WHIT MEN HAVE DONE FOR MONEY.

Otago Witness, Issue 1912, 13 July 1888, Page 32

WHIT MEN HAVE DONE FOR MONEY.

What have men not done for money ? The money motive, indeed, is present in most of the enterprises and affairs in which man concerns himself, if we except those undertaken through the influence of the purer affections and noble ambitions.

It was for money that the maritime adventurers of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries sailed over unknown seas in quest of mythical El Dorados; for money that the alchemists oi' old dedicated then lives to the search after the philosopher's stone ; for money that the great Duke of Marlborough allowed his reputation and honour to be tarnished by accepting bribes ; for money that Arkwright and so many other notable inventors wrought while solving the mpolsamcal problems the elucidation of which gave England her industrial greatness ; for mon<'y that Fauntleroy forged ; that Law schemed ; and that Eugene Aram committed murder. So the catalogue might be continued through endless ramifications, the list being added to from every state and condition of life — political, professional, commercial, literary, artistic, and even religious. The inducement of money is the prime mover of the universe. Often cursed as the " root of all evil," it has been as often blessed a.« the "provider of all good." But it is rather of its exceptional than general working that we purpose to speak at present —to show how it operates in prompting men to do difficult, uncommon, or arduous feats.

English kings have done some strange things for money. Richard I raised for his military enterprise against Saladin by selling Crown "manors ancT fortresses, and | would have sold London itself if he could have found a purchaser. Henry 111 sold or pledged the Crown jewels when in want of cash ; and when Edward I got them back again and added largely to them, they were stolen by thieves — also for moneys sake — while the monarch was away in the North having a tussle with the Scots. Another pawner of Crown jewels was the third Edward; and even the heroic Henry V was compelled to pledge his " Skeleton Collar,!' ] garnished with sapphires, rubies, and pearls, and his " Rich Collar," valued at £2800, to raise funds to carry him and his army to France to chastise the jesting Dauphin. Henry VI and James I both, resorted to similar means of supplying their monetary niiedrf ; and Charles I cleared out the'jewelhouse altogether, sent the " baubles " to Holland, where the money-lenders would have nothing to do with them, and at last had to place them in the hands of merchants at home ; the relief he thus obtained being of a very temporary nature, however, much trouble arising subsequently when the king was asked to redeem the jewels. Later British rulers and princes have also gone great lengths in their schemings for money, ' but the Crown jewels have not in recent times been regarded as marketable commodities.

Marrying for money is common enough, though it often , assumes very uncommon aspects ; but an instance of " not marrying " for money caused some little stir a few years ago. In a case that came before the Court of Queen's Bench in 1872, it appeared that four years previously a Miss Crowdy, aunt of the plaintiff, Mr Cresswell, had agreed to give her nephew, who was 23 years of age, an annual sum of £300 for life conditionally on his not marrying a certain widow with three children. The nephew had fulfilled his part of the strange bargain, but the aunt had not adhered to hers; hence the suit for enforcing the carrying out of the contract. The court gave a verdict for the young man.

Money is made a marriage condition in some banks — notably the London banks — it being insisted that no clerk shall marry until he lias obtained a stipulated income. It is to be hoped that the banks do not allow "love's young dream " to be thwarted by wit hholding the necessary stipend too long. As regards Government clerks, the Crown is not so exacting, the precise relation of money to marriage not having been authoritatively laid down ; nevertheless, stringent regulations on the matter of insolvency exists civil servants being expressly forbidden to become security for needy friends, and dismissal being the penalty for financial trouble. A " Somerset House young man" may either marry for money or not, as he pleases, only if his marriage leads him into embarrassment he is not to expect any mercy from his Stfi te employers.

One or two odd matches for money may be worth alluding to before we dismiss the subject of matrimony, or " matfcer-o'-money," as a wapr onw styled it. A young blacksmith, 18 years of age, was paying court to the daughter of a widow. He called to see the young lady one evening, and finding her from home, proposed to aw:ut her return. In the course of conversation the mother said : " What is the use of marrying a penniless girl. Now, I have £500 ; marry me." And he did. Widows arc famed for business-like courtships. In 17? 5 a widow residing in Olerkenwell, aged "about 40," lent money to a young shoemaker to assist him in his business. How much it benefited him we are not told, but he presently had a chance of bettering himself by removing to Leicester. He waited upon the old lady, and told her of his intention to leave London. She said little, but the next day he was surprised to find himself arrested for the money due to the widow. Shn offered to cancel the debt, however, if he would marry her, and he accepted the condition, and not only secured the extinction .of his debt but £1000 into the bargain. A young lady of Peckham, a Miss Sally Berrybridge,' bestowed her hand upon Mr Josiah Wliitaker, whose 94 years were counterbalanced by his £50,000; and in the "Gentleman's Magazine "for 1731 we have the following record: — "Married, the Rev. W. Roger Wain, of York, about 26 years of age, to a Lincolnshire lady, upwards of 80, wit h whom he is to" have £SOOO in money, £300 per annum, and a coach and four during life only."