diff options
| author | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-14 20:11:13 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-14 20:11:13 -0700 |
| commit | 99b5d26c420c0f00ffd2baabbe689cd9d1e4ef65 (patch) | |
| tree | 3a71645c06434f563e285607daf6fb002ffc11c5 /38811-h | |
Diffstat (limited to '38811-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 38811-h/38811-h.htm | 20060 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 38811-h/images/frontispiece.jpg | bin | 0 -> 66335 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 38811-h/images/titlepage.jpg | bin | 0 -> 66178 bytes |
3 files changed, 20060 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/38811-h/38811-h.htm b/38811-h/38811-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..fe9a2a4 --- /dev/null +++ b/38811-h/38811-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,20060 @@ +<?xml version="1.0" encoding="us-ascii"?> + +<!DOCTYPE html + PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd" > + +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en"> + <head> + <title> + The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll, Vol. 11 (of 12) by Robert G. Ingersoll + </title> + <style type="text/css" xml:space="preserve"> + + body { margin:5%; background:#faebd0; text-align:justify} + P { text-indent: 1em; margin-top: .25em; margin-bottom: .25em; } + H1,H2,H3,H4,H5,H6 { text-align: center; margin-left: 15%; margin-right: 15%; } + hr { width: 50%; text-align: center;} + .foot { margin-left: 20%; margin-right: 20%; text-align: justify; text-indent: -3em; font-size: 90%; } + blockquote {font-size: 97%; font-style: italic; margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%;} + .mynote {background-color: #DDE; color: #000; padding: .5em; margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 95%;} + .toc { margin-left: 10%; margin-bottom: .75em;} + .toc2 { margin-left: 20%;} + div.fig { display:block; margin:0 auto; text-align:center; } + .figleft {float: left; margin-left: 0%; margin-right: 1%;} + .figright {float: right; margin-right: 0%; margin-left: 1%;} + .pagenum {display:inline; font-size: 70%; font-style:normal; + margin: 0; padding: 0; position: absolute; right: 1%; + text-align: right;} + pre { font-style: italic; font-size: 90%; margin-left: 10%;} + +</style> + </head> + <body> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + +The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll, Vol. 11 +(of 12), by Robert G. Ingersoll + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + +Title: The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll, Vol. 11 (of 12) + Dresden Edition--Miscellany + +Author: Robert G. Ingersoll + +Release Date: February 9, 2012 [EBook #38811] +Last Updated: November 15, 2012 + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ASCII + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WORKS OF INGERSOLL *** + + + + +Produced by David Widger + + + + + +</pre> + <p> + <a name="title" id="title"></a> + </p> + <h1> + THE WORKS OF ROBERT G. INGERSOLL + </h1> + <p> + <br /> + </p> + <h2> + By Robert G. Ingersoll + </h2> + <p> + <br /> + </p> + <h3> + "TO PLOW IS TO PRAY; TO PLANT IS TO PROPHESY,<br /> AND THE HARVEST ANSWERS + AND FULFILLS." + </h3> + <p> + <br /> + </p> + <h3> + IN TWELVE VOLUMES, VOLUME XI. + </h3> + <p> + <br /> + </p> + <h2> + MISCELLANY + </h2> + <p> + <br /> + </p> + <h3> + 1900 + </h3> + <p> + <br /> + </p> + <h3> + DRESDEN EDITION + </h3> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <table summary="" style="margin-right: auto; margin-left: auto" cellpadding="4" border="3"> + <tbody> + <tr> + <td> + <big><big><a + href="http://www.gutenberg.org/files/38811/old/orig38811-h/main.htm">This + file has been formatted in a very plain format for use with tablet + readers. Those wishing to view this eBook in its normal more + appealing format for laptops and other computers may click on this + line to to view the original HTML file.</a></big></big> + </td> + <td></td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + <p> + <br /> + </p> + <div class="fig" style="width:80%;"> + <img alt="titlepage (64K)" src="images/titlepage.jpg" width="100%" /><br /> + </div> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <div class="fig" style="width:80%;"> + <img alt="frontispiece (64K)" src="images/frontispiece.jpg" width="100%" /><br /> + </div> + <h4> + <br /> North View of "Walston," Dobbs Ferry-on-Hudson, New York <br /> <br /> + </h4> + <hr /> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <h2> + Contents + </h2> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#linkTOC">CONTENTS OF VOLUME XI.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0001">ADDRESS ON THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0002">TRIAL OF C. B. REYNOLDS FOR BLASPHEMY.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0003">GOD IN THE CONSTITUTION.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0004">A REPLY TO BISHOP SPALDING.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0005">CRIMES AGAINST CRIMINALS.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0006">A WOODEN GOD.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0007">SOME INTERROGATION POINTS.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0008">ART AND MORALITY.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0009">THE DIVIDED HOUSEHOLD OF FAITH.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0010">WHY AM I AN AGNOSTIC?</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0011">HUXLEY AND AGNOSTICISM.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0012">ERNEST RENAN.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0013">TOLSTOÏ AND "THE KREUTZER SONATA."</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0014">THOMAS PAINE.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0015">THE THREE PHILANTHROPISTS.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0016">SHOULD THE CHINESE BE EXCLUDED?</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0017">A WORD ABOUT EDUCATION.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0018">WHAT I WANT FOR CHRISTMAS.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0019">FOOL FRIENDS.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0020">INSPIRATION</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0021">THE TRUTH OF HISTORY.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0022">HOW TO EDIT A LIBERAL PAPER.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0023">SECULARISM.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0024">CRITICISM OF "ROBERT ELSMERE," "JOHN WARD, PREACHER," + AND "AN AFRICAN FARM."</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0025">THE LIBEL LAWS</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0026">REV. DR. NEWTON'S SERMON ON A NEW RELIGION.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0027">AN ESSAY ON CHRISTMAS.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0028">HAS FREETHOUGHT A CONSTRUCTIVE SIDE?</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0029">THE IMPROVED MAN.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0030">EIGHT HOURS MUST COME.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0031">THE JEWS.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0032">CRUMBLING CREEDS.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0033">OUR SCHOOLS.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0034">VIVISECTION.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0035">THE CENSUS ENUMERATOR'S OFFICIAL CATECHISM.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0036">THE AGNOSTIC CHRISTMAS</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0037">SPIRITUALITY.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0038">SUMTER'S GUN.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0039">WHAT INFIDELS HAVE DONE.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0040">CRUELTY IN THE ELMIRA REFORMATORY.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0041">LAW'S DELAY.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0042">THE BIGOTRY OF COLLEGES.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0043">A YOUNG MAN'S CHANCES TO-DAY.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0044">SCIENCE AND SENTIMENT.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0045">SOWING AND REAPING.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0046">SHOULD INFIDELS SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO SUNDAY SCHOOL?</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0047">WHAT WOULD YOU SUBSTITUTE FOR THE BIBLE AS A MORAL + GUIDE?</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0048">GOVERNOR ROLLINS' FAST-DAY PROCLAMATION.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0049">A LOOK BACKWARD AND A PROPHECY.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0050">POLITICAL MORALITY.</a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0051">A FEW REASONS FOR DOUBTING THE INSPIRATION OF THE + BIBLE.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <hr /> + <p> + <br /> <br /> <a name="linkTOC" id="linkTOC"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + CONTENTS OF VOLUME XI. + </h2> + <blockquote> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0001">ADDRESS ON THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> Introduction by Frederick Douglass("Abou Ben Adhem")—Decision + of<br /> the United States Supreme Court pronouncing the Civil Rights Act<br /> + Unconstitutional—Limitations of Judges—Illusion Destroyed by + the<br /> Decision in the Dred Scott Case—Mistake of Our Fathers in + adopting<br /> the Common Law of England—The 13th Amendment to the + Constitution<br /> Quoted—The Clause of the Constitution upholding + Slavery—Effect of<br /> this Clause—Definitions of a State by + Justice Wilson and Chief Justice<br /> Chase—Effect of the + Thirteenth Amendment—Justice Field on Involuntary<br /> Servitude—Civil + Rights Act Quoted—Definition of the Word Servitude by<br /> the + Supreme Court—Obvious Purpose of the Amendment—Justice + Miller<br /> on the 14th Amendment—Citizens Created by this + Amendment—Opinion<br /> of Justice Field—Rights and + Immunities guaranteed by the<br /> Constitution—Opinion delivered + by Chief-Justice Waite—Further Opinions<br /> of Courts on the + question of Citizenship—Effect of the 13th, 14th and<br /> 15th + Amendments—"Corrective" Legislation by Congress—Denial of + equal<br /> "Social" Privileges—Is a State responsible for the + Action of its Agent<br /> when acting contrary to Law?—The Word + "State" must include the People<br /> of the State as well as the + Officers of the State—The Louisiana Civil<br /> Rights Law, and a + Case tried under it—Uniformity of Duties essential to<br /> the + Carrier—Congress left Powerless to protect Rights conferred by the<br /> + Constitution—Definition of "Appropriate Legislation"—Propositions + laid<br /> down regarding the Sovereignty of the State, the powers of the + General<br /> Government, etc.—A Tribute to Justice Harlan—A + Denial that Property<br /> exists by Virtue of Law—Civil Rights not + a Question of Social<br /> Equality—Considerations upon which + Social Equality depends—Liberty not<br /> a Question of Social + Equality—The Superior Man—Inconsistencies of the<br /> Past—No + Reason why we should Hate the Colored People—The Issues that<br /> + are upon Us.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0002">TRIAL OF C. B. REYNOLDS FOR BLASPHEMY.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> ADDRESS TO THE JURY.<br /> Report of the Case from the New York + Times (note)—The Right to express<br /> Opinions—Attempts to + Rule the Minds of Men by Force—Liberty the<br /> Greatest Good—Intellectual + Hospitality Defined—When the Catholic<br /> Church had Power—Advent + of the Protestants—The Puritans, Quakers.<br /> Unitarians, + Universalists—What is Blasphemy?—Why this Trial should not<br /> + have Taken Place—Argument cannot be put in Jail—The + Constitution of<br /> New Jersey—A higher Law than Men can Make—The + Blasphemy Statute<br /> Quoted and Discussed—Is the Statute + Constitutional?—The Harm done<br /> by Blasphemy Laws—The + Meaning of this Persecution—Religions are<br /> Ephemeral—Let + us judge each other by our Actions—Men who have braved<br /> Public + Opinion should be Honored—The Blasphemy Law if enforced would<br /> + rob the World of the Results of Scientific Research—It declares + the<br /> Great Men of to-day to be Criminals—The Indictment Read + and Commented<br /> upon—Laws that go to Sleep—Obsolete + Dogmas the Denial of which was<br /> once punished by Death—Blasphemy + Characterized—On the Argument<br /> that Blasphemy Endangers the + Public Peace—A Definition of real<br /> Blasphemy—Trials for + Blasphemy in England—The case of Abner<br /> Kneeland—True + Worship, Prayer, and Religion—What is Holy and<br /> Sacred—What + is Claimed in this Case—For the Honor of the State—The<br /> + word Liberty—Result of the Trial (note).<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0003">GOD IN THE CONSTITUTION.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> The Feudal System—Office and Purpose of our Constitution—Which + God<br /> shall we Select?—The Existence of any God a Matter of + Opinion—What is<br /> entailed by a Recognition of a God in the + Constitution—Can the Infinite<br /> be Flattered with a + Constitutional Amendment?—This government is<br /> Secular—The + Government of God a Failure—The Difference between the<br /> + Theological and the Secular Spirit—A Nation neither Christian nor<br /> + Infidel—The Priest no longer a Necessity—Progress of Science + and the<br /> Development of the Mind.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0004">A REPLY TO BISHOP SPALDING.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> On God in the Constitution—Why the Constitutional Convention + ignored<br /> the Question of Religion—The Fathers Misrepresented—Reasons + why the<br /> Attributes of God should not form an Organic Part of the + Law of the<br /> Land—The Effect of a Clause Recognizing God.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0005">CRIMES AGAINST CRIMINALS.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> The Three Pests of a Community—I. Forms of Punishment and + Torture—More<br /> Crimes Committed than Prevented by Governments—II. + Are not Vices<br /> transmitted by Nature?—111. Is it Possible for + all People to be<br /> Honest?—Children of Vice as the natural + Product of Society—Statistics:<br /> the Relation between Insanity, + Pauperism, and Crime—IV. The Martyrs of<br /> Vice—Franklin's + Interest in the Treatment of Prisoners—V. Kindness<br /> as a + Remedy—Condition of the Discharged Prisoner—VI. Compensation<br /> + for Convicts—VII. Professional Criminals—Shall the Nation + take<br /> Life?—Influence of Public Executions on the Spectators—Lynchers<br /> + for the Most Part Criminals at Heart—VIII. The Poverty of the Many + a<br /> perpetual Menace—Limitations of Land-holding.—IX. + Defective Education<br /> by our Schools—Hands should be educated + as well as Head—Conduct<br /> improved by a clearer Perception of + Consequences—X. The Discipline of<br /> the average Prison + Hardening and Degrading—While Society cringes before<br /> Great + Thieves there will be Little Ones to fill the Jails—XI. Our<br /> + Ignorance Should make us Hesitate.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0006">A WOODEN GOD.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> On Christian and Chinese worship—Report of the Select + Committee<br /> on Chinese Immigration—The only true God as + contrasted with<br /> Joss—Sacrifices to the "Living God"—Messrs. + Wright, Dickey, O'Connor<br /> and Murch on the "Religious System" of the + American Union—How to prove<br /> that Christians are better than + Heathens—Injustice in the Name of<br /> God—An honest + Merchant the best Missionary—A Few Extracts from<br /> Confucius—The + Report proves that the Wise Men of China who predicted<br /> that + Christians could not be Trusted were not only Philosophers but<br /> + Prophets.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0007">SOME INTERROGATION POINTS.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> A New Party and its Purpose—The Classes that Exist in every<br /> + Country—Effect of Education on the Common People—Wants + Increased by<br /> Intelligence—The Dream of 1776—The + Monopolist and the Competitor—The<br /> War between the Gould and + Mackay Cables—Competition between<br /> Monopolies—All + Advance in Legislation made by Repealing Laws—Wages<br /> and + Values not to be fixed by Law—Men and Machines—The Specific + of<br /> the Capitalist: Economy—The poor Man and Woman devoured by<br /> + their Fellow-men—Socialism one of the Worst Possible forms of<br /> + Slavery—Liberty not to be exchanged for Comfort—Will the + Workers<br /> always give their Earnings for the Useless?—Priests, + Successful Frauds,<br /> and Robed Impostors.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0008">ART AND MORALITY.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> The Origin of Man's Thoughts—The imaginative Man—"Medicinal + View" of<br /> Poetry—Rhyme and Religion—The theological + Poets and their Purpose in<br /> Writing—Moral Poets and their + "Unwelcome Truths"—The really Passionate<br /> are the Virtuous—Difference + between the Nude and the Naked—Morality<br /> the Melody of Conduct—The + inculcation of Moral Lessons not contemplated<br /> by Artists or great + Novelists—Mistaken Reformers—Art not a<br /> Sermon—Language + a Multitude of Pictures—Great Pictures and Great<br /> Statues + painted and chiseled with Words—Mediocrity moral from a<br /> + Necessity which it calls Virtue—Why Art Civilizes—The Nude—The + Venus<br /> de Milo—This is Art.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0009">THE DIVIDED HOUSEHOLD OF FAITH.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> The Way in which Theological Seminaries were Endowed—Religious<br /> + Guide-boards—Vast Interests interwoven with Creeds—Pretensions + of<br /> Christianity—Kepler's Discovery of his Three Great Laws—Equivocations<br /> + and Evasions of the Church—Nature's Testimony against the<br /> + Bible—The Age of Man on the Earth—"Inspired" Morality of the<br /> + Bible—Miracles—Christian Dogmas—What the church has + been Compelled to<br /> Abandon—The Appeal to Epithets, Hatred and + Punishment—"Spirituality"<br /> the last Resource of the Orthodox—What + is it to be Spiritual?—Two<br /> Questions for the Defenders of + Orthodox Creeds.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0010">WHY AM I AN AGNOSTIC?</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> Part I. Inharmony of Nature and the Lot of Man with the Goodness + and<br /> Wisdom of a supposed Deity—Why a Creator is Imagined—Difficulty + of the<br /> Act of Creation—Belief in Supernatural Beings—Belief + and Worship among<br /> Savages—Questions of Origin and Destiny—Progress + impossible without<br /> Change of Belief—Circumstances Determining + Belief—How may the<br /> True Religion be Ascertained?—Prosperity + of Nations nor Virtue<br /> of Individuals Dependent on Religions or Gods—Uninspired + Books<br /> Superior—Part II. The Christian Religion—Credulity—Miracles + cannot<br /> be Established—Effect of Testimony—Miraculous + Qualities of all<br /> Religions—Theists and Naturalists—The + Miracle of Inspiration—How<br /> can the alleged Fact of + Inspiration be Established?—God's work and<br /> Man's—Rewards + for Falsehood offered by the Church.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0011">HUXLEY AND AGNOSTICISM.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> Statement by the Principal of King's College—On the + Irrelevancy of a<br /> Lack of Scientific Knowledge—Difference + between the Agnostic and<br /> the Christian not in Knowledge but in + Credulity—The real name of<br /> an Agnostic said to be "Infidel"—What + an Infidel is—"Unpleasant"<br /> significance of the Word—Belief + in Christ—"Our Lord and his Apostles"<br /> possibly Honest Men—Their + Character not Invoked—Possession by evil<br /> spirits—Professor + Huxley's Candor and Clearness—The splendid Dream<br /> of Auguste + Comte—Statement of the Positive Philosophy—Huxley and<br /> + Harrison.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0012">ERNEST RENAN.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> His Rearing and his Anticipated Biography—The complex + Character of the<br /> Christ of the Gospels—Regarded as a Man by + Renan—The Sin against the<br /> Holy Ghost—Renan on the + Gospels—No Evidence that they were written<br /> by the Men whose + Names they Bear—Written long after the Events they<br /> Describe—Metaphysics + of the Church found in the Gospel of John—Not<br /> Apparent why + Four Gospels should have been Written—Regarded as<br /> legendary + Biographies—In "flagrant contradiction one with another"—The<br /> + Divine Origin of Christ an After-growth—Improbable that he + intended to<br /> form a Church—Renan's Limitations—Hebrew + Scholarship—His "People of<br /> Israel"—His Banter and + Blasphemy.<br /> TOLSTOY AND "THE KREUTZER SONATA."<br /> Tolstoy's Belief + and Philosophy—His Asceticism—His View of Human<br /> Love—Purpose + of "The Kreutzer Sonata"—Profound Difference between the<br /> Love + of Men and that of Women—Tolstoy cannot now found a Religion, but<br /> + may create the Necessity for another Asylum—The Emotions—The + Curious<br /> Opinion Dried Apples have of Fruit upon the Tree—Impracticability + of<br /> selling All and giving to the Poor—Love and Obedience—Unhappiness + in<br /> the Marriage Relation not the fault of Marriage.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0014">THOMAS PAINE.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> Life by Moncure D. Conway—Early Advocacy of Reforms against + Dueling<br /> and Cruelty to Animals—The First to write "The United + States of<br /> America"—Washington's Sentiment against Separation + from Great<br /> Britain—Paine's Thoughts in the Declaration of + Independence—Author of<br /> the first Proclamation of Emancipation + in America—Establishment of a<br /> Fund for the Relief of the Army—H's + "Farewell Address"—The "Rights of<br /> Man"—Elected to the + French Convention—Efforts to save the Life of the<br /> King—His + Thoughts on Religion—Arrested—The "Age of Reason" and the<br /> + Weapons it has furnished "Advanced Theologians"—Neglect by + Gouverneur<br /> Morris and Washington—James Monroe's letter to + Paine and to the<br /> Committee of General Safety—The vaunted + Religious Liberty of<br /> Colonial Maryland—Orthodox Christianity + at the Beginning of the 19th<br /> Century—New Definitions of God—The + Funeral of Paine.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0015">THE THREE PHILANTHROPISTS.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> I. Mr. A., the Professional Philanthropist, who established a + Colony<br /> for the Enslavement of the Poor who could not take care of + themselves,<br /> amassed a large Fortune thereby, built several + churches, and earned<br /> the Epitaph, "He was the Providence of the + Poor"—II. Mr. B.,<br /> the Manufacturer, who enriched himself by + taking advantage of the<br /> Necessities of the Poor, paid the lowest + Rate of Wages, considered<br /> himself one of God's Stewards, endowed + the "B Asylum" and the "B<br /> College," never lost a Dollar, and of + whom it was recorded, "He Lived<br /> for Others." III. Mr. C., who + divided his Profits with the People who had<br /> earned it, established + no Public Institutions, suppressed Nobody; and<br /> those who have + worked for him said, "He allowed Others to live for<br /> Themselves."<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0016">SHOULD THE CHINESE BE EXCLUDED?</a> + </p> + <p> + SHOULD THE CHINESE BE EXCLUDED?<br /> Trampling on the Rights of + Inferiors—Rise of the Irish and Germans<br /> to Power—The + Burlingame Treaty—Character of Chinese Laborers—Their<br /> + Enemies in the Pacific States—Violation of Treaties—The + Geary Law—The<br /> Chinese Hated for their Virtues—More + Piety than Principle among the<br /> People's Representatives—Shall + we go back to Barbarism?<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0017">A WORD ABOUT EDUCATION.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> What the Educated Man Knows—Necessity of finding out the + Facts<br /> of Nature—"Scholars" not always Educated Men; from + necessaries to<br /> luxuries; who may be called educated; mental misers; + the first duty of<br /> man; university education not necessary to + usefulness, no advantage in<br /> learning useless facts.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0018">WHAT I WANT FOR CHRISTMAS.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> Would have the Kings and Emperors resign, the Nobility drop their<br /> + Titles, the Professors agree to teach only What they Know, the<br /> + Politicians changed to Statesmen, the Editors print only the<br /> Truth—Would + like to see Drunkenness and Prohibition abolished,<br /> Corporal + Punishment done away with, and the whole World free.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0019">FOOL FRIENDS.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> The Fool Friend believes every Story against you, never denies a + Lie<br /> unless it is in your Favor, regards your Reputation as Common + Prey,<br /> forgets his Principles to gratify your Enemies, and is so + friendly that<br /> you cannot Kick him.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0020">INSPIRATION.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> Nature tells a different Story to all Eyes and Ears—Horace + Greeley and<br /> the Big Trees—The Man who "always did like + rolling land"—What the<br /> Snow looked like to the German—Shakespeare's + different Story for each<br /> Reader—As with Nature so with the + Bible.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0021">THE TRUTH OF HISTORY.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> People who live by Lying—A Case in point—H. Hodson + Rugg's Account of<br /> the Conversion of Ingersoll and 5,000 of his + Followers—The "Identity of<br /> Lost Israel with the British + Nation"—Old Falsehoods about Infidels—The<br /> New York + Observer and Thomas Paine—A Rascally English Editor—The<br /> + Charge that Ingersoll's Son had been Converted—The Fecundity of<br /> + Falsehood.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0022">HOW TO EDIT A LIBERAL PAPER.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> The Editor should not narrow his Horizon so that he can see only<br /> + One Thing—To know the Defects of the Bible is but the Beginning of<br /> + Wisdom—The Liberal Paper should not discuss Theological Questions<br /> + Alone—A Column for Children—Candor and Kindness—Nothing + should be<br /> Asserted that is not Known—Above All, teach the + Absolute Freedom of the<br /> Mind.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0023">SECULARISM.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> The religion of Humanity; what it Embraces and what it Advocates—A<br /> + Protest against Ecclesiastical Tyranny—Believes in Building a Home<br /> + here—Means Food and Fireside—The Right to express your + Thought—Its<br /> advice to every Human Being—A Religion + without Mysteries, Miracles, or<br /> Persecutions.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0024">CRITICISM OF "ROBERT ELSMERE," "JOHN WARD, + PREACHER," AND "AN AFRICAN FARM."</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> Religion unsoftened by Infidelity—The Orthodox Minister + whose Wife has<br /> a Heart—Honesty of Opinion not a Mitigating + Circumstance—Repulsiveness<br /> of an Orthodox Life—John + Ward an Object of Pity—Lyndall of the<br /> "African Farm"—The + Story of the Hunter—Death of Waldo—Women the<br /> Caryatides + of the Church—Attitude of Christianity toward other<br /> Religions—Egotism + of the ancient Jews.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0025">THE LIBEL LAWS.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> All Articles appearing in a newspaper should be Signed by the<br /> + Writer—The Law if changed should throw greater Safeguards around + the<br /> Reputation of the Citizen—Pains should be taken to give + Prominence to<br /> Retractions—The Libel Laws like a Bayonet in + War.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0026">REV. DR. NEWTON'S SERMON ON A NEW RELIGION.</a> + </p> + <p> + REV. DR. NEWTON'S SERMON ON A NEW RELIGION.<br /> Mr. Newton not Regarded + as a Sceptic—New Meanings given to Old<br /> Words—The + vanishing Picture of Hell—The Atonement—Confidence being<br /> + Lost in the Morality of the Gospel—Exclusiveness of the Churches—The<br /> + Hope of Immortality and Belief in God have Nothing to do with Real<br /> + Religion—Special Providence a Mistake.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0027">AN ESSAY ON CHRISTMAS.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> The Day regarded as a Holiday—A Festival far older<br /> than + Christianity—Relics of Sun-worship in Christian<br /> Ceremonies—Christianity + furnished new Steam for an old Engine—Pagan<br /> Festivals + correspond to Ours—Why Holidays are Popular—They must be for<br /> + the Benefit of the People.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0028">HAS FREETHOUGHT A CONSTRUCTIVE SIDE?</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> The Object of Freethought—what the Religionist calls + "Affirmative<br /> and Positive"—The Positive Side of Freethought—Constructive + Work of<br /> Christianity.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0029">THE IMPROVED MAN.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> He will be in Favor of universal Liberty, neither Master nor + Slave; of<br /> Equality and Education; will develop in the Direction of + the Beautiful;<br /> will believe only in the Religion of this World—His + Motto—Will not<br /> endeavor to change the Mind of the "Infinite"—Will + have no Bells or<br /> Censers—Will be satisfied that the + Supernatural does not exist—Will be<br /> Self-poised, Independent, + Candid and Free.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0030">EIGHT HOURS MUST COME.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> The Working People should be protected by Law—Life of no + particular<br /> Importance to the Man who gets up before Daylight and + works till<br /> after Dark—A Revolution probable in the Relations + between Labor and<br /> Capital—Working People becoming Educated + and more Independent—The<br /> Government can Aid by means of Good + Laws—Women the worst Paid—There<br /> should be no Resort to + Force by either Labor or Capital.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0031">THE JEWS.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> Much like People of other Religions—Teaching given Christian + Children<br /> about those who die in the Faith of Abraham—Dr. John + Hall on<br /> the Persecution of the Jews in Russia as the Fulfillment of<br /> + Prophecy—Hostility of Orthodox early Christians excited by Jewish<br /> + Witnesses against the Faith—An infamous Chapter of History—Good<br /> + and bad Men of every Faith—Jews should outgrow their own<br /> + Superstitions—What the intelligent Jew Knows.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0032">CRUMBLING CREEDS.</a> + </p> + <p> + CRUMBLING CREEDS.<br /> The Common People called upon to Decide as + between the Universities and<br /> the Synods—Modern Medicine, Law, + Literature and Pictures as against the<br /> Old—Creeds agree with + the Sciences of their Day—Apology the Prelude<br /> to Retreat—The + Presbyterian Creed Infamous, but no worse than<br /> the Catholic—Progress + begins when Expression of Opinion is<br /> Allowed—Examining the + Religions of other Countries—The Pulpit's<br /> Position Lost—The + Dogma of Eternal Pain the Cause of the orthodox<br /> Creeds losing + Popularity—Every Church teaching this Infinite Lie must<br /> Fall.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0033">OUR SCHOOLS.</a> + </p> + <p> + OUR SCHOOLS.<br /> Education the only Lever capable of raising Mankind—The<br /> + School-house more Important than the Church—Criticism of New + York's<br /> School-Buildings—The Kindergarten System Recommended—Poor + Pay of<br /> Teachers—The great Danger to the Republic is + Ignorance.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0034">VIVISECTION.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> The Hell of Science—Brutal Curiosity of Vivisectors—The + Pretence that<br /> they are working for the Good of Man—Have these + scientific Assassins<br /> added to useful Knowledge?—No Good to + the Race to be Accomplished by<br /> Torture—The Tendency to + produce a Race of intelligent Wild Beasts.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0035">THE CENSUS ENUMERATOR'S OFFICIAL CATECHISM.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> Right of the Government to ask Questions and of the Citizen to + refuse<br /> to answer them—Matters which the Government has no + Right to pry<br /> into—Exposing the Debtor's financial Condition—A + Man might decline to<br /> tell whether he has a Chronic Disease or not.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0036">THE AGNOSTIC CHRISTMAS.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> Natural Phenomena and Myths celebrated—The great Day of the + first<br /> Religion, Sun-worship—A God that Knew no Hatred nor + Sought Revenge—The<br /> Festival of Light.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0037">SPIRITUALITY.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> A much-abused Word—The Early Christians too Spiritual to be<br /> + Civilized—Calvin and Knox—Paine, Voltaire and Humboldt not<br /> + Spiritual—Darwin also Lacking—What it is to be really + Spiritual—No<br /> connection with Superstition.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0038">SUMTER'S GUN.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> What were thereby blown into Rags and Ravelings—The Birth of + a<br /> new Epoch announced—Lincoln made the most commanding Figure + of the<br /> Century—Story of its Echoes.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0039">WHAT INFIDELS HAVE DONE.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> What might have been Asked of a Christian 100 years after<br /> + Christ—Hospitals and Asylums not all built for Charity—Girard<br /> + College—Lick Observatory—Carnegie not an Orthodox Christian—Christian<br /> + Colleges—Give us Time.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0040">CRUELTY IN THE ELMIRA REFORMATORY.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> Brockway a Savage—The Lash will neither develop the Brain + nor cultivate<br /> the Heart—Brutality a Failure—Bishop + Potter's apostolical Remark.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0041">LAW'S DELAY.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> The Object of a Trial—Justice can afford to Wait—The + right of<br /> Appeal—Case of Mrs. Maybrick—Life Imprisonment + for Murderers—American<br /> Courts better than the English.<br /> + BIGOTRY OF COLLEGES.<br /> Universities naturally Conservative—Kansas + State University's<br /> Objection to Ingersoll as a commencement Orator—Comment + by Mr. Depew<br /> (note)—Action of Cornell and the University of + Missouri.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0043">A YOUNG MAN'S CHANCES TO-DAY.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> The Chances a few Years ago—Capital now Required—Increasing<br /> + competition in Civilized Life—Independence the first Object—If + he has<br /> something to say, there will be plenty to listen.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0044">SCIENCE AND SENTIMENT.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> Science goes hand in hand with Imagination—Artistic and + Ethical<br /> Development—Science destroys Superstition, not true + Religion—Education<br /> preferable to Legislation—Our + Obligation to our Children.<br /> "SOWING AND REAPING."<br /> Moody's + Belief accounted for—A dishonest and corrupting Doctrine—A<br /> + want of Philosophy and Sense—Have Souls in Heaven no Regrets?—Mr.<br /> + Moody should read some useful Books.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0046">SHOULD INFIDELS SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO SUNDAY + SCHOOL?</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> Teachings of orthodox Sunday Schools—The ferocious God of + the<br /> Bible—Miracles—A Christian in Constantinople would + not send his<br /> Child to a Mosque—Advice to all Agnostics—Strangle + the Serpent of<br /> Superstition.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0047">WHAT WOULD YOU SUBSTITUTE FOR THE BIBLE AS A MORAL + GUIDE?</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> Character of the Bible—Men and Women not virtuous because of + any<br /> Book—The Commandments both Good and Bad—Books that + do not help<br /> Morality—Jehovah not a moral God—What is + Morality?—Intelligence the<br /> only moral guide.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0048">GOVERNOR ROLLINS' FAST-DAY PROCLAMATION.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> Decline of the Christian Religion in New Hampshire—Outgrown<br /> + Beliefs—Present-day Views of Christ and the Holy Ghost—Abandoned<br /> + Notions about the Atonement—Salvation for Credulity—The + Miracles<br /> of the New Testament—The Bible "not true but + inspired"—The "Higher<br /> Critics" riding two Horses—Infidelity + in the Pulpit—The "restraining<br /> Influences of Religion" as + illustrated by Spain and Portugal—Thinking,<br /> Working and + Praying—The kind of Faith that has Departed.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0049">A LOOK BACKWARD AND A PROPHECY.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> The <i>Truth Seeker</i> congratulated on its Twenty-fifth Birthday—Teachings<br /> + of Twenty-five Years ago—Dodging and evading—The Clerical + Assault<br /> on Darwin—Draper, Buckle, Hegel, Spencer, Emerson—Comparison<br /> + of Prejudices—Vanished Belief in the Devil—Matter and<br /> + Force—Contradictions Dwelling in Unity—Substitutes for + Jehovah—A<br /> Prophecy.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0050">POLITICAL MORALITY.</a> + </p> + <p> + <br /> Argument in the contested Election Case of Strobach against + Herbert—The<br /> Importance of Honest Elections—Poisoning + the Source of Justice—The<br /> Fraudulent Voter a Traitor to his + Sovereign, the Will of the<br /> People—Political Morality + Imperative.<br /> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link0051">A FEW REASONS FOR DOUBTING THE INSPIRATION OF THE + BIBLE.</a> + </p> + <p> + Date and Manner of Composing the Old Testament—Other Books not now + in<br /> Existence, and Disagreements about the Canon—Composite + Character of<br /> certain Books—Various Versions—Why was + God's message given to the Jews<br /> alone?—The Story of the + Creation, of the Flood, of the Tower, and<br /> of Lot's wife—Moses + and Aaron and the Plagues of Egypt—Laws of<br /> Slavery—Instructions + by Jehovah Calculated to excite Astonishment and<br /> Mirth—Sacrifices + and the Scapegoat—Passages showing that the Laws of<br /> Moses + were made after the Jews had left the Desert—Jehovah's dealings<br /> + with his People—The Sabbath Law—Prodigies—Joshua's + Miracle—Damned<br /> Ignorance and Infamy—Jephthah's + Sacrifice—Incredible Stories—The<br /> Woman of Endor and the + Temptation of David—Elijah and Elisha—Loss of<br /> the + Pentateuch from Moses to Josiah—The Jews before and after being<br /> + Abandoned by Jehovah—Wealth of Solomon and other Marvels.<br /> + </p> + </blockquote> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <hr /> + <p> + <br /> <br /> <a name="link0001" id="link0001"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + ADDRESS ON THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT. + </h2> + <p> + ON the 22d of October, 1883, a vast number of citizens met at Lincoln + Hall, Washington, D. C., to give expression to their views concerning the + decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, in which it is held + that the Civil Rights Act is unconstitutional. + </p> + <p> + Col. Robert G. Ingersoll was one of the speakers. + </p> + <p> + The Hon. Frederick Douglass introduced him as follows: + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + Abou Ben Adhem—(may his tribe increase!) + Awoke one night from a deep dream of peace, + And saw within the moonlight of his room, + Making it rich and like a lily in bloom, + An angel writing in a book of gold: + Exceeding peace had made Ben Adhem bold; + And to the presence in the room he said, + "What writest thou?" The vision raised its head, + And, with a look made all of sweet accord, + Answered, "The names of those who love the Lord." + "And is mine one?" asked Abou. "Nay, not so," + Replied the angel. Abou spoke more low, + But cheerily still; and said, "I pray thee, then, + Write me as one that loves his fellow-men." + The angel wrote, and vanished. The next night + It came again, with a great wakening light, + And showed the names whom love of God had blest; + And, lo! Ben Adhem's name led all the rest. +</pre> + <p> + I have the honor to introduce Robert G. Ingersoll. + </p> + <p> + MR. INGERSOLL'S SPEECH. + </p> + <p> + Ladies and Gentlemen: + </p> + <p> + We have met for the purpose of saying a few words about the recent + decision of the Supreme Court, in which that tribunal has held the first + and second sections of the Civil Rights Act to be unconstitutional; and so + held in spite of the fact that for years the people of the North and South + have, with singular unanimity, supposed the Act to be constitutional—supposed + that it was upheld by the 13th and 14th Amendments,—and so supposed + because they knew with certainty the intention of the framers of the + amendments. They knew this intention, because they knew what the enemies + of the amendments and the enemies of the Civil Rights Act claimed was the + intention. And they also knew what the friends of the amendments and the + law admitted the intention to be. The prejudices born of ignorance and of + slavery had died or fallen asleep, and even the enemies of the amendments + and the law had accepted the situation. + </p> + <p> + But I shall speak of the decision as I feel, and in the same manner as I + should speak even in the presence of the Court. You must remember that I + am not attacking persons, but opinions—not motives, but reasons—not + judges, but decisions. + </p> + <p> + The Supreme Court has decided: + </p> + <p> + 1. That the first and second sections of the Civil Rights Act of March 1, + 1875, are unconstitutional, as applied to the States—not being + authorized by the 13th and 14th Amendments. + </p> + <p> + 2. That the 14th Amendment is prohibitory upon the States only, and the + legislation forbidden to be adopted by Congress for enforcing it, is not + "direct" legislation, but "corrective,"—such as may be necessary or + proper for counteracting and restraining the effect of laws or acts passed + or done by the several States. + </p> + <p> + 3. That the 13th Amendment relates only to slavery and involuntary + servitude, which it abolishes. + </p> + <p> + 4. That the 13th Amendment establishes universal freedom in the United + States. + </p> + <p> + 5. That Congress may probably pass laws directly enforcing its provisions. + </p> + <p> + 6. That such legislative power in Congress extends only to the subject of + slavery, and its incidents. + </p> + <p> + 7. That the denial of equal accommodations in inns, public conveyances and + places of public amusement, imposes no badge of slavery or involuntary + servitude upon the party, but at most infringes rights which are protected + from State aggression by the 14th Amendment. + </p> + <p> + 8. The Court is uncertain whether the accommodations and privileges sought + to be protected by the first and second sections of the Civil Rights Act + are or are not rights constitutionally demandable,—and if they are, + in what form they are to be protected. + </p> + <p> + 9. Neither does the Court decide whether the law, as it stands, is + operative in the Territories and the District of Columbia. + </p> + <p> + 10. Neither does the Court decide whether Congress, under the commercial + power, may or may not pass a law securing to all persons equal + accommodations on lines of public conveyance between two or more States. + </p> + <p> + 11. The Court also holds, in the present case, that until some State law + has been passed, or some State action through its officers or agents has + been taken adverse to the rights of citizens sought to be protected by the + 14th Amendment, no legislation of the United States under said amendment, + or any proceeding under such legislation, can be called into activity, for + the reason that the prohibitions of the amendment are against State laws + and acts done under State authority. The essence of said decision being, + that the managers and owners of inns, railways, and all public + conveyances, of theatres and all places of public amusement, may + discriminate on account of race, color, or previous condition of + servitude, and that the citizen so discriminated against, is without + redress. + </p> + <p> + This decision takes from seven millions of people the shield of the + Constitution. It leaves the best of the colored race at the mercy of the + meanest of the white. It feeds fat the ancient grudge that vicious + ignorance bears toward race and color. It will be approved and quoted by + hundreds of thousands of unjust men. The masked wretches who, in the + darkness of night, drag the poor negro from his cabin, and lacerate with + whip and thong his quivering flesh, will, with bloody hands, applaud the + Supreme Court. The men who, by mob violence, prevent the negro from + depositing his ballot—who with gun and revolver drive him from the + polls, and those who insult with vile and vulgar words the inoffensive + colored girl, will welcome this decision with hyena joy. The basest will + rejoice—the noblest will mourn. + </p> + <p> + But even in the presence of this decision, we must remember that it is one + of the necessities of government that there should be a court of last + resort; and while all courts will more or less fail to do justice, still, + the wit of man has, as yet, devised no better way. Even after reading this + decision, we must take it for granted that the judges of the Supreme Court + arrived at their conclusions honestly and in accordance with the best + light they had. While they had the right to render the decision, every + citizen has the right to give his opinion as to whether that decision is + good or bad. Knowing that they are liable to be mistaken, and honestly + mistaken, we should always be charitable enough to admit that others may + be mistaken; and we may also take another step, and admit that we may be + mistaken about their being mistaken. We must remember, too, that we have + to make judges out of men, and that by being made judges their prejudices + are not diminished and their intelligence is not increased. No matter + whether a man wears a crown or a robe or a rag. Under the emblem of power + and the emblem of poverty, the man alike resides. The real thing is the + man—the distinction often exists only in the clothes. Take away the + crown—there is only a man. Remove the robe—there remains a + man. Take away the rag, and we find at least a man. + </p> + <p> + There was a time in this country when all bowed to a decision of the + Supreme Court. It was unquestioned. It was regarded as "a voice from on + high." The people heard and they obeyed. The Dred Scott decision destroyed + that illusion forever. From that day to this the people have claimed the + privilege of putting the decisions of the Supreme Court in the crucible of + reason. These decisions are no longer exempt from honest criticism. While + the decision remains, it is the law. No matter how absurd, no matter how + erroneous, no matter how contrary to reason and justice, it remains the + law. It must be overturned either by the Court itself (and the Court has + overturned hundreds of its own decisions), or by legislative action, or by + an amendment to the Constitution. We do not appeal to armed revolution. + Our Government is so framed that it provides for what may be called + perpetual peaceful revolution. For the redress of any grievance, for the + purpose of righting any wrong, there is the perpetual remedy of an appeal + to the people. + </p> + <p> + We must remember, too, that judges keep their backs to the dawn. They find + what has been, what is, but not what ought to be. They are tied and + shackled by precedent, fettered by old decisions, and by the desire to be + consistent, even in mistakes. They pass upon the acts and words of others, + and like other people, they are liable to make mistakes. In the olden time + we took what the doctors gave us, we believed what the preachers said; and + accepted, without question, the judgments of the highest court. Now it is + different. We ask the doctor what the medicine is, and what effect he + expects it to produce. We cross-examine the minister, and we criticise the + decision of the Chief-Justice. We do this, because we have found that some + doctors do not kill, that some ministers are quite reasonable, and that + some judges know something about law. In this country, the people are the + sovereigns. All officers—including judges—are simply their + servants, and the sovereign has always the right to give his opinion as to + the action of his agent. The sovereignty of the people is the rock upon + which rests the right of speech and the freedom of the press. + </p> + <p> + Unfortunately for us, our fathers adopted the common law of England—a + law poisoned by kingly prerogative—by every form of oppression, by + the spirit of caste, and permeated, saturated, with the political heresy + that the people received their rights, privileges and immunities from the + crown. The thirteen original colonies received their laws, their forms, + their ideas of justice, from the old world. All the judicial, legislative, + and executive springs and sources had been touched and tainted. + </p> + <p> + In the struggle with England, our fathers justified their rebellion by + declaring that Nature had clothed all men with the right to life, liberty, + and the pursuit of happiness. The moment success crowned their efforts, + they changed their noble declaration of equal rights for all, and basely + interpolated the word "white." They adopted a Constitution that denied the + Declaration of Independence—a Constitution that recognized and + upheld slavery, protected the slave-trade, legalized piracy upon the high + seas—that demoralized, degraded, and debauched the nation, and that + at last reddened with brave blood the fields of the Republic. + </p> + <p> + Our fathers planted the seeds of injustice, and we gathered the harvest. + In the blood and flame of civil war, we retraced our fathers' steps. In + the stress of war, we implored the aid of Liberty, and asked once more for + the protection of Justice. We civilized the Constitution of our fathers. + We adopted three Amendments—the 13th, 14th and 15th—the + Trinity of Liberty. + </p> + <p> + Let us examine these amendments: + </p> + <p> + "Neither slavery, nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for + crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within + the United States or any place subject to their jurisdiction. + </p> + <p> + "Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate + legislation." + </p> + <p> + Before the adoption of this amendment, the Constitution had always been + construed to be the perfect shield of slavery. In order that slavery might + be protected, the slave States were considered as sovereign. Freedom was + regarded as a local prejudice, slavery as the ward of the Nation, the + jewel of the Constitution. For three-quarters of a century, the Supreme + Court of the United States exhausted judicial ingenuity in guarding, + protecting and fostering that infamous institution. For the purpose of + preserving that infinite outrage, words and phrases were warped, and + stretched, and tortured, and thumbscrewed, and racked. Slavery was the one + sacred thing, and the Supreme Court was its constitutional guardian. + </p> + <p> + To show the faithfulness of that tribunal, I call your attention to the 3d + clause of the 2d section of the 4th article of the Constitution: + </p> + <p> + "No person held to service or labor in any State under the laws thereof, + escaping to another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation + therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered + up on the claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due." + </p> + <p> + The framers of the Constitution were ashamed to use the word "slave," and + thereupon they said "person." They were ashamed to use the word "slavery," + and they evaded it by saying, "held to service or labor." They were + ashamed to put in the word "master," so they called him "the party to whom + service or labor may be due." + </p> + <p> + How can a slave owe service? How can a slave owe labor? How could a slave + make a contract? How could the master have a legal claim against a slave? + And yet, the Supreme Court of the United States found no difficulty in + upholding the Fugitive Slave Law by virtue of that clause. There were + hundreds of decisions declaring that Congress had power to pass laws to + carry that clause into effect, and it was carried into effect. + </p> + <p> + You will observe the wording of this clause: + </p> + <p> + "No person held to service or labor in any State under the laws thereof, + escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation + therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered + up on the claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due." + </p> + <p> + To whom was this clause directed? To individuals or to States? It + expressly provides that the "person" held to service or labor shall not be + discharged from such service or labor in consequence of any law or + regulation in the "State" to which he has fled. Did that law apply to + States, or to individuals? + </p> + <p> + The Supreme Court held that it applied to individuals as well as to + States. Any "person," in any State, interfering with the master who was + endeavoring to steal the person he called his slave, was liable to + indictment, and hundreds and thousands were indicted, and hundreds + languished in prisons because they were noble enough to hold in infinite + contempt such infamous laws and such infamous decisions. The best men in + the United States—the noblest spirits under the flag—were + imprisoned because they were charitable, because they were just, because + they showed the hunted slave the path to freedom, and taught him where to + find amid the glittering host of heaven the blessed Northern Star. + </p> + <p> + Every fugitive slave carried that clause with him when he entered a free + State; carried it into every hiding place; and every Northern man was + bound, by virtue of that clause, to act as the spy and hound of slavery. + The Supreme Court, with infinite ease, made a club of that clause with + which to strike down the liberty of the fugitive and the manhood of the + North. + </p> + <p> + In the Dred Scott decision it was solemnly decided that a man of African + descent, whether a slave or not, was not, and could not be, a citizen of a + State or of the United States. The Supreme Court held on the even tenor of + its way, and in the Rebellion that tribunal was about the last fort to + surrender. + </p> + <p> + The moment the 13th Amendment was adopted, the slaves became freemen. The + distinction between "white" and "colored" vanished. The negroes became as + though they had never been slaves—as though they had always been + free—as though they had been white. They became citizens—they + became a part of "the people," and "the people" constituted the State, and + it was the State thus constituted that was entitled to the constitutional + guarantee of a republican government. + </p> + <p> + These freed men became citizens—became a part of the State in which + they lived. + </p> + <p> + The highest and noblest definition of a State, in our Reports, was given + by Justice Wilson, in the case of Chisholm, &c., vs. Georgia; + </p> + <p> + "By a State, I mean a complete body of free persons, united for their + common benefit, to enjoy peaceably what is their own, and to do justice to + others." + </p> + <p> + Chief Justice Chase declared that: + </p> + <p> + "The people, in whatever territory dwelling, whether temporarily or + permanently, or whether organized under regular government, or united by + less definite relations, constitute the State." + </p> + <p> + Now, if the people, the moment the 13th Amendment was adopted were all + free, and if these people constituted the State; if, under the + Constitution of the United States, every State is guaranteed a republican + government, then it is the duty of the General Government to see to it + that every State has such a government. If distinctions are made between + free men on account of race or color, the government is not republican. + The manner in which this guarantee of a republican form of government is + to be enforced or made good, must be left to the wisdom and discretion of + Congress. + </p> + <p> + The 13th Amendment not only destroyed, but it built. It destroyed the + slave-pen, and on its site erected the temple of Liberty. It did not + simply free slaves—it made citizens. It repealed every statute that + upheld slavery. It erased from every Report every decision against + freedom. It took the word "white" from every law, and blotted from the + Constitution all clauses acknowledging property in man. + </p> + <p> + If, then, all the people in each State, were, by virtue of the 13th + Amendment, free, what right had a majority to enslave a minority? What + right had a majority to make any distinctions between free men? What right + had a majority to take from a minority any privilege, or any immunity, to + which they were entitled as free men? What right had the majority to make + that unequal which the Constitution made equal? + </p> + <p> + Not satisfied with saying that slavery should not exist, we find in the + amendment the words "nor involuntary servitude." This was intended to + destroy every mark and badge of legal inferiority. + </p> + <p> + Justice Field upon this very question, says: + </p> + <p> + "It is, however, clear that the words 'involuntary servitude' include + something more than slavery, in the strict sense of the term. They include + also serfage, vassalage, villanage, peonage, and all other forms of + compulsory service for the mere benefit or pleasure of others. Nor is this + the full import of the term. The abolition of slavery and involuntary + servitude was intended to make every one born in this country a free man, + and as such to give him the right to pursue the ordinary avocations of + life without other restraint than such as affects all others, and to enjoy + equally with them the fruits of his labor. A person allowed to pursue only + one trade or calling, and only in one locality of the country, would not + be, in the strict sense of the term, in a condition of slavery, but + probably no one would deny that he would be in a condition of servitude. + He certainly would not possess the liberties, or enjoy the privileges of a + freeman." + </p> + <p> + Justice Field also quotes with approval the language of the counsel for + the plaintiffs in the case: + </p> + <p> + "Whenever a law of a State, or a law of the United States, makes a + discrimination between classes of persons which deprives the one class of + their freedom or their property, or which makes a caste of them, to + subserve the power, pride, avarice, vanity or vengeance of others—there + involuntary servitude exists within the meaning of the 13th Amendment." + </p> + <p> + To show that the framers of the 13th Amendment intended to blot out every + form of slavery and servitude, I call attention to the Civil Rights Act, + approved April 9, 1866, which provided, among other things, that: + </p> + <p> + "All persons born in the United States, and not subject to any foreign + power—excluding Indians not taxed—are citizens of the United + States; and such citizens, of every race and color, without regard to any + previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, are entitled to + the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of + person and property enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to + like punishments, pains and penalties—and to none other—any + law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to the contrary + notwithstanding; and they shall have the same rights in every State and + Territory of the United States as white persons." + </p> + <p> + The Supreme Court, in <i>The Slaughter-House Cases,</i> (16 Wallace, 69) + has said that the word servitude has a larger meaning than the word + slavery. "The word 'servitude' implies subjection to the will of another + contrary to the common right." A man is in a state of involuntary + servitude when he is forced to do, or prevented from doing, a thing, not + by the law of the State, but by the simple will of another. He who enjoys + less than the common rights of a citizen, he who can be forced from the + public highway at the will of another, who can be denied entrance to the + cars of a common carrier, is in a state of servitude. + </p> + <p> + The 13th Amendment did away with slavery not only, and with involuntary + servitude, but with every badge and brand and stain and mark of slavery. + It abolished forever distinctions on account of race and color. + </p> + <p> + In the language of the Supreme Court: + </p> + <p> + "It was the obvious purpose of the 13th Amendment to forbid all shades and + conditions of African slavery." + </p> + <p> + And to that I add, it was the obvious purpose of that amendment to forbid + all shades and conditions of slavery, no matter of what sort or kind—all + marks of legal inferiority. Each citizen was to be absolutely free. All + his rights complete, whole, unmaimed and unabridged. + </p> + <p> + From the moment of the adoption of that amendment, the law became + color-blind. All distinctions on account of complexion vanished. It took + the whip from the hand of the white man, and put the nation's flag above + the negro's hut. It gave horizon, scope and dome to the lowest life. It + stretched a sky studded with stars of hope above the humblest head. + </p> + <p> + The Supreme Court has admitted, in the very case we are now discussing, + that: + </p> + <p> + "Under the 13th Amendment the legislation meaning the legislation of + Congress—so far as necessary or proper to eradicate all forms and + incidents of slavery and involuntary servitude, may be direct and primary, + operating upon the acts of individuals, whether sanctioned by State + legislation or not." + </p> + <p> + Here we have the authority for dealing with individuals. + </p> + <p> + The only question then remaining is, whether an individual, being the + keeper of a public inn, or the agent of a railway corporation, created by + a State, can be held responsible in a Federal Court for discriminating + against a citizen of the United States on account of race, color, or + previous condition of servitude. If such discrimination is a badge of + slavery, or places the party discriminated against in a condition of + involuntary servitude, then the Civil Rights Act may be upheld by the 13th + Amendment. + </p> + <p> + In The United Slates vs. Harris, 106 U. S., 640, the Supreme Court says: + </p> + <p> + "It is clear that the 13th Amendment, besides abolishing forever slavery + and involuntary servitude within the United States, gives power to + Congress to protect all citizens from being in any way subjected to + slavery or involuntary servitude, except for the punishment of crime, and + in the enjoyment of that freedom which it was the object of the amendment + to secure." + </p> + <p> + This declaration covers the entire case. + </p> + <p> + I agree with Justice Field: + </p> + <p> + "The 13th Amendment is not confined to African slavery. It is general and + universal in its application—prohibiting the slavery of white men as + well as black men, and not prohibiting mere slavery in the strict sense of + the term, but involuntary servitude in every form." 16 Wallace, 90. + </p> + <p> + The 13th Amendment declares that neither slavery nor involuntary servitude + shall exist. Who must see to it that this declaration is carried out? + There can be but one answer. It is the duty of Congress. + </p> + <p> + At last the question narrows itself to this: Is a citizen of the United + States, when denied admission to public inns, railway cars and theatres, + on account of his race or color, in a condition of involuntary servitude? + If he is, then he is under the immediate protection of the General + Government, by virtue of the 13th Amendment; and the Civil Rights Act is + clearly constitutional. + </p> + <p> + If excluded from one inn, he may be from all; if from one car, why not + from all? The man who depends for the preservation of his privileges upon + a conductor, instead of the Constitution, is in a condition of involuntary + servitude. He who depends for his rights—not upon the laws of the + land, but upon a landlord, is in a condition of involuntary servitude. + </p> + <p> + The framers of the 13th Amendment knew that the negro would be persecuted + on account of his race and color—knew that many of the States could + not be trusted to protect the rights of the colored man; and for that + reason, the General Government was clothed with power to protect the + colored people from all forms of slavery and involuntary servitude. + </p> + <p> + Of what use are the declarations in the Constitution that slavery and + involuntary servitude shall not exist, and that all persons born or + naturalized in the United States shall be citizens—not only of the + United States, but of the States in which they reside—if, behind + these declarations, there is no power to act—no duty for the General + Government to discharge? + </p> + <p> + Notwithstanding the 13th Amendment had been adopted—notwithstanding + slavery and involuntary servitude had been legally destroyed—it was + found that the negro was still the helpless victim of the white man. + Another amendment was needed; and all the Justices of the Supreme Court + have told us why the 14th Amendment was adopted. + </p> + <p> + Justice Miller, speaking for the entire court, tells us that: + </p> + <p> + "In the struggle of the civil war, slavery perished, and perished as a + necessity of the bitterness and force of the conflict." + </p> + <p> + That: + </p> + <p> + "When the armies of freedom found themselves on the soil of slavery, they + could do nothing else than free the victims whose enforced servitude was + the foundation of the war." + </p> + <p> + He also admits that: + </p> + <p> + "When hard pressed in the contest, the colored men (for they proved + themselves men in that terrible crisis) offered their services, and were + accepted, by thousands, to aid in suppressing the unlawful rebellion." + </p> + <p> + He also informs us that: + </p> + <p> + "Notwithstanding the fact that the Southern States had formerly recognized + the abolition of slavery, the condition of the slave, without further + protection of the Federal Government, was almost as bad as it had been + before." + </p> + <p> + And he declares that: + </p> + <p> + "The Southern States imposed upon the colored race onerous disabilities + and burdens—curtailed their rights in the pursuit of liberty and + property, to such an extent that their freedom was of little value, while + the colored people had lost the protection which they had received from + their former owners from motives of interest." + </p> + <p> + And that: + </p> + <p> + "The colored people in some States were forbidden to appear in the towns + in any other character than that of menial servants—that they were + required to reside on the soil without the right to purchase or own it—that + they were excluded from many occupations of gain and profit—that + they were not permitted to give testimony in the courts where white men + were on trial—and it was said that their lives were at the mercy of + bad men, either because laws for their protection were insufficient, or + were not enforced." + </p> + <p> + We are informed by the Supreme Court that, "under these circumstances," + the proposition for the 14th Amendment was passed through Congress, and + that Congress declined to treat as restored to full participation in the + Government of the Union, the States which had been in insurrection, until + they ratified that article by a formal vote of their legislative bodies. + </p> + <p> + Thus it will be seen that the rebel States were restored to the Union by + adopting the 14th Amendment. In order to become equal members of the + Federal Union, these States solemnly agreed to carry out the provisions of + that amendment. + </p> + <p> + The 14th Amendment provides that: + </p> + <p> + "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the + jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States, and of the State + wherein they reside." + </p> + <p> + That is affirmative in its character. That affirmation imposes the + obligation upon the General Government to protect its citizens everywhere. + That affirmation clothes the Federal Government with power to protect its + citizens. Under that clause, the Federal arm can reach to the boundary of + the Republic, for the purpose of protecting the weakest citizen from the + tyranny of citizens or States. That clause is a contract between the + Government and every man—a contract wherein the citizen promises + allegiance, and the nation promises protection. + </p> + <p> + By this clause, the Federal Government adopted all the citizens of all the + States and Territories, including the District of Columbia, and placed + them under the shield of the Constitution—made each one a ward of + the Republic. + </p> + <p> + Under this contract, the Government is under direct obligation to the + citizen. The Government cannot shirk its responsibility by leaving a + citizen to be protected in his rights, as a citizen of the United States, + by a State. The obligation of protection is direct. The obligation on the + part of the citizen to the Government is direct. The citizen cannot be + untrue to the Government because his State is, The action of the State + under the 14th Amendment is no excuse for the citizen. He must be true to + the Government. In war, the Government has a right to his service. In + peace, he has the right to be protected. + </p> + <p> + If the citizen must depend upon the State, then he owes the first + allegiance to that government or power that is under obligation to protect + him. Then, if a State secedes from the Union, the citizen should go with + the State—should go with the power that protects. + </p> + <p> + That is not my doctrine. My doctrine is this: The first duty of the + General Government is to protect each citizen. The first duty of each + citizen is to be true—not to his State, but to the Republic. + </p> + <p> + This clause of the 14th Amendment made us all citizens of the United + States—all children of the Republic. Under this decision, the + Republic refuses to acknowledge her children. Under this decision of the + Supreme Court, they are left upon the doorsteps of the States. Citizens + are changed to foundlings. + </p> + <p> + If the 14th Amendment created citizens of the United States, the power + that created must define the rights of the citizens thus created, and must + provide a remedy where such rights are infringed. The Federal Government + speaks through its representatives—through Congress; and Congress, + by the Civil Rights Act, defined some of the rights, privileges and + immunities of a citizen of the United States—and Congress provided a + remedy when such rights and privileges were invaded, and gave jurisdiction + to the Federal courts. + </p> + <p> + No State, or the department of any State, can authoritatively define the + rights, privileges and immunities of a citizen of the United States. These + rights and immunities must be defined by the United States, and when so + defined, they cannot be abridged by State authority. + </p> + <p> + In the case of Bartemeyer vs. Iowa, 18 Wall., p. 140, Justice Field, in a + concurring opinion, speaking of the 14th Amendment, says: + </p> + <p> + "It grew out of the feeling that a nation which had been maintained by + such costly sacrifices was, after all, worthless, if a citizen could not + be protected in all his fundamental rights, everywhere—North and + South, East and West—throughout the limits of the Republic. The + amendment was not, as held in the opinion of the majority, primarily + intended to confer citizenship on the negro race. It had a much broader + purpose. It was intended to justify legislation extending the protection + of the National Government over the common rights of all citizens of the + United States, and thus obviate objection to the legislation adopted for + the protection of the emancipated race. It was intended to make it + possible for all persons—which necessarily included those of every + race and color—to live in peace and security wherever the + jurisdiction of the nation reached. It therefore recognized, if it did not + create, a national citizenship. This national citizenship is primary and + not secondary.". + </p> + <p> + I cannot refrain from calling attention to the splendor and nobility of + the truths expressed by Justice Field in this opinion. + </p> + <p> + So, Justice Field, in his dissenting opinion in what are known as <i>The + Slaughter-House Cases</i>, found in 16 Wallace, p. 95, still speaking of + the 14th Amendment, says: + </p> + <p> + "It recognizes in express terms—if it does not create—citizens + of the United States, and it makes their citizenship dependent upon the + place of their birth or the fact of their adoption, and not upon the + constitution or laws of any State, or the condition of their ancestry. + </p> + <p> + "A citizen of a State is now only a citizen of the United States residing + in that State. The fundamental rights, privileges and immunities which + belong to him as a free man and a free citizen of the United States, are + not dependent upon the citizenship of any State. * * * + </p> + <p> + "They do not derive their existence from its legislation, and cannot be + destroyed by its power." + </p> + <p> + What are "the fundamental rights, privileges and immunities" which belong + to a free man? Certainly the rights of all citizens of the United States + are equal. Their immunities and privileges must be the same. He who makes + a discrimination between citizens on account of color, violates the + Constitution of the United States. + </p> + <p> + Have all citizens the same right to travel on the highways of the country? + Have they all the same right to ride upon the railways created by State + authority? A railway is an improved highway. It was only by holding that + it was an improved highway that counties and States aided in their + construction. It has been decided, over and over again, that a railway is + an improved highway. A railway corporation is the creation of a State—an + agent of the State. It is under the control of the State—and upon + what principle can a citizen be prevented from using the highways of a + State on an equality with all other citizens? + </p> + <p> + These are all rights and immunities guaranteed by the Constitution of the + United States. + </p> + <p> + Now, the question is—and it is the only question—can these + rights and immunities, thus guaranteed and thus confirmed, be protected by + the General Government? + </p> + <p> + In the case of <i>The U. S. vs. Reese, et al.</i>, 92 U. S., p. 207, the + Supreme Court decided, the opinion having been delivered by Chief-Justice + Waite, as follows: + </p> + <p> + "Rights and immunities created by, and dependent upon, the Constitution of + the United States can be protected by Congress. The form and the manner of + the protection may be such as Congress in the legitimate exercise of its + legislative discretion shall provide. This may be varied to meet the + necessities of the particular right to be protected." + </p> + <p> + This decision was acquiesced in by Justices Strong, Bradley, Swayne, + Davis, Miller and Field. Dissenting opinions were filed by Justices + Clifford and Hunt, but neither dissented from the proposition that: + </p> + <p> + "Rights and immunities created by or dependent upon the Constitution of + the United States can be protected by Congress," and that "the form and + manner of the protection may be such as Congress in the exercise of its + legitimate discretion shall provide." + </p> + <p> + So, in the same case, I find this language: + </p> + <p> + "It follows that the Amendment"—meaning the 15th—"has invested + the citizens of the United States with a new constitutional right, which + is within the protecting power of Congress. This, under the express + provisions of the second section of the Amendment, Congress may enforce by + appropriate legislation." + </p> + <p> + If the 15th Amendment invested the citizens of the United States with a + new constitutional right—that is, the right to vote—and if for + that reason that right is within the protecting power of Congress, then I + ask, if the 14th Amendment made certain persons citizens of the United + States, did such citizenship become a constitutional right? And is such + citizenship within the protecting power of Congress? Does citizenship mean + anything except certain "rights, privileges and immunities"? + </p> + <p> + Is it not an invasion of citizenship to invade the immunities or + privileges or rights belonging to a citizen? Are not, then, all the + immunities and privileges and rights under the protecting power of + Congress? + </p> + <p> + The 13th Amendment found the negro a slave, and made him a free man. That + gave to him a new constitutional right, and according to the Supreme + Court, that right is within the protecting power of Congress. + </p> + <p> + What rights are within the protecting power of Congress? All the rights + belonging to a free man. + </p> + <p> + The 14th Amendment made the negro a citizen. What then is under the + protecting power of Congress? All the rights, privileges and immunities + belonging to him as a citizen. + </p> + <p> + So, in the case of <i>Tennessee vs, Davis</i>, 100 U, S,, 263, the Supreme + Court, held that: + </p> + <p> + "The United States is a government whose authority extends over the whole + territory of the Union, acting upon all the States, and upon all the + people of all the States. + </p> + <p> + "No State can exclude the Federal Government from the exercise of any + authority conferred upon it by the Constitution, or withhold from it for a + moment the cognizance of any subject which the Constitution has committed + to it." + </p> + <p> + This opinion was given by Justice Strong, and acquiesced in by + Chief-Justice Waite, Justices Miller, Swayne, Bradley and Harlan. + </p> + <p> + So in the case of <i>Pensacola Tel. Co. vs. Western Union Tel. Co</i>., 96 + U. S., p. 10, the opinion having been delivered by Chief-Justice Waite, I + find this: + </p> + <p> + "The Government of the United States, within the scope of its power, + operates upon every foot of territory under its jurisdiction. It + legislates for the whole Nation, and is not embarrassed by State lines." + </p> + <p> + This was acquiesced in by Justices Clifford, Strong, Bradley, Swayne and + Miller. + </p> + <p> + So we are told by the entire Supreme Court in the case of <i>Tiernan vs. + Rynker</i>, 102 U. S., 126, that: + </p> + <p> + "When the subject to which the power applies is national in its character, + or of such a nature as to admit of uniformity of regulation, the power is + exclusive of State authority." + </p> + <p> + Surely the question of citizenship is "national in its character." Surely + the question as to what are the rights, privileges and immunities of a + citizen of the United States is "national in its character." + </p> + <p> + Unless the declarations and definitions, the patriotic paragraphs, and the + legal principles made, given, uttered and defined by the Supreme Court are + but a judicial jugglery of words, the Civil Rights Act is upheld by the + intent, spirit and language of the 14th Amendment. + </p> + <p> + It was found that the 13th Amendment did not protect the negro. Then the + 14th was adopted. Still the colored citizen was trodden under foot. Then + the 15th was adopted. The 13th made him free, and, in my judgment, made + him a citizen, and clothed him with all the rights of a citizen. That was + denied, and then the 14th declared that he was a citizen. In my judgment, + that gave him the right to vote. But that was denied—then the 15th + was adopted, declaring that his right to vote should never be denied. + </p> + <p> + The 13th Amendment made all free. It broke the chains, pulled up the + whipping-posts, overturned the auction-blocks, gave the colored mother her + child, put the shield of the Constitution over the cradle, destroyed all + forms of involuntary servitude, and in the azure heaven of our flag it put + the Northern Star. + </p> + <p> + The 14th Amendment made us all citizens. It is a contract between the + Republic and each individual—a contract by which the Nation agrees + to protect the citizen, and the citizen agrees to defend the Nation. This + amendment placed the crown of sovereignty on every brow. + </p> + <p> + The 15th Amendment secured the citizen in his right to vote, in his right + to make and execute the laws, and put these rights above the power of any + State. This amendment placed the ballot—the sceptre of authority—in + every sovereign hand. + </p> + <p> + We are told by the Supreme Court, in the case under discussion, that: + </p> + <p> + "We must not forget that the province and scope of the 13th and 14th + Amendments are different;" that the 13th Amendment "simply abolished + slavery," and that the 14th Amendment "prohibited the States from + abridging the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States; + from depriving them of life, liberty or property, without due process of + law; and from denying to any the equal protection of the laws." + </p> + <p> + We are told that: + </p> + <p> + "The amendments are different, and the powers of Congress under them are + different. What Congress has power to do under one it may not have power + to do under the other." That "under the 13th Amendment it has only to do + with slavery and its incidents;" but that "under the 14th Amendment it has + power to counteract and render nugatory all State laws or proceedings + which have the effect to abridge any of the privileges or immunities of + the citizens of the United States, or to deprive them of life, liberty or + property, without due process of law, or to deny to any of them the equal + protection of the laws." + </p> + <p> + Did not Congress have that power under the 13th Amendment? Could the + States, in spite of the 13th Amendment, deprive free men of life or + property without due process of law? Does the Supreme Court wish to be + understood, that until the 14th Amendment was adopted the States had the + right to rob and kill free men? Yet, in its effort to narrow and belittle + the 13th Amendment, it has been driven to this absurdity. Did not + Congress, under the 13th Amendment, have power to destroy slavery and + involuntary servitude? Did not Congress, under that amendment, have the + power to protect the lives, liberty and property of free men? And did not + Congress have the power "to render nugatory all State laws and proceedings + under which free men were to be deprived of life, liberty or property, + without due process of law"? + </p> + <p> + If Congress was not clothed with such power by the 13th Amendment, what + was the object of that amendment? Was that amendment a mere opinion, or a + prophecy, or the expression of a hope? + </p> + <p> + The 14th Amendment provides that: + </p> + <p> + "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges + or immunities of citizens of the United States. Nor shall any State + deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of + law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection + of its laws." + </p> + <p> + We are told by the Supreme Court that Congress has no right to enforce the + 14th Amendment by direct legislation, but that the legislation under that + amendment can only be of a "corrective" character—such as may be + necessary or proper for counteracting and redressing the effect of + unconstitutional laws passed by the States. In other words, that Congress + has no duty to perform, except to counteract the effect of + unconstitutional laws by corrective legislation. + </p> + <p> + The Supreme Court has also decided, in the present case, that Congress has + no right to legislate for the purpose of enforcing these clauses until the + States shall have taken action. What action can the State take? If a State + passes laws contrary to these provisions or clauses, they are void. If a + State passes laws in conformity to these provisions, certainly Congress is + not called on to legislate. Under what circumstances, then, can Congress + be called upon to act by way of "corrective" legislation, as to these + particular clauses? What can Congress do? Suppose the State passes no law + upon the subject, but allows citizens of the State—managers of + railways, and keepers of public inns, to discriminate between their + passengers and guests on account of race or color—what then? + </p> + <p> + Again, what is the difference between a State that has no law on the + subject, and a State that has passed an unconstitutional law? In other + words, what is the difference between no law and a void law? If the + "corrective" legislation of Congress is not needed where the State has + passed an unconstitutional law, is it needed where the State has passed no + law? What is there in either case to correct? Surely it requires no + particular legislation on the part of Congress to kill a law that never + had life. + </p> + <p> + The States are prohibited by the Constitution from making any regulations + of foreign commerce. Consequently, all regulations made by the States are + null and void, no matter what the motive of the States may have been, and + it requires no law of Congress to annul such laws or regulations. This was + decided by the Supreme Court of the United States, long ago, in what are + known as <i>The License Cases</i>. The opinion may be found in the 5th of + Howard, 583. + </p> + <p> + "The nullity of any act inconsistent with the Constitution, is produced by + the declaration that the Constitution is supreme." + </p> + <p> + This was decided by the Supreme Court, the opinion having been delivered + by Chief Justice Marshall, in the case of <i>Gibbons vs. Ogden</i>, 9 + Wheat, 210. + </p> + <p> + The same doctrine was held in the case of <i>Henderson et al., vs. Mayor + of New York, et al.</i>, 92 U. S. 272—the opinion of the Court being + delivered by Justice Miller. + </p> + <p> + So it was held in the case of <i>The Board of Liquidation vs. McComb</i>—2 + Otto, 541. + </p> + <p> + "That an unconstitutional law will be treated by the courts as null and + void"—citing <i>Osborn vs. The Bank of the United States</i>, 9 + Wheaton, 859, and <i>Davis vs. Gray</i>, 16 Wallace, 220. + </p> + <p> + Now, if the legislation of Congress must be "corrective," then I ask, + corrective of what? Certainly not of unconstitutional and void laws. That + which is void, cannot be corrected. That which is unconstitutional is not + the subject of correction. Congress either has the right to legislate + directly, or not at all; because indirect or corrective legislation can + apply only, according to the Supreme Court, to unconstitutional and void + laws that have been passed by a Stale; and as such laws cannot be + "corrected," the doctrine of "corrective legislation" dies an extremely + natural death. + </p> + <p> + A State can do one of three things: 1. It can pass an unconstitutional + law; 2. It can pass a constitutional law; 3. It can fail to pass any law. + The unconstitutional law, being void, cannot be corrected. The + constitutional law does not need correction. And where no law has been + passed, correction is impossible. + </p> + <p> + The Supreme Court insists that Congress can not take action until the + State does. A State that fails to pass any law on the subject, has not + taken action. This leaves the person whose immunities and privileges have + been invaded, with no redress except such as he may find in the State + Courts in a suit at law; and if the State Court takes the same view that + is apparently taken by the Supreme Court in this case,—namely, that + it is a "social question," one not to be regulated by law, and not covered + in any way by the Constitution—then, discrimination can be made + against citizens by landlords and railway conductors, and they are left + absolutely without remedy. + </p> + <p> + The Supreme Court asks, in this decision, + </p> + <p> + "Can the act of a mere individual—the owner of the inn, or public + conveyance, or place of amusement, refusing the accommodation, be justly + regarded as imposing any badge of slavery or servitude upon the applicant, + or only as inflicting an ordinary civil injury properly cognizable by the + laws of the State, and presumably subject to redress by those laws, until + the contrary appears?" + </p> + <p> + How is "the contrary to appear"? Suppose a person denied equal privileges + upon the railway on account of race and color, brings suit and is + defeated? And suppose the highest tribunal of the State holds that the + question is of a "social" character—what then? If, to use the + language of the Supreme Court, it is "an ordinary civil injury, imposing + no badge of slavery or servitude," then, no Federal question is involved. + </p> + <p> + Why did not the Supreme Court tell us what may be done when "the contrary + appears"? Nothing is clearer than the intention of the Supreme Court in + this case—and that is, to decide that denying to a man equal + accommodations at public inns on account of race or color, is not an + abridgment of a privilege or immunity of a citizen of the United States, + and that such person, so denied, is not in a condition of involuntary + servitude, or denied the equal protection of the laws. In other words—that + it is a "social question." + </p> + <p> + I have been told by one who heard the decision when it was read from the + bench, that the following phrase was in the opinion: + </p> + <p> + "<i>There are certain physiological differences of race that cannot be + ignored</i>." + </p> + <p> + That phrase is a lamp, in the light of which the whole decision should be + read. + </p> + <p> + Suppose that in one of the Southern States, the negroes being in a decided + majority and having entire control, had drawn the color line, had insisted + that: + </p> + <p> + "There were certain physiological differences between the races that could + not be ignored," and had refused to allow white people to enter their + hotels, to ride in the best cars, or to occupy the aristocratic portion of + a theatre; and suppose that a white man, thrust from the hotels, denied + the entrance to cars, had brought his suit in the Federal Court. Does any + one believe that the Supreme Court would have intimated to that man that + "there is only a social question involved,—a question with which the + Constitution and laws have nothing to do, and that he must depend for his + remedy upon the authors of the injury"? Would a white man, under such + circumstances, feel that he was in a condition of involuntary servitude? + Would he feel that he was treated like an underling, like a menial, like a + serf? Would he feel that he was under the protection of the laws, shielded + like other men by the Constitution? Of course, the argument of color is + just as strong on one side as on the other. The white man says to the + black, "You are not my equal because you are black;" and the black man can + with the same propriety, reply, "You are not my equal because you are + white." The difference is just as great in the one case as in the other. + The pretext that this question involves, in the remotest degree, a social + question, is cruel, shallow, and absurd. + </p> + <p> + The Supreme Court, some time ago, held that the 4th Section of the Civil + Rights Act was constitutional. That section declares that: + </p> + <p> + "No citizen possessing all other qualifications which are or maybe + prescribed by law, shall be disqualified for service as grand or petit + juror in any court of the United States or of any State, on account of + color or previous condition of servitude." + </p> + <p> + It also provides that: + </p> + <p> + "If any officer or other person charged with any duty in the selection or + summoning of jurors, shall exclude, or fail to summon, any citizen in the + case aforesaid, he shall, on conviction, be guilty of misdemeanor and be + fined not more than five hundred dollars." + </p> + <p> + In the case known as <i>Ex-parte vs. Virginia</i>—found in 100 U. S. + 339—it was held that an indictment against a State officer, under + this section, for excluding persons of color from the jury, could be + sustained. Now, let it be remembered, there was no law of the State of + Virginia, by virtue of which a man was disqualified from sitting on the + jury by reason of race or color. The officer did exclude, and did fail to + summon, a citizen on account of race or color or previous condition of + servitude. And the Supreme Court held: + </p> + <p> + "That whether the Statute-book of the State actually laid down any such + rule of disqualification or not, the State, through its officer, enforced + such rule; and that it was against such State action, through its officers + and agents, that the last clause of the section was directed." + </p> + <p> + The Court further held that: + </p> + <p> + "This aspect of the law was deemed sufficient to divest it of any + unconstitutional character." + </p> + <p> + In other words, the Supreme Court held that the officer was an agent of + the State, although acting contrary to the statute of the State; and that, + consequently, such officer, acting outside of law, was amenable to the + Civil Rights Act, under the 14th Amendment, that referred only to States. + The question arises: Is a State responsible for the action of its agent + when acting contrary to law? In other words: Is the principal bound by the + acts of his agent, that act not being within the scope of his authority? + Is a State liable—or is the Government liable—for the act of + any officer, that act not being authorized by law? + </p> + <p> + It has been decided a thousand times, that a State is not liable for the + torts and trespasses of its officers. How then can the agent, acting + outside of his authority, be prosecuted under a law deriving its entire + validity from a constitutional amendment applying only to States? Does an + officer, by acting contrary to State law, become so like a State that the + word State, used in the Constitution, includes him? + </p> + <p> + So it was held in the case of <i>Neal vs. Delaware</i>,—103 U. S., + 307,—that an officer acting contrary to the laws of the State—in + defiance of those laws—would be amenable to the Civil Rights Act, + passed under an amendment to the Constitution now held applicable only to + States. + </p> + <p> + It is admitted, and expressly decided in the case of <i>The U. S. vs. + Reese et al.