PROSPECTIVE POLYGAMY.

NZ Truth, Issue 508, 13 March 1915, Page 5

PROSPECTIVE POLYGAMY.

A Reply to J. B. Hulbert.

. . "Pear "Truth," — Where has .1. U. Hul. ... Bert been hanging out all (here weary years? He says the upper clamj women would not submit to concubinage. Wot oh I Why n concubinage of nn lnlhiltcly worse kind tlmn tlmt which forms thu kernel of Mr. J.B.H/h objection exists m our midst this very day. Further, 1 It Is, to my mind, a serious qucs- ' . tjon as to whether (he rnce Is nny one „ whit better, off for the monogamous .marriage ulnte as advocated or demanded by our present-day social and ,f lvU laws. If, Hiiy, the exigency arisen and (If the number of slain as hull- . cated by our cabins Is any data to - . Judge by) thero Is a grave possibility of it doing ho, wo will have millions of widows nnd spinsters thrown on i thq world of work, nnd n new problem will arise, which will entirely alter tho ethics and tho auindnrd of chivalry and honor which Is vow extended to our women. Thero have been Instances , . In the world's history when man— man tho ruler — has deemed It "legally" ne- '.'■ ewjsary not to advocate, but to compel " polygamy (thr rapo of the Sablnes has this color). .1.1.1. H. says that women In tho more highly developed communities will not submit to concublnngo. Won't nho? What In the woman now-n-days , wbo Im married' to a. rich roue? Shame ' ' or economic dependonco m many caseß U.'op mucli from soliciting the. nld of the. divorce court. Indifference In others '.dkllows the man to do as he pleases \ |f >wn low ». rto lon X aM M 0 keeps his % ,~1/Jfo and his homo lit comfort. All history has shown that woman will do exactly what material conHidurntlon demund as equivalent:. The ethics of any rnce or period are only thu outcome of environment and circumstances peculiar to the times or people. As an InKtancc, what a Ynnkeo Hloek-brnkor would consider a. smart ploce of business .1.H.11, would probably designate ns downright thieving. A Munkok merchant may have live wives, and everyone true to him. They have no other

i choice. How often do we hear of (pardon the word) ''bludgers" protecting themselves from the couch of virtuous matrimony. It is a fact (vide KrafftEbing) that many monogamists protitute their wives m such a sickening way that many of the wives would welcome polygamy. Many married men think that the marriage rite gives them a right to everything that is the woman except her immortal soul. That is God's and holy matrimony's. Wonder *if J.B.H. ever heard what a Maori chief named Paora once said to the Yen. Arch-Deacon Maunsell. The Venerable Arch., had been catechising the old chief about the polygamic laws of the Maoris. He wanted to introduce the monogamlc laws of our holy church (having, posßibly, the fee m his mind's eye). So, through an interpreter, he said, "Say to him that the bad custom of having two wives is still going on amongst his people, and I want his assurance that he will stop it." The old chief listened and then roared put, "It is not a bad custom. It is a good one. The birds of. the air and the beasts of the glades cease to pair when the female is fertilised and for long Intervals, to my certain knowledge, the Pakeha with his model one-wife system continues to occupy the same apartment till within a few nights of the birth of a child. The Maori has bred a race of noble men and 1 women, physically and mentally strong, by his custom." How the Maori has degenerated since the introduction of the "monogamic" system everyone knows. Let not J.8.H., or any other, worry much about the mooted polygamic future. If the circumstances warrant it, polygamy will be | accepted cheerfully and become a phase of our own' ethics, arid, •m the years to come people will read m their | histories the strange tale of how men m the nineteenth century were supposed only (but only supposed m many cases) to have one wife. The circumstances of the hour mould the thought of the mind and the ethic and custom is the resultant fruit.— Yours, etc., A. RETTIN.