I am sorry for being contrarian, but my opinion is that Heathcliff is not particularly good at all. He keeps winning the game because he is basically playing it on easy mode.
Before the Married Women’s Property Act of 1882, a married woman did not have independent legal existence (she was a feme covert). At the time of Wuthering Heights, a wife wasn’t just unable to own and dispose of property; but also unable to earn wages in her own right (which was allowed by the Married Women’s Property Act of 1870) which is why in The Tenant of Wildfell Hall by Anne Brontë Helen Graham passes herself off as a widow for more reasons than just escaping her husband Arthur.
While divorce was not outright outlawed, it required a private Act of Parliament to annul the marriage (and until the Matrimonial Causes Act of 1857 the marriage was a sacramental institution, i.e. handled by ecclesial rather than civic courts). The complexities and costs of procuring a divorce were daunting in their own right, so that only the ultra-rich could even consider it, but they were virtually impossible for women to achieve on their own initiative; because a married women, per the principle of coverture, was subordinate and without property, she only had independent means if her previous legal guardians had specifically set aside her dowry as separate from the main property of the married couple (i.e. husband).
Even a generous dowry in itself would scarcely suffice to cover the proceedings of a divorce, meaning that only men could initiate it, and after all the proceedings were settled the men would typically retain the entirety of the couple’s properties and monies. Marriage might offer some financial security and social prestige for the women of the gentry, but it was also a surrender of all personal liberty and rights to property or even wages. Why do you think Jane Austen in Persuasion considers it obvious to everyone why a widow might choose to remain widowed (but then dedicates a paragraph or two to exploring why on Earth a widower would not seek to remarry)?
So what does this have to do with Heathcliff? Well, it means that as soon as he has seduced a teenage Isabella into marrying him, he has near-absolute lordship over her. Anything short of outright murder is game, and Isabella not only does not have independent means to sue her husband for any mistreatment, she can’t even sue him because she is not an independent legal entity! The case of Cathy Linton is very similar, because while it rests on coercion rather than deception, and on Heathcliff’s assuming of guardianship over his son and his properties, Cathy’s non-existence as a legal person is the same.
That Isabella’s brother (and Cathy’s father) is a local magistrate might seem like a leverage, but here again we come back to the matter that Heathcliff his playing the game on ‘easy mode’; in London, or any town with more than one or two lawyers, really, Edgar might be able to use his influence and money to hire someone who isn’t on Heathcliff’s payroll. Nelly could call the constabulary to smoke Heathcliff out of the Heights when he abducts Cathy and be more sure of the results.
But Wuthering Heights & Thrushcross Grange are set in a heavily rural region, where the one local lawyer can be easily bought, especially when Linton is ill and cannot move about fast enough to pre-empt Heathcliff’s bribery. In an urban environment, there would be other gentry, the emerging bourgeoisie, any number of people who could take notice and take action against Heathcliff.
Much like how Arthur Huntingdon isolates his wife Helen to lord over her the better, Heathcliff makes full use of the secluded nature of the Heights and the Grange. Far away from the eyes of society, where his personal wealth alone might not be enough to shield him from consequences of his villainy, it is easy for Heathcliff to play master. I wonder how he would do in Bath or London.
yousharknotpass
jimmyeatworldofficial
tangentwithtanner
theartofmadeline
amandla
titsay
romaincrisis
