r husband, no adept
in the female nature, had tried to use reason with her, instead of
something far more persuasive. Hence his failure to convince and
convert. The act of withdrawing from her, seemed, under the
circumstances, abrupt. In brief, there were probably small faults on
both sides, more than balanced by large virtues; and one should not be
hasty in judging.

When the merchant, strange to say, opposed views so calm and impartial,
and again, with some warmth, deplored the case of the unfortunate man,
his companion, not without seriousness, checked him, saying, that this
would never do; that, though but in the most exceptional case, to admit
the existence of unmerited misery, more particularly if alleged to have
been brought about by unhindered arts of the wicked, such an admission
was, to say the least, not prudent; since, with some, it might
unfavorably bias their most important persuasions. Not that those
persuasions were legitimately servile to such influences. Because,
since the common occurrences of life could never, in the nature of
things, steadily look one way and tell one story, as flags in the
trade-wind; hence, if the conviction of a Providence, for instance, were
in any way made dependent upon such variabilities as everyday events,
the degree of that conviction would, in thinking minds, be subject to
fluctuations akin to those of the stock-exchange during a long and
uncertain war. Here he glanced aside at his transfer-book, and after a
moment's pause continued. It was of the essence of a right conviction of
the divine nature, as with a right conviction of the human, that, based
less on experience than intuition, it rose above the zones of weather.

When now the merchant, with all his heart, coincided with this (as being
a sensible, as well as religious person, he could not but do), his
companion expressed satisfaction, that, in an age of some distrust on
such subjects, he could yet meet with one who shared with him, almost to
the full, so sound and sublime a confidence.

Still, he was far from the illiberality of denying that philosophy duly
bounded was not permissible. Only he deemed it at least desirable that,
when such a case as that alleged of the unfortunate man was made the
subject of philosophic discussion, it should be so philosophized upon,
as not to afford handles to those unblessed with the true light. For,
but to grant that there was so much as a mystery about such a case,
might by tho