which, under tho circumstances and peculiar conditions in which they both lived, could hardly have resulted otherwise than it did. Mr Wesley had scarcely recoverod from tho pangs of disappointed love. In a letter to Mr Thomas Bigg, of Newcastle, dated October 7, 1749, he writes :—" For ten years God has been preparing a fellow labourer for me; by a wonderful train of Providence last year I was convinced of it. ... But wo soon after were torn asunder by a whirlwind. . . , The whole world fought against me. . . . Yesterday I saw my friend (that was), and him to whom she was sacrificed" (see "The Orphan House of Wesley," by W. W. Stamp, lato President of the Conference; John Mason Finsbury, p. 51) — yet in February, 1751, he was married to Mrs Vazoille. Absorbed by the work he had in hand, he failed to oner to his second love those demonstrations of affection to which she had been accustomed, and which alone mako matrimony desirable. She, on, the other hand, a highly educated and sensitive lady, enddwed with a considerable fortune, accustomed as she had been to the most devoted attentions of an affectionate husband, feeling tho neglect of his successor (whether that neglect was unavoidable or not), and witnessing tho honour and warm expressions of friendship lavished upon him by his admirers of both Bexes, often riding with him in the carriage purchased with her money while she was left alone, could hardly fail to feel neglected by him who had vowed to " love and comfort, to honour and keep her in sickness and in health," one does not wonder that marriage under such circumstances should turn out unhappily. What I wish to point out to your readers is that the fault was not solely on the side of the lady, as has been and still in, I fear, the fashion to aliirm in this case— at any rate, tho letter which you have published does not evidence much of that " softness " which Mr W'esloy says is tho only influence by which "love can bo won," I am not aware that man's greatnoss tends to develop marital affection. Perhaps John Wesley was too great a man to cultivate such insignificant qualifications. There can be no doubt that tho marriage turned out unfortunately; in fact, it waa an instance of " marryingjn haste and repenting at leisure." Further, there is much better ground forbolieving£hat Mr Wesley's estrangement from his brother Charles wag due rathor to tho in±onded marriage with his first love than his consummated union with Mrs Vazeille.—" Pall Mall Gazette.1'