_La Veuve et ses Deux Filles_ is better known by the title of _Blanche
and Vermillion_, under which it has been frequently printed, and was
also produced on the French stage by Mons. Florian, in March, 1781.
The moral of the story is declared by the Fairy to be that excessively
trite and common-place axiom, that happiness consists in content, or,
in the words of the author, the possession of things only that are
necessary without wishing for more; but the author forgot to show us
that Blanche was discontented. It does not appear that she wished for
superfluities, or to be a "great Queen," or that such an idea ever
entered her head till the Fairy promised her she should become one,
"not to reward," but "to punish," her for begrudging to give away
her plums. Poor Blanche is therefore made an _unhappy_ queen; her
low birth renders her an object of contempt at Court; the King is a
worthless person, who neglects the innocent girl his passion induced
him to place upon his throne, and who is the mother of his children;
and at length the miserable wife exclaims that "happiness is not to
be found in magnificent palaces but in the innocent occupations of
the country." Now this is foolish--it is worse, for it is false and
injurious. There is as much happiness in palaces and on thrones, thank
God, as there is in cottages. The occupations of a virtuous sovereign
are as innocent as those of a husbandman, while the power to do good,
existing with the will, must make the balance of happiness greatly in
favour of the former. The cares of State are burdensome enough, no
doubt, and the more conscientious the monarch, the weightier the sense
of responsibility; but has the countryman no cares, no sorrows, no
_vices_? The legal occupations of all classes are "innocent." Is it
only kings and nobles who yield to temptations or indulge in the evil
propensities of our common nature? There has been too much of this
fallacy infused into what are called moral stories, and at the risk of
being accused of breaking a butterfly on the wheel, I have singled out
this particular instance, as _Blanche and Vermillion_ is to be found
in almost every child's story-book. That the author's intention was
laudable, I do not doubt; but to read a wholesome lesson, she should
have shown Blanche to have been discontented with the lot assigned to
her by Providence, pining to mix in society for which she was neither
fitted by birth nor education, and dreaming that happiness consisted
solely in rank, wealth, and luxury. The moral should have been, not
that such possessions were incompatible with virtue and happiness, but
that their owners were not exempted from the frailties and sufferings
of humanity, and that unequal marriages were rarely fortunate ones.
All this, it will be said, she might mean, but it is not evident;
and the only impression made upon a child's mind by this story, if
any impression can be made by it whatever, is the very absurd and
objectionable one, that all kings and queens are wicked and unhappy,
and all farmers and dairy-maids virtuous and contented.