ordered the Prince to put off his ragged clothes and wear garments suitable to his rank. She then appointed him head over all her servants, and left all she possessed in his charge, requesting him to enter the town two days after herself.
The disguised Princess went on ahead, and arriving at the palace changed her clothes to those befitting a princess awaiting the return of her husband. The Prince arrived the second day with all the Princess had won and left in his charge. Coming to his father he saluted him, and showing him his wealth told him this was the profit on the capital with which he had started some months before: his plan being that if the real owner presented himself to claim his own, he would have him seized and sent to jail. The King was very much pleased to see his son again safe and sound bringing with him the proofs of his industry.
He then came to his wife, and requested that now at least she might allow him to beat her with his slippers. The Princess, however, objected again, and going into her own apartment brought out the dirty clothes the Prince had worn when her slave, showed them to him and reminded him. of all that had happened.
The Prince was much abashed, begged her pardon, and never again suggested beating his clever wife with his slippers.
Garo Marriages.
Folk-Lore, xxxii. p. 202 et seqq.)
I am glad Sir James Frazer accepts my contention that "in the case cited marriage with the daughter was a consequence not a cause of the marriage with the widow." I repeat that the case is not clear, and I had not overlooked the general custom as reference to my note will show. It is also clear from the citations from Dalton, Gait, Hunter, and Playfair, that the man succeeds to enjoyment of the property as husband of the widow (his aunt in so many cases). Thus "material advantages are inseparably attached to the hand of the widow." That is my point.