</i>, (already quoted) that when the wrongful refusal at an + election is because of race, color, or previous condition of servitude, + Congress can interfere and provide for the punishment of any individual + guilty of such refusal, no matter whether such individual acted under or + against the authority of the State. + </p> + <p> + With this statement I most heartily agree. I agree that: + </p> + <p> + "When the wrongful refusal is because of race, color, or previous + condition of servitude, Congress can interfere and provide for the + punishment of any individual guilty of such refusal." + </p> + <p> + That is the key that unlocks the whole question. Congress has power—full, + complete, and ample,—to protect all citizens from unjust + discrimination, and from being deprived of equal privileges on account of + race, color, or previous condition of servitude. And this language is just + as applicable to the 13th and 14th, as to the 15th Amendment. If a citizen + is denied the accommodations of a public inn, or a seat in a railway car, + on account of race or color, or deprived of liberty on account of race or + color, the Constitution has been violated, and the citizen thus + discriminated against or thus deprived of liberty, is entitled to redress + in a Federal Court. + </p> + <p> + It is held by the Supreme Court that the word "State" does not apply to + the "people" of the State—that it applies only to the agents of the + people of the State. And yet, the word "State," as used in the + Constitution, has been held to include not only the persons in office, but + the people who elected them—not only the agents, but the principals. + In the Constitution it is provided that "no State shall coin money; and no + State shall emit bills of credit." According to this decision, any person + in any State, unless prevented by State authority, has the right to coin + money and to emit bills of credit, and Congress has no power to legislate + upon the subject—provided he does not counterfeit any of the coins + or current money of the United States. Congress would have to deal—not + with the individuals, but with the State; and unless the State had passed + some act allowing persons to coin money, or emit bills of credit, Congress + could do nothing. Yet, long ago, Congress passed a statute preventing any + person in any State from coining money. No matter if a citizen should coin + it of pure gold, of the requisite fineness and weight, and not in the + likeness of United States coins, he would be a criminal. We have a silver + dollar, coined by the Government, worth eighty-five cents; and yet, if any + person, in any State, should coin what he called a dollar, not like our + money, but with a dollar's worth of silver in it, he would be guilty of a + crime. + </p> + <p> + It may be said that the Constitution provides that Congress shall have + power to coin money, and provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the + securities and current coin of the United States; in other words, that the + Constitution gives power to Congress to coin money and denies it to the + States, not only, but gives Congress the power to legislate against + counterfeiting. So, in the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, power is given + to Congress, and power is denied to the States, not only, but Congress is + expressly authorized to enforce the amendments by appropriate legislation. + Certainly the power is as broad in the one case as in the other; and in + both cases, individuals can be reached as well as States. + </p> + <p> + So the Constitution provides that: + </p> + <p> + "Congress shall have power to regulate commerce among the several States." + </p> + <p> + Under this clause Congress deals directly with individuals. The States are + not engaged in commerce, but the people are; and Congress makes rules and + regulations for the government of the people so engaged. + </p> + <p> + The Constitution also provides that: + </p> + <p> + "Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with the Indian tribes." + </p> + <p> + It was held in the case of <i>The United States vs. Holliday</i>, 3 Wall., + 407, that: + </p> + <p> + "Commerce with the Indian tribes means commerce with the individuals + composing those tribes." + </p> + <p> + And under this clause it has been further decided that Congress has the + power to regulate commerce not only between white people and Indian + tribes, but between Indian tribes; and not only that, but between + individual Indians. <i>Worcester vs. The State, 6 Pet., 575; The United + States vs. 4.3 Gallons, 93 U. S., 188; The United States vs. Shawmux, 2 + Saw., 304.</i> + </p> + <p> + Now, if the word "tribe" includes individual Indians, may not the word + "State" include citizens? + </p> + <p> + In this decision it is admitted by the Supreme Court that where a subject + is submitted to the general legislative power of Congress, then Congress + has plenary powers of legislation over the whole subject. Let us apply + these words to the 13th Amendment. In this very decision I find that the + 13th Amendment: + </p> + <p> + "By its own unaided force and effect, abolished slavery and established + universal freedom." + </p> + <p> + The Court admits that: + </p> + <p> + "Legislation may be necessary and proper to meet all the various cases and + circumstances to be affected by it, and to prescribe proper modes of + redress for its violation in letter or spirit." + </p> + <p> + The Court further admits: + </p> + <p> + "And such legislation may be primary and direct in its character." + </p> + <p> + And then gives the reason: + </p> + <p> + "For the amendment is not a mere prohibition of State laws establishing or + upholding slavery, but an absolute declaration that slavery or involuntary + servitude shall not exist in any part of the United States." + </p> + <p> + I now ask, has that subject—that is to say, Liberty,—been + submitted to the general legislative power of Congress? The 13th Amendment + provides that Congress shall have power to enforce that amendment by + appropriate legislation. + </p> + <p> + In construing the 13th and 14th Amendments and the Civil Rights Act, it + seems to me that the Supreme Court has forgotten the principle of + construction that has been laid down so often by courts, and that is this: + that in construing statutes, courts may look to the history and condition + of the country as circumstances from which to gather the intention of the + Legislature. So it seems to me that the Court failed to remember the rule + laid down by Story in the case of <i>Prigg vs. The Commonwealth of + Pennsylvania,</i> 16 Pet., 611, a rule laid down in the interest of + slavery—laid down for the purpose of depriving human beings of their + liberty: + </p> + <p> + "Perhaps the safest rule of interpretation, after all, will be found to be + to look to the nature and objects of the particular powers, duties and + rights with all the lights and aids of contemporary history, and to give + to the words of each just such operation and force consistent with their + legitimate meaning, as may fairly secure and attain the ends proposed." + </p> + <p> + It must be admitted that certain rights were conferred by the 13th + Amendment. Surely certain rights were conferred by the 14th Amendment; and + these rights should be protected and upheld by the Federal Government. And + it was held in the case last cited, that: + </p> + <p> + "If by one mode of interpretation the right must become shadowy and + unsubstantial, and without any remedial power adequate to the end, and by + another mode it will attain its just end and secure its manifest purpose—it + would seem, upon principles of reasoning absolutely irresistable, that the + latter ought to prevail. No court of justice can be authorized so as to + construe any clauses of the Constitution as to defeat its obvious ends, + when another construction, equally accordant with the words and sense + thereof, will enforce and protect them." + </p> + <p> + In the present case, the Supreme Court holds, that Congress can not + legislate upon this subject until the State has passed some law contrary + to the Constitution. + </p> + <p> + I call attention in reply to this, to the case of <i>Hall vs. De Cuir,</i> + 95 U. S., 486. The State of Louisiana, in 1869, acting in the spirit of + these amendments to the Constitution, passed a law requiring that all + persons engaged within that State in the business of common carriers of + passengers, should make no discrimination on account of race, color, or + previous condition of servitude. Under this law, Mrs. De Cuir, a colored + woman, took passage on a steamer, buying a ticket from New Orleans to + Hermitage—the entire trip being within the limits of the State. The + captain of the boat refused to give her equal accommodations with other + passengers—the refusal being on the ground of her color. She + commenced suit against the captain in the State Court of Louisiana, and + recovered judgment for one thousand dollars. The defendant appealed to the + Supreme Court of that State, and the judgment of the lower court was + sustained. Thereupon, the captain died, and the case was taken to the + Supreme Court of the United States by his administrator, on the ground + that a Federal question was involved. + </p> + <p> + You will see that this was a case where the State had acted, and had acted + exactly in accordance with the constitutional amendments, and had by law + provided that the privileges and immunities of the citizen of the United + States—residing in the State of Louisiana—should not be + abridged, and that no distinction should be made on account of race or + color. But in that case the Supreme Court of the United States solemnly + decided that the legislation of the State was void—that the State of + Louisiana had no right to interfere—no right, by law, to protect a + citizen of the United States from being discriminated against under such + circumstances. + </p> + <p> + You will remember that the plaintiff, Mrs. De Cuir, was to be carried from + New Orleans to Hermitage, and that both places were within the State of + Louisiana. Notwithstanding this, the Supreme Court held: + </p> + <p> + "That if the public good required such legislation, it must come from + Congress and not from the State." + </p> + <p> + What reason do you suppose was given? It was this: The Constitution gives + to Congress power to regulate commerce between the States; and it appeared + from the evidence given in that case, that the boat plied between the + ports of New Orleans and Vicksburg. Consequently, it was engaged in + interstate commerce. Therefore, it was under the protection of Congress; + and being under the protection of Congress, the State had no authority to + protect its citizens by a law in perfect harmony with the Constitution of + the United States, while such citizens were within the limits of + Louisiana. The Supreme Court scorns the protection of a State! + </p> + <p> + In the case recently decided, and about which we are talking to-night, the + Supreme Court decides exactly the other way. It decides that if the public + good requires such legislation, it must come from the States, and not from + Congress; that Congress cannot act until the State has acted, and until + the State has acted wrong, and that Congress can then only act for the + purpose of "correcting" such State action. The decision in <i>Hall vs. De + Cuir</i> was rendered in 1877. The Civil Rights Act was then in force, and + applied to all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States, and + provided expressly that: + </p> + <p> + "All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall be + entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the accommodations, + privileges, and facilities of inns, public conveyances on land or water, + theatres, and other places of public amusement, without regard to race or + color." + </p> + <p> + And yet the Supreme Court said: + </p> + <p> + "No carrier of passengers can conduct his business with satisfaction to + himself, or comfort to those employing him, if on one side of a State line + his passengers, both white and colored, must be permitted to occupy the + same cabin, and on the other to be kept separate." + </p> + <p> + What right had the other State to pass a law that passengers should be + kept separate, on account of race or color? How could such a law have been + constitutional? The Civil Rights Act applied to all States, and to both + sides of the lines between all States, and produced absolute uniformity—and + did not put the captain to the trouble of dividing his passengers. The + Court further said: + </p> + <p> + "Uniformity in the regulations by which the carrier is to be governed from + one end to the other of his route, is a necessity in his business." + </p> + <p> + The uniformity had been guaranteed by the Civil Rights Act, and the + statute of the State of Louisiana was in exact conformity with the 14th + Amendment and the Civil Rights Act. The Court also said: + </p> + <p> + "And to secure uniformity, Congress, which is untrammeled by State lines, + has been invested with the exclusive power of determining what such + regulations shall be." + </p> + <p> + Yes. Congress has been invested with such power, and Congress has used it + in passing the Civil Rights Act—and yet, under these circumstances, + the Court proceeds to imagine the difficulty that a captain would have in + dividing his passengers as he crosses a State line, keeping them apart + until he reaches the line of another State, and then bringing them + together, and so going on through the process of dispersing and huddling, + to the end of his unfortunate route. + </p> + <p> + It is held by the Supreme Court, that uniformity of duties is essential to + the carrier, and so essential, that Congress has control of the whole + matter. If uniformity is so desirable for the carrier that Congress takes + control, then uniformity as to the rights of passengers is equally + desirable; and under the 13th and 14th Amendments, Congress has the + exclusive power to state what the rights, privileges and immunities of + passengers shall be. So that, in 1877, the Supreme Court decided that the + <i>States could not</i> legislate; and in 1883, that <i>Congress could not</i>, + unless the State had. If Congress controls interstate commerce upon the + navigable waters, it also controls interstate commerce upon the railways. + And if Congress has exclusive jurisdiction in the one case, it has in the + other. And if it has exclusive jurisdiction, it does not have to wait + until States take action. If it does not have to wait until States take + action, then the Civil Rights Act, in so far as it refers to the rights of + passengers going from one State to another, must be constitutional. + </p> + <p> + It must be remembered, in this discussion, that the 8th Section of the + Constitution conferred upon Congress the power: + </p> + <p> + "To make all laws that may be necessary and proper for carrying into + execution the powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of the + United States." + </p> + <p> + So the 2nd Section of the 13th Article provides: + </p> + <p> + "Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate + legislation." + </p> + <p> + The same language is used in the 14th and 15th Amendments. + </p> + <p> + "This clause does not limit—it enlarges—the powers vested in + the General Government. It is an additional power—not a restriction + on those already granted. It does not impair the right of the Legislature + to exercise its best judgment in the selection of measures to carry into + execution the constitutional powers of the Government. A sound + construction of the Constitution must allow to the National Legislature + that discretion with respect to the means by which the powers it confers + are to be carried into execution, which will enable that body to perform + the high duties assigned to it in the manner most beneficial to the + people. Let the end be legitimate—let it be within the scope of the + Constitution, and all means which are appropriate—which are plainly + adapted to that end—are constitutional." + </p> + <p> + This is the language of Chief Justice Marshall, in the case of <i>M'Caulay, + vs. The State</i>, 4 Wheaton, 316. + </p> + <p> + "Congress must possess the choice of means, and must be empowered to use + any means which are in fact conducive to the exercise of a power granted + by the Constitution." U. S. vs. Fisher, 2 Cranch, 358. + </p> + <p> + Again: + </p> + <p> + "The power of Congress to pass laws to enforce rights conferred by the + Constitution is not limited to the express powers of legislation + enumerated in the Constitution. The powers which are necessary and proper + as means to carry into effect rights expressly given and duties expressly + enjoined, are always implied. The end being given, the means to accomplish + it are given also." <i>Prigs vs. The Commonwealth</i>, 16 Peters, 539. + </p> + <p> + This decision was delivered by Justice Story, and is the same one already + referred to, in which liberty was taken from a human being by judicial + construction. It was held in that case that the 2nd Section of the 4th + Article of the Constitution, to which I have already called attention, + contained "a positive and unqualified recognition of the right" of the + owner in a slave, unaffected by any State law or regulation. If this is + so, then I assert that the 13th Amendment "contains a positive and + unqualified recognition of the right" of every human being to liberty; + that the 14th Amendment "contains a positive and unqualified recognition + of the right" to citizenship; and that the 15th Amendment "contains a + positive and unqualified recognition of the right" to vote. + </p> + <p> + Justice Story held in that case that: + </p> + <p> + "Under and by virtue of that section of the Constitution the owner of a + slave was clothed with entire authority in every State in the nation to + seize and recapture his slave." + </p> + <p> + He also held that: + </p> + <p> + "In that sense, and to that extent, that clause of the Constitution might + properly be said to execute itself, and to require no aid from legislation—State + or National." + </p> + <p> + "But," says Justice Story: + </p> + <p> + "The clause of the Constitution does not stop there, but says that he, the + slave, shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or + labor may be due." + </p> + <p> + And he holds that: + </p> + <p> + "Under that clause of the section Congress became clothed with the + appropriate authority to legislate for its enforcement." + </p> + <p> + Now let us look at the 13th and 14th Amendments in the light of that + decision. + </p> + <p> + First. Liberty and citizenship were given the colored people by this + amendment. And Justice Story tells us that: + </p> + <p> + "The power of Congress to enforce rights conferred by the Constitution is + not limited to the express powers of legislation enumerated in the + Constitution, but the powers which are necessary to protect such rights + are always implied." + </p> + <p> + Language cannot be stronger; words cannot be clearer. But now this + decision has been reversed by the Supreme Court, and Congress is left + powerless to protect rights conferred by the Constitution. It has been + shorn of implied powers. It has duties to perform, and no power to act. It + has rights to protect, but cannot choose the means. It is entangled in its + own strength. It is a prisoner in the bastile of judicial construction. + </p> + <p> + Let us go further. Justice Story tells us that: + </p> + <p> + "The words 'but shall be given up on the claim of the person to whom such + labor or service may be due,' clothes Congress with the appropriate + authority to legislate for its enforcement." + </p> + <p> + In the light of this remark, let us look at the 14th Amendment: + </p> + <p> + "All persons bom or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the + jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State + wherein they reside." + </p> + <p> + To which are added these words: + </p> + <p> + "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges + or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State + deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of + law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection + of the laws." + </p> + <p> + Now, if the words: "But shall be delivered up on claim of the party to + whom such service or labor may be due," clothes Congress with power to + legislate upon the entire subject, then I ask if the words in the 14th + Amendment declaring that "no law shall be made by any State, or enforced, + which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United + States; and that no State shall deprive any person of life, liberty or + property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its + jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws," does not clothe Congress + with the power to legislate upon the entire subject? + </p> + <p> + In the two cases there is only this difference: The first decision was + made in the interest of human slavery—made to protect property in + man; and the second decision ought to have been made for exactly the + opposite purpose. Under the first decision, Congress had the right to + select the means—but now that is denied. And yet it was decided in + <i>M'Cauley vs. The State</i>, 4 Wheaton, 316, that: + </p> + <p> + "When the Government has a right to do an act, and has imposed on it the + duty of performing an act, then it must, according to the dictates of + reason, be allowed to select the means." + </p> + <p> + Again: + </p> + <p> + "The Government has the right to employ freely every means not prohibited, + for the fulfillment of its acknowledged duties." + </p> + <p> + <i>The Legal Tender Cases</i>—12 Wallace, 457. + </p> + <p> + It will thus be seen that Congress has the undoubted right to make all + laws necessary for the exercise of all the powers vested in it by the + Constitution. When the Constitution imposes a duty upon Congress, it + grants the necessary means. Congress certainly, then, has the right to + pass all necessary laws for the enforcement of the 13th, 14th and 15th + Amendments. Any legislation is "appropriate" that is calculated to + accomplish the end sought and that is not repugnant to the Constitution. + Within these limits Congress has the sovereign power of choice. No better + definition of "appropriate legislation" has been given than that by the + Supreme Court of California, in the case of The People vs. Washington, 38 + California, 658: + </p> + <p> + "Legislation which practically tends to facilitate the securing to all, + through the aid of the judicial and executive departments of the + Government, the full enjoyment of personal freedom, is appropriate." + </p> + <p> + The Supreme Court despairingly asks: + </p> + <p> + "If this legislation is appropriate for enforcing the prohibitions of the + Amendment, it is difficult to see where it is to stop. Why may not + Congress, with equal show of authority, enact a code of laws for the + enforcement and vindication of all rights of life, liberty and property?" + </p> + <p> + My answer is: The legislation will stop when and where the discriminations + on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude, stop. + Whenever an immunity or privilege of a citizen of the United States is + trodden down by the State, or by an individual, under the circumstances + mentioned in the Civil Rights Act—that is to say, on account of + race, color, or previous condition of servitude—then the Federal + Government must interfere. The Government must defend the immunities and + privileges of its citizens, not only from State invasion, but from + individual invaders, when that invasion is based upon the distinction of + race, color, or previous condition of servitude. The Government has taken + upon itself that duty. This duty can be discharged by a law making a + uniform rule, obligatory not only upon States, but upon individuals. All + this will stop when the discriminations stop. + </p> + <p> + After such examination of the authorities as I have been able to make, I + lay down the following propositions, namely: + </p> + <p> + 1. The sovereignty of a State extends only to that which exists by its own + authority. + </p> + <p> + 2. The powers of the General Government were not conferred by the people + of a single State; they were given by the people of the United States; and + the laws of the United States, in pursuance of the Constitution, are + supreme over the entire Republic. + </p> + <p> + 3. The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of each State. + </p> + <p> + 4. The United States is a Government whose authority extends over the + whole territory of the Union, acting upon all the States and upon all the + people of all the States. + </p> + <p> + 5. No State can exclude the Federal Government from the exercise of any + authority conferred upon it by the Constitution, or withhold from it, for + a moment, the cognizance of any subject which that instrument has + committed to it. + </p> + <p> + 6. It is the duty of Congress to enforce the Constitution, and it has been + clothed with power to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into + execution all the powers vested by the Constitution in the General + Government. + </p> + <p> + 7. It is the duty of the Government to protect every citizen of the United + States in all his rights, everywhere, without regard to race, color, or + previous condition of servitude; and this the Government has the right to + do by direct legislation. + </p> + <p> + 8. Every citizen, when his privileges and immunities are invaded by the + legislature of a State, has the right of appeal from such. State to the + Supreme Court of the nation. + </p> + <p> + 9. When a State fails to pass any law protecting a citizen from + discrimination on account of race or color, and fails, in fact, to protect + such citizen, then such citizen has the right to find redress in the + Federal Courts. + </p> + <p> + 10. Whenever, in the Constitution, a State is prohibited from doing + anything that in the nature of the thing can be done by any citizen of + that State, then the word "State" embraces and includes all the people of + a State. + </p> + <p> + 11. The 13th Amendment declares that neither slavery nor involuntary + servitude shall exist within the jurisdiction of the United States. + </p> + <p> + This is not a mere negation—it is a splendid affirmation. The duty + is imposed upon the General Government by that amendment to see to it that + neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall exist. + </p> + <p> + It is a question absolutely within the power of the Federal Government, + and the Federal Government is clothed with power to make all necessary + laws to enforce that amendment against States and persons. + </p> + <p> + 12. The 14th Amendment provides that all persons born or naturalized in + the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of + the United States and of the States wherein they reside. This is also an + affirmation. It is not a prohibition. The moment that amendment was + adopted, it became the duty of the United States to protect the citizens + recognized or created by that amendment. We are no longer citizens of the + United States because we are citizens of a State, but we are citizens of + the United States because we have been born or have been naturalized + within the jurisdiction of the United States. It therefore follows, that + it is not only the right, but it is the duty, of Congress, to pass all + laws necessary for the protection of citizens of the United States. + </p> + <p> + 13. Congress can not shirk this responsibility by leaving citizens of the + United States to the care and keeping of the several States. + </p> + <p> + The recent decision of the Supreme Court cuts, as with a sword, the tie + that binds the citizen to the nation. Under the old Constitution, it was + not certainly known who were citizens of the United States. There were + citizens of the States, and such citizens looked to their several States + for protection. The Federal Government had no citizens. Patriotism did not + rest on mutual obligation. Under the 14th Amendment, we are all citizens + of a common country; and our first duty, our first obligation, our highest + allegiance, is not to the State in which we reside, but to the Federal + Government. The 14th Amendment tends to destroy State prejudices and lays + a foundation for national patriotism. + </p> + <p> + 14. All statutes—all amendments to the Constitution—in + derogation of natural rights, should be strictly construed. + </p> + <p> + 15. All statutes and amendments for the preservation of natural rights + should be liberally construed. Every court should, by strict construction, + narrow the scope of every law that infringes upon any natural human right; + and every court should, by construction, give the broadest meaning to + every statute or constitutional provision passed or adopted for the + preservation of freedom. + </p> + <p> + 16. In construing the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments, the Supreme Court + need not go back to decisions rendered in the days of slavery—when + every statute was construed in favor of the sovereignty of the State and + the rights of the master. These amendments utterly obliterated such + decisions. The Supreme Court should begin with the amendments. It need not + look behind them. They are a part of the fundamental organic law of the + nation. They were adopted to destroy the old statutes, to obliterate the + infamous clauses in the Constitution, and to lay a new foundation for a + new nation. + </p> + <p> + 17. Congress has the power to eradicate all forms and incidents of slavery + and involuntary servitude, by direct and primary legislation binding upon + States and individuals alike. And when citizens are denied the exercise of + common rights and privileges—when they are refused admittance to + public inns and railway cars, on an equality with white persons—and + when such denial and refusal are based upon race and color, such citizens + are in a condition of involuntary servitude. + </p> + <p> + The Supreme Court has failed to take into consideration the intention of + the framers of these amendments. It has failed to comprehend the spirit of + the age. It has undervalued the accomplishment of the war. It has not + grasped in all their height and depth the great amendments to the + Constitution and the real object of government. To preserve liberty is the + only use for government. There is no other excuse for legislatures, or + presidents, or courts, for statutes or decisions. Liberty is not simply a + means—it is an end. Take from our history, our literature, our laws, + our hearts—that word, and we are naught but moulded clay. Liberty is + the one priceless jewel. It includes and holds and is the weal and wealth + of life. Liberty is the soil and light and rain—it is the plant and + bud and flower and fruit—and in that sacred word lie all the seeds + of progress, love and joy. + </p> + <p> + This decision, in my judgment, is not worthy of the Court by which it was + delivered. It has given new life to the serpent of State Sovereignty. It + has breathed upon the dying embers of ignorant hate. It has furnished food + and drink, breath and blood, to prejudices that were perishing of famine, + and in the old case of <i>Civilization vs. Barbarism</i>, it has given the + defendant a new trial. + </p> + <p> + From this decision, John M. Harlan had the breadth of brain, the goodness + of heart, and the loyalty to logic, to dissent. By the fortress of + Liberty, one sentinel remains at his post. For moral courage I have + supreme respect, and I admire that intellectual strength that breaks the + cords and chains of prejudice and damned custom as though they were but + threads woven in a spider's loom. This judge has associated his name with + freedom, and he will be remembered as long as men are free. + </p> + <p> + We are told by the Supreme Court that: + </p> + <p> + "Slavery cannot exist without law, any more than property and lands and + goods can exist without law." + </p> + <p> + I deny that property exists by virtue of law. I take exactly the opposite + ground. It was the fact that man had property in lands and goods, that + produced laws for the protection of such property. The Supreme Court has + mistaken an effect for a cause. Laws passed for the protection of + property, sprang from the possession and ownership of the thing to be + protected. When one man enslaves another, it is a violation of all justice—a + subversion of the foundation of all law. Statutes passed for the purpose + of enabling man to enslave his fellow-man, resulted from a conspiracy + entered into by the representatives of brute force. Nothing can be more + absurd than to call such a statute, born of such a conspiracy a law. + According to the idea of the Supreme Court, man never had property until + he had passed a law upon the subject. The first man who gathered leaves + upon which to sleep, did not own them, because no law had been passed on + the leaf subject. The first man who gathered fruit—the first man who + fashioned a club with which to defend himself from wild beasts, according + to the Supreme Court, had no property in these things, because no laws had + been passed, and no courts had published their decisions. + </p> + <p> + So the defenders of monarchy have taken the ground that societies were + formed by contract—as though at one time men all lived apart, and + came together by agreement and formed a government. We might just as well + say that the trees got into groves by contract or conspiracy. Man is a + social being. By living together there grow out of the relation, certain + regulations, certain customs. These at last hardened into what we call law—into + what we call forms of government—and people who wish to defend the + idea that we got everything from the king, say that our fathers made a + contract. Nothing can be more absurd. Men did not agree upon a form of + government and then come together; but being together, they made rules for + the regulation of conduct. Men did not make some laws and then get some + property to fit the laws, but having property they made laws for its + protection. + </p> + <p> + It is hinted by the Supreme Court that this is in some way a question of + social equality. It is claimed that social equality cannot be enforced by + law. Nobody thinks it can. This is not a question of social equality, but + of equal rights. A colored citizen has the same right to ride upon the + cars—to be fed and lodged at public inns, and to visit theatres, + that I have. Social equality is not involved. + </p> + <p> + The Federal soldiers who escaped from Libby and Andersonville, and who in + swamps, in storm, and darkness, were rescued and fed by the slave, had no + scruples about eating with a negro. They were willing to sit beneath the + same tree and eat with him the food he brought. The white soldier was then + willing to find rest and slumber beneath the negro's roof. Charity has no + color. It is neither white nor black. Justice and Patriotism are the same. + Even the Confederate soldier was willing to leave his wife and children + under the protection of a man whom he was fighting to enslave. + </p> + <p> + Danger does not draw these nice distinctions as to race or color. Hunger + is not proud. Famine is exceedingly democratic in the matter of food. In + the moment of peril, prejudices perish. The man fleeing for his life does + not have the same ideas about social questions, as he who sits in the + Capitol, wrapped in official robes. Position is apt to be supercilious. + Power is sometimes cruel. Prosperity is often heartless. + </p> + <p> + This cry about social equality is born of the spirit of caste—the + most fiendish of all things. It is worse than slavery. Slavery is at least + justified by avarice—by a desire to get something for nothing—by + a desire to live in idleness upon the labor of others—but the spirit + of caste is the offspring of natural cruelty and meanness. + </p> + <p> + Social relations depend upon almost an infinite number of influences and + considerations. We have our likes and dislikes. We choose our companions. + This is a natural right. You cannot force into my house persons whom I do + not want. But there is a difference between a public house and a private + house. The one is for the public. The private house is for the family and + those they may invite. The landlord invites the entire public, and he must + serve those who come if they are fit to be received. A railway is public, + not private. It derives its powers and its rights from the State. It takes + private land for public purposes. It is incorporated for the good of the + public, and the public must be served. The railway, the hotel, and the + theatre, have a right to make a distinction between people of good and bad + manners—between the clean and the unclean. There are white people + who have no right to be in any place except a bath-tub, and there are + colored people in the same condition. An unclean white man should not be + allowed to force himself into a hotel, or into a railway car—neither + should the unclean colored. What I claim is, that in public places, no + distinction should be made on account of race or color. The bad black man + should be treated like the bad white man, and the good black man like the + good white man. Social equality is not contended for—neither between + white and white, black and black, nor between white and black. + </p> + <p> + In all social relations we should have the utmost liberty—but public + duties should be discharged and public rights should be recognized, + without the slightest discrimination on account of race or color. Riding + in the same cars, stopping at the same inns, sitting in the same theatres, + no more involve a social question, or social equality, than speaking the + same language, reading the same books, hearing the same music, traveling + on the same highway, eating the same food, breathing the same air, warming + by the same sun, shivering in the same cold, defending the same flag, + loving the same country, or living in the same world. + </p> + <p> + And yet, thousands of people are in deadly fear about social equality. + They imagine that riding with colored people is dangerous—that the + chance acquaintance may lead to marriage. They wish to be protected from + such consequences by law. They dare not trust themselves. They appeal to + the Supreme Court for assistance, and wish to be barricaded by a + constitutional amendment. They are willing that colored women shall + prepare their food—that colored waiters shall bring it to them—willing + to ride in the same cars with the porters and to be shown to their seats + in theatres by colored ushers—willing to be nursed in sickness by + colored servants. They see nothing dangerous—nothing repugnant, in + any of these relations,—but the idea of riding in the same car, + stopping at the same hotel, fills them with fear—fear for the future + of our race. Such people can be described only in the language of Walt + Whitman. "They are the immutable, granitic pudding-heads of the world.". + </p> + <p> + Liberty is not a social question. Civil equality is not social equality. + We are equal only in rights. No two persons are of equal weight, or + height. There are no two leaves in all the forests of the earth alike—no + two blades of grass—no two grains of sand—no two hairs. No two + any-things in the physical world are precisely alike. Neither mental nor + physical equality can be created by law, but law recognizes the fact that + all men have been clothed with equal rights by Nature, the mother of us + all. + </p> + <p> + The man who hates the black man because he is black, has the same spirit + as he who hates the poor man because he is poor. It is the spirit of + caste. The proud useless despises the honest useful. The parasite idleness + scorns the great oak of labor on which it feeds, and that lifts it to the + light. + </p> + <p> + I am the inferior of any man whose rights I trample under foot. Men are + not superior by reason of the accidents of race or color. They are + superior who have the best heart—the best brain. Superiority is born + of honesty, of virtue, of charity, and above all, of the love of liberty. + The superior man is the providence of the inferior. He is eyes for the + blind, strength for the weak, and a shield for the defenceless. He stands + erect by bending above the fallen. He rises by lifting others. + </p> + <p> + In this country all rights must be preserved, all wrongs redressed, + through the ballot. The colored man has in his possession in his care, a + part of the sovereign power of the Republic. At the ballot-box he is the + equal of judges and senators, and presidents, and his vote, when counted, + is the equal of any other. He must use this sovereign power for his own + protection, and for the preservation of his children. The ballot is his + sword and shield. It is his political providence. It is the rock on which + he stands, the column against which he leans. He should vote for no man + who dees not believe in equal rights for all—in the same privileges + and immunities for all citizens, irrespective of race or color. + </p> + <p> + He should not be misled by party cries, or by vague promises in political + platforms. He should vote for the men, for the party, that will protect + him; for congressmen who believe in liberty, for judges who worship + justice, whose brains are not tangled by technicalities, and whose hearts + are not petrified by precedents; and for presidents who will protect the + blackest citizen from the tyranny of the whitest State. As you cannot + trust the word of some white people, and as some black people do not + always tell the truth, you must compel all candidates to put their + principle' in black and white. + </p> + <p> + Of one thing you can rest assured: The best white people are your friends. + The humane, the civilized, the just, the most intelligent, the grandest, + are on your side. The sympathies of the noblest are with you. Your enemies + are also the enemies of liberty, of progress and of justice. The white men + who make the white race honorable believe in equal rights for you. The + noblest living are, the noblest dead were, your friends. I ask you to + stand with your friends. + </p> + <p> + Do not hold the Republican party responsible for this decision, unless the + Republican party endorses it. Had the question been submitted to that + party, it would have been decided exactly the other way—at least a + hundred to one. That party gave you the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments. + They were given in good faith. These amendments put you on a + constitutional and political equality with white men. That they have been + narrowed in their application by the Supreme Court, is not the fault of + the Republican party. Let us wait and see what the Republican party will + do. That party has a strange history, and in that history is a mingling of + cowardice and courage. The army of progress always becomes fearful after + victory, and courageous after defeat. It has been the custom for principle + to apologize to prejudice. The Proclamation of Emancipation gave liberty + only to slaves beyond our lines—those beneath our flag were left to + wear their chains. We said to the Southern States: "Lay down your arms, + and you shall keep your slaves." We tried to buy peace at the expense of + the negro. + </p> + <p> + We offered to sacrifice the manhood of the North, and the natural rights + of the colored man, upon the altar of the Union. The rejection of that + offer saved us from infamy. At one time we refused to allow the loyal + black man to come within our lines. We would meet him at the outposts, + receive his information, and drive him back to chain and lash. The + Government publicly proclaimed that the war was waged to save the Union, + with slavery. We were afraid to claim that the negro was a man—afraid + to admit that he was property—and so we called him "contraband." We + hesitated to allow the negro to fight for his own freedom—hesitated + to let him wear the uniform of the nation while he battled for the + supremacy of its flag. + </p> + <p> + These are some of the inconsistencies of the past. In spite of them we + advanced. We were educated by events, and at last we clearly saw that + slavery was rebellion; that the "institution" had borne its natural fruit—civil + war; that the entire country was responsible for slavery, and that slavery + was responsible for rebellion. We declared that slavery should be + extirpated from the Republic. The great armies led by the greatest + commander of the modern world, shattered, crushed and demolished the + Rebellion. The North grew grand. The people became sublime. The three + sacred amendments were adopted. The Republic was free. + </p> + <p> + Then came a period of hesitation, apology and fear. The colored citizen + was left to his fate. For years the Federal arm, palsied by policy, was + powerless to protect; and this period of fear, of hesitation, of apology, + of lack of confidence in the right, has borne its natural fruit—this + decision of the Supreme Court. + </p> + <p> + But it is not for me to give you advice. Your conduct has been above all + praise. You have been as patient as the earth beneath, as the stars above. + You have been law-abiding and industrious, You have not offensively + asserted your rights, or offensively borne your wrongs. You have been + modest and forgiving. You have returned good for evil. When I remember + that the ancestors of my race were in universities and colleges and common + schools while you and your fathers were on the auction-block, in the + slave-pen, or in the field beneath the cruel lash, in States where reading + and writing were crimes, I am astonished at the progress you have made. + </p> + <p> + All that I—all that any reasonable man—can ask is, that you + continue doing as you have done. Above all things—educate your + children—strive to make yourselves independent—work for homes—work + for yourselves—and wherever it is possible become the masters of + yourselves. + </p> + <p> + Nothing gives me more pleasure than to see your little children with books + under their arms, going and coming from school. + </p> + <p> + It is very easy to see why colored people should hate us, but why we + should hate them is beyond my comprehension. They never sold our wives. + They never robbed our cradles.. They never scarred our backs. They never + pursued us with bloodhounds. They never branded our flesh. + </p> + <p> + It has been said that it is hard to forgive a man to whom we have done a + great injury. I can conceive of no other reason why we should hate the + colored people. To us they are a standing reproach. Their history is our + shame. Their virtues seem to enrage some white people—their patience + to provoke, and their forgiveness to insult. Turn the tables—change + places—and with what fierceness, with what ferocity, with what + insane and passionate intensity we would hate them! + </p> + <p> + The colored people do not ask for revenge—they simply ask for + justice. They are willing to forget the past—willing to hide their + scars—anxious to bury the broken chains, and to forget the miseries + and hardships, the tears and agonies, of two hundred years. + </p> + <p> + The old issues are again upon us. Is this a Nation? Have all citizens of + the United States equal rights, without regard to race or color? Is it the + duty of the General Government to protect its citizens? Can the Federal + arm be palsied by the action or non-action of a State? + </p> + <p> + Another opportunity is given for the people of this country to take sides. + According to my belief, the supreme thing for every man to do is to be + absolutely true to himself. All consequences—whether rewards or + punishments, whether honor and power, or disgrace and poverty, are as + dreams undreamt. I have made my choice. I have taken my stand. Where my + brain and heart go, there I will publicly and openly walk. Doing this, is + my highest conception of duty. Being allowed to do this, is liberty. + </p> + <p> + If this is not now a free Government; if citizens cannot now be protected, + regardless of race or color; if the three sacred amendments have been + undermined by the Supreme Court—we must have another; and if that + fails, then another; and we must neither stop, nor pause, until the + Constitution shall become a perfect shield for every right, of every human + being, beneath our flag. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0002" id="link0002"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + TRIAL OF C. B. REYNOLDS FOR BLASPHEMY. + </h2> + <h3> + Address to the Jury. + </h3> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + * Within thirty miles of New York, in the city of + Morristown, New Jersey, a man was put on trial yesterday for + distributing a pamphlet argument against the infallibility + of the Bible. The crime which the Indictment alleges Is + Blasphemy, for which the statutes of New Jersey provide a + penalty of two hundred dollars fine, or twelve months + imprisonment, or both. It is the first case of the kind ever + tried in New Jersey, although the law dates back to colonial + days. Charles B. Reynolds is the man on trial, and the State + of New Jersey, through the Prosecuting Attorney of Morris + County, is the prosecutor. The Circuit Court, Judge Francis + Child, assisted by County Judges Munson and Quimby, sit upon + the case. Prosecutor Wilder W. Cutler represents the State, + and Robert G. Ingersoll appears for the defendant. + + Mr. Reynolds went to Boonton last summer to hold "free- + thought" meetings. Announcing his purpose without any + flourish, he secured a piece of ground, pitched a tent upon + it, and invited the towns-people to come and hear him. It + was understood that he had been a Methodist minister: that, + finding it impossible to reconcile his mind to some of the + historical parts of the Bible, and unable to accept it in + its entirety as a moral guide, he left the church and set + out to proclaim his conclusions. The churches in Boonton + arrayed themselves against him. The Catholics and Methodists + were especially active. Taking this opposition as an excuse, + one element of the town invaded his tent. They pelted + Reynolds with ancient eggs and vegetables. They chopped away + the guy ropes of the tent and slashed the canvas with their + knives. When the tent collapsed, the crowd rushed for the + speaker to inflict further punishment by plunging him in the + duck pond They rummaged the wrecked tent, but in vain. He + had made his way ont in the confusion and was no more seen + in Boonton. + + But what he had said did not leave Boonton with him, and the + pamphlets he had distributed were read by many who probably + would not have looked between their covers had his visit + been attended by no unusual circumstances. Boonton was still + agitated up on the subject when Mr. Reynolds appeared in + Morristown. This time he did not try to hold meetings, but + had his pamphlets with him. + + Mr. Reynolds appeared in Morristown with the pamphlets on + October thirteenth. A Boonton delegation was there, + clamoring for his indictment for blasphemy. The Grand Jury + heard of his visit and found two indictments against him; + one for blasphemy at + + Boonton and the second for blasphemy at Morristown. He + furnished a five hundred dollar bond to appear for trial. On + account of Colonel Ingersoll's throat troubles the case was + adjourned several times through the winter and until Monday + last, when it was set peremptorily for trial yesterday. + + The public feeling excited at Boonton was overshadowed by + that at Morristown and the neighboring region. For six + months no topic was so interesting to the public as this. It + monopolized attention at the stores, and became a fruitful + subject of gossip in social and church circles. Under such + circumstances it was to be expected that everybody who could + spare the time would go to court yesterday. Lines of people + began to climb the court house hill early in the morning. At + the hour of opening court the room set apart for the trial + was packed, and distaffs had to be stationed at the foot of + the stairs to keep back those who were not early enough. + From nine thirty to eleven o'clock the crowd inside talked + of blasphemy in all the phases suggested by this case, and + the outsiders waited patiently on the lawn and steps and + along the dusty approaches to the gray building. + + Eleven o'clock brought the train from New York and on it + Colonel Ingersoll. His arrival at the court house with his + clerk opened a new chapter in the day's gossip. The event + was so absorbing indeed, that the crowd failed entirely to + notice an elderly man wearing a black frock snit, a silk + hat, with an army badge pinned to his coat, and looking like + a merchant of means, who entered the court house a few + minutes behind the famous lawyer. The last comer was the + defendant. + + All was ready for the case. Within five minutes five jurors + were in the box. Then Colonel Ingersoll asked what were his + rights about challenges. He was informed that he might make + six peremptory challenges and must challenge before the + jurors took their seats. The only disqualification the Court + would recognize would be the inability of a juror to change + his opinion in spite of evidence. Colonel Ingersoll induced + the Court to let him examine the five in the box and + promptly ejected two Presbyterians. + + Thereafter Colonel Ingersoll examined every juror as soon as + presented. He asked particularly about the nature of each + man's prejudice, if he had one. To a juror who did not know + that he understood the word, the Colonel replied: "I may not + define the word legally, but my own idea is that a man is + prejudiced when he has made up his mind on a case without + knowing anything about it." This juror thought that he came + under that category. + + Presbyterians had a rather hard time with the examiner. + After twenty men had been examined and the defence had + exercised five of its peremptory challenges, the following + were sworn as jurymen. * * * * + + The jury having been sworn, Prosecutor Cutler announced that + he would try only the indictment for the offence in + Morristown. He said that Reynolds was charged with + distributing pamphlets containing matter claimed to be + blasphemous under the law. If the charge could be proved he + asked a verdict of guilty. Then he called sixteen towns- + people, to most of whom Reynolds had given a pamphlet. + + Colonel Ingersoll tried to get the Presbyterian witnesses to + say that they had read the pamphlet. Not one of them + admitted it. Further than this he attempted no + cross-examination. + + "I do not know that I shall have any witnesses one way or + the other," Colonel Ingersoll said, rising to suggest a + recess. "Perhaps after dinner I may feel like making a few + remarks." + + "There will be great disappointment if you do not" Judge + Child responded, in a tone that meant a word for himself as + well as for the other listeners. The spectators nodded + approval to this sentiment. At 4:20 o'clock Col. Ingersoll + having spoken since 2 o'clock, Judge Child adjourned court + until this morning. + + As Colonel Ingersoll left the room a throng pressed after + him to offer congratulations. One old man said: "Colonel + Ingersoll I am a Presbyterian pastor, but I must say that + was the noblest speech in defence of liberty I ever heard! + Your hand, sir; your hand,"—The Times, New York, May + 20,1887. +</pre> + <p> + GENTLEMEN of the Jury: I regard this as one of the most important cases + that can be submitted to a jury. It is not a case that involves a little + property, neither is it one that involves simply the liberty of one man. + It involves the freedom of speech, the intellectual liberty of every + citizen of New Jersey. + </p> + <p> + The question to be tried by you is whether a man has the right to express + his honest thought; and for that reason there can be no case of greater + importance submitted to a jury. And it may be well enough for me, at the + outset, to admit that there could be no case in which I could take a + greater—a deeper interest. For my part, I would not wish to live in + a world where I could not express my honest opinions. Men who deny to + others the right of speech are not fit to live with honest men. + </p> + <p> + I deny the right of any man, of any number of men, of any church, of any + State, to put a padlock on the lips—to make the tongue a convict. I + passionately deny the right of the Herod of authority to kill the children + of the brain. A man has a right to work with his hands, to plow the earth, + to sow the seed, and that man has a right to reap the harvest. If we have + not that right, then all are slaves except those who take these rights + from their fellow-men. If you have the right to work with your hands and + to gather the harvest for yourself and your children, have you not a right + to cultivate your brain? Have you not the right to read, to observe, to + investigate—and when you have so read and so investigated, have you + not the right to reap that field? And what is it to reap that field? It is + simply to express what you have ascertained—simply to give your + thoughts to your fellow-men. + </p> + <p> + If there is one subject in this world worthy of being discussed, worthy of + being understood, it is the question of intellectual liberty. Without + that, we are simply painted clay; without that, we are poor, miserable + serfs and slaves. If you have not the right to express your opinions, if + the defendant has not this right, then no man ever walked beneath the blue + of heaven that had the right to express his thought. If others claim the + right, where did they get it? How did they happen to have it, and how did + you happen to be deprived of it? Where did a church or a nation get that + right? + </p> + <p> + Are we not all children of the same Mother? Are we not all compelled to + think, whether we wish to or not? Can you help thinking as you do? When + you look out upon the woods, the fields,—when you look at the solemn + splendors of the night—these things produce certain thoughts in your + mind, and they produce them necessarily. No man can think as he desires. + No man controls the action of his brain, any more than he controls the + action of his heart. The blood pursues its old accustomed ways in spite of + you. The eyes see, if you open them, in spite of you. The ears hear, if + they are unstopped, without asking your permission. And the brain thinks + in spite of you. Should you express that thought? Certainly you should, if + others express theirs. You have exactly the same right. He who takes it + from you is a robber. + </p> + <p> + For thousands of years people have been trying to force other people to + think their way. Did they succeed? No. Will they succeed? No. Why? Because + brute force is not an argument. You can stand with the lash over a man, or + you can stand by the prison door, or beneath the gallows, or by the stake, + and say to this man: "Recant or the lash descends, the prison door is + locked upon you, the rope is put about your neck, or the torch is given to + the fagot." And so the man recants. Is he convinced? Not at all. Have you + produced a new argument? Not the slightest. And yet the ignorant bigots of + this world have been trying for thousands of years to rule the minds of + men by brute force. They have endeavored to improve the mind by torturing + the flesh—to spread religion with the sword and torch. They have + tried to convince their brothers by putting their feet in iron boots, by + putting fathers, mothers, patriots, philosophers and philanthropists in + dungeons. And what has been the result? Are we any nearer thinking alike + to-day than we were then? + </p> + <p> + No orthodox church ever had power that it did not endeavor to make people + think its way by force and flame. And yet every church that ever was + established commenced in the minority, and while it was in the minority + advocated free speech—every one. John Calvin, the founder of the + Presbyterian Church, while he lived in France, wrote a book on religious + toleration in order to show that all men had an equal right to think; and + yet that man afterward, clothed in a little authority, forgot all his + sentiments about religious liberty, and had poor Servetus burned at the + stake, for differing with him on a question that neither of them knew + anything about. In the minority, Calvin advocated toleration—in the + majority, he practiced murder. + </p> + <p> + I want you to understand what has been done in the world to force men to + think alike. It seems to me that if there is some infinite being who wants + us to think alike, he would have made us alike. Why did he not do so? Why + did he make your brain so that you could not by any possibility be a + Methodist? Why did he make yours so that you could not be a Catholic? And + why did he make the brain of another so that he is an unbeliever—why + the brain of another so that he became a Mohammedan—if he wanted us + all to believe alike? + </p> + <p> + After all, may be Nature is good enough and grand enough and broad enough + to give us the diversity born of liberty. May be, after all, it would not + be best for us all to be just the same. What a stupid world, if everybody + said yes to everything that everybody else might say. + </p> + <p> + The most important thing in this world is liberty. More important than + food or clothes—more important than gold or houses or lands—more + important than art or science—more important than all religions, is + the liberty of man. + </p> + <p> + If civilization tends to do away with liberty, then I agree with Mr. + Buckle that civilization is a curse. Gladly would I give up the splendors + of the nineteenth century—gladly would I forget every invention that + has leaped from the brain of man—gladly would I see all books ashes, + all works of art destroyed, all statues broken, and all the triumphs of + the world lost—gladly, joyously would I go back to the abodes and + dens of savagery, if that were necessary to preserve the inestimable gem + of human liberty. So would every man who has a heart and brain. + </p> + <p> + How has the church in every age, when in authority, defended itself? + Always by a statute against blasphemy, against argument, against free + speech. And there never was such a statute that did not stain the book + that it was in, and that did not certify to the savagery of the men who + passed it. Never. By making a statute and by defining blasphemy, the + church sought to prevent discussion—sought to prevent argument—sought + to prevent a man giving his honest opinion. Certainly a tenet, a dogma, a + doctrine, is safe when hedged about by a statute that prevents your + speaking against it. In the silence of slavery it exists. It lives because + lips are locked. It lives because men are slaves. + </p> + <p> + If I understand myself, I advocate only the doctrines that in my judgment + will make this world happier and better. If I know myself, I advocate only + those things that will make a man a better citizen, a better father, a + kinder husband—that will make a woman a better wife, a better mother—doctrines + that will fill every home with sunshine and with joy. And if I believed + that anything I should say to-day would have any other possible tendency, + I would stop. I am a believer in liberty. That is my religion—to + give to every other human being every right that I claim for myself, and I + grant to every other human being, not the right—because it is his + right—but instead of granting I declare that it is his right, to + attack every doctrine that I maintain, to answer every argument that I + urge—in other words, he must have absolute freedom of speech. + </p> + <p> + I am a believer in what I call "intellectual hospitality." A man comes to + your door. If you are a gentleman and he appears to be a good man, you + receive him with a smile. You ask after his health. You say: "Take a + chair; are you thirsty, are you hungry, will you not break bread with me?" + That is what a hospitable, good man does—he does not set the dog on + him. Now, how should we treat a new thought? I say that the brain should + be hospitable and say to the new thought: "Come in; sit down; I want to + cross-examine you; I want to find whether you are good or bad; if good, + stay; if bad, I don't want to hurt you—probably you think you are + all right,—but your room is better than your company, and I will + take another idea in your place." Why not? Can any man have the egotism to + say that he has found it all out? No. Every man who has thought, knows not + only how little he knows, but how little every other human being knows, + and how ignorant, after all, the world must be. + </p> + <p> + There was a time in Europe when the Catholic Church had power. And I want + it distinctly understood with this jury, that while I am opposed to + Catholicism I am not opposed to Catholics—while I am opposed to + Presbyterianism I am not opposed to Presbyterians. I do not fight people,—I + fight ideas, I fight principles, and I never go into personalities. As I + said, I do not hate Presbyterians, but Presbyterianism—that is, I am + opposed to their doctrine. I do not hate a man that has the rheumatism—I + hate the rheumatism when it has a man. So I attack certain principles + because I think they are wrong, but I always want it understood that I + have nothing against persons—nothing against victims. + </p> + <p> + There was a time when the Catholic Church was in power in the Old World. + All at once there arose a man called Martin Luther, and what did the dear + old Catholics think? "Oh," they said, "that man and his followers are + going to hell." But they did not go. They were very good people. They may + have been mistaken—I do not know. I think they were right in their + opposition to Catholicism—but I have just as much objection to the + religion they founded as I have to the church they left. But they thought + they were right, and they made very good citizens, and it turned out that + their differing from the Mother Church did not hurt them. And then after + awhile they began to divide, and there arose Baptists; and-the other + gentlemen, who believed in this law that is now in New Jersey, began + cutting off their ears so that they could hear better; they began putting + them in prison so that they would have a chance to think. But the Baptists + turned out to be good folks—first rate—good husbands, good + fathers, good citizens. And in a little while, in England, the people + turned to be Episcopalians, on account of a little war that Henry VIII. + had with the Pope,—and I always sided with the Pope in that war—but + it made no difference; and in a little while the Episcopalians turned out + to be just about like other folks—no worse—and, as I know of, + no better. + </p> + <p> + After awhile arose the Puritan, and the Episcopalian said, "We don't want + anything of him—he is a bad man;" and they finally drove some of + them away and they settled in New England, and there were among them + Quakers, than whom there never were better people on the earth—industrious, + frugal, gentle, kind and loving—and yet these Puritans began hanging + them. They said: "They are corrupting our children; if this thing goes on, + everybody will believe in being kind and gentle and good, and what will + become of us?" They were honest about it. So they went to cutting off + ears. But the Quakers were good people and none of the prophecies were + fulfilled. + </p> + <p> + In a little while there came some Unitarians and they said, "The world is + going to ruin, sure;"—but the world went on as usual, and the + Unitarians produced men like Channing—one of the tenderest spirits + that ever lived—they produced men like Theodore Parker—one of + the greatest brained and greatest hearted men produced upon this continent—a + good man—and yet they thought he was a blasphemer—they even + prayed for his death—on their bended knees they asked their God to + take time to kill him. Well, they were mistaken. Honest, probably. + </p> + <p> + After awhile came the Universalists, who said: "God is good. He will not + damn anybody always, just for a little mistake he made here. This is a + very short life; the path we travel is very dim, and a great many shadows + fall in the way, and if a man happens to stub his toe, God will not burn + him forever." And then all the rest of the sects cried out, "Why, if you + do away with hell, everybody will murder just for pastime—everybody + will go to stealing just to enjoy themselves." But they did not. The + Universalists were good people—just as good as any others. Most of + them much better. None of the prophecies were fulfilled, and yet the + differences existed. + </p> + <p> + And so we go on until we find people who do not believe the Bible at all, + and when they say they do not, they come within this statute. + </p> + <p> + Now, gentlemen, I am going to try to show you, first, that this statute + under which Mr. Reynolds is being tried is unconstitutional—that it + is not in harmony with the constitution of New Jersey; and I am going to + try to show you in addition to that, that it was passed hundreds of years + ago, by men who believed it was right to burn heretics and tie Quakers to + the end of a cart; men and even modest women—stripped naked—and + lash them from town to town. They were the men who originally passed that + statute, and I want to show you that it has slept all this time, and I am + informed—I do not know how it is—that there never has been a + prosecution in this State for blasphemy. + </p> + <p> + Now, gentlemen, what is blasphemy? Of course nobody knows what it is, + unless he takes into consideration where he is. What is blasphemy in one + country would be a religious exhortation, in another. It is owing to where + you are and who is in authority. And let me call your attention to the + impudence and bigotry of the American Christians. We send missionaries to + other countries. What for? To tell them that their religion is false, that + their gods are myths and monsters, that their saviors and apostles were + impostors, and that our religion is true. You send a man from Morristown—a + Presbyterian, over to Turkey. He goes there, and he tells the Mohammedans—and + he has it in a pamphlet and he distributes it—that the Koran is a + lie, that Mohammed was not a prophet of God, that the angel Gabriel is not + so large that it is four hundred leagues between his eyes—that it is + all a mistake—there never was an angel so large as that. Then what + would the Turks do? Suppose the Turks had a law like this statute in New + Jersey. They would put the Morristown missionary in jail, and he would + send home word, and then what would the people of Morristown say? Honestly—what + do you think they would say? They would say, "Why, look at those poor, + heathen wretches. We sent a man over there armed with the truth, and yet + they were so blinded by their idolatrous religion, so steeped in + superstition, that they actually put that man in prison." Gentlemen, does + not that show the need of more missionaries? I would say, yes. + </p> + <p> + Now, let us turn the tables. A gentleman comes from Turkey to Morristown. + He has got a pamphlet. He says, "The Koran is the inspired book, Mohammed + is the real prophet, your Bible is false and your Savior simply a myth." + Thereupon the Morristown people put him in jail. Then what would the Turks + say? They would say, "Morristown needs more missionaries," and I would + agree with them. + </p> + <p> + In other words, what we want is intellectual hospitality. Let the world + talk. And see how foolish this trial is. I have no doubt that the + prosecuting attorney-agrees with me to-day, that whether this law is good + or bad, this trial should not have taken place. And let me tell you why. + Here comes a man into your town and circulates a pamphlet. Now, if they + had just kept still, very few would ever have heard of it. That would have + been the end. The diameter of the echo would have been a few thousand + feet. But in order to stop the discussion of that question, they indicted + this man, and that question has been more discussed in this country since + this indictment than all the discussions put together since New Jersey was + first granted to Charles II.'s dearest brother James, the Duke of York.. + And what else? A trial here that is to be reported and published all over + the United States, a trial that will give Mr. Reynolds a congregation of + fifty millions of people. And yet this was done for the purpose of + stopping a discussion of this subject. I want to show you that the thing + is in itself almost idiotic—that it defeats itself, and that you + cannot crush out these things by force. Not only so, but Mr. Reynolds has + the right to be defended, and his counsel has the right to give his + opinions on this subject. + </p> + <p> + Suppose that we put Mr. Reynolds in jail. The argument has not been sent + to jail. That is still going the rounds, free as the winds. Suppose you + keep him at hard labor a year—all the time he is there, hundreds and + thousands of people will be reading some account, or some fragment, of + this trial. There is the trouble. If you could only imprison a thought, + then intellectual tyranny might succeed. If you could only take an + argument and put a striped suit of clothes on it—if you could only + take a good, splendid, shining fact and lock it up in some dungeon of + ignorance, so that its light would never again enter the mind of man, then + you might succeed in stopping human progress. Otherwise, no. + </p> + <p> + Let us see about this particular statute. In the first place, the State + has a constitution. That constitution is a rule, a limitation to the power + of the Legislature, and a certain breastwork for the protection of private + rights, and the constitution says to this sea of passions and prejudices: + "Thus far and no farther." The constitution says to each individual: "This + shall panoply you; this is your complete coat of mail; this shall defend + your rights." And it is usual in this country to make as a part of each + constitution several general declarations—called the Bill of Rights. + So I find that in the old constitution of New Jersey, which was adopted in + the year of grace 1776, although the people at that time were not educated + as they are now—the spirit of the Revolution at that time not having + permeated all classes of society—a declaration in favor of religious + freedom. The people were on the eve of a revolution. This constitution was + adopted on the third day of July, 1776, one day before the immortal + Declaration of Independence. Now, what do we find in this—and we + have got to go by this light, by this torch, when we examine the statute. + </p> + <p> + I find in that constitution, in its Eighteenth Section, this: "No person + shall ever in this State be deprived of the inestimable privilege of + worshiping God, in a manner agreeable to the dictates of his own + conscience; nor under any pretence whatever be compelled to attend any + place of worship contrary to his own faith and judgment; nor shall he be + obliged to pay tithes, taxes, or any other rates for the purpose of + building or repairing any church or churches, contrary to what he believes + to be true." That was a very great and splendid step. It was the divorce + of church and state. It no longer allowed the State to levy taxes for the + support of a particular religion, and it said to every citizen of New + Jersey: All that you give for that purpose must be voluntarily given, and + the State will not compel you to pay for the maintenance of a church in + which you do not believe. So far so good. + </p> + <p> + The next paragraph was not so good. "There shall be no establishment of + any one religious sect in this State in preference to another, and no + Protestant inhabitants of this State shall be denied the enjoyment of any + civil right merely on account of his religious principles; but all persons + professing a belief in the faith of any Protestant sect, who shall demean + themselves peaceably, shall be capable of being elected to any office of + profit or trust, and shall fully and freely enjoy every privilege and + immunity enjoyed by other citizens." + </p> + <p> + What became of the Catholics under that clause, I do not know—whether + they had any right to be elected to office or not under this Act. But in + 1844, the State having grown civilized in the meantime, another + constitution was adopted. The word Protestant was then left out. There was + to be no establishment of one religion over another. But Protestantism did + not render a man capable of being elected to office any more than + Catholicism, and nothing is said about any religious belief whatever. So + far, so good. + </p> + <p> + "No religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office of + public trust. No person shall be denied the enjoyment of any civil right + on account of his religious principles." + </p> + <p> + That is a very broad and splendid provision. "No person shall be denied + any civil right on account of his religious principles." That was copied + from the Virginia constitution, and that clause in the Virginia + constitution was written by Thomas Jefferson, and under that clause men + were entitled to give their testimony in the courts of Virginia whether + they believed in any religion or not, in any bible or not, or in any god + or not. + </p> + <p> + That same clause was afterward adopted by the State of Illinois, also by + many other States, and wherever that clause is, no citizen can be denied + any civil right on account of his religious principles. It is a broad and + generous clause. This statute, under which this indictment is drawn, is + not in accordance with the spirit of that splendid sentiment. Under that + clause, no man can be deprived of any civil right on account of his + religious principles, or on account of his belief. And yet, on account of + this miserable, this antiquated, this barbarous and savage statute, the + same man who cannot be denied any political or civil right, can be sent to + the penitentiary as a common felon for simply expressing his honest + thought. And before I get through I hope to convince you that this statute + is unconstitutional. + </p> + <p> + But we will go another step: "Every person may freely speak, write, or + publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of + that right." + </p> + <p> + That is in the constitution of nearly every State in the Union, and the + intention of that is to cover slanderous words—to cover a case where + a man under pretence of enjoying the freedom of speech falsely assails or + accuses his neighbor. Of course he should be held responsible for that + abuse. + </p> + <p> + Then follows the great clause in the constitution of 1844—more + important than any other clause in that instrument—a clause that + shines in that constitution like a star at night.— + </p> + <p> + "No law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of + the press." + </p> + <p> + Can anything be plainer—anything be more forcibly stated? + </p> + <p> + "No law shall be passed to abridge the liberty of speech." + </p> + <p> + Now, while you are considering this statute, I want you to keep in mind + this other statement: + </p> + <p> + "No law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of + the press." + </p> + <p> + And right here there is another thing I want to call your attention to. + There is a constitution higher than any statute. There is a law higher + than any constitution. It is the law of the human conscience, and no man + who is a man will defile and pollute his conscience at the bidding of any + legislature. Above all things, one should maintain his selfrespect, and + there is but one way to do that, and that is to live in accordance with + your highest ideal. + </p> + <p> + There is a law higher than men can make. The facts as they exist in this + poor world—the absolute consequences of certain acts—they are + above all. And this higher law is the breath of progress, the very + outstretched wings of civilization, under which we enjoy the freedom we + have. Keep that in your minds. There never was a legislature great enough—there + never was a constitution sacred enough, to compel a civilized man to stand + between a black man and his liberty. There never was a constitution great + enough to make me stand between any human being and his right to express + his honest thoughts. Such a constitution is an insult to the human soul, + and I would care no more for it than I would for the growl of a wild + beast. But we are not driven to that necessity here. This constitution is + in accord with the highest and noblest aspirations of the heart—"No + law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech." + </p> + <p> + Now let us come to this old law—this law that was asleep for a + hundred years before this constitution was adopted—this law coiled + like a snake beneath the foundations of the Government—this law, + cowardly, dastardly—this law passed by wretches who were afraid: to + discuss—this law passed by men who could not, and who knew they + could not, defend their creed—and so they said: "Give us the sword + of the State and we will cleave the heretic down." And this law was made + to control the minority. When the Catholics were in power they visited + that law upon their opponents. When the Episcopalians were in power, they + tortured and burned the poor Catholic who had scoffed and who had denied + the truth of their religion. Whoever was in power used that, and whoever + was out of power cursed that—and yet, the moment he got in power he + used it: The people became civilized—but that law was on the statute + book. It simply remained. There it was, sound asleep—its lips drawn + over its long and cruel teeth. Nobody savage enough to waken it. And it + slept on, and New Jersey has flourished. Men have done well. You have had + average health in this country. Nobody roused the statute until the + defendant in this case went to Boonton, and there made a speech in which + he gave his honest thought, and the people not having an argument handy, + threw stones. Thereupon Mr. Reynolds, the defendant, published a pamphlet + on Blasphemy and in it gave a photograph of the Boonton Christians. That + is his offence. Now let us read this infamous statute: + </p> + <p> + "<i>If any person shall willfully blaspheme the holy name of God by + denying, cursing, or contumeliously reproaching his being</i>"— + </p> + <p> + I want to say right here—many a man has cursed the God of another + man. The Catholics have cursed the God of the Protestant. The + Presbyterians have cursed the God of the Catholics—charged them with + idolatry—cursed their images, laughed at their ceremonies. And these + compliments have been interchanged between all the religions of the world. + But I say here to-day that no man, unless a raving maniac, ever cursed the + God in whom he believed. No man, no human being, has ever lived who cursed + his own idea of God. He always curses the idea that somebody else + entertains. No human being ever yet cursed what he believed to be infinite + wisdom and infinite goodness—and you know it. Every man on this jury + knows that. He feels that that must be an absolute certainty. Then what + have they cursed? Some God they did not believe in—that is all. And + has a man that right? I say, yes. He has a right to give his opinion of + Jupiter, and there is nobody in Morristown who will deny him that right. + But several thousands years ago it would have been very dangerous for him + to have cursed Jupiter, and yet Jupiter is just as powerful now as he was + then, but the Roman people are not powerful, and that is all there was to + Jupiter—the Roman people. + </p> + <p> + So there was a time when you could have cursed Zeus, the god of the + Greeks, and like Socrates, they would have compelled you to drink hemlock. + Yet now everybody can curse this god. Why? Is the god dead? No. He is just + as alive as he ever was. Then what has happened? The Greeks have passed + away. That is all. So in all of our churches here. Whenever a church is in + the minority it clamors for free speech. When it gets in the majority, no. + I do not believe the history of the world will show that any orthodox + church when in the majority ever had the courage to face the free lips of + the world. It sends for a constable. And is it not wonderful that they + should do this when they preach the gospel of universal forgiveness—when + they say, "if a man strike you on one cheek turn to him the other also—but + if he laughs at your religion, put him in the penitentiary"? Is that the + doctrine? Is that the law? + </p> + <p> + Now, read this law. Do you know as I read it I can almost hear John Calvin + laugh in his grave. That would have been a delight to him. It is written + exactly as he would have written it. There never was an inquisitor who + would not have read that law with a malicious smile. The Christians who + brought the fagots and ran with all their might to be at the burning, + would have enjoyed that law. You know that when they used to burn people + for having said something against religion, they used to cut their tongues + out before they burned them. Why? For fear that if they did not, the poor, + burning victims might say something that would scandalize the Christian + gentlemen who were building the fire. All these persons would have been + delighted with this law. + </p> + <p> + Let us read a little further: + </p> + <p> + "—<i>Or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching Jesus Christ</i>." + </p> + <p> + Why, whoever did, since the poor man, or the poor God, was crucified? How + did they come to crucify him? Because they did not believe in free speech + in Jerusalem. How else? Because there was a law against blasphemy in + Jerusalem—a law exactly like this. Just think of it. Oh, I tell you + we have passed too many mile-stones on the shining road of human progress + to turn back and wallow in that blood, in that mire. + </p> + <p> + No: Some men have said that he was simply a man. Some believed that he was + actually a God. Others believed that he was not only a man, but that he + stood as the representative of infinite love and wisdom. No man ever said + one word against that Being for saying "Do unto others as ye would that + others should do unto you." No man ever raised his voice against him + because he said, "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy." + And are they the "merciful" who when some man endeavors to answer their + argument, put him in the penitentiary? No. The trouble is, the priests—the + trouble is, the ministers—the trouble is, the people whose business + it was to tell the meaning of these things, quarreled' with each other, + and they put meanings upon human expressions by malice, meanings that the + words will not bear. And let me be just to them. I believe that nearly all + that has been done in this world has been honestly done. I believe that + the poor savage who kneels down and prays to a stuffed snake—prays + that his little children may recover from the fever—is honest, and + it seems to me that a good God would answer his prayer if he could, if it + was in accordance with wisdom, because the poor savage was doing the best + he could, and no one can do any better than that. + </p> + <p> + So I believe that the Presbyterians who used to think that nearly + everybody was going to hell, said exactly what they believed. They were + honest about it, and I would not send one of them to jail—would + never think of such a thing—even if he called the unbelievers of the + world "wretches," "dogs," and "devils." What would I do? I would simply + answer him—that is all; answer him kindly. I might laugh at him a + little, but I would answer him in kindness. + </p> + <p> + So these divisions of the human mind are natural. They are a necessity. Do + you know that all the mechanics that ever lived—take the best ones—cannot + make two clocks that will run exactly alike one hour, one minute? They + cannot make two pendulums that will beat in exactly the same time, one + beat. If you cannot do that, how are you going to make hundreds, + thousands, billions of people, each with a different quality and quantity + of brain, each clad in a robe of living, quivering flesh, and each driven + by passion's storm over the wild sea of life—how are you going to + make them all think alike? This is the impossible thing that Christian + ignorance and bigotry and malice have been trying to do. This was the + object of the Inquisition and of the foolish Legislature that passed this + statute. + </p> + <p> + Let me read you another line from this ignorant statute:— + </p> + <p> + "<i>Or the Christian religion</i>." + </p> + <p> + Well, what is the Christian religion? "If you scoff at the Christian + religion—if you curse the Christian religion." Well what is it? + Gentlemen, you hear Presbyterians every day attack the Catholic Church. Is + that the Christian religion? The Catholic believes it is the Christian + religion, and you have to admit that it is the oldest one, and then the + Catholics turn round and scoff at the Protestants. Is that the Christian + religion? If so, every Christian religion has been cursed by every other + Christian religion. Is not that an absurd and foolish statute? + </p> + <p> + I say that the Catholic has the right to attack the Presbyterian and tell + him, "Your doctrine is all wrong." I think he has the right to say to him, + "You are leading thousands to hell." If he believes it, he not only has + the right to say it, but it is his duty to say it; and if the Presbyterian + really believes the Catholics are all going to the devil, it is his duty + to say so. Why not? I will never have any religion that I cannot defend—that + is, that I do not believe I can defend. I may be mistaken, because no man + is absolutely certain that he knows. We all understand that. Every one is + liable to be mistaken. The horizon of each individual is very narrow, and + in his poor sky the stars are few and very small. + </p> + <p> + "<i>Or the Word of God</i>—" + </p> + <p> + What is that? + </p> + <p> + "<i>The canonical Scriptures contained in the books of the Old and New + Testaments</i>." + </p> + <p> + Now, what has a man the right to say about that? Has he the right to show + that the book of Revelation got into the canon by one vote, and one only? + Has he the right to show that they passed in convention upon what books + they would put in and what they would not? Has he the right to show that + there were twenty-eight books called "The Books of the Hebrew's"? Has he + the right to show that? Has he the right to show that Martin Luther said + he did not believe there was one solitary word of gospel in the Epistle to + the Romans? Has he the right to show that some of these books were not + written till nearly two hundred years afterward? Has he the right to say + it, if he believes it? I do not say whether this is true or not, but has a + man the right to say it if he believes it? + </p> + <p> + Suppose I should read the Bible all through right here in Morristown, and + after I got through I should make up my mind that it is not a true book—what + ought I to say? Ought I to clap my hand over my mouth and start for + another State, and the minute I got over the line say, "It is not true, It + is not true"? Or, ought I to have the right and privilege of saying right + here in New Jersey, "My fellow-citizens, I have read the book—I do + not believe that it is the word of God"? Suppose I read it and think it is + true, then I am bound to say so. If I should go to Turkey and read the + Koran and make up my mind that it is false, you would all say that I was a + miserable poltroon if I did not say so. + </p> + <p> + By force you can make hypocrites—men who will agree with you from + the teeth out, and in their hearts hate you. We want no more hypocrites. + We have enough in every community. And how are you going to keep from + having more? By having the air free,—by wiping from your statute + books such miserable and infamous laws as this. + </p> + <p> + "<i>The Holy Scriptures</i>." + </p> + <p> + Are they holy? Must a man be honest? Has he the right to be sincere? There + are thousands of things in the Scriptures that everybody believes. + Everybody believes the Scriptures are right when they say, "Thou shalt not + steal"—everybody. And when they say "Give good measure, heaped up + and running over," everybody says, "Good!" So when they say "Love your + neighbor," everybody applauds that. Suppose a man believes that, and + practices it, does it make any difference whether he believes in the flood + or not? Is that of any importance? Whether a man built an ark or not—does + that make the slightest difference? A man might deny it and yet be a very + good man. Another might believe it and be a very mean man. Could it now, + by any possibility, make a man a good father, a good husband, a good + citizen? Does it make any difference whether you believe it or not? Does + it make any difference whether or not you believe that a man was going + through town, and his hair was a little short, like mine, and some little + children laughed at him, and thereupon two bears from the woods came down + and tore to pieces about forty of these children? Is it necessary to + believe that? Suppose a man should say, "I guess that is a mistake; they + did not copy that right; I guess the man that reported that was a little + dull of hearing and did not get the story exactly right." Any harm in + saying that? Is a man to be sent to the penitentiary for that? Can you + imagine an infinitely good God sending a man to hell because he did not + believe the bear story? + </p> + <p> + So I say if you believe the Bible, say so; if you do not believe it, say + so. And here is the vital mistake, I might almost say, in Protestantism + itself. The Protestants when they fought the Catholics said: "Read the + Bible for yourselves—stop taking it from your priests—read the + sacred volume with your own eyes; it is a revelation from God to his + children, and you are the children." And then they said: "If after you + read it you do not believe it, and you say anything against it, we will + put you in jail, and God will put you in hell." That is a fine position to + get a man in. It is like a man who invited his neighbor to come and look + at his pictures, saying: "They are the finest in the place, and I want + your candid opinion. A man who looked at them the other day said they were + daubs, and I kicked him downstairs—now I want your candid judgment." + So the Protestant Church says to a man, "This Bible is a message from your + Father,—your Father in heaven. Read it. Judge for yourself. But if + after you have read it you say it is not true, I will put you in the + penitentiary for one year." + </p> + <p> + The Catholic Church has a little more sense about that—at least more + logic. It says: "This Bible is not given to everybody. It is given to the + world, to be sure, but it must be interpreted by the church. God would not + give a Bible to the world unless he also appointed some one, some + organization, to tell the world what it means." They said: "We do not want + the world filled with interpretations, and all the interpreters fighting + each other." And the Protestant has gone to the infinite absurdity of + saying: "Judge for yourself, but if you judge wrong you will go to the + penitentiary here and to hell hereafter.". + </p> + <p> + Now, let us see further: + </p> + <p> + "<i>Or by profane scoffing expose them to ridicule</i>" + </p> + <p> + Think of such a law as that, passed under a constitution that says, "No + law shall abridge the liberty of speech." But you must not ridicule the + Scriptures. Did anybody ever dream of passing a law to protect Shakespeare + from being laughed at? Did anybody ever think of such a thing? Did anybody + ever want any legislative enactment to keep people from holding Robert + Burns in contempt? The songs of Burns will be sung as long as there is + love in the human heart. Do we need to protect him from ridicule by a + statute? Does he need assistance from New Jersey? Is any statute needed to + keep Euclid from being laughed at in this neighborhood? And is it possible + that a work written by an infinite Being has to be protected by a + legislature? Is it possible that a book cannot be written by a God so that + it will not excite the laughter of the human race? + </p> + <p> + Why, gentlemen, humor is one of the most valuable things in the human + brain. It is the torch of the mind—it sheds light. Humor is the + readiest test of truth—of the natural, of the sensible—and + when you take from a man all sense of humor, there will only be enough + left to make a bigot. Teach this man who has no humor—no sense of + the absurd—the Presbyterian creed, fill his darkened brain with + superstition and his heart with hatred—then frighten him with the + threat of hell, and he will be ready to vote for that statute. Such men + made that law. + </p> + <p> + Let us read another clause:— + </p> + <p> + "<i>And every person so offending shall, on conviction, be fined nor + exceeding two hundred dollars, or imprisoned at hard labor not exceeding + twelve months, or both</i>." + </p> + <p> + I want you to remember that this statute was passed in England hundreds of + years ago—just in that language. The punishment, however, has been + somewhat changed. In the good old days when the king sat on the throne—in + the good old days when the altar was the right-bower of the throne—then, + instead of saying: "Fined two hundred dollars and imprisoned one year," it + was: "All his goods shall be confiscated; his tongue shall be bored with a + hot iron, and upon his forehead he shall be branded with the letter B; and + for the second offence he shall suffer death by burning." Those were the + good old days when people maintained the orthodox religion in all its + purity and in all its ferocity. + </p> + <p> + The first question for you, gentlemen, to decide in this case is: Is this + statute constitutional? Is this statute in harmony with, the part of the + constitution of 1844 which says: "The liberty of speech shall not be + abridged"? That is for you to say. Is this law constitutional, or is it + simply an old statute that fell asleep, that was forgotten, that people + simply failed to repeal? I believe I can convince you, if you will think a + moment, that our fathers never intended to establish a government like + that. When they fought for what they believed to be religious liberty—when + they fought for what they believed to be liberty of speech, they believed + that all such statutes would be wiped from the statute books of all the + States. + </p> + <p> + Let me tell you another reason why I believe this. We have in this country + naturalization laws. People may come here irrespective of their religion. + They must simply swear allegiance to this country—they must forswear + allegiance to every other potentate, prince and power—but they do + not have to change their religion. A Hindoo may become a citizen of the + United States, and the Constitution of the United States, like the + constitution of New Jersey, guarantees religious liberty. That Hindoo + believes in a God—in a God that no Christian does believe in. He + believes in a sacred book that every Christian looks upon as a collection + of falsehoods. He believes, too, in a Savior—in Buddha. Now, I ask + you,—when that man comes here and becomes a citizen—when the + Constitution is about him, above him—has he the right to give his + ideas about his religion? Has he the right to say in New Jersey: "There is + no God except the Supreme Brahm—there is no Savior except Buddha, + the Illuminated, Buddha the Blest"? I say that he has that right—and + you have no right, because in addition to that he says, "You are mistaken; + your God is not God; your Bible is not true, and your religion is a + mistake," to abridge his liberty of speech. He has the right to say it, + and if he has the right to say it, I insist before this Court and before + this jury, that he has the right to give his reasons for saying it; and in + giving those reasons, in maintaining his side, he has the right, not + simply to appeal to history, not simply to the masonry of logic, but he + has the right to shoot the arrows of wit, and to use the smile of + ridicule. Anything that can be laughed out of this world ought not to stay + in it. + </p> + <p> + So the Persian—the believer in Zoroaster, in the spirits of Good and + Evil, and that the spirit of Evil will finally triumph forever—if + that is his religion—has the right to state it, and the right to + give his reasons for his belief. How infinitely preposterous for you, one + of the States of this Union, to invite a Persian or a Hindoo to come to + your shores. You do not ask him to renounce his God. You ask him to + renounce the Shah. Then when he becomes a citizen, having the rights of + every other citizen, he has the right to defend his religion and to + denounce yours. + </p> + <p> + There is another thing. What was the spirit of our Government at that + time? You must look at the leading men. Who were they? What were their + opinions? Were most of them as guilty of blasphemy as is the defendant in + this case? Thomas Jefferson—and there is, in my judgment, only one + name on the page of American history greater than his—only one name + for which I have a greater and tenderer reverence—and that is + Abraham Lincoln, because of all men who ever lived and had power, he was + the most merciful. And that is the way to test a man. How does he use + power? Does he want to crush his fellow citizens? Does he like to lock + somebody up in the penitentiary because he has the power of the moment? + Does he wish to use it as a despot, or as a philanthropist—like a + devil, or like a man? Thomas Jefferson entertained about the same views + entertained by the defendant in this case, and he was made President of + the United States. He was the author of the Declaration of Independence, + founder of the University of Virginia, writer of that clause in the + constitution of that State, that made all the citizens equal before the + law. And when I come to the very sentences here charged as blasphemy, I + will show you that these were the common sentiments of thousands of very + great, of very intellectual and admirable men. + </p> + <p> + I have no time, and it may be this is not the place and the occasion, to + call your attention to the infinite harm that has been done in almost + every religious nation by statutes such as this. Where that statute is, + liberty can not be; and if this statute is enforced by this jury and by + this Court, and if it is afterwards carried out, and if it could be + carried out in the States of this Union, there would be an end of all + intellectual progress. We would go back to the Dark Ages. Every man's + mind, upon these subjects at least, would become a stagnant pool, covered + with the scum of prejudice and meanness. + </p> + <p> + And wherever such laws have been enforced, have the people been friends? + Here we are to-day in this blessed air—here amid these happy fields. + Can we imagine, with these surroundings, that a man for having been found + with a crucifix in his poor little home, had been taken from his wife and + children and burned—burned by Protestants? You cannot conceive of + such a thing now. Neither can you conceive that there was a time when + Catholics found some poor Protestant contradicting one of the dogmas of + the church, and took that poor honest wretch—while his wife wept—while + his children clung to his hands—to the public square, drove a stake + in the ground, put a chain or two about him, lighted the fagots, and let + the wife whom he loved and his little children see the flames climb around + his limbs—you cannot imagine that any such infamy was ever + practiced. And yet I tell you that the same spirit made this detestable, + infamous, devilish statute. + </p> + <p> + You can hardly imagine that there was a time when the same kind of men + that made this law said to another man: "You say this world is round?" + "Yes, sir; I think it is, because I have seen its shadow on the moon." + "You have?"