But
that was the very sign of his conventionalism. Though he interested
himself more in these irregular persons, he hardly ever ventured to
paint their inner life so as to show how little there was to choose
between the sins of those who are at war with society and the sins of
those who bend to the yoke of society. He widened rather than narrowed
the chasm between the outlaw and the respectable citizen, even while
he did not disguise his own romantic interest in the former. He
extenuated, no doubt, the sins of all brave and violent defiers of the
law, as distinguished from the sins of crafty and cunning abusers of
the law. But the leaning he had to the former was, as he was willing
to admit, what he regarded as a "naughty" leaning. He did not attempt
for a moment to balance accounts between them and society. He paid his
tribute as a matter of course to the established morality, and only
put in a word or two by way of attempt to diminish the severity of the
sentence on the bold transgressor. And then, where what is called the
"law of honour" comes in to traverse the law of religion, he had no
scruple in setting aside the latter in favour of the customs of
gentlemen, without any attempt to justify that course.
Pages:
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194