with a lover, I muſt repeat with emphaſis, a former obſervation,—it would be well if they were only agreeable or rational companions.—But in this reſpect his advice is even inconſiſtent with a paſſage which I mean to quote with the moſt marked approbation.
'The ſentiment that a woman may allow all innocent freedoms, provided her virtue is ſecure, is both groſsly indelicate and dangerous, and has proved fatal to many of your ſex.' With this opinion I perfectly coincide. A man, or a woman, of any feeling, muſt always wiſh to convince a beloved object that it is the careſſes of the individual, not the ſex, that is received and returned with pleaſure; and that the heart, rather than the ſenſes, is moved. Without this natural delicacy, love becomes a ſelfiſh perſonal gratification that ſoon degrades the character.
I carry this ſentiment ſtill further. Affection, when love is out of the queſtion, authoriſes many perſonal endearments, that naturally flowing from an innocent heart, give life to the behaviour; but the perſonal intercourſe of appetite, gallantry, or vanity, is deſpicable. When a man ſqueezes the hand of a pretty woman, handing her to a carriage, whom he has never ſeen before, ſhe will conſider ſuch an impertinent freedom in the light of an inſult, if ſhe have any true delicacy, inſtead of being flattered by this unmeaning homage to beauty. Theſe are the privileges of friendſhip, or the momentary homage which the heart pays to virtue, when it flaſhes ſuddenly on the notice—mere animal ſpirits have no claim to the kindneſſes of affection.