—Now, can you imagine a society, outside of hyenas and + boa-constrictors, that would take that man, put him in the penitentiary, + in a dungeon, turn the key upon him, and let his name be blotted from the + book of human life? Years afterward some explorer amid ruins finds a few + bones. The same spirit that did that, made this statute—the same + spirit that did that, went before the grand jury in this case—exactly. + Give the men that had this man indicted, the power, and I would not want + to live in that particular part of the country. I would not willingly live + with such men. I would go somewhere else, where the air is free, where I + could speak my sentiments to my wife, to my children, and to my neighbors. + </p> + <p> + Now, this persecution differs only in degree from the infamies of the + olden times. What does it mean? It means that the State of New Jersey has + all the light it wants. And what does that mean? It means that the State + of New Jersey is absolutely infallible—that it has got its growth + and does not propose to grow any more. New Jersey knows enough, and it + will send teachers to the penitentiary. + </p> + <p> + It is hardly possible that this State has accomplished all that it is ever + going to accomplish. Religions are for a day. They are the clouds. + Humanity is the eternal blue. Religions are the waves of the sea. These + waves depend upon the force and direction of the wind—that is to + say, of passion; but Humanity is the great sea. And so our religions + change from day to day, and it is a blessed thing that they do. Why? + Because we grow, and we are getting a little more civilized every day,—and + any man that is not willing to let another man express his opinion, is not + a civilized man, and you know it. Any man that does not give to everybody + else the rights he claims for himself, is not in honest man. + </p> + <p> + Here is a man who says, "I am going to join the Methodist Church." What + right has he? Just the same right to join it that I have not to join it—no + more, no less. But if you are a Methodist and I am not, it simply proves + that you do not agree with me, and that I do not agree with you—that + is all. Another man is a Catholic. He was born a Catholic, or is convinced + that Catholicism is right. That is his business, and any man that would + persecute him on that account, is a poor barbarian—a savage; any man + that would abuse him on that account, is a barbarian—a savage. + </p> + <p> + Then I take the next step. A man does not wish to belong to any church. + How are you going to judge him? Judge him by the way he treats his wife, + his children, his neighbors. Does he pay his debts? Does he tell the + truth? Does he help the poor? Has he got a heart that melts when he hears + grief's story? That is the way to judge him. I do not care what he thinks + about the bears, or the flood, about bibles or gods. When some poor mother + is found wandering in the street with a babe at her breast, does he quote + Scripture, or hunt for his pocket-book? That is the way to judge. And + suppose he does not believe in any bible whatever? If Christianity is + true, that is his misfortune, and everybody should pity the poor wretch + that is going down the hill. Why kick him? You will get your revenge on + him through all eternity—is not that enough? + </p> + <p> + So I say, let us judge each other by our actions, not by theories, not by + what we happen to believe—because that depends very much on where we + were born. + </p> + <p> + If you had been born in Turkey, you probably would have been a Mohammedan. + If I had been born among the Hindoos, I might have been a Buddhist—I + can't tell. If I had been raised in Scotland, on oatmeal, I might have + been a Covenanter—nobody knows. If I had lived in Ireland, and seen + my poor wife and children driven into the street, I think I might have + been a Home-ruler—no doubt of it. You see it depends on where you + were born—much depends on our surroundings. + </p> + <p> + Of course, there are men born in Turkey who are not Mohammedans, and there + are men born in this country who are not Christians—Methodists, + Unitarians, or Catholics, plenty of them, who are unbelievers—plenty + of them who deny the truth of the Scriptures—plenty of them who say: + </p> + <p> + "I know not whether there be a God or not." Well, it is a thousand times + better to say that honestly than to say dishonestly that you believe in + God. + </p> + <p> + If you want to know the opinion of your neighbor, you want his honest + opinion. You do not want to be deceived. You do not want to talk with a + hypocrite. You want to get straight at his honest mind—and then you + are going to judge him, not by what he says but by what he does. It is + very easy to sail along with the majority—easy to sail the way the + boats are going—easy to float with the stream; but when you come to + swim against the tide, with the men on the shore throwing rocks at you, + you will get a good deal of exercise in this world. + </p> + <p> + And do you know that we ought to feel under the greatest obligation to men + who have fought the prevailing notions of their day? There is not a + Presbyterian in Morristown that does not hold up for admiration the man + that carried the flag of the Presbyterians when they were in the minority—not + one. There is not a Methodist in this State who does not admire John and + Charles Wesley and Whitefield, who carried the banner of that new and + despised sect when it was in the minority. They glory in them because they + braved public opinion, because they dared to oppose idiotic, barbarous and + savage statutes like this. And there is not a Universalist that does not + worship dear old Hosea Ballou—I love him myself—because he + said to the Presbyterian minister: "You are going around trying to keep + people out of hell, and I am going around trying to keep hell out of the + people." Every Universalist admires him and loves him because when + despised and railed at and spit upon, he stood firm, a patient witness for + the eternal mercy of God. And there is not a solitary Protestant who does + not honor Martin Luther—who does not honor the Covenanters in poor + Scotland, and that poor girl who was tied out on the sand of the sea by + Episcopalians, and kept there till the rising tide drowned her, and all + she had to do to save her life was to say, "God save the king," but she + would not say it without the addition of the words, "If it be God's will." + No one, who is not a miserable, contemptible wretch, can fail to stand in + admiration before such courage, such self-denial—such heroism. No + matter what the attitude of your body may be, your soul falls on its knees + before such men and such women. + </p> + <p> + Let us take another step. Where would we have been if authority had always + triumphed? Where would we have been if such statutes had always been + carried out? We have now a science called astronomy. That science has done + more to enlarge the horizon of human thought than all things else. We now + live in an infinite universe. We know that the sun is a million times + larger than our earth, and we know that there are other great luminaries + millions of times larger than our sun. We know that there are planets so + far away that light, traveling at the rate of one hundred and eighty-five + thousand miles a second, requires fifteen thousand years to reach this + grain of sand, this tear, we call the earth—and we now know that all + the fields of space are sown thick with constellations. If that statute + had been enforced, that science would not now be the property of the human + mind. That science is contrary to the Bible, and for asserting the truth + you become a criminal. For what sum of money, for what amount of wealth, + would the world have the science of astronomy expunged from the brain of + man? We learned the story of the stars in spite of that statute. + </p> + <p> + The first men who said the world was round were scourged for scoffing at + the Scriptures. And even Martin Luther, speaking of one of the greatest + men that ever lived, said: "Does he think with his little lever to + overturn the Universe of God?" Martin Luther insisted that such men ought + to be trampled under foot. If that statute had been carried into effect, + Galileo would have been impossible. Kepler, the discoverer of the three + laws, would have died with the great secret locked in his brain, and + mankind would have been left ignorant, superstitious, and besotted. And + what else? If that statute had been carried out, the world would have been + deprived of the philosophy of Spinoza; of the philosophy, of the + literature, of the wit and wisdom, the justice and mercy of Voltaire, the + greatest Frenchman that ever drew the breath of life—the man who by + his mighty pen abolished torture in a nation, and helped to civilize a + world. + </p> + <p> + If that statute had been enforced, nearly all the books that enrich the + libraries of the world could not have been written. If that statute had + been enforced, Humboldt could not have delivered the lectures now known as + "The Cosmos." If that statute had been enforced, Charles Darwin would not + have been allowed to give to the world his discoveries that have been of + more benefit to mankind than all the sermons ever uttered. In England they + have placed his sacred dust in the great Abbey. If he had lived in New + Jersey, and this statute could have been enforced, he would have lived one + year at least in your penitentiary. Why? That man went so far as not + simply to deny the truth of your Bible, but absolutely to deny the + existence of your God. Was he a good man? Yes, one of the noblest and + greatest of men. Humboldt, the greatest German who ever lived, was of the + same opinion. + </p> + <p> + And so I might go on with the great men of to-day. Who are the men who are + leading the race upward and shedding light in the intellectual world? They + are the men declared by that statute to be criminals. Mr. Spencer could + not publish his books in the State of New Jersey. He would be arrested, + tried, and imprisoned; and yet that man has added to the intellectual + wealth of the world. + </p> + <p> + So with Huxley, so with Tyndall, so with Helmholtz—so with the + greatest thinkers and greatest writers of modern times. + </p> + <p> + You may not agree with these men—and what does that prove? It simply + proves that they do not agree with you—that is all. Who is to blame? + I do not know. They may be wrong, and you may be right; but if they had + the power, and put you in the penitentiary simply because you differed + with them, they would be savages; and if you have the power and imprison + men because they differ from you, why then, of course, you are savages. + </p> + <p> + No; I believe in intellectual hospitality. I love men that have a little + horizon to their minds—a little sky, a little scope. I hate anything + that is narrow and pinched and withered and mean and crawling, and that is + willing to live on dust. I believe in creating such an atmosphere that + things will burst into blossom. I believe in good will, good health, good + fellowship, good feeling—and if there is any God on the earth, or in + heaven, let us hope that he will be generous and grand. Do you not see + what the effect will be? I am not cursing you because you are a Methodist, + and not damning you because you are a Catholic, or because you are an + Infidel—a good man is more than all of these. The grandest of all + things is to be in the highest and noblest sense a man. + </p> + <p> + Now let us see the frightful things that this man, the defendant in this + case, has done. Let me read the charges against him as set out in this + indictment. + </p> + <p> + I shall insist that this statute does not cover any publication—that + it covers simply speech—not in writing, not in book or pamphlet. Let + us see: + </p> + <p> + "<i>This Bible describes God as so loving that he drowned the whole world + in his mad fury</i>." + </p> + <p> + Well, the great question about that is, is it true? Does the Bible + describe God as having drowned the whole world with the exception of eight + people? Does it, or does it not? I do not know whether there is anybody in + this county who has really read the Bible, but I believe the story of the + flood is there. It does say that God destroyed all flesh, and that he did + so because he was angry. He says so, himself, if the Bible be true. + </p> + <p> + The defendant has simply repeated what is in the Bible. The Bible says + that God is loving, and says that he drowned the world, and that he was + angry. Is it blasphemy to quote from the "Sacred Scriptures"? + </p> + <p> + "<i>Because it was so much worse than he, knowing all things, ever + supposed it could be.</i>" + </p> + <p> + Well, the Bible does say that he repented having made man. Now, is there + any blasphemy in saying that the Bible is true? That is the only question. + It is a fact that God, according to the Bible, did drown nearly everybody. + If God knows all things, he must have known at the time he made them that + he was going to drown them. Is it likely that a being of infinite wisdom + would deliberately do what he knew he must undo? Is it blasphemy to ask + that question? Have you a right to think about it at all? If you have, you + have the right to tell somebody what you think—if not, you have no + right to discuss it, no right to think about it. All you have to do is to + read it and believe it—to open your mouth like a young robin, and + swallow—worms or shingle nails—no matter which. + </p> + <p> + The defendant further blasphemed and said that:— + </p> + <p> + "<i>An all-wise, unchangeable God, who got out of patience with a world + which was just what his own stupid blundering had made it, knew no better + way out of the muddle than to destroy it by drowning!</i>" + </p> + <p> + Is that true? Was not the world exactly as God made it? Certainly. Did he + not, if the Bible is true, drown the people? He did. Did he know he would + drown them when he made them? He did. Did he know they ought to be drowned + when they were made? He did. Where then, is the blasphemy in saying so? + There is not a minister in this world who could explain it—who would + be permitted to explain it—under this statute. And yet you would + arrest this man and put him in the penitentiary. But after you lock him in + the cell, there remains the question still. Is it possible that a good and + wise God, knowing that he was going to drown them, made millions of + people? What did he make them for? I do not know. I do not pretend to be + wise enough to answer that question. Of course, you cannot answer the + question. Is there anything blasphemous in that? Would it be blasphemy in + me to say I do not believe that any God ever made men, women and children—mothers, + with babes clasped to their breasts, and then sent a flood to fill the + world with death? + </p> + <p> + A rain lasting for forty days—the water rising hour by hour, and the + poor wretched children of God climbing to the tops of their houses—then + to the tops of the hills. The water still rising—no mercy. The + people climbing higher and higher, looking to the mountains for salvation—the + merciless rain still falling, the inexorable flood still rising. Children + falling from the arms of mothers—no pity. The highest hills covered—infancy + and old age mingling in death—the cries of women, the sobs and sighs + lost in the roar of waves—the heavens still relentless. The + mountains are covered—a shoreless sea rolls round the world, and on + its billows are billions of corpses. + </p> + <p> + This is the greatest crime that man has imagined, and this crime is called + a deed of infinite mercy. + </p> + <p> + Do you believe that? I do not believe one word of it, and I have the right + to say to all the world that this is false. + </p> + <p> + If there be a good God, the story is not true. If there be a wise God, the + story is not true. Ought an honest man to be sent to the penitentiary for + simply telling the truth? + </p> + <p> + Suppose we had a statute that whoever scoffed at science—whoever by + profane language should bring the rule of three into contempt, or whoever + should attack the proposition that two parallel lines will never include a + space, should be sent to the penitentiary—what would you think of + it? It would be just as wise and just as idiotic as this. + </p> + <p> + And what else says the defendant? + </p> + <p> + "<i>The Bible-God says that his people made him jealous." "Provoked him to + anger.</i>" + </p> + <p> + Is that true? It is. If it is true, is it blasphemous? + </p> + <p> + Let us read another line— + </p> + <p> + "<i>And now he will raise the mischief with them; that his anger bums like + hell</i>." + </p> + <p> + That is true. The Bible says of God—"My anger burns to the lowest + hell." And that is all that the defendant says. Every word of it is in the + Bible. He simply does not believe it—and for that reason is a + "blasphemer." + </p> + <p> + I say to you now, gentlemen,—and I shall argue to the Court,—that + there is not in what I have read a solitary blasphemous word—not a + word that has not been said in hundreds of pulpits in the Christian world. + Theodore Parker, a Unitarian, speaking of this Bible-God said: "Vishnu + with a necklace of skulls, Vishnu with bracelets of living, hissing + serpents, is a figure of Love and Mercy compared to the God of the Old + Testament." That, we might call "blasphemy," but not what I have read. + </p> + <p> + Let us read on:— + </p> + <p> + "<i>He would destroy them all were it not that he feared the wrath of the + enemy</i>." + </p> + <p> + That is in the Bible—word for word. Then the defendant in + astonishment says: + </p> + <p> + "<i>The Almighty God afraid of his enemies!</i>" + </p> + <p> + That is what the Bible says. What does it mean? If the Bible is true, God + was afraid. + </p> + <p> + "<i>Can the mind conceive of more horrid blasphemy?</i>" + </p> + <p> + Is not that true? If God be infinitely good and wise and powerful, is it + possible he is afraid of anything? If the defendant had said that God was + afraid of his enemies, that might have been blasphemy—but this man + says the Bible says that, and you are asked to say that it is blasphemy. + Now, up to this point there is no blasphemy, even if you were to enforce + this infamous statute—this savage law. + </p> + <p> + "<i>The Old Testament records for our instruction in morals, the most foul + and bestial instances of fornication, incest, and polygamy, perpetrated by + God's own saints, and the New Testament indorses these lecherous wretches + as examples for all good Christians to follow</i>.". + </p> + <p> + Now, is it not a fact that the Old Testament does uphold polygamy? Abraham + would have gotten into trouble in New Jersey—no doubt of that. Sarah + could have obtained a divorce in this State—no doubt of that. What + is the use of telling a falsehood about it? Let us tell the truth about + the patriarchs. + </p> + <p> + Everybody knows that the same is true of Moses. We have all heard of + Solomon—a gentleman with five or six hundred wives, and three or + four hundred other ladies with whom he was acquainted. This is simply what + the defendant says. Is there any blasphemy about that? It is only the + truth. If Solomon were living in the United States to-day, we would put + him in the penitentiary. You know that under the Edmunds Mormon law he + would be locked up. If you should present a petition signed by his eleven + hundred wives, you could not get him out. + </p> + <p> + So it was with David. There are some splendid things about David, of + course. I admit that, and pay my tribute of respect to his courage—but + he happened to have ten or twelve wives too many, so he shut them up, put + them in a kind of penitentiary and kept them there till they died. That + would not be considered good conduct even in Morristown. You know that. Is + it any harm to speak of it? There are plenty of ministers here to set it + right—thousands of them all over the country, every one with his + chance to talk all day Sunday and nobody to say a word back. The pew + cannot reply to the pulpit, you know; it has just to sit there and take + it. If there is any harm in this, if it is not true, they ought to answer + it. But it is here, and the only answer is an indictment. + </p> + <p> + I say that Lot was a bad man. So I say of Abraham, and of Jacob. Did you + ever know of a more despicable fraud practiced by one brother on another + than Jacob practiced on Esau? My sympathies have always been with Esau. He + seemed to be a manly man. Is it blasphemy to say that you do not like a + hypocrite, a murderer, or a thief, because his name is in the Bible? How + do you know what such men are mentioned for? May be they are mentioned as + examples, and you certainly ought not to be led away and induced to + imagine that a man with seven hundred wives is a pattern of domestic + propriety, one to be followed by yourself and your sons. I might go on and + mention the names of hundreds of others who committed every conceivable + crime, in the name of religion—who declared war, and on the field of + battle killed men, women and babes, even children yet unborn, in the name + of the most merciful God. The Bible is filled with the names and crimes of + these sacred savages, these inspired beasts. Any man who says that a God + of love commanded the commission of these crimes is, to say the least of + it, mistaken. If there be a God, then it is blasphemous to charge him with + the commission of crime. + </p> + <p> + But let us read further from this indictment: + </p> + <p> + "The aforesaid printed document contains other scandalous, infamous and + blasphemous matters and things, to the tenor and effect following, that is + to say—" + </p> + <p> + Then comes this particularly blasphemous line: + </p> + <p> + "<i>Now, reader, take time and calmly think it over</i> ." + </p> + <p> + Gentlemen, there are many things I have read that I should not have + expressed in exactly the same language used by the defendant, and many + things that I am going to read I might not have said at all, but the + defendant had the right to say every word with which he is charged in this + indictment. He had the right to give his honest thought, no matter whether + any human being agreed with what he said or not, and no matter whether any + other man approved of the manner in which he said these things. I defend + his right to speak, whether I believe in what he spoke or not, or in the + propriety of saying what he did. I should defend a man just as cheerfully + who had spoken against my doctrine, as one who had spoken against the + popular superstitions of my time. It would make no difference to me how + unjust the attack was upon my belief—how maliciously ingenious; and + no matter how sacred the conviction that was attacked, I would defend the + freedom of speech. And why? Because no attack can be answered by force, no + argument can be refuted by a blow, or by imprisonment, or by fine. You may + imprison the man, but the argument is free; you may fell the man to the + earth, but the statement stands. + </p> + <p> + The defendant in this case has attacked certain beliefs, thought by the + Christian world to be sacred. Yet, after all, nothing is sacred but the + truth, and by truth I mean what a man sincerely and honestly believes. The + defendant says: + </p> + <p> + "<i>Take time to calmly think it over: Was a Jewish girl the mother of + God, the mother of your God?</i>" + </p> + <p> + The defendant probably asked this question, supposing that it must be + answered by all sensible people in the negative. If the Christian religion + is true, then a Jewish girl was the mother of Almighty God. Personally, if + the doctrine is true, I have no fault to find with the statement that a + Jewish maiden was the mother of God.—Millions believe, that this is + true—I do not believe,—but who knows? If a God came from the + throne of the universe, came to this world and became the child of a pure + and loving woman, it would not lessen, in my eyes, the dignity or the + greatness of that God. + </p> + <p> + There is no more perfect picture on the earth, or within the imagination + of man, than a mother holding in her thrilled and happy arms a child, the + fruit of love. + </p> + <p> + No matter how the statement is made, the fact remains the same. A Jewish + girl became the mother of God. If the Bible is true, that is true, and to + repeat it, even according to your law, is not blasphemous, and to doubt + it, or to express the doubt, or to deny it, is not contrary to your + constitution. + </p> + <p> + To this defendant it seemed improbable that God was ever born of woman, + was ever held in the lap of a mother; and because he cannot believe this, + he is charged with blasphemy. Could you pour contempt on Shakespeare by + saying that his mother was a woman,—by saying that he was once a + poor, crying, little, helpless child? Of course he was; and he afterwards + became the greatest human being that ever touched the earth,—the + only man whose intellectual wings have reached from sky to sky; and he was + once a crying babe. What of it? Does that cast any scorn or contempt upon + him? Does this take any of the music from "Midsummer Night's Dream"?—any + of the passionate wealth from "Antony and Cleopatra," any philosophy from + "Macbeth," any intellectual grandeur from "King Lear"? On the contrary, + these great productions of the brain show the growth of the dimpled babe, + give every mother a splendid dream and hope for her child, and cover every + cradle with a sublime possibility. + </p> + <p> + The defendant is also charged with having said that: "<i>God cried and + screamed</i>." + </p> + <p> + Why not? If he was absolutely a child, he was like other children,—like + yours, like mine. I have seen the time, when absent from home, that I + would have given more to have heard my children cry, than to have heard + the finest orchestra that ever made the air burst into flower. What if God + did cry? It simply shows that his humanity was real and not assumed, that + it was a tragedy, real, and not a poor pretence. And the defendant also + says that if the orthodox religion be true, that the + </p> + <p> + "<i>God of the Universe kicked, and flung about his little arms, and made + aimless dashes into space with his little fists</i>." + </p> + <p> + Is there anything in this that is blasphemous? One of the best pictures I + ever saw of the Virgin and Child was painted by the Spaniard, Murillo. + Christ appears to be a truly natural, chubby, happy babe. Such a picture + takes nothing from the majesty, the beauty, or the glory of the + incarnation. + </p> + <p> + I think it is the best thing about the Catholic Church that it lifts up + for adoration and admiration, a mother,—that it pays what it calls + "Divine honors" to a woman. There is certainly goodness in that, and where + a church has so few practices that are good, I am willing to point this + one out. It is the one redeeming feature about Catholicism, that it + teaches the worship of a woman. + </p> + <p> + The defendant says more about the childhood of Christ. He goes so far as + to say, that: + </p> + <p> + "<i>He was found staring foolishly at his own little toes.</i>" + </p> + <p> + And why not? The Bible says, that "he increased in wisdom and stature." + The defendant might have referred to something far more improbable. In the + same verse in which St. Luke says that Jesus increased in wisdom and + stature, will be found the assertion that he increased in favor with God + and man. The defendant might have asked how it was that the love of God + for God increased. + </p> + <p> + But the defendant has simply stated that the child Jesus grew, as other + children grow; that he acted like other children, and if he did, it is + more than probable that he did stare at his own toes. I have laughed many + a time to see little children astonished with the sight of their feet. + They seem to wonder what on earth puts the little toes in motion. + Certainly there is nothing blasphemous in supposing that the feet of + Christ amused him, precisely as the feet of other children have amused + them. There is nothing blasphemous about this; on the contrary, it is + beautiful. If I believed in the existence of God, the Creator of this + world, the Being who, with the hand of infinity, sowed the fields of space + with stars, as a farmer sows his grain, I should like to think of him as a + little, dimpled babe, overflowing with joy, sitting upon the knees of a + loving mother. The ministers themselves might take a lesson even from the + man who is charged with blasphemy, and make an effort to bring an infinite + God a little nearer to the human heart. + </p> + <p> + The defendant also says, speaking of the infant Christ, "<i>He was nursed + at Mary's breast.</i>" + </p> + <p> + Yes, and if the story be true, that is the tenderest fact in it. Nursed at + the breast of woman. No painting, no statue, no words can make a deeper + and a tenderer impression upon the heart of man than this: The infinite + God, a babe, nursed at the holy breast of woman. + </p> + <p> + You see these things do not strike all people the same. To a man that has + been raised on the orthodox desert, these things are incomprehensible. He + has been robbed of his humanity. He has no humor, nothing but the stupid + and the solemn. His fancy sits with folded wings. + </p> + <p> + Imagination, like the atmosphere of spring, woos every seed of earth to + seek the blue of heaven, and whispers of bud and flower and fruit. + Imagination gathers from every field of thought and pours the wealth of + many lives into the lap of one. To the contracted, to the cast-iron people + who believe in heartless and inhuman creeds, the words of the defendant + seem blasphemous, and to them the thought that God was a little child is + monstrous. + </p> + <p> + They cannot bear to hear it said that he nursed at the breast of a maiden, + that he was wrapped in swaddling clothes, that he had the joys and sorrows + of other babes. I hope, gentlemen, that not only you, but the attorneys + for the prosecution, have read what is known as the "Apocryphal New + Testament," books that were once considered inspired, once admitted to be + genuine, and that once formed a part of our New Testament. I hope you have + read the books of Joseph and Mary, of the Shepherd of Hermes, of the + Infancy and of Mary, in which many of the things done by the youthful + Christ are described—books that were once the delight of the + Christian world; books that gave joy to children, because in them they + read that Christ made little birds of clay, that would at his command + stretch out their wings and fly with joy above his head. If the defendant + in this case had said anything like that, here in the State of New Jersey, + he would have been indicted; the orthodox ministers would have shouted + "blasphemy," and yet, these little stories made the name of Christ dearer + to children. + </p> + <p> + The church of to-day lacks sympathy; the theologians are without + affection. After all, sympathy is genius. A man who really sympathizes + with another understands him. A man who sympathizes with a religion, + instantly sees the good that is in it, and the man who sympathizes with + the right, sees the evil that a creed contains. + </p> + <p> + But the defendant, still speaking of the infant Christ, is charged with + having said: + </p> + <p> + "<i>God smiled when he was comfortable. He lay in a cradle and was rocked + to sleep.</i>" + </p> + <p> + Yes, and there is no more beautiful picture than that. Let some great + religious genius paint a picture of this kind—of a babe smiling with + content, rocked in the cradle by the mother who bends tenderly and proudly + above him. There could be no more beautiful, no more touching, picture + than this. What would I not give for a picture of Shakespeare as a babe,—a + picture that was a likeness,—rocked by his mother? I would give more + for this than for any painting that now enriches the walls of the world. + </p> + <p> + The defendant also says, that: + </p> + <p> + "<i>God was sick when cutting his teeth.</i>" + </p> + <p> + And what of that? We are told that he was tempted in all points, as we + are. That is to say, he was afflicted, he was hungry, he was thirsty, he + suffered the pains and miseries common to man. Otherwise, he was not + flesh, he was not human. + </p> + <p> + "<i>He caught the measles, the mumps, the scarlet fever and the whooping + cough</i>." + </p> + <p> + Certainly he was liable to have these diseases, for he was, in fact, a + child. Other children have them. Other children, loved as dearly by their + mothers as Christ could have been by his, and yet they are taken from the + little family by fever; taken, it may be, and buried in the snow, while + the poor mother goes sadly home, wishing that she was lying by its side. + All that can be said of every word in this address, about Christ and about + his childhood, amounts to this; that he lived the life of a child; that he + acted like other children. I have read you substantially what he has said, + and this is considered blasphemous. + </p> + <p> + He has said, that: + </p> + <p> + "<i>According to the Old Testament, the God of the Christian world + commanded people to destroy each other.</i>" + </p> + <p> + If the Bible is true, then the statement of the defendant is true. Is it + calculated to bring God into contempt to deny that he upheld polygamy, + that he ever commanded one of his generals to rip open with the sword of + war, the woman with child? Is it blasphemy to deny that a God of infinite + love gave such commandments? Is such a denial calculated to pour contempt + and scorn upon the God of the orthodox? + </p> + <p> + Is it blasphemous to deny that God commanded his children to murder each + other? Is it blasphemous to say that he was benevolent, merciful and just? + </p> + <p> + It is impossible to say that the Bible is true and that God is good. I do + not believe that a God made this world, filled it with people and then + drowned them. I do not believe that infinite wisdom ever made a mistake. + If there be any God he was too good to commit such an infinite crime, too + wise, to make such a mistake. Is this blasphemy? Is it blasphemy to say + that Solomon was not a virtuous man, or that David was an adulterer? + </p> + <p> + Must we say when this ancient King had one of his best generals placed in + the front of the battle—deserted him and had him murdered for the + purpose of stealing his wife, that he was "a man after God's own heart"? + Suppose the defendant in this case were guilty of something like that? + Uriah was fighting for his country, fighting the battles of David, the + King. David wanted to take from him his wife. He sent for Joab, his + commander-in-chief, and said to him: + </p> + <p> + "Make a feint to attack a town. Put Uriah at the front of the attacking + force, and when the people sally forth from the town to defend its gate, + fall back so that this gallant, noble, patriotic man may be slain." + </p> + <p> + This was done and the widow was stolen by the King. Is it blasphemy to + tell the truth and to say exactly what David was? Let us be honest with + each other; let us be honest with this defendant. + </p> + <p> + For thousands of years men have taught that the ancient patriarchs were + sacred, that they were far better than the men of modern times, that what + was in them a virtue, is in us a crime. Children are taught in Sunday + schools to admire and respect these criminals of the ancient days. The + time has come to tell the truth about these men, to call things by their + proper names, and above all, to stand by the right, by the truth, by mercy + and by justice. If what the defendant has said is blasphemy under this + statute then the question arises, is the statute in accordance with the + constitution? If this statute is constitutional, why has it been allowed + to sleep for all these years? I take this position: Any law made for the + preservation of a human right, made to guard a human being, cannot sleep + long enough to die; but any law that deprives a human being of a natural + right—if that law goes to sleep, it never wakes, it sleeps the sleep + of death. + </p> + <p> + I call the attention of the Court to that remarkable case in England + where, only a few years ago, a man appealed to trial by battle. The law + allowing trial by battle had been asleep in the statute book of England + for more than two hundred years, and yet the court held that, in spite of + the fact that the law had been asleep—it being a law in favor of a + defendant—he was entitled to trial by battle. And why? Because it + was a statute at the time made in defence of a human right, and that + statute could not sleep long enough or soundly enough to die. In + consequence of this decision, the Parliament of England passed a special + act, doing away forever with the trial by battle. + </p> + <p> + When a statute attacks an individual right, the State must never let it + sleep. When it attacks the right of the public at large and is allowed to + pass into a state of slumber, it cannot be raised for the purpose of + punishing an individual. + </p> + <p> + Now, gentlemen, a few words more. I take an almost infinite interest in + this trial, and before you decide, I am exceedingly anxious that you + should understand with clearness the thoughts I have expressed upon this + subject I want you to know how the civilized feel, and the position now + taken by the leaders of the world. + </p> + <p> + A few years ago almost everything spoken against the grossest possible + superstition was considered blasphemous. The altar hedged itself about + with the sword; the Priest went in partnership with the King. In those + days statutes were leveled against all human speech. Men were convicted of + blasphemy because they believed in an actual personal God; because they + insisted that God had body and parts. Men were convicted of blasphemy + because they denied that God had form. They have been imprisoned for + denying the doctrine of transubstantiation, and they have been torn in + pieces for defending that doctrine. There are but few dogmas now believed + by any Christian church that have not at some time been denounced as + blasphemous. + </p> + <p> + When Henry VIII. put himself at the head of the Episcopal Church a creed + was made, and in that creed there were five dogmas that must, of + necessity, be believed. Anybody who denied any one, was to be punished—for + the first offence, with fine, with imprisonment, or branding, and for the + second offence, with death. Not one of these five dogmas is now a part of + the creed of the Church of England. + </p> + <p> + So I could go on for days and weeks and months, showing that hundreds and + hundreds of religious dogmas, to deny which was death, have been either + changed or abandoned for others nearly as absurd as the old ones were. It + may be, however, sufficient to say, that wherever the church has had power + it has been a crime for any man to speak his honest thought. No church has + ever been willing that any opponent should give a transcript of his mind. + Every church in power has appealed to brute force, to the sword, for the + purpose of sustaining its creed. Not one has had the courage to occupy the + open field. The church has not been satisfied with calling Infidels and + unbelievers blasphemers. Each church has accused nearly every other church + of being a blasphemer. Every pioneer has been branded as a criminal. The + Catholics called Martin Luther a blasphemer, and Martin Luther called + Copernicus a blasphemer. Pious ignorance always regards intelligence as a + kind of blasphemy. Some of the greatest men of the world, some of the + best, have been put to death for the crime of blasphemy, that is to say, + for the crime of endeavoring to benefit their fellow-men. + </p> + <p> + As long as the church has the power to close the lips of men, so long and + no longer will superstition rule this world. + </p> + <p> + "Blasphemy is the word that the majority hisses into the ear of the few." + </p> + <p> + After every argument of the church has been answered, has been refuted, + then the church cries, "blasphemy!" + </p> + <p> + Blasphemy is what an old mistake says of a newly discovered truth. + </p> + <p> + Blasphemy is what a withered last year's leaf says to a this year's bud. + </p> + <p> + Blasphemy is the bulwark of religious prejudice. + </p> + <p> + Blasphemy is the breastplate of the heartless. + </p> + <p> + And let me say now, that the crime of blasphemy, as set out in this + statute, is impossible. No man can blaspheme a book. No man can commit + blasphemy by telling his honest thought. No man can blaspheme a God, or a + Holy Ghost, or a Son of God. The Infinite cannot be blasphemed. + </p> + <p> + In the olden time, in the days of savagery and superstition, when some + poor man was struck by lightning, or when a blackened mark was left on the + breast of a wife and mother, the poor savage supposed that some god, + angered by something he had done, had taken his revenge. What else did the + savage suppose? He believed that this god had the same feelings, with + regard to the loyalty of his subjects, that an earthly chief had, or an + earthly king had, with regard to the loyalty or treachery of members of + his tribe, or citizens of his kingdom. So the savage said, when his + country was visited by a calamity, when the flood swept the people away, + or the storm scattered their poor houses in fragments: "We have allowed + some Freethinker to live; some one is in our town or village who has not + brought his gift to the priest, his incense to the altar; some man of our + tribe or of our country does not respect our god." Then, for the purpose + of appeasing the supposed god, for the purpose of again winning a smile + from heaven, for the purpose of securing a little sunlight for their + fields and homes, they drag the accused man from his home, from his wife + and children, and with all the ceremonies of pious brutality, shed his + blood. They did it in self-defence; they believed that they were saving + their own lives and the lives of their children; they did it to appease + their god. Most people are now beyond that point. Now when disease visits + a community, the intelligent do not say the disease came because the + people were wicked; when the cholera comes, it is not because of the + Methodists, of the Catholics, of the Presbyterians, or of the Infidels. + When the wind destroys a town in the far West, it is not because somebody + there had spoken his honest thoughts. We are beginning to see that the + wind blows and destroys without the slightest reference to man, without + the slightest care whether it destroys the good or the bad, the + irreligious or the religious. When the lightning leaps from the clouds it + is just as likely to strike a good man as a bad man, and when the great + serpents of flame climb around the houses of men, they burn just as gladly + and just as joyously, the home of virtue, as they do the den and lair of + vice. + </p> + <p> + Then the reason for all these laws has failed. The laws were made on + account of a superstition. That superstition has faded from the minds of + intelligent men, and, as a consequence, the laws based on the superstition + ought to fail. + </p> + <p> + There is one splendid thing in nature, and that is that men and nations + must reap the consequences of their acts—reap them in this world, if + they live, and in another if there be one. The man who leaves this world a + bad man, a malicious man, will probably be the same man when he reaches + another realm, and the man who leaves this shore good, charitable and + honest, will be good, charitable and honest, no matter on what star he + lives again. The world is growing sensible upon these subjects, and as we + grow sensible, we grow charitable. + </p> + <p> + Another reason has been given for these laws against blasphemy, the most + absurd reason that can by any possibility be given. It is this: There + should be laws against blasphemy, because the man who utters blasphemy + endangers the public peace. + </p> + <p> + Is it possible that Christians will break the peace? Is it possible that + they will violate the law? Is it probable that Christians will congregate + together and make a mob, simply because a man has given an opinion against + their religion? What is their religion? They say, "If a man smites you on + one cheek, turn the other also." They say, "We must love our neighbors as + we love ourselves." Is it possible then, that you can make a mob out of + Christians,—that these men, who love even their enemies, will attack + others, and will destroy life, in the name of universal love? And yet, + Christians themselves say that there ought to be laws against blasphemy, + for fear that Christians, who are controlled by universal love, will + become so outraged, when they hear an honest man express an honest + thought, that they will leap upon him and tear him in pieces. + </p> + <p> + What is blasphemy? I will give you a definition; I will give you my + thought upon this subject. What is real blasphemy? + </p> + <p> + To live on the unpaid labor of other men—that is blasphemy. + </p> + <p> + To enslave your fellow-man, to put chains upon his body—that is + blasphemy. + </p> + <p> + To enslave the minds of men, to put manacles upon the brain, padlocks upon + the lips—that is blasphemy. + </p> + <p> + To deny what you believe to be true, to admit to be true what you believe + to be a lie—that is blasphemy. + </p> + <p> + To strike the weak and unprotected, in order that you may gain the + applause of the ignorant and superstitious mob—that is blasphemy. + </p> + <p> + To persecute the intelligent few, at the command of the ignorant many—that + is blasphemy. + </p> + <p> + To forge chains, to build dungeons, for your honest fellow-men—that + is blasphemy. + </p> + <p> + To pollute the souls of children with the dogma of eternal pain—that + is blasphemy. + </p> + <p> + To violate your conscience—that is blasphemy. + </p> + <p> + The jury that gives an unjust verdict, and the judge who pronounces an + unjust sentence, are blasphemers. + </p> + <p> + The man who bows to public opinion against his better judgment and against + his honest conviction, is a blasphemer. + </p> + <p> + Why should we fear our fellow-men? Why should not each human being have + the right, so far as thought and its expression are concerned, of all the + world? What harm can come from an honest interchange of thought? + </p> + <p> + I have been giving you my real ideas. I have spoken freely, and yet the + sun rose this morning, just the same as it always has. There is no + particular change visible in the world, and I do not see but that we are + all as happy to-day as though we had spent yesterday in making somebody + else miserable. I denounced on yesterday the superstitions of the + Christian world, and yet, last night I slept the sleep of peace. You will + pardon me for saying again that I feel the greatest possible interest in + the result of this trial, in the principle at stake. This is my only + apology, my only excuse, for taking your time. For years I have felt that + the great battle for human liberty, the battle that has covered thousands + of fields with heroic dead, had finally been won. When I read the history + of this world, of what has been endured, of what has been suffered, of the + heroism and infinite courage of the intellectual and honest few, battling + with the countless serfs and slaves of kings and priests, of tyranny, of + hypocrisy, of ignorance and prejudice, of faith and fear, there was in my + heart the hope that the great battle had been fought, and that the human + race, in its march towards the dawn, had passed midnight, and that the + "great balance weighed up morning." This hope, this feeling, gave me the + greatest possible joy. When I thought of the many who had been burnt, of + how often the sons of liberty had perished in ashes, of how many o! the + noblest and greatest had stood upon scaffolds, and of the countless + hearts, the grandest that ever throbbed in human breasts, that had been + broken by the tyranny of church and state, of how many of the noble and + loving had sighed themselves away in dungeons, the only consolation was + that the last bastile had fallen, that the dungeons of the Inquisition had + been torn down and that the scaffolds of the world could no longer be wet + with heroic blood. + </p> + <p> + You know that sometimes, after a great battle has been fought, and one of + the armies has been broken, and its fortifications carried, there are + occasional stragglers beyond the great field, stragglers who know nothing + of the fate of their army, know nothing of the victory, and for that + reason, fight on. There are a few such stragglers in the State of New + Jersey. They have never heard of the great victory. They do not know that + in all civilized countries the hosts of superstition have been put to + flight. They do not know that Freethinkers, Infidels, are to-day the + leaders of the intellectual armies of the world. + </p> + <p> + One of the last trials of this character, tried in Great Britain,—and + that is the country that our ancestors fought in the sacred name of + liberty,—one of the last trials in that country, a country ruled by + a state church, ruled by a woman who was born a queen, ruled by dukes and + nobles and lords, children of ancient robbers—was in the year 1843. + George Jacob Holyoake, one of the best of the human race, was imprisoned + on a charge of Atheism, charged with having written a pamphlet and having + made a speech in which he had denied the existence of the British God. The + judge who tried him, who passed sentence upon him, went down to his grave + with a stain upon his intellect and upon his honor. All the real + intelligence of Great Britain rebelled against the outrage. There was a + trial after that to which I will call your attention. Judge Coleridge, + father of the present Chief Justice of England, presided at this trial. A + poor man by the name of Thomas Pooley, a man who dug wells for a living, + wrote on the gate of a priest, that, if people would burn their Bibles and + scatter the ashes on the lands, the crops would be better, and that they + would also save a good deal of money in tithes. He wrote several sentences + of a kindred character. He was a curious man. He had an idea that the + world was a living, breathing animal. He would not dig a well beyond a + certain depth for fear he might inflict pain upon this animal, the earth. + He was tried before Judge Coleridge, on that charge. An infinite God was + about to be dethroned, because an honest well-digger had written his + sentiments on the fence of a parson. He was indicted, tried, convicted and + sentenced to prison. Afterward, many intelligent people asked for his + pardon, on the ground that he was in danger of becoming insane. The judge + refused to sign the petition. The pardon was refused. Long before his + sentence expired, he became a raving maniac. He was removed to an asylum + and there died. Some of the greatest men in England attacked that judge, + among these, Mr. Buckle, author of "The History of Civilization in + England," one of the greatest books in this world. Mr. Buckle denounced + Judge Coleridge. He brought him before the bar of English opinion, and + there was not a man in England, whose opinion was worth anything, who did + not agree with Mr. Buckle, and did not with him, declare the conviction of + Thomas Pooley to be an infamous outrage. What were the reasons given? + This, among others: The law was dead; it had been asleep for many years; + it was a law passed during the ignorance of the Middle Ages, and a law + that came out of the dungeon of religious persecution; a law that was + appealed to by bigots and by hypocrites, to punish, to imprison an honest + man. + </p> + <p> + In many parts of this country, people have entertained the idea that New + England was still filled with the spirit of Puritanism, filled with the + descendants of those who killed Quakers in the name of universal + benevolence, and traded Quaker children in the Barbadoes for rum, for the + purpose of establishing the fact that God is an infinite father. + </p> + <p> + Yet, the last trial in Massachusetts on a charge like this, was when Abner + Kneeland was indicted on a charge of Atheism. He was tried for having + written this sentence: "The Universalists believe in a God which I do + not." He was convicted and imprisoned. Chief Justice Shaw upheld the + decision, and upheld it because he was afraid of public opinion; upheld + it, although he must have known that the statute under which Kneeland was + indicted was clearly and plainly in violation of the Constitution. No man + can read the decision of Justice Shaw without being convinced that he was + absolutely dominated, either by bigotry, or hypocrisy. One of the judges + of that court, a noble man, wrote a dissenting opinion, and in that + dissenting opinion is the argument of a civilized, of an enlightened + jurist. No man can answer the dissenting opinion of Justice Morton. The + case against Kneeland was tried more than fifty years ago, and there has + been none since in the New England States; and this case, that we are now + trying, is the first ever tried in New Jersey. The fact that it is the + first, certifies to my interpretation of this statute, and it also + certifies to the toleration and to the civilization of the people of this + State. The statute is upon your books. You inherited it from your ignorant + ancestors, and they inherited it from their savage ancestors. The people + of New Jersey were heirs of the mistakes and of the atrocities of ancient + England. + </p> + <p> + It is too late to enforce a law like this. Why has it been allowed to + slumber? Who obtained this indictment? Were they actuated by good and + noble motives? Had they the public weal at heart, or were they simply + endeavoring to be revenged upon this defendant? Were they willing to + disgrace the State, in order that they might punish him? + </p> + <p> + I have given you my definition of blasphemy, and now the question arises, + what is worship? Who is a worshiper? What is prayer? What is real + religion? Let me answer these questions. + </p> + <p> + Good, honest, faithful work, is worship. The man who ploughs the fields + and fells the forests; the man who works in mines, the man who battles + with the winds and waves out on the wide sea, controlling the commerce of + the world; these men are worshipers. The man who goes into the forest, + leading his wife by the hand, who builds him a cabin, who makes a home in + the wilderness, who helps to people and civilize and cultivate a + continent, is a worshiper. + </p> + <p> + Labor is the only prayer that Nature answers; it is the only prayer that + deserves an answer,—good, honest, noble work. + </p> + <p> + A woman whose husband has gone down to the gutter, gone down to + degradation and filth; the woman who follows him and lifts him out of the + mire and presses him to her noble heart, until he becomes a man once more, + this woman is a worshiper. Her act is worship. + </p> + <p> + The poor man and the poor woman who work night and day, in order that they + may give education to their children, so that they may have a better life + than their father and mother had; the parents who deny themselves the + comforts of life, that they may lay up something to help their children to + a higher place—they are worshipers; and the children who, after they + reap the benefit of this worship, become ashamed of their parents, are + blasphemers. + </p> + <p> + The man who sits by the bed of his invalid wife,—a wife prematurely + old and gray,—the husband who sits by her bed and holds, her thin, + wan hand in his as lovingly, and kisses it as rapturously, as + passionately, as when it was dimpled,—that is worship; that man is a + worshiper; that is real religion. + </p> + <p> + Whoever increases the sum of human joy, is a worshiper. He who adds to the + sum of human misery, is a blasphemer. + </p> + <p> + Gentlemen, you can never make me believe—no statute can ever + convince me, that there is any infinite Being in this universe who hates + an honest man. It is impossible to satisfy me that there is any God, or + can be any God, who holds in abhorrence a soul that has the courage to + express his thought. Neither can the whole world convince me that any man + should be punished, either in this world or in the next, for being candid + with his fellow-men. If you send men to the penitentiary for speaking + their thoughts, for endeavoring to enlighten their fellows, then the + penitentiary will become a place of honor, and the victim will step from + it—not stained, not disgraced, but clad in robes of glory. + </p> + <p> + Let us take one more step. + </p> + <p> + What is holy, what is sacred? I reply that human happiness is holy, human + rights are holy. The body and soul of man—these are sacred. The + liberty of man is of far more importance than any book; the rights of man + more sacred than any religion—than any Scriptures, whether inspired + or not. + </p> + <p> + What we want is the truth, and does any one suppose that all of the truth + is confined in one book—that the mysteries of the whole world are + explained by one volume? + </p> + <p> + All that is—all that conveys information to man—all that has + been produced by the past—all that now exists—should be + considered by an intelligent man. All the known truths of this world—all + the philosophy, all the poems, all the pictures, all the statues, all the + entrancing music—the prattle of babes, the lullaby of mothers, the + words of honest men, the trumpet calls to duty—all these make up the + bible of the world—everything that is noble and true and free, you + will find in this great book. + </p> + <p> + If we wish to be true to ourselves,—if we wish to benefit our + fellow-men—if we wish to live honorable lives—we will give to + every other human being every right that we claim for ourselves. + </p> + <p> + There is another thing that should be remembered by you. You are the + judges of the law, as well as the judges of the facts. In a case like + this, you are the final judges as to what the law is; and if you acquit, + no court can reverse your verdict. To prevent the least misconception, let + me state to you again what I claim: + </p> + <p> + First. I claim that the constitution of New Jersey declares that: + </p> + <p> + "<i>The liberty of speech shall not be abridged</i>." Second. That this + statute, under which this indictment is found, is unconstitutional, + because it does abridge the liberty of speech; it does exactly that which + the constitution emphatically says shall not be done. + </p> + <p> + Third. I claim, also, that under this law—even if it be + constitutional—the words charged in this indictment do not amount to + blasphemy, read even in the light, or rather in the darkness, of this + statute. + </p> + <p> + Do not, I pray you, forget this point. Do not forget, that, no matter what + the Court may tell you about the law—how good it is, or how bad it + is—no matter what the Court may instruct you on that subject—do + not forget one thing, and that is: That the words charged in the + indictment are the only words that you can take into consideration in this + case. Remember that no matter what else may be in the pamphlet—no + matter what pictures or cartoons there may be of the gentlemen in Boonton + who mobbed this man in the name of universal liberty and love—do not + forget that you have no right to take one word into account except the + exact words set out in this indictment—that is to say, the words + that I have read to you. Upon this point the Court will instruct you that + you have nothing to do with any other line in that pamphlet; and I now + claim, that should the Court instruct you that the statute is + constitutional, still I insist that the words set out in this indictment + do not amount to blasphemy. + </p> + <p> + There is still another point. This statute says: "Whoever shall <i>willfully</i> + speak against." Now, in this case, you must find that the defendant + "willfully" did so and so—that is to say, that he made the + statements attributed to him knowing that they were not true. If you + believe that he was honest in what he said, then this statute does not + touch him. Even under this statute, a man may give his honest opinion. + Certainly, there is no law that charges a man with "willfully" being + honest—"willfully" telling his real opinion—"willfully" giving + to his fellow-men his thought. + </p> + <p> + Where a man is charged with larceny, the indictment must set out that he + took the goods or the property with the intention to steal—with what + the law calls the <i>animus furandi</i>. If he took the goods with the + intention to steal, then he is a thief; but if he took the goods believing + them to be his own, then he is guilty of no offence. So in this case, + whatever was said by the defendant must have been "willfully" said. And I + claim that if you believe that what the man said was honestly said, you + cannot find him guilty under this statute. + </p> + <p> + One more point: This statute has been allowed to slumber so long, that no + man had the right to awaken it. For more than one hundred years it has + slept; and so far as New Jersey is concerned, it has been sound asleep + since 1664. For the first time it is dug out of its grave. The breath of + life is sought to be breathed into it, to the end that some people may + wreak their vengeance on an honest man. + </p> + <p> + Is there any evidence—has there been any—to show that the + defendant was not absolutely candid in the expression of his opinions? Is + there one particle of evidence tending, to show that he is not a perfectly + honest and sincere man? Did the prosecution have the courage to attack his + reputation? No. The State has simply proved to you that he circulated that + pamphlet—that is all. + </p> + <p> + It was claimed, among other things, that the defendant circulated this + pamphlet among children. There was no such evidence—not the + slightest. The only evidence about schools, or school-children was, that + when the defendant talked with the bill-poster,—whose business the + defendant was interfering with,—he asked him something about the + population of the town, and about the schools. But according to the + evidence, and as a matter of fact, not a solitary pamphlet was ever given + to any child, or to any youth. According to the testimony, the defendant + went into two or three stores,—laid the pamphlets on a show case, or + threw them upon a desk—put them upon a stand where papers were sold, + and in one instance handed a pamphlet to a man. That is all. + </p> + <p> + In my judgment, however, there would have been no harm in giving this + pamphlet to every citizen of your place. + </p> + <p> + Again I say, that a law that has been allowed to sleep for all these years—allowed + to sleep by reason of the good sense and by reason of the tolerant spirit + of the State of New Jersey, should not be allowed to leap into life + because a few are intolerant, or because a few lacked good sense and + judgment. This snake should not be warmed into vicious life by the blood + of anger. + </p> + <p> + Probably not a man on this jury agrees with me about the subject of + religion. Probably not a member of this jury thinks that I am right in the + opinions that I have entertained and have so often expressed. Most of you + belong to some church, and I presume that those who do, have the good of + what they call Christianity at heart. There maybe among you some + Methodists. If so, they have read the history of their church, and they + know that when it was in the minority, it was persecuted, and they know + that they can not read the history of that persecution without becoming + indignant. They know that the early Methodists were denounced as heretics, + as ranters, as ignorant pretenders. + </p> + <p> + There are also on this jury, Catholics, and they know that there is a + tendency in many parts of this country to persecute a man now because he + is a Catholic. They also know that their church has persecuted in times + past, whenever and wherever it had the power; and they know that + Protestants, when in power, have always persecuted Catholics; and they + know, in their hearts, that all persecution, whether in the name of law, + or religion, is monstrous, savage, and fiendish. + </p> + <p> + I presume that each one of you has the good of what you call Christianity + at heart. If you have, I beg of you to acquit this man. If you believe + Christianity to be a good, it never can do any church any good to put a + man in jail for the expression of opinion. Any church that imprisons a man + because he has used an argument against its creed, will simply convince + the world that it cannot answer the argument. + </p> + <p> + Christianity will never reap any honor, will never reap any profit, from + persecution. It is a poor, cowardly, dastardly way of answering arguments. + No gentleman will do it—no civilized man ever did do it—no + decent human being ever did, or ever will. + </p> + <p> + I take it for granted that you have a certain regard, a certain affection, + for the State in which you live—that you take a pride in the + Commonwealth of New Jersey. If you do, I beg of you to keep the record of + your State clean. Allow no verdict to be recorded against the freedom of + speech. At present there is not to be found on the records of any inferior + court, or on those of the Supreme tribunal—any case in which a man + has been punished for speaking his sentiments. The records have not been + stained—have not been polluted—with such a verdict. + </p> + <p> + Keep such a verdict from the Reports of your State—from the Records + of your courts. No jury has yet, in the State of New Jersey, decided that + the lips of honest men are not free—that there is a manacle upon the + brain. + </p> + <p> + For the sake of your State—for the sake of her reputation throughout + the world—for your own sakes—and those of your children, and + their children yet to be—say to the world that New Jersey shares in + the spirit of this age,—that New Jersey is not a survival of the + Dark Ages,—that New Jersey does not still regard the thumbscrew as + an instrument of progress,—that New Jersey needs no dungeon to + answer the arguments of a free man, and does not send to the penitentiary, + men who think, and men who speak. Say to the world, that where arguments + are without foundation, New Jersey has confidence enough in the brains of + her people to feel that such arguments can be refuted by reason. + </p> + <p> + For the sake of your State, acquit this man. For the sake of something of + far more value to this world than New Jersey—for the sake of + something of more importance to mankind than this continent—for the + sake of Human Liberty, for the sake of Free Speech, acquit this man. + </p> + <p> + What light is to the eyes, what love is to the heart, Liberty is to the + soul of man. Without it, there come suffocation, degradation and death. + </p> + <p> + In the name of Liberty, I implore—and not only so, but I insist—that + you shall find a verdict in favor of this defendant. Do not do the + slightest thing to stay the march of human progress. Do not carry us back, + even for a moment, to the darkness of that cruel night that good men hoped + had passed away forever. + </p> + <p> + Liberty is the condition of progress. Without Liberty, there remains only + barbarism. Without Liberty, there can be no civilization. + </p> + <p> + If another man has not the right to think, you have not even the right to + think that he thinks wrong. If every man has not the right to think, the + people of New Jersey had no right to make a statute, or to adopt a + constitution—no jury has the right to render a verdict, and no court + to pass its sentence. + </p> + <p> + In other words, without liberty of thought, no human being has the right + to form a judgment. It is impossible that there should be such a thing as + real religion without liberty. Without liberty there can be no such thing + as conscience, no such word as justice. All human actions—all good, + all bad—have for a foundation the idea of human liberty, and without + Liberty there can be no vice, and there can be no virtue. + </p> + <p> + Without Liberty there can be no worship, no blasphemy—no love, no + hatred, no justice, no progress. + </p> + <p> + Take the word Liberty from human speech and all the other words become + poor, withered, meaningless sounds—but with that word realized—with + that word understood, the world becomes a paradise. + </p> + <p> + Understand me. I am not blaming the people. I am not blaming the + prosecution, or the prosecuting attorney. The officers of the court are + simply doing what they feel to be their duty. They did not find the + indictment. That was found by the grand jury. The grand jury did not find + the indictment of its own motion. Certain people came before the grand + jury and made their complaint—gave their testimony, and upon that + testimony, under this statute, the indictment was found. + </p> + <p> + While I do not blame these people—they not being on trial—I do + ask you to stand on the side of right. + </p> + <p> + I cannot conceive of much greater happiness than to discharge a public + duty, than to be absolutely true to conscience, true to judgment, no + matter what authority may say, no matter what public opinion may demand. A + man who stands by the right, against the world, cannot help applauding + himself, and saying: "I am an honest man." + </p> + <p> + I want your verdict—a verdict born of manhood, of courage; and I + want to send a dispatch to-day to a woman who is lying sick. I wish you to + furnish the words of this dispatch—only two words—and these + two words will fill an anxious heart with joy. They will fill a soul with + light. It is a very short message—only two words—and I ask you + to furnish them: "Not guilty." + </p> + <p> + You are expected to do this, because I believe you will be true to your + consciences, true to your best judgment, true to the best interests of the + people of New Jersey, true to the great cause of Liberty. + </p> + <p> + I sincerely hope that it will never be necessary again, under the flag of + the United States—that flag for which has been shed the bravest and + best blood of the world—under that flag maintained by Washington, by + Jefferson, by Franklin and by Lincoln—under that flag in defence of + which New Jersey poured out her best and bravest blood—I hope it + will never be necessary again for a man to stand before a jury and plead + for the Liberty of Speech. + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + Note: The jury in this case brought in a verdict of guilty. + The Judge imposed a fine of twenty-five dollars and costs + amounting in all to seventy-five dollars, which Colonel + Ingersoll paid, giving his services free.—C. P. Farrell. +</pre> + <p> + <a name="link0003" id="link0003"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + GOD IN THE CONSTITUTION. + </h2> + <p> + "<i>All governments derive their just powers from the consent of the + governed</i>." + </p> + <p> + IN this country it is admitted that the power to govern resides in the + people themselves; that they are the only rightful source of authority. + For many centuries before the formation of our Government, before the + promulgation of the Declaration of Independence, the people had but little + voice in the affairs of nations. The source of authority was not in this + world; kings were not crowned by their subjects, and the sceptre was not + held by the consent of the governed. The king sat on his throne by the + will of God, and for that reason was not accountable to the people for the + exercise of his power. He commanded, and the people obeyed. He was lord of + their bodies, and his partner, the priest, was lord of their souls. The + government of earth was patterned after the kingdom on high. God was a + supreme autocrat in heaven, whose will was law, and the king was a supreme + autocrat on earth whose will was law. The God in heaven had inferior + beings to do his will, and the king on earth had certain favorites and + officers to do his. These officers were accountable to him, and he was + responsible to God. + </p> + <p> + The Feudal system was supposed to be in accordance with the divine plan. + The people were not governed by intelligence, but by threats and promises, + by rewards and punishments. No effort was made to enlighten the common + people; no one thought of educating a peasant—of developing the mind + of a laborer. The people were created to support thrones and altars. Their + destiny was to toil and obey—to work and want. They were to be + satisfied with huts and hovels, with ignorance and rags, and their + children must expect no more. In the presence of the king they fell upon + their knees, and before the priest they groveled in the very dust. The + poor peasant divided his earnings with the state, because he imagined it + protected his body; he divided his crust with the church, believing that + it protected his soul. He was the prey of Throne and Altar—one + deformed his body, the other his mind—and these two vultures fed + upon his toil. He was taught by the king to hate the people of other + nations, and by the priest to despise the believers in all other + religions. He was made the enemy of all people except his own. He had no + sympathy with the peasants of other lands, enslaved and plundered like + himself., He was kept in ignorance, because education is the enemy of + superstition, and because education is the foe of that egotism often + mistaken for patriotism. + </p> + <p> + The intelligent and good man holds in his affections the good and true of + every land—the boundaries of countries are not the limitations of + his sympathies. Caring nothing for race, or color, he loves those who + speak other languages and worship other gods. Between him and those who + suffer, there is no impassable gulf. He salutes the world, and extends the + hand of friendship to the human race. He does not bow before a provincial + and patriotic god—one who protects his tribe or nation, and abhors + the rest of mankind. + </p> + <p> + Through all the ages of superstition, each nation has insisted that it was + the peculiar care of the true God, and that it alone had the true religion—that + the gods of other nations were false and fraudulent, and that other + religions were wicked, ignorant and absurd. In this way the seeds of + hatred had been sown, and in this way have been kindled the flames of war. + Men have had no sympathy with those of a different complexion, with those + who knelt at other altars and expressed their thoughts in other words—and + even a difference in garments placed them beyond the sympathy of others. + Every peculiarity was the food of prejudice and the excuse for hatred. + </p> + <p> + The boundaries of nations were at last crossed by commerce. People became + somewhat acquainted, and they found that the virtues and vices were quite + evenly distributed. At last, subjects became somewhat acquainted with + kings—peasants had the pleasure of gazing at princes, and it was + dimly perceived that the differences were mostly in rags and names. + </p> + <p> + In 1776 our fathers endeavored to retire the gods from politics. They + declared that "all governments derive their just powers from the consent + of the governed." This was a contradiction of the then political ideas of + the world; it was, as many believed, an act of pure blasphemy—a + renunciation of the Deity. It was in fact a declaration of the + independence of the earth. It was a notice to all churches and priests + that thereafter mankind would govern and protect themselves. Politically + it tore down every altar and denied the authority of every "sacred book," + and appealed from the Providence of God to the Providence of Man. + </p> + <p> + Those who promulgated the Declaration adopted a Constitution for the great + Republic. + </p> + <p> + What was the office or purpose of that Constitution? + </p> + <p> + Admitting that all power came from the people, it was necessary, first, + that certain means be adopted for the purpose of ascertaining the will of + the people, and second, it was proper and convenient to designate certain + departments that should exercise certain powers of the Government. There + must be the legislative, the judicial and the executive departments. Those + who make laws should not execute them. Those who execute laws should not + have the power of absolutely determining their meaning or their + constitutionality. For these reasons, among others, a Constitution was + adopted. + </p> + <p> + This Constitution also contained a declaration of rights. It marked out + the limitations of discretion, so that in the excitement of passion, men + shall not go beyond the point designated in the calm moment of reason. + </p> + <p> + When man is unprejudiced, and his passions subject to reason, it is well + he should define the limits of power, so that the waves driven by the + storm of passion shall not overbear the shore. + </p> + <p> + A constitution is for the government of man in this world. It is the chain + the people put upon their servants, as well as upon themselves. It defines + the limit of power and the limit of obedience. + </p> + <p> + It follows, then, that nothing should be in a constitution that cannot be + enforced by the power of the state—that is, by the army and navy. + Behind every provision of the Constitution should stand the force of the + nation. Every sword, every bayonet, every cannon should be there. + </p> + <p> + Suppose, then, that we amend the Constitution and acknowledge the + existence and supremacy of God—what becomes of the supremacy of the + people, and how is this amendment to be enforced? A constitution does not + enforce itself. It must be carried out by appropriate legislation. Will it + be a crime to deny the existence of this constitutional God? Can the + offender be proceeded against in the criminal courts? Can his lips be + closed by the power of the state? Would not this be the inauguration of + religious persecution? + </p> + <p> + And if there is to be an acknowledgment of God in the Constitution, the + question naturally arises as to which God is to have this honor. Shall we + select the God of the Catholics—he who has established an infallible + church presided over by an infallible pope, and who is delighted with + certain ceremonies and placated by prayers uttered in exceedingly common + Latin? Is it the God of the Presbyterian with the Five Points of + Calvinism, who is ingenious enough to harmonize necessity and + responsibility, and who in some way justifies himself for damning most of + his own children? Is it the God of the Puritan, the enemy of joy—of + the Baptist, who is great enough to govern the universe, and small enough + to allow the destiny of a soul to depend on whether the body it inhabited + was immersed or sprinkled? + </p> + <p> + What God is it proposed to put in the Constitution? Is it the God of the + Old Testament, who was a believer in slavery and who justified polygamy? + If slavery was right then, it is right now; and if Jehovah was right then, + the Mormons are right now. Are we to have the God who issued a commandment + against all art—who was the enemy of investigation and of free + speech? Is it the God who commanded the husband to stone his wife to death + because she differed with him on the subject of religion? Are we to have a + God who will re-enact the Mosaic code and punish hundreds of offences with + death? What court, what tribunal of last resort, is to define this God, + and who is to make known his will? In his presence, laws passed by men + will be of no value. The decisions of courts will be as nothing. But who + is to make known the will of this supreme God? Will there be a supreme + tribunal composed of priests? + </p> + <p> + Of course all persons elected to office will either swear or affirm to + support the Constitution. Men who do not believe in this God, cannot so + swear or affirm. Such men will not be allowed to hold any office of trust + or honor. A God in the Constitution will not interfere with the oaths or + affirmations of hypocrites. Such a provision will only exclude honest and + conscientious unbelievers. Intelligent people know that 110 one knows + whether there is a God or not. The existence of such a Being is merely a + matter of opinion. Men who believe in the liberty of man, who are willing + to die for the honor of their country, will be excluded from taking any + part in the administration of its affairs. Such a provision would place + the country under the feet of priests. + </p> + <p> + To recognize a Deity in the organic law of our country would be the + destruction of religious liberty. The God in the Constitution would have + to be protected. There would be laws against blasphemy, laws against the + publication of honest thoughts, laws against carrying books and papers in + the mails in which this constitutional God should be attacked. Our land + would be filled with theological spies, with religious eavesdroppers, and + all the snakes and reptiles of the lowest natures, in this sunshine of + religious authority, would uncoil and crawl. + </p> + <p> + It is proposed to acknowledge a God who is the lawful and rightful + Governor of nations; the one who ordained the powers that be. If this God + is really the Governor of nations, it is not necessary to acknowledge him + in the Constitution. This would not add to his power. If he governs all + nations now, he has always controlled the affairs of men. Having this + control, why did he not see to it that he was recognized in the + Constitution of the United States? If he had the supreme authority and + neglected to put himself in the Constitution, is not this, at least, <i>prima + facie</i> evidence that he did not desire to be there? + </p> + <p> + For one, I am not in favor of the God who has "ordained the powers that + be." What have we to say of Russia—of Siberia? What can we say of + the persecuted and enslaved? What of the kings and nobles who live on the + stolen labor of others? What of the priest and cardinal and pope who + wrest, even from the hand of poverty, the single coin thrice earned? + </p> + <p> + Is it possible to flatter the Infinite with a constitutional amendment? + The Confederate States acknowledged God in their constitution, and yet + they were overwhelmed by a people in whose organic law no reference to God + is made. All the kings of the earth acknowledge the existence of God, and + God is their ally; and this belief in God is used as a means to enslave + and rob, to govern and degrade the people whom they call their subjects. + </p> + <p> + The Government of the United States is secular. It derives its power from + the consent of man. It is a Government with which God has nothing whatever + to do—and all forms and customs, inconsistent with the fundamental + fact that the people are the source of authority, should be abandoned. In + this country there should be no oaths—no man should be sworn to tell + the truth, and in no court should there be any appeal to any supreme + being. A rascal by taking the oath appears to go in partnership with God, + and ignorant jurors credit the firm instead of the man. A witness should + tell his story, and if he speaks falsely should be considered as guilty of + perjury. Governors and Presidents should not issue religious + proclamations. They should not call upon the people to thank God. It is no + part of their official duty. It is outside of and beyond the horizon of + their authority. There is nothing in the Constitution of the United States + to justify this religious impertinence. + </p> + <p> + For many years priests have attempted to give to our Government a + religious form. Zealots have succeeded in putting the legend upon our + money: "In God We Trust;" and we have chaplains in the army and navy, and + legislative proceedings are usually opened with prayer. All this is + contrary to the genius of the Republic, contrary to the Declaration of + Independence, and contrary really to the Constitution of the United + States. We have taken the ground that the people can govern themselves + without the assistance of any supernatural power. We have taken the + position that the people are the real and only rightful source of + authority. We have solemnly declared that the people must determine what + is politically right and what is wrong, and that their legally expressed + will is the supreme law. This leaves no room for national superstition—no + room for patriotic gods or supernatural beings—and this does away + with the necessity for political prayers. + </p> + <p> + The government of God has been tried. It was tried in Palestine several + thousand years ago, and the God of the Jews was a monster of cruelty and + ignorance, and the people governed by this God lost their nationality. + Theocracy was tried through the Middle Ages. God was the Governor—the + pope was his agent, and every priest and bishop and cardinal was armed + with credentials from the Most High—and the result was that the + noblest and best were in prisons, the greatest and grandest perished at + the stake. The result was that vices were crowned with honor, and virtues + whipped naked through the streets. The result was that hypocrisy swayed + the sceptre of authority, while honesty languished in the dungeons of the + Inquisition. + </p> + <p> + The government of God was tried in Geneva when John Calvin was his + representative; and under this government of God the flames climbed around + the limbs and blinded the eyes of Michael Servetus, because he dared to + express an honest thought. This government of God was tried in Scotland, + and the seeds of theological hatred were sown, that bore, through hundreds + of years, the fruit of massacre and assassination. This government of God + was established in New England, and the result was that Quakers were + hanged or burned—the laws of Moses re-enacted and the "witch was not + suffered to live." The result was that investigation was a crime, and the + expression of an honest thought a capital offence. This government of God + was established in Spain, and the Jews were expelled, the Moors were + driven out, Moriscoes were exterminated, and nothing left but the ignorant + and bankrupt worshipers of this monster. This government of God was tried + in the United States when slavery was regarded as a divine institution, + when men and women were regarded as criminals because they sought for + liberty by flight, and when others were regarded as criminals because they + gave them food and shelter. The pulpit of that day defended the buying and + selling of women and babes, and the mouths of slave-traders were filled + with passages of Scripture, defending and upholding the traffic in human + flesh. + </p> + <p> + We have entered upon a new epoch. This is the century of man. Every effort + to really better the condition of mankind has been opposed by the + worshipers of some God. The church in all ages and among all peoples has + been the consistent enemy of the human race. Everywhere and at all times, + it has opposed the liberty of thought and expression. It has been the + sworn enemy of investigation and of intellectual development. It has + denied the existence of facts, the tendency of which was to undermine its + power. It has always been carrying fagots to the feet of Philosophy. It + has erected the gallows for Genius. It has built the dungeon for Thinkers. + And to-day the orthodox church is as much opposed as it ever was to the + mental freedom of the human race. + </p> + <p> + Of course, there is a distinction made between churches and individual + members. There have been millions of Christians who have been believers in + liberty and in the freedom of expression—millions who have fought + for the rights of man—but churches as organizations, have been on + the other side. It is true that churches have fought churches—that + Protestants battled with the Catholics for what they were pleased to call + the freedom of conscience; and it is also true that the moment these + Protestants obtained the civil power, they denied this freedom of + conscience to others. + </p> + <p> + 'Let me show you the difference between the theological and the secular + spirit. Nearly three hundred years ago, one of the noblest of the human + race, Giordano Bruno, was burned at Rome by the Catholic Church—that + is to say, by the "Triumphant Beast." This man had committed certain + crimes—he had publicly stated that there were other worlds than this—other + constellations than ours. He had ventured the supposition that other + planets might be peopled. More than this, and worse than this, he had + asserted the heliocentric theory—that the earth made its annual + journey about the sun. He had also given it as his opinion that matter is + eternal. For these crimes he was found unworthy to live, and about his + body were piled the fagots of the Catholic Church. This man, this genius, + this pioneer of the science of the nineteenth century, perished as + serenely as the sun sets. The Infidels of to-day find excuses for his + murderers. They take into consideration the ignorance and brutality of the + times. They remember that the world was governed by a God who was then the + source of all authority. This is the charity of Infidelity,—of + philosophy. But the church of to-day is so heartless, is still so cold and + cruel, that it can find no excuse for the murdered. + </p> + <p> + This is the difference between Theocracy and Democracy—between God + and man. + </p> + <p> + If God is allowed in the Constitution, man must abdicate. There is no room + for both. If the people of the great Republic become superstitious enough + and ignorant enough to put God in the Constitution of the United States, + the experiment of self-government will have failed, and the great and + splendid declaration that "all governments derive their just powers from + the consent of the governed" will have been denied, and in its place will + be found this: All power comes from God; priests are his agents, and the + people are their slaves. + </p> + <p> + Religion is an individual matter, and each soul should be left entirely + free to form its own opinions and to judge of its accountability to a + supposed supreme being. With religion, government has nothing whatever to + do. Government is founded upon force, and force should never interfere + with the religious opinions of men. Laws should define the rights of men + and their duties toward each other, and these laws should be for the + benefit of man in this world. + </p> + <p> + A nation can neither be Christian nor Infidel—a nation is incapable + of having opinions upon these subjects. If a nation is Christian, will all + the citizens go to heaven? If it is not, will they all be damned? Of + course it is admitted that the majority of citizens composing a nation may + believe or disbelieve, and they may call the nation what they please. A + nation is a corporation. To repeat a familiar saying, "it has no soul." + There can be no such thing as a Christian corporation. Several Christians + may form a corporation, but it can hardly be said that the corporation + thus formed was included in the atonement. For instance: Seven Christians + form a corporation—that is to say, there are seven natural persons + and one artificial—can it be said that there are eight souls to be + saved? + </p> + <p> + No human being has brain enough, or knowledge enough, or experience + enough, to say whether there is, or is not, a God. Into this darkness + Science has not yet carried its torch. No human being has gone beyond the + horizon of the natural. As to the existence of the supernatural, one man + knows precisely as much, and exactly as little as another. Upon this + question, chimpanzees and cardinals, apes and popes, are upon exact + equality. The smallest insect discernible only by the most powerful + microscope, is as familiar with this subject, as the greatest genius that + has been produced by the human race. + </p> + <p> + Governments and laws are for the preservation of rights and the regulation + of conduct. One man should not be allowed to interfere with the liberty of + another. In the metaphysical world there should be no interference + whatever, The same is true in the world of art. Laws cannot regulate what + is or is not music, what is or what is not beautiful—and + constitutions cannot definitely settle and determine the perfection of + statues, the value of paintings, or the glory and subtlety of thought. In + spite of laws and constitutions the brain will think. In every direction + consistent with the well-being and peace of society, there should be + freedom. No man should be compelled to adopt the theology of another; + neither should a minority, however small, be forced to acquiesce in the + opinions of a majority, however large. + </p> + <p> + If there be an infinite Being, he does not need our help—we need not + waste our energies in his defence. It is enough for us to give to every + other human being the liberty we claim for ourselves. There may or may not + be a Supreme Ruler of the universe—but we are certain that man + exists, and we believe that freedom is the condition of progress; that it + is the sunshine of the mental and moral world, and that without it man + will go back to the den of savagery, and will become the fit associate of + wild and ferocious beasts. + </p> + <p> + We have tried the government of priests, and we know that such governments + are without mercy. In the administration of theocracy, all the instruments + of torture have been invented. If any man wishes to have God recognized in + the Constitution of our country, let him read the history of the + Inquisition, and let him remember that hundreds of millions of men, women + and children have been sacrificed to placate the wrath, or win the + approbation of this God. + </p> + <p> + There has been in our country a divorce of church and state. This follows + as a natural sequence of the declaration that "governments derive their + just powers from the consent of the governed." The priest was no longer a + necessity. His presence was a contradiction of the principle on which the + Republic was founded. He represented, not the authority of the people, but + of some "Power from on High," and to recognize this other Power was + inconsistent with free government. The founders of the Republic at that + time parted company with the priests, and said to them: "You may turn your + attention to the other world—we will attend to the affairs of this." + Equal liberty was given to all. But the ultra theologian is not satisfied + with this—he wishes to destroy the liberty of the people—he + wishes a recognition of his God as the source of authority, to the end + that the church may become the supreme power. + </p> + <p> + But the sun will not be turned backward. The people of the United States + are intelligent. They no longer believe implicitly in supernatural + religion. They are losing confidence in the miracles and marvels of the + Dark Ages. They know the value of the free school. They appreciate the + benefits of science. They are believers in education, in the free play of + thought, and there is a suspicion that the priest, the theologian, is + destined to take his place with the necromancer, the astrologer, the + worker of magic, and the professor of the black art. + </p> + <p> + We have already compared the benefits of theology and science. When the + theologian governed the world, it was covered with huts and hovels for the + many, palaces and cathedrals for the few. To nearly all the children of + men, reading and writing were unknown arts. The poor were clad in rags and + skins—they devoured crusts, and gnawed bones. The day of Science + dawned, and the luxuries of a century ago are the necessities of to-day. + Men in the middle ranks of life have more of the conveniences and + elegancies than the princes and kings of the theological times. But above + and over all this, is the development of mind. There is more of value in + the brain of an average man of to-day—of a master-mechanic, of a + chemist, of a naturalist, of an inventor, than there was in the brain of + the world four hundred years ago. + </p> + <p> + These blessings did not fall from the skies, These benefits did not drop + from the outstretched hands of priests. They were not found in cathedrals + or behind altars—neither were they searched for with holy candles. + They were not discovered by the closed eyes of prayer, nor did they come + in answer to superstitious supplication. They are the children of freedom, + the gifts of reason, observation and experience—and for them all, + man is indebted to man. + </p> + <p> + Let us hold fast to the sublime declaration of Lincoln. Let us insist that + this, the Republic, is "A government of the people, by the people, and for + the people."