Our relief at the morality of the reassurance that man is not promiscuous in his fancies must not blind us to the fact that he is (to use the word coined by certain American writers to describe themselves) something of a Varietist.  Even those who say there is only one man or woman in the world for them, find that it is not always the same man or woman.  It happens that our law permits us to study this phenomenon among entirely law-abiding people.  I know one lady who has been married five times.  She is, as might be expected, a wise, attractive, and interesting woman.  The question is, is she wise, attractive, and interesting because she has been married five times, or has she been married five times because she is wise, attractive, and interesting?  Probably some of the truth lies both ways.  I also know of a household consisting of three families, A having married first B, and then C, who afterwards married D. All three unions were fruitful; so that the children had a change both of fathers and mothers.  Now I cannot honestly say that these and similar cases have convinced me that people are the worse for a change.  The lady who has married and managed five husbands must be much more expert at it than most monogamic ladies; and as a companion and counsellor she probably leaves them nowhere.  Mr Kipling’s question

“What can they know of England that only England know?”

disposes not only of the patriots who are so patriotic that they never leave their own country to look at another, but of the citizens who are so domestic that they have never married again and never loved anyone except their own husbands and wives.  The domestic doctrinaires are also the dull people.  The impersonal relation of sex may be judicially reserved for one person; but any such reservation of friendship, affection, admiration, sympathy and so forth is only possible to a wretchedly narrow and jealous nature; and neither history nor contemporary society shews us a single amiable and respectable character capable of it.  This has always been recognized in cultivated society:  that is why poor people accuse cultivated society of profligacy, poor people being often so ignorant and uncultivated that they have nothing to offer each other but the sex relationship, and cannot conceive why men and women should associate for any other purpose.

As to the children of the triple household, they were not only on excellent terms with one another, and never thought of any distinction between their full and their half brothers and sisters; but they had the superior sociability which distinguishes the people who live in communities from those who live in small families.

The inference is that changes of partners are not in themselves injurious or undesirable.  People are not demoralized by them when they are effected according to law.  Therefore we need not hesitate to alter the law merely because the alteration would make such changes easier.