[ 134 ]
band, but she would not be a Wife, and, if you bear the blunt Stile that some People put it into, she would only keep a St———n.
There is indeed no dissembling the Matter, 'tis neither better or worse; she would please her Appetite with the bare brutal Part, but would be freed from that which she calls the trouble of Matrimony Child-bearing; which, by the way, the most virtuous, modest, chast and valuable Ladies in the World, have, in all Ages, esteemed to be the Blessing of a married Life.
I remember there was an Example of a Lady in a certain neighbouring Country, who married a Person of Quality, but conditioned with him not to cohabit for a certain Time, I think it was for a Year or two; and the Reason she gave for it was, that she would not spoil her Shape; but then, as above, she conditioned not to cohabit, and yet when she did cohabit, her Lord did not find her so chast, or that her Virtue was of so much value to her as her Beauty; and she ventured, if Fame lies not, the spoiling her Shapes, in an extraordinary manner, when she declined the Enjoyment of her own Husband, and ran the risque of her small Waste in the ordinary way. But that Part is not to the present Case.
In all the Examples I have met with, where the Conduct of the Person has been justifiable, they have joined to their Aversions for Child-bearing the proper Remedies, namely, abstinence from the Men; if the Lady that desires to be no Breeder, keeps her self single and chast; if she preserves her Virtue, and remains unmarried, I have no more to say, let it be to her as she desires; no doubt she will not betrou-