—The Arena, Boston, Mass., January, 1890. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0004" id="link0004"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + A REPLY TO BISHOP SPALDING. + </h2> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + * An unfinished reply to Bishop J. L. Spalding's article + "God in the Constitution," which appeared in the Arena. + Boston, Mass., April, 1890. +</pre> + <p> + BISHOP SPALDING admits that "The introduction of the question of religion + would not only have brought discord into the Constitutional convention, + but would have also engendered strife throughout the land." Undoubtedly + this is true. I am compelled to admit this, for the reason that in all + times and in all lands the introduction of the question of religion has + brought discord and has engendered strife. + </p> + <p> + He also says: "In the presence of such danger, like wise men and patriots, + they avoided irritating subjects"—the irritating subject being the + question of religion. I admit that it always has been, and promises always + to be, an "irritating subject," because it is not a subject decided by + reason, but by ignorance, prejudice, arrogance and superstition. + Consequently he says: "It was prudence, then, not skepticism, which + induced them to leave the question of religion to the several States." The + Bishop admits that it was prudent for the founders of this Government to + leave the question of religion entirely to the States. It was prudent + because the question of religion is irritating—because religious + questions engender strife and hatred. Now, if it was prudent for the + framers of the Constitution to leave religion out of the Constitution, and + allow that question to be settled by the several States themselves under + that clause preventing the establishment of religion or the free exercise + thereof, why is it not wise still—why is it not prudent now? + </p> + <p> + My article was written against the introduction of religion into the + Constitution of the United States. I am opposed to a recognition of God + and of Jesus Christ in that instrument; and the reason I am opposed to it + is, that: "The introduction of the question of religion would not only + bring discord, but would engender strife throughout the land." I am + opposed to it for the reason that religion is an "irritating subject," and + also because if it was prudent when the Constitution was made, to leave + God out, it is prudent now to keep him out. + </p> + <p> + The Bishop is mistaken—as bishops usually are—when he says: + "Had our fathers been skeptics, or anti-theists, they would not have + required the President and Vice-President, the Senators and + Representatives in Congress, and all executive and judicial officers of + the United States, to call God to witness that they intended to perform + their duties under the Constitution like honest men and loyal citizens." + </p> + <p> + The framers of the Constitution did no such thing. They allowed every + officer, from the President down, either to swear or to affirm, and those + who affirmed did not call God to witness. In other words, our Constitution + allowed every officer to abolish the oath and to leave God out of the + question. + </p> + <p> + The Bishop informs us, however, that: "The causes which would have made it + unwise to introduce any phase of religious controversy into the + Constitutional convention have long since ceased to exist." Is there as + much division now in the religious world as then? Has the Catholic Church + thrown away the differences between it and the Protestants? Are we any + better friends to-day than we were in 1789? As a matter of fact, is there + not now a cause which did not to the same extent exist then? Have we not + in the United States, millions of people who believe in no religion + whatever, and who regard all creeds as the work of ignorance and + superstition? + </p> + <p> + The trouble about putting God in the Constitution in 1789 was, that they + could not agree on the God to go in; and the reason why our fathers did + not unite church and state was, that they could not agree on which church + was to be the bride. The Catholics of Maryland certainly would not have + permitted the nation to take the Puritan Church, neither would the + Presbyterians of Pennsylvania have agreed to this, nor would the + Episcopalians of New York, or of any Southern State. Each church said: + "Marry me, or die a bachelor." + </p> + <p> + The Bishop asks whether there are "still reasons why an express + recognition of God's sovereignty and providence should not form part of + the organic law of the land"? I ask, were there any reasons, in 1789, why + an express recognition of God's sovereignty and providence should not form + part of the organic law of the land? Did not the Bishop say, only a few + lines back of that, "that the introduction of the question of religion + into that body would have brought discord, and would have engendered + strife throughout the land." What is the "question of religion" to which + he referred? Certainly "the recognition of God's sovereignty and + providence," with the addition of describing the God as the author of the + supposed providence. Thomas Jefferson would have insisted on having a God + in the Constitution who was not the author of the Old and New Testaments. + Benjamin Franklin would have asked for the same God; and on that question + John Adams would have voted yes. Others would have voted for a Catholic + God—others for an Episcopalian, and so on, until the representatives + of the various creeds were exhausted. + </p> + <p> + I took the ground, and I still take the ground, that there is nothing in + the Constitution that cannot on occasion be enforced by the army and navy—that + is to say, that cannot be defended and enforced by the sword. Suppose God + is acknowledged in the Constitution, and somebody denies the existence of + this God—what are you to do with him? Every man elected to office + must swear or affirm that he will support the Constitution. Can one who + does not believe in this God, conscientiously take such oath, or make such + affirmation? + </p> + <p> + The effect, then, of such a clause in the Constitution would be to drive + from public life all except the believers in this God, and this + providence. The Government would be in fact a theocracy and would resort + for its preservation to one of the old forms of religious persecution. + </p> + <p> + I took the ground in my article, and still maintain it, that all + intelligent people know that no one knows whether there is a God or not. + This cannot be answered by saying, "that nearly all intelligent men in + every age, including our own, have believed in God and have held that they + had rational grounds for such faith." This is what is called a departure + in pleading—it is a shifting of the issue. I did not say that + intelligent people do not believe in the existence of God. What I did say + is, that intelligent people know that no one knows whether there is a God + or not. + </p> + <p> + It is not true that we know the conditions of thought. Neither is it true + that we know that these conditions are unconditioned. There is no such + thing as the unconditioned conditional. We might as well say that the + relative is unrelated—that the unrelated is the absolute—and + therefore that there is no difference between the absolute and the + relative. + </p> + <p> + The Bishop says we cannot know the relative without knowing the absolute. + The probability is that he means that we cannot know the relative without + admitting the existence of the absolute, and that we cannot know the + phenomenal without taking the noumenal for granted. Still, we can neither + know the absolute nor the noumenal for the reason that our mind is limited + to relations. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0005" id="link0005"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + CRIMES AGAINST CRIMINALS. + </h2> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + * "An Address delivered before the State Bar Association at + Albany, N. Y., January 1, 1890." +</pre> + <p> + IN this brief address, the object is to suggest—there being no time + to present arguments at length. The subject has been chosen for the reason + that it is one that should interest the legal profession, because that + profession to a certain extent controls and shapes the legislation of our + country and fixes definitely the scope and meaning of all laws. + </p> + <p> + Lawyers ought to be foremost in legislative and judicial reform, and of + all men they should understand the philosophy of mind, the causes of human + action, and the real science of government. + </p> + <p> + It has been said that the three pests of a community are: A priest without + charity; a doctor without knowledge, and, a lawyer without a sense of + justice. + </p> + <p> + I. + </p> + <p> + All nations seem to have had supreme confidence in the deterrent power of + threatened and inflicted pain. They have regarded punishment as the + shortest road to reformation. Imprisonment, torture, death, constituted a + trinity under whose protection society might feel secure. + </p> + <p> + In addition to these, nations have relied on confiscation and degradation, + on maimings, whippings, brandings, and exposures to public ridicule and + contempt. Connected with the court of justice was the chamber of torture. + The ingenuity of man was exhausted in the construction of instruments that + would surely reach the most sensitive nerve. All this was done in the + interest of civilization—for the protection of virtue, and the + well-being of states. Curiously it was found that the penalty of death + made little difference. Thieves and highwaymen, heretics and blasphemers, + went on their way. It was then thought necessary to add to this penalty of + death, and consequently, the convicted were tortured in every conceivable + way before execution. They were broken on the wheel—their joints + dislocated on the rack. They were suspended by their legs and arms, while + immense weights were placed upon their breasts. Their flesh was burned and + torn with hot irons. They were roasted at slow fires. They were buried + alive—given to wild beasts—molten lead was poured in their + ears—their eye-lids were cut off and, the wretches placed with their + faces toward the sun—others were securely bound, so that they could + move neither hand nor foot, and over their stomachs were placed inverted + bowls; under these bowls rats were confined; on top of the bowls were + heaped coals of fire, so that the rats in their efforts to escape would + gnaw into the bowels of the victims. They were staked out on the sands of + the sea, to be drowned by the slowly rising tide—and every means by + which human nature can be overcome slowly, painfully and terribly, was + conceived and carried into execution. And yet the number of so-called + criminals increased. Enough, the fact is that, no matter how severe the + punishments were, the crimes increased. + </p> + <p> + For petty offences men were degraded—given to the mercy of the + rabble. Their ears were cut off, their nostrils slit, their foreheads + branded. They were tied to the tails of carts and flogged from one town to + another. And yet, in spite of all, the poor wretches obstinately refused + to become good and useful citizens. + </p> + <p> + Degradation has been thoroughly tried, with its maimings and brandings, + and the result was that those who inflicted the punishments became as + degraded as their victims. + </p> + <p> + Only a few years ago there were more than two hundred offences in Great + Britain punishable by death. The gallows-tree bore fruit through all the + year, and the hangman was the busiest official in the kingdom—but + the criminals increased. + </p> + <p> + Crimes were committed to punish crimes, and crimes were committed to + prevent crimes. The world has been filled with prisons and dungeons, with + chains and whips, with crosses and gibbets, with thumbscrews and racks, + with hangmen and headsmen—and yet these frightful means and + instrumentalities and crimes have accomplished little for the preservation + of property or life. It is safe to say that governments have committed far + more crimes than they have prevented. + </p> + <p> + Why is it that men will suffer and risk so much for the sake of stealing? + Why will they accept degradation and punishment and infamy as their + portion? Some will answer this question by an appeal to the dogma of + original sin; others by saying that millions of men and women are under + the control of fiends—that they are actually possessed by devils; + and others will declare that all these people act from choice—that + they are possessed of free wills, of intelligence—that they know and + appreciate consequences, and that, in spite of all, they deliberately + prefer a life of crime. + </p> + <p> + II. + </p> + <p> + Have we not advanced far enough intellectually to deny the existence of + chance? Are we not satisfied now that back of every act and thought and + dream and fancy is an efficient cause? Is anything, or can anything, be + produced that is not necessarily produced? Can the fatherless and + motherless exist? Is there not a connection between all events, and is not + every act related to all other acts? Is it not possible, is it not + probable, is it not true, that the actions of all men are determined by + countless causes over which they have no positive control? + </p> + <p> + Certain it is that men do not prefer unhappiness to joy. + </p> + <p> + It can hardly be said that man intends permanently to injure himself, and + that he does what he does in order that he may live a life of misery. On + the other hand, we must take it for granted that man endeavors to better + his own condition, and seeks, although by mistaken ways, his own + well-being. The poorest man would like to be rich—the sick desire + health—and no sane man wishes to win the contempt and hatred of his + fellow-men. Every human being prefers liberty to imprisonment. + </p> + <p> + Are the brains of criminals exactly like the brains of honest men? Have + criminals the same ambitions, the same standards of happiness or of + well-being? If a difference exists in brain, will that in part account for + the difference in character? Is there anything in heredity? Are vices as + carefully transmitted by nature as virtues? Does each man in some degree + bear burdens imposed by ancestors? We know that diseases of flesh and + blood are transmitted—that the child is the heir of physical + deformity. Are diseases of the brain—are deformities of the soul, of + the mind, also transmitted? + </p> + <p> + We not only admit, but we assert, that in the physical world there are + causes and effects. We insist that there is and can be no effect without + an efficient cause. When anything happens in that world, we are satisfied + that it was naturally and necessarily produced. The causes may be obscure, + but we as implicitly believe in their existence as when we know positively + what they are. In the physical world we have taken the ground that there + is nothing miraculous—that everything is natural—and if we + cannot explain it, we account for our inability to explain, by our own + ignorance. Is it not possible, is it not probable, that what is true in + the physical world is equally true in the realm of mind—in that + strange world of passion and desire? Is it possible that thoughts or + desires or passions are the children of chance, born of nothing? Can we + conceive of nothing as a force, or as a cause? If, then, there is behind + every thought and desire and passion an efficient cause, we can, in part + at least, account for the actions of men. + </p> + <p> + A certain man under certain conditions acts in a certain way. There are + certain temptations that he, with his brain, with his experience, with his + intelligence, with his surroundings cannot withstand. He is irresistibly + led to do, or impelled to do, certain things; and there are other things + that he can not do. If we change the conditions of this man, his actions + will be changed. Develop his mind, give him new subjects of thought, and + you change the man; and the man being Changed, it follows of necessity + that his conduct will be different. + </p> + <p> + In civilized countries the struggle for existence is severe—the + competition far sharper than in savage lands. The consequence is that + there are many failures. These failures lack, it may be, opportunity or + brain or moral force or industry, or something without which, under the + circumstances, success is impossible. Certain lines of conduct are called + legal, and certain others criminal, and the men who fail in one line may + be driven to the other. How do we know that it is possible for all people + to be honest? Are we certain that all people can tell the truth? Is it + possible for all men to be generous or candid or courageous? + </p> + <p> + I am perfectly satisfied that there are millions of people incapable of + committing certain crimes, and it may be true that there are millions of + others incapable of practicing certain virtues. We do not blame a man + because he is not a sculptor, a poet, a painter, or a statesman. We say he + has not the genius. Are we certain that it does not require genius to be + good? Where is the man with intelligence enough to take into consideration + the circumstances of each individual case? Who has the mental balance with + which to weigh the forces of heredity, of want, of temptation,—and + who can analyze with certainty the mysterious motions of the brain? Where + and what are the sources of vice and virtue? In what obscure and shadowy + recesses of the brain are passions born? And what is it that for the + moment destroys the sense of right and wrong? + </p> + <p> + Who knows to what extent reason becomes the prisoner of passion—of + some strange and wild desire, the seeds of which were sown, it may be, + thousands of years ago in the breast of some savage? To what extent do + antecedents and surroundings affect the moral sense? + </p> + <p> + Is it not possible that the tyranny of governments, the injustice of + nations, the fierceness of what is called the law, produce in the + individual a tendency in the same direction? Is it not true that the + citizen is apt to imitate his nation? Society degrades its enemies—the + individual seeks to degrade his. Society plunders its enemies, and now and + then the citizen has the desire to plunder his. Society kills its enemies, + and possibly sows in the heart of some citizen the seeds of murder. + </p> + <p> + III. + </p> + <p> + Is it not true that the criminal is a natural product, and that society + unconsciously produces these children of vice? Can we not safely take + another step, and say that the criminal is a victim, as the diseased and + insane and deformed are victims? We do not think of punishing a man + because he is afflicted with disease—our desire is to find a cure. + We send him, not to the penitentiary, but to the hospital, to an asylum. + We do this because we recognize the fact that disease is naturally + produced—that it is inherited from parents, or the result of + unconscious negligence, or it may be of recklessness—but instead of + punishing, we pity. If there are diseases of the mind, of the brain, as + there are diseases of the body; and if these diseases of the mind, these + deformities of the brain, produce, and necessarily produce, what we call + vice, why should we punish the-criminal, and pity those who are physically + diseased? + </p> + <p> + Socrates, in some respects at least one of the wisest of men, said: "It is + strange that you should not be angry when you meet a man with an + ill-conditioned body, and yet be vexed when you encounter one with an + ill-conditioned soul." + </p> + <p> + We know that there are deformed bodies, and we are equally certain that + there are deformed minds. + </p> + <p> + Of course, society has the right to protect itself, no matter whether the + persons who attack its well-being are responsible or not, no matter + whether they are sick in mind, or deformed in brain. The right of + self-defence exists, not only in the individual, but in society. The great + question is, How shall this right of self-defence be exercised? What + spirit shall be in the nation, or in society—the spirit of revenge, + a desire to degrade and punish and destroy, or a spirit born of the + recognition of the fact that criminals are victims? + </p> + <p> + The world has thoroughly tried confiscation, degradation, imprisonment, + torture and death, and thus far the world has failed. In this connection I + call your attention to the following statistics gathered in our own + country: + </p> + <p> + In 1850, we had twenty-three millions of people, and between six and seven + thousand prisoners. + </p> + <p> + In 1860—thirty-one millions of people, and nineteen thousand + prisoners. + </p> + <p> + In 1870—thirty-eight millions of people, and thirty-two thousand + prisoners. + </p> + <p> + In 1880—fifty millions of people, and fifty-eight thousand + prisoners. + </p> + <p> + It may be curious to note the relation between insanity, pauperism and + crime: + </p> + <p> + In 1850, there were fifteen thousand insane; in 1860, twenty-four + thousand; in 1870, thirty-seven thousand; in 1880, ninety-one thousand. + </p> + <p> + In the light of these statistics, we are not succeeding in doing away with + crime. There were in 1880, fifty-eight thousand prisoners, and in the same + year fifty-seven thousand homeless children, and sixty-six thousand + paupers in almshouses. + </p> + <p> + Is it possible that we must go to the same causes for these effects? + </p> + <p> + IV. + </p> + <p> + There is no reformation in degradation. To mutilate a criminal is to say + to all the world that he is a criminal, and to render his reformation + substantially impossible. Whoever is degraded by society becomes its + enemy. The seeds of malice are sown in his heart, and to the day of his + death he will hate the hand that sowed the seeds. + </p> + <p> + There is also another side to this question. A punishment that degrades + the punished will degrade the man who inflicts the punishment, and will + degrade the government that procures the infliction. The whipping-post + pollutes, not only the whipped, but the whipper, and not only the whipper, + but the community at large. Wherever its shadow falls it degrades. + </p> + <p> + If, then, there is no reforming power in degradation—no deterrent + power—for the reason that the degradation of the criminal degrades + the community, and in this way produces more criminals, then the next + question is, Whether there is any reforming power in torture? The trouble + with this is that it hardens and degrades to the last degree the ministers + of the law. Those who are not affected by the agonies of the bad will in a + little time care nothing for the sufferings of the good. There seems to be + a little of the wild beast in men—a something that is fascinated by + suffering, and that delights in inflicting pain. When a government + tortures, it is in the same state of mind that the criminal was when he + committed his crime. It requires as much malice in those who execute the + law, to torture a criminal, as it did in the criminal to torture and kill + his victim. The one was a crime by a person, the other by a nation. + </p> + <p> + There is something in injustice, in cruelty, that tends to defeat itself. + There were never as many traitors in England as when the traitor was drawn + and quartered—when he was tortured in every possible way—when + his limbs, torn and bleeding, were given to the fury of mobs or exhibited + pierced by pikes or hung in chains. These frightful punishments produced + intense hatred of the government, and traitors continued to increase until + they became powerful enough to decide what treason was and who the + traitors were, and to inflict the same torments on others. + </p> + <p> + Think for a moment of what man has suffered in the cause of crime. Think + of the millions that have been imprisoned, impoverished and degraded + because they were thieves and forgers, swindlers and cheats. Think for a + moment of what they have endured—of the difficulties under which + they have pursued their calling, and it will be exceedingly hard to + believe that they were sane and natural people possessed of good brains, + of minds well-poised, and that they did what they did from a choice + unaffected by heredity and the countless circumstances that tend to + determine the conduct of human beings. + </p> + <p> + The other day I was asked these questions: "Has there been as much heroism + displayed for the right as for the wrong? Has virtue had as many martyrs + as vice?" + </p> + <p> + For hundreds of years the world has endeavored to destroy the good by + force. The expression of honest thought was regarded as the greatest of + crimes. Dungeons were filled by the noblest and the best, and the blood of + the bravest was shed by the sword or consumed by flame. It was impossible + to destroy the longing in the heart of man for liberty and truth. Is it + not possible that brute force and cruelty and revenge, imprisonment, + torture and death are as impotent to do away with vice as to destroy + virtue? + </p> + <p> + In our country there has been for many years a growing feeling that + convicts should neither be degraded nor tortured. It was provided in the + Constitution of the United States that "cruel and unusual punishments + should not be inflicted." Benjamin Franklin took great interest in the + treatment of prisoners, being a thorough believer in the reforming + influence of justice, having no confidence whatever in punishment for + punishment's sake. + </p> + <p> + To me it has always been a mystery how the average man, knowing something + of the weakness of human nature, something of the temptations to which he + himself has been exposed—remembering the evil of his life, the + things he would have done had there been opportunity, had he absolutely + known that discovery would be impossible—should have feelings of + hatred toward the imprisoned. + </p> + <p> + Is it possible that the average man assaults the criminal in a spirit of + self-defence? Does he wish to convince his neighbors that the evil thought + and impulse were never in his mind? Are his words a shield that he uses to + protect himself from suspicion? For my part, I sympathize sincerely with + all failures, with the victims of society, with those who have fallen, + with the imprisoned, with the hopeless, with those who have been stained + by verdicts of guilty, and with those who, in the moment of passion have + destroyed, as with a blow, the future of their lives. + </p> + <p> + How perilous, after all, is the state of man. It is the work of a life to + build a great and splendid character. It is the work of a moment to + destroy it utterly, from turret to foundation stone. How cruel hypocrisy + is! + </p> + <p> + Is there any remedy? Can anything be done for the reformation of the + criminal? + </p> + <p> + He should be treated with kindness. Every right should be given him, + consistent with the safety of society. He should neither be degraded nor + robbed. The State should set the highest and noblest example. The powerful + should never be cruel, and in the breast of the supreme there should be no + desire for revenge. + </p> + <p> + A man in a moment of want steals the property of another, and he is sent + to the penitentiary—first, as it is claimed, for the purpose of + deterring others; and secondly, of reforming him. The circumstances of + each individual case are rarely inquired into. Investigation stops when + the simple fact of the larceny has been ascertained. No distinctions are + made except as between first and subsequent offences. Nothing is allowed + for surroundings. + </p> + <p> + All will admit that the industrious must be protected. In this world it is + necessary to work. Labor is the foundation of all prosperity. Larceny is + the enemy of industry. Society has the right to protect itself. The + question is, Has it the right to punish?—has it the right to + degrade?—or should it endeavor to reform the convict? + </p> + <p> + A man is taken to the penitentiary. He is clad in the garments of a + convict. He is degraded—he loses his name—he is designated by + a number. He is no longer treated as a human being—he becomes the + slave of the State. Nothing is done for his improvement—nothing for + his reformation. He is driven like a beast of burden; robbed of his labor; + leased, it may be, by the State to a contractor, who gets out of his + hands, out of his muscles, out of his poor brain, all the toil that he + can. He is not allowed to speak with a fellow-prisoner. At night he is + alone in his cell. The relations that should exist between men are + destroyed. He is a convict. He is no longer worthy to associate even with + his keepers. The jailer is immensely his superior, and the man who turns + the key upon him at night regards himself, in comparison, as a model of + honesty, of virtue and manhood. The convict is pavement on which those who + watch him walk. He remains for the time of his sentence, and when that + expires he goes forth a branded man. He is given money enough to pay his + fare back to the place from whence he came. + </p> + <p> + What is the condition of this man? Can he get employment? Not if he + honestly states who he is and where he has been. The first thing he does + is to deny his personality, to assume a name. He endeavors by telling + falsehoods to lay the foundation for future good conduct. The average man + does not wish to employ an ex-convict, because the average man has no + confidence in the reforming power of the penitentiary. He believes that + the convict who comes out is worse than the convict who went in. He knows + that in the penitentiary the heart of this man has been hardened—that + he has been subjected to the torture of perpetual humiliation—that + he has been treated like a ferocious beast; and so he believes that this + ex-convict has in his heart hatred for society, that he feels he has been + degraded and robbed. Under these circumstances, what avenue is opened to + the ex-convict? If he changes his name, there will be some detective, some + officer of the law, some meddlesome wretch, who will betray his secret. He + is then discharged. He seeks employment again, and he must seek it by + again telling what is not true. He is again detected and again discharged. + And finally he becomes convinced that he cannot live as an honest man. He + naturally drifts back into the society of those who have had a like + experience; and the result is that in a little while he again stands in + the dock, charged with the commission of another crime. Again he is sent + to the penitentiary—and this is the end. He feels that his day is + done, that the future has only degradation for him. + </p> + <p> + The men in the penitentiaries do not work for themselves. Their labor + belongs to others. They have no interest in their toil—no reason for + doing the best they can—and the result is that the product of their + labor is poor. This product comes in competition with the work of + mechanics, honest men, who have families to support, and the cry is that + convict labor takes the bread from the mouths of virtuous people. + </p> + <p> + VI. + </p> + <p> + Why should the State take without compensation the labor of these men; and + why should they, after having been imprisoned for years, be turned out + without the means of support? Would it not be far better, far more + economical, to pay these men for their labor, to lay aside their earnings + from day to day, from month to month, and from year to year—to put + this money at interest, so that when the convict is released after five + years of imprisonment he will have several hundred dollars of his own—not + merely money enough to pay his way back to the place from which he was + sent, but enough to make it possible for him to commence business on his + own account, enough to keep the wolf of crime from the door of his heart? + </p> + <p> + Suppose the convict comes out with five hundred dollars. This would be to + most of that class a fortune. It would form a breastwork, a fortress, + behind which the man could fight temptation. This would give him food and + raiment, enable him to go to some other State or country where he could + redeem himself. If this were done, thousands of convicts would feel under + immense obligation to the Government. They would think of the penitentiary + as the place in which they were saved—in which they were redeemed—and + they would feel that the verdict of guilty rescued them from the abyss of + crime. Under these circumstances, the law would appear beneficent, and the + heart of the poor convict, instead of being filled with malice, would + overflow with gratitude. He would see the propriety of the course pursued + by the Government. He would recognize and feel and experience the benefits + of this course, and the result would be good, not only to him, but to the + nation as well. + </p> + <p> + If the convict worked for himself, he would do the best he could, and the + wares produced in the penitentiaries would not cheapen the labor of other + men. + </p> + <p> + VII. + </p> + <p> + There are, however, men who pursue crime as a vocation—as a + profession—men who have been convicted again and again, and who will + persist in using the liberty of intervals to prey upon the rights of + others. What shall be done with these men and women? + </p> + <p> + Put one thousand hardened thieves on an island—compel them to + produce what they eat and use—and I am almost certain that a large + majority would be opposed to theft. Those who worked would not permit + those who did not, to steal the result of their labor. In other words, + self-preservation would be the dominant idea, and these men would + instantly look upon the idlers as the enemies of their society. + </p> + <p> + Such a community would be self-supporting. Let women of the same class be + put by themselves. Keep the sexes absolutely apart. Those who are beyond + the power of reformation should not have the liberty to reproduce + themselves. Those who cannot be reached by kindness—by justice—those + who under no circumstances are willing to do their share, should be + separated. They should dwell apart, and dying, should leave no heirs. + </p> + <p> + What shall be done with the slayers of their fellow-men—with + murderers? Shall the nation take life? + </p> + <p> + It has been contended that the death penalty deters others—that it + has far more terror than imprisonment for life. What is the effect of the + example set by a nation? Is not the tendency to harden and degrade not + only those who inflict and those who witness, but the entire community as + well? + </p> + <p> + A few years ago a man was hanged in Alexandria, Virginia. One who + witnessed the execution, on that very day, murdered a peddler in the + Smithsonian grounds at Washington. He was tried and executed, and one who + witnessed his hanging went home, and on the same day murdered his wife. + </p> + <p> + The tendency of the extreme penalty is to prevent conviction. In the + presence of death it is easy for a jury to find a doubt. Technicalities + become important, and absurdities, touched with mercy, have the appearance + for a moment of being natural and logical. Honest and conscientious men + dread a final and irrevocable step. If the penalty were imprisonment for + life, the jury would feel that if any mistake were made it could be + rectified; but where the penalty is death a mistake is fatal. A + conscientious man takes into consideration the defects of human nature—the + uncertainty of testimony, and the countless shadows that dim and darken + the understanding, and refuses to find a verdict that, if wrong, cannot be + righted. + </p> + <p> + The death penalty, inflicted by the Government, is a perpetual excuse for + mobs. + </p> + <p> + The greatest danger in a Republic is a mob, and as long as States inflict + the penalty of death, mobs will follow the example. If the State does not + consider life sacred, the mob, with ready rope, will strangle the + suspected. The mob will say: "The only difference is in the trial; the + State does the same—we know the man is guilty—why should time + be wasted in technicalities?" In other words, why may not the mob do + quickly that which the State does slowly? + </p> + <p> + Every execution tends to harden the public heart—tends to lessen the + sacredness of human life. In many States of this Union the mob is supreme. + For certain offences the mob is expected to lynch the supposed criminal. + It is the duty of every citizen—and as it seems to me especially of + every lawyer—to do what he can to destroy the mob spirit. One would + think that men would be afraid to commit any crime in a community where + the mob is in the ascendency, and yet, such are the contradictions and + subtleties of human nature, that it is exactly the opposite. And there is + another thing in this connection—the men who constitute the mob are, + as a rule, among the worst, the lowest, and the most depraved. + </p> + <p> + A few years ago, in Illinois, a man escaped from jail, and, in escaping, + shot the sheriff. He was pursued, overtaken—lynched. The man who put + the rope around his neck was then out on bail, having been indicted for an + assault to murder. And after the poor wretch was dead, another man climbed + the tree from which he dangled and, in derision, put a cigar in the mouth + of the dead; and this man was on bail, having been indicted for larceny. + </p> + <p> + Those who are the fiercest to destroy and hang their fellow-men for having + committed crimes, are, for the most part, at heart, criminals themselves. + </p> + <p> + As long as nations meet on the fields of war—as long as they sustain + the relations of savages to each other—as long as they put the + laurel and the oak on the brows of those who kill—just so long will + citizens resort to violence, and the quarrels of individuals be settled by + dagger and revolver. + </p> + <p> + VIII. + </p> + <p> + If we are to change the conduct of men, we must change their conditions. + Extreme poverty and crime go hand in hand. Destitution multiplies + temptations and destroys the finer feelings. The bodies and souls of men + are apt to be clad in like garments. If the body is covered with rags, the + soul is generally in the same condition. Selfrespect is gone—the man + looks down—he has neither hope nor courage. He becomes sinister—he + envies the prosperous—hates the fortunate, and despises himself. + </p> + <p> + As long as children are raised in the tenement and gutter, the prisons + will be full. The gulf between the rich and poor will grow wider and + wider. One will depend on cunning, the other on force. It is a great + question whether those who live in luxury can afford to allow others to + exist in want. The value of property depends, not on the prosperity of the + few, but on the prosperity of a very large majority. Life and property + must be secure, or that subtle thing called "value" takes its leave. The + poverty of the many is a perpetual menace. If we expect a prosperous and + peaceful country, the citizens must have homes. The more homes, the more + patriots, the more virtue, and the more security for all that gives worth + to life. + </p> + <p> + We need not repeat the failures of the old world. To divide lands among + successful generals, or among favorites of the crown, to give vast estates + for services rendered in war, is no worse than to allow men of great + wealth to purchase and hold vast tracts of land. The result is precisely + the same—that is to say, a nation composed of a few landlords and of + many tenants—the tenants resorting from time to time to mob + violence, and the landlords depending upon a standing army. The property + of no man, however, should be taken for either private or public use + without just compensation and in accordance with law. There is in the + State what is known as the right of eminent domain. The State reserves to + itself the power to take the land of any private citizen for a public use, + paying to that private citizen a just compensation to be legally + ascertained. When a corporation wishes to build a railway, it exercises + this right of eminent domain, and where the owner of land refuses to sell + a right of way, or land for the establishment of stations or shops, and + the corporation proceeds to condemn the land to ascertain its value, and + when the amount thus ascertained is paid, the property vests in the + corporation. This power is exercised because in the estimation of the + people the construction of a railway is a public good. + </p> + <p> + I believe that this power should be exercised in another direction. It + would be well as it seems to me, for the Legislature to fix the amount of + land that a private citizen may own, that will not be subject to be taken + for the use of which I am about to speak. The amount to be thus held will + depend upon many local circumstances, to be decided by each State for + itself. Let me suppose that the amount of land that may be held for a + farmer for cultivation has been fixed at one hundred and sixty acres—and + suppose that A has several thousand acres. B wishes to buy one hundred and + sixty acres or less of this land, for the purpose of making himself a + home. A refuses to sell. Now, I believe that the law should be so that B + can invoke this right of eminent domain, and file his petition, have the + case brought before a jury, or before commissioners, who shall hear the + evidence and determine the value, and on the payment of the amount the + land shall belong to B. + </p> + <p> + I would extend the same law to lots and houses in cities and villages—the + object being to fill our country with the owners of homes, so that every + child shall have a fireside, every father and mother a roof, provided they + have the intelligence, the energy and the industry to acquire the + necessary means. + </p> + <p> + Tenements and flats and rented lands are, in my judgment, the enemies of + civilization. They make the rich richer, and the poor poorer. They put a + few in palaces, but they put many in prisons. + </p> + <p> + I would go a step further than this. I would exempt homes of a certain + value not only from levy and sale, but from every kind of taxation, State + and National—so that these poor people would feel that they were in + partnership with nature—that some of the land was absolutely theirs, + and that no one could drive them from their home—so that mothers + could feel secure. If the home increased in value, and exceeded the limit, + then taxes could be paid on the excess; and if the home were sold, I would + have the money realized exempt for a certain time in order that the family + should have the privilege of buying another home. + </p> + <p> + The home, after all, is the unit of civilization, of good government; and + to secure homes for a great majority of our citizens, would be to lay the + foundation of our Government deeper and broader and stronger than that of + any nation that has existed among men. + </p> + <p> + IX. + </p> + <p> + No one places a higher value upon the free school than I do; and no one + takes greater pride in the prosperity of our colleges and universities. + But at the same time, much that is called education simply unfits men + successfully to fight the battle of life. Thousands are to-day studying + things that will be of exceedingly little importance to them or to others. + Much valuable time is wasted in studying languages that long ago were + dead, and histories in which there is no truth. + </p> + <p> + There was an idea in the olden time—and it is not yet dead—that + whoever was educated ought not to work; that he should use his head and + not his hands. Graduates were ashamed to be found engaged in manual labor, + in ploughing fields, in sowing or in gathering grain. To this manly kind + of independence they preferred the garret and the precarious existence of + an unappreciated poet, borrowing their money from their friends, and their + ideas from the dead. The educated regarded the useful as degrading—they + were willing to stain their souls to keep their hands white. + </p> + <p> + The object of all education should be to increase the use fulness of man—usefulness + to himself and others. Every human being should be taught that his first + duty is to take care of himself, and that to be self-respecting he must be + self-supporting. To live on the labor of others, either by force which + enslaves, or by cunning which robs, or by borrowing or begging, is wholly + dishonorable. Every man should be taught some useful art. His hands should + be educated as well as his head. He should be taught to deal with things + as they are—with life as it is. This would give a feeling of + independence, which is the firmest foundation of honor, of character. + Every man knowing that he is useful, admires himself. + </p> + <p> + In all the schools children should be taught to work in wood and iron, to + understand the construction and use of machinery, to become acquainted + with the great forces that man is using to do his work. The present system + of education teaches names, not things. It is as though we should spend + years in learning the names of cards, without playing a game. + </p> + <p> + In this way boys would learn their aptitudes—would ascertain what + they were fitted for—what they could do. It would not be a guess, or + an experiment, but a demonstration. Education should increase a boy's + chances for getting a living. The real good of it is to get food and roof + and raiment, opportunity to develop the mind and the body and live a full + and ample life. + </p> + <p> + The more real education, the less crime—and the more homes, the + fewer prisons. + </p> + <p> + X. + </p> + <p> + The fear of punishment may deter some, the fear of exposure others; but + there is no real reforming power in fear or punishment. Men cannot be + tortured into greatness, into goodness. All this, as I said before, has + been thoroughly tried. The idea that punishment was the only relief, found + its limit, its infinite, in the old doctrine of eternal pain; but the + believers in that dogma stated distinctly that the victims never would be, + and never could be, reformed. + </p> + <p> + As men become civilized they become capable of greater pain and of greater + joy. To the extent that the average man is capable of enjoying or + suffering, to that extent he has sympathy with others. The average man, + the more enlightened he becomes, the more apt he is to put himself in the + place of another. He thinks of his prisoner, of his employee, of his + tenant—and he even thinks beyond these; he thinks of the community + at large. As man becomes civilized he takes more and more into + consideration circumstances and conditions. He gradually loses faith in + the old ideas and theories that every man can do as he wills, and in the + place of the word "wills," he puts the word "must." The time comes to the + intelligent man when in the place of punishments he thinks of + consequences, results—that is to say, not something inflicted by + some other power, but something necessarily growing out of what is done. + The clearer men perceive the consequences of actions, the better they will + be. Behind consequences we place no personal will, and consequently do not + regard them as inflictions, or punishments. Consequences, no matter how + severe they may be, create in the mind no feeling of resentment, no desire + for revenge.' We do not feel bitterly toward the fire because it burns, or + the frost that freezes, or the flood that overwhelms, or the sea that + drowns—because we attribute to these things no motives, good or bad. + So, when through the development of the intellect man perceives not only + the nature, but the absolute certainty of consequences, he refrains from + certain actions, and this may be called reformation through the intellect—and + surely there is no better reformation than this. Some may be, and probably + millions have been, reformed, through kindness, through gratitude—made + better in the sunlight of charity. In the atmosphere of kindness the seeds + of virtue burst into bud and flower. Cruelty, tyranny, brute force, do not + and can not by any possibility better the heart of man. He who is forced + upon his knees has the attitude, but never the feeling, of prayer. + </p> + <p> + I am satisfied that the discipline of the average prison hardens and + degrades. It is for the most part a perpetual exhibition of arbitrary + power. There is really no appeal. The cries of the convict are not heard + beyond the walls. The protests die in cells, and the poor prisoner feels + that the last tie between him and his fellow-men has been broken. He is + kept in ignorance of the outer world. The prison is a cemetery, and his + cell is a grave. + </p> + <p> + In many of the penitentiaries there are instruments of torture, and now + and then a convict is murdered. Inspections and investigations go for + naught, because the testimony of a convict goes for naught. He is + generally prevented by fear from telling his wrongs; but if he speaks, he + is not believed—he is regarded as less than a human being, and so + the imprisoned remain without remedy. When the visitors are gone, the + convict who has spoken is prevented from speaking again. + </p> + <p> + Every manly feeling, every effort toward real reformation, is trampled + under foot, so that when the convict's time is out there is little left on + which to build. He has been humiliated to the last degree, and his spirit + has so long been bent by authority and fear that even the desire to stand + erect has almost faded from the mind. The keepers feel that they are safe, + because no matter what they do, the convict when released will not tell + the story of his wrongs, for if he conceals his shame, he must also hide + their guilt. + </p> + <p> + Every penitentiary should be a real reformatory. That should be the + principal object for the establishment of the prison. The men in charge + should be of the kindest and noblest. They should be filled with divine + enthusiasm for humanity, and every means should be taken to convince the + prisoner that his good is sought—that nothing is done for revenge—nothing + for a display of power, and nothing for the gratification of malice. He + should feel that the warden is his unselfish friend. When a convict is + charged with a violation of the rules—with insubordination, or with + any offence, there should be an investigation in due and proper form, + giving the convict an opportunity to be heard. He should not be for one + moment the victim of irresponsible power. He would then feel that he had + some rights, and that some little of the human remained in him still. They + should be taught things of value—instructed by competent men. Pains + should be taken, not to punish, not to degrade, but to benefit and + ennoble. + </p> + <p> + We know, if we know anything, that men in the penitentiaries are not + altogether bad, and that many out are not altogether good; and we feel + that in the brain and heart of all, there are the seeds of good and bad. + We know, too, that the best are liable to fall, and it may be that the + worst, under certain conditions, may be capable of grand and heroic deeds. + Of one thing we may be assured—and that is, that criminals will + never be reformed by being robbed, humiliated and degraded. + </p> + <p> + Ignorance, filth, and poverty are the missionaries of crime. As long as + dishonorable success outranks honest effort—as long as society bows + and cringes before the great thieves, there will be little ones enough to + fill the jails. + </p> + <p> + XI. + </p> + <p> + All the penalties, all the punishments, are inflicted under a belief that + man can do right under all circumstances—that his conduct is + absolutely under his control, and that his will is a pilot that can, in + spite of winds and tides, reach any port desired. All this is, in my + judgment, a mistake. It is a denial of the integrity of nature. It is + based upon the supernatural and miraculous, and as long as this mistake + remains the corner-stone of criminal jurisprudence, reformation will be + impossible. + </p> + <p> + We must take into consideration the nature of man—the facts of mind—the + power of temptation—the limitations of the intellect—the force + of habit—the result of heredity—the power of passion—the + domination of want—the diseases of the brain—the tyranny of + appetite—the cruelty of conditions—the results of association—the + effects of poverty and wealth, of helplessness and power. + </p> + <p> + Until these subtle things are understood—until we know that man, in + spite of all, can certainly pursue the highway of the right, society + should not impoverish and degrade, should not chain and kill those who, + after all, may be the helpless victims of unknown causes that are deaf and + blind. + </p> + <p> + We know something of ourselves—of the average man—of his + thoughts, passions, fears and aspirations—something of his sorrows + and his joys, his weakness, his liability to fall—something of what + he resists—the struggles, the victories and the failures of his + life. We know something of the tides and currents of the mysterious sea—something + of the circuits of the wayward winds—but we do not know where the + wild storms are born that wreck and rend. Neither do we know in what + strange realm the mists and clouds are formed that darken all the heaven + of the mind, nor from whence comes the tempest of the brain in which the + will to do, sudden as the lightning's flash, seizes and holds the man + until the dreadful deed is done that leaves a curse upon the soul. + </p> + <p> + We do not know. Our ignorance should make us hesitate. Our weakness should + make us merciful. + </p> + <p> + I cannot more fittingly close this address than by quoting the prayer of + the Buddhist: "I pray thee to have pity on the vicious—thou hast + already had pity on the virtuous by making them so." + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0006" id="link0006"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + A WOODEN GOD. + </h2> + <h3> + To the Editor: + </h3> + <p> + To-day Messrs. Wright, Dickey, O'Connor, and Murch, of the select + committee on the causes of the present depression of labor, presented the + majority special report upon Chinese immigration. + </p> + <p> + These gentlemen are in great fear for the future of our most holy and + perfectly authenticated religion, and have, like faithful watchmen, from + the walls and towers of Zion, hastened to give the alarm. They have + informed Congress that "Joss has his temple of worship in the Chinese + quarters, in San Francisco. Within the walls of a dilapidated structure is + exposed to the view of the faithful the god of the Chinaman, and here are + his altars of worship. Here he tears up his pieces of paper; here he + offers up his prayers; here he receives his religious consolations, and + here is his road to the celestial land;" that "Joss is located in a long, + narrow room in a building in a back alley, upon a kind of altar;" that "he + is a wooden image, looking as much like an alligator as like a human + being;" that the Chinese "think there is such a place as heaven;" that + "all classes of Chinamen worship idols;" that "the temple is open every + day at all hours;" that "the Chinese have no Sunday;" that this heathen + god has "huge jaws, a big red tongue, large white teeth, a half-dozen + arms, and big, fiery eyeballs. About him are placed offerings of meat and + other eatables—a sacrificial offering." + </p> + <p> + *A letter to the Chicago Times, written at Washington, D. C., March + 27,1880. + </p> + <p> + No wonder that these members of the committee were shocked at such an + image of God, knowing as they did that the only true God was correctly + described by the inspired lunatic of Patmos in the following words: + </p> + <p> + "And there sat in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks one like unto + the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about + the paps with a golden girdle. His head and his hairs were white like + wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; and his feet + like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the + sound of many waters. And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of + his mouth went a sharp, two-edged sword: and his countenance was as the + sun shineth in his strength." + </p> + <p> + Certainly a large mouth filled with white teeth is preferable to one used + as the scabbard of a sharp, two-edged sword. Why should these gentlemen + object to a god with big, fiery eyeballs, when their own Deity has eyes + like a flame of fire? + </p> + <p> + Is it not a little late in the day to object to people because they + sacrifice meat and other eatables to their god? We all know that for + thousands of years the "real" God was exceedingly fond of roasted meat; + that he loved the savor of burning flesh, and delighted in the perfume of + fresh, warm blood. + </p> + <p> + The following account of the manner in which the "living God" desired that + his chosen people should sacrifice, tends to show the degradation and + religious blindness of the Chinese: + </p> + <p> + "Aaron therefore went unto the altar, and slew the calf of the sin + offering, which was for himself. And the sons of Aaron brought the blood + unto him: and he dipped his finger in the blood, and put it upon the horns + of the altar, and poured out the blood at the bottom of the altar: But the + fat, and the kidneys, and the caul above the liver of the sin offering, he + burnt upon the altar; as the Lord commanded Moses. And the flesh and the + hide he burnt with fire without the camp. And he slew the burnt offering; + and Aaron's sons presented unto him the blood, which he sprinkled round + about upon the altar. * * * And he brought the meat offering, and took a + handful thereof, and burnt it upon the altar. * * * He slew also the + bullock and the ram for a sacrifice of peace offering, which was for the + people: and Aaron's sons presented unto him the blood, which he sprinkled + upon the altar round about, and the fat of the bullock and of the ram, the + rump, and that which covereth the inwards and the kidneys, and the caul + above the liver, and they put the fat upon the breasts, and he burnt the + fat upon the altar. And the breast and the right shoulder Aaron waved for + a wave offering before the Lord, as Moses commanded." + </p> + <p> + If the Chinese only did something like this, we would know that they + worshiped the "living" God. The idea that the supreme head of the + "American system of religion" can be placated with a little meat and + "ordinary eatables" is simply preposterous. He has always asked for blood, + and has always asserted that without the shedding of blood there is no + remission of sin. + </p> + <p> + The world is also informed by these gentlemen that "the idolatry of the + Chinese produces a demoralizing effect upon our American youth by bringing + sacred things into disrespect, and making religion a theme of disgust and + contempt." + </p> + <p> + In San Francisco there are some three hundred thousand people. Is it + possible that a few Chinese can bring our "holy religion" into disgust and + contempt? In that city there are fifty times as many churches as + joss-houses. Scores of sermons are uttered every week; religious books and + papers are plentiful as leaves in autumn, and somewhat dryer; thousands of + Bibles are within the reach of all. And there, too, is the example of a + Christian city. + </p> + <p> + Why should we send missionaries to China if we can not convert the heathen + when they come here? When missionaries go to a foreign land, the poor, + benighted people have to take their word for the blessings showered upon a + Christian people; but when the heathen come here they can see for + themselves. What was simply a story becomes a demonstrated fact. They come + in contact with people who love their enemies. They see that in a + Christian land men tell the truth; that they will not take advantage of + strangers; that they are just and patient, kind and tender; that they + never resort to force; that they have no prejudice on account of color, + race, or religion; that they look upon mankind as brethren; that they + speak of God as a universal Father, and are willing to work, and even to + suffer, for the good not only of their own countrymen, but of the heathen + as well. All this the Chinese see and know, and why they still cling to + the religion of their country is to me a matter of amazement. + </p> + <p> + We all know that the disciples of Jesus do unto others as they would that + others should do unto them, and that those of Confucius do not unto others + anything that they would not that others should do unto them. Surely, such + peoples ought to live together in perfect peace. + </p> + <p> + Rising with the subject, growing heated with a kind of holy indignation, + these Christian representatives of a Christian people most solemnly + declare that: + </p> + <p> + "Anyone who is really endowed with a correct knowledge of our religious + system, which acknowledges the existence of a living God and an + accountability to him, and a future state of reward and punishment, who + feels that he has an apology for this abominable pagan worship is not a + fit person to be ranked as a good citizen of the American Union. It is + absurd to make any apology for its toleration. It must be abolished, and + the sooner the decree goes forth by the power of this Government the + better it will be for the interests of this land." + </p> + <p> + I take this, the earliest opportunity, to inform these gentlemen composing + a majority of the committee, that we have in the United States no + "religious system"; that this is a secular Government. That it has no + religious creed; that it does not believe or disbelieve in a future state + of reward and punishment; that it neither affirms nor denies the existence + of a "living God"; and that the only god, so far as this Government is + concerned, is the legally expressed will of a majority of the people. + Under our flag the Chinese have the same right to worship a wooden god + that you have to worship any other. The Constitution protects equally the + church of Jehovah and the house of Joss. Whatever their relative positions + may be in heaven, they stand upon a perfect equality in the United States. + </p> + <p> + This Government is an Infidel Government. We have a Constitution with man + put in and God left out; and it is the glory of this country that we have + such a Constitution. + </p> + <p> + It may be surprising to you that I have an apology for pagan worship, yet + I have. And it is the same one that I have for the writers of this report. + I account for both by the word <i>superstition</i>. Why should we object + to their worshiping God as they please? If the worship is improper, the + protestation should come not from a committee of Congress, but from God + himself. If he is satisfied that is sufficient. + </p> + <p> + Our religion can only be brought into contempt by the actions of those who + profess to be governed by its teachings. This report will do more in that + direction than millions of Chinese could do by burning pieces of paper + before a wooden image. If you wish to impress the Chinese with the value + of your religion, of what you are pleased to call "The American system," + show them that Christians are better than heathens. Prove to them that + what you are pleased to call the "living God" teaches higher and holier + things, a grander and purer code of morals than can be found upon pagan + pages. Excel these wretches in industry, in honesty, in reverence for + parents, in cleanliness, in frugality; and above all by advocating the + absolute liberty of human thought. + </p> + <p> + Do not trample upon these people because they have a different conception + of things about which even this committee knows nothing. + </p> + <p> + Give them the same privilege you enjoy of making a God after their own + fashion. And let them describe him as they will. Would you be willing to + have them remain, if one of their race, thousands of years ago, had + pretended to have seen God, and had written of him as follows: + </p> + <p> + "There went up a smoke out of his nostrils, and fire out of his mouth + devoured: coals were kindled by it, * * * and he rode upon a cherub and + did fly." + </p> + <p> + Why should you object to these people on account of their religion? Your + objection has in it the spirit of hate and intolerance. Of that spirit the + Inquisition was born. That spirit lighted the fagot, made the thumbscrew, + put chains upon the limbs, and lashes upon the backs of men. The same + spirit bought and sold, captured and kidnapped human beings; sold babes, + and justified all the horrors of slavery. + </p> + <p> + Congress has nothing to do with the religion of the people. Its members + are not responsible to God for the opinions of their constituents, and it + may tend to the happiness of the constituents for me to state that they + are in no way responsible for the religion of the members. Religion is an + individual, not a national, matter. And where the nation interferes with + the right of conscience, the liberties of the people are devoured by the + monster superstition. + </p> + <p> + If you wish to drive out the Chinese, do not make a pretext of religion. + Do not pretend that you are trying to do God a favor. Injustice in his + name is doubly detestable. The assassin can not sanctify his dagger by + falling on his knees, and it does not help a falsehood if it be uttered as + a prayer. Religion, used to intensify the hatred of men toward men under + the pretence of pleasing God, has cursed this world. + </p> + <p> + A portion of this most remarkable report is intensely religious. There is + in it almost the odor of sanctity; and when reading it, one is impressed + with the living piety of its authors. But on the twenty-fifth page there + are a few passages that must pain the hearts of true believers. + </p> + <p> + Leaving their religious views, the members immediately betake themselves + to philosophy and prediction. Listen: + </p> + <p> + "The Chinese race and the American citizen, whether native-born or one who + is eligible to our naturalization laws and becomes a citizen, are in a + state of antagonism. They cannot, or will not, ever meet upon common + ground, and occupy together the same social level. This is impossible. The + pagan and the Christian travel different paths. This one believes in a + living God; and that one in a type of monsters and the worship of wood and + stone. Thus in the religion of the two races of men they are as wide apart + as the poles of the two hemispheres. They cannot now and never will + approach the same religious altar. The Christian will not recede to + barbarism, nor will the Chinese advance to the enlightened belt (whatever + it is) of civilization. * * * He cannot be converted to those modern ideas + of religious worship which have been accepted by Europe and which crown + the American system." + </p> + <p> + Christians used to believe that through their religion all the nations of + the earth were finally to be blest. In accordance with that belief + missionaries have been sent to every land, and untold wealth has been + expended for what has been called the spread of the gospel. + </p> + <p> + I am almost sure that I have read somewhere that "Christ died for <i>all</i> + men," and that "God is no respecter of persons." It was once taught that + it was the duty of Christians to tell all people the "tidings of great + joy." I have never believed these things myself, but have always contended + that an honest merchant was the best missionary. Commerce makes friends, + religion makes enemies; the one enriches and the other impoverishes; the + one thrives best where the truth is told, the other where falsehoods are + believed. For myself, I have but little confidence in any business or + enterprise or investment that promises dividends only after the death of + the stockholders. + </p> + <p> + But I am astonished that four Christian statesmen, four members of + Congress, in the last quarter of the nineteenth century, who seriously + object to people on account of their religious convictions, should still + assert that the very religion in which they believe—and the only + religion established by the "living God," head of the American system—is + not adapted to the spiritual needs of one-third of the human race. It is + amazing that these four gentlemen have, in the defence of the Christian + religion, announced the discovery that it is wholly inadequate for the + civilization of mankind; that the light of the cross can never penetrate + the darkness of China; "that all the labors of the missionary, the example + of the good, the exalted character of our civilization, make no impression + upon the pagan life of the Chinese;" and that even the report of this + committee will not tend to elevate, refine, and Christianize the yellow + heathen of the Pacific coast. In the name of religion these gentlemen have + denied its power, and mocked at the enthusiasm of its founder. Worse than + this, they have predicted for the Chinese a future of ignorance and + idolatry in this world, and, if the "American system" of religion is true, + hell-fire in the next. + </p> + <p> + For the benefit of these four philosophers and prophets I will give a few + extracts from the writings of Confucius, that will, in my judgment, + compare favorably with the best passages of their report: + </p> + <p> + "My doctrine is that man must be true to the principles of his nature, and + the benevolent exercise of them toward others. + </p> + <p> + With coarse rice to eat, with water to drink, and with my bended arm for a + pillow, I still have joy. + </p> + <p> + Riches and honor acquired by injustice are to me but floating clouds. + </p> + <p> + The man who, in view of gain, thinks of righteousness; who, in view of + danger, forgets life, and who remembers an old agreement, however far back + it extends, such a man may be reckoned a complete man. + </p> + <p> + Recompense injury with justice, and kindness with kindness. + </p> + <p> + There is one word which may serve as a rule of practice for all one's + life: Reciprocity is that word." + </p> + <p> + When the ancestors of the four Christian Congressmen were barbarians, when + they lived in caves, gnawed bones, and worshiped dried snakes, the + infamous Chinese were reading these sublime sentences of Confucius. When + the forefathers of these Christian statesmen were hunting toads to get the + jewels out of their heads, to be used as charms, the wretched Chinese were + calculating eclipses, and measuring the circumference of the earth. When + the progenitors of these representatives of the "American system of + religion" were burning women charged with nursing devils, the people + "incapable of being influenced by the exalted character of our + civilization," were building asylums for the insane. + </p> + <p> + Neither should it be forgotten that, for thousands of years, the Chinese + have honestly practiced the great principle known as Civil Service Reform—a + something that even the administration of Mr. Hayes has reached only + through the proxy of promise. + </p> + <p> + If we wish to prevent the immigration of the Chinese, let us reform our + treaties with the vast empire from whence they came. For thousands of + years the Chinese secluded themselves from the rest of the world. They did + not deem the Christian nations fit to associate with. We forced ourselves + upon them. We called, not with cards, but with cannon. The English + battered down the door in the names of opium and Christ. This infamy was + regarded as another triumph for the gospel. At last, in self-defence, the + Chinese allowed Christians to touch their shores. Their wise men, their + philosophers, protested, and prophesied that time would show that + Christians could not be trusted. This report proves that the wise men were + not only philosophers, but prophets. + </p> + <p> + Treat China as you would England. Keep a treaty while it is in force. + Change it if you will, according to the laws of nations, but on no account + excuse a breach of national faith by pretending that we are dishonest for + God's sake. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0007" id="link0007"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + SOME INTERROGATION POINTS. + </h2> + <p> + A NEW party is struggling for recognition—a party with leaders who + are not politicians, with followers who are not seekers after place. Some + of those who suffer and some of those who sympathize, have combined. Those + who feel that they are oppressed are organized for the purpose of + redressing their wrongs. The workers for wages, and the seekers for work + have uttered a protest. This party is an instrumentality for the + accomplishment of certain things that are very near and very dear to the + hearts of many millions. + </p> + <p> + The object to be attained is a fairer division of profits between + employers and employed. There is a feeling that in some way the workers + should not want—that the industrious should not be the indigent. + There is a hope that men and women and children are not forever to be the + victims of ignorance and want—that the tenement house is not always + to be the home of the poor, or the gutter the nursery of their babes. + </p> + <p> + As yet, the methods for the accomplishment of these aims have not been + agreed upon. Many theories have been advanced and none has been adopted. + The question is so vast, so complex, touching human interests in so many + ways, that no one has yet been great enough to furnish a solution, or, if + any one has furnished a solution, no one else has been wise enough to + understand it. + </p> + <p> + 'The hope of the future is that this question will finally be understood. + It must not be discussed in anger. If a broad and comprehensive view is to + be taken, there is no place for hatred or for prejudice. Capital is not to + blame. Labor is not to blame. Both have been caught in the net of + circumstances. The rich are as generous as the poor would be if they + should change places. Men acquire through the noblest and the tenderest + instincts. They work and save not only for themselves, but for their wives + and for their children. There is but little confidence in the charity of + the world. The prudent man in his youth makes preparation for his age. The + loving father, having struggled himself, hopes to save his children from + drudgery and toil. + </p> + <p> + In every country there are classes—that is to say, the spirit of + caste, and this spirit will exist until the world is truly civilized. + Persons in most communities are judged not as individuals, but as members + of a class. Nothing is more natural, and nothing more heartless. These + lines that divide hearts on account of clothes or titles, are growing more + and more indistinct, and the philanthropists, the lovers of the human + race, believe that the time is coming when they will be obliterated. We + may do away with kings and peasants, and yet there may still be the rich + and poor, the intelligent and foolish, the beautiful and deformed, the + industrious and idle, and it may be, the honest and vicious. These + classifications are in the nature of things. They are produced for the + most part by forces that are now beyond the control of man—but the + old rule, that men are disreputable in the proportion that they are + useful, will certainly be reversed. The idle lord was always held to be + the superior of the industrious peasant, the devourer better than the + producer, and the waster superior to the worker. + </p> + <p> + While in this country we have no titles of nobility, we have the rich and + the poor—no princes, no peasants, but millionaires and mendicants. + The individuals composing these classes are continually changing. The rich + of to-day may be the poor of to-morrow, and the children of the poor may + take their places. In this country, the children of the poor are educated + substantially in the same schools with those of the rich. All read the + same papers, many of the same books, and all for many years hear the same + questions discussed. They are continually being educated, not only at + schools, but by the press, by political campaigns, by perpetual + discussions on public questions, and the result is that those who are rich + in gold are often poor in thought, and many who have not whereon to lay + their heads have within those heads a part of the intellectual wealth of + the world. + </p> + <p> + Years ago the men of wealth were forced to contribute toward the education + of the children of the poor. The support of schools by general taxation + was defended on the ground that it was a means of providing for the public + welfare, of perpetuating the institutions of a free country by making + better men and women. This policy has been pursued until at last the + schoolhouse is larger than the church, and the common people through + education have become uncommon. They now know how little is really known + by what are called the upper classes—how little after all is + understood by kings, presidents, legislators, and men of culture. They are + capable not only of understanding a few questions, but they have acquired + the art of discussing those that no one understands. With the facility of + politicians they can hide behind phrases, make barricades of statistics, + and <i>chevaux-de-frise</i> of inferences and assertions. They understand + the sophistries of those who have governed. + </p> + <p> + In some respects these common people are the superiors of the so-called + aristocracy. While the educated have been turning their attention to the + classics, to the dead languages, and the dead ideas and mistakes that they + contain—while they have been giving their attention to ceramics, + artistic decorations, and compulsory prayers, the common people have been + compelled to learn the practical things—to become acquainted with + facts—by doing the work of the world. The professor of a college is + no longer a match for a master mechanic. The master mechanic not only + understands principles, but their application. He knows things as they + are. He has come in contact with the actual, with realities. He knows + something of the adaptation of means to ends, and this is the highest and + most valuable form of education. The men who make locomotives, who + construct the vast engines that propel ships, necessarily know more than + those who have spent their lives in conjugating Greek verbs, looking for + Hebrew roots, and discussing the origin and destiny of the universe. + </p> + <p> + Intelligence increases wants. By education the necessities of the people + become increased. The old wages will not supply the new wants. Man longs + for a harmony between the thought within and the things without. When the + soul lives in a palace the body is not satisfied with rags and patches. + The glaring inequalities among men, the differences in condition, the + suffering and the poverty, have appealed to the good and great of every + age, and there has been in the brain of the philanthropist a dream—a + hope, a prophecy, of a better day. + </p> + <p> + It was believed that tyranny was the foundation and cause of the + differences between men—that the rich were all robbers and the poor + all victims, and that if a society or government could be founded on equal + rights and privileges, the inequalities would disappear, that all would + have food and clothes and reasonable work and reasonable leisure, and that + content would be found by every hearth. + </p> + <p> + There was a reliance on nature—an idea that men had interfered with + the harmonious action of great principles which if left to themselves + would work out universal wellbeing for the human race. Others imagined + that the inequalities between men were necessary—that they were part + of a divine plan, and that all would be adjusted in some other world—that + the poor here would be the rich there, and the rich here might be in + torture there. Heaven became the reward of the poor, of the slave, and + hell their revenge. + </p> + <p> + When our Government was established it was declared that all men are + endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among which were + life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It was then believed that if + all men had an equal opportunity, if they were allowed to make and execute + their own laws, to levy their own taxes, the frightful inequalities seen + in the despotisms and monarchies of the old world would entirely + disappear. This was the dream of 1776. The founders of the Government knew + how kings and princes and dukes and lords and barons had lived upon the + labor of the peasants. They knew the history of those ages of want and + crime, of luxury and suffering. But in spite of our Declaration, in spite + of our Constitution, in spite of universal suffrage, the inequalities + still exist. We have the kings and princes, the lords and peasants, in + fact, if not in name. Monopolists, corporations, capitalists, workers for + wages, have taken their places, and we are forced to admit that even + universal suffrage cannot clothe and feed the world. + </p> + <p> + For thousands of years men have been talking and writing about the great + law of supply and demand—and insisting that in some way this + mysterious law has governed and will continue to govern the activities of + the human race. It is admitted that this law is merciless—that when + the demand fails, the producer, the laborer, must suffer, must perish—that + the law feels neither pity nor malice—it simply acts, regardless of + consequences. Under this law capital will employ the cheapest. The single + man can work for less than the married. Wife and children are luxuries not + to be enjoyed under this law. The ignorant have fewer wants than the + educated, and for this reason can afford to work for less. The great law + will give employment to the single and to the ignorant in preference to + the married and intelligent. The great law has nothing to do with food or + clothes, with filth or crime. It cares nothing for homes, for + penitentiaries, or asylums. It simply acts—and some men triumph, + some succeed, some fail, and some perish. + </p> + <p> + Others insist that the curse of the world is monopoly. And yet, as long as + some men are stronger than others, as long as some are more intelligent + than others, they must be, to the extent of such advantage, monopolists. + Every man of genius is a monopolist. + </p> + <p> + We are told that the great remedy against monopoly—that is to say, + against extortion, is free and unrestricted competition. But after all, + the history of this world shows that the brutalities of competition are + equaled only by those of monopoly. The successful competitor becomes a + monopolist, and if competitors fail to destroy each other, the instinct of + self-preservation suggests a combination. In other words, competition is a + struggle between two or more persons or corporations for the purpose of + determining which shall have the uninterrupted privilege of extortion. + </p> + <p> + In this country the people have had the greatest reliance on competition. + If a railway company charged too much a rival road was built. As a matter + of fact, we are indebted for half the railroads of the United States to + the extortion of the other half, and the same may truthfully be said of + telegraph lines. As a rule, while the exactions of monopoly constructed + new roads and new lines, competition has either destroyed the weaker, or + produced the pool which is a means of keeping both monopolies alive, or of + producing a new monopoly with greater needs, supplied by methods more + heartless than the old. When a rival road is built the people support the + rival because the fares and freights are somewhat less. Then the old and + richer monopoly inaugurates war, and the people, glorying in the benefits + of competition, are absurd enough to support the old. In a little while + the new company, unable to maintain the contest, left by the people at the + mercy of the stronger, goes to the wall, and the triumphant monopoly + proceeds to make the intelligent people pay not only the old price, but + enough in addition to make up for the expenses of the contest. + </p> + <p> + Is there any remedy for this? None, except with the people themselves. + When the people become intelligent enough to support the rival at a + reasonable price; when they know enough to allow both roads to live; when + they are intelligent enough to recognize a friend and to stand by that + friend as against a known enemy, this question will be at least on the + edge of a solution. + </p> + <p> + So far as I know, this course has never been pursued except in one + instance, and that is the present war between the Gould and Mackay cables. + The Gould system had been charging from sixty to eighty cents a word, and + the Mackay system charged forty. Then the old monopoly tried to induce the + rival to put the prices back to sixty. The rival refused, and thereupon + the Gould combination dropped to twelve and a half, for the purpose of + destroying the rival. The Mackay cable fixed the tariff at twenty-five + cents, saying to its customers, "You are intelligent enough to understand + what this war means. If our cables are defeated, the Gould system will go + back not only to the old price, but will add enough to reimburse itself + for the cost of destroying us. If you really wish for competition, if you + desire a reasonable service at a reasonable rate, you will support us." + Fortunately an exceedingly intelligent class of people does business by + the cables. They are merchants, bankers, and brokers, dealing with large + amounts, with intricate, complicated, and international questions. Of + necessity, they are used to thinking for themselves. They are not dazzled + into blindness by the glare of the present. They see the future. They are + not duped by the sunshine of a moment or the promise of an hour. They see + beyond the horizon of a penny saved. These people had intelligence enough + to say, "The rival who stands between us and extortion is our friend, and + our friend shall not be allowed to die." + </p> + <p> + Does not this tend to show that people must depend upon themselves, and + that some questions can be settled by the intelligence of those who buy, + of those who use, and that customers are not entirely helpless? + </p> + <p> + Another thing should not be forgotten, and that is this: there is the same + war between monopolies that there is between individuals, and the + monopolies for many years have been trying to destroy each other. They + have unconsciously been working for the extinction of monopolies. These + monopolies differ as individuals do. You find among them the rich and the + poor, the lucky and the unfortunate, millionaires and tramps. The great + monopolies have been devouring the little ones. + </p> + <p> + Only a few years ago, the railways in this country were controlled by + local directors and local managers. The people along the lines were + interested in the stock. As a consequence, whenever any legislation was + threatened hostile to the interests of these railways, they had local + friends who used their influence with legislators, governors and juries. + During this time they were protected, but when the hard times came many of + these companies were unable to pay their interest. They suddenly became + Socialists. They cried out against their prosperous rivals. They felt like + joining the Knights of Labor. They began to talk about rights and wrongs. + But in spite of their cries, they have passed into the hands of the richer + roads—they were seized by the great monopolies. Now the important + railways are owned by persons living in large cities or in foreign + countries. They have no local friends, and when the time conies, and it + may come, for the General Government to say how much these companies shall + charge for passengers and freight, they will have no local friends. It may + be that the great mass of the people will then be on the other side. So + that after all, the great corporations have been busy settling the + question against themselves. + </p> + <p> + Possibly a majority of the American people believe to-day that in some way + all these questions between capital and labor can be settled by + constitutions, laws, and judicial decisions. Most people imagine that a + statute is a sovereign specific for any evil. But while the theory has all + been one way, the actual experience has been the other—just as the + free traders have all the arguments and the protectionists most of the + facts. + </p> + <p> + The truth is, as Mr. Buckle says, that for five hundred years all real + advance in legislation has been made by repealing laws. Of one thing we + must be satisfied, and that is that real monopolies have never been + controlled by law, but the fact that such monopolies exist, is a + demonstration that the law has been controlled. In our country, + legislators are for the most part controlled by those who, by their wealth + and influence, elect them. The few, in reality, cast the votes of the + many, and the few influence the ones voted for by the many. Special + interests, being active, secure special legislation, and the object of + special legislation is to create a kind of monopoly—that is to say, + to get some advantage. Chiefs, barons, priests, and kings ruled, robbed, + destroyed, and duped, and their places have been taken by corporations, + monopolists, and politicians. The large fish still live on the little + ones, and the fine theories have as yet failed to change the condition of + mankind. + </p> + <p> + Law in this country is effective only when it is the recorded will of a + majority. When the zealous few get control of the Legislature, and laws + are passed to prevent Sabbath-breaking, or wine-drinking, they succeed + only in putting their opinions and provincial prejudices in legal phrase. + There was a time when men worked from fourteen to sixteen hours a day. + These hours have not been lessened, they have not been shortened by law. + The law has followed and recorded, but the law is not a leader and not a + prophet. It appears to be impossible to fix wages—just as impossible + as to fix the values of all manufactured things, including works of art. + The field is too great, the problem too complicated, for the human mind to + grasp. + </p> + <p> + To fix the value of labor is to fix all values—labor being the + foundation of all values. The value of labor cannot be fixed unless we + understand the relations that all things bear to each other and to man. If + labor were a legal tender—if a judgment for so many dollars could be + discharged by so many days of labor,—and the law was that twelve + hours of work should be reckoned as one day, then the law could change the + hours to ten or eight, and the judgments could be paid in the shortened + days. But it is easy to see that in all contracts made after the passage + of such a law, the difference in hours would be taken into consideration. + </p> + <p> + We must remember that law is not a creative force. It produces nothing. It + raises neither corn nor wine. The legitimate object of law is to protect + the weak, to prevent violence and fraud, and to enforce honest contracts, + to the end that each person may be free to do as he desires, provided only + that he does not interfere with the rights of others. Our fathers tried to + make people religious by law. They failed. Thousands are now trying to + make people temperate in the same manner. Such efforts always have been + and probably always will be failures. People who believe that an infinite + God gave to the Hebrews a perfect code of laws, must admit that even this + code failed to civilize the inhabitants of Palestine. + </p> + <p> + It seems impossible to make people just or charitable or industrious or + agreeable or successful, by law, any more than you can make them + physically perfect or mentally sound. Of course we admit that good people + intend to make good laws, and that good laws faithfully and honestly + executed, tend to the preservation of human rights and to the elevation of + the race, but the enactment of a law not in accordance with a sentiment + already existing in the minds and hearts of the people—the very + people who are depended upon to enforce this law—is not a help, but + a hindrance. A real law is but the expression, in an authoritative and + accurate form, of the judgment and desire of the majority. As we become + intelligent and kind, this intelligence and kindness find expression in + law. + </p> + <p> + But how is it possible to fix the wages of every man? To fix wages is to + fix prices, and a government to do this intelligently, would necessarily + have to have the wisdom generally attributed to an infinite Being. It + would have to supervise and fix the conditions of every exchange of + commodities and the value of every conceivable thing. Many things can be + accomplished by law, employeers may be held responsible for injuries to + the employed. The mines can be ventilated. Children can be rescued from + the deformities of toil—burdens taken from the backs of wives and + mothers—houses made wholesome, food healthful—that is to say, + the weak can be protected from the strong, the honest from the vicious, + honest contracts can be enforced, and many rights protected. + </p> + <p> + The men who have simply strength, muscle, endurance, compete not only with + other men of strength, but with the inventions of genius. What would + doctors say if physicians of iron could be invented with curious cogs and + wheels, so that when a certain button was touched the proper prescription + would be written? How would lawyers feel if a lawyer could be invented in + such a way that questions of law, being put in a kind of hopper and a + crank being turned, decisions of the highest court could be prophesied + without failure? And how would the ministers feel if somebody should + invent a clergyman of wood that would to all intents and purposes answer + the purpose? + </p> + <p> + Invention has filled the world with the competitors not only of laborers, + but of mechanics—mechanics of the highest skill. To-day the ordinary + laborer is for the most part a cog in a wheel. He works with the tireless—he + feeds the insatiable. When the monster stops, the man is out of + employment, out of bread; He has not saved anything. The machine that he + fed was not feeding him, was not working for him—the invention was + not for his benefit. The other day I heard a man say that it was almost + impossible for thousands of good mechanics to get employment, and that, in + his judgment, the Government ought to furnish work for the people. A few + minutes after, I heard another say that he was selling a patent for + cutting out clothes, that one of his machines could do the work of twenty + tailors, and that only the week before he had sold two to a great house in + New York, and that over forty cutters had been discharged. + </p> + <p> + On every side men are being discharged and machines are being invented to + take their places. When the great factory shuts down, the workers who + inhabited it and gave it life, as thoughts do the brain, go away and it + stands there like an empty skull. A few workmen, by the force of habit, + gather about the closed doors and broken windows and talk about distress, + the price of food and the coming winter. They are convinced that they have + not had their share of what their labor created. They feel certain that + the machines inside were not their friends. They look at the mansion of + the employeer and think of the places where they live. They have saved + nothing—nothing but themselves. The employeer seems to have enough. + Even when employeers fail, when they become bankrupt, they are far better + off than the laborers ever were. Their worst is better than the toilers' + best. + </p> + <p> + The capitalist comes forward with his specific. He tells the workingman + that he must be economical—and yet, under the present system, + economy would only lessen wages. Under the great law of supply and demand + every saving, frugal, self-denying workingman is unconsciously doing what + little he can to reduce the compensation of himself and his fellows. The + slaves who did not wish to run away helped fasten chains on those who did. + So the saving mechanic is a certificate that wages are high enough. Does + the great law demand that every worker live on the least possible amount + of bread? Is it his fate to work one day, that he may get enough food to + be able to work another? Is that to be his only hope—that and death? + </p> + <p> + Capital has always claimed and still claims the right to combine. + Manufacturers meet and determine upon prices, even in spite of the great + law of supply and demand. Have the laborers the same right to consult and + combine? The rich meet in the bank, the clubhouse, or parlor. Workingmen, + when they combine, gather in the street. All the organized forces of + society are against them. Capital has the army and the navy, the + legislative, the judicial, and the executive departments. When the rich + combine, it is for the purpose of "exchanging ideas." When the poor + combine, it is a "conspiracy." If they act in concert, if they really do + something, it is a "mob." If they defend themselves, it is "treason." How + is it that the rich control the departments of government? In this country + the political power is equally divided among the men. There are certainly + more poor than there are rich. Why should the rich control? Why should not + the laborers combine for the purpose of controlling the executive, + legislative, and judicial departments? Will they ever find how powerful + they are? + </p> + <p> + In every country there is a satisfied class—too satisfied to care. + They are like the angels in heaven, who are never disturbed by the + miseries of earth. They are too happy to be generous. This satisfied class + asks no questions and answers none. They believe the world is as it should + be. All reformers are simply disturbers of the peace. When they talk low, + they should not be listened to; when they talk loud, they should be + suppressed. + </p> + <p> + The truth is to-day what it always has been—what it always will be—those + who feel are the only ones who think. A cry comes from the oppressed, from + the hungry, from the down-trodden, from the unfortunate, from men who + despair and from women who weep. There are times when mendicants become + revolutionists—when a rag becomes a banner, under which the noblest + and bravest battle for the right. + </p> + <p> + How are we to settle the unequal contest between men and machines? Will + the machine finally go into partnership with the laborer? Can these forces + of nature be controlled for the benefit of her suffering children? Will + extravagance keep pace with ingenuity? Will the workers become intelligent + enough and strong enough to be the owners of the machines? Will these + giants, these Titans, shorten or lengthen the hours of labor? Will they + give leisure to the industrious, or will they make the rich richer, and + the poor poorer? + </p> + <p> + Is man involved in the "general scheme of things"? Is there no pity, no + mercy? Can man become intelligent enough to be generous, to be just; or + does the same law or fact control him that controls the animal and + vegetable world? The great oak steals the sunlight from the smaller trees. + The strong animals devour the weak—everything eating something else—everything + at the mercy of beak and claw and hoof and tooth—of hand and club, + of brain and greed—inequality, injustice, everywhere. + </p> + <p> + The poor horse standing in the street with his dray, overworked, + over-whipped, and under-fed, when he sees other horses groomed to mirrors, + glittering with gold and silver, scorning with proud feet the very earth, + probably indulges in the usual socialistic reflections, and this same + horse, worn out and old, deserted by his master, turned into the dusty + road, leans his head on the topmost rail, looks at donkeys in a field of + clover, and feels like a Nihilist. + </p> + <p> + In the days of savagery the strong devoured the weak—actually ate + their flesh. In spite of all the laws that man has made, in spite of all + advance in science, literature and art, the strong, the cunning, the + heartless still live on the weak, the unfortunate, and foolish. True, they + do not eat their flesh, they do not drink their blood, but they live on + their labor, on their self-denial, their weariness and want. The poor man + who deforms himself by toil, who labors for wife and child through all his + anxious, barren, wasted life—who goes to the grave without even + having had one luxury—has been the food of others. He has been + devoured by his fellow-men. The poor woman living in the bare and lonely + room, cheerless and fireless, sewing night and day to keep starvation from + a child, is slowly being eaten by her fellow-men. When I take into + consideration the agony of civilized life—the number of failures, + the poverty, the anxiety, the tears, the withered hopes, the bitter + realities, the hunger, the crime, the humiliation, the shame—I am + almost forced to say that cannibalism, after all, is the most merciful + form in which man has ever lived upon his fellow-man. + </p> + <p> + Some of the best and purest of our race have advocated what is known as + Socialism. They have not only taught, but, what is much more to the + purpose, have believed that a nation should be a family; that the + government should take care of all its children; that it should provide + work and food and clothes and education for all, and that it should divide + the results of all labor equitably with all. + </p> + <p> + Seeing the inequalities among men, knowing of the destitution and crime, + these men were willing to sacrifice, not only their own liberties, but the + liberties of all. + </p> + <p> + Socialism seems to be one of the worst possible forms of slavery. Nothing, + in my judgment, would so utterly paralyze all the forces, all the splendid + ambitions and aspirations that now tend to the civilization of man. In + ordinary systems of slavery there are some masters, a few are supposed to + be free; but in a socialistic state all would be slaves. + </p> + <p> + If the government is to provide work it must decide for the worker what he + must do. It must say who shall chisel statues, who shall paint pictures, + who shall compose music, and who shall practice the professions. Is any + government, or can any government, be capable of intelligently performing + these countless duties? It must not only control work, it must not only + decide what each shall do, but it must control expenses, because expenses + bear a direct relation to products. Therefore the government must decide + what the worker shall eat and wherewithal he shall be clothed; the kind of + house in which he shall live; the manner in which it shall be furnished, + and, if this government furnishes the work, it must decide on the days or + the hours of leisure. More than this, it must fix values; it must decide + not only who shall sell, but who shall buy, and the price that must be + paid—and it must fix this value not simply upon the labor, but on + everything that can be produced, that can be exchanged or sold. + </p> + <p> + Is it possible to conceive of a despotism beyond this? + </p> + <p> + The present condition of the world is bad enough, with its poverty and + ignorance, but it is far better than it could by any possibility be under + any government like the one described. There would be less hunger of the + body, but not of the mind. Each man would simply be a citizen of a large + penitentiary, and, as in every well regulated prison, somebody would + decide what each should do. The inmates of a prison retire early; they + rise with the sun; they have something to eat; they are not dissipated; + they have clothes; they attend divine service; they have but little to say + about their neighbors; they do not suffer from cold; their habits are + excellent, and yet, no one envies their condition. Socialism destroys the + family. The children belong to the state. Certain officers take the places + of parents. Individuality is lost. + </p> + <p> + The human race cannot afford to exchange its liberty for any possible + comfort. You remember the old fable of the fat dog that met the lean wolf + in the forest. The wolf, astonished to see so prosperous an animal, + inquired of the dog where he got his food, and the dog told him that there + was a man who took care of him, gave him his breakfast, his dinner, and + his supper with the utmost regularity, and that he had all that he could + eat and very little to do. The wolf said, "Do you think this man would + treat me as he does you?" The dog replied, "Yes, come along with me." So + they jogged on together toward the dog's home. On the way the wolf + happened to notice that some hair was worn off the dog's neck, and he + said, "How did the hair become worn?" "That is," said the dog, "the mark + of the collar—my master ties me at night." "Oh," said the wolf, "Are + you chained? Are you deprived of your liberty? I believe I will go back. I + prefer hunger." + </p> + <p> + It is impossible for any man with a good heart to be satisfied with this + world as it now is. No one can truly enjoy even what he earns—what + he knows to be his own, knowing that millions of his fellow-men are in + misery and want. When we think of the famished we feel that it is almost + heartless to eat. To meet the ragged and shivering makes one almost + ashamed to be well dressed and warm—one feels as though his heart + was as cold as their bodies. + </p> + <p> + In a world filled with millions and millions of acres of land waiting to + be tilled, where one man can raise the food for hundreds, millions are on + the edge of famine. Who can comprehend the stupidity at the bottom of this + truth? + </p> + <p> + Is there to be no change? Are "the law of supply and demand," invention + and science, monopoly and competition, capital and legislation always to + be the enemies of those who toil? + </p> + <p> + Will the workers always be ignorant enough and stupid enough to give their + earnings for the useless? Will they support millions of soldiers to kill + the sons of other workingmen? Will they always build temples for ghosts + and phantoms, and live in huts and dens themselves? Will they forever + allow parasites with crowns, and vampires with mitres, to live upon their + blood? Will they remain the slaves of the beggars they support? How long + will they be controlled by friends who seek favors, and by reformers who + want office? Will they always prefer famine in the city to a feast in the + fields? Will they ever feel and know that they have no right to bring + children into this world that they cannot support? Will they use their + intelligence for themselves, or for others? Will they become wise enough + to know that they cannot obtain their own liberty by destroying that of + others? Will they finally see that every man has a right to choose his + trade, his profession, his employment, and has the right to work when, and + for whom, and for what he will? Will they finally say that the man who has + had equal privileges with all others has no right to complain, or will + they follow the example that has been set by their oppressors? Will they + learn that force, to succeed, must have a thought behind it, and that + anything done, in order that it may endure, must rest upon the + corner-stone of justice? + </p> + <p> + Will they, at the command of priests, forever extinguish the spark that + sheds a little light in every brain? Will they ever recognize the fact + that labor, above all things, is honorable—that it is the foundation + of virtue? Will they understand that beggars cannot be generous, and that + every healthy man must earn the right to live? Will honest men stop taking + off their hats to successful fraud? Will industry, in the presence of + crowned idleness, forever fall upon its knees, and will the lips unstained + by lies forever kiss the robed impostor's hand?—North American + Review, March, 1887. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0008" id="link0008"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + ART AND MORALITY. + </h2> + <p> + ART is the highest form of expression, and exists for the sake of + expression. Through art thoughts become visible. Back of forms are the + desire, the longing, the brooding creative instinct, the maternity of mind + and the passion that give pose and swell, outline and color. + </p> + <p> + Of course there is no such thing as absolute beauty or absolute morality. + We now clearly perceive that beauty and conduct are relative. We have + outgrown the provincialism that thought is back of substance, as well as + the old Platonic absurdity, that ideas existed before the subjects of + thought. So far, at least, as man is concerned, his thoughts have been + produced by his surroundings, by the action and interaction of things upon + his mind; and so far as man is concerned, things have preceded thoughts. + The impressions that these things make upon us are what we know of them. + The absolute is beyond the human mind. Our knowledge is confined to the + relations that exist between the totality of things that we call the + universe, and the effect upon ourselves. + </p> + <p> + Actions are deemed right or wrong, according to experience and the + conclusions of reason. Things are beautiful by the relation that certain + forms, colors, and modes of expression bear to us. At the foundation of + the beautiful will be found the fact of happiness, the gratification of + the senses, the delight of intellectual discovery and the surprise and + thrill of appreciation. That which we call the beautiful, wakens into life + through the association of ideas, of memories, of experiences, of + suggestions of pleasure past and the perception that the prophecies of the + ideal have been and will be fulfilled. + </p> + <p> + Art cultivates and kindles the imagination, and quickens the conscience. + It is by imagination that we put ourselves in the place of another. When + the wings of that faculty are folded, the master does not put himself in + the place of the slave; the tyrant is not locked in the dungeon, chained + with his victim. The inquisitor did not feel the flames that devoured the + martyr. The imaginative man, giving to the beggar, gives to himself. Those + who feel indignant at the perpetration of wrong, feel for the instant that + they are the victims; and when they attack the aggressor they feel that + they are defending themselves. Love and pity are the children of the + imagination. + </p> + <p> + Our fathers read with great approbation the mechanical sermons in rhyme + written by Milton, Young and Pollok. Those theological poets wrote for the + purpose of convincing their readers that the mind of man is diseased, + filled with infirmities, and that poetic poultices and plasters tend to + purify and strengthen the moral nature of the human race. Nothing to the + true artist, to the real genius, is so contemptible as the "medicinal + view." + </p> + <p> + Poems were written to prove that the practice of virtue was an investment + for another world, and that whoever followed the advice found in those + solemn, insincere and lugubrious rhymes, although he might be exceedingly + unhappy in this world, would with great certainty be rewarded in the next. + These writers assumed that there was a kind of relation between rhyme and + religion, between verse and virtue; and that it was their duty to call the + attention of the world to all the snares and pitfalls of pleasure. They + wrote with a purpose. They had a distinct moral end in view. They had a + plan. They were missionaries, and their object was to show the world how + wicked it was and how good they, the writers, were. They could not + conceive of a man being so happy that everything in nature partook of his + feeling; that all the birds were singing for him, and singing by reason of + his joy; that everything sparkled and shone and moved in the glad rhythm + of his heart. They could not appreciate this feeling. They could not think + of this joy guiding the artist's hand, seeking expression in form and + color. They did not look upon poems, pictures, and statues as results, as + children of the brain fathered by sea and sky, by flower and star, by love + and light. They were not moved by gladness. They felt the responsibility + of perpetual duty. They had a desire to teach, to sermonize, to point out + and exaggerate the faults of others and to describe the virtues practiced + by themselves. Art became a colporteur, a distributer of tracts, a + mendicant missionary whose highest ambition was to suppress all heathen + joy. + </p> + <p> + Happy people were supposed to have forgotten, in a reckless moment, duty + and responsibility. True poetry would call them back to a realization of + their meanness and their misery. It was the skeleton at the feast, the + rattle of whose bones had a rhythmic sound. It was the forefinger of + warning and doom held up in the presence of a smile. + </p> + <p> + These moral poets taught the "unwelcome truths," and by the paths of life + put posts on which they painted hands pointing at graves. They loved to + see the pallor on the cheek of youth, while they talked, in solemn tones, + of age, decrepitude and lifeless clay. + </p> + <p> + Before the eyes of love they thrust, with eager hands, the skull of death. + They crushed the flowers beneath their feet and plaited crowns of thorns + for every brow. + </p> + <p> + According to these poets, happiness was inconsistent with virtue. The + sense of infinite obligation should be perpetually present. They assumed + an attitude of superiority. They denounced and calumniated the reader. + They enjoyed his confusion when charged with total depravity. They loved + to paint the sufferings of the lost, the worthlessness of human life, the + littleness of mankind, and the beauties of an unknown world. They knew but + little of the heart. They did not know that without passion there is no + virtue, and that the really passionate are the virtuous. + </p> + <p> + Art has nothing to do directly with morality or immorality. It is its own + excuse for being; it exists for itself. + </p> + <p> + The artist who endeavors to enforce a lesson, becomes a preacher; and the + artist who tries by hint and suggestion to enforce the immoral, becomes a + pander. + </p> + <p> + There is an infinite difference between the nude and the naked, between + the natural and the undressed. In the presence of the pure, unconscious + nude, nothing can be more contemptible than those forms in which are the + hints and suggestions of drapery, the pretence of exposure, and the + failure to conceal. The undressed is vulgar—the nude is pure. + </p> + <p> + The old Greek statues, frankly, proudly nude, whose free and perfect limbs + have never known the sacrilege of clothes, were and are as free from + taint, as pure, as stainless, as the image of the morning star trembling + in a drop of perfumed dew. + </p> + <p> + Morality is the harmony between act and circumstance. It is the melody of + conduct. A wonderful statue is the melody of proportion. A great picture + is the melody of form and color. A great statue does not suggest labor; it + seems to have been created as a joy. A great painting suggests no + weariness and no effort; the greater, the easier it seems. So a great and + splendid life seems to have been without effort. There is in it no idea of + obligation, no idea of responsibility or of duty. The idea of duty changes + to a kind of drudgery that which should be, in the perfect man, a perfect + pleasure. + </p> + <p> + The artist, working simply for the sake of enforcing a moral, becomes a + laborer. The freedom of genius is lost, and the artist is absorbed in the + citizen. The soul of the real artist should be moved by this melody of + proportion as the body is unconsciously swayed by the rhythm of a + symphony. No one can imagine that the great men who chiseled the statues + of antiquity intended to teach the youth of Greece to be obedient to their + parents. We cannot believe that Michael Angelo painted his grotesque and + somewhat vulgar "Day of Judgment" for the purpose of reforming Italian + thieves. The subject was in all probability selected by his employeer, and + the treatment was a question of art, without the slightest reference to + the moral effect, even upon priests. We are perfectly certain that Corot + painted those infinitely poetic landscapes, those cottages, those sad + poplars, those leafless vines on weather-tinted walls, those quiet pools, + those contented cattle, those fields flecked with light, over which bend + the skies, tender as the breast of a mother, without once thinking of the + ten commandments. There is the same difference between moral art and the + product of true genius, that there is between prudery and virtue. + </p> + <p> + The novelists who endeavor to enforce what they are pleased to call "moral + truths," cease to be artists. They create two kinds of characters—types + and caricatures. The first never has lived, and the second never will. The + real artist produces neither. In his pages you will find individuals, + natural people, who have the contradictions and inconsistencies + inseparable from humanity. The great artists "hold the mirror up to + nature," and this mirror reflects with absolute accuracy. The moral and + the immoral writers—that is to say, those who have some object + besides that of art—use convex or concave mirrors, or those with + uneven surfaces, and the result is that the images are monstrous and + deformed. The little novelist and the little artist deal either in the + impossible or the exceptional. The men of genius touch the universal. + Their words and works throb in unison with the great ebb and flow of + things. They write and work for all races and for all time. + </p> + <p> + It has been the object of thousands of reformers to destroy the passions, + to do away with desires; and could this object be accomplished, life would + become a burden, with but one desire—that is to say, the desire for + extinction. Art in its highest forms increases passion, gives tone and + color and zest to life. But while it increases passion, it refines. It + extends the horizon. The bare necessities of life constitute a prison, a + dungeon. Under the influence of art the walls expand, the roof rises, and + it becomes a temple. + </p> + <p> + Art is not a sermon, and the artist is not a preacher. Art accomplishes by + indirection. The beautiful refines. The perfect in art suggests the + perfect in conduct. The harmony in music teaches, without intention, the + lesson of proportion in life. The bird in his song has no moral purpose, + and yet the influence is humanizing. The beautiful in nature acts through + appreciation and sympathy. It does not browbeat, neither does it + humiliate. It is beautiful without regard to you. Roses would be + unbearable if in their red and perfumed hearts were mottoes to the effect + that bears eat bad boys and that honesty is the best policy. + </p> + <p> + Art creates an atmosphere in which the proprieties, the amenities, and the + virtues unconsciously grow. The rain does not lecture the seed. The light + does not make rules for the vine and flower. + </p> + <p> + The heart is softened by the pathos of the perfect. + </p> + <p> + The world is a dictionary of the mind, and in this dictionary of things + genius discovers analogies, resemblances, and parallels amid opposites, + likeness in difference, and corroboration in contradiction. Language is + but a multitude of pictures. Nearly every word is a work of art, a picture + represented by a sound, and this sound represented by a mark, and this + mark gives not only the sound, but the picture of something in the outward + world and the picture of something within the mind, and with these words + which were once pictures, other pictures are made. + </p> + <p> + The greatest pictures and the greatest statues, the most wonderful and + marvelous groups, have been painted and chiseled with words. They are as + fresh to-day as when they fell from human lips. Penelope still ravels, + weaves, and waits; Ulysses' bow is bent, and through the level rings the + eager arrow flies. Cordelia's tears are falling now. The greatest gallery + of the world is found in Shakespeare's book. The pictures and the marbles + of the Vatican and Louvre are faded, crumbling things, compared with his, + in which perfect color gives to perfect form the glow and movement of + passion's highest life. + </p> + <p> + Everything except the truth wears, and needs to wear, a mask. Little souls + are ashamed of nature. Prudery pretends to have only those passions that + it cannot feel. Moral poetry is like a respectable canal that never + overflows its banks. It has weirs through which slowly and without damage + any excess of feeling is allowed to flow. It makes excuses for nature, and + regards love as an interesting convict. Moral art paints or chisels feet, + faces, and rags. It regards the body as obscene. It hides with drapery + that which it has not the genius purely to portray. Mediocrity becomes + moral from a necessity which it has the impudence to call virtue. It + pretends to regard ignorance as the foundation of purity and insists that + virtue seeks the companionship of the blind. + </p> + <p> + Art creates, combines, and reveals. It is the highest manifestation of + thought, of passion, of love, of intuition. It is the highest form of + expression, of history and prophecy. It allows us to look at an unmasked + soul, to fathom the abysses of passion, to understand the heights and + depths of love. + </p> + <p> + Compared with what is in the mind of man, the outward world almost ceases + to excite our wonder. The impression produced by mountains, seas, and + stars is not so great, so thrilling, as the music of Wagner. The + constellations themselves grow small when we read "Troilus and Cres-sida," + "Hamlet," or "Lear." What are seas and stars in the presence of a heroism + that holds pain and death as naught? What are seas and stars compared with + human hearts? What is the quarry compared with the statue? + </p> + <p> + Art civilizes because it enlightens, develops, strengthens, ennobles. It + deals with the beautiful, with the passionate, with the ideal. It is the + child of the heart. To be great, it must deal with the human. It must be + in accordance with the experience, with the hopes, with the fears, and + with the possibilities of man. No one cares to paint a palace, because + there is nothing in such a picture to touch the heart. It tells of + responsibility, of the prison, of the conventional. It suggests a load—it + tells of apprehension, of weariness and ennui. The picture of a cottage, + over which runs a vine, a little home thatched with content, with its + simple life, its natural sunshine and shadow, its trees bending with + fruit, its hollyhocks and pinks, its happy children, its hum of bees, is a + poem—a smile in the desert of this world. + </p> + <p> + The great lady, in velvet and jewels, makes but a poor picture. There is + not freedom enough in her life. She is constrained. She is too far away + from the simplicity of happiness. In her thought there is too much of the + mathematical. In all art you will find a touch of chaos, of liberty; and + there is in all artists a little of the vagabond—that is to say, + genius. + </p> + <p> + The nude in art has rendered holy the beauty of woman. Every Greek statue + pleads for mothers and sisters. From these marbles come strains of music. + They have filled the heart of man with tenderness and worship. They have + kindled reverence, admiration and love. The Venus de Milo, that even + mutilation cannot mar, tends only to the elevation of our race. It is a + miracle of majesty and beauty, the supreme idea of the supreme woman. It + is a melody in marble. All the lines meet in a kind of voluptuous and glad + content. The pose is rest itself. The eyes are filled with thoughts of + love. The breast seems dreaming of a child. + </p> + <p> + The prudent is not the poetic; it is the mathematical. Genius is the + spirit of abandon; it is joyous, irresponsible. It moves in the swell and + curve of billows; it is careless of conduct and consequence. For a moment, + the chain of cause and effect seems broken; the soul is free. It gives an + account not even to itself. Limitations are forgotten; nature seems + obedient to the will; the ideal alone exists; the universe is a symphony. + </p> + <p> + Every brain is a gallery of art, and every soul is, to a greater or less + degree, an artist. The pictures and statues that now enrich and adorn the + walls and niches of the world, as well as those that illuminate the pages + of its literature, were taken originally from the private galleries of the + brain. + </p> + <p> + The soul—that is to say the artist—compares the pictures in + its own brain with the pictures that have been taken from the galleries of + others and made visible. This soul, this artist, selects that which is + nearest perfection in each, takes such parts as it deems perfect, puts + them together, forms new pictures, new statues, and in this way creates + the ideal. + </p> + <p> + To express desires, longings, ecstasies, prophecies and passions in form + and color; to put love, hope, heroism and triumph in marble; to paint + dreams and memories with words; to portray the purity of dawn, the + intensity and glory of noon, the tenderness of twilight, the splendor and + mystery of night, with sounds; to give the invisible to sight and touch, + and to enrich the common things of earth with gems and jewels of the mind—this + is Art.—North American Review, March, 1888. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0009" id="link0009"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + THE DIVIDED HOUSEHOLD OF FAITH. + </h2> + <p> + "Let determined things to destiny hold unbewailed their way." THERE is a + continual effort in the mind of man to find the harmony that he knows must + exist between all known facts. It is hard for the scientist to implicitly + believe anything that he suspects to be inconsistent with a known fact. He + feels that every fact is a key to many mysteries—that every fact is + a detective, not only, but a perpetual witness. He knows that a fact has a + countless number of sides, and that all these sides will match all other + facts, and he also suspects that to understand one fact perfectly—like + the fact of the attraction of gravitation—would involve a knowledge + of the universe. + </p> + <p> + It requires not only candor, but courage, to accept a fact. When a new + fact is found it is generally denied, resisted, and calumniated by the + conservatives until denial becomes absurd, and then they accept it with + the statement that they always supposed it was true. + </p> + <p> + The old is the ignorant enemy of the new. The old has pedigree and + respectability; it is filled with the spirit of caste; it is associated + with great events, and with great names; it is intrenched; it has an + income—it represents property. Besides, it has parasites, and the + parasites always defend themselves. + </p> + <p> + Long ago frightened wretches who had by tyranny or piracy amassed great + fortunes, were induced in the moment of death to compromise with God and + to let their money fall from their stiffening hands into the greedy palms + of priests. In this way many theological seminaries were endowed, and in + this way prejudices, mistakes, absurdities, known as religious truths, + have been perpetuated. In this way the dead hypocrites have propagated and + supported their kind. + </p> + <p> + Most religions—no matter how honestly they originated—have + been established by brute force. Kings and nobles have used them as a + means to enslave, to degrade and rob. The priest, consciously and + unconsciously, has been the betrayer of his followers. + </p> + <p> + Near Chicago there is an ox that betrays his fellows. Cattle—twenty + or thirty at a time—are driven to the place of slaughter. This ox + leads the way—the others follow. When the place is reached, this + Bishop Dupanloup turns and goes back for other victims. + </p> + <p> + This is the worst side: There is a better. + </p> + <p> + Honest men, believing that they have found the whole truth—the real + and only faith—filled with enthusiasm, give all for the purpose of + propagating the "divine creed." They found colleges and universities, and + in perfect, pious, ignorant sincerity, provide that the creed, and nothing + but the creed, must be taught, and that if any professor teaches anything + contrary to that, he must be instantly dismissed—that is to say, the + children must be beaten with the bones of the dead. + </p> + <p> + These good religious souls erect guide-boards with a provision to the + effect that the guide-boards must remain, whether the roads are changed or + not, and with the further provision that the professors who keep and + repair the guide-boards must always insist that the roads have not been + changed. + </p> + <p> + There is still another side. + </p> + <p> + Professors do not wish to lose their salaries. They love their families + and have some regard for themselves. There is a compromise between their + bread and their brain. On pay-day they believe—at other times they + have their doubts. They settle with their own consciences by giving old + words new meanings. They take refuge in allegory, hide behind parables, + and barricade themselves with oriental imagery. They give to the most + frightful passages a spiritual meaning—and while they teach the old + creed to their followers, they speak a new philosophy to their equals. + </p> + <p> + There is still another side. + </p> + <p> + A vast number of clergymen and laymen are perfectly satisfied. They have + no doubts. They believe as their fathers and mothers did. The "scheme of + salvation" suits them because they are satisfied that they are embraced + within its terms. They give themselves no trouble. They believe because + they do not understand. They have no doubts because they do not think. + They regard doubt as a thorn in the pillow of orthodox slumber. Their + souls are asleep, and they hate only those who disturb their dreams. These + people keep their creeds for future use. They intend to have them ready at + the moment of dissolution. They sustain about the same relation to daily + life that the small-boats carried by steamers do to ordinary navigation—they + are for the moment of shipwreck. Creeds, like life-preservers, are to be + used in disaster. + </p> + <p> + We must also remember that everything in nature—bad as well as good—has + the instinct of self-preservation. All lies go armed, and all mistakes + carry concealed weapons. Driven to the last corner, even non-resistance + appeals to the dagger. + </p> + <p> + Vast interests—political, social, artistic, and individual—are + interwoven with all creeds. Thousands of millions of dollars have been + invested; many millions of people obtain their bread by the propagation + and support of certain religious doctrines, and many millions have been + educated for that purpose and for that alone. Nothing is more natural than + that they should defend themselves—that they should cling to a creed + that gives them roof and raiment. + </p> + <p> + Only a few years ago Christianity was a complete system. It included and + accounted for all phenomena; it was a philosophy satisfactory to the + ignorant world; it had an astronomy and geology of its own; it answered + all questions with the same readiness and the same inaccuracy; it had + within its sacred volumes the history of the past, and the prophecies of + all the future; it pretended to know all that was, is, or ever will be + necessary for the well-being of the human race, here and hereafter. + </p> + <p> + When a religion has been founded, the founder admitted the truth of + everything that was generally believed that did not interfere with his + system. Imposture always has a definite end in view, and for the sake of + the accomplishment of that end, it will admit the truth of anything and + everything that does not endanger its success. + </p> + <p> + The writers of all sacred books—the inspired prophets—had no + reason for disagreeing with the common people about the origin of things, + the creation of the world, the rising and setting of the sun, and the uses + of the stars, and consequently the sacred books of all ages have indorsed + the belief general at the time. You will find in our sacred books the + astronomy, the geology, the philosophy and the morality of the ancient + barbarians. The religionist takes these general ideas as his foundation, + and upon them builds the supernatural structure. For many centuries the + astronomy, geology, philosophy and morality of our Bible were accepted. + They were not questioned, for the reason that the world was too ignorant + to question. + </p> + <p> + A few centuries ago the art of printing was invented. A new world was + discovered. There was a complete revolution in commerce. The arts were + born again. The world was filled with adventure; millions became + self-reliant; old ideas were abandoned—old theories were put aside—and + suddenly, the old leaders of thought were found to be ignorant, shallow + and dishonest. The literature of the classic world was discovered and + translated into modern languages. The world was circumnavigated; + Copernicus discovered the true relation sustained by our earth to the + solar system, and about the beginning of the seventeenth century many + other wonderful discoveries were made. In 1609, a Hollander found that two + lenses placed in a certain relation to each other magnified objects seen + through them. This discovery was the foundation of astronomy. In a little + while it came to the knowledge of Galileo; the result was a telescope, + with which man has read the volume of the skies. + </p> + <p> + On the 8th day of May, 1618, Kepler discovered the greatest of his three + laws. These were the first great blows struck for the enfranchisement of + the human mind. A few began to suspect that the ancient Hebrews were not + astronomers. From that moment the church became the enemy of science. In + every possible way the inspired ignorance was defended—the lash, the + sword, the chain, the fagot and the dungeon were the arguments used by the + infuriated church. + </p> + <p> + To such an extent was the church prejudiced against the new philosophy, + against the new facts, that priests refused to look through the telescope + of Galileo. + </p> + <p> + At last it became evident to the intelligent world that the inspired + writings, literally translated, did not contain the truth—the Bible + was in danger of being driven from the heavens. + </p> + <p> + The church also had its geology. The time when the earth was created had + been definitely fixed and was certainly known. This fact had not only been + stated by inspired writers, but their statement had been indorsed by + priests, by bishops, cardinals, popes and ecumenical councils; that was + settled. + </p> + <p> + But a few men had learned the art of seeing. There were some eyes not + always closed in prayer. They looked at the things about them; they + observed channels that had been worn in solid rock by streams; they saw + the vast territories that had been deposited by rivers; their attention + was called to the slow inroads upon continents by seas—to the + deposits by volcanoes—to the sedimentary rocks—to the vast + reefs that had been built by the coral, and to the countless evidences of + age, of the lapse of time—and finally it was demonstrated that this + earth had been pursuing its course about the sun for millions and millions + of ages. + </p> + <p> + The church disputed every step, denied every fact, resorted to every + device that cunning could suggest or ingenuity execute, but the conflict + could not be maintained. The Bible, so far as geology was concerned, was + in danger of being driven from the earth. + </p> + <p> + Beaten in the open field, the church began to equivocate, to evade, and to + give new meanings to inspired words. Finally, falsehood having failed to + harmonize the guesses of barbarians with the discoveries of genius, the + leading churchmen suggested that the Bible was not written to teach + astronomy, was not written to teach geology, and that it was not a + scientific book, but that it was written in the language of the people, + and that as to unimportant things it contained the general beliefs of its + time. + </p> + <p> + The ground was then taken that, while it was not inspired in its science, + it was inspired in its morality, in its prophecy, in its account of the + miraculous, in the scheme of salvation, and in all that it had to say on + the subject of religion. + </p> + <p> + The moment it was suggested that the Bible was not inspired in everything + within its lids, the seeds of suspicion were sown. The priest became less + arrogant. The church was forced to explain. The pulpit had one language + for the faithful and another for the philosophical, i. e., it became + dishonest with both. + </p> + <p> + The next question that arose was as to the origin of man. + </p> + <p> + The Bible was being driven from the skies. The testimony of the stars was + against the sacred volume. The church had also been forced to admit that + the world was not created at the time mentioned in the Bible—so that + the very stones of the earth rose and united with the stars in giving + testimony against the sacred volume. + </p> + <p> + As to the creation of the world, the church resorted to the artifice of + saying that "days" in reality meant long periods of time; so that no + matter how old the earth was, the time could be spanned by six periods—in + other words, that the years could not be too numerous to be divided by + six. + </p> + <p> + But when it came to the creation of man, this evasion, or artifice, was + impossible. The Bible gives the date of the creation of man, because it + gives the age at which the first man died, and then it gives the + generations from Adam to the flood, and from the flood to the birth of + Christ, and in many instances the actual age of the principal ancestor is + given. So that, according to this account—according to the inspired + figures—man has existed upon the earth only about six thousand + years. There is no room left for any people beyond Adam. + </p> + <p> + If the Bible is true, certainly Adam was the first man; consequently, we + know, if the sacred volume be true, just how long man has lived and + labored and suffered on this earth. + </p> + <p> + The church cannot and dare not give up the account of the creation of Adam + from the dust of the earth, and of Eve from the rib of the man. The church + cannot give up the story of the Garden of Eden—the serpent—the + fall and the expulsion; these must be defended because they are vital. + Without these absurdities, the system known as Christianity cannot exist. + Without the fall, the atonement is a <i>non sequitur.</i> Facts bearing + upon these questions were discovered and discussed by the greatest and + most thoughtful of men. Lamarck, Humboldt, Haeckel, and above all, Darwin, + not only asserted, but demonstrated, that man is not a special creation. + If anything can be established by observation, by reason, then the fact + has been established that man is related to all life below him—that + he has been slowly produced through countless years—that the story + of Eden is a childish myth—that the fall of man is an infinite + absurdity. + </p> + <p> + If anything can be established by analogy and reason, man has existed upon + the earth for many millions of ages. We know now, if we know anything, + that people not only existed before Adam, but that they existed in a + highly civilized state; that thousands of years before the Garden of Eden + was planted men communicated to each other their ideas by language, and + that artists clothed the marble with thoughts and passions. + </p> + <p> + This is a demonstration that the origin of man given in the Old Testament + is untrue—that the account was written by the ignorance, the + prejudice and the egotism of the olden time. + </p> + <p> + So, if anything outside of the senses can be known, we do know that + civilization is a growth—that man did not commence a perfect being, + and then degenerate, but that from small beginnings he has slowly risen, + to the intellectual height he now occupies. + </p> + <p> + The church, however, has not been willing to accept these truths, because + they contradict the sacred word. Some of the most ingenious of the clergy + have been endeavoring for years to show that there is no conflict—that + the account in Genesis is in perfect harmony with the theories of Charles + Darwin, and these clergymen in some way manage to retain their creed and + to accept a philosophy that utterly destroys it. + </p> + <p> + But in a few years the Christian world will be forced to admit that the + Bible is not inspired in its astronomy, in its geology, or in its + anthropology—that is to say, that the inspired writers knew nothing + of the sciences, knew nothing of the origin of the earth, nothing of the + origin of man—in other words, nothing of any particular value to the + human race. + </p> + <p> + It is, however, still insisted that the Bible is inspired in its morality. + Let us examine this question. + </p> + <p> + We must admit, if we know anything, if we feel anything, if conscience is + more than a word, if there is such a thing as right and such a thing as + wrong beneath the dome of heaven—we must admit that slavery is + immoral. If we are honest, we must also admit that the Old Testament + upholds slavery. It will be cheerfully admitted that Jehovah was opposed + to the enslavement of one Hebrew by another. Christians may quote the + commandment "Thou shalt not steal" as being opposed to human slavery, but + after that commandment was given, Jehovah himself told his chosen people + that they might "buy their bondmen and bondwomen of the heathen round + about, and that they should be their bondmen and their bondwomen forever." + So all that Jehovah meant by the commandment "Thou shalt not steal" was + that one Hebrew should not steal from another Hebrew, but that all Hebrews + might steal from the people of any other race or creed. + </p> + <p> + It is perfectly apparent that the Ten Commandments were made only for the + Jews, not for the world, because the author of these commandments + commanded the people to whom they were given to violate them nearly all as + against the surrounding people. + </p> + <p> + A few years ago it did not occur to the Christian world that slavery was + wrong. It was upheld by the church. Ministers bought and sold the very + people for whom they declared that Christ had died. Clergymen of the + English church owned stock in slave-ships, and the man who denounced + slavery was regarded as the enemy of morality, and thereupon was duly + mobbed by the followers of Jesus Christ. Churches were built with the + results of labor stolen from colored Christians. Babes were sold from + mothers and a part of the money given to send missionaries from America to + heathen lands with the tidings of great joy. Now every intelligent man on + the earth, every decent man, holds in abhorrence the institution of human + slavery. + </p> + <p> + So with the institution of polygamy. If anything on the earth is immoral, + that is. If there is anything calculated to destroy home, to do away with + human love, to blot out the idea of family life, to cover the hearthstone + with serpents, it is the institution of polygamy. The Jehovah of the Old + Testament was a believer in that institution. + </p> + <p> + Can we now say that the Bible is inspired in its morality? Consider for a + moment the manner in which, under the direction of Jehovah, wars were + waged. Remember the atrocities that were committed. Think of a war where + everything was the food of the sword. Think for a moment of a deity + capable of committing the crimes that are described and gloated over in + the Old Testament. The civilized man has outgrown the sacred cruelties and + absurdities. + </p> + <p> + There is still another side to this question. + </p> + <p> + A few centuries ago nothing was more natural than the unnatural. Miracles + were as plentiful as actual events. In those blessed days, that which + actually occurred was not regarded of sufficient importance to be + recorded. A religion without miracles would have excited derision. A creed + that did not fill the horizon—that did not account for everything—that + could not answer every question, would have been regarded as worthless. + </p> + <p> + After the birth of Protestantism, it could not be admitted by the leaders + of the Reformation that the Catholic Church still had the power of working + miracles. If the Catholic Church was still in partnership with God, what + excuse could have been made for the Reformation? The Protestants took the + ground that the age of miracles had passed. This was to justify the new + faith. But Protestants could not say that miracles had never been + performed, because that would take the foundation not only from the + Catholics but from themselves; consequently they were compelled to admit + that miracles were performed in the apostolic days, but to insist that, in + their time, man must rely upon the facts in nature. Protestants were + compelled to carry on two kinds of war; they had to contend with those who + insisted that miracles had never been performed; and in that argument they + were forced to insist upon the necessity for miracles, on the probability + that they were performed, and upon the truthfulness of the apostles. A + moment afterward, they had to answer those who contended that miracles + were performed at that time; then they brought forward against the + Catholics the same arguments that their first opponents had brought + against them. + </p> + <p> + This has made every Protestant brain "a house divided against itself." + This planted in the Reformation the "irrepressible conflict." + </p> + <p> + But we have learned more and more about what we call Nature—about + what we call facts. Slowly it dawned upon the mind that force is + indestructible—that we cannot imagine force as existing apart from + matter—that we cannot even think of matter existing apart from force—that + we cannot by any possibility conceive of a cause without an effect, of an + effect without a cause, of an effect that is not also a cause. We find no + room between the links of cause and effect for a miracle. We now perceive + that a miracle must be outside of Nature—that it can have no father, + no mother—that is to say, that it is an impossibility. + </p> + <p> + The intellectual world has abandoned the miraculous. + </p> + <p> + Most ministers are now ashamed to defend a miracle. Some try to explain + miracles, and yet, if a miracle is explained, it ceases to exist. Few + congregations could keep from smiling were the minister to seriously + assert the truth of the Old Testament miracles. + </p> + <p> + Miracles must be given up. That field must be abandoned by the religious + world. The evidence accumulates every day, in every possible direction in + which the human mind can investigate, that the miraculous is simply the + impossible. + </p> + <p> + Confidence in the eternal constancy of Nature increases day by day. The + scientist has perfect confidence in the attraction of gravitation—in + chemical affinities—in the great fact of evolution, and feels + absolutely certain that the nature of things will remain forever the same. + </p> + <p> + We have at last ascertained that miracles can be perfectly understood; + that there is nothing mysterious about them; that they are simply + transparent falsehoods. + </p> + <p> + The real miracles are the facts in nature. No one can explain the + attraction of gravitation. No one knows why soil and rain and light become + the womb of life. No one knows why grass grows, why water runs, or why the + magnetic needle points to the north. The facts in nature are the eternal + and the only mysteries. There is nothing strange about the miracles of + superstition. They are nothing but the mistakes of ignorance and fear, or + falsehoods framed by those who wished to live on the labor of others. + </p> + <p> + In our time the champions of Christianity, for the most part, take the + exact ground occupied by the Deists. They dare not defend in the open + field the mistakes, the cruelties, the immoralities and the absurdities of + the Bible. They shun the Garden of Eden as though the serpent was still + there. They have nothing to say about the fall of man. They are silent as + to the laws upholding slavery and polygamy. They are ashamed to defend the + miraculous. They talk about these things to Sunday schools and to the + elderly members of their congregations; but when doing battle for the + faith, they misstate the position of their opponents and then insist that + there must be a God, and that the soul is immortal. + </p> + <p> + We may admit the existence of an infinite Being; we may admit the + immortality of the soul, and yet deny the inspiration of the Scriptures + and the divine origin of the Christian religion. These doctrines, or these + dogmas, have nothing in common. The pagan world believed in God and taught + the dogma of immortality. These ideas are far older than Christianity, and + they have been almost universal. + </p> + <p> + Christianity asserts more than this. It is based upon the inspiration of + the Bible, on the fall of man, on the atonement, on the dogma of the + Trinity, on the divinity of Jesus Christ, on his resurrection from the + dead, on his ascension into heaven. + </p> + <p> + Christianity teaches not simply the immortality of the soul—not + simply the immortality of joy—but it teaches the immortality of + pain, the eternity of sorrow. It insists that evil, that wickedness, that + immorality and that every form of vice are and must be perpetuated + forever. It believes in immortal convicts, in eternal imprisonment and in + a world of unending pain. It has a serpent for every breast and a curse + for nearly every soul. This doctrine is called the dearest hope of the + human heart, and he who attacks it is denounced as the most infamous of + men. + </p> + <p> + Let us see what the church, within a few years, has been compelled + substantially to abandon,—that is to say, what it is now almost + ashamed to defend. + </p> + <p> + First, the astronomy of the sacred Scriptures; second, the geology; third, + the account given of the origin of man; fourth, the doctrine of original + sin, the fall of the human race; fifth, the mathematical contradiction + known as the Trinity; sixth, the atonement—because it was only on + the ground that man is accountable for the sin of another, that he could + be justified by reason of the righteousness of another; seventh, that the + miraculous is either the misunderstood or the impossible; eighth, that the + Bible is not inspired in its morality, for the reason that slavery is not + moral, that polygamy is not good, that wars of extermination are not + merciful, and that nothing can be more immoral than to punish the innocent + on account of the sins of the guilty; and ninth, the divinity of Christ. + </p> + <p> + All this must be given up by the really intelligent, by those not afraid + to think, by those who have the courage of their convictions and the + candor to express their thoughts. What then is left? + </p> + <p> + Let me tell you. Everything in the Bible that is true, is left; it still + remains and is still of value. It cannot be said too often that the truth + needs no inspiration; neither can it be said too often that inspiration + cannot help falsehood. Every good and noble sentiment uttered in the Bible + is still good and noble. Every fact remains. All that is good in the + Sermon on the Mount is retained. The Lord's Prayer is not affected. The + grandeur of self-denial, the nobility of forgiveness, and the ineffable + splendor of mercy are with us still. And besides, there remains the great + hope for all the human race. + </p> + <p> + What is lost? All the mistakes, all the falsehoods, all the absurdities, + all the cruelties and all the curses contained in the Scriptures. We have + almost lost the "hope" of eternal pain—the "consolation" of + perdition; and in time we shall lose the frightful shadow that has fallen + upon so many hearts, that has darkened so many lives. + </p> + <p> + The great trouble for many years has been, and still is, that the clergy + are not quite candid. They are disposed to defend the old creed. They have + been educated in the universities of the Sacred Mistake—universities + that Bruno would call "the widows of true learning." They have been taught + to measure with a false standard; they have weighed with inaccurate + scales. In youth, they became convinced of the truth of the creed. This + was impressed upon them by the solemnity of professors who spoke in tones + of awe. The enthusiasm of life's morning was misdirected. They went out + into the world knowing nothing of value. They preached a creed outgrown. + Having been for so many years entirely certain of their position, they met + doubt with a spirit of irritation—afterward with hatred. They are + hardly courageous enough to admit that they are wrong. + </p> + <p> + Once the pulpit was the leader—it spoke with authority. By its side + was the sword of the state, with the hilt toward its hand. Now it is + apologized for—it carries a weight. It is now like a living man to + whom has been chained a corpse. It cannot defend the old, and it has not + accepted the new. In some strange way it imagines that morality cannot + live except in partnership with the sanctified follies and falsehoods of + the past. + </p> + <p> + The old creeds cannot be defended by argument. They are not within the + circumference of reason—they are not embraced in any of the facts + within the experience of man. All the subterfuges have been exposed; all + the excuses have been shown to be shallow, and at last the church must + meet, and fairly meet, the objections of our time. + </p> + <p> + Solemnity is no longer an argument. Falsehood is no longer sacred. People + are not willing to admit that mistakes are divine. Truth is more important + than belief—far better than creeds, vastly more useful than + superstitions. The church must accept the truths of the present, must + admit the demonstrations of science, or take its place in the mental + museums with the fossils and monstrosities of the past. + </p> + <p> + The time for personalities has passed; these questions cannot be + determined by ascertaining the character of the disputants; epithets are + no longer regarded as arguments; the curse of the church produces + laughter; theological slander is no longer a weapon; argument must be + answered with argument, and the church must appeal to reason, and by that + standard it must stand or fall. The theories and discoveries of Darwin + cannot be answered by the resolutions of synods, or by quotations from the + Old Testament. + </p> + <p> + The world has advanced. The Bible has remained the same. We must go back + to the book—it cannot come to us—or we must leave it forever. + In order to remain orthodox we must forget the discoveries, the + inventions, the intellectual efforts of many centuries; we must go back + until our knowledge—or rather our ignorance—will harmonize + with the barbaric creeds. + </p> + <p> + It is not pretended that all the creeds have not been naturally produced. + It is admitted that under the same circumstances the same religions would + again ensnare the human race. It is also admitted that under the same + circumstances the same efforts would be made by the great and intellectual + of every age to break the chains of superstition. + </p> + <p> + There is no necessity of attacking people—we should combat error. We + should hate hypocrisy, but not the hypocrite—larceny, but not the + thief—superstition, but not its victim. We should do all within our + power to inform, to educate, and to benefit our fellow-men. + </p> + <p> + There is no elevating power in hatred. There is no reformation in + punishment. The soul grows greater and grander in the air of kindness, in + the sunlight of intelligence. + </p> + <p> + We must rely upon the evidence of our senses, upon the conclusions of our + reason. + </p> + <p> + For many centuries the church has insisted that man is totally depraved, + that he is naturally wicked, that all of his natural desires are contrary + to the will of God. Only a few years ago it was solemnly asserted that our + senses were originally honest, true and faithful, but having been + debauched by original sin, were now cheats and liars; that they constantly + deceived and misled the soul; that they were traps and snares; that no man + could be safe who relied upon his senses, or upon his reason;—he + must simply rely upon faith; in other words, that the only way for man to + really see was to put out his eyes. + </p> + <p> + There has been a rapid improvement in the intellectual world. The + improvement has been slow in the realm of religion, for the reason that + religion was hedged about, defended and barricaded by fear, by prejudice + and by law. It was considered sacred. It was illegal to call its truth in + question. Whoever disputed the priest became a criminal; whoever demanded + a reason, or an explanation, became a blasphemer, a scoffer, a moral + leper. + </p> + <p> + The church defended its mistakes by every means within its power. + </p> + <p> + But in spite of all this there has been advancement, and there are enough + of the orthodox clergy left to make it possible for us to measure the + distance that has been traveled by sensible people. + </p> + <p> + The world is beginning to see that a minister should be a teacher, and + that "he should not endeavor to inculcate a particular system of dogmas, + but to prepare his hearers for exercising their own judgments." + </p> + <p> + As a last resource, the orthodox tell the thoughtful that they are not + "spiritual"—that they are "of the earth, earthy"—that they + cannot perceive that which is spiritual. They insist that "God is a + spirit, and must be worshiped in spirit." + </p> + <p> + But let me ask, What is it to be spiritual? In order to be really + spiritual, must a man sacrifice this world for the sake of another? Were + the selfish hermits, who deserted their wives and children for the + miserable purpose of saving their own little souls, spiritual? Were those + who put their fellow-men in dungeons, or burned them at the state* on + account of a difference of opinion, all spiritual people? Did John Calvin + give evidence of his spirituality by burning Servetus? Were they spiritual + people who invented and used instruments of torture—who denied the + liberty of thought and expression—who waged wars for the propagation + of the faith? Were they spiritual people who insisted that Infinite Love + could punish his poor, ignorant children forever? Is it necessary to + believe in eternal torment to understand the meaning of the word + spiritual? Is it necessary to hate those who disagree with you, and to + calumniate those whose argument you cannot answer, in order to be + spiritual? Must you hold a demonstrated fact in contempt; must you deny or + avoid what you know to be true, in order to substantiate the fact that you + are spiritual? + </p> + <p> + What is it to be spiritual? Is the man spiritual who searches for the + truth—who lives in accordance with his highest ideal—who loves + his wife and children—who discharges his obligations—who makes + a happy fireside for the ones he loves—who succors the oppressed—who + gives his honest opinions—who is guided by principle—who is + merciful and just? + </p> + <p> + Is the man spiritual who loves the beautiful—who is thrilled by + music, and touched to tears in the presence of the sublime, the heroic and + the self-denying? Is the man spiritual who endeavors by thought and deed + to ennoble the human race? + </p> + <p> + The defenders of the orthodox faith, by this time, should know that the + foundations are insecure. + </p> + <p> + They should have the courage to defend, or the candor to abandon. If the + Bible is an inspired book, it ought to be true. Its defenders must admit + that Jehovah knew the facts not only about the earth, but about the stars, + and that the Creator of the universe knew all about geology and astronomy + even four thousand years ago. + </p> + <p> + The champions of Christianity must show that the Bible tells the truth + about the creation of man, the Garden of Eden, the temptation, the fall + and the flood. They must take the ground that the sacred book is + historically correct; that the events related really happened; that the + miracles were actually performed; that the laws promulgated from Sinai + were and are wise and just, and that nothing is upheld, commanded, + indorsed, or in any way approved or sustained that is not absolutely + right. In other words, if they insist that a being of infinite goodness + and intelligence is the author of the Bible, they must be ready to show + that it is absolutely perfect. They must defend its astronomy, geology, + history, miracle and morality. + </p> + <p> + If the Bible is true, man is a special creation, and if man is a special + creation, millions of facts must have conspired, millions of ages ago, to + deceive the scientific world of to-day. + </p> + <p> + If the Bible is true, slavery is right, and the world should go back to + the barbarism of the lash and chain. If the Bible' is true, polygamy is + the highest form of virtue. If the Bible is true, nature has a master, and + the miraculous is independent of and superior to cause and effect. If the + Bible is true, most of the children of men are destined to suffer eternal + pain. If the Bible is true, the science known as astronomy is a collection + of mistakes—the telescope is a false witness, and light is a + luminous liar. If the Bible is true, the science known as geology is false + and every fossil is a petrified perjurer. + </p> + <p> + The defenders of orthodox creeds should have the courage to candidly + answer at least two questions: First, Is the Bible inspired? Second, Is + the Bible true? And when they answer these questions, they should remember + that if the Bible is true, it needs no inspiration, and that if not true, + inspiration can do it no good.—North American Review, August, 1888. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0010" id="link0010"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + WHY AM I AN AGNOSTIC? + </h2> + <h3> + I. + </h3> + <p> + "With thoughts beyond the reaches of our souls." + </p> + <p> + THE same rules or laws of probability must govern in religious questions + as in others. There is no subject—and can be none—concerning + which any human being is under any obligation to believe without evidence. + Neither is there any intelligent being who can, by any possibility, be + flattered by the exercise of ignorant credulity. The man who, without + prejudice, reads and understands the Old and New Testaments will cease to + be an orthodox Christian. The intelligent man who investigates the + religion of any country without fear and without prejudice will not and + cannot be a believer. + </p> + <p> + Most people, after arriving at the conclusion that Jehovah is not God, + that the Bible is not an inspired book, and that the Christian religion, + like other religions, is the creation of man, usually say: "There must be + a Supreme Being, but Jehovah is not his name, and the Bible is not his + word. There must be somewhere an over-ruling Providence or Power." + </p> + <p> + This position is just as untenable as the other. He who cannot harmonize + the cruelties of the Bible with the goodness of Jehovah, cannot harmonize + the cruelties of Nature with the goodness and wisdom of a supposed Deity. + He will find it impossible to account for pestilence and famine, for + earthquake and storm, for slavery, for the triumph of the strong over the + weak, for the countless victories of injustice. He will find it impossible + to account for martyrs—for the burning of the good, the noble, the + loving, by the ignorant, the malicious, and the infamous. + </p> + <p> + How can the Deist satisfactorily account for the sufferings of women and + children? In what way will he justify religious persecution—the + flame and sword of religious hatred? Why did his God sit idly on his + throne and allow his enemies to wet their swords in the blood of his + friends? Why did he not answer the prayers of the imprisoned, of the + helpless? And when he heard the lash upon the naked back of the slave, why + did he not also hear the prayer of the slave? And when children were sold + from the breasts of mothers, why was he deaf to the mother's cry? + </p> + <p> + It seems to me that the man who knows the limitations of the mind, who + gives the proper value to human testimony, is necessarily an Agnostic. He + gives up the hope of ascertaining first or final causes, of comprehending + the supernatural, or of conceiving of an infinite personality. From out + the words Creator, Preserver, and Providence, all meaning falls. + </p> + <p> + The mind of man pursues the path of least resistance, and the conclusions + arrived at by the individual depend upon the nature and structure of his + mind, on his experience, on hereditary drifts and tendencies, and on the + countless things that constitute the difference in minds. One man, finding + himself in the midst of mysterious phenomena, comes to the conclusion that + all is the result of design; that back of all things is an infinite + personality—that is to say, an infinite man; and he accounts for all + that is by simply saying that the universe was created and set in motion + by this infinite personality, and that it is miraculously and + supernaturally governed and preserved. This man sees with perfect + clearness that matter could not create itself, and therefore he imagines a + creator of matter. He is perfectly satisfied that there is design in the + world, and that consequently there must have been a designer. It does not + occur to him that it is necessary to account for the existence of an + infinite personality. He is perfectly certain that there can be no design + without a designer, and he is equally certain that there can be a designer + who was not designed. The absurdity becomes so great that it takes the + place of a demonstration. He takes it for granted that matter was created + and that its creator was not. He assumes that a creator existed from + eternity, without cause, and created what is called matter out of nothing; + or, whereas there was nothing, this creator made the something that we + call substance. + </p> + <p> + Is it possible for the human mind to conceive of an infinite personality? + Can it imagine a beginningless being, infinitely powerful and intelligent? + If such a being existed, then there must have been an eternity during + which nothing did exist except this being; because, if the Universe was + created, there must have been a time when it was not, and back of that + there must have been an eternity during which nothing but an infinite + personality existed. Is it possible to imagine an infinite intelligence + dwelling for an eternity in infinite nothing? How could such a being be + intelligent? What was there to be intelligent about? There was but one + thing to know, namely, that there was nothing except this being. How could + such a being be powerful? There was nothing to exercise force upon. There + was nothing in the universe to suggest an idea. Relations could not exist—except + the relation between infinite intelligence and infinite nothing. + </p> + <p> + The next great difficulty is the act of creation. My mind is so that I + cannot conceive of something being created out of nothing. Neither can I + conceive of anything being created without a cause. Let me go one step + further. It is just as difficult to imagine something being created with, + as without, a cause. To postulate a cause does not in the least lessen the + difficulty. In spite of all, this lever remains without a fulcrum. + </p> + <p> + We cannot conceive of the destruction of substance. The stone can be + crushed to powder, and the powder can be ground to such a fineness that + the atoms can only be distinguished by the most powerful microscope, and + we can then imagine these atoms being divided and subdivided again and + again and again; but it is impossible for us to conceive of the + annihilation of the least possible imaginable fragment of the least atom + of which we can think. Consequently the mind can imagine neither creation + nor destruction. From this point it is very easy to reach the + generalization that the indestructible could not have been created. + </p> + <p> + These questions, however, will be answered by each individual according to + the structure of his mind, according to his experience, according to his + habits of thought, and according to his intelligence or his ignorance, his + prejudice or his genius. + </p> + <p> + Probably a very large majority of mankind believe in the existence of + supernatural beings, and a majority of what are known as the civilized + nations, in an infinite personality. In the realm of thought majorities do + not determine. Each brain is a kingdom, each mind is a sovereign. + </p> + <p> + The universality of a belief does not even tend to prove its truth. A + large majority of mankind have believed in what is known as God, and an + equally large majority have as implicitly believed in what is known as the + Devil. These beings have been inferred from phenomena. They were produced + for the most part by ignorance, by fear, and by selfishness. Man in all + ages has endeavored to account for the mysteries of life and death, of + substance, of force, for the ebb and flow of things, for earth and star. + The savage, dwelling in his cave, subsisting on roots and reptiles, or on + beasts that could be slain with club and stone, surrounded by countless + objects of terror, standing by rivers, so far as he knew, without source + or end, by seas with but one shore, the prey of beasts mightier than + himself, of diseases strange and fierce, trembling at the voice of + thunder, blinded by the lightning, feeling the earth shake beneath him, + seeing the sky lurid with the volcano's glare,—fell prostrate and + begged for the protection of the Unknown. + </p> + <p> + In the long night of savagery, in the midst of pestilence and famine, + through the long and dreary winters, crouched in dens of darkness, the + seeds of superstition were sown in the brain of man. The savage believed, + and thoroughly believed, that everything happened in reference to him; + that he by his actions could excite the anger, or by his worship placate + the wrath, of the Unseen. He resorted to flattery and prayer. To the best + of his ability he put in stone, or rudely carved in wood, his idea of this + god. For this idol he built a hut, a hovel, and at last a cathedral. + Before these images he bowed, and at these shrines, whereon he lavished + his wealth, he sought protection for himself and for the ones he loved. + The few took advantage of the ignorant many. They pretended to have + received messages from the Unknown. They stood between the helpless + multitude and the gods. They were the carriers of flags of truce. At the + court of heaven they presented the cause of man, and upon the labor of the + deceived they lived. + </p> + <p> + The Christian of to-day wonders at the savage who bowed before his idol; + and yet it must be confessed that the god of stone answered prayer and + protected his worshipers precisely as the Christian's God answers prayer + and protects his worshipers to-day. + </p> + <p> + My mind is so that it is forced to the conclusion that substance is + eternal; that the universe was without beginning and will be without end; + that it is the one eternal existence; that relations are transient and + evanescent; that organisms are produced and vanish; that forms change,—but + that the substance of things is from eternity to eternity. It may be that + planets are born and die, that constellations will fade from the infinite + spaces, that countless suns will be quenched,—but the substance will + remain. + </p> + <p> + The questions of origin and destiny seem to be beyond the powers of the + human mind. + </p> + <p> + Heredity is on the side of superstition. All our ignorance pleads for the + old. In most men there is a feeling that their ancestors were exceedingly + good and brave and wise, and that in all things pertaining to religion + their conclusions should be followed. They believe that their fathers and + mothers were of the best, and that that which satisfied them should + satisfy their children. With a feeling of reverence they say that the + religion of their mother is good enough and pure enough and reasonable + enough for them. In this way the love of parents and the reverence for + ancestors have unconsciously bribed the reason and put out, or rendered + exceedingly dim, the eyes of the mind. + </p> + <p> + There is a kind of longing in the heart of the old to live and die where + their parents lived and died—a tendency to go back to the homes of + their youth. Around the old oak of manhood grow and cling these vines. Yet + it will hardly do to say that the religion of my mother is good enough for + me, any more than to say the geology or the astronomy or the philosophy of + my mother is good enough for me. Every human being is entitled to the best + he can obtain; and if there has been the slightest improvement on the + religion of the mother, the son is entitled to that improvement, and he + should not deprive himself of that advantage by the mistaken idea that he + owes it to his mother to perpetuate, in a reverential way, her ignorant + mistakes. + </p> + <p> + If we are to follow the religion of our fathers and mothers, our fathers + and mothers should have followed the religion of theirs. Had this been + done, there could have been no improvement in the world of thought. The + first religion would have been the last, and the child would have died as + ignorant as the mother. Progress would have been impossible, and on the + graves of ancestors would have been sacrificed the intelligence of + mankind. + </p> + <p> + We know, too, that there has been the religion of the tribe, of the + community, and of the nation, and that there has been a feeling that it + was the duty of every member of the tribe or community, and of every + citizen of the nation, to insist upon it that the religion of that tribe, + of that community, of that nation, was better than that of any other. We + know that all the prejudices against other religions, and all the egotism + of nation and tribe, were in favor of the local superstition. Each citizen + was patriotic enough to denounce the religions of other nations and to + stand firmly by his own. And there is this peculiarity about man: he can + see the absurdities of other religions while blinded to those of his own. + The Christian can see clearly enough that Mohammed was an impostor. He is + sure of it, because the people of Mecca who were acquainted with him + declared that he was no prophet; and this declaration is received by + Christians as a demonstration that Mohammed was not inspired. Yet these + same Christians admit that the people of Jerusalem who were acquainted + with Christ rejected him; and this rejection they take as proof positive + that Christ was the Son of God. + </p> + <p> + The average man adopts the religion of his country, or, rather, the + religion of his country adopts him. He is dominated by the egotism of + race, the arrogance of nation, and the prejudice called patriotism. He + does not reason—he feels. He does not investigate—he believes. + To him the religions of other nations are absurd and infamous, and their + gods monsters of ignorance and cruelty. In every country this average man + is taught, first, that there is a supreme being; second, that he has made + known his will; third, that he will reward the true believer; fourth, that + he will punish the unbeliever, the scoffer, and the blasphemer; fifth, + that certain ceremonies are pleasing to this god; sixth, that he has + established a church; and seventh, that priests are his representatives on + earth. And the average man has no difficulty in determining that the God + of his nation is the true God; that the will of this true God is contained + in the sacred scriptures of his nation; that he is one of the true + believers, and that the people of other nations—that is, believing + other religions—are scoffers; that the only true church is the one + to which he belongs; and that the priests of his country are the only ones + who have had or ever will have the slightest influence with this true God. + All these absurdities to the average man seem self-evident propositions; + and so he holds all other creeds in scorn, and congratulates himself that + he is a favorite of the one true God. + </p> + <p> + If the average Christian had been born in Turkey, he would have been a + Mohammedan; and if the average Mohammedan had been born in New England and + educated at Andover, he would have regarded the damnation of the heathen + as the "tidings of great joy." + </p> + <p> + Nations have eccentricities, peculiarities, and hallucinations, and these + find expression in their laws, customs, ceremonies, morals, and religions. + And these are in great part determined by soil, climate, and the countless + circumstances that mould and dominate the lives and habits of insects, + individuals, and nations. The average man believes implicitly in the + religion of his country, because he knows nothing of any other and has no + desire to know. It fits him because he has been deformed to fit it, and he + regards this fact of fit as an evidence of its inspired truth. + </p> + <p> + Has a man the right to examine, to investigate, the religion of his own + country—the religion of his father and mother? Christians admit that + the citizens of all countries not Christian have not only this right, but + that it is their solemn duty. Thousands of missionaries are sent to + heathen countries to persuade the believers in other religions not only to + examine their superstitions, but to renounce them, and to adopt those of + the missionaries. It is the duty of a heathen to disregard the religion of + his country and to hold in contempt the creed of his father and of his + mother. If the citizens of heathen nations have the right to examine the + foundations of their religion, it would seem that the citizens of + Christian nations have the same right. Christians, however, go further + than this; they say to the heathen: You must examine your religion, and + not only so, but you must reject it; and, unless you do reject it, and, in + addition to such rejection, adopt ours, you will be eternally damned. Then + these same Christians say to the inhabitants of a Christian country: You + must not examine; you must not investigate; but whether you examine or + not, you must believe, or you will be eternally damned. + </p> + <p> + If there be one true religion, how is it possible to ascertain which of + all the religions the true one is? There is but one way. We must + impartially examine the claims of all. The right to examine involves the + necessity to accept or reject. Understand me, not the right to accept or + reject, but the necessity. From this conclusion there is no possible + escape. If, then, we have the right to examine, we have the right to tell + the conclusion reached. Christians have examined other religions somewhat, + and they have expressed their opinion with the utmost freedom—that + is to say, they have denounced them all as false and fraudulent; have + called their gods idols and myths, and their priests impostors. + </p> + <p> + The Christian does not deem it worth while to read the Koran. Probably not + one Christian in a thousand ever saw a copy of that book. And yet all + Christians are perfectly satisfied that the Koran is the work of an + impostor, No Presbyterian thinks it is worth his while to examine the + religious systems of India; he knows that the Brahmins are mistaken, and + that all their miracles are falsehoods. No Methodist cares to read the + life of Buddha, and no Baptist will waste his time studying the ethics of + Confucius. Christians of every sort and kind take it for granted that + there is only one true religion, and that all except Christianity are + absolutely without foundation. The Christian world believes that all the + prayers of India are unanswered; that all the sacrifices upon the + countless altars of Egypt, of Greece, and of Rome were without effect. + They believe that all these mighty nations worshiped their gods in vain; + that their priests were deceivers or deceived; that their ceremonies were + wicked or meaningless; that their temples were built by ignorance and + fraud, and that no God heard their songs of praise, their cries of + despair, their words of thankfulness; that on account of their religion no + pestilence was stayed; that the earthquake and volcano, the flood and + storm went on their ways of death—while the real God looked on and + laughed at their calamities and mocked at their fears. + </p> + <p> + We find now that the prosperity of nations has depended, not upon their + religion, not upon the goodness or providence of some god, but on soil and + climate and commerce, upon the ingenuity, industry, and courage of the + people, upon the development of the mind, on the spread of education, on + the liberty of thought and action; and that in this mighty panorama of + national life, reason has built and superstition has destroyed. + </p> + <p> + Being satisfied that all believe precisely as they must, and that + religions have been naturally produced, I have neither praise nor blame + for any man. Good men have had bad creeds, and bad men have had good ones. + Some of the noblest of the human race have fought and died for the wrong. + The brain of man has been the trysting-place of contradictions. + </p> + <p> + Passion often masters reason, and "the state of man, like to a little + kingdom, suffers then the nature of an insurrection." + </p> + <p> + In the discussion of theological or religious questions, we have almost + passed the personal phase, and we are now weighing arguments instead of + exchanging epithets and curses. They who really seek for truth must be the + best of friends. Each knows that his desire can never take the place of + fact, and that, next to finding truth, the greatest honor must be won in + honest search. + </p> + <p> + We see that many ships are driven in many ways by the same wind. So men, + reading the same book, write many creeds and lay out many roads to heaven. + To the best of my ability, I have examined the religions of many countries + and the creeds of many sects. They are much alike, and the testimony by + which they are substantiated is of such a character that to those who + believe is promised an eternal reward. In all the sacred books there are + some truths, some rays of light, some words of love and hope. The face of + savagery is sometimes softened by a smile—the human triumphs, and + the heart breaks into song. But in these books are also found the words of + fear and hate, and from their pages crawl serpents that coil and hiss in + all the paths of men. + </p> + <p> + For my part, I prefer the books that inspiration has not claimed. Such is + the nature of my brain that Shakespeare gives me greater joy than all the + prophets of the ancient world. There are thoughts that satisfy the hunger + of the mind. I am convinced that Humboldt knew more of geology than the + author of Genesis; that Darwin was a greater naturalist than he who told + the story of the flood; that Laplace was better acquainted with the habits + of the sun and moon than Joshua could have been, and that Haeckel, Huxley, + and Tyndall know more about the earth and stars, about the history of man, + the philosophy of life—more that is of use, ten thousand times—than + all the writers of the sacred books. + </p> + <p> + I believe in the religion of reason—the gospel of this world; in the + development of the mind, in the accumulation of intellectual wealth, to + the end that man may free himself from superstitious fear, to the end that + he may take advantage of the forces of nature to feed and clothe the + world. + </p> + <p> + Let us be honest with ourselves. In the presence of countless mysteries; + standing beneath the boundless heaven sown thick with constellations; + knowing that each grain of sand, each leaf, each blade of grass, asks of + every mind the answer-less question; knowing that the simplest thing + defies solution; feeling that we deal with the superficial and the + relative, and that we are forever eluded by the real, the absolute,—let + us admit the limitations of our minds, and let us have the courage and the + candor to say: We do not know. + </p> + <p> + North American Review, December, 1889. + </p> + <p> + II. + </p> + <p> + THE Christian religion rests on miracles. There are no miracles in the + realm of science. The real philosopher does not seek to excite wonder, but + to make that plain which was wonderful. He does not endeavor to astonish, + but to enlighten. He is perfectly confident that there are no miracles in + nature. He knows that the mathematical expression of the same relations, + contents, areas, numbers and proportions must forever remain the same. He + knows that there are no miracles in chemistry; that the attractions and + repulsions, the loves and hatreds, of atoms are constant. Under like + conditions, he is certain that like will always happen; that the product + ever has been and forever will be the same; that the atoms or particles + unite in definite, unvarying proportions,—so many of one kind mix, + mingle, and harmonize with just so many of another, and the surplus will + be forever cast out. There are no exceptions. Substances are always true + to their natures. They have no caprices, no prejudices, that can vary or + control their action. They are "the same yesterday, to-day, and forever." + </p> + <p> + In this fixedness, this constancy, this eternal integrity, the intelligent + man has absolute confidence. It is useless to tell him that there was a + time when fire would not consume the combustible, when water would not + flow in obedience to the attraction of gravitation, or that there ever was + a fragment of a moment during which substance had no weight. + </p> + <p> + Credulity should be the servant of intelligence. The ignorant have not + credulity enough to believe the actual, because the actual appears to be + contrary to the evidence of their senses. To them it is plain that the sun + rises and sets, and they have not credulity enough to believe in the + rotary motion of the earth—that is to say, they have not + intelligence enough to comprehend the absurdities involved in their + belief, and the perfect harmony between the rotation of the earth and all + known facts. They trust their eyes, not their reason. Ignorance has always + been and always will be at the mercy of appearance. Credulity, as a rule, + believes everything except the truth. The semi-civilized believe in + astrology, but who could convince them of the vastness of astronomical + spaces, the speed of light, or the magnitude and number of suns and + constellations? If Hermann, the magician, and Humboldt, the philosopher, + could have appeared before savages, which would have been regarded as a + god? + </p> + <p> + When men knew nothing of mechanics, nothing of the correlation of force, + and of its indestructibility, they were believers in perpetual motion. So + when chemistry was a kind of sleight-of-hand, or necromancy, something + accomplished by the aid of the supernatural, people talked about the + transmutation of metals, the universal solvent, and the philosopher's + stone. Perpetual motion would be a mechanical miracle; and the + transmutation of metals would be a miracle in chemistry; and if we could + make the result of multiplying two by two five, that would be a miracle in + mathematics. No one expects to find a circle the diameter of which is just + one fourth of the circumference. If one could find such a circle, then + there would be a miracle in geometry. + </p> + <p> + In other words, there are no miracles in any science. The moment we + understand a question or subject, the miraculous necessarily disappears. + If anything actually happens in the chemical world, it will, under like + conditions, happen again. + </p> + <p> + No one need take an account of this result from the mouths of others: all + can try the experiment for themselves. There is no caprice, and no + accident. + </p> + <p> + It is admitted, at least by the Protestant world, that the age of miracles + has passed away, and, consequently, miracles cannot at present be + established by miracles; they must be substantiated by the testimony of + witnesses who are said by certain writers—or, rather, by uncertain + writers—to have lived several centuries ago; and this testimony is + given to us, not by the witnesses themselves, not by persons who say that + they talked with those witnesses, but by unknown persons who did not give + the sources of their information. + </p> + <p> + The question is: Can miracles be established except by miracles? We know + that the writers may have been mistaken. It is possible that they may have + manufactured these accounts themselves. The witnesses may have told what + they knew to be untrue, or they may have been honestly deceived, or the + stories may have been true as at first told. Imagination may have added + greatly to them, so that after several centuries of accretion a very + simple truth was changed to a miracle. + </p> + <p> + We must admit that all probabilities must be against miracles, for the + reason that that which is probable cannot by any possibility be a miracle. + Neither the probable nor the possible, so far as man is concerned, can be + miraculous. The probability therefore says that the writers and witnesses + were either mistaken or dishonest. + </p> + <p> + We must admit that we have never seen a miracle ourselves, and we must + admit that, according to our experience, there are no miracles. If we have + mingled with the world, we are compelled to say that we have known a vast + number of persons—including ourselves—to be mistaken, and many + others who have failed to tell the exact truth. The probabilities are on + the side of our experience, and, consequently, against the miraculous; and + it is a necessity that the free mind moves along the path of least + resistance. + </p> + <p> + The effect of testimony depends on the intelligence and honesty of the + witness and the intelligence of him who weighs. A man living in a + community where the supernatural is expected, where the miraculous is + supposed to be of almost daily occurrence, will, as a rule, believe that + all wonderful things are the result of supernatural agencies. He will + expect providential interference, and, as a consequence, his mind will + pursue the path of least resistance, and will account for all phenomena by + what to him is the easiest method. Such people, with the best intentions, + honestly bear false witness. They have been imposed upon by appearances, + and are victims of delusion and illusion. + </p> + <p> + In an age when reading and writing were substantially unknown, and when + history itself was but the vaguest hearsay handed down from dotage to + infancy, nothing was rescued from oblivion except the wonderful, the + miraculous. The more marvelous the story, the greater the interest + excited. Narrators and hearers were alike ignorant and alike honest. At + that time nothing was known, nothing suspected, of the orderly course of + nature—of the unbroken and unbreakable chain of causes and effects. + The world was governed by caprice. Everything was at the mercy of a being, + or beings, who were themselves controlled by the same passions that + dominated man. Fragments of facts were taken for the whole, and the + deductions drawn were honest and monstrous. + </p> + <p> + It is probably certain that all of the religions of the world have been + believed, and that all the miracles have found credence in countless + brains; otherwise they could not have been perpetuated. They were not all + born of cunning. Those who told were as honest as those who heard. This + being so, nothing has been too absurd for human credence. + </p> + <p> + All religions, so far as I know, claim to have been miraculously founded, + miraculously preserved, and miraculously propagated. The priests of all + claimed to have messages from God, and claimed to have a certain + authority, and the miraculous has always been appealed to for the purpose + of substantiating the message and the authority. + </p> + <p> + If men believe in the supernatural, they will account for all phenomena by + an appeal to supernatural means or power. We know that formerly everything + was accounted for in this way except some few simple things with which man + thought he was perfectly acquainted. After a time men found that under + like conditions like would happen, and as to those things the supposition + of supernatural interference was abandoned; but that interference was + still active as to all the unknown world. In other words, as the circle of + man's knowledge grew, supernatural interference withdrew and was active + only just beyond the horizon of the known. + </p> + <p> + Now, there are some believers in universal special providence—that + is, men who believe in perpetual interference by a supernatural power, + this interference being for the purpose of punishing or rewarding, of + destroying or preserving, individuals and nations. + </p> + <p> + Others have abandoned the idea of providence in ordinary matters, but + still believe that God interferes on great occasions and at critical + moments, especially in the affairs of nations, and that his presence is + manifest in great disasters. This is the compromise position. These people + believe that an infinite being made the universe and impressed upon it + what they are pleased to call "laws," and then left it to run in + accordance with those laws and forces; that as a rule it works well, and + that the divine maker interferes only in cases of accident, or at moments + when the machine fails to accomplish the original design. + </p> + <p> + There are others who take the ground that all is natural; that there never + has been, never will be, never can be any interference from without, for + the reason that nature embraces all, and that there can be no without or + beyond. + </p> + <p> + The first class are Theists pure and simple; the second are Theists as to + the unknown, Naturalists as to the known; and the third are Naturalists + without a touch or taint of superstition. + </p> + <p> + What can the evidence of the first class be worth? This question is + answered by reading the history of those nations that believed thoroughly + and implicitly in the supernatural. There is no conceivable absurdity that + was not established by their testimony. Every law or every fact in nature + was violated. Children were bom without parents; men lived for thousands + of years; others subsisted without food, without sleep; thousands and + thousands were possessed with evil spirits controlled by ghosts and + ghouls; thousands confessed themselves guilty of impossible offences, and + in courts, with the most solemn forms, impossibilities were substantiated + by the oaths, affirmations, and confessions of men, women, and children. + </p> + <p> + These delusions were not confined to ascetics and peasants, but they took + possession of nobles and kings; of people who were at that time called + intelligent; of the then educated. No one denied these wonders, for the + reason that denial was a crime punishable generally with death. Societies, + nations, became insane—victims of ignorance, of dreams, and, above + all, of fears. Under these conditions human testimony is not and cannot be + of the slightest value. We now know that nearly all of the history of the + world is false, and we know this because we have arrived at that phase or + point of intellectual development where and when we know that effects must + have causes, that everything is naturally produced, and that, + consequently, no nation could ever have been great, powerful, and rich + unless it had the soil, the people, the intelligence, and the commerce. + Weighed in these scales, nearly all histories are found to be fictions. + </p> + <p> + The same is true of religions. Every intelligent American is satisfied + that the religions of India, of Egypt, of Greece and Rome, of the Aztecs, + were and are false, and that all the miracles on which they rest are + mistakes. Our religion alone is excepted. Every intelligent Hindoo + discards all religions and all miracles except his own. The question is: + When will people see the defects in their own theology as clearly as they + perceive the same defects in every other? + </p> + <p> + All the so-called false religions were substantiated by miracles, by signs + and wonders, by prophets and martyrs, precisely as our own. Our witnesses + are no better than theirs, and our success is no greater. If their + miracles were false, ours cannot be true. Nature was the same in India and + in Palestine. + </p> + <p> + One of the corner-stones of Christianity is the miracle of inspiration, + and this same miracle lies at the foundation of all religions. How can the + fact of inspiration be established? How could even the inspired man know + that he was inspired? If he was influenced to write, and did write, and + did express thoughts and facts that to him were absolutely new, on + subjects about which he had previously known nothing, how could he know + that he had been influenced by an infinite being? And if he could know, + how could he convince others? + </p> + <p> + What is meant by inspiration? Did the one inspired set down only the + thoughts of a supernatural being? Was he simply an instrument, or did his + personality color the message received and given? Did he mix his ignorance + with the divine information, his prejudices and hatreds with the love and + justice of the Deity? If God told him not to eat the flesh of any beast + that dieth of itself, did the same infinite being also tell him to sell + this meat to the stranger within his gates? + </p> + <p> + A man says that he is inspired—that God appeared to him in a dream, + and told him certain things. Now, the things said to have been + communicated may have been good and wise; but will the fact that the + communication is good or wise establish the inspiration? If, on the other + hand, the communication is absurd or wicked, will that conclusively show + that the man was not inspired? Must we judge from the communication? In + other words, is our reason to be the final standard? + </p> + <p> + How could the inspired man know that the communication was received from + God? If God in reality should appear to a human being, how could this + human being know who had appeared? By what standard would he judge? Upon + this question man has no experience; he is not familiar enough with the + supernatural to know gods even if they exist. Although thousands have + pretended to receive messages, there has been no message in which there + was, or is, anything above the invention of man. There are just as + wonderful things in the uninspired as in the inspired books, and the + prophecies of the heathen have been fulfilled equally with those of the + Judean prophets. If, then, even the inspired man cannot certainly know + that he is inspired, how is it possible for him to demonstrate his + inspiration to others? The last solution of this question is that + inspiration is a miracle about which only the inspired can have the least + knowledge, or the least evidence, and this knowledge and this evidence not + of a character to absolutely convince even the inspired. + </p> + <p> + There is certainly nothing in the Old or the New Testament that could not + have been written by uninspired human beings. To me there is nothing of + any particular value in the Pentateuch. I do not know of a solitary + scientific truth contained in the five books commonly attributed to Moses. + There is not, as far as I know, a line in the book of Genesis calculated + to make a human being better. The laws contained in Exodus, Leviticus, + Numbers, and Deuteronomy are for the most part puerile and cruel. Surely + there is nothing in any of these books that could not have been produced + by uninspired men. Certainly there is nothing calculated to excite + intellectual admiration in the book of Judges or in the wars of Joshua; + and the same may be said of Samuel, Chronicles, and Kings. The history is + extremely childish, full of repetitions of useless details, without the + slightest philosophy, without a generalization bom of a wide survey. + Nothing is known of other nations; nothing imparted of the slightest + value; nothing about education, discovery, or invention. And these idle + and stupid annals are interspersed with myth and miracle, with flattery + for kings who supported priests, and with curses and denunciations for + those who would not hearken to the voice of the prophets. If all the + historic books of the Bible were blotted from the memory of mankind, + nothing of value would be lost. + </p> + <p> + Is it possible that the writer or writers of First and Second Kings were + inspired, and that Gibbon wrote "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" + without supernatural assistance? Is it possible that the author of Judges + was simply the instrument of an infinite God, while John W. Draper wrote + "The Intellectual Development of Europe" without one ray of light from the + other world? Can we believe that the author of Genesis had to be inspired, + while Darwin experimented, ascertained, and reached conclusions for + himself. + </p> + <p> + Ought not the work of a God to be vastly superior to that of a man? And if + the writers of the Bible were in reality inspired, ought not that book to + be the greatest of books? For instance, if it were contended that certain + statues had been chiselled by inspired men, such statues should be + superior to any that uninspired man has made. As long as it is admitted + that the Venus de Milo is the work of man, no one will believe in inspired + sculptors—at least until a superior statue has been found. So in the + world of painting. We admit that Corot was uninspired. Nobody claims that + Angelo had supernatural assistance. Now, if some one should claim that a + certain painter was simply the instrumentality of God, certainly the + pictures produced by that painter should be superior to all others. + </p> + <p> + I do not see how it is possible for an intelligent human being to conclude + that the Song of Solomon is the work of God, and that the tragedy of Lear + was the work of an uninspired man. We are all liable to be mistaken, but + the Iliad seems to me a greater work than the Book of Esther, and I prefer + it to the writings of Haggai and Hosea. �?schylus is superior to + Jeremiah, and Shakespeare rises immeasurably above all the sacred books of + the world. + </p> + <p> + It does not seem possible that any human being ever tried to establish a + truth—anything that really happened—by what is called a + miracle. It is easy to understand how that which was common became + wonderful by accretion,—by things added, and by things forgotten,—and + it is easy to conceive how that which was wonderful became by accretion + what was called supernatural. But it does not seem possible that any + intelligent, honest man ever endeavored to prove anything by a miracle. + </p> + <p> + As a matter of fact, miracles could only satisfy people who demanded no + evidence; else how could they have believed the miracle? It also appears + to be certain that, even if miracles had been performed, it would be + impossible to establish that fact by human testimony. In other words, + miracles can only be established by miracles, and in no event could + miracles be evidence except to those who were actually present; and in + order for miracles to be of any value, they would have to be perpetual. It + must also be remembered that a miracle actually performed could by no + possibility shed any light on any moral truth, or add to any human + obligation. + </p> + <p> + If any man has, ever been inspired, this is a secret miracle, known to no + person, and suspected only by the man claiming to be inspired. It would + not be in the power of the inspired to give satisfactory evidence of that + fact to anybody else. + </p> + <p> + The testimony of man is insufficient to establish the supernatural. + Neither the evidence of one man nor of twelve can stand when contradicted + by the experience of the intelligent world. If a book sought to be proved + by miracles is true, then it makes no difference whether it was inspired + or not; and if it is not true, inspiration cannot add to its value. + </p> + <p> + The truth is that the church has always—unconsciously, perhaps—offered + rewards for falsehood. It was founded upon the supernatural, the + miraculous, and it welcomed all statements calculated to support the + foundation. It rewarded the traveller who found evidences of the + miraculous, who had seen the pillar of salt into which the wife of Lot had + been changed, and the tracks of Pharaoh's chariots on the sands of the Red + Sea. It heaped honors on the historian who filled his pages with the + absurd and impossible. It had geologists and astronomers of its own who + constructed the earth and the constellations in accordance with the Bible. + With sword and flame it destroyed the brave and thoughtful men who told + the truth. It was the enemy of investigation and of reason. Faith and + fiction were in partnership. + </p> + <p> + To-day the intelligence of the world denies the miraculous. Ignorance is + the soil of the supernatural. The foundation of Christianity has crumbled, + has disappeared, and the entire fabric must fall. The natural is true. The + miraculous is false. + </p> + <p> + North American Review, March, 1890. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0011" id="link0011"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + HUXLEY AND AGNOSTICISM. + </h2> + <p> + PROFESSOR HUXLEY AND AGNOSTICISM. + </p> + <p> + IN the February number of the Nineteenth Century, 1889, is an article by + Professor Huxley, entitled "Agnosticism." It seems that a church congress + was held at Manchester in October, 1888, and that the Principal of King's + College brought the topic of Agnosticism before the assembly and made the + following statement: + </p> + <p> + "But if this be so, for a man to urge as an escape from this article of + belief that he has no means of a scientific knowledge of an unseen world, + or of the future, is irrelevant. His difference from Christians lies, not + in the fact that he has no knowledge of these things, but that he does not + believe the authority on which they are stated. He may prefer to call + himself an Agnostic, but his real name is an older one—he is an + infidel; that is to say, an unbeliever. The word infidel, perhaps, carries + an unpleasant significance. Perhaps it is right that it should. It is, and + it ought to be, an unpleasant thing for a man to have to say plainly that + he does not believe in Jesus Christ." + </p> + <p> + Let us examine this statement, putting it in language that is easily + understood; and for that purpose we will divide it into several + paragraphs. + </p> + <p> + First.—"For a man to urge that he has no means of a scientific + knowledge of the unseen world, or of the future, is irrelevant." + </p> + <p> + Is there any other knowledge than a scientific knowledge? Are there + several kinds of knowing? Is there such a thing as scientific ignorance? + If a man says, "I know nothing of the unseen world because I have no + knowledge upon that subject," is the fact that he has no knowledge + absolutely irrelevant? Will the Principal of King's College say that + having no knowledge is the reason he knows? When asked to give your + opinion upon any subject, can it be said that your ignorance of that + subject is irrelevant? If this be true, then your knowledge of the subject + is also irrelevant? + </p> + <p> + Is it possible to put in ordinary English a more perfect absurdity? How + can a man obtain any knowledge of the unseen world? He certainly cannot + obtain it through the medium of the senses. It is not a world that he can + visit. He cannot stand upon its shores, nor can he view them from the + ocean of imagination. The Principal of King's College, however, insists + that these impossibilities are irrelevant. + </p> + <p> + No person has come back from the unseen world. No authentic message has + been delivered. Through all the centuries, not one whisper has broken the + silence that lies beyond the grave. Countless millions have sought for + some evidence, have listened in vain for some word. + </p> + <p> + It is most cheerfully admitted that all this does not prove the + non-existence of another world—all this does not demonstrate that + death ends all. But it is the justification of the Agnostic, who candidly + says, "I do not know." + </p> + <p> + Second.—The Principal of King's College states that the difference + between an Agnostic and a Christian "lies, not in the fact that he has no + knowledge of these things, but that he does not believe the authority on + which they are stated." + </p> + <p> + Is this a difference in knowledge, or a difference in belief—that is + to say, a difference in credulity? + </p> + <p> + The Christian believes the Mosaic account. He reverently hears and admits + the truth of all that he finds within the Scriptures. Is this knowledge? + How is it possible to know whether the reputed authors of the books of the + Old Testament were the real ones? The witnesses are dead. The lips that + could testify are dust. Between these shores roll the waves of many + centuries. Who knows whether such a man as Moses existed or not? Who knows + the author of Kings and Chronicles? By what testimony can we substantiate + the authenticity of the prophets, or of the prophecies, or of the + fulfillments? Is there any difference between the knowledge of the + Christian and of the Agnostic? Does the Principal of King's College know + any more as to the truth of the Old Testament than the man who modestly + calls for evidence? Has not a mistake been made? Is not the difference one + of belief instead of knowledge? And is not this difference founded on the + difference in credulity? Would not an infinitely wise and good being—where + belief is a condition to salvation—supply the evidence? Certainly + the Creator of man—if such exist—knows the exact nature of the + human mind—knows the evidence necessary to convince; and, + consequently, such a being would act in accordance with such conditions. + </p> + <p> + There is a relation between evidence and belief. The mind is so + constituted that certain things, being in accordance with its nature, are + regarded as reasonable, as probable. + </p> + <p> + There is also this fact that must not be overlooked: that is, that just in + the proportion that the brain is developed it requires more evidence, and + becomes less and less credulous. Ignorance and credulity go hand in hand. + Intelligence understands something of the law of average, has an idea of + probability. It is not swayed by prejudice, neither is it driven to + extremes by suspicion. It takes into consideration personal motives. It + examines the character of the witnesses, makes allowance for the ignorance + of the time,—for enthusiasm, for fear,—and comes to its + conclusion without fear and without passion. + </p> + <p> + What knowledge has the Christian of another world? The senses of the + Christian are the same as those of the Agnostic. + </p> + <p> + He hears, sees, and feels substantially the same. His vision is limited. + He sees no other shore and hears nothing from another world. + </p> + <p> + Knowledge is something that can be imparted. It has a foundation in fact. + It comes within the domain of the senses. It can be told, described, + analyzed, and, in addition to all this, it can be classified. Whenever a + fact becomes the property of one mind, it can become the property of the + intellectual world. There are words in which the knowledge can be + conveyed. + </p> + <p> + The Christian is not a supernatural person, filled with supernatural + truths. He is a natural person, and all that he knows of value can be + naturally imparted. It is within his power to give all that he has to the + Agnostic. + </p> + <p> + The Principal of King's College is mistaken when he says that the + difference between the Agnostic and the Christian does not lie in the fact + that the Agnostic has no knowledge, "but that he does not believe the + authority on which these things are stated." + </p> + <p> + The real difference is this: the Christian says that he has knowledge; the + Agnostic admits that he has none; and yet the Christian accuses the + Agnostic of arrogance, and asks him how he has the impudence to admit the + limitations of his mind. To the Agnostic every fact is a torch, and by + this light, and this light only, he walks. + </p> + <p> + It is also true that the Agnostic does not believe the authority relied on + by the Christian. What is the authority of the Christian? Thousands of + years ago it is supposed that certain men, or, rather, uncertain men, + wrote certain things. It is alleged by the Christian that these men were + divinely inspired, and that the words of these men are to be taken as + absolutely true, no matter whether or not they are verified by modern + discovery and demonstration. + </p> + <p> + How can we know that any human being was divinely inspired? There has been + no personal revelation to us to the effect that certain people were + inspired—it is only claimed that the revelation was to them. For + this we have only their word, and about that there is this difficulty: we + know nothing of them, and, consequently, cannot, if we desire, rely upon + their character for truth. This evidence is not simply hearsay—it is + far weaker than that. We have only been told that they said these things; + we do not know whether the persons claiming to be inspired wrote these + things or not; neither are we certain that such persons ever existed. We + know now that the greatest men with whom we are acquainted are often + mistaken about the simplest matters. We also know that men saying + something like the same things, in other countries and in ancient days, + must have been impostors. The Christian has no confidence in the words of + Mohammed; the Mohammedan cares nothing about the declarations of Buddha; + and the Agnostic gives to the words of the Christian the value only of the + truth that is in them. He knows that these sayings get neither truth nor + worth from the person who uttered them. He knows that the sayings + themselves get their entire value from the truth they express. So that the + real difference between the Christian and the Agnostic does not lie in + their knowledge,—for neither of them has any knowledge on this + subject,—but the difference does lie in credulity, and in nothing + else. The Agnostic does not rely on the authority of Moses and the + prophets. He finds that they were mistaken in most matters capable of + demonstration. He finds that their mistakes multiply in the proportion + that human knowledge increases. He is satisfied that the religion of the + ancient Jews is, in most things, as ignorant and cruel as other religions + of the ancient world. He concludes that the efforts, in all ages, to + answer the questions of origin and destiny, and to account for the + phenomena of life, have all been substantial failures. + </p> + <p> + In the presence of demonstration there is no opportunity for the exercise + of faith. Truth does not appeal to credulity—it appeals to evidence, + to established facts, to the constitution of the mind. It endeavors to + harmonize the new fact with all that we know, and to bring it within the + circumference of human experience. + </p> + <p> + The church has never cultivated investigation. It has never said: Let him + who has a mind to think, think; but its cry from the first until now has + been: Let him who has ears to hear, hear. + </p> + <p> + The pulpit does not appeal to the reason of the pew; it speaks by + authority and it commands the pew to believe, and it not only commands, + but it threatens. + </p> + <p> + The Agnostic knows that the testimony of man is not sufficient to + establish what is known as the miraculous. We would not believe to-day the + testimony of millions to the effect that the dead had been raised. The + church itself would be the first to attack such testimony. If we cannot + believe those whom we know, why should we believe witnesses who have been + dead thousands of years, and about whom we know nothing? + </p> + <p> + Third.—The Principal of King's College, growing somewhat severe, + declares that "he may prefer to call himself an Agnostic, but his real + name is an older one—he is an infidel; that is to say, an + unbeliever." + </p> + <p> + This is spoken in a kind of holy scorn. According to this gentleman, an + unbeliever is, to a certain extent, a disreputable person. + </p> + <p> + In this sense, what is an unbeliever? He is one whose mind is so + constituted that what the Christian calls evidence is not satisfactory to + him. Is a person accountable for the constitution of his mind, for the + formation of his brain? Is any human being responsible for the weight that + evidence has upon him? Can he believe without evidence? Is the weight of + evidence a question of choice? Is there such a thing as honestly weighing + testimony? Is the result of such weighing necessary? Does it involve moral + responsibility? If the Mosaic account does not convince a man that it is + true, is he a wretch because he is candid enough to tell the truth? Can he + preserve his manhood only by making a false statement? + </p> + <p> + The Mohammedan would call the Principal of King's College an unbeliever,—so + would the tribes of Central Africa,—and he would return the + compliment, and all would be equally justified. Has the Principal of + King's College any knowledge that he keeps from the rest of the world? Has + he the confidence of the Infinite? Is there anything praiseworthy in + believing where the evidence is sufficient, or is one to be praised for + believing only where the evidence is insufficient? Is a man to be blamed + for not agreeing with his fellow-citizen? Were the unbelievers in the + pagan world better or worse than their neighbors? It is probably true that + some of the greatest Greeks believed in the gods of that nation, and it is + equally true that some of the greatest denied their existence. If + credulity is a virtue now, it must have been in the days of Athens. If to + believe without evidence entities one to eternal reward in this century, + certainly the same must have been true in the days of the Pharaohs. + </p> + <p> + An infidel is one who does not believe in the prevailing religion. We now + admit that the infidels of Greece and Rome were right. The gods that they + refused to believe in are dead. Their thrones are empty, and long ago the + sceptres dropped from their nerveless hands. To-day the world honors the + men who denied and derided these gods. + </p> + <p> + Fourth.—The Principal of King's College ventures to suggest that + "the word infidel, perhaps, carries an unpleasant significance; perhaps it + is right that it should." + </p> + <p> + A few years ago the word infidel did carry "an unpleasant significance." A + few years ago its significance was so unpleasant that the man to whom the + word was applied found himself in prison or at the stake. In particularly + kind communities he was put in the stocks, pelted with offal, derided by + hypocrites, scorned by ignorance, jeered by cowardice, and all the priests + passed by on the other side. + </p> + <p> + There was a time when Episcopalians were regarded as infidels; when a true + Catholic looked upon a follower of Henry VIII. as an infidel, as an + unbeliever; when a true Catholic held in detestation the man who preferred + a murderer and adulterer—a man who swapped religions for the sake of + exchanging wives—to the Pope, the head of the universal church. + </p> + <p> + It is easy enough to conceive of an honest man denying the claims of a + church based on the caprice of an English king. The word infidel "carries + an unpleasant significance" only where the Christians are exceedingly + ignorant, intolerant, bigoted, cruel, and unmannerly. + </p> + <p> + The real gentleman gives to others the rights that he claims for himself. + The civilized man rises far above the bigotry of one who has been "born + again." Good breeding is far gentler than "universal love." + </p> + <p> + It is natural for the church to hate an unbeliever—natural for the + pulpit to despise one who refuses to subscribe, who refuses to give. It is + a question of revenue instead of religion. The Episcopal Church has the + instinct of self-preservation. It uses its power, its influence, to compel + contribution. It forgives the giver. + </p> + <p> + Fifth.—The Principal of King's College insists that "it is, and it + ought to be, an unpleasant thing for a man to have to say plainly that he + does not believe in Jesus Christ." + </p> + <p> + Should it be an unpleasant thing for a man to say plainly what he + believes? Can this be unpleasant except in an uncivilized community—a + community in which an uncivilized church has authority? + </p> + <p> + Why should not a man be as free to say that he does not believe as to say + that he does believe? Perhaps the real question is whether all men have an + equal right to express their opinions. Is it the duty of the minority to + keep silent? Are majorities always right? If the minority had never + spoken, what to-day would have been the condition of this world? Are the + majority the pioneers of progress, or does the pioneer, as a rule, walk + alone? Is it his duty to close his lips? Must the inventor allow his + inventions to die in the brain? Must the discoverer of new truths make of + his mind a tomb? Is man under any obligation to his fellows? Was the + Episcopal religion always in the majority? Was it at any time in the + history of the world an unpleasant thing to be called a Protestant? Did + the word Protestant "carry an unpleasant significance"? Was it "perhaps + right that it should"? Was Luther a misfortune to the human race? + </p> + <p> + If a community is thoroughly civilized, why should it be an unpleasant + thing for a man to express his belief in respectful language? If the + argument is against him, it might be unpleasant; but why should simple + numbers be the foundation of unpleasantness? If the majority have the + facts,—if they have the argument,—why should they fear the + mistakes of the minority? Does any theologian hate the man he can answer? + </p> + <p> + It is claimed by the Episcopal Church that Christ was in fact God; and it + is further claimed that the New Testament is an inspired account of what + that being and his disciples did and said. Is there any obligation resting + on any human being to believe this account? Is it within the power of man + to determine the influence that testimony shall have upon his mind? + </p> + <p> + If one denies the existence of devils, does he, for that reason, cease to + believe in Jesus Christ? Is it not possible to imagine that a great and + tender soul living in Palestine nearly twenty centuries ago was + misunderstood? Is it not within the realm of the possible that his words + have been inaccurately reported? Is it not within the range of the + probable that legend and rumor and ignorance and zeal have deformed his + life and belittled his character? + </p> + <p> + If the man Christ lived and taught and suffered, if he was, in reality, + great and noble, who is his friend—the one who attributes to him + feats of jugglery, or he who maintains that these stories were invented by + zealous ignorance and believed by enthusiastic credulity? + </p> + <p> + If he claimed to have wrought miracles, he must have been either dishonest + or insane; consequently, he who denies miracles does what little he can to + rescue the reputation of a great and splendid man. + </p> + <p> + The Agnostic accepts the good he did, the truth he said, and rejects only + that which, according to his judgment, is inconsistent with truth and + goodness. + </p> + <p> + The Principal of King's College evidently believes in the necessity of + belief. He puts conviction or creed or credulity in place of character. + According to his idea, it is impossible to win the approbation of God by + intelligent investigation and by the expression of honest conclusions. He + imagines that the Infinite is delighted with credulity, with belief + without evidence, faith without question. + </p> + <p> + Man has but little reason, at best; but this little should be used. No + matter how small the taper is, how feeble the ray of light it casts, it is + better than darkness, and no man should be rewarded for extinguishing the + light he has. + </p> + <p> + We know now, if we know anything, that man in this, the nineteenth + century, is better capable of judging as to the happening of any event, + than he ever was before. We know that the standard is higher to-day—we + know that the intellectual light is greater—we know that the human + mind is better equipped to deal with all questions of human interest, than + at any other time within the known history of the human race. + </p> + <p> + It will not do to say that "our Lord and his apostles must at least be + regarded as honest men." Let this be admitted, and what does it prove? + Honesty is not enough. Intelligence and honesty must go hand in hand. We + may admit now that "our Lord and his apostles" were perfectly honest men; + yet it does not follow that we have a truthful account of what they said + and of what they did. It is not pretended that "our Lord" wrote anything, + and it is not known that one of the apostles ever wrote a word. + Consequently, the most that we can say is that somebody has written + something about "our Lord and his apostles." Whether that somebody knew or + did not know is unknown to us. As to whether what is written is true or + false, we must judge by that which is written. + </p> + <p> + First of all, is it probable? is it within the experience of mankind? We + should judge of the gospels as we judge of other histories, of other + biographies. We know that many biographies written by perfectly honest men + are not correct. We know, if we know anything, that honest men can be + mistaken, and it is not necessary to believe everything that a man writes + because we believe he was honest. Dishonest men may write the truth. + </p> + <p> + At last the standard or criterion is for each man to judge according to + what he believes to be human experience. We are satisfied that nothing + more wonderful has happened than is now happening. We believe that the + present is as wonderful as the past, and just as miraculous as the future. + If we are to believe in the truth of the Old Testament, the word evidence + loses its meaning; there ceases to be any standard of probability, and the + mind simply accepts or denies without reason. + </p> + <p> + We are told that certain miracles were performed for the purpose of + attesting the mission and character of Christ. How can these miracles be + verified? The miracles of the Middle Ages rest upon substantially the same + evidence. The same may be said of the wonders of all countries and of all + ages. How is it a virtue to deny the miracles of Mohammed and to believe + those attributed to Christ? + </p> + <p> + You may say of St. Augustine that what he said was true or false. We know + that much of it was false; and yet we are not justified in saying that he + was dishonest. Thousands of errors have been propagated by honest men. As + a rule, mistakes get their wings from honest people. The testimony of a + witness to the happening of the impossible gets no weight from the honesty + of the witness. The fact that falsehoods are in the New Testament does not + tend to prove that the writers were knowingly untruthful. No man can be + honest enough to substantiate, to the satisfaction of reasonable men, the + happening of a miracle. + </p> + <p> + For this reason it makes not the slightest difference whether the writers + of the New Testament were honest or not. Their character is not involved. + Whenever a man rises above his contemporaries, whenever he excites the + wonder of his fellows, his biographers always endeavor to bridge over the + chasm between the people and this man, and for that purpose attribute to + him the qualities which in the eyes of the multitude are desirable. + </p> + <p> + Miracles are demanded by savages, and, consequently, the savage biographer + attributes miracles to his hero. What would we think now of a man who, in + writing the life of Charles Darwin, should attribute to him supernatural + powers? What would we say of an admirer of Humboldt who should claim that + the great German could cast out devils? We would feel that Darwin and + Humboldt had been belittled; that the biographies were written for + children and by men who had not outgrown the nursery. + </p> + <p> + If the reputation of "our Lord" is to be preserved—if he is to stand + with the great and splendid of the earth—if he is to continue a + constellation in the intellectual heavens, all claim to the miraculous, to + the supernatural, must be abandoned. + </p> + <p> + No one can overestimate the evils that have been endured by the human race + by reason of a departure from the standard of the natural. The world has + been governed by jugglery, by sleight-of-hand. Miracles, wonders, tricks, + have been regarded as of far greater importance than the steady, the + sublime and unbroken march of cause and effect. The improbable has been + established by the impossible. Falsehood has furnished the foundation for + faith. + </p> + <p> + Is the human body at present the residence of evil spirits, or have these + imps of darkness perished from the world? Where are they? If the New + Testament establishes anything, it is the existence of innumerable devils, + and that these satanic beings absolutely took possession of the human + mind. Is this true? Can anything be more absurd? Does any intellectual man + who has examined the question believe that depraved demons live in the + bodies of men? Do they occupy space? Do they live upon some kind of food? + Of what shape are they? Could they be classified by a naturalist? Do they + run or float or fly? If to deny the existence of these supposed beings is + to be an infidel, how can the word infidel "carry an unpleasant + significance"? + </p> + <p> + Of course it is the business of the principals of most colleges, as well + as of bishops, cardinals, popes, priests, and clergymen to insist upon the + existence of evil spirits. All these gentlemen are employeed to counteract + the influence of these supposed demons. Why should they take the bread out + of their own mouths? Is it to be expected that they will unfrock + themselves? + </p> + <p> + The church, like any other corporation, has the instinct of + self-preservation. It will defend itself; it will fight as long as it has + the power to change a hand into a fist. + </p> + <p> + The Agnostic takes the ground that human experience is the basis of + morality. Consequently, it is of no importance who wrote the gospels, or + who vouched or vouches for the genuineness of the miracles. In his scheme + of life these things are utterly unimportant. He is satisfied that "the + miraculous" is the impossible. He knows that the witnesses were wholly + incapable of examining the questions involved, that credulity had + possession of their minds, that "the miraculous" was expected, that it was + their daily food. + </p> + <p> + All this is very clearly and delightfully stated by Professor Huxley, and + it hardly seems possible that any intelligent man can read what he says + without feeling that the foundation of all superstition has been weakened. + The article is as remarkable for its candor as for its clearness. Nothing + is avoided—everything is met. No excuses are given.. He has left all + apologies for the other side. When you have finished what Professor Huxley + has written, you feel that your mind has been in actual contact with the + mind of another, that nothing has been concealed; and not only so, but you + feel that this mind is not only willing, but anxious, to know the actual + truth. + </p> + <p> + To me, the highest uses of philosophy are, first, to free the mind of + fear, and, second, to avert all the evil that can be averted, through + intelligence—that is to say, through a knowledge of the conditions + of well-being. + </p> + <p> + We are satisfied that the absolute is beyond our vision, beneath our + touch, above our reach. We are now convinced that we can deal only with + phenomena, with relations, with appearances, with things that impress the + senses, that can be reached by reason, by the exercise of our faculties. + We are satisfied that the reasonable road is "the straight road," the only + "sacred way." + </p> + <p> + Of course there is faith in the world—faith in this world—and + always will be, unless superstition succeeds in every land. But the faith + of the wise man is based upon facts. His faith is a reasonable conclusion + drawn from the known. He has faith in the progress of the race, in the + triumph of intelligence, in the coming sovereignty of science. He has + faith in the development of the brain, in the gradual enlightenment of the + mind. And so he works for the accomplishment of great ends, having faith + in the final victory of the race. + </p> + <p> + He has honesty enough to say that he does not know. He perceives and + admits that the mind has limitations. He doubts the so-called wisdom of + the past. He looks for evidence, and he endeavors to keep his mind free + from prejudice. He believes in the manly virtues, in the judicial spirit, + and in his obligation to tell his honest thoughts. + </p> + <p> + It is useless to talk about a destruction of consolations. That which is + suspected to be untrue loses its power to console. A man should be brave + enough to bear the truth. + </p> + <p> + Professor Huxley has stated with great clearness the attitude of the + Agnostic. It seems that he is somewhat severe on the Positive Philosophy, + While it is hard to see the propriety of worshiping Humanity as a being, + it is easy to understand the splendid dream of August Comte. Is the human + race worthy to be worshiped by itself—that is to say, should the + individual worship himself? Certainly the religion of humanity is better + than the religion of the inhuman. The Positive Philosophy is better far + than Catholicism. It does not fill the heavens with monsters, nor the + future with pain. + </p> + <p> + It may be said that Luther and Comte endeavored to reform the Catholic + Church. Both were mistaken, because the only reformation of which that + church is capable is destruction. It is a mass of superstition. + </p> + <p> + The mission of Positivism is, in the language of its founder, "to + generalize science and to systematize sociality." It seems to me that + Comte stated with great force and with absolute truth the three phases of + intellectual evolution or progress. + </p> + <p> + First.—"In the supernatural phase the mind seeks causes—aspires + to know the essence of things, and the How and Why of their operation. In + this phase, all facts are regarded as the productions of supernatural + agents, and unusual phenomena are interpreted as the signs of the pleasure + or displeasure of some god." + </p> + <p> + Here at this point is the orthodox world of to-day. The church still + imagines that phenomena should be interpreted as the signs of the pleasure + or displeasure of God. Nearly every history is deformed with this childish + and barbaric view. + </p> + <p> + Second.—The next phase or modification, according to Comte, is the + metaphysical. "The supernatural agents are dispensed with, and in their + places we find abstract forces or entities supposed to inhere in + substances and capable of engendering phenomena." + </p> + <p> + In this phase people talk about laws and principles as though laws and + principles were forces capable of producing phenomena. + </p> + <p> + Third.—"The last stage is the Positive. The mind, convinced of the + futility of all enquiry into causes and essences, restricts itself to the + observation and classification of phenomena, and to the discovery of the + invariable relations of succession and similitude—in a word, to the + discovery of the relations of phenomena." + </p> + <p> + Why is not the Positive stage the point reached by the Agnostic? He has + ceased to inquire into the origin of things. He has perceived the + limitations of the mind. He is thoroughly convinced of the uselessness and + futility and absurdity of theological methods, and restricts himself to + the examination of phenomena, to their relations, to their effects, and + endeavors to find in the complexity of things the true conditions of human + happiness. + </p> + <p> + Although I am not a believer in the philosophy of Auguste Comte, I cannot + shut my eyes to the value of his thought; neither is it possible for me + not to applaud his candor, his intelligence, and the courage it required + even to attempt to lay the foundation of the Positive Philosophy. + </p> + <p> + Professor Huxley and Frederic Harrison are splendid soldiers in the army + of Progress. They have attacked with signal success the sacred and solemn + stupidities of superstition. Both have appealed to that which is highest + and noblest in man. Both have been the destroyers of prejudice. Both have + shed light, and both have won great victories on the fields of + intellectual conflict. They cannot afford to waste time in attacking each + other. + </p> + <p> + After all, the Agnostic and the Positivist have the same end in view—both + believe in living for this world. + </p> + <p> + The theologians, finding themselves unable to answer the arguments that + have been urged, resort to the old subterfuge—to the old cry that + Agnosticism takes something of value from the life of man. Does the + Agnostic take any consolation from the world? Does he blot out, or dim, + one star in the heaven of hope? Can there be anything more consoling than + to feel, to know, that Jehovah is not God—that the message of the + Old Testament is not from the infinite? + </p> + <p> + Is it not enough to fill the brain with a happiness unspeakable to know + that the words, "Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire," will + never be spoken to one of the children of men? + </p> + <p> + Is it a small thing to lift from the shoulders of industry the burdens of + superstition? Is it a little thing to drive the monster of fear from the + hearts of men?—North American Review, April, 1889. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0012" id="link0012"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + ERNEST RENAN. + </h2> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + "Blessed are those + Whose blood and judgment are so well co-mingled + That they are not a pipe for fortune's finger + To sound what stop she please." +</pre> + <p> + ERNEST RENAN is dead. Another source of light; another force of + civilization; another charming personality; another brave soul, graceful + in thought, generous in deed; a sculptor in speech, a colorist in words—clothing + all in the poetry born of a delightful union of heart and brain—has + passed to the realm of rest. + </p> + <p> + Reared under the influences of Catholicism, educated for the priesthood, + yet by reason of his natural genius, he began to think. Forces that + utterly subjugate and enslave the mind of mediocrity sometimes rouse to + thought and action the superior soul. + </p> + <p> + Renan began to think—a dangerous thing for a Catholic to do. Thought + leads to doubt, doubt to investigation, investigation to truth—the + enemy of all superstition. + </p> + <p> + He lifted the Catholic extinguisher from the light and flame of reason. He + found that his mental vision was improved. He read the Scriptures for + himself, examined them as he did other books not claiming to be inspired. + He found the same mistakes, the same prejudices, the same miraculous + impossibilities in the book attributed to God that he found in those known + to have been written by men. + </p> + <p> + Into the path of reason, or rather into the highway, Renan was led by + Henriette, his sister, to whom he pays a tribute that has the perfume of a + perfect flower. + </p> + <p> + "I was," writes Renan, "brought up by women and priests, and therein lies + the whole explanation of my good qualities and of my defects." In most + that he wrote is the tenderness of woman, only now and then a little touch + of the priest showing itself, mostly in a reluctance to spoil the ivy by + tearing down some prison built by superstition. + </p> + <p> + In spite of the heartless "scheme" of things he still found it in his + heart to say, "When God shall be complete, He will be just," at the same + time saying that "nothing proves to us that there exists in the world a + central consciousness—a soul of the universe—and nothing + proves the contrary." So, whatever was the verdict of his brain, his heart + asked for immortality. He wanted his dream, and he was willing that others + should have theirs. Such is the wish and will of all great souls. + </p> + <p> + He knew the church thoroughly and anticipated what would finally be + written about him by churchmen: "Having some experience of ecclesiastical + writers I can sketch out in advance the way my biography will be written + in Spanish in some Catholic review, of Santa Fé, in the year 2,000. + Heavens! how black I shall be! I shall be so all the more, because the + church when she feels that she is lost will end with malice. She will bite + like a mad dog." + </p> + <p> + He anticipated such a biography because he had thought for himself, and + because he had expressed his thoughts—because he had declared that + "our universe, within the reach of our experience, is not governed by any + intelligent reason. God, as the common herd understand him, the living + God, the acting God—the God-Providence, does not show himself in the + universe"—because he attacked the mythical and the miraculous in the + life of Christ and sought to rescue from the calumnies of ignorance and + faith a serene and lofty soul. + </p> + <p> + The time has arrived when Jesus must become a myth or a man. The idea that + he was the infinite God must be abandoned by all who are not religiously + insane. Those who have given up the claim that he was God, insist that he + was divinely appointed and illuminated; that he was a perfect man—the + highest possible type of the human race and, consequently, a perfect + example for all the world. + </p> + <p> + As time goes on, as men get wider or grander or more complex ideas of + life, as the intellectual horizon broadens, the idea that Christ was + perfect may be modified. + </p> + <p> + The New Testament seems to describe several individuals under the same + name, or at least one individual who passed through several stages or + phases of religious development. Christ is described as a devout Jew, as + one who endeavored to comply in all respects with the old law. Many + sayings are attributed to him consistent with this idea. He certainly was + a Hebrew in belief and feeling when he said, "Swear not by Heaven, because + it is God's throne, nor by earth, for it is his footstool; nor by + Jerusalem, for it is his holy city." These reasons were in exact + accordance with the mythology of the Jews. God was regarded simply as an + enormous man, as one who walked in the garden in the cool of the evening, + as one who had met man face to face, who had conversed with Moses for + forty days upon Mount Sinai, as a great king, with a throne in the + heavens, using the earth to rest his feet upon, and regarding Jerusalem as + his holy city. + </p> + <p> + Then we find plenty of evidence that he wished to reform the religion of + the Jews; to fulfill the law, not to abrogate it Then there is still + another change: he has ceased his efforts to reform that religion and has + become a destroyer. He holds the Temple in contempt and repudiates the + idea that Jerusalem is the holy city. He concludes that it is unnecessary + to go to some mountain or some building to worship or to find God, and + insists that the heart is the true temple, that ceremonies are useless, + that all pomp and pride and show are needless, and that it is enough to + worship God under heaven's dome, in spirit and in truth. + </p> + <p> + It is impossible to harmonize these views unless we admit that Christ was + the subject of growth and change; that in consequence of growth and change + he modified his views; that, from wanting to preserve Judaism as it was, + he became convinced that it ought to be reformed. That he then abandoned + the idea of reformation, and made up his mind that the only reformation of + which the Jewish religion was capable was destruction. If he was in fact a + man, then the course he pursued was natural; but if he was God, it is + perfectly absurd. If we give to him perfect knowledge, then it is + impossible to account for change or growth. If, on the other hand, the + ground is taken that he was a perfect man, then, it might be asked, Was he + perfect when he wished to preserve, or when he wished to reform, or when + he resolved to destroy, the religion of the Jews? If he is to be regarded + as perfect, although not divine, when did he reach perfection? + </p> + <p> + It is perfectly evident that Christ, or the character that bears that + name, imagined that the world was about to be destroyed, or at least + purified by fire, and that, on account of this curious belief, he became + the enemy of marriage, of all earthly ambition and of all enterprise. With + that view in his mind, he said to himself, "Why should we waste our + energies in producing food for destruction? Why should we endeavor to + beautify a world that is so soon to perish?" Filled with the thought of + coming change, he insisted that there was but one important thing, and + that was for each man to save his soul. He should care nothing for the + ties of kindred, nothing for wife or child or property, in the shadow of + the coming disaster. He should take care of himself. He endeavored, as it + is said, to induce men to desert all they had, to let the dead, bury the + dead, and follow him. He told his disciples, or those he wished to make + his disciples, according to the Testament, that it was their duty to + desert wife and child and property, and if they would so desert kindred + and wealth, he would reward them here and hereafter. + </p> + <p> + We know now—if we know anything—that Jesus was mistaken about + the coming of the end, and we know now that he was greatly controlled in + his ideas of life, by that mistake. Believing that the end was near, he + said, "Take no thought for the morrow, what ye shall eat or what ye shall + drink or wherewithal ye shall be clothed." It was in view of the + destruction of the world that he called the attention of his disciples to + the lily that toiled not and yet excelled Solomon in the glory of its + raiment. Having made this mistake, having acted upon it, certainly we + cannot now say that he was perfect in knowledge. + </p> + <p> + He is regarded by many millions as the impersonation of patience, of + forbearance, of meekness and mercy, and yet, according to the account, he + said many extremely bitter words, and threatened eternal pain. + </p> + <p> + We also know, if the account be true, that he claimed to have supernatural + power, to work miracles, to cure the blind and to raise the dead, and we + know that he did nothing of the kind. So if the writers of the New + Testament tell the truth as to what Christ claimed, it is absurd to say + that he was a perfect man. If honest, he was deceived, and those who are + deceived are not perfect. + </p> + <p> + There is nothing in the New Testament, so far as we know, that touches on + the duties of nation to nation, or of nation to its citizens; nothing of + human liberty; not one word about education; not the faintest hint that + there is such a thing as science; nothing calculated to stimulate + industry, commerce, or invention; not one word in favor of art, of music + or anything calculated to feed or clothe the body, nothing to develop the + brain of man. + </p> + <p> + When it is assumed that the life of Christ, as described in the New + Testament, is perfect, we at least take upon ourselves the burden of + deciding what perfection is. People who asserted that Christ was divine, + that he was actually God, reached the conclusion, without any laborious + course of reasoning, that all he said and did was absolute perfection. + They said this because they had first been convinced that he was divine. + The moment his divinity is given up and the assertion is made that he was + perfect, we are not permitted to reason in that way. They said he was God, + therefore perfect. Now, if it is admitted that he was human, the + conclusion that he was perfect does not follow. We then take the burden + upon ourselves of deciding what perfection is. To decide what is perfect + is beyond the powers of the human mind. + </p> + <p> + Renan, in spite of his education, regarded Christ as a man, and did the + best he could to account for the miracles that had been attributed to him, + for the legends that had gathered about his name, and the impossibilities + connected with his career, and also tried to account for the origin or + birth of these miracles, of these legends, of these myths, including the + resurrection and ascension. I am not satisfied with all the conclusions he + reached or with all the paths he traveled. The refraction of light caused + by passing through a woman's tears is hardly a sufficient foundation for a + belief in so miraculous a miracle as the bodily ascension of Jesus Christ. + </p> + <p> + There is another thing attributed to Christ that seems to me conclusive + evidence against the claim of perfection. Christ is reported to have said + that all sins could be forgiven except the sin against the Holy Ghost. + This sin, however, is not defined. Although Christ died for the whole + world, that through him all might be saved, there is this one terrible + exception: There is no salvation for those who have sinned, or who may + hereafter sin, against the Holy Ghost. Thousands of persons are now in + asylums, having lost their reason because of their fear that they had + committed this unknown, this undefined, this unpardonable sin. + </p> + <p> + It is said that a Roman Emperor went through a form of publishing his laws + or proclamations, posting them so high on pillars that they could not be + read, and then took the lives of those who ignorantly violated these + unknown laws. He was regarded as a tyrant, as a murderer. And yet, what + shall we say of one who declared that the sin against the Holy Ghost was + the only one that could not be forgiven, and then left an ignorant world + to guess what that sin is? Undoubtedly this horror is an interpolation. + </p> + <p> + There is something like it in the Old Testament. It is asserted by + Christians that the Ten Commandments are the foundation of all law and of + all civilization, and you will find lawyers insisting that the Mosaic Code + was the first information that man received on the subject of law; that + before that time the world was without any knowledge of justice or mercy. + If this be true the Jews had no divine laws, no real instruction on any + legal subject until the Ten Commandments were given. Consequently, before + that time there had been proclaimed or published no law against the + worship of other gods or of idols. Moses had been on Mount Sinai talking + with Jehovah. At the end of the dialogue he received the Tables of Stone + and started down the mountain for the purpose of imparting this + information to his followers. When he reached the camp he heard music. He + saw people dancing, and he found that in his absence Aaron and the rest of + the people had cast a molten calf which they were then worshiping. This so + enraged Moses that he broke the Tables of Stone and made preparations for + the punishment of the Jews. Remember that they knew nothing about this + law, and, according to the modern Christian claims, could not have known + that it was wrong to melt gold and silver and mould it in the form of a + calf. And yet Moses killed about thirty thousand of these people for + having violated a law of which they had never heard; a law known only to + one man and one God. Nothing could be more unjust, more ferocious, than + this; and yet it can hardly be said to exceed in cruelty the announcement + that a certain sin was unpardonable and then fail to define the sin. + Possibly, to inquire what the sin is, is the sin. + </p> + <p> + Renan regards Jesus as a man, and his work gets its value from the fact + that it is written from a human standpoint. At the same time he, + consciously or unconsciously, or may be for the purpose of sprinkling a + little holy water on the heat of religious indignation, now and then seems + to speak of him as more than human, or as having accomplished something + that man could not. + </p> + <p> + He asserts that "the Gospels are in part legendary; that they contain many + things not true; that they are full of miracles and of the supernatural." + At the same time he insists that these legends, these miracles, these + supernatural things do not affect the truth of the probable things + contained in these writings. He sees, and sees clearly, that there is no + evidence that Matthew or Mark or Luke or John wrote the books attributed + to them; that, as a matter of fact, the mere title of "according to + Matthew," "according to Mark," shows that they were written by others who + claimed them to be in accordance with the stories that had been told by + Matthew or by Mark. So Renan takes the ground that the Gospel of Luke is + founded on anterior documents and "is the work of a man who selected, + pruned and combined, and that the same man wrote the Acts of the Apostles + and in the same way." + </p> + <p> + The gospels were certainly written long after the events described, and + Renan finds the reason for this in the fact that the Christians believed + that the world was about to end; that, consequently, there was no need of + composing books; it was only necessary for them to preserve in their + hearts during the little margin of time that remained a lively image of + Him whom they soon expected to meet in the clouds. For this reason the + gospels themselves had but little authority for 150 years, the Christians + relying on oral traditions. Renan shows that there was not the slightest + scruple about inserting additions in the gospels, variously combining + them, and in completing some by taking parts from others; that the books + passed from hand to hand, and that each one transcribed in the margin of + his copy the words and parables he had found elsewhere which touched him; + that it was not until human tradition became weakened that the text + bearing the names of the apostles became authoritative. + </p> + <p> + Renan has criticised the gospels somewhat in the same spirit that he would + criticise a modern work. He saw clearly that the metaphysics filling the + discourses of John were deformities and distortions, full of mysticism, + having nothing to do really with the character of Jesus. He shows too + "that the simple idea of the Kingdom of God, at the time the Gospel + according to St. John was written, had faded away; that the hope of the + advent of Christ was growing dim, and that from belief the disciples + passed into discussion, from discussion to dogma, from dogma to ceremony," + and, finding that the new Heaven and the new Earth were not coming as + expected, they turned their attention to governing the old Heaven and the + old Earth. The disciples were willing to be humble for a few days, with + the expectation of wearing crowns forever. They were satisfied with + poverty, believing that the wealth of the world was to be theirs. The + coming of Christ, however, being for some unaccountable reason delayed, + poverty and humility grew irksome, and human nature began to assert + itself. + </p> + <p> + In the Gospel of John you will find the metaphysics of the church. There + you find the Second Birth. There you find the doctrine of the atonement + clearly set forth. There you find that God died for the whole world, and + that whosoever believeth not in him is to be damned. There is nothing of + the kind in Matthew. Matthew makes Christ say that, if you will forgive + others, God will forgive you. The Gospel "according to Mark" is the same. + So is the Gospel "according to Luke." There is nothing about salvation + through belief, nothing about the atonement. In Mark, in the last chapter, + the apostles are told to go into all the world and preach the gospel, with + the statement that whoever believed and was baptised should be saved, and + whoever failed to believe should be damned. But we now know that that is + an interpolation. Consequently, Matthew, Mark and Luke never had the + faintest conception of the "Christian religion." They knew nothing of the + atonement, nothing of salvation by faith—nothing. So that if a man + had read only Matthew, Mark and Luke, and had strictly followed what he + found, he would have found himself, after death, in perdition. + </p> + <p> + Renan finds that certain portions of the Gospel "according to John" were + added later; that the entire twenty-first chapter is an interpolation; + also, that many places bear the traces of erasures and corrections. So he + says that it would be "impossible for any one to compose a life of Jesus, + with any meaning in it, from the discourses which John attributes to him, + and he holds that this Gospel of John is full of preaching, Christ + demonstrating himself; full of argumentation, full of stage effect, devoid + of simplicity, with long arguments after each miracle, stiff and awkward + discourses, the tone of which is often false and unequal." He also insists + that there are evidently "artificial portions, variations like that of a + musician improvising on a given theme." + </p> + <p> + In spite of all this, Renan, willing to soothe the prejudice of his time, + takes the ground that the four canonical gospels are authentic, that they + date from the first century, that the authors were, generally speaking, + those to whom they are attributed; but he insists that their historic + value is very diverse. This is a back-handed stroke. Admitting, first, + that they are authentic; second, that they were written about the end of + the first century; third, that they are not of equal value, disposes, so + far as he is concerned, of the dogma of inspiration. + </p> + <p> + One is at a loss to understand why four gospels should have been written. + As a matter of fact there can be only one true account of any occurrence, + or of any number of occurrences. Now, it must be taken for granted, that + an inspired account is true. Why then should there be four inspired + accounts? It may be answered that all were not to write the entire story. + To this the reply is that all attempted to cover substantially the same + ground. + </p> + <p> + Many years ago the early fathers thought it necessary to say why there + were four inspired books, and some of them said, because there were four + cardinal directions and the gospels fitted the north, south, east and + west. Others said that there were four principal winds—a gospel for + each wind. They might have added that some animals have four legs. + </p> + <p> + Renan admits that the narrative portions have not the same authority; + "that many legends proceeded from the zeal of the second Christian + generation; that the narrative of Luke is historically weak; that + sentences attributed to Jesus have been distorted and exaggerated; that + the book was written outside of Palestine and after the siege of + Jerusalem; that Luke endeavors to make the different narratives agree, + changing them for that purpose; that he softens the passages which had + become embarrassing; that he exaggerated the marvelous, omitted errors in + chronology; that he was a compiler, a man who had not been an eye-witness + himself, and who had not seen eye-witnesses, but who labors at texts and + wrests their sense to make them agree." This certainly is very far from + inspiration. So "Luke interprets the documents according to his own idea; + being a kind of anarchist, opposed to property, and persuaded that the + triumph of the poor was approaching; that he was especially fond of the + anecdotes showing the conversion of sinners, the exaltation of the humble, + and that he modified ancient traditions to give them this meaning." + </p> + <p> + Renan reached the conclusion that the gospels are neither biographies + after the manner of Suetonius nor fictitious legends in the style of + Philostratus, but that they are legendary biographies like the legends of + the saints, the lives of Plotinus and Isidore, in which historical truth + and the desire to present models of virtue are combined in various + degrees; that they are "inexact" that they "contain numerous errors and + discordances." So he takes the ground that twenty or thirty years after + Christ, his reputation had greatly increased, that "legends had begun to + gather about Him like clouds," that "death added to His perfection, + freeing Him from all defects in the eyes of those who had loved Him, that + His followers wrested the prophecies so that they might fit Him. They + said, 'He is the Messiah.' The Messiah was to do certain things; therefore + Jesus did certain things. Then an account would be given of the doing." + All of which of course shows that there can be maintained no theory of + inspiration. + </p> + <p> + It is admitted that where individuals are witnesses of the same + transaction, and where they agree upon the vital points and disagree upon + details, the disagreement may be consistent with their honesty, as tending + to show that they have not agreed upon a story; but if the witnesses are + inspired of God then there is no reason for their disagreeing on anything, + and if they do disagree it is a demonstration that they were not inspired, + but it is not a demonstration that they are not honest. While perfect + agreement may be evidence of rehearsal, a failure to perfectly agree is + not a demonstration of the truth or falsity of a story; but if the + witnesses claim to be inspired, the slightest disagreement is a + demonstration that they were not inspired. + </p> + <p> + Renan reaches the conclusion, proving every step that he takes, that the + four principal documents—that is to say, the four gospels—are + in "flagrant contradiction one with another." He attacks, and with perfect + success, the miracles of the Scriptures, and upon this subject says: + "Observation, which has never once been falsified, teaches us that + miracles never happen, but in times and countries in which they are + believed and before persons disposed to believe them. No miracle ever + occurred in the presence of men capable of testing its miraculous + character." He further takes the ground that no contemporary miracle will + bear inquiry, and that consequently it is probable that the miracles of + antiquity which have been performed in popular gatherings would be shown + to be simple illusion, were it possible to criticise them in detail. In + the name of universal experience he banishes miracles from history. These + were brave things to do, things that will bear good fruit. As long as men + believe in miracles, past or present they remain the prey of superstition. + The Catholic is taught that miracles were performed anciently not only, + but that they are still being performed. This is consistent inconsistency. + Protestants teach a double doctrine: That miracles used to be performed, + that the laws of nature used to be violated, but that no miracle is + performed now. No Protestant will admit that any miracle was performed by + the Catholic Church. Otherwise, Protestants could not be justified in + leaving a church with whom the God of miracles dwelt. So every Protestant + has to adopt two kinds of reasoning: that the laws of Nature used to be + violated and that miracles used to be performed, but that since the + apostolic age Nature has had her way and the Lord has allowed facts to + exist and to hold the field. A supernatural account, according to Renan, + "always implies credulity or imposture,"—probably both. + </p> + <p> + It does not seem possible to me that Christ claimed for himself what the + Testament claims for him. These claims were made by admirers, by + followers, by missionaries. + </p> + <p> + When the early Christians went to Rome they found plenty of demigods. It + was hard to set aside the religion of a demigod by telling the story of a + man from Nazareth. These missionaries, not to be outdone in ancestry, + insisted—and this was after the Gospel "according to St. John" had + been written—that Christ was the Son of God. Matthew believed that + he was the son of David, and the Messiah, and gave the genealogy of + Joseph, his father, to support that claim. + </p> + <p> + In the time of Christ no one imagined that he was of divine origin. This + was an after-growth. In order to place themselves on an equality with + Pagans they started the claim of divinity, and also took the second step + requisite in that country: First, a god for his father, and second, a + virgin for his mother. This was the Pagan combination of greatness, and + the Christians added to this that Christ was God. + </p> + <p> + It is hard to agree with the conclusion reached by Renan, that Christ + formed and intended to form a church. Such evidence, it seems to me, is + hard to find in the Testament. Christ seemed to satisfy himself, according + to the Testament, with a few statements, some of them exceedingly wise and + tender, some utterly impracticable and some intolerant. + </p> + <p> + If we accept the conclusions reached by Renan we will throw away, the + legends without foundation; the miraculous legends; and everything + inconsistent with what we know of Nature. Very little will be left—a + few sayings to be found among those attributed to Confucius, to Buddha, to + Krishna, to Epictetus, to Zeno, and to many others. Some of these sayings + are full of wisdom, full of kindness, and others rush to such extremes + that they touch the borders of insanity. When struck on one cheek to turn + the other, is really joining a conspiracy to secure the triumph of + brutality. To agree not to resist evil is to become an accomplice of all + injustice. We must not take from industry, from patriotism, from virtue, + the right of self-defence. + </p> + <p> + Undoubtedly Renan gave an honest transcript of his mind, the road his + thought had followed, the reasons in their order that had occurred to him, + the criticisms born of thought, and the qualifications, softening phrases, + children of old sentiments and emotions that had not entirely passed away. + He started, one might say, from the altar and, during a considerable part + of the journey, carried the incense with him. The farther he got away, the + greater was his clearness of vision and the more thoroughly he was + convinced that Christ was merely a man, an idealist. But, remembering the + altar, he excused exaggeration in the "inspired" books, not because it was + from heaven, not because it was in harmony with our ideas of veracity, but + because the writers of the gospel were imbued with the Oriental spirit of + exaggeration, a spirit perfectly understood by the people who first read + the gospels, because the readers knew the habits of the writers. + </p> + <p> + It had been contended for many years that no one could pass judgment on + the veracity of the Scriptures who did not understand Hebrew. This + position was perfectly absurd. No man needs to be a student of Hebrew to + know that the shadow on the dial did not go back several degrees to + convince a petty king that a boil was not to be fatal. Renan, however, + filled the requirement. He was an excellent Hebrew scholar. This was a + fortunate circumstance, because it answered a very old objection. + </p> + <p> + The founder of Christianity was, for his own sake, taken from the divine + pedestal and allowed to stand like other men on the earth, to be judged by + what he said and did, by his theories, by his philosophy, by his spirit. + </p> + <p> + No matter whether Renan came to a correct conclusion or not, his work did + a vast deal of good. He convinced many that implicit reliance could not be + placed upon the gospels, that the gospels themselves are of unequal worth; + that they were deformed by ignorance and falsehood, or, at least, by + mistake; that if they wished to save the reputation of Christ they must + not rely wholly on the gospels, or on what is found in the New Testament, + but they must go farther and examine all legends touching him. Not only + so, but they must throw away the miraculous, the impossible and the + absurd. + </p> + <p> + He also has shown that the early followers of Christ endeavored to add to + the reputation of their Master by attributing to him the miraculous and + the foolish; that while these stories added to his reputation at that + time, since the world has advanced they must be cast aside or the + reputation of the Master must suffer. + </p> + <p> + It will not do now to say that Christ himself pretended to do miracles. + This would establish the fact at least that he was mistaken. But we are + compelled to say that his disciples insisted that he was a worker of + miracles. This shows, either that they were mistaken or untruthful. + </p> + <p> + We all know that a sleight-of-hand performer could gain a greater + reputation among savages than Darwin or Humboldt; and we know that the + world in the time of Christ was filled with barbarians, with people who + demanded the miraculous, who expected it; with people, in fact, who had a + stronger belief in the supernatural than in the natural; people who never + thought it worth while to record facts. The hero of such people, the + Christ of such people, with his miracles, cannot be the Christ of the + thoughtful and scientific. + </p> + <p> + Renan was a man of most excellent temper; candid; not striving for + victory, but for truth; conquering, as far as he could, the old + superstitions; not entirely free, it may be, but believing himself to be + so. He did great good. He has helped to destroy the fictions of faith. He + has helped to rescue man from the prison of superstition, and this is the + greatest benefit that man can bestow on man. + </p> + <p> + He did another great service, not only to Jews, but to Christendom, by + writing the history of "The People of Israel." Christians for many + centuries have persecuted the Jews. They have charged them with the + greatest conceivable crime—with having crucified an infinite God. + This absurdity has hardened the hearts of men and poisoned the minds of + children. The persecution of the Jews is the meanest, the most senseless + and cruel page in history. Every civilized Christian should feel on his + cheeks the red spots of shame as he reads the wretched and infamous story. + </p> + <p> + The flame of this prejudice is fanned and fed in the Sunday schools of our + day, and the orthodox minister points proudly to the atrocities + perpetrated against the Jews by the barbarians of Russia as evidences of + the truth of the inspired Scriptures. In every wound God puts a tongue to + proclaim the truth of his book. + </p> + <p> + If the charge that the Jews killed God were true, it is hardly reasonable + to hold those who are now living responsible for what their ancestors did + nearly nineteen centuries ago. + </p> + <p> + But there is another point in connection with this matter: If Christ was + God, then the Jews could not have killed him without his consent; and, + according to the orthodox creed, if he had not been sacrificed, the whole + world would have suffered eternal pain. Nothing can exceed the meanness of + the prejudice of Christians against the Jewish people. They should not be + held responsible for their savage ancestors, or for their belief that + Jehovah was an intelligent and merciful God, superior to all other gods. + Even Christians do not wish to be held responsible for the Inquisition, + for the Torquemadas and the John Calvins, for the witch-burners and the + Quaker-whippers, for the slave-traders and child-stealers, the most of + whom were believers in our "glorious gospel," and many of whom had been + bom the second time. + </p> + <p> + Renan did much to civilize the Christians by telling the truth in a + charming and convincing way about the "People of Israel." Both sides are + greatly indebted to him: one he has ably defended, and the other greatly + enlightened. + </p> + <p> + Having done what good he could in giving what he believed was light to his + fellow-men, he had no fear of becoming a victim of God's wrath, and so he + laughingly said: "For my part I imagine that if the Eternal in his + severity were to send me to hell I should succeed in escaping from it. I + would send up to my Creator a supplication that would make him smile. The + course of reasoning by which I would prove to him that it was through his + fault that I was damned would be so subtle that he would find some + difficulty in replying. The fate which would suit me best is Purgatory—a + charming place, where many delightful romances begun on earth must be + continued." + </p> + <p> + Such cheerfulness, such good philosophy, with cap and bells, such banter + and blasphemy, such sound and solid sense drive to madness the priest who + thinks the curse of Rome can fright the world. How the snake of + superstition writhes when he finds that his fangs have lost their poison. + </p> + <p> + He was one of the gentlest of men—one of the fairest in discussion, + dissenting from the views of others with modesty, presenting his own with + clearness and candor. His mental manners were excellent. He was not + positive as to the "unknowable." He said "Perhaps." He knew that knowledge + is good if it increases the happiness of man; and he felt that + superstition is the assassin of liberty and civilization. He lived a life + of cheerfulness, of industry, devoted to the welfare of mankind. + </p> + <p> + He was a seeker of happiness by the highway of the natural, a destroyer of + the dogmas of mental deformity, a worshiper of Liberty and the Ideal. As + he lived, he died—hopeful and serene—and now, standing in + imagination by his grave, we ask: Will the night be eternal? The brain + says, Perhaps; while the heart hopes for the Dawn.—North American + Review, November, 1892. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0013" id="link0013"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + TOLSTOÏ AND "THE KREUTZER SONATA." + </h2> + <p> + COUNT TOLSTOÏ is a man of genius. He is acquainted with Russian life + from the highest to the lowest—that is to say, from the worst to the + best. He knows the vices of the rich and the virtues of the poor. He is a + Christian, a real believer in the Old and New Testaments, an honest + follower of the Peasant of Palestine. He denounces luxury and ease, art + and music; he regards a flower with suspicion, believing that beneath + every blossom lies a coiled serpent. He agrees with Lazarus and denounces + Dives and the tax-gatherers. He is opposed, not only to doctors of + divinity, but of medicine. + </p> + <p> + From the Mount of Olives he surveys the world. + </p> + <p> + He is not a Christian like the Pope in the Vatican, or a cardinal in a + palace, or a bishop with revenues and retainers, or a millionaire who + hires preachers to point out the wickedness of the poor, or the director + of a museum who closes the doors on Sunday. He is a Christian something + like Christ. + </p> + <p> + To him this life is but a breathing-spell between the verdict and the + execution; the sciences are simply sowers of the seeds of pride, of + arrogance and vice. Shocked by the cruelties and unspeakable horrors of + war, he became a non-resistant and averred that he would not defend his + own body or that of his daughter from insult and outrage. In this he + followed the command of his Master: "Resist not evil." He passed, not + simply from war to peace, but from one extreme to the other, and advocated + a doctrine that would leave the basest of mankind the rulers of the world. + This was and is the error of a great and tender soul. + </p> + <p> + He did not accept all the teachings of Christ at once. His progress has + been, judging from his writings, somewhat gradual; but by accepting one + proposition he prepared himself for the acceptance of another. He is not + only a Christian, but has the courage of his convictions, and goes without + hesitation to the logical conclusion. He has another exceedingly rare + quality; he acts in accordance with his belief. His creed is translated + into deed. He opposes the doctors of divinity, because they darken and + deform the teachings of the Master. He denounces the doctors of medicine, + because he depends on Providence and the promises of Jesus Christ. To him + that which is called progress is, in fact, a profanation, and property is + a something that the organized few have stolen from the unorganized many. + He believes in universal labor, which is good, each working for himself. + He also believes that each should have only the necessaries of life—which + is bad. According to his idea, the world ought to be filled with peasants. + There should be only arts enough to plough and sow and gather the harvest, + to build huts, to weave coarse cloth, to fashion clumsy and useful + garments, and to cook the simplest food. Men and women should not adorn + their bodies. They should not make themselves desirable or beautiful. + </p> + <p> + But even under such circumstances they might, like the Quakers, be proud + of humility and become arrogantly meek. + </p> + <p> + Tolstoi would change the entire order of human development. As a matter of + fact, the savage who adorns himself or herself with strings of shells, or + with feathers, has taken the first step towards civilization. The tatooed + is somewhat in advance of the unfrescoed. At the bottom of all this is the + love of approbation, of the admiration of their fellows, and this feeling, + this love, cannot be torn from the human heart. + </p> + <p> + In spite of ourselves we are attracted by what to us is beautiful, because + beauty is associated with pleasure, with enjoyment. The love of the + well-formed, of the beautiful, is prophetic of the perfection of the human + race. It is impossible to admire the deformed. They may be loved for their + goodness or genius, but never because of their deformity. There is within + us the love of proportion. There is a physical basis for the appreciation + of harmony, which is also a kind of proportion. + </p> + <p> + The love of the beautiful is shared with man by most animals. The wings of + the moth are painted by love, by desire. This is the foundation of the + bird's song. This love of approbation, this desire to please, to be + admired, to be loved, is in some way the cause of all heroic, + self-denying, and sublime actions. + </p> + <p> + Count Tolstoï, following parts of the New Testament, regards love as + essentially impure. He seems really to think that there is a love superior + to human love; that the love of man for woman, of woman for man, is, after + all, a kind of glittering degradation; that it is better to love God than + woman; better to love the invisible phantoms of the skies than the + children upon our knees—in other words, that it is far better to + love a heaven somewhere else than to make one here. He seems to think that + women adorn themselves simply for the purpose of getting in their power + the innocent and unsuspecting men. He forgets that the best and purest of + human beings are controlled, for the most part unconsciously, by the + hidden, subtle tendencies of nature. He seems to forget the great fact of + "natural selection," and that the choice of one in preference to all + others is the result of forces beyond the control of the individual. To + him there seems to be no purity in love, because men are influenced by + forms, by the beauty of women; and women, knowing this fact, according to + him, act, and consequently both are equally guilty. He endeavors to show + that love is a delusion; that at best it can last but for a few days; that + it must of necessity be succeeded by indifference, then by disgust, lastly + by hatred; that in every Garden of Eden is a serpent of jealousy, and that + the brightest days end with the yawn of ennui. + </p> + <p> + Of course he is driven to the conclusion that life in this world is + without value, that the race can be perpetuated only by vice, and that the + practice of the highest virtue would leave the world without the form of + man. Strange as it may sound to some, this is the same conclusion reached + by his Divine Master: "They did eat, they drank, they married, they were + given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered the ark and the flood + came and destroyed them all." "Every one that hath forsaken houses, or + brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or + lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit + everlasting life." + </p> + <p> + According to Christianity, as it really is and really was, the Christian + should have no home in this world—at least none until the earth has + been purified by fire. His affections should be given to God; not to wife + and children, not to friends or country. He is here but for a time on a + journey, waiting for the summons. This life is a kind of dock running out + into the sea of eternity, on which he waits for transportation. Nothing + here is of any importance; the joys of life are frivolous and corrupting, + and by losing these few gleams of happiness in this world he will bask + forever in the unclouded rays of infinite joy. Why should a man risk an + eternity of perfect happiness for the sake of enjoying himself a few days + with his wife and children? Why should he become an eternal outcast for + the sake of having a home and fireside here? + </p> + <p> + The "Fathers" of the church had the same opinion of marriage. They agreed + with Saint Paul, and Tolstoï agrees with them. They had the same + contempt for wives and mothers, and uttered the same blasphemies against + that divine passion that has filled the world with art and song. + </p> + <p> + All this is to my mind a kind of insanity; nature soured or withered—deformed + so that celibacy is mistaken for virtue. The imagination becomes polluted, + and the poor wretch believes that he is purer than his thoughts, holier + than his desires, and that to outrage nature is the highest form of + religion. But nature imprisoned, obstructed, tormented, always has sought + for and has always found revenge. Some of these victims, regarding the + passions as low and corrupting, feeling humiliated by hunger and thirst, + sought through maimings and mutilations the purification of the soul. + </p> + <p> + Count Tolstoi in "The Kreutzer Sonata," has drawn, with a free hand, one + of the vilest and basest of men for his hero. He is suspicious, jealous, + cruel, infamous. The wife is infinitely too good for such a wild + unreasoning beast, and yet the writer of this insane story seems to + justify the assassin. If this is a true picture of wedded life in Russia, + no wonder that Count Tolstoï looks forward with pleasure to the + extinction of the human race. + </p> + <p> + Of all passions that can take possession of the heart or brain jealousy is + the worst. For many generations the chemists sought for the secret by + which all metals could be changed to gold, and through which the basest + could become the best. Jealousy seeks exactly the opposite. It endeavors + to transmute the very gold of love into the dross of shame and crime. + </p> + <p> + The story of "The Kreutzer Sonata" seems to have been written for the + purpose of showing that woman is at fault; that she has no right to be + attractive, no right to be beautiful; and that she is morally responsible + for the contour of her throat, for the pose of her body, for the symmetry + of her limbs, for the red of her lips, and for the dimples in her cheeks. + </p> + <p> + The opposite of this doctrine is nearer true. It would be far better to + hold people responsible for their ugliness than for their beauty. It may + be true that the soul, the mind, in some wondrous way fashions the body, + and that to that extent every individual is responsible for his looks. It + may be that the man or woman thinking high thoughts will give, + necessarily, a nobility to expression and a beauty to outline. + </p> + <p> + It is not true that the sins of man can be laid justly at the feet of + woman. Women are better than men; they have greater responsibilities; they + bear even the burdens of joy. This is the real reason why their faults are + considered greater. + </p> + <p> + Men and women desire each other, and this desire is a condition of + civilization, progress, and happiness, and of everything of real value. + But there is this profound difference in the sexes: in man this desire is + the foundation of love, while in woman love is the foundation of this + desire. + </p> + <p> + Tolstoï seems to be a stranger to the heart of woman. + </p> + <p> + Is it not wonderful that one who holds self-denial in such high esteem + should say, "That life is embittered by the fear of one's children, and + not only on account of their real or imaginary illnesses, but even by + their very presence"? + </p> + <p> + Has the father no real love for the children? Is he not paid a thousand + times through their caresses, their sympathy, their love? Is there no joy + in seeing their minds unfold, their affections develop? Of course, love + and anxiety go together. That which we love we wish to protect. The + perpetual fear of death gives love intensity and sacredness. Yet Count + Tolstoï gives us the feelings of a father incapable of natural + affection; of one who hates to have his children sick because the orderly + course of his wretched life is disturbed. So, too, we are told that modern + mothers think too much of their children, care too much for their health, + and refuse to be comforted when they die. Lest these words may be thought + libellous, the following extract is given; + </p> + <p> + "In old times women consoled themselves with the belief, The Lord hath + given, and the Lord hath taken away. Blessed be the name of the Lord. They + consoled themselves with the thought that the soul of the departed had + returned to him who gave it; that it was better to die innocent than to + live in sin. If women nowadays had such a comfortable faith to support + them, they might take their misfortunes less hard." + </p> + <p> + The conclusion reached by the writer is that without faith in God, woman's + love grovels in the mire. + </p> + <p> + In this case the mire is made by the tears of mothers falling on the clay + that hides their babes. + </p> + <p> + The one thing constant, the one peak that rises above all clouds, the one + window in which the light forever burns, the one star that darkness cannot + quench, is woman's love. + </p> + <p> + This one fact justifies the existence and the perpetuation of the human + race. Again I say that women are better than men; their hearts are more + unreservedly given; in the web of their lives sorrow is inextricably woven + with the greatest joys; self-sacrifice is a part of their nature, and at + the behest of love and maternity they walk willingly and joyously down to + the very gates of death. + </p> + <p> + Is there nothing in this to excite the admiration, the adoration, of a + modern reformer? Are the monk and nun superior to the father and mother? + </p> + <p> + The author of "The Kreutzer Sonata" is unconsciously the enemy of mankind. + He is filled with what might be called a merciless pity, a sympathy almost + malicious. Had he lived a few centuries ago, he might have founded a + religion; but the most he can now do is, perhaps, to create the necessity + for another asylum. + </p> + <p> + Count Tolstoi objects to music—not the ordinary kind, but to great + music, the music that arouses the emotions, that apparently carries us + beyond the limitations of life, that for the moment seems to break the + great chain of cause and effect, and leaves the soul soaring and free. + "Emotion and duty," he declares, "do not go hand in hand." All art touches + and arouses the emotional nature. The painter, the poet, the sculptor, the + composer, the orator, appeal to the emotions, to the passions, to the + hopes and fears. The commonplace is transfigured; the cold and angular + facts of existence take form and color; the blood quickens; the fancies + spread their wings; the intellect grows sympathetic; the river of life + flows full and free; and man becomes capable of the noblest deeds. Take + emotion from the heart of man and the idea of obligation would be lost; + right and wrong would lose their meaning, and the word "ought" would never + again be spoken. We are subject to conditions, liable to disease, pain, + and death. We are capable of ecstasy. Of these conditions, of these + possibilities, the emotions are born. + </p> + <p> + Only the conditionless can be the emotionless. + </p> + <p> + We are conditioned beings; and if the conditions are changed, the result + may be pain or death or greater joy. We can only live within certain + degrees of heat. If the weather were a few degrees hotter or a few degrees + colder, we could not exist. We need food and roof and raiment. Life and + happiness depend on these conditions. We do not certainly know what is to + happen, and consequently our hopes and fears are constantly active—that + is to say, we are emotional beings. The generalization of Tolstoï, + that emotion never goes hand in hand with duty, is almost the opposite of + the truth. The idea of duty could not exist without emotion. Think of men + and women without love, without desires, without passions? Think of a + world without art or music—a world without beauty, without emotion. + </p> + <p> + And yet there are many writers busy pointing out the loathsomeness of love + and their own virtues. Only a little while ago an article appeared in one + of the magazines in which all women who did not dress according to the + provincial prudery of the writer were denounced as impure. Millions of + refined and virtuous wives and mothers were described as dripping with + pollution because they enjoyed dancing and were so well formed that they + were not obliged to cover their arms and throats to avoid the pity of + their associates. And yet the article itself is far more indelicate than + any dance or any dress, or even lack of dress. What a curious opinion + dried apples have of fruit upon the tree! + </p> + <p> + Count Tolstoï is also the enemy of wealth, of luxury. In this he + follows the New Testament. "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye + of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven." He + gathers his inspiration from the commandment, "Sell all that thou hast and + give to the poor." + </p> + <p> + Wealth is not a crime any more than health or bodily or intellectual + strength. The weak might denounce the strong, the sickly might envy the + healthy, just as the poor may denounce or envy the rich. A man is not + necessarily a criminal because he is wealthy. He is to be judged, not by + his wealth, but by the way he uses his wealth. The strong man can use his + strength, not only for the benefit of himself, but for the good of others. + So a man of intelligence can be a benefactor of the human race. + Intelligence is often used to entrap the simple and to prey upon the + unthinking, but we do not wish to do away with intelligence. So strength + is often used to tyrannize over the weak, and in the same way wealth may + be used to the injury of mankind. To sell all that you have and give to + the poor is not a panacea for poverty. The man of wealth should help the + poor man to help himself. Men cannot receive without giving some + consideration, and if they have not labor or property to give, they give + their manhood, their self-respect. Besides, if all should obey this + injunction, "Sell what thou hast and give to the poor," who would buy? We + know that thousands and millions of rich men lack generosity and have but + little feeling for their fellows. The fault is not in the money, not in + the wealth, but in the individuals. They would be just as bad were they + poor. The only difference is that they would have less power. The good man + should regard wealth as an instrumentality, as an opportunity, and he + should endeavor to benefit his fellow-men, not by making them the + recipients of his charity, but by assisting them to assist themselves. The + desire to clothe and feed, to educate and protect, wives and children, is + the principal reason for making money—one of the great springs of + industry, prudence, and economy. + </p> + <p> + Those who labor have a right to live. They have a right to what they earn. + He who works has a right to home and fireside and to the comforts of life. + Those who waste the spring, the summer, and the autumn of their lives must + bear the winter when it comes. Many of our institutions are absurdly + unjust. Giving the land to the few, making tenants of the many, is the + worst possible form of socialism—of paternal government. In most of + the nations of our day the idlers and non-producers are either beggars or + aristocrats, paupers or princes, and the great middle laboring class + support them both. Rags and robes have a liking for each other. Beggars + and kings are in accord; they are all parasites, living on the same blood, + stealing the same labor—one by beggary, the other by force. And yet + in all this there can be found no reason for denouncing the man who has + accumulated. One who wishes to tear down his bams and build greater has + laid aside something to keep the wolf of want from the door of home when + he is dead. + </p> + <p> + Even the beggars see the necessity of others working, and the nobility see + the same necessity with equal clearness. But it is hardly reasonable to + say that all should do the same kind of work, for the reason that all have + not the same aptitudes, the same talents. Some can plough, others can + paint; some can reap and mow, while others can invent the instruments that + save labor; some navigate the seas; some work in mines; while others + compose music that elevates and refines the heart of the world. + </p> + <p> + But the worst thing in "The Kreutzer Sonata" is the declaration that a + husband can by force compel the wife to love and obey him. Love is not the + child of fear; it is not the result of force. No one can love on + compulsion. Even Jehovah found that it was impossible to compel the Jews + to love him. He issued his command to that effect, coupled with threats of + pain and death, but his chosen people failed to respond. + </p> + <p> + Love is the perfume of the heart; it is not subject to the will of + husbands or kings or God. + </p> + <p> + Count Tolstoï would establish slavery in every house; he would make + every husband a tyrant and every wife a trembling serf. No wonder that he + regards such marriage as a failure. He is in exact harmony with the curse + of Jehovah when he said unto the woman: "I will greatly multiply thy + sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children, and + thy desire shall be unto thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." + </p> + <p> + This is the destruction of the family, the pollution of home, the + crucifixion of love. + </p> + <p> + Those who are truly married are neither masters nor servants. The idea of + obedience is lost in the desire for the happiness of each. Love is not a + convict, to be detained with bolts and chains. Love is the highest + expression of liberty. Love neither commands nor obeys. + </p> + <p> + The curious thing is that the orthodox world insists that all men and + women should obey the injunctions of Christ; that they should take him as + the supreme example, and in all things follow his teachings. This is + preached from countless pulpits, and has been for many centuries. And yet + the man who does follow the Savior, who insists that he will not resist + evil, who sells what he has and gives to the poor, who deserts his wife + and children for the love of God, is regarded as insane. + </p> + <p> + Tolstoï, on most subjects, appears to be in accord with the founder + of Christianity, with the apostles, with the writers of the New Testament, + and with the Fathers of the church; and yet a Christian teacher of a + Sabbath school decides, in the capacity of Postmaster-General, that "The + Kreutzer Sonata" is unfit to be carried in the mails. + </p> + <p> + Although I disagree with nearly every sentence in this book, regard the + story as brutal and absurd, the view of life presented as cruel, vile, and + false, yet I recognize the right of Count Tolstoï to express his + opinions on all subjects, and the right of the men and women of America to + read for themselves. + </p> + <p> + As to the sincerity of the author, there is not the slightest doubt. He is + willing to give all that he has for the good of his fellow-men. He is a + soldier in what he believes to be a sacred cause, and he has the courage + of his convictions. He is endeavoring to organize society in accordance + with the most radical utterances that have been attributed to Jesus + Christ. The philosophy of Palestine is not adapted to an industrial and + commercial age. Christianity was born when the nation that produced it was + dying. It was a requiem—a declaration that life was a failure, that + the world was about to end, and that the hopes of mankind should be lifted + to another sphere. Tolstoï stands with his back to the sunrise and + looks mournfully upon the shadow. He has uttered many tender, noble, and + inspiring words. There are many passages in his works that must have been + written when his eyes were filled with tears. He has fixed his gaze so + intently on the miseries and agonies of life that he has been driven to + the conclusion that nothing could be better than the effacement of the + human race. + </p> + <p> + Some men, looking only at the faults and tyrannies of government, have + said: "Anarchy is better." Others, looking at the misfortunes, the + poverty, the crimes, of men, have, in a kind of pitying despair, reached + the conclusion that the best of all is death. These are the opinions of + those who have dwelt in gloom—of the self-imprisoned. + </p> + <p> + By comparing long periods of time, we see that, on the whole, the race is + advancing; that the world is growing steadily, and surely, better; that + each generation enjoys more and suffers less than its predecessor. We find + that our institutions have the faults of individuals. Nations must be + composed of men and women; and as they have their faults, nations cannot + be perfect. The institution of marriage is a failure to the extent, and + only to the extent, that the human race is a failure. Undoubtedly it is + the best and the most important institution that has been established by + the civilized world. If there is unhappiness in that relation, if there is + tyranny upon one side and misery upon the other, it is not the fault of + marriage. Take homes from the world and only wild beasts are left. + </p> + <p> + We cannot cure the evils of our day and time by a return to savagery. It + is not necessary to become ignorant to increase our happiness. The highway + of civilization leads to the light. The time will come when the human race + will be truly enlightened, when labor will receive its due reward, when + the last institution begotten of ignorance and savagery will disappear. + The time will come when the whole world will say that the love of man for + woman, of woman for man, of mother for child, is the highest, the noblest, + the purest, of which the heart is capable. + </p> + <p> + Love, human love, love of men and women, love of mothers fathers, and + babes, is the perpetual and beneficent force. Not the love of phantoms, + the love that builds cathedrals and dungeons, that trembles and prays, + that kneels and curses; but the real love, the love that felled the + forests, navigated the seas, subdued the earth, explored continents, built + countless homes, and founded nations—the love that kindled the + creative flame and wrought the miracles of art, that gave us all there is + of music, from the cradle-song that gives to infancy its smiling sleep to + the great symphony that bears the soul away with wings of fire—the + real love, mother of every virtue and of every joy.—North American + Review, September, 1890. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0014" id="link0014"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + THOMAS PAINE. + </h2> + <h3> + A MAGAZINE ARTICLE. + </h3> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + "A great man's memory may outlive his life half a year, + But, by'r lady, he must build churches then." +</pre> + <p> + EIGHTY-THREE years ago Thomas Paine ceased to defend himself. The moment + he became dumb all his enemies found a tongue. He was attacked on every + hand. The Tories of England had been waiting for their revenge. The + believers in kings, in hereditary government, the nobility of every land, + execrated his memory. Their greatest enemy was dead. The believers in + human slavery, and all who clamored for the rights of the States as + against the sovereignty of a Nation, joined in the chorus of denunciation. + In addition to this, the believers in the inspiration of the Scriptures, + the occupants of orthodox pulpits, the professors in Christian colleges, + and the religious historians, were his sworn and implacable foes. + </p> + <p> + This man had gratified no ambition at the expense of his fellow-men; he + had desolated no country with the flame and sword of war; he had not wrung + millions from the poor and unfortunate; he had betrayed no trust, and yet + he was almost universally despised. He gave his life for the benefit of + mankind. Day and night for many, many weary years, he labored for the good + of others, and gave himself body and soul to the great cause of human + liberty. And yet he won the hatred of the people for whose benefit, for + whose emancipation, for whose civilization, for whose exaltation he gave + his life. + </p> + <p> + Against him every slander that malignity could coin and hypocrisy pass was + gladly and joyously taken as genuine, and every truth with regard to his + career was believed to be counterfeit. He was attacked by thousands where + he was defended by one, and the one who defended him was instantly + attacked, silenced, or destroyed. + </p> + <p> + At last his life has been written by Moncure D. Conway, and the real + history of Thomas Paine, of what he attempted and accomplished, of what he + taught and suffered, has been intelligently, truthfully and candidly given + to the world. Henceforth the slanderer will be without excuse. + </p> + <p> + He who reads Mr. Conway's pages will find that Thomas Paine was more than + a patriot—that he was a philanthropist—a lover not only of his + country, but of all mankind. He will find that his sympathies were with + those who suffered, without regard to religion or race, country or + complexion. He will find that this great man did not hesitate to attack + the governing class of his native land—to commit what was called + treason against the king, that he might do battle for the rights of men; + that in spite of the prejudices of birth, he took the side of the American + Colonies; that he gladly attacked the political abuses and absurdities + that had been fostered by altars and thrones for many centuries; that he + was for the people against nobles and kings, and that he put his life in + pawn for the good of others. + </p> + <p> + In the winter of 1774, Thomas Paine came to America. After a time he was + employeed as one of the writers on the <i>Pennsylvania Magazine.</i> + </p> + <p> + Let us see what he did, calculated to excite the hatred of his fellow-men. + </p> + <p> + The first article he ever wrote in America, and the first ever published + by him anywhere, appeared in that magazine on the 8th of 'March, 1775. It + was an attack on American slavery—a plea for the rights of the + negro. In that article will be found substantially all the arguments that + can be urged against that most infamous of all institutions. Every is full + of humanity, pity, tenderness, and love of justice. + </p> + <p> + Five days after this article appeared the American Anti-Slavery Society + was formed. Certainly this should not excite our hatred. To-day the + civilized world agrees with the essay written by Thomas Paine in 1775. + </p> + <p> + At that time great interests were against him. The owners of slaves became + his enemies, and the pulpits, supported by slave labor, denounced this + abolitionist. + </p> + <p> + The next article published by Thomas Paine, in the same magazine, and for + the next month, was an attack on the practice of dueling, showing that it + was barbarous, that it did not even tend to settle the right or wrong of a + dispute, that it could not be defended on any just grounds, and that its + influence was degrading and cruel. The civilized world now agrees with the + opinions of Thomas Paine upon that barbarous practice. + </p> + <p> + In May, 1775, appeared in the same magazine another article written by + Thomas Paine, a Protest Against Cruelty to Animals. He began the work that + was so successfully and gloriously carried out by Henry Bergh, one of the + noblest, one of the grandest, men that this continent has produced. + </p> + <p> + The good people of this world agree with Thomas Paine. + </p> + <p> + In August of the same year he wrote a plea for the Rights of Woman, the + first ever published in the New World. Certainly he should not be hated + for that. + </p> + <p> + He was the first to suggest a union of the colonies. Before the + Declaration of Independence was issued, Paine had written of and about the + Free and Independent States of America. He had also spoken of the United + Colonies as the "Glorious Union," and he was the first to write these + words: "The United States of America." + </p> + <p> + In May, 1775, Washington said: "If you ever hear of me joining in any such + measure (as separation from Great Britain) you have my leave to set me + down for everything wicked." He had also said; "It is not the wish or + interest of the government (meaning Massachusetts), or of any other upon + this continent, separately or collectively, to set up for independence." + And in the same year Benjamin Franklin assured Chatham that no one in + America was in favor of separation. As a matter of fact, the people of the + colonies wanted a redress of their grievances—they were not dreaming + of separation, of independence. + </p> + <p> + In 1775 Paine wrote the pamphlet known as "Common Sense." This was + published on the 10th of January, 1776. It was the first appeal for + independence, the first cry for national life, for absolute separation. No + pamphlet, no book, ever kindled such a sudden conflagration,—a + purifying flame, in which the prejudices and fears of millions were + consumed. To read it now, after the lapse of more than a hundred years, + hastens the blood. It is but the meagre truth to say that Thomas Paine did + more for the cause of separation, to sow the seeds of independence, than + any other man of his time. Certainly we should not despise him for this. + The Declaration of Independence followed, and in that declaration will be + found not only the thoughts, but some of the expressions of Thomas Paine. + </p> + <p> + During the war, and in the very darkest hours, Paine wrote what is called + "The Crisis," a series of pamphlets giving from time to time his opinion + of events, and his prophecies. These marvelous publications produced an + effect nearly as great as the pamphlet "Common Sense." These strophes, + written by the bivouac fires, had in them the soul of battle. + </p> + <p> + In all he wrote, Paine was direct and natural. He touched the very heart + of the subject. He was not awed by names or titles, by place or power. He + never lost his regard for truth, for principle—never wavered in his + allegiance to reason, to what he believed to be right. His arguments were + so lucid, so unanswerable, his comparisons and analogies so apt, so + unexpected, that they excited the passionate admiration of friends and the + unquenchable hatred of enemies. So great were these appeals to patriotism, + to the love of liberty, the pride of independence, the glory of success, + that it was said by some of the best and greatest of that time that the + American cause owed as much to the pen of Paine as to the sword of + Washington. + </p> + <p> + On the 2d day of November, 1779, there was introduced into the Assembly of + Pennsylvania an act for the abolition of slavery. The preamble was written + by Thomas Paine. To him belongs the honor and glory of having written the + first Proclamation of Emancipation in America—Paine the first, + Lincoln the last. + </p> + <p> + Paine, of all others, succeeded in getting aid for the struggling colonies + from France. "According to Lamartine, the King, Louis XVI., loaded Paine + with favors, and a gift of six millions was confided into the hands of + Franklin and Paine. On the 25th of August, 1781, Paine reached Boston + bringing two million five hundred thousand livres in silver, and in convoy + a ship laden with clothing and military stores." + </p> + <p> + "In November, 1779, Paine was elected clerk to the General Assembly of + Pennsylvania. In 1780, the Assembly received a letter from General + Washington in the field, saying that he feared the distresses in the army + would lead to mutiny in the ranks. This letter was read by Paine to the + Assembly. He immediately wrote to Blair McClenaghan, a Philadelphia + merchant, explaining the urgency, and inclosing five hundred dollars, the + amount of salary due him as clerk, as his contribution towards a relief + fund. The merchant called a meeting the next day, and read Paine's letter. + A subscription list was immediately circulated, and in a short time about + one million five hundred thousand dollars was raised. With this capital + the Pennsylvania bank—afterwards the bank of North America—was + established for the relief of the army." + </p> + <p> + In 1783 "Paine wrote a memorial to Chancellor Livingston, Secretary of + Foreign Affairs, Robert Morris, Minister of Finance, and his assistant, + urging the necessity of adding a Continental Legislature to Congress, to + be elected by the several States. Robert Morris invited the Chancellor and + a number of eminent men to meet Paine at dinner, where his plea for a + stronger Union was discussed and approved. This was probably the earliest + of a series of consultations preliminary to the Constitutional + Convention." + </p> + <p> + "On the 19th of April, 1783, it being the eighth anniversary of the Battle + of Lexington, Paine printed a little pamphlet entitled 'Thoughts on Peace + and the Probable Advantages Thereof.'" In this pamphlet he pleads for "a + supreme Nationality absorbing all cherished sovereignties." Mr. Conway + calls this pamphlet Paine's "Farewell Address," and gives the following + extract: + </p> + <p> + "It was the cause of America that made me an author. The force with which + it struck my mind, and the dangerous condition in which the country was + in, by courting an impossible and an unnatural reconciliation with those + who were determined to reduce her, instead of striking out into the only + line that could save her,—a Declaration of Independence.—made + it impossible for me, feeling as I did, to be silent; and if, in the + course of more than seven years, I have rendered her any service, I have + likewise added something to the reputation of literature, by freely and + disinterestedly employing it in the great cause of mankind.... But as the + scenes of war are closed, and every man preparing for home and happier + times, I therefore take leave of the subject. I have most sincerely + followed it from beginning to end, and through all its turns and windings; + and whatever country I may hereafter be in, I shall always feel an honest + pride at the part I have taken and acted, and a gratitude to nature and + providence for putting it in my power to be of some use to mankind." + </p> + <p> + Paine had made some enemies, first, by attacking African slavery, and, + second, by insisting upon the sovereignty of the Nation. + </p> + <p> + During the Revolution our forefathers, in order to justify making war on + Great Britain, were compelled to take the ground that all men are entitled + to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In no other way could they + justify their action. After the war, the meaner instincts began to take + possession of the mind, and those who had fought for their own liberty + were perfectly willing to enslave others. We must also remember that the + Revolution was begun and carried on by a noble minority—that the + majority were really in favor of Great Britain and did what they dared to + prevent the success of the American cause. The minority, however, had + control of affairs. They were active, energetic, enthusiastic, and + courageous, and the majority were overawed, shamed, and suppressed. But + when peace came, the majority asserted themselves and the interests of + trade and commerce were consulted. Enthusiasm slowly died, and patriotism + was mingled with the selfishness of traffic. + </p> + <p> + But, after all, the enemies of Paine were few, the friends were many. He + had the respect and admiration of the greatest and the best, and was + enjoying the fruits of his labor. + </p> + <p> + The Revolution was ended, the colonies were free. They had been united, + they formed a Nation, and the United States of America had a place on the + map of the world. + </p> + <p> + Paine was not a politician. He had not labored for seven years to get an + office. His services were no longer needed in America. He concluded to + educate the English people, to inform them of their rights, to expose the + pretences, follies and fallacies, the crimes and cruelties of nobles, + kings, and parliaments. In the brain and heart of this man were the dream + and hope of the universal republic. He had confidence in the people. He + hated tyranny and war, despised the senseless pomp and vain show of + crowned robbers, laughed at titles, and the "honorable" badges worn by the + obsequious and servile, by fawners and followers; loved liberty with all + his heart, and bravely fought against those who could give the rewards of + place and gold, and for those who could pay only with thanks. + </p> + <p> + Hoping to hasten the day of freedom, he wrote the "Rights of Man"—a + book that laid the foundation for all the real liberty that the English + now enjoy—a book that made known to Englishmen the Declaration of + Nature, and convinced millions that all are children of the same mother, + entitled to share equally in her gifts. Every Englishman who has outgrown + the ideas of 1688 should remember Paine with love and reverence. Every + Englishman who has sought to destroy abuses, to lessen or limit the + prerogatives of the crown, to extend the suffrage, to do away with "rotten + boroughs," to take taxes from knowledge, to increase and protect the + freedom of speech and the press, to do away with bribes under the name of + pensions, and to make England a government of principles rather than of + persons, has been compelled to adopt the creed and use the arguments of + Thomas Paine. In England every step toward freedom has been a triumph of + Paine over Burke and Pitt. No man ever rendered a greater service to his + native land. + </p> + <p> + The book called the "Rights of Man" was the greatest contribution that + literature had given to liberty. It rests on the bed-rock. No attention is + paid to precedents except to show that they are wrong. Paine was not + misled by the proverbs that wolves had written for sheep. He had the + intelligence to examine for himself, and the courage to publish his + conclusions. As soon as the "Rights of Man" was published the Government + was alarmed. Every effort was made to suppress it. The author was + indicted; those who published, and those who sold, were arrested and + imprisoned. But the new gospel had been preached—a great man had + shed light—a new force had been born, and it was beyond the power of + nobles and kings to undo what the author-hero had done. + </p> + <p> + To avoid arrest and probable death, Paine left England. He had sown with + brave hand the seeds of thought, and he knew that he had lighted a fire + that nothing could extinguish until England should be free. + </p> + <p> + The fame of Thomas Paine had reached France in many ways—principally + through Lafayette. His services in America were well known. The pamphlet + "Common Sense" had been published in French, and its effect had been + immense. "The Rights of Man" that had created, and was then creating, such + a stir in England, was also known to the French. The lovers of liberty + everywhere were the friends and admirers of Thomas Paine. In America, + England, Scotland, Ireland, and France he was known as the defender of + popular rights. He had preached a new gospel. He had given a new Magna + Charta to the people. + </p> + <p> + So popular was Paine in France that he was elected by three constituencies + to the National Convention. He chose to represent Calais. From the moment + he entered French territory he was received with almost royal honors. He + at once stood with the foremost, and was welcomed by all enlightened + patriots. As in America, so in France, he knew no idleness—he was an + organizer and worker. The first thing he did was to found the first + Republican Society, and the next to write its Manifesto, in which the + ground was taken that France did not need a king; that the people should + govern themselves. In this Manifesto was this argument: + </p> + <p> + "What kind of office must that be in a government which requires neither + experience nor ability to execute? that may be abandoned to the desperate + chance of birth; that may be filled with an idiot, a madman, a tyrant, + with equal effect as with the good, the virtuous, the wise? An office of + this nature is a mere nonentity; it is a place of show, not of use." + </p> + <p> + He said: + </p> + <p> + "I am not the personal enemy of kings. Quite the contrary. No man wishes + more heartily than myself to see them all in the happy and honorable state + of private individuals; but I am the avowed, open and intrepid enemy of + what is called monarchy; and I am such by principles which nothing can + either alter or corrupt, by my attachment to humanity, by the anxiety + which I feel within myself for the dignity and honor of the human race." + </p> + <p> + One of the grandest things done by Thomas Paine was his effort to save the + life of Louis XVI. The Convention was in favor of death. Paine was a + foreigner. His career had caused some jealousies. He knew the danger he + was in—that the tiger was already crouching for a spring—but + he was true to his principles. He was opposed to the death penalty. He + remembered that Louis XVI. had been the friend of America, and he very + cheerfully risked his life, not only for the good of France, not only to + save the king, but to pay a debt of gratitude. He asked the Convention to + exile the king to the United States. He asked this as a member of the + Convention and as a citizen of the United States. As an American he felt + grateful not only to the king, but to every Frenchman. He, the adversary + of all kings, asked the Convention to remember that kings were men, and + subject to human frailties. He took still another step, and said: "As + France has been the first of European nations to abolish royalty, let us + also be the first to abolish the punishment of death." + </p> + <p> + Even after the death of Louis had been voted, Paine made another appeal. + With a courage born of the highest possible sense of duty he said: + </p> + <p> + "France has but one ally—the United States of America. That is the + only nation that can furnish France with naval provisions, for the + kingdoms of Northern Europe are, or soon will be, at war with her. It + happens that the person now under discussion is regarded in America as a + deliverer of their country. I can assure you that his execution will there + spread universal sorrow, and it is in your power not thus to wound the + feelings of your ally. Could I speak the French language I would descend + to your bar, and in their name become your petitioner to respite the + execution of your sentence on Louis. Ah, citizens, give not the tyrant of + England the triumph of seeing the man perish on the scaffold who helped my + dear brothers of America to break his chains." + </p> + <p> + This was worthy of the man who had said: "Where Liberty is <i>not</i>, + there is my country." + </p> + <p> + Paine was second on the committee to prepare the draft of a constitution + for France to be submitted to the Convention. He was the real author, not + only of the draft of the Constitution, but of the Declaration of Rights. + </p> + <p> + In France, as in America, he took the lead. His first thoughts seemed to + be first principles. He was clear because he was profound. People without + ideas experience great difficulty in finding words to express them. + </p> + <p> + From the moment that Paine cast his vote in favor of mercy—in favor + of life—the shadow of the guillotine was upon him. He knew that when + he voted for the King's life, he voted for his own death. Paine remembered + that the king had been the friend of America, and to him ingratitude + seemed the worst of crimes. He worked to destroy the monarch, not the man; + the king, not the friend. He discharged his duty and accepted death. This + was the heroism of goodness—the sublimity of devotion. + </p> + <p> + Believing that his life was near its close, he made up his mind to give to + the world his thoughts concerning "revealed religion." This he had for + some time intended to do, but other matters had claimed his attention. + Feeling that there was no time to be lost, he wrote the first part of the + "Age of Reason," and gave the manuscript to Joel Barlow. Six hours after, + he was arrested. The second part was written in prison while he was + waiting for death. + </p> + <p> + Paine clearly saw that men could not be really free, or defend the freedom + they had, unless they were free to think and speak. He knew that the + church was the enemy of liberty, that the altar and throne were in + partnership, that they helped each other and divided the spoils. + </p> + <p> + He felt that, being a man, he had the right to examine the creeds and the + Scriptures for himself, and that, being an honest man, it was his duty and + his privilege to tell his fellow-men the conclusions at which he arrived. + </p> + <p> + He found that the creeds of all orthodox churches were absurd and cruel, + and that the Bible was no better. Of course he found that there were some + good things in the creeds and in the Bible. These he defended, but the + infamous, the inhuman, he attacked. + </p> + <p> + In matters of religion he pursued the same course that he had in things + political. He depended upon experience, and above all on reason. He + refused to extinguish the light in his own soul. He was true to himself, + and gave to others his honest thoughts. He did not seek wealth, or place, + or fame. He sought the truth. + </p> + <p> + He had felt it to be his duty to attack the institution of slavery in + America, to raise his voice against dueling, to plead for the rights of + woman, to excite pity for the sufferings of domestic animals, the + speechless friends of man; to plead the cause of separation, of + independence, of American nationality, to attack the abuses and crimes of + mon-archs, to do what he could to give freedom to the world. + </p> + <p> + He thought it his duty to take another step. Kings asserted that they + derived their power, their right to govern, from God. To this assertion + Paine replied with the "Rights of Man." Priests pretended that they were + the authorized agents of God. Paine replied with the "Age of Reason." + </p> + <p> + This book is still a power, and will be as long as the absurdities and + cruelties of the creeds and the Bible have defenders. The "Age of Reason" + affected the priests just as the "Rights of Man" affected nobles and + kings. The kings answered the arguments of Paine with laws, the priests + with lies. Kings appealed to force, priests to fraud. Mr. Conway has + written in regard to the "Age of Reason" the most impressive and the most + interesting chapter in his book. + </p> + <p> + Paine contended for the rights of the individual,—tor the + jurisdiction of the soul. Above all religions he placed Reason, above all + kings, Men, and above all men, Law. + </p> + <p> + The first part of the "Age of Reason" was written in the shadow of a + prison, the second part in the gloom of death. From that shadow, from that + gloom, came a flood of light. This testament, by which the wealth of a + marvelous brain, the love of a great and heroic heart were given to the + world, was written in the presence of the scaffold, when the writer + believed he was giving his last message to his fellow-men. + </p> + <p> + The "Age of Reason" was his crime. + </p> + <p> + Franklin, Jefferson, Sumner and Lincoln, the four greatest statesmen that + America has produced, were believers in the creed of Thomas Paine. + </p> + <p> + The Universalists and Unitarians have found their best weapons, their best + arguments, in the "Age of Reason." + </p> + <p> + Slowly, but surely, the churches are adopting not only the arguments, but + the opinions of the great Reformer. + </p> + <p> + Theodore Parker attacked the Old Testament and Calvinistic theology with + the same weapons and with a bitterness excelled by no man who has + expressed his thoughts in our language. + </p> + <p> + Paine was a century in advance of his time. If he were living now his + sympathy would be with Savage, Chadwick, Professor Briggs and the + "advanced theologians." He, too, would talk about the "higher criticism" + and the latest definition of "inspiration." These advanced thinkers + substantially are repeating the "Age of Reason." They still wear the old + uniform—clinging to the toggery of theology—but inside of + their religious rags they agree with Thomas Paine. + </p> + <p> + Not one argument that Paine urged against the inspiration of the Bible, + against the truth of miracles, against the barbarities and infamies of the + Old Testament, against the pretensions of priests and the claims of kings, + has ever been answered. + </p> + <p> + His arguments in favor of the existence of what he was pleased to call the + God of Nature were as weak as those of all Theists have been. But in all + the affairs of this world, his clearness of vision, lucidity of + expression, cogency of argument, aptness of comparison, power of statement + and comprehension of the subject in hand, with all its bearings and + consequences, have rarely, if ever, been excelled. + </p> + <p> + He had no reverence for mistakes because they were old. He did not admire + the castles of Feudalism even when they were covered with ivy. He not only + said that the Bible was not inspired, but he demonstrated that it could + not all be true. This was "brutal." He presented arguments so strong, so + clear, so convincing, that they could not be answered. This was "vulgar." + </p> + <p> + He stood for liberty against kings, for humanity against creeds and gods. + This was "cowardly and low." He gave his life to free and civilize his + fellow-men. This was "infamous." + </p> + <p> + Paine was arrested and imprisoned in December, 1793. He was, to say the + least, neglected by Gouverneur Morris and Washington. He was released + through the efforts of James Monroe, in November, 1794. He was called back + to the Convention, but too late to be of use. As most of the actors had + suffered death, the tragedy was about over and the curtain was falling. + Paine remained in Paris until the "Reign of Terror" was ended and that of + the Corsican tyrant had commenced. + </p> + <p> + Paine came back to America hoping to spend the remainder of his life + surrounded by those for whose happiness and freedom he had labored so many + years. He expected to be rewarded with the love and reverence of the + American people. + </p> + <p> + In 1794 James Monroe had written to Paine these words: + </p> + <p> + "It is unnecessary for me to tell you how much all your countrymen, I + speak of the great mass of the people, are interested in your welfare. + They have not forgot the history of their own Revolution and the difficult + scenes through which they passed; nor do they review its several stages + without reviving in their bosoms a due sensibility of the merits of those + who served them in that great and arduous conflict. The crime of + ingratitude has not yet stained, and I hope never will stain, our national + character. You are considered by them as not only having rendered + important services in our own Revolution, but as being on a more extensive + scale the friend of human rights and a distinguished and able advocate of + public liberty. To the welfare of Thomas Paine we are not and cannot be + indifferent." + </p> + <p> + In the same year Mr. Monroe wrote a letter to the Committee of General + Safety, asking for the release of Mr. Paine, in which, among other things, + he said: + </p> + <p> + "The services Thomas Paine rendered to his country in its struggle for + freedom have implanted in the hearts of his countrymen a sense of + gratitude never to be effaced as long as they shall deserve the title of a + just and generous people." + </p> + <p> + On reaching America, Paine found that the sense of gratitude had been + effaced. He found that the Federalists hated him with all their hearts + because he believed in the rights of the people and was still true to the + splendid principles advocated during the darkest days of the Revolution. + In almost every pulpit he found a malignant and implacable foe, and the + pews were filled with his enemies. The slaveholders hated him. He was held + responsible even for the crimes of the French Revolution. He was regarded + as a blasphemer, an Atheist, an enemy of God and man. The ignorant + citizens of Bordentown, as cowardly as orthodox, longed to mob the author + of "Common Sense" and "The Crisis." They thought he had sold himself to + the Devil because he had defended God against the slanderous charges that + he had inspired the writers of the Bible—because he had said that a + being of infinite goodness and purity did not establish slavery and + polygamy. + </p> + <p> + Paine had insisted that men had the right to think for themselves. This so + enraged the average American citizen that he longed for revenge. + </p> + <p> + In 1802 the people of the United States had exceedingly crude ideas about + the liberty of thought and expression Neither had they any conception of + religious freedom. Their highest thought on that subject was expressed by + the word "toleration," and even this toleration extended only to the + various Christian sects. Even the vaunted religious liberty of colonial + Maryland was only to the effect that one kind of Christian should not + fine, imprison and kill another kind of Christian, but all kinds of + Christians had the right, and it was their duty, to brand, imprison and + kill Infidels of every kind. + </p> + <p> + Paine had been guilty of thinking for himself and giving his conclusions + to the world without having asked the consent of a priest—just as he + had published his political opinions without leave of the king. He had + published his thoughts on religion and had appealed to reason—to the + light in every mind, to the humanity, the pity, the goodness which he + believed to be in every heart. He denied the right of kings to make laws + and of priests to make creeds. He insisted that the people should make + laws, and that every human being should think for himself. While some + believed in the freedom of religion, he believed in the religion of + freedom. + </p> + <p> + If Paine had been a hypocrite, if he had concealed his opinions, if he had + defended slavery with quotations from the "sacred Scriptures"—if he + had cared nothing for the liberties of men in other lands—if he had + said that the state could not live without the church—if he had + sought for place instead of truth, he would have won wealth and power, and + his brow would have been crowned with the laurel of fame. + </p> + <p> + He made what the pious call the "mistake" of being true to himself—of + living with an unstained soul. He had lived and labored for the people. + The people were untrue' to him. They returned evil for good, hatred for + benefits received, and yet this great chivalric soul remembered their + ignorance and loved them with all his heart, and fought their oppressors + with all his strength. + </p> + <p> + We must remember what the churches and creeds were in that day, what the + theologians really taught, and what the people believed. To save a few in + spite of their vices, and to damn the many without regard to their + virtues, and all for the glory of the Damner:—<i>this was Calvinism</i>. + "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear," but he that hath a brain to + think must not think. He that believeth without evidence is good, and he + that believeth in spite of evidence is a saint. Only the wicked doubt, + only the blasphemer denies. <i>This was orthodox Christianity</i>. + </p> + <p> + Thomas Paine had the courage, the sense, the heart, to denounce these + horrors, these absurdities, these infinite infamies. He did what he could + to drive these theological vipers, these Calvinistic cobras, these fanged + and hissing serpents of superstition from the heart of man. + </p> + <p> + A few civilized men agreed with him then, and the world has progressed + since 1809. Intellectual wealth has accumulated; vast mental estates have + been left to the world. Geologists have forced secrets from the rocks, + astronomers from the stars, historians from old records and lost + languages. In every direction the thinker and the investigator have + ventured and explored, and even the pews have begun to ask questions of + the pulpits. Humboldt has lived, and Darwin and Haeckel and Huxley, and + the armies led by them, have changed the thought of the world. + </p> + <p> + The churches of 1809 could not be the friends of Thomas Paine. No church + asserting that belief is necessary to salvation ever was, or ever will be, + the champion of true liberty. A church founded on slavery—that is to + say, on blind obedience, worshiping irresponsible and arbitrary power, + must of necessity be the enemy of human freedom. + </p> + <p> + The orthodox churches are now anxious to save the little that Paine left + of their creed. If one now believes in God, and lends a little financial + aid, he is considered a good and desirable member. He need not define God + after the manner of the catechism. He may talk about a "Power that works + for righteousness," or the tortoise Truth that beats the rabbit Lie in the + long run, or the "Unknowable," or the "Unconditioned," or the "Cosmic + Force," or the "Ultimate Atom," or "Protoplasm," or the "What"—provided + he begins this word with a capital. + </p> + <p> + We must also remember that there is a difference between independence and + liberty. Millions have fought for independence—to throw off some + foreign yoke—and yet were at heart the enemies of true liberty. A + man in jail, sighing to be free, may be said to be in favor of liberty, + but not from principle; but a man who, being free, risks or gives his life + to free the enslaved, is a true soldier of liberty. + </p> + <p> + Thomas Paine had passed the legendary limit of life. One by one most of + his old friends and acquaintances had deserted him. Maligned on every + side, execrated, shunned and abhorred—his virtues denounced as vices—his + services forgotten—his character blackened, he preserved the poise + and balance of his soul. He was a victim of the people, but his + convictions remained unshaken. He was still a soldier in the army of + freedom, and still tried to enlighten and civilize those who were + impatiently waiting for his death. Even those who loved their enemies + hated him, their friend—the friend of the whole world—with all + their hearts. + </p> + <p> + On the 8th of June, 1809, death came—Death, almost his only friend. + </p> + <p> + At his funeral no pomp, no pageantry, no civic procession, no military + display. In a carriage, a woman and her son who had lived on the bounty of + the dead—On horseback, a Quaker, the humanity of whose heart + dominated the creed of his head—and, following on foot, two negroes + filled with gratitude—constituted the funeral cortege of Thomas + Paine. + </p> + <p> + He who had received the gratitude of many millions, the thanks of generals + and statesmen—he who had been the friend and companion of the wisest + and best—he who had taught a people to be free, and whose words had + inspired armies and enlightened nations, was thus given back to Nature, + the mother of us all. + </p> + <p> + If the people of the great Republic knew the life of this generous, this + chivalric man, the real story of his services, his sufferings and his + triumphs—of what he did to compel the robed and crowned, the priests + and kings, to give back to the people liberty, the jewel of the soul; if + they knew that he was the first to write, "The Religion of Humanity"; if + they knew that he, above all others, planted and watered the seeds of + independence, of union, of nationality, in the hearts of our forefathers—that + his words were gladly repeated by the best and bravest in many lands; if + they knew that he attempted, by the purest means, to attain the noblest + and loftiest ends—that he was original, sincere, intrepid, and that + he could truthfully say: "The world is my country, to do good my religion"—if + the people only knew all this—the truth—they would repeat the + words of Andrew Jackson: "Thomas Paine needs no monument made with hands; + he has erected a monument in the hearts of all lovers of liberty."—North + American Review, August, 1893. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0015" id="link0015"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + THE THREE PHILANTHROPISTS. + </h2> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + "Well, while I am a beggar, I will rail, + And say there is no sin but to be rich." +</pre> + <p> + MR. A. lived in the kingdom of————. He was a + sincere professional philanthropist. He was absolutely certain that he + loved his fellow-men, and that his views were humane and scientific. He + concluded to turn his attention to taking care of people less fortunate + than himself. + </p> + <p> + With this object in view he investigated the common people that lived + about him, and he found that they were extremely ignorant, that many of + them seemed to take no particular interest in life or in business, that + few of them had any theories of their own, and that, while many had + muscle, there was only now and then one who had any mind worth speaking + of. Nearly all of them were destitute of ambition. They were satisfied if + they got something to eat, a place to sleep, and could now and then + indulge in some form of dissipation. They seemed to have great confidence + in to-morrow—trusted to luck, and took no thought for the future. + Many of them were extravagant, most of them dissipated, and a good many + dishonest. + </p> + <p> + Mr. A. found that many of the husbands not only failed to support their + families, but that some of them lived on the labor of their wives; that + many of the wives were careless of their obligations, knew nothing about + the art of cooking; nothing about keeping house; and that parents, as a + general thing, neglected their children or treated them with cruelty. He + also found that many of the people were so shiftless that they died of + want and exposure. + </p> + <p> + After having obtained this information Mr. A. made up his mind to do what + little he could to better their condition. He petitioned the king to + assist him, and asked that he be allowed to take control of five hundred + people in consideration that he would pay a certain amount into the + treasury of the kingdom. The king being satisfied that Mr. A. could take + care of these people better than they were taking care of themselves, + granted the petition. + </p> + <p> + Mr. A., with the assistance of a few soldiers, took these people from + their old homes and haunts to a plantation of his own. He divided them + into groups, and over each group placed a superintendent. He made certain + rules and regulations for their conduct. They were only compelled to work + from twelve to fourteen hours a day, leaving ten hours for sleep and + recreation. Good and substantial food was provided. Their houses were + comfortable and their clothing sufficient. Their work was laid out from + day to day and from month to month, so that they knew exactly what they + were to do in each hour of every day. These rules were made for the good + of the people, to the end that they might not interfere with each other, + that they might attend to their duties, and enjoy themselves in a + reasonable way. They were not allowed to waste their time, or to use + stimulants or profane language. They were told to be respectful to the + superintendents, and especially to Mr. A.; to be obedient, and, above all, + to accept the position in which Providence had placed them, without + complaining, and to cheerfully perform their tasks. + </p> + <p> + Mr. A. had found out all that the five hundred persons had earned the year + before they were taken control of by him—just how much they had + added to the wealth of the world. He had statistics taken for the year + before with great care showing the number of deaths, the cases of sickness + and of destitution, the number who had committed suicide, how many had + been convicted of crimes and misdemeanors, how many days they had been + idle, and how much time and money they had spent in drink and for + worthless amusements. + </p> + <p> + During the first year of their enslavement he kept like statistics. He + found that they had earned several times as much; that there had been no + cases of destitution, no drunkenness; that no crimes had been committed; + that there had been but little sickness, owing to the regular course of + their lives; that few had been guilty of misdemeanors, owing to the + certainty of punishment; and that they had been so watched and + superintended that for the most part they had traveled the highway of + virtue and industry. + </p> + <p> + Mr. A. was delighted, and with a vast deal of pride showed these + statistics to his friends. He not only demonstrated that the five hundred + people were better off than they had been before, but that his own income + was very largely increased. He congratulated himself that he had added to + the well-being of these people not only, but had laid the foundation of a + great fortune for himself. On these facts and these figures he claimed not + only to be a philanthropist, but a philosopher; and all the people who had + a mind to go into the same business agreed with him. + </p> + <p> + Some denounced the entire proceeding as unwarranted, as contrary to reason + and justice. These insisted that the five hundred people had a right to + live in their own way provided they did not interfere with others; that + they had the right to go through the world with little food and with poor + clothes, and to live in huts, if such was their choice. But Mr. A. had no + trouble in answering these objectors. He insisted that well-being is the + only good, and that every human being is under obligation, not only to + take care of himself, but to do what little he can towards taking care of + others; that where five hundred people neglect to take care of themselves, + it is the duty of somebody else, who has more intelligence and more means, + to take care of them; that the man who takes five hundred people and + improves their condition, gives them on the average better food, better + clothes, and keeps them out of mischief, is a benefactor. + </p> + <p> + "These people," said Mr. A., "were tried. They were found incapable of + taking care of themselves. They lacked intelligence or will or honesty or + industry or ambition or something, so that in the struggle for existence + they fell behind, became stragglers, dropped by the wayside, died in + gutters; while many were destined to end their days either in dungeons or + on scaffolds. Besides all this, they were a nuisance to their prosperous + fellow-citizens, a perpetual menace to the peace of society. They + increased the burden of taxation; they filled the ranks of the criminal + classes, they made it necessary to build more jails, to employ more + policemen and judges; so that I, by enslaving them, not only assisted + them, not only protected them against themselves, not only bettered their + condition, not only added to the well-being of-society at large, but + greatly increased my own fortune." + </p> + <p> + Mr. A. also took the ground that Providence, by giving him superior + intelligence, the genius of command, the aptitude for taking charge of + others, had made it his duty to exercise these faculties for the + well-being of the people and for the glory of God. Mr. A. frequently + declared that he was God's steward. He often said he thanked God that he + was not governed by a sickly sentiment, but that he was a man of sense, of + judgment, of force of character, and that the means employeed by him were + in accordance with the logic of facts. + </p> + <p> + Some of the people thus enslaved objected, saying that they had the same + right to control themselves that Mr. A. had to control himself. But it + only required a little discipline to satisfy them that they were wrong. + Some of the people were quite happy, and declared that nothing gave them + such perfect contentment as the absence of all responsibility. Mr. A. + insisted that all men had not been endowed with the same capacity; that + the weak ought to be cared for by the strong; that such was evidently the + design of the Creator, and that he intended to do what little he could to + carry that design into effect. + </p> + <p> + Mr. A. was very successful. In a few years he had several thousands of + men, women, and children working for him. He amassed a large fortune. He + felt that he had been intrusted with this money by Providence. He + therefore built several churches, and once in a while gave large sums to + societies for the spread of civilization. He passed away regretted by a + great many people—not including those who had lived under his + immediate administration. He was buried with great pomp, the king being + one of the pall-bearers, and on his tomb was this: + </p> + <p> + HE WAS THE PROVIDENCE OF THE POOR. II. + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + "And, being rich, my virtue then shall be + To say there is no vice but beggary." +</pre> + <p> + Mr. B. did not believe in slavery. He despised the institution with every + drop of his blood, and was an advocate of universal freedom. He held all + the ideas of Mr. A. in supreme contempt, and frequently spent whole + evenings in denouncing the inhumanity and injustice of the whole business. + He even went so far as to contend that many of A.'s slaves had more + intelligence than A. himself, and that, whether they had intelligence or + not, they had the right to be free. He insisted that Mr. A.'s philanthropy + was a sham; that he never bought a human being for the purpose of + bettering that being's condition; that he went into the business simply to + make money for himself; and that his talk about his slaves committing less + crime than when they were free was simply to justify the crime committed + by himself in enslaving his fellow-men. + </p> + <p> + Mr. B. was a manufacturer, and he employeed some five or six thousand men. + He used to say that these men were not forced to work for him; that they + were at perfect liberty to accept or reject the terms; that, so far as he + was concerned, he would just as soon commit larceny or robbery as to force + a man to work for him. "Every laborer under my roof," he used to say, "is + as free to choose as I am." + </p> + <p> + Mr B. believed in absolutely free trade; thought it an outrage to + interfere with the free interplay of forces; said that every man should + buy, or at least have the privilege of buying, where he could buy + cheapest, and should have the privilege of selling where he could get the + most. He insisted that a man who has labor to sell has the right to sell + it to the best advantage, and that the purchaser has the right to buy it + at the lowest price. He did not enslave men—he hired them. Some said + that he took advantage of their necessities; but he answered that he + created no necessities, that he was not responsible for their condition, + that he did not make them poor, that he found them poor and gave them + work, and gave them the same wages that he could employ others for. He + insisted that he was absolutely just to all; he did not give one man more + than another, and he never refused to employ a man on account of the man's + religion or politics; all that he did was simply to employ that man if the + man wished to be employed, and give him the wages, no more and no less, + that some other man of like capacity was willing to work for. + </p> + <p> + Mr. B. also said that the price of the article manufactured by him fixed + the wages of the persons employed, and that he, Mr. B., was not + responsible for the price of the article he manufactured; consequently he + was not responsible for the wages of the workmen. He agreed to pay them a + certain price, he taking the risk of selling his articles, and he paid + them regularly just on the day he agreed to pay them, and if they were not + satisfied with the wages, they were at perfect liberty to leave. One of + his private sayings was: "The poor ye have always with you." And from this + he argued that some men were made poor so that others could be generous. + "Take poverty and suffering from the world," he said, "and you destroy + sympathy and generosity." + </p> + <p> + Mr. B. made a large amount of money. Many of his workmen complained that + their wages did not allow them to live in comfort. Many had large + families, and therefore but little to eat. Some of them lived in crowded + rooms. Many of the children were carried off by disease; but Mr. B. took + the ground that all these people had the right to go, that he did not + force them to remain, that if they were not healthy it was not his fault, + and that whenever it pleased Providence to remove a child, or one of the + parents, he, Mr. B., was not responsible. + </p> + <p> + Mr. B. insisted that many of his workmen were extravagant; that they + bought things that they did not need; that they wasted in beer and + tobacco, money that they should save for funerals; that many of them + visited places of amusement when they should have been thinking about + death, and that others bought toys to please the children when they hardly + had bread enough to eat. He felt that he was in no way accountable for + this extravagance, nor for the fact that their wages did not give them the + necessaries of life, because he not only gave them the same wages that + other manufacturers gave, but the same wages that other workmen were + willing to work for. + </p> + <p> + Mr. B. said,—and he always said this as though it ended the + argument,—and he generally stood up to say it: "The great law of + supply and demand is of divine origin; it is the only law that will work + in all possible or conceivable cases; and this law fixes the price of all + labor, and from it there is no appeal. If people are not satisfied with + the operation of the law, then let them make a new world for themselves." + </p> + <p> + Some of Mr. B.'s friends reported that on several occasions, forgetting + what he had said on others, he did declare that his confidence was + somewhat weakened in the law of supply and demand; but this was only when + there seemed to be an over-production of the things he was engaged in + manufacturing, and at such times he seemed to doubt the absolute equity of + the great law. + </p> + <p> + Mr. B. made even a larger fortune than Mr. A., because when his workmen + got old he did not have to care for them, when they were sick he paid no + doctors, and when their children died he bought no coffins. In this way he + was relieved of a large part of the expenses that had to be borne by Mr. + A. When his workmen became too old, they were sent to the poorhouse; when + they were sick, they were assisted by charitable societies; and when they + died, they were buried by pity. + </p> + <p> + In a few years Mr. B. was the owner of many millions. He also considered + himself as one of God's stewards; felt that Providence had given him the + intelligence to combine interests, to carry out great schemes, and that he + was specially raised up to give employment to many thousands of people. He + often regretted that he could do no more for his laborers without + lessening his own profits, or, rather, without lessening his fund for the + blessing of mankind—the blessing to begin immediately after his + death. He was so anxious to be the providence of posterity that he was + sometimes almost heartless in his dealings with contemporaries. He felt + that it was necessary for him to be economical, to save every dollar that + he could, because in this way he could increase the fund that was finally + to bless mankind. He also felt that in this way he could lay the + foundations of a permanent fame—that he could build, through his + executors, an asylum to be called the "B. Asylum," that he could fill a + building with books to be called the "B. Library," and that he could also + build and endow an institution of learning to be called the "B. College," + and that, in addition, a large amount of money could be given for the + purpose of civilizing the citizens of less fortunate countries, to the end + that they might become imbued with that spirit of combination and + manufacture that results in putting large fortunes in the hands of those + who have been selected by Providence, on account of their talents, to make + a better distribution of wealth than those who earned it could have done. + </p> + <p> + Mr. B. spent many thousands of dollars to procure such legislation as + would protect him from foreign competition. He did not believe the law of + supply and demand would work when interfered with by manufacturers living + in other countries. + </p> + <p> + Mr. B., like Mr. A., was a man of judgment. He had what is called a level + head, was not easily turned aside from his purpose, and felt that he was + in accord with the general sentiment of his time. By his own exertions he + rose from poverty to wealth. He was born in a hut and died in a palace. He + was a patron of art and enriched his walls with the works of the masters. + He insisted that others could and should follow his example. For those who + failed or refused he had no sympathy. He accounted for their poverty and + wretchedness by saying: "These paupers have only themselves to blame." He + died without ever having lost a dollar. His funeral was magnificent, and + clergymen vied with each other in laudations of the dead. Over his dust + rises a monument of marble with the words: + </p> + <p> + HE LIVED FOR OTHERS. III + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + "But there are men who steal, and vainly try + To gild the crime with pompous charity." +</pre> + <p> + There was another man, Mr. C., who also had the genius for combination. He + understood the value of capital, the value of labor; knew exactly how much + could be done with machinery; understood the economy of things; knew how + to do everything in the easiest and shortest way. And he, too, was a + manufacturer and had in his employ many thousands of men, women, and + children. He was what is called a visionary, a sentimentalist, rather weak + in his will, not very obstinate, had but little egotism; and it never + occurred to him that he had been selected by Providence, or any + supernatural power, to divide the property of others. It did not seem to + him that he had any right to take from other men their labor without + giving them a full equivalent. He felt that if he had more intelligence + than his fellow-men he ought to use that intelligence not only for his own + good but for theirs; that he certainly ought not to use it for the purpose + of gaining an advantage over those who were his intellectual inferiors. He + used to say that a man strong intellectually had no more right to take + advantage of a man weak intellectually than the physically strong had to + rob the physically weak. + </p> + <p> + He also insisted that we should not take advantage of each other's + necessities; that you should not ask a drowning man a greater price for + lumber than you would if he stood on the shore; that if you took into + consideration the necessities of your fellow-man, it should be only to + lessen the price of that which you would sell to him, not to increase it. + He insisted that honest men do not take advantage of their fellows. He was + so weak that he had not perfect confidence in the great law of supply and + demand as applied to flesh and blood. He took into consideration another + law of supply and demand; he knew that the workingman had to be supplied + with food, and that his nature demanded something to eat, a house to live + in, clothes to wear. + </p> + <p> + Mr. C. used to think about this law of supply and demand as applicable to + individuals. He found that men would work for exceedingly small wages when + pressed for the necessaries of life; that under some circumstances they + would give their labor for half of what it was worth to the employer, + because they were in a position where they must do something for wife or + child. He concluded that he had no right to take advantage of the + necessities of others, and that he should in the first place honestly find + what the work was worth to him, and then give to the man who did the work + that amount. + </p> + <p> + Other manufacturers regarded Mr. C. as substantially insane, while most of + his workmen looked upon him as an exceedingly good-natured man, without + any particular genius for business. Mr. C., however, cared little about + the opinions of others, so long as he maintained his respect for himself. + </p> + <p> + At the end of the first year he found that he had made a large profit, and + thereupon he divided this profit with the people who had earned it. Some + of his friends said to him that he ought to endow some public institution; + that there should be a college in his native town; but Mr. C. was of such + a peculiar turn of mind that he thought justice ought to go before + charity, and a little in front of egotism, and a desire to immortalize + one's self. He said that it seemed to him that of all persons in the world + entitled to this profit were the men who had earned it, the men who had + made it by their labor, by days of actual toil. He insisted that, as they + had earned it, it was really theirs, and if it was theirs, they should + have it and should spend it in their own way. Mr. C. was told that he + would make the workmen in other factories dissatisfied, that other + manufacturers would become his enemies, and that his course would + scandalize some of the greatest men who had done so much for the + civilization of the world and for the spread of intelligence. Mr. C. + became extremely unpopular with men of talent, with those who had a genius + for business. He, however, pursued his way, and carried on his business + with the idea that the men who did the work were entitled to a fair share + of the profits; that, after all, money was not as sacred as men, and that + the law of supply and demand, as understood, did not apply to flesh and + blood. + </p> + <p> + Mr. C. said: "I cannot be happy if those who work for me are defrauded. If + I feel I am taking what belongs to them, then my life becomes miserable. + To feel that I have done justice is one of the necessities of my nature. I + do not wish to establish colleges. I wish to establish no public + institution. My desire is to enable those who work for me to establish a + few thousand homes for themselves. My ambition is to enable them to buy + the books they really want to read. I do not wish to establish a hospital, + but I want to make it possible for my workmen to have the services of the + best physicians—physicians of their own choice. + </p> + <p> + "It is not for me to take their money and use it for the good of others or + for my own glory. It is for me to give what they have earned to them. + After I have given them the money that belongs to them, I can give them my + advice—I can tell them how I hope they will use it; and after I have + advised them, they will use it as they please. You cannot make great men + and great women by suppression. Slavery is not the school in which genius + is born. Every human being must make his own mistakes for himself, must + learn for himself, must have his own experience; and if the world + improves, it must be from choice, not from force; and every man who does + justice, who sets the example of fair dealing, hastens the coming of + universal honesty, of universal civilization." + </p> + <p> + Mr. C. carried his doctrine out to the fullest extent, honestly and + faithfully. When he died, there were at the funeral those who had worked + for him, their wives and their children. Their tears fell upon his grave. + They planted flowers and paid to him the tribute of their love. Above his + silent dust they erected a monument with this inscription: + </p> + <p> + HE ALLOWED OTHERS TO LIVE FOR THEMSELVES. + </p> + <p> + North American Review, December, 1831. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0016" id="link0016"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + SHOULD THE CHINESE BE EXCLUDED? + </h2> + <p> + THE average American, like the average man of any country, has but little + imagination. People who speak a different language, or worship some other + god, or wear clothing unlike his own, are beyond the horizon of his + sympathy. He cares but little or nothing for the sufferings or misfortunes + of those who are of a different complexion or of another race. His + imagination is not powerful enough to recognize the human being, in spite + of peculiarities. Instead of this he looks upon every difference as an + evidence of inferiority, and for the inferior he has but little if any + feeling. If these "inferior people" claim equal rights he feels insulted, + and for the purpose of establishing his own superiority tramples on the + rights of the so-called inferior. + </p> + <p> + In our own country the native has always considered himself as much better + than the immigrant, and as far superior to all people of a different + complexion. At one time our people hated the Irish, then the Germans, then + the Italians, and now the Chinese. The Irish and Germans, however, became + numerous. They became citizens, and, most important of all, they had + votes. They combined, became powerful, and the political parties sought + their aid. They had something to give in exchange for protection—in + exchange for political rights. In consequence of this they were flattered + by candidates, praised by the political press, and became powerful enough + not only to protect themselves, but at last to govern the principal cities + in the United States. As a matter of fact the Irish and the Germans drove + the native Americans out of the trades and from the lower forms of labor. + They built the railways and canals. They became servants. Afterward the + Irish and the Germans were driven from the canals and railways by the + Italians. + </p> + <p> + The Irish and Germans improved their condition. They went into other + businesses, into the higher and more lucrative trades. They entered the + professions, turned their attention to politics, became merchants, + brokers, and professors in colleges. They are not now building railroads + or digging on public works. They are contractors, legislators, holders of + office, and the Italians and Chinese are doing the old work. + </p> + <p> + If matters had been allowed to work in a natural way, without the + interference of mobs or legislators, the Chinese would have driven the + Italians to better employments, and all menial labor would, in time, be + done by the Mongolians. + </p> + <p> + In olden times each nation hated all others. This was considered natural + and patriotic. Spain, after many centuries of war, expelled the Moors, + then the Moriscoes, and then the Jews. And Spain, in the name of religion + and patriotism, succeeded in driving from its territory its industry, its + taste and its intelligence, and by these mistakes became poor, ignorant + and weak. France started on the same path when the Huguenots were + expelled, and even England at one time deported the Jews. In those days a + difference of race or religion was sufficient to justify any absurdity and + any cruelty. + </p> + <p> + In our country, as a matter of fact, there is but little prejudice against + emigrants coming from Europe, except among naturalized citizens; but + nearly all foreign-born citizens are united in their prejudice against the + Chinese. + </p> + <p> + The truth is that the Chinese came to this country by invitation. Under + the Burlingame Treaty, China and the United States recognized: + </p> + <p> + "The inherent and inalienable right of man to change his home and + allegiance, and also the mutual advantage of free migration and emigration + of their citizens and subjects respectively from one country to the other + for purposes of curiosity, of trade, or as permanent residents." + </p> + <p> + And it was provided: + </p> + <p> + "That the citizens of the United States visiting or residing in China and + Chinese subjects visiting or residing in the United States should + reciprocally enjoy the same privileges, immunities and exemptions, in + respect to travel or residence, as shall be enjoyed by the citizens or + subjects of the most favored nation, in the country in which they shall + respectively be visiting or residing." + </p> + <p> + So, by the treaty of 1880, providing for the limitation or suspension of + emigration of Chinese labor, it was declared: + </p> + <p> + "That the limitation or suspension should apply only to Chinese who + emigrated to the United States as laborers; but that Chinese laborers who + were then in the United States should be allowed to go and come of their + own free will and should be accorded all the rights, privileges, + immunities and exemptions, which were accorded to the citizens and + subjects of the most favored nations." + </p> + <p> + It will thus be seen that all Chinese laborers who came to this country + prior to the treaty of 1880 were to be treated the same as the citizens + and subjects of the most favored nation; that is to say, they were to be + protected by our laws the same as we protect our own citizens. + </p> + <p> + These Chinese laborers are inoffensive, peaceable and law-abiding. They + are honest, keeping their contracts, doing as they agree. They are + exceedingly industrious, always ready to work and always giving + satisfaction to their employers. They do not interfere with other people. + They cannot become citizens. They have no voice in the making or the + execution of the laws. They attend to their own business. They have their + own ideas, customs, religion and ceremonies—about as foolish as our + own; but they do not try to make converts or to force their dogmas on + others. They are patient, uncomplaining, stoical and philosophical. They + earn what they can, giving reasonable value for the money they receive, + and as a rule, when they have amassed a few thousand dollars, they go back + to their own country. They do not interfere with our ideas, our ways or + customs. They are silent workers, toiling without any object, except to do + their work and get their pay. They do not establish saloons and run for + Congress. Neither do they combine for the purpose of governing others. Of + all the people on our soil they are the least meddlesome. Some of them + smoke opium, but the opium-smoker does not beat his wife. Some of them + play games of chance, but they are not members of the Stock Exchange. They + eat the bread that they earn; they neither beg nor steal, but they are of + no use to parties or politicians except as they become fuel to supply the + flame of prejudice. They are not citizens and they cannot vote. Their + employers are about the only friends they have. + </p> + <p> + In the Pacific States the lowest became their enemies and asked for their + expulsion. They denounced the Chinese and those who gave them work. The + patient followers of Confucius were treated as outcasts—stoned by + boys in the streets and mobbed by the fathers. Few seemed to have any + respect for their rights or their feelings. They were unlike us. They wore + different clothes. They dressed their hair in a peculiar way, and + therefore they were beyond our sympathies. These ideas, these practices, + demoralized many communities; the laboring people became cruel and the + small politicians infamous. + </p> + <p> + When the rights of even one human being are held in contempt the rights of + all are in danger. We cannot destroy the liberties of others without + losing our own. By exciting the prejudices of the ignorant we at last + produce a contempt for law and justice, and sow the seeds of violence and + crime. + </p> + <p> + Both of the great political parties pandered to the leaders of the crusade + against the Chinese for the sake of electoral votes, and in the Pacific + States the friends of the Chinese were forced to keep still or to publicly + speak contrary to their convictions. The orators of the "Sand Lots" were + in power, and the policy of the whole country was dictated by the most + ignorant and prejudiced of our citizens. Both of the great parties + ratified the outrages committed by the mobs, and proceeded with alacrity + to violate the treaties and solemn obligations of the Government. These + treaties were violated, these obligations were denied, and thousands of + Chinamen were deprived of their rights, of their property, and hundreds + were maimed or murdered. They were driven from their homes. They were + hunted like wild beasts. All this was done in a country that sends + missionaries to China to tell the benighted savages of the blessed + religion of the United States. + </p> + <p> + At first a demand was made that the Chinese should be driven out, then + that no others should be allowed to come, and laws with these objects in + view were passed, in spite of the treaties, preventing the coming of any + more. For a time that satisfied the haters of the Mongolian. Then came a + demand for more stringent legislation, so that many of the Chinese already + here could be compelled to leave. The answer or response to this demand is + what is known as the Geary Law. + </p> + <p> + By this act it is provided, among other things, that any Chinaman + convicted of not being lawfully in the country shall be removed to China, + after having been imprisoned at hard labor for not exceeding one year. + This law also does away with bail on <i>habeas corpus</i>, proceedings + where the right to land has been denied to a Chinaman. It also compels all + Chinese laborers to obtain, within one year after the passage of the law, + certificates of residence from the revenue collectors, and if found + without such certificate they shall be held to be unlawfully in the United + States. + </p> + <p> + It is further provided that if a Chinaman claims that he failed to get + such certificate by "accident, sickness or other unavoidable cause," then + he must clearly establish such claim to the satisfaction of the judge "by + at least one credible white witness." + </p> + <p> + If we were at war with China then we might legally consider every Chinaman + as an enemy, but we were and are at peace with that country. The Geary Act + was passed by Congress and signed by the President simply for the sake of + votes. The Democrats in Congress voted for it to save the Pacific States + to the Democratic column; and a Republican President signed it so that the + Pacific States should vote the Republican ticket. Principle was forgotten, + or rather it was sacrificed, in the hope of political success. It was then + known, as now, that China is a peaceful nation, that it does not believe + in war as a remedy, that it relies on negotiation and treaty. It is also + known that the Chinese in this country were helpless, without friends, + without power to defend themselves. It is possible that many members of + Congress voted in favor of the Act believing that the Supreme Court would + hold it unconstitutional, and that in the meantime it might be politically + useful. + </p> + <p> + The idea of imprisoning a man at hard labor for a year, and this man a + citizen of a friendly nation, for the crime of being found in this country + without a certificate of residence, must be abhorrent to the mind of every + enlightened man. Such punishment for such an "offence" is barbarous and + belongs to the earliest times of which we know. This law makes industry a + crime and puts one who works for his bread on a level with thieves and the + lowest criminals, treats him as a felon, and clothes him in the stripes of + a convict,—and all this is done at the demand of the ignorant, of + the prejudiced, of the heartless, and because the Chinese are not voters + and have no political power. + </p> + <p> + The Chinese are not driven away because there is no room for them. Our + country is not crowded. There are many millions of acres waiting for the + plow. There is plenty of room here under our flag for five hundred + millions of people. These Chinese that we wish to oppress and imprison are + people who understand the art of irrigation. They can redeem the deserts. + They are the best of gardeners. They are modest and willing to occupy the + lowest seats. They only ask to be day-laborers, washers and ironers. They + are willing to sweep and scrub. They are good cooks. They can clear lands + and build railroads. They do not ask to be masters—they wish only to + serve. In every capacity they are faithful; but in this country their + virtues have made enemies, and they are hated because of their patience, + their honesty and their industry. + </p> + <p> + The Geary Law, however, failed to provide the ways and means for carrying + it into effect, so that the probability is it will remain a dead letter + upon the statute book. The sum of money required to carry it out is too + large, and the law fails to create the machinery and name the persons + authorized to deport the Chinese. Neither is there any mode of trial + pointed out. According to the law there need be no indictment by a grand + jury, no trial by a jury, and the person found guilty of being here + without a certificate of residence can be imprisoned and treated as a + felon without the ordinary forms of trial. + </p> + <p> + This law is contrary to the laws and customs of nations. The punishment is + unusual, severe, and contrary to our Constitution, and under its + provisions aliens—citizens of a friendly nation—can be + imprisoned without due process of law. The law is barbarous, contrary to + the spirit and genius of American institutions, and was passed in + violation of solemn treaty stipulations. + </p> + <p> + The Congress-that passed it is the same that closed the gates of the + World's Fair on the "blessed Sabbath," thinking it wicked to look at + statues and pictures on that day. These representatives of the people seem + to have had more piety than principle. + </p> + <p> + After the passage of such a law by the United States is it not indecent + for us to send missionaries to China? Is there not work enough for them at + home? We send ministers to China to convert the heathen; but when we find + a Chinaman on our soil, where he can be saved by our example, we treat him + as a criminal. + </p> + <p> + It is to the interest of this country to maintain friendly relations with + China. We want the trade of nearly one-fourth of the human race. We want + to pay for all we get from that country in articles of our own + manufacture. We lost the trade of Mexico and the South American Republics + because of slavery, because we hated people in whose veins was found a + drop of African blood, and now we are losing the trade of China by + pandering to the prejudices of the ignorant and cruel. + </p> + <p> + After all, it pays to do right. This is a hard truth to learn—especially + for a nation. A great nation should be bound by the highest conception of + justice and honor. Above all things it should be true to its treaties, its + contracts, its obligations. It should remember that its responsibilities + are in accordance with its power and intelligence. + </p> + <p> + Our Government is founded on the equality of human rights—on the + idea, the sacred truth, that all are entitled to life, liberty and the + pursuit of happiness. Our country is an asylum for the oppressed of all + nations—of all races. Here, the Government gets its power from the + consent of the governed. After the abolition of slavery these great truths + were not only admitted, but they found expression in our Constitution and + laws. + </p> + <p> + Shall we now go back to barbarism? + </p> + <p> + Russia is earning the hatred of the civilized world by driving the Jews + from their homes. But what can the United States say? Our mouths are + closed by the Geary Law. We are in the same business. Our law is as + inhuman as the order or ukase of the Czar. + </p> + <p> + Let us retrace our steps, repeal the law and accomplish what we justly + desire by civilized means. Let us treat China as we would England; and, + above all, let us respect the rights of men,—North American Review, + July, 1893. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0017" id="link0017"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + A WORD ABOUT EDUCATION. + </h2> + <p> + THE end of life—the object of life—is happiness. Nothing can + be better than that—nothing higher. In order to be really happy, man + must be in harmony with his surroundings, with the conditions of + well-being. In order to know these surroundings, he must be educated, and + education is of value only as it contributes to the wellbeing of man, and + only that is education which increases the power of man to gratify his + real wants—wants of body and of mind. + </p> + <p> + The educated man knows the necessity of finding out the facts in nature, + the relations between himself and his fellow-men, between himself and the + world, to the end that he may take advantage of these facts and relations + for the benefit of himself and others. He knows that a man may understand + Latin and Greek, Hebrew and Sanscrit, and be as ignorant of the great + facts and forces in nature as a native of Central Africa. + </p> + <p> + The educated man knows something that he can use, not only for the benefit + of himself, but for the benefit of others. Every skilled mechanic, every + good farmer, every man who knows some of the real facts in nature that + touch him, is to that extent an educated man. The skilled mechanic and the + intelligent farmer may not be what we call "scholars," and what we call + scholars may not be educated men. + </p> + <p> + Man is in constant need. He must protect himself from cold and heat, from + sun and storm. He needs food and raiment for the body, and he needs what + we call art for the development and gratification of his brain. Beginning + with what are called the necessaries of life, he rises to what are known + as the luxuries, and the luxuries become necessaries, and above luxuries + he rises to the highest wants of the soul. + </p> + <p> + The man who is fitted to take care of himself, in the conditions he may be + placed, is, in a very important sense, an educated man. The savage who + understands the habits of animals, who is a good hunter and fisher, is a + man of education, taking into consideration his circumstances. The + graduate of a university who cannot take care of himself—no matter + how much he may have studied—is not an educated man. + </p> + <p> + In our time, an educated man, whether a mechanic, a farmer, or one who + follows a profession, should know something about what the world has + discovered. He should have an idea of the outlines of the sciences. He + should have read a little, at least, of the best that has been written. He + should know something of mechanics, a little about politics, commerce, and + metaphysics; and in addition to all this, he should know how to make + something. His hands should be educated, so that he can, if necessary, + supply his own wants by supplying the wants of others. + </p> + <p> + There are mental misers—men who gather learning all their lives and + keep it to themselves. They are worse than hoarders of gold, because when + they die their learning dies with them, while the metal miser is compelled + to leave his gold for others. + </p> + <p> + The first duty of man is to support himself—to see to it that he + does not become a burden. His next duty is to help others if he has a + surplus, and if he really believes they deserve to be helped. + </p> + <p> + It is not necessary to have what is called a university education in order + to be useful or to be happy, any more than it is necessary to be rich, to + be happy. Great wealth is a great burden, and to have more than you can + use, is to care for more than you want. The happiest are those who are + prosperous, and who by reasonable endeavor can supply their reasonable + wants and have a little surplus year by year for the winter of their + lives. + </p> + <p> + So, it is no use to learn thousands and thousands of useless facts, or to + fill the brain with unspoken tongues. This is burdening yourself with more + than you can use. The best way is to learn the useful. + </p> + <p> + We all know that men in moderate circumstances cau have just as + comfortable houses as the richest, just as comfortable clothing, just as + good food. They can see just as fine paintings, just as marvelous statues, + and they can hear just as good music. They can attend the same theatres + and the same operas. They can enjoy the same sunshine, and above all, can + love and be loved just as well as kings and millionaires. + </p> + <p> + So the conclusion of the whole matter is, that he is educated who knows + how to take care of himself; and that the happy man is the successful man, + and that it is only a burden to have more than you want, or to learn those + things that you cannot use.—The High School Register, Omaha, + Nebraska, January. 1891. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0018" id="link0018"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + WHAT I WANT FOR CHRISTMAS. + </h2> + <p> + IF I had the power to produce exactly what I want for next Christmas, I + would have all the kings and emperors resign and allow the people to + govern themselves. + </p> + <p> + I would have all the nobility drop their titles and give their lands back + to the people. I would have the Pope throw away his tiara, take off his + sacred vestments, and admit that he is not acting for God—is not + infallible—but is just an ordinary Italian. I would have all the + cardinals, archbishops, bishops, priests and clergymen admit that they + know nothing about theology, nothing about hell or heaven, nothing about + the destiny of the human race, nothing about devils or ghosts, gods or + angels. I would have them tell all their "flocks" to think for themselves, + to be manly men and womanly women, and to do all in their power to + increase the sum of human happiness. + </p> + <p> + I would have all the professors in colleges, all the teachers in schools + of every kind, including those in Sunday schools, agree that they would + teach only what they know, that they would not palm off guesses as + demonstrated truths. + </p> + <p> + I would like to see all the politicians changed to statesmen,—to men + who long to make their country great and free,—to men who care more + for public good than private gain—men who long to be of use. + </p> + <p> + I would like to see all the editors of papers and magazines agree to print + the truth and nothing but the truth, to avoid all slander and + misrepresentation, and to let the private affairs of the people alone. + </p> + <p> + I would like to see drunkenness and prohibition both abolished. + </p> + <p> + I would like to see corporal punishment done away with in every home, in + every school, in every asylum, reformatory, and prison. Cruelty hardens + and degrades, kindness reforms and ennobles. + </p> + <p> + I would like to see the millionaires unite and form a trust for the public + good. + </p> + <p> + I would like to see a fair division of profits between capital and labor, + so that the toiler could save enough to mingle a little June with the + December of his life. + </p> + <p> + I would like to see an international court established in which to settle + disputes between nations, so that armies could be disbanded and the great + navies allowed to rust and rot in perfect peace. + </p> + <p> + I would like to see the whole world free—free from injustice—free + from superstition. + </p> + <p> + This will do for next Christmas. The following Christmas, I may want more.—The + Arena, Boston, December, 1897. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0019" id="link0019"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + FOOL FRIENDS. + </h2> + <h3> + NOTHING hurts a man, nothing hurts a party so terribly as fool friends. + </h3> + <p> + A fool friend is the sewer of bad news, of slander and all base and + unpleasant things. + </p> + <p> + A fool friend always knows every mean thing that has been said against you + and against the party. + </p> + <p> + He always knows where your party is losing, and the other is making large + gains. + </p> + <p> + He always tells you of the good luck your enemy has had. + </p> + <p> + He implicitly believes every story against you, and kindly suspects your + defence. + </p> + <p> + A fool friend is always full of a kind of stupid candor. + </p> + <p> + He is so candid that he always believes the statement of an enemy. + </p> + <p> + He never suspects anything on your side. + </p> + <p> + Nothing pleases him like being shocked by horrible news concerning some + good man. + </p> + <p> + He never denies a lie unless it is in your favor. + </p> + <p> + He is always finding fault with his party, and is continually begging + pardon for not belonging to the other side. + </p> + <p> + He is frightfully anxious that all his candidates should stand well with + the opposition. + </p> + <p> + He is forever seeing the faults of his party and the virtues of the other. + </p> + <p> + He generally shows his candor by scratching the ticket. + </p> + <p> + He always searches every nook and comer of his conscience to find a reason + for deserting a friend or a principle. + </p> + <p> + In the moment of victory he is magnanimously on your side. + </p> + <p> + In defeat he consoles you by repeating prophecies made after the event. + </p> + <p> + The fool friend regards your reputation as common prey for all the + vultures, hyenas and jackals. + </p> + <p> + He takes a sad pleasure in your misfortunes. + </p> + <p> + He forgets his principles to gratify your enemies. + </p> + <p> + He forgives your maligner, and slanders you with all his heart. + </p> + <p> + He is so friendly that you cannot kick him. + </p> + <p> + He generally talks for you but always bets the other way. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0020" id="link0020"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + INSPIRATION + </h2> + <p> + WE are told that we have in our possession the inspired will of God. What + is meant by the word "inspired" is not exactly known; but whatever else it + may mean, certainly it means that the "inspired" must be the true. If it + is true, there is in fact no need of its being inspired—the truth + will take care of itself. + </p> + <p> + The church is forced to say that the Bible differs from all other books; + it is forced to say that it contains the actual will of God. Let us then + see what inspiration really is. A man looks at the sea, and the sea says + something to him. It makes an impression upon his mind. It awakens memory, + and this impression depends upon the man's experience—upon his + intellectual capacity. Another looks upon the same sea. He has a different + brain; he has had a different experience. The sea may speak to him of joy; + to the other of grief and tears. The sea cannot tell the same thing to any + two human beings, because no two human beings have had the same + experience. + </p> + <p> + Another, standing upon the shore, listening to what the great Greek + tragedian called "The multitudinous laughter of the sea," may say: Every + drop has visited all the shores of the earth; every one has been frozen in + the vast and icy North; every one has fallen in snow, has been whirled by + storms around mountain peaks; every one has been kissed to vapor by the + sun; every one has worn the seven-hued garment of light; every one has + fallen in pleasant rain, gurgled from springs and laughed in brooks while + lovers wooed upon the banks, and every one has rushed with mighty rivers + back to the sea's embrace. Everything in Nature tells a different story to + all eyes that see, and to all ears that hear. + </p> + <p> + Once in my life, and once only, I heard Horace Greeley deliver a lecture. + I think the title was "Across the Continent." At last he reached the + mammoth trees of California, and I thought, "Here is an opportunity for + the old man to indulge his fancy. Here are trees that have outlived a + thousand human governments. There are limbs above his head older than the + pyramids. While man was emerging from barbarism to something like + civilization, these trees were growing. Older than history, every one + appeared to be a memory, a witness, and a prophecy. The same wind that + filled the sails of the Argonauts had swayed these trees." But these trees + said nothing of this kind to Mr. Greeley. Upon these subjects not a word + was told him. Instead, he took his pencil, and after figuring awhile, + remarked: "One of these trees, sawed into inch boards, would make more + than three hundred thousand feet of lumber." + </p> + <p> + I was once riding in the cars in Illinois. There had been a violent + thunder storm. The rain had ceased, the sun was going down. The great + clouds had floated toward the west, and there they assumed most wonderful + architectural shapes. There were temples and palaces domed and turreted, + and they were touched with silver, with amethyst and gold. They looked + like the homes of the Titans, or the palaces of the gods. A man was + sitting near me. I touched him and said, "Did you ever see anything so + beautiful?" He looked out. He saw nothing of the cloud, nothing of the + sun, nothing of the color; he saw only the country, and replied, "Yes, it + is beautiful; I always did like rolling land." + </p> + <p> + On another occasion I was riding in a stage. There had been a snow, and + after the snow a sleet, and all the trees were bent, and all the boughs + were arched. Every fence, every log cabin, had been transfigured, touched + with a glory almost beyond this world. The great fields were a pure and + perfect white; the forests, drooping beneath their load of gems, made + wonderful caves, from which one almost expected to see troops of fairies + come. The whole world looked like a bride, jeweled from head to foot. A + German on the back seat, hearing our talk, and our exclamations of wonder, + leaned forward, looked out of the stage window, and said, "Y-a-a-s; it + looks like a clean table cloth!" + </p> + <p> + So, when we look upon a flower, a painting, a statue, a star, or a violet, + the more we know, the more we have experienced, the more we have thought, + the more we remember,—the more the statue, the star, the painting, + the violet, has to tell. Nature says to me all that I am capable of + understanding—gives all that I can receive. + </p> + <p> + As with star or flower or sea, so with a book. A man reads Shakespeare. + What does he get from him? All that he has the mind to understand. He gets + his little cup full. Let another read him who knows nothing of the drama, + nothing of the impersonations of passion, and what does he get? Almost + nothing. Shakespeare has a different story for each reader. He is a world + in which each recognizes his acquaintances—he may know a few—he + may know all. + </p> + <p> + The impression that Nature makes upon the mind, the stories told by sea + and star and flower, must be the natural food of thought. Leaving out for + the moment the impression gained from ancestors, the hereditary fears and + drifts and trends—the natural food of thought must be the impression + made upon the brain by coming in contact, through the medium of the five + senses, with what we call the outward world. The brain is natural. Its + food is natural. The result—thought—must be natural. The + supernatural can be constructed with no material except the natural. Of + the supernatural we can have no conception. + </p> + <p> + "Thought" may be deformed, and the thought of one may be strange to, and + denominated as unnatural by, another; but it cannot be supernatural. It + may be weak, it may be insane, but it is not supernatural. Above the + natural, man cannot rise. There can be deformed ideas, as there are + deformed persons. There can be religious monstrosities and misshapen, but + they must be naturally produced. Some people have ideas about what they + are pleased to call the supernatural; what they call the supernatural is + simply the deformed. The world is to each man according to each man. It + takes the world as it really is, and that man to make that man's world, + and that man's world cannot exist without that man. + </p> + <p> + You may ask, and what of all this? I reply: As with everything in Nature, + so with the Bible. It has a different story for each reader. Is then, the + Bible a different book to every human being who reads it? It is. Can God, + then, through the Bible, make the same revelation to two persons? He + cannot. Why? Because the man who reads it is the man who inspires. + Inspiration is in the man, as well as in the book. God should have + "inspired" readers as well as writers. + </p> + <p> + You may reply, God knew that his book would be understood differently by + each one; really intended that it should be understood as it is understood + by each. If this is so, then my understanding of the Bible is the real + revelation to me. If this is so, I have no right to take the understanding + of another. I must take the revelation made to me through my + understanding, and by that revelation I must stand. Suppose, then, that I + do read this Bible honestly, carefully, and when I get through I am + compelled to say, "The book is not true!" + </p> + <p> + If this is the honest result, then you are compelled to say, either that + God has made no revelation to me, or that the revelation that it is not + true is the revelation made to me, and by which I am bound. If the book + and my brain are both the work of the same infinite God, whose fault is it + that the book and the brain do not agree? Either God should have written a + book to fit my brain, or should have made my brain to fit his book. + </p> + <p> + The inspiration of the Bible depends upon the ignorance of him who reads.—The + Truth Seeker Annual, New York, 1885. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0021" id="link0021"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + THE TRUTH OF HISTORY. + </h2> + <p> + THOUSANDS of Christians have asked: How was it possible for Christ and his + apostles to deceive the people of Jerusalem? How came the miracles to be + believed? Who had the impudence to say that lepers had been cleansed, and + that the dead had been raised? How could such impostors have escaped + exposure? + </p> + <p> + I ask: How did Mohammed deceive the people of Mecca? How has the Catholic + Church imposed upon millions of people? Who can account for the success of + falsehood? + </p> + <p> + Millions of people are directly interested in the false. They live by + lying. To deceive is the business of their lives. Truth is a cripple; lies + have wings. It is almost impossible to overtake and kill and bury a lie. + If you do, some one will erect a monument over the grave, and the lie is + born again as an epitaph. Let me give you a case in point. + </p> + <p> + A few days ago the Matlock <i>Register</i>, a paper published in England, + printed the following: + </p> + <p> + CONVERSION OF THE ARCH ATHEIST. + </p> + <p> + "Mr. Isaac Loveland, of Shoreham, desires us to insert the following:— + </p> + <p> + "November 27, 1886. + </p> + <p> + "Dear Mr. Loveland.—A day or two since, I received from Mr. Hine the + exhilarating intelligence that through his lectures on the 'Identity of + the British Nation with Lost Israel,' in Canada and the United States, + that Col. Bob Ingersoll, the arch Atheist, has been converted to + Christianity, and has joined the Episcopal Church. Praise the Lord!!! + 5,000 of his followers <i>have been won for Christ</i> through Mr. Hine's + grand mission work, the other side of the Atlantic. The Colonel's cousin, + the Rev. Mr. Ingersoll, wrote to Mr. Hine soon after he began lecturing in + America, informing him that his lectures had made a great impression on + the Colonel and other Atheists. I noted it at the time in the Messenger. + Bradlaugh will yet be converted; his brother has been, and has joined a + British Israel Identity Association. This is progress, and shows what an + energetic, determined man (like Mr. Hine), who is earnest in his faith, + can do. + </p> + <p> + "Very faithfully yours, + </p> + <p> + "H. HODSON RUGG. + </p> + <p> + "Grove-road, St. John's Wood, London." + </p> + <p> + How can we account for an article like that? Who made up this story? Who + had the impudence to publish it? + </p> + <p> + As a matter of fact, I never saw Mr. Hine, never heard of him until this + extract was received by me in the month of December. I never read a word + about the "Identity of Lost Israel with the British Nation." It is a + question in which I never had, and never expect to have, the slightest + possible interest. + </p> + <p> + Nothing can be more preposterous than that the Englishman in whose veins + can be found the blood of the Saxon, the Dane, the Norman, the Piet, the + Scot and the Celt, is the descendant of "Abraham, Isaac and Jacob." The + English language does not bear the remotest resemblance to the Hebrew, and + yet it is claimed by the Reverend Hod-son Rugg that not only myself, but + five thousand other Atheists, were converted by the Rev. Mr. Hine, because + of his theory that Englishmen and Americans are simply Jews in disguise. + </p> + <p> + This letter, in my judgment, was published to be used by missionaries in + China, Japan, India and Africa. + </p> + <p> + If stories like this can be circulated about a living man, what may we not + expect concerning the dead who have opposed the church? + </p> + <p> + Countless falsehoods have been circulated about all the opponents of + superstition. Whoever attacks the popular falsehoods of his time will find + that a lie defends itself by telling other lies. Nothing is so prolific, + nothing can so multiply itself, nothing can lay and hatch as many eggs, as + a good, healthy, religious lie. + </p> + <p> + And nothing is more wonderful than the credulity of the believers in the + supernatural. They feel under a kind of obligation to believe everything + in favor of their religion, or against any form of what they are pleased + to call "Infidelity." + </p> + <p> + The old falsehoods about Voltaire, Paine, Hume, Julian, Diderot and + hundreds of others, grow green every spring. They are answered; they are + demonstrated to be without the slightest foundation; but they rarely die. + And when one does die there seems to be a kind of Cæsarian + operation, so that in each instance although the mother dies the child + lives to undergo, if necessary, a like operation, leaving another child, + and sometimes two. + </p> + <p> + There are thousands and thousands of tongues ready to repeat what the + owners know to be false, and these lies are a part of the stock in trade, + the valuable assets, of superstition. No church can afford to throw its + property away. To admit that these stories are false now, is to admit that + the church has been busy lying for hundreds of years, and it is also to + admit that the word of the church is not and cannot be taken as evidence + of any fact. + </p> + <p> + A few years ago, I had a little controversy with the editor of the New + York <i>Observer</i>, the Rev. Irenaeus Prime, (who is now supposed to be + in heaven enjoying the bliss of seeing Infidels in hell), as to whether + Thomas Paine recanted his religious opinions. I offered to deposit a + thousand dollars for the benefit of a charity, if the reverend doctor + would substantiate the charge that Paine recanted. I forced the New York + <i>Observer</i> to admit that Paine did not recant, and compelled that + paper to say that "Thomas Paine died a blaspheming Infidel." + </p> + <p> + A few months afterward an English paper was sent to me—a religious + paper—and in that paper was a statement to the effect that the + editor of the New York <i>Observer</i> had claimed that Paine recanted; + that I had offered to give a thousand dollars to any charity that Mr. + Prime might select, if he would establish the fact that Paine did recant; + and that so overwhelming was the testimony brought forward by Mr. Prime, + that I admitted that Paine did recant, and paid the thousand dollars. + </p> + <p> + This is another instance of what might be called the truth of history. + </p> + <p> + I wrote to the editor of that paper, telling the exact facts, and offering + him advertising rates to publish the denial, and in addition, stated that + if he would send me a copy of his paper with the denial, I would send him + twenty-five dollars for his trouble. I received no reply, and the lie is + in all probability still on its travels, going from Sunday school to + Sunday school, from pulpit to pulpit, from hypocrite to savage,—that + is to say, from missionary to Hottentot—without the slightest + evidence of fatigue—fresh and strong, and in its cheeks the roses + and lilies of perfect health. + </p> + <p> + Some person, expecting to add another gem to his crown of glory, put in + circulation the story that one of my daughters had joined the Presbyterian + Church,—a story without the slightest foundation—and although + denied a hundred times, it is still being printed and circulated for the + edification of the faithful. Every few days I receive some letter of + inquiry as to this charge, and I have industriously denied it for years, + but up to the present time, it shows no signs of death—not even of + weakness. + </p> + <p> + Another religious gentleman put in print the charge that my son, having + been raised in the atmosphere of Infidelity, had become insane and died in + an asylum. Notwithstanding the fact that I never had a son, the story + still goes right on, and is repeated day after day without the semblance + of a blush. + </p> + <p> + Now, if all this is done while I am alive and well, and while I have all + the facilities of our century for spreading the denials, what will be done + after my lips are closed? + </p> + <p> + The mendacity of superstition is almost enough to make a man believe in + the supernatural. + </p> + <p> + And so I might go on for a hundred columns. Billions of falsehoods have + been told and there are trillions yet to come. The doctrines of Malthus + have nothing to do with this particular kind of reproduction. + </p> + <p> + "And there are also many other falsehoods which the church has told, the + which if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world + itself could not contain the books that should be written."—The + Truth Seeker, New York, February, 19,1887. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0022" id="link0022"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + HOW TO EDIT A LIBERAL PAPER. + </h2> + <h3> + A LIBERAL paper should be edited by a Liberal man. + </h3> + <p> + And by the word Liberal I mean, not only free, not only one who thinks for + himself, not only one who has escaped from the prisons of customs and + creed, but one who is candid, intelligent and kind. + </p> + <p> + This Liberal editor should not forever play upon one string, no matter how + wonderful the music. He should not have his attention forever fixed upon + one question—that is to say, he should not look through a reversed + telescope and narrow his horizon to that degree that he sees only one + thing. + </p> + <p> + To know that the Bible is the literature of a barbarous people, to know + that it is uninspired, to be certain that the supernatural does not and + cannot exist—all this is but the beginning of wisdom. This only lays + the foundation for unprejudiced observation. To kill weeds, to fell + forests, to drive away or exterminate wild beasts—this is + preparatory to doing something of greater value. Of course the weeds must + be killed, the forests must be felled, and the beasts must be destroyed + before the building of homes and the cultivation of fields. + </p> + <p> + A Liberal paper should not discuss theological questions alone. + Intelligent people everywhere have given up most of the old superstitions. + They have pretty well made up their minds what is false, and they want to + know some others. + </p> + <p> + That is to say, liberal toward everything that is true. For this reason, a + Liberal paper should keep abreast of the discoveries of the human mind. No + science should be neglected; no fact should be overlooked. Inventions + should be described and understood. And not only this, but the beautiful + in thought, in form and color, should be preserved. The paper should be + filled with things calculated to interest thoughtful, intelligent and + serious people. There should be a column for children as well as for men. + </p> + <p> + Above all, it should be perfectly kind and candid. In discussion there is + no place for hatred, no opportunity for slander. A personality is always + out of place. An angry man can neither reason himself, nor perceive the + reason of what another says. The orthodox world has always dealt in + personalities. Every minister can answer the argument of an opponent by + attacking the character of the opponent. This example should never be + followed by a Liberal man. Nobody can be bad enough to prove that the + Bible is uninspired, and nobody can be good enough to prove that it is the + word of God. These facts have no relation. They neither stand nor fall + together. + </p> + <p> + Nothing should be asserted that is not known. Nothing should be denied, + the falsity of which has not been, or cannot be, demonstrated. Opinions + are simply given for what they are worth. They are guesses, and one + guesser should give to another guesser all the right of guessing that he + claims for himself. Upon the great questions of origin, of destiny, of + immortality, of punishment and reward in other worlds, every honest man + must say, "I do not know." Upon these questions, this is the creed of + intelligence. Nothing is harder to bear than the egotism of ignorance and + the arrogance of superstition. The man who has some knowledge of the + difficulties surrounding these subjects, who knows something of the + limitations of the human mind, must, of necessity, be mentally modest. And + this condition of mental modesty is the only one consistent with + individual progress. + </p> + <p> + Above all, and over all, a Liberal paper should teach the absolute freedom + of the mind, the utter independence of the individual, the perfect liberty + of speech. We should remember that the world is as it must be; that the + present is the necessary offspring of the past; that the future must be + what the present makes it, and that the real work of the reformer, of the + philanthropist, is to change the conditions of the present, to the end + that the future may be better. + </p> + <p> + Secular Thought, Toronto, January 8,1887. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0023" id="link0023"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + SECULARISM. + </h2> + <p> + SEVERAL people have asked me the meaning of this term. + </p> + <p> + Secularism is the religion of humanity; it embraces the affairs of this + world; it is interested in everything that touches the welfare of a + sentient being; it advocates attention to the particular planet in which + we happen to live; it means that each individual counts for something; it + is a declaration of intellectual independence; it means that the pew is + superior to the pulpit, that those who bear the burdens shall have the + profits and that they who fill the purse shall hold the strings. It is a + protest against theological oppression, against ecclesiastical tyranny, + against being the serf, subject or slave of any phantom, or of the priest + of any phantom. It is a protest against wasting this life for the sake of + one that we know not of. It proposes to let the gods take care of + themselves. It is another name for common sense; that is to say, the + adaptation of means to such ends as are desired and understood. + </p> + <p> + Secularism believes in building a home here, in this world. It trusts to + individual effort, to energy, to intelligence, to observation and + experience rather than to the unknown and the supernatural. It desires to + be happy on this side of the grave. + </p> + <p> + Secularism means food and fireside, roof and raiment, reasonable work and + reasonable leisure, the cultivation of the tastes, the acquisition of + knowledge, the enjoyment of the arts, and it promises for the human race + comfort, independence, intelligence, and above all, liberty. It means the + abolition of sectarian feuds, of theological hatreds. It means the + cultivation of friendship and intellectual hospitality. It means the + living for ourselves and each other; for the present instead of the past, + for this world rather than for another. It means the right to express your + thought in spite of popes, priests, and gods. It means that impudent + idleness shall no longer live upon the labor of honest men. It means the + destruction of the business of those who trade in fear. It proposes to + give serenity and content to the human soul. It will put out the fires of + eternal pain. It is striving to do away with violence and vice, with + ignorance, poverty and disease. It lives for the ever present to-day, and + the ever coming to-morrow. It does not believe in praying and receiving, + but in earning and deserving. It regards work as worship, labor as prayer, + and wisdom as the savior of mankind. It says to every human being, Take + care of yourself so that you may be able to help others; adorn your life + with the gems called good deeds; illumine your path with the sunlight + called friendship and love. + </p> + <p> + Secularism is a religion, a religion that is understood. It has no + mysteries, no mummeries, no priests, no ceremonies, no falsehoods, no + miracles, and no persecutions. It considers the lilies of the field, and + takes thought for the morrow. It says to the whole world, Work that you + may eat, drink, and be clothed; work that you may enjoy; work that you may + not want; work that you may give and never need.—The Independent + Pulpit, Waco, Texas, 1887. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0024" id="link0024"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + CRITICISM OF "ROBERT ELSMERE," "JOHN WARD, PREACHER," AND "AN AFRICAN + FARM." + </h2> + <p> + IF one wishes to know what orthodox religion really is—I mean that + religion unsoftened by Infidelity, by doubt—let him read "John Ward, + Preacher." This book shows exactly what the love of God will do in the + heart of man. This shows what the effect of the creed of Christendom is, + when absolutely believed. In this case it is the woman who is free and the + man who is enslaved. In "Robert Els-mere" the man is breaking chains, + while the woman prefers the old prison with its ivy-covered walls. + </p> + <p> + Why should a man allow human love to stand between his soul and the will + of God—between his soul and eternal joy? Why should not the true + believer tear every blossom of pity, of charity, from his heart, rather + than put in peril his immortal soul? + </p> + <p> + An orthodox minister has a wife with a heart. Having a heart she cannot + believe in the orthodox creed. She thinks God better than he is. She + flatters the Infinite. This endangers the salvation of her soul. If she is + upheld in this the souls of others may be lost. Her husband feels not only + accountable for her soul, but for the souls of others that may be injured + by what she says, and by what she does. He is compelled to choose between + his wife and his duty, between the woman and God. He is not great enough + to go with his heart. He is selfish enough to side with the + administration, with power. He lives a miserable life and dies a miserable + death. + </p> + <p> + The trouble with Christianity is that it has no element of compromise—it + allows no room for charity so far as belief is concerned. Honesty of + opinion is not even a mitigating circumstance. You are not asked to + understand—you are commanded to believe. There is no common ground. + The church carries no flag of truce. It does not say, Believe you must, + but, You must believe. No exception can be made in favor of wife or + mother, husband or child. All human relations, all human love must, if + necessary, be sacrificed with perfect cheerfulness. "Let the dead bury + their dead—follow thou me. Desert wife and child. Human love is + nothing—nothing but a snare. You must love God better than wife, + better than child." John Ward endeavored to live in accordance with this + heartless creed. + </p> + <p> + Nothing can be more repulsive than an orthodox life—than one who + lives in exact accordance with the creed. It is hard to conceive of a more + terrible character than John Calvin. It is somewhat difficult to + understand the Puritans, who made themselves unhappy by way of recreation, + and who seemed to enjoy themselves when admitting their utter + worthlessness and in telling God how richly they deserved to be eternally + damned. They loved to pluck from the tree of life every bud, every + blossom, every leaf. The bare branches, naked to the wrath of God, excited + their admiration. They wondered how birds could sing, and the existence of + the rainbow led them to suspect the seriousness of the Deity. How can + there be any joy if man believes that he acts and lives under an infinite + responsibility, when the only business of this life is to avoid the + horrors of the next? Why should the lips of men feel the ripple of + laughter if there is a bare possibility that the creed of Christendom is + true? + </p> + <p> + I take it for granted that all people believe as they must—that all + thoughts and dreams have been naturally produced—that what we call + the unnatural is simply the uncommon. All religions, poems, statues, vices + and virtues, have been wrought by nature with the instrumentalities called + men. No one can read "John Ward, Preacher," without hating with all his + heart the creed of John Ward; and no one can read the creed of John Ward, + preacher, without pitying with all his heart John Ward; and no one can + read this book without feeling how much better the wife was than the + husband—how much better the natural sympathies are than the + religions of our day, and how much superior common sense is to what is + called theology. + </p> + <p> + When we lay down the book we feel like saying: No matter whether God + exists or not; if he does, he can take care of himself; if he does, he + does not take care of us; and whether he lives or not we must take care of + ourselves. Human love is better than any religion. It is better to love + your wife than to love God. It is better to make a happy home here than to + sunder hearts with creeds. This book meets the issues far more frankly, + with far greater candor. This book carries out to its logical sequence the + Christian creed. It shows how uncomfortable a true believer must be, and + how uncomfortable he necessarily makes those with whom he comes in + contact. It shows how narrow, how hard, how unsympathetic, how selfish, + how unreasonable, how unpoetic, the creed of the orthodox church is. + </p> + <p> + In "Robert Elsmere" there is plenty of evidence of reading and + cultivation, of thought and talent. So in "John Ward, Preacher," there is + strength, purpose, logic, power of statement, directness and courage. But + "The Story of an African Farm" has but little in common with the other + two. + </p> + <p> + It is a work apart—belonging to no school, and not to be judged by + the ordinary rules and canons of criticism. There are some puerilities and + much philosophy, trivialities and some of the profoundest reflections. In + addition to this, there is a vast and wonderful sympathy. + </p> + <p> + The following upon love is beautiful and profound: "There is a love that + begins in the head and goes down to the heart, and grows slowly, but it + lasts till death and asks less than it gives. There is another love that + blots out wisdom, that is sweet with the sweetness of life and bitter with + the bitterness of death, lasting for an hour; but it is worth having lived + a whole life for that hour. It is a blood-red flower, with the color of + sin, but there is always the scent of a god about it." + </p> + <p> + There is no character in "Robert Elsmere" or in "John Ward, Preacher," + comparable for a moment to Lyndall in the "African Farm." In her there is + a splendid courage. She does not blame others for her own faults; she + accepts. There is that splendid candor that you find in Juliet in "Measure + for Measure." She is asked: + </p> + <p> + "Love you the man that wronged you?" + </p> + <p> + And she replies: + </p> + <p> + "Yes; as I love the woman that wronged him." + </p> + <p> + The death of this wonderful girl is extremely pathetic. + </p> + <p> + None but an artist could have written it: + </p> + <p> + "Then slowly, without a sound, the beautiful eyes closed. The dead face + that the glass reflected was a thing of marvellous beauty and + tranquillity. The gray dawn crept in over it and saw it lying there." + </p> + <p> + So the story of the hunter is wonderfully told. This hunter climbs above + his fellows—day by day getting away from human sympathy, away from + ignorance. He lost at last his fellow-men, and truth was just as far away + as ever. Here he found the bones of another hunter, and as he looked upon + the poor remains the wild faces said: + </p> + <p> + "So he lay down here, for he was very tired. He went to sleep forever. He + put himself to sleep. Sleep is very tranquil. You are not lonely when you + are asleep, neither do your hands ache nor your heart." + </p> + <p> + So the death of Waldo is most wonderfully told. The book is filled with + thought, and with thoughts of the writer—nothing is borrowed. It is + original, true and exceedingly sad. It has the pathos of real life. There + is in it the hunger of the heart, the vast difference between the actual + and the ideal: + </p> + <p> + "I like to feel that strange life beating up against me. I like to realize + forms of life utterly unlike my own. When my own life feels small and I am + oppressed with it, I like to crush together and see it in a picture, in an + instant, a multitude of disconnected, unlike phases of human life—a + mediaeval monk with his string of beads pacing the quiet orchard, and + looking up from the grass at his feet to the heavy fruit trees; little + Malay boys playing naked on a shining sea-beach; a Hindoo philosopher + alone under his banyan tree, thinking, thinking, thinking, so that in the + thought of God he may lose himself; a troop of Bacchanalians dressed in + white, with crowns of vine-leaves, dancing along the Roman streets; a + martyr on the night of his death looking through the narrow window to the + sky and feeling that already he has the wings that shall bear him up; an + epicurean discoursing at a Roman bath to a knot of his disciples on the + nature of happiness; a Kafir witch-doctor seeking for herbs by moonlight, + while from the huts on the hillside come the sound of dogs barking and the + voices of women and children; a mother giving bread and milk to her + children in little wooden basins and singing the evening song. I like to + see it all; I feel it run through me—that life belongs to me; it + makes my little life larger, it breaks down the narrow walls that shut me + in." + </p> + <p> + The author, Olive Schreiner, has a tropic zone in her heart. She sometimes + prattles like a child, then suddenly, and without warning, she speaks like + a philosopher—like one who had guessed the riddle of the Sphinx. + She, too, is overwhelmed with the injustice of the world—with the + negligence of nature—and she finds that it is impossible to find + repose for heart or brain in any Christian creed. + </p> + <p> + These books show what the people are thinking—the tendency of modern + thought. Singularly enough the three are written by women. Mrs. Ward, the + author of "Robert Elsmere," to say the least is not satisfied with the + Episcopal Church. She feels sure that its creed is not true. At the same + time, she wants it denied in a respectful tone of voice, and she really + pities people who are compelled to give up the consolation of eternal + punishment, although she has thrown it away herself and the tendency of + her book is to make other people do so. It is what the orthodox call "a + dangerous book." It is a flank movement calculated to suggest a doubt to + the unsuspecting reader, to some sheep who has strayed beyond the + shepherd's voice. + </p> + <p> + It is hard for any one to read "John Ward, Preacher," without hating + Puritanism with all his heart and without feeling certain that nothing is + more heartless than the "scheme of salvation;" and whoever finishes "The + Story of an African Farm" will feel that he has been brought in contact + with a very great, passionate and tender soul. Is it possible that women, + who have been the Caryatides of the church, who have borne its insults and + its burdens, are to be its destroyers? + </p> + <p> + Man is a being capable of pleasure and pain. The fact that he can enjoy + himself—that he can obtain good—gives him courage—courage + to defend what he has, courage to try to get more. The fact that he can + suffer pain sows in his mind the seeds of fear. Man is also filled with + curiosity. He examines. He is astonished by the uncommon. He is forced to + take an interest in things because things affect him. He is liable at + every moment to be injured. Countless things attack him. He must defend + himself. As a consequence his mind is at work; his experience in some + degree tells him what may happen; he prepares; he defends himself from + heat and cold. All the springs of action lie in the fact that he can + suffer and enjoy. The savage has great confidence in his senses. He has + absolute confidence in his eyes and ears. It requires many years of + education and experience before he becomes satisfied that things are not + always what they appear. It would be hard to convince the average + barbarian that the sun does not actually rise and set—hard to + convince him that the earth turns. He would rely upon appearances and + would record you as insane. + </p> + <p> + As man becomes civilized, educated, he finally has more confidence in his + reason than in his eyes. He no longer believes that a being called Echo + exists. He has found out the theory of sound, and he then knows that the + wave of air has been returned to his ear, and the idea of a being who + repeats his words fades from his mind; he begins then to rely, not upon + appearances, but upon demonstration, upon the result of investigation. At + last he finds that he has been deceived in a thousand ways, and he also + finds that he can invent certain instruments that are far more accurate + than his senses—instruments that add power to his sight, to his + hearing and to the sensitiveness of his touch. Day by day he gains + confidence in himself. + </p> + <p> + There is in the life of the individual, as in the life of the race, a + period of credulity, when not only appearances are accepted without + question, but the declarations of others. The child in the cradle or in + the lap of its mother, has implicit confidence in fairy stories—believes + in giants and dwarfs, in beings who can answer wishes, who create castles + and temples and gardens with a thought. So the race, in its infancy, + believed in such beings and in such creations. As the child grows, facts + take the place of the old beliefs, and the same is true of the race. + </p> + <p> + As a rule, the attention of man is drawn first, not to his own mistakes, + not to his own faults, but to the mistakes and faults of his neighbors. + The same is true of a nation—it notices first the eccentricities and + peculiarities of other nations. This is especially true of religious + systems. Christians take it for granted that their religion is true, that + there can be about that no doubt, no mistake. They begin to examine the + religions of other nations. They take it for granted that all these other + religions are false. They are in a frame of mind to notice contradictions, + to discover mistakes and to apprehend absurdities. In examining other + religions they use their common sense. They carry in the hand the lamp of + probability. The miracles of other Christs, or of the founders of other + religions, appear unreasonable—they find that they are not supported + by evidence. Most of the stories excite their laughter. Many of the laws + seem cruel, many of the ceremonies absurd. These Christians satisfy + themselves that they are right in their first conjecture—that is, + that other religions are all made by men. Afterward the same arguments + they have used against other religions were found to be equally forcible + against their own. They find that the miracles of Buddha rest upon the + same kind of evidence as the miracles in the Old Testament, as the + miracles in the New—that the evidence in the one case is just as + weak and unreliable as in the other. They also find that it is just as + easy to account for the existence of Christianity as for the existence of + any other religion, and they find that the human mind in all countries has + traveled substantially the same road and has arrived at substantially the + same conclusions. + </p> + <p> + It may be truthfully said that Christianity by the examination of other + religions laid the foundation for its own destruction. The moment it + examined another religion it became a doubter, a sceptic, an investigator. + It began to call for proof. This course being pursued in the examination + of Christianity itself, reached the result that had been reached as to + other religions. In other words, it was impossible for Christians + successfully to attack other religions without showing that their own + religion could be destroyed. The fact that only a few years ago we were + all provincial should be taken into consideration. A few years ago nations + were unacquainted with each other—no nation had any conception of + the real habits, customs, religions and ideas of any other. Each nation + imagined itself to be the favored of heaven—the only one to whom God + had condescended to make known his will—the only one in direct + communication with angels and deities. Since the circumnavigation of the + globe, since the invention of the steam engine, the discovery of + electricity, the nations of the world have become acquainted with each + other, and we now know that the old ideas were born of egotism, and that + egotism is the child of ignorance and savagery. + </p> + <p> + Think of the egotism of the ancient Jews, who imagined that they were "the + chosen people"—the only ones in whom God took the slightest + interest! Imagine the egotism of the Catholic Church, claiming that it is + the only church—that it is continually under the guidance of the + Holy Ghost, and that the pope is infallible and occupies the place of God. + Think of the egotism of the Presbyterian, who imagines that he is one of + "the elect," and that billions of ages before the world was created, God, + in the eternal counsel of his own good pleasure, picked out this + particular Presbyterian, and at the same time determined to send billions + and billions to the pit of eternal pain. Think of the egotism of the man + who believes in special providence. The old philosophy, the old religion, + was made in about equal parts of ignorance and egotism. This earth was the + universe. The sun rose and set simply for the benefit of "God's chosen + people." The moon and stars were made to beautify the night, and all the + countless hosts of heaven were for no other purpose than to decorate what + might be called the ceiling of the earth. It was also believed that this + firmament was solid—that up there the gods lived, and that they + could be influenced by the prayers and desires of men. + </p> + <p> + We have now found that the earth is only a grain of sand, a speck, an atom + in an infinite universe. We now know that the sun is a million times + larger than the earth, and that other planets are millions of times larger + than the sun; and when we think of these things, the old stories of the + Garden of Eden and Sinai and Calvary seem infinitely out of proportion. + </p> + <p> + At last we have reached a point where we have the candor and the + intelligence to examine the claims of our own religion precisely as we + examine those of other countries. We have produced men and women great + enough to free themselves from the prejudices born of provincialism—from + the prejudices, we might almost say, of patriotism. A few people are great + enough not to be controlled by the ideas of the dead—great enough to + know that they are not bound by the mistakes of their ancestors—and + that a man may actually love his mother without accepting her belief. We + have even gone further than this, and we are now satisfied that the only + way to really honor parents is to tell our best and highest thoughts. + These thoughts ought to be in the mind when reading the books referred to. + There are certain tendencies, certain trends of thought, and these + tendencies—these trends—bear fruit; that is to say, they + produce the books about which I have spoken as well as many others. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0025" id="link0025"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + THE LIBEL LAWS + </h2> + <p> + Question. Have you any suggestions to make in regard to remodeling the + libel laws? + </p> + <p> + Answer. I believe that every article appearing in a paper should be signed + by the writer. If it is libelous, then the writer and the publisher should + both be held responsible in damages. The law on this subject, if changed, + should throw greater safeguards around the reputation of the citizen. It + does not seem to me that the papers have any right to complain. Probably a + good many suits are brought that should not be instituted, but just think + of the suits that are not brought. + </p> + <p> + Personally I have no complaint to make, as it would be very hard to find + anything in any paper against me, but it has never occurred to me that the + press needed any greater liberty than it now enjoys. + </p> + <p> + It might be a good thing for a paper to publish each week, a list of + mistakes, if this could be done without making that edition too large. But + certainly when a false and scandalous charge has been made by mistake or + as the result of imposition, great pains should be taken to give the + retraction at once and in a way to attract attention. + </p> + <p> + I suppose the papers are liable to be imposed upon—liable to print + thousands of articles to which the attention of the editor or proprietor + was not called. Still, that is not the fault of the man whose character is + attacked. On the whole I think the papers have the advantage of the + average citizen as the law now is. + </p> + <p> + If all articles had to be signed by the writer, I am satisfied the writer + would be more careful and less liable to write anything of a libelous + nature. I am willing to admit that I have given but little attention to + the subject, probably for the reason that I have never been a sufferer. + </p> + <p> + It would hardly do to hold only the writer responsible. Suppose a man + writes a libelous article, leaves the country, and then the article is + published; is there no remedy? A suit for libel is not much of a remedy, I + admit, but it is some. It is like the bayonet in war. Very few are injured + by bayonets, but a good many are afraid that they may be. + </p> + <p> + —The Herald, New York, October 26,1888. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0026" id="link0026"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + REV. DR. NEWTON'S SERMON ON A NEW RELIGION. + </h2> + <p> + I HAVE read the report of the Rev. R. Heber Newton's sermon and I am + satisfied, first, that Mr. Newton simply said what he thoroughly believes + to be true, and second, that some of the conclusions at which he arrives + are certainly correct. I do not regard Mr. Newton as a heretic or sceptic. + Every man who reads the Bible must, to a greater or less extent, think for + himself. He need not tell his thoughts; he has the right to keep them to + himself. But if he undertakes to tell them, then he should be absolutely + honest. + </p> + <p> + The Episcopal creed is a few ages behind the thought of the world. For + many, years the foremost members and clergymen in that church have been + giving some new meanings to the old words and phrases. Words are no more + exempt from change than other things in nature. A word at one time rough, + jagged, harsh and cruel, is finally worn smooth. A word known as slang, + picked out of the gutter, is cleaned, educated, becomes respectable and + finally is found in the mouths of the best and purest. + </p> + <p> + We must remember that in the world of art the picture depends not alone on + the painter, but on the one who sees it. So words must find some part of + their meaning in the man who hears or the man who reads. In the old times + the word "hell" gave to the hearer or reader the picture of a vast pit + filled with an ocean of molten brimstone, in which innumerable souls were + suffering the torments of fire, and where millions of devils were engaged + in the cheerful occupation of increasing the torments of the damned. This + was the real old orthodox view. + </p> + <p> + As man became civilized, however, the picture grew less and less vivid. + Finally, some expressed their doubts about the brimstone, and others began + to think that if the Devil was, and is, really an enemy of God he would + not spend his time punishing sinners to please God. Why should the Devil + be in partnership with his enemy, and why should he inflict torments on + poor souls who were his own friends, and who shared with him the feeling + of hatred toward the Almighty? + </p> + <p> + As men became more and more civilized, the idea began to dawn in their + minds that an infinitely good and wise being would not have created + persons, knowing that they would be eternal failures, or that they were to + suffer eternal punishment, because there could be no possible object in + eternal punishment—no reformation, no good to be accomplished—and + certainly the sight of all this torment would not add to the joy of + heaven, neither would it tend to the happiness of God. + </p> + <p> + So the more civilized adopted the idea that punishment is a consequence + and not an infliction. Then they took another step and concluded that + every soul, in every world, in every age, should have at least the chance + of doing right. And yet persons so believing still used the word "hell," + but the old meaning had dropped out. + </p> + <p> + So with regard to the atonement. At one time it was regarded as a kind of + bargain in which so much blood was shed for so many souls. This was a + barbaric view. Afterward, the mind developing a little, the idea got in + the brain that the life of Christ was worth its moral effect. And yet + these people use the word "atonement," but the bargain idea has been lost. + </p> + <p> + Take for instance the word "justice." The meaning that is given to that + word depends upon the man who uses it—depends for the most part on + the age in which he lives, the country in which he was born. The same is + true of the word "freedom." Millions and millions of people boasted that + they were the friends of freedom, while at the same time they enslaved + their fellow-men. So, in the name of justice every possible crime has been + perpetrated and in the name of mercy every instrument of torture has been + used. + </p> + <p> + Mr. Newton realizes the fact that everything in the world changes; that + creeds are influenced by civilization, by the acquisition of knowledge, by + the progress of the sciences and arts—in other words, that there is + a tendency in man to harmonize his knowledge and to bring about a + reconciliation between what he knows and what he believes. This will be + fatal to superstition, provided the man knows anything. + </p> + <p> + Mr. Newton, moreover, clearly sees that people are losing confidence in + the morality of the gospel; that its foundation lacks common sense; that + the doctrine of forgiveness is unscientific, and that it is impossible to + feel that the innocent can rightfully suffer for the guilty, or that the + suffering of innocence can in any way justify the crimes of the wicked. I + think he is mistaken, however, when he says that the early church softened + or weakened the barbaric passions. I think the early church was as + barbarous as any institution that ever gained a footing in this world. I + do not believe that the creed of the early church, as understood, could + soften anything. A church that preaches the eternity of punishment has + within it the seed of all barbarism and the soil to make it grow. + </p> + <p> + So Mr. Newton is undoubtedly right when he says that the organized + Christianity of to-day is not the leader in social progress. No one now + goes to a synod to find a fact in science or on any subject. A man in + doubt does not ask the average minister; he regards him as behind the + times. He goes to the scientist, to the library. He depends upon the + untrammelled thought of fearless men. + </p> + <p> + The church, for the most part, is in the control of the rich, of the + respectable, of the well-to-do, of the unsympathetic, of the men who, + having succeeded themselves, think that everybody ought to succeed. The + spirit of caste is as well developed in the church as it is in the average + club. There is the same exclusive feeling, and this feeling in the next + world is to be heightened and deepened to such an extent that a large + majority of our fellow-men are to be eternally excluded. + </p> + <p> + The peasants of Europe—the workingmen—do not go to the church + for sympathy. If they do they come home empty, or rather empty hearted. + So, in our own country the laboring classes, the mechanics, are not + depending on the churches to right their wrongs. They do not expect the + pulpits to increase their wages. The preachers get their money from the + well-to-do—from the employeer class—and their sympathies are + with those from whom they receive their wages. + </p> + <p> + The ministers attack the pleasures of the world. They are not so much + scandalized by murder and forgery as by dancing and eating meat on Friday. + They regard unbelief as the greatest of all sins. They are not touching + the real, vital issues of the day, and their hearts do not throb in unison + with the hearts of the struggling, the aspiring, the enthusiastic and the + real believers in the progress of the human race. + </p> + <p> + It is all well enough to say that we should depend on Providence, but + experience has taught us that while it may do no harm to say it, it will + do no good to do it. We have found that man must be the Providence of man, + and that one plow will do more, properly pulled and properly held, toward + feeding the world, than all the prayers that ever agitated the air. + </p> + <p> + So, Mr. Newton is correct in saying, as I understand him to say, that the + hope of immortality has nothing to do with orthodox religion. Neither, in + my judgment, has the belief in the existence of a God anything in fact to + do with real religion. The old doctrine that God wanted man to do + something for him, and that he kept a watchful eye upon all the children + of men; that he rewarded the virtuous and punished the wicked, is + gradually fading from the mind. We know that some of the worst men have + what the world calls success. We know that some of the best men lie upon + the straw of failure. We know that honesty goes hungry, while larceny sits + at the banquet. We know that the vicious have every physical comfort, + while the virtuous are often clad in rags. + </p> + <p> + Man is beginning to find that he must take care of himself; that special + providence is a mistake. This being so, the old religions must go down, + and in their place man must depend upon intelligence, industry, honesty; + upon the facts that he can ascertain, upon his own experience, upon his + own efforts. Then religion becomes a thing of this world—a religion + to put a roof above our heads, a religion that gives to every man a home, + a religion that rewards virtue here. + </p> + <p> + If Mr. Newton's sermon is in accordance with the Episcopal creed, I + congratulate the creed. In any event, I think Mr. Newton deserves great + credit for speaking his thought. Do not understand that I imagine that he + agrees with me. The most I will say is that in some things I agree with + him, and probably there is a little too much truth and a little too much + humanity in his remarks to please the bishop. + </p> + <p> + There is this wonderful fact, no man has ever yet been persecuted for + thinking God bad. When any one has said that he believed God to be so good + that he would, in his own time and way, redeem the entire human race, and + that the time would come when every soul would be brought home and sit on + an equality with the others around the great fireside of the universe, + that man has been denounced as a poor, miserable, wicked wretch.—New + York Herald, December 13,1888. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0027" id="link0027"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + AN ESSAY ON CHRISTMAS. + </h2> + <p> + MY family and I regard Christmas as a holiday—that is to say, a day + of rest and pleasure—a day to get acquainted with each other, a day + to recall old memories, and for the cultivation of social amenities. The + festival now called Christmas is far older than Christianity. It was known + and celebrated for thousands of years before the establishment of what is + known as our religion. It is a relic of sun-worship. It is the day on + which the sun triumphs over the hosts of darkness, and thousands of years + before the New Testament was written, thousands of years before the + republic of Rome existed, before one stone of Athens was laid, before the + Pharaohs ruled in Egypt, before the religion of Brahma, before Sanscrit + was spoken, men and women crawled out of their caves, pushed the matted + hair from their eyes, and greeted the triumph of the sun over the powers + of the night. + </p> + <p> + There are many relics of this worship—among which is the shaving of + the priest's head, leaving the spot shaven surrounded by hair, in + imitation of the rays of the sun. There is still another relic—the + ministers of our day close their eyes in prayer. When men worshiped the + sun—when they looked at that luminary and implored its assistance—they + shut their eyes as a matter of necessity. Afterward the priests looking at + their idols glittering with gems, shut their eyes in flattery, pretending + that they could not bear the effulgence of the presence; and to-day, + thousands of years after the old ideas have passed away, the modern + parson, without knowing the origin of the custom, closes his eyes when he + prays. + </p> + <p> + There are many other relics and souvenirs of the dead worship of the sun, + and this festival was adopted by Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, and by + Christians. As a matter of fact, Christianity furnished new steam for an + old engine, infused a new spirit into an old religion, and, as a matter of + course, the old festival remained. + </p> + <p> + For all of our festivals you will find corresponding pagan festivals. For + instance, take the eucharist, the communion, where persons partake of the + body and blood of the Deity. This is an exceedingly old custom. Among the + ancients they ate cakes made of corn, in honor of Ceres and they called + these cakes the flesh of the goddess, and they drank wine in honor of + Bacchus, and called this the blood of their god. And so I could go on + giving the pagan origin of every Christian ceremony and custom. The + probability is that the worship of the sun was once substantially + universal, and consequently the festival of Christ was equally wide + spread. + </p> + <p> + As other religions have been produced, the old customs have been adopted + and continued, so that the result is, this festival of Christmas is almost + world-wide. It is popular because it is a holiday. Overworked people are + glad of days that bring rest and recreation and allow them to meet their + families and their friends. They are glad of days when they give and + receive gifts—evidences of friendship, of remembrance and love. It + is popular because it is really human, and because it is interwoven with + our customs, habits, literature, and thought. + </p> + <p> + For my part I am willing to have two or three a year—the more + holidays the better. Many people have an idea that I am opposed to Sunday. + I am perfectly willing to have two a week. All I insist on is that these + days shall be for the benefit of the people, and that they shall be kept + not in a way to make folks miserable or sad or hungry, but in a way to + make people happy, and to add a little to the joy of life. Of course, I am + in favor of everybody keeping holidays to suit himself, provided he does + not interfere with others, and I am perfectly willing that everybody + should go to church on that day, provided he is willing that I should go + somewhere else.—The Tribune, New York, December, 1889. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0028" id="link0028"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + HAS FREETHOUGHT A CONSTRUCTIVE SIDE? + </h2> + <p> + THE object of the Freethinker is to ascertain the truth—the + conditions of well-being—to the end that this life will be made of + value. This is the affirmative, positive, and constructive side. + </p> + <p> + Without liberty there is no such thing as real happiness. There may be the + contentment of the slave—of one who is glad that he has passed the + day without a beating—one who is happy because he has had enough to + eat—but the highest possible idea of happiness is freedom. + </p> + <p> + All religious systems enslave the mind. Certain things are demanded—certain + things must be believed—certain things must be done—and the + man who becomes the subject or servant of this superstition must give up + all idea of individuality or hope of intellectual growth and progress. + </p> + <p> + The religionist informs us that there is somewhere in the universe an + orthodox God, who is endeavoring to govern the world, and who for this + purpose resorts to famine and flood, to earthquake and pestilence—and + who, as a last resort, gets up a revival of religion. That is called + "affirmative and positive." + </p> + <p> + The man of sense knows that no such God exists, and thereupon he affirms + that the orthodox doctrine is infinitely absurd. This is called a + "negation." But to my mind it is an affirmation, and is a part of the + positive side of Freethought. + </p> + <p> + A man who compels this Deity to abdicate his throne renders a vast and + splendid service to the human race. + </p> + <p> + As long as men believe in tyranny in heaven they will practice tyranny on + earth. Most people are exceedingly imitative, and nothing is so gratifying + to the average orthodox man as to be like his God. + </p> + <p> + These same Christians tell us that nearly everybody is to be punished + forever, while a few fortunate Christians who were elected and selected + billions of ages before the world was created, are to be happy. This they + call the "tidings of great joy." The Freethinker denounces this doctrine + as infamous beyond the power of words to express. He says, and says + clearly, that a God who would create a human being, knowing that that + being was to be eternally miserable, must of necessity be an infinite + fiend. + </p> + <p> + The free man, into whose brain the serpent of superstition has not crept, + knows that the dogma of eternal pain is an infinite falsehood. He also + knows—if the dogma be true—that every decent human being + should hate, with every drop of his blood, the creator of the universe. He + also knows—if he knows anything—that no decent human being + could be happy in heaven with a majority of the human race in hell. He + knows that a mother could not enjoy the society of Christ with her + children in perdition; and if she could, he knows that such a mother is + simply a wild beast. The free man knows that the angelic hosts, under such + circumstances, could not enjoy themselves unless they had the hearts of + boa-constrictors. + </p> + <p> + It will thus be seen that there is an affirmative, a positive, a + constructive side to Freethought. + </p> + <p> + What is the positive side? + </p> + <p> + First: A denial of all orthodox falsehoods—an exposure of all + superstitions. This is simply clearing the ground, to the end that seeds + of value may be planted. It is necessary, first, to fell the trees, to + destroy the poisonous vines, to drive out the wild beasts. Then comes + another phase—another kind of work. The Freethinker knows that the + universe is natural—that there is no room, even in infinite space, + for the miraculous, for the impossible. The Freethinker knows, or feels + that he knows, that there is no sovereign of the universe, who, like some + petty king or tyrant, delights in showing his authority. He feels that all + in the universe are conditioned beings, and that only those are happy who + live in accordance with the conditions of happiness, and this fact or + truth or philosophy embraces all men and all gods—if there be gods. + </p> + <p> + The positive side is this: That every good action has good consequences—that + it bears good fruit forever—and that every bad action has evil + consequences, and bears bad fruit. The Freethinker also asserts that every + man must bear the consequences of his actions—that he must reap what + he sows, and that he cannot be justified by the goodness of another, or + damned for the wickedness of another. + </p> + <p> + There is still another side, and that is this: The Freethinker knows that + all the priests and cardinals and popes know nothing of the supernatural—they + know nothing about gods or angels or heavens or hells—nothing about + inspired books or Holy Ghosts, or incarnations or atonements. He knows + that all this is superstition pure and simple. He knows also that these + people—from pope to priest, from bishop to parson, do not the + slightest good in this world—that they live upon the labor of others—that + they earn nothing themselves—that they contribute nothing toward the + happiness, or well-being, or the wealth of mankind. He knows that they + trade and traffic in ignorance and fear, that they make merchandise of + hope and grief—and he also knows that in every religion the priest + insists on five things—First: There is a God. Second: He has made + known his will. Third: He has selected me to explain this message. Fourth: + We will now take up a collection; and Fifth: Those who fail to subscribe + will certainly be damned. + </p> + <p> + The positive side of Freethought is to find out the truth—the facts + of nature—to the end that we may take advantage of those truths, of + those facts—for the purpose of feeding and clothing and educating + mankind. + </p> + <p> + In the first place, we wish to find that which will lengthen human life—that + which will prevent or kill disease—that which will do away with pain—that + which will preserve or give us health. + </p> + <p> + We also want to go in partnership with these forces of nature, to the end + that we may be well fed and clothed—that we may have good houses + that protect us from heat and cold. And beyond this—beyond these + simple necessities—there are still wants and aspirations, and + free-thought will give us the highest possible in art—the most + wonderful and thrilling in music—the greatest paintings, the most + marvelous sculpture—in other words, free-thought will develop the + brain to its utmost capacity. Freethought is the mother of art and + science, of morality and happiness. + </p> + <p> + It is charged by the worshipers of the Jewish myth, that we destroy, that + we do not build. + </p> + <p> + What have we destroyed? We have destroyed the idea that a monster created + and governs this world—the declaration that a God of infinite mercy + and compassion upheld slavery and polygamy and commanded the destruction + of men, women, and babes. We have destroyed the idea that this monster + created a few of his children for eternal joy, and the vast majority for + everlasting pain. We have destroyed the infinite absurdity that salvation + depends upon belief, that investigation is dangerous, and that the torch + of reason lights only the way to hell. We have taken a grinning devil from + every grave, and the curse from death—and in the place of these + dogmas, of these infamies, we have put that which is natural and that + which commends itself to the heart and brain. + </p> + <p> + Instead of loving God, we love each other. Instead of the religion of the + sky—the religion of this world—the religion of the family—the + love of husband for wife, of wife for husband—the love of all for + children. So that now the real religion is: Let us live for each other; + let us live for this world, without regard for the past and without fear + for the future. Let us use our faculties and our powers for the benefit of + ourselves and others, knowing that if there be another world, the same + philosophy that gives us joy here will make us happy there. + </p> + <p> + Nothing can be more absurd than the idea that we can do something to + please or displease an infinite Being. If our thoughts and actions can + lessen or increase the happiness of God, then to that extent God is the + slave and victim of man. + </p> + <p> + The energies of the world have been wasted in the service of a phantom—millions + of priests have lived on the industry of others and no effort has been + spared to prevent the intellectual freedom of mankind. + </p> + <p> + We know, if we know anything, that supernatural religion has no foundation + except falsehood and mistake. To expose these falsehoods—to correct + these mistakes—to build the fabric of civilization on the foundation + of demonstrated truth—is the task of the Freethinker. To destroy + guide-boards that point in the wrong direction—to correct charts + that lure to reef and wreck—to drive the fiend of fear from the mind—to + protect the cradle from the serpent of superstition and dispel the + darkness of ignorance with the sun of science—is the task of the + Freethinker. + </p> + <p> + What constructive work has been done by the church? Christianity gave us a + flat world a few thousand years ago—a heaven above it where Jehovah + dwells and a hell below it where most people will dwell. Christianity took + the ground that a certain belief was necessary to salvation and that this + belief was far better and of more importance than the practice of all the + virtues. It became the enemy of investigation—the bitter and + relentless foe of reason and the liberty of thought. It committed every + crime and practiced every cruelty in the propagation of its creed. It drew + the sword against the freedom of the world. It established schools and + universities for the preservation of ignorance. It claimed to have within + its keeping the source and standard of all truth. If the church had + succeeded the sciences could not have existed. + </p> + <p> + Freethought has given us all we have of value. It has been the great + constructive force. It is the only discoverer, and every science is its + child.—The Truth Seeker, New York 1890. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0029" id="link0029"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + THE IMPROVED MAN. + </h2> + <p> + THE Improved Man will be in favor of universal liberty, that is to say, he + will be opposed to all kings and nobles, to all privileged classes. He + will give to all others the rights he claims for himself. He will neither + bow nor cringe, nor accept bowing and cringing from others. He will be + neither master nor slave, neither prince nor peasant—simply man. + </p> + <p> + He will be the enemy of all caste, no matter whether its foundation be + wealth, title or power, and of him it will be said: "Blessed is that man + who is afraid of no man and of whom no man is afraid." + </p> + <p> + The Improved Man will be in favor of universal education. He will believe + it the duty of every person to shed all the light he can, to the end that + no child may be reared in darkness. By education he will mean the gaining + of useful knowledge, the development of the mind along the natural paths + that lead to human happiness. + </p> + <p> + He will not waste his time in ascertaining the foolish theories of extinct + peoples or in studying the dead languages for the sake of understanding + the theologies of ignorance and fear, but he will turn his attention to + the affairs of life, and will do his utmost to see to it that every child + has an opportunity to learn the demonstrated facts of science, the true + history of the world, the great principles of right and wrong applicable + to human conduct—the things necessary to the preservation of the + individual and of the state, and such arts and industries as are essential + to the preservation of all. + </p> + <p> + He will also endeavor to develop the mind in the direction of the + beautiful—of the highest art—so that the palace in which the + mind dwells may be enriched and rendered beautiful, to the end that these + stones, called facts, may be changed into statues. + </p> + <p> + The Improved Man will believe only in the religion of this world. He will + have nothing to do with the miraculous and supernatural. He will find that + there is no room in the universe for these things. He will know that + happiness is the only good, and that everything that tends to the + happiness of sentient beings is good, and that to do the things—and + no other—that add to the happiness of man is to practice the highest + possible religion. His motto will be: "Sufficient unto each world is the + evil thereof." He will know that each man should be his own priest, and + that the brain is the real cathedral. He will know that in the realm of + mind there is no authority—that majorities in this mental world can + settle nothing—that each soul is the sovereign of its own world, and + that it cannot abdicate without degrading itself. He will not bow to + numbers or force; to antiquity or custom. He, standing under the flag of + nature, under the blue and stars, will decide for himself. He will not + endeavor by prayers and supplication, by fastings and genuflections, to + change the mind of the "Infinite" or alter the course of nature, neither + will he employ others to do those things in his place. He will have no + confidence in the religion of idleness, and will give no part of what he + earns to support parson or priest, archbishop or pope. He will know that + honest labor is the highest form of prayer. He will spend no time in + ringing bells or swinging censers, or in chanting the litanies of + barbarism, but he will appreciate all that is artistic—that is + beautiful—that tends to refine and ennoble the human race. He will + not live a life of fear. He will stand in awe neither of man nor ghosts. + He will enjoy not only the sunshine of life, but will bear with fortitude + the darkest days. He will have no fear of death. About the grave, there + will be no terrors, and his life will end as serenely as the sun rises. + </p> + <p> + The Improved Man will be satisfied that the supernatural does not exist—that + behind every fact, every thought and dream is an efficient cause. He will + know that every human action is a necessary product, and he will also know + that men cannot be reformed by punishment, by degradation or by revenge. + He will regard those who violate the laws of nature and the laws of States + as victims of conditions, of circumstances, and he will do what he can for + the wellbeing of his fellow-men. + </p> + <p> + The Improved Man will not give his life to the accumulation of wealth. He + will find no happiness in exciting the envy of his neighbors. He will not + care to live in a palace while others who are good, industrious and kind + are compelled to huddle in huts and dens. He will know that great wealth + is a great burden, and that to accumulate beyond the actual needs of a + reasonable human being is to increase not wealth, but responsibility and + trouble. + </p> + <p> + The Improved Man will find his greatest joy in the happiness of others and + he will know that the home is the real temple. He will believe in the + democracy of the fireside, and will reap his greatest reward in being + loved by those whose lives he has enriched. + </p> + <p> + The Improved Man will be self-poised, independent, candid and free. He + will be a scientist. He will observe, investigate, experiment and + demonstrate. He will use his sense and his senses. He will keep his mind + open as the day to the hints and suggestions of nature. He will always be + a student, a learner and a listener—a believer in intellectual + hospitality. In the world of his brain there will be continuous summer, + perpetual seed-time and harvest. Facts will be the foundation of his + faith. In one hand he will carry the torch of truth, and with the other + raise the fallen.—The World, New York, February 28,1890. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0030" id="link0030"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + EIGHT HOURS MUST COME. + </h2> + <p> + I HARDLY know enough on the subject to give an opinion as to the time when + eight hours are to become a day's work, but I am perfectly satisfied that + eight hours will become a labor day. + </p> + <p> + The working people should be protected by law; if they are not, the + capitalists will require just as many hours as human nature can bear. We + have seen here in America street-car drivers working sixteen and seventeen + hours a day. It was necessary to have a strike in order to get to + fourteen, another strike to get to twelve, and nobody could blame them for + keeping on striking till they get to eight hours. + </p> + <p> + For a man to get up before daylight and work till after dark, life is of + no particular importance. He simply earns enough one day to prepare + himself to work another. His whole life is spent in want and toil, and + such a life is without value. + </p> + <p> + Of course, I cannot say that the present effort is going to succeed—all + I can say is that I hope it will. I cannot see how any man who does + nothing—who lives in idleness—can insist that others should + work ten or twelve hours a day. Neither can I see how a man who lives on + the luxuries of life can find it in his heart, or in his stomach, to say + that the poor ought to be satisfied with the crusts and crumbs they get. + </p> + <p> + I believe there is to be a revolution in the relations between labor and + capital. The laboring people a few generations ago were not very + intellectual. There were no schoolhouses, no teachers except the church, + and the church taught obedience and faith—told the poor people that + although they had a hard time here, working for nothing, they would be + paid in Paradise with a large interest. Now the working people are more + intelligent—they are better educated—they read and write. In + order to carry on the works of the present, many of them are machinists of + the highest order. They must be reasoners. Every kind of mechanism insists + upon logic. The working people are reasoners—their hands and heads + are in partnership. They know a great deal more than the capitalists. It + takes a thousand times the brain to make a locomotive that it does to run + a store or a bank. Think of the intelligence in a steamship and in all the + thousand machines and devices that are now working for the world. These + working people read. They meet together—they discuss. They are + becoming more and more independent in thought. They do not believe all + they hear. They may take their hats off their heads to the priests, but + they keep their brains in their heads for themselves. + </p> + <p> + The free school in this country has tended to put men on an equality, and + the mechanic understands his side of the case, and is able to express his + views. Under these circumstances there must be a revolution. That is to + say, the relations between capital and labor must be changed, and the time + must come when they who do the work—they who make the money—will + insist on having some of the profits. + </p> + <p> + I do not expect this remedy to come entirely from the Government, or from + Government interference. I think the Government can aid in passing good + and wholesome laws—laws fixing the length of a labor day; laws + preventing the employment of children; laws for the safety and security of + workingmen in mines and other dangerous places. But the laboring people + must rely upon themselves; on their intelligence, and especially on their + political power. They are in the majority in this country. They can if + they wish—if they will stand together—elect Congresses and + Senates, Presidents and Judges. They have it in their power to administer + the Government of the United States. + </p> + <p> + The laboring man, however, ought to remember that all who labor are their + brothers, and that all women who labor are their sisters, and whenever one + class of workingmen or working women is oppressed all other laborers ought + to stand by the oppressed class. Probably the worst paid people in the + world are the working-women. Think of the sewing women in this city—and + yet we call ourselves civilized! I would like to see all working people + unite for the purpose of demanding justice, not only for men, but for + women. + </p> + <p> + All my sympathies are on the side of those who toil—of those who + produce the real wealth of the world—of those who carry the burdens + of mankind. + </p> + <p> + Any man who wishes to force his brother to work—to toil—more + than eight hours a day is not a civilized man. + </p> + <p> + My hope for the workingman has its foundation in the fact that he is + growing more and more intelligent. I have also the same hope for the + capitalist. The time must come when the capitalist will clearly and + plainly see that his interests are identical with those of the laboring + man. He will finally become intelligent enough to know that his prosperity + depends on the prosperity of those who labor. When both become intelligent + the matter will be settled. + </p> + <p> + Neither labor nor capital should resort to force.—The Morning + Journal, April 27, 1890. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0031" id="link0031"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + THE JEWS. + </h2> + <p> + WHEN I was a child, I was taught that the Jews were an exceedingly + hard-hearted and cruel people, and that they were so destitute of the + finer feelings that they had a little while before that time crucified the + only perfect man who had appeared upon the earth; that this perfect man + was also perfect God, and that the Jews had really stained their hands + with the blood of the Infinite. + </p> + <p> + When I got somewhat older, I found that nearly all people had been guilty + of substantially the same crime—that is, that they had destroyed the + progressive and the thoughtful; that religionists had in all ages been + cruel; that the chief priests of all people had incited the mob, to the + end that heretics—that is to say, philosophers—that is to say, + men who knew that the chief priests were hypocrites—might be + destroyed. + </p> + <p> + I also found that Christians had committed more of these crimes than all + other religionists put together. + </p> + <p> + I also became acquainted with a large number of Jewish people, and I found + them like other people, except that, as a rule, they were more + industrious, more temperate, had fewer vagrants among them, no beggars, + very few criminals; and in addition to all this, I found that they were + intelligent, kind to their wives and children, and that, as a rule, they + kept their contracts and paid their debts. + </p> + <p> + The prejudice was created almost entirely by religious, or rather + irreligious, instruction. All children in Christian countries are taught + that all the Jews are to be eternally damned who die in the faith of + Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; that it is not enough to believe in the + inspiration of the Old Testament—not enough to obey the Ten + Commandments—not enough to believe the miracles performed in the + days of the prophets, but that every Jew must accept the New Testament and + must be a believer in Christianity—that is to say, he must be + regenerated—or he will simply be eternal kindling wood. + </p> + <p> + The church has taught, and still teaches, that every Jew is an outcast; + that he is to-day busily fulfilling prophecy; that he is a wandering + witness in favor of "the glad tidings of great joy;" that Jehovah is + seeing to it that the Jews shall not exist as a nation—that they + shall have no abiding place, but that they shall remain scattered, to the + end that the inspiration of the Bible may be substantiated. + </p> + <p> + Dr. John Hall of this city, a few years ago, when the Jewish people were + being persecuted in Russia, took the ground that it was all fulfillment of + prophecy, and that whenever a Jewish maiden was stabbed to death, God put + a tongue in every wound for the purpose of declaring the truth of the Old + Testament. + </p> + <p> + Just as long as Christians take these positions, of course they will do + what they can to assist in the fulfillment of what they call prophecy, and + they will do their utmost to keep the Jewish people in a state of exile, + and then point to that fact as one of the corner-stones of Christianity. + </p> + <p> + My opinion is that in the early days of Christianity all sensible Jews + were witnesses against the faith, and in this way excited the hostility of + the orthodox. Every sensible Jew knew that no miracles had been performed + in Jerusalem. They all knew that the sun had not been darkened, that the + graves had not given up their dead, that the veil of the temple had not + been rent in twain—and they told what they knew. They were then + denounced as the most infamous of human beings, and this hatred has + pursued them from that day to this. + </p> + <p> + There is no other chapter in history so infamous, so bloody, so cruel, so + relentless, as the chapter in which is told the manner in which Christians—those + who love their enemies—have treated the Jewish people. This story is + enough to bring the blush of shame to the cheek, and the words of + indignation to the lips of every honest man. + </p> + <p> + Nothing can be more unjust than to generalize about nationalities, and to + speak of a race as worthless or vicious, simply because you have met an + individual who treated you unjustly. There are good people and bad people + in all races, and the individual is not responsible for the crimes of the + nation, or the nation responsible for the actions of the few. Good men and + honest men are found in every faith, and they are not honest or dishonest + because they are Jews or Gentiles, but for entirely different reasons. + </p> + <p> + Some of the best people I have ever known are Jews, and some of the worst + people I have known are Christians. The Christians were not bad simply + because they were Christians, neither were the Jews good because they were + Jews. A man is far above these badges of faith and race. Good Jews are + precisely the same as good Christians, and bad Christians are wonderfully + like bad Jews. + </p> + <p> + Personally, I have either no prejudices about religion, or I have equal + prejudice against all religions. The consequence is that I judge of people + not by their creeds, not by their rites, not by their mummeries, but by + their actions. + </p> + <p> + In the first place, at the bottom of this prejudice lies the coiled + serpent of superstition. In other words, it is a religious question. It + seems impossible for the people of one religion to like the people + believing in another religion. They have different gods, different + heavens, and a great variety of hells. For the followers of one god to + treat the followers of another god decently is a kind of treason. In order + to be really true to his god, each follower must not only hate all other + gods, but the followers of all other gods. + </p> + <p> + The Jewish people should outgrow their own superstitions. It is time for + them to throw away the idea of inspiration. The intelligent jew of to-day + knows that the Old Testament was written by barbarians., and he knows that + the rites and ceremonies are simply absurd. He knows that no intelligent + man should care anything about Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, three dead + barbarians. In other words, the Jewish people should leave their + superstition and rely on science and philosophy. + </p> + <p> + The Christian should do the same. He, by this time, should know that his + religion is a mistake, that his creed has no foundation in the eternal + verities. The Christian certainly should give up the hopeless task of + converting the Jewish people, and the Jews should give up the useless task + of converting the Christians. There is no propriety in swapping + superstitions—neither party can afford to give any boot. + </p> + <p> + When the Christian throws away his cruel and heartless superstitions, and + when the Jew throws away his, then they can meet as man to man. + </p> + <p> + In the meantime, the world will go on in its blundering way, and I shall + know and feel that everybody does as he must, and that the Christian, to + the extent that he is prejudiced, is prejudiced by reason of his + ignorance, and that consequently the great lever with which to raise all + mankind into the sunshine of philosophy, is intelligence. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0032" id="link0032"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + CRUMBLING CREEDS. + </h2> + <p> + THERE is a desire in each brain to harmonize the knowledge that it has. If + a man knows, or thinks he knows, a few facts, he will naturally use those + facts for the purpose of determining the accuracy of his opinions on other + subjects. This is simply an effort to establish or prove the unknown by + the known—a process that is constantly going on in the minds of all + intelligent people. + </p> + <p> + It is natural for a man not governed by fear, to use what he knows in one + department of human inquiry, in every other department that he + investigates. The average of intelligence has in the last few years + greatly increased. Man may have as much credulity as he ever had, on some + subjects, but certainly on the old subjects he has less. There is not as + great difference to-day between the members of the learned professions and + the common people. Man is governed less and less by authority. He cares + but little for the conclusions of the universities. He does not feel bound + by the actions of synods or ecumenical councils—neither does he bow + to the decisions of the highest tribunals, unless the reasons given for + the decision satisfy his intellect. One reason for this is, that the + so-called "learned" do not agree among themselves—that the + universities dispute each other—that the synod attacks the + ecumenical council—that the parson snaps his fingers at the priest, + and even the Protestant bishop holds the pope in contempt. If the learned + cau thus disagree, there is no reason why the common people should hold to + one opinion. They are at least called upon to decide as between the + universities or synods; and in order to decide, they must examine both + sides, and having examined both sides, they generally have an opinion of + their own. + </p> + <p> + There was a time when the average man knew nothing of medicine—he + simply opened his mouth and took the dose. If he died, it was simply a + dispensation of Providence—if he got well, it was a triumph of + science. Now this average man not only asks the doctor what is the matter + with him—not only asks what medicine will be good for him,—but + insists on knowing the philosophy of the cure—asks the doctor why he + gives it—what result he expects—and, as a rule, has a judgment + of his own. + </p> + <p> + So in law. The average business man has an exceedingly good idea of the + law affecting his business. There is nothing now mysterious about what + goes on in courts or in the decisions of judges—they are published + in every direction, and all intelligent people who happen to read these + opinions have their ideas as to whether the opinions are right or wrong. + They are no longer the victims of doctors, or of lawyers, or of courts. + </p> + <p> + The same is true in the world of art and literature. The average man has + an opinion of his own. He is no longer a parrot repeating what somebody + else says. He not only has opinions, but he has the courage to express + them. In literature the old models fail to satisfy him. He has the courage + to say that Milton is tiresome—that Dante is prolix—that they + deal with subjects having no human interest. He laughs at Young's "Night + Thoughts" and Pollok's "Course of Time"—knowing that both are filled + with hypocrisies and absurdities. He no longer falls upon his knees before + the mechanical poetry of Mr. Pope. He chooses—and stands by his own + opinion. I do not mean that he is entirely independent, but that he is + going in that direction. + </p> + <p> + The same is true of pictures. He prefers the modern to the old masters. He + prefers Corot to Raphael. He gets more real pleasure from Millet and + Troyon than from all the pictures of all the saints and donkeys of the + Middle Ages. + </p> + <p> + In other words, the days of authority are passing away. + </p> + <p> + The same is true in music. The old no longer satisfies, and there is a + breadth, color, wealth, in the new that makes the old poor and barren in + comparison. + </p> + <p> + To a far greater extent this advance, this individual independence, is + seen in the religious world. The religion of our day—that is to say, + the creeds—at the time they were made, were in perfect harmony with + the knowledge, or rather with the ignorance, of man in all other + departments of human inquiry. All orthodox creeds agreed with the sciences + of their day—with the astronomy and geology and biology and + political conceptions of the Middle Ages. These creeds were declared to be + the absolute and eternal truth. They could not be changed without + abandoning the claim that made them authority. The priests, through a kind + of unconscious self-defence, clung to every word. They denied the truth of + all discovery. They measured every assertion in every other department by + their creeds. At last the facts against them became so numerous—their + congregations became so intelligent—that it was necessary to give + new meanings to the old words. The cruel was softened—the absurd was + partially explained, and they kept these old words, although the original + meanings had fallen out. They became empty purses, but they retained them + still. + </p> + <p> + Slowly but surely came the time when this course could not longer be + pursued. The words must be thrown away—the creeds must be changed—they + were no longer believed—only occasionally were they preached. The + ministers became a little ashamed—they began to apologize. Apology + is the prelude to retreat. + </p> + <p> + Of all the creeds, the Presbyterian, the old Congregational, were the most + explicit, and for that reason the most absurd. When these creeds were + written, those who wrote them had perfect confidence in their truth. They + did not shrink because of their cruelty. They cared nothing for what + others called absurdity. They failed not to declare what they believed to + be "the whole counsel of God." + </p> + <p> + At that time, cruel punishments were inflicted by all governments. People + were torn asunder, mutilated, burned. Every atrocity was perpetrated in + the name of justice, and the limit of pain was the limit of endurance. + These people imagined that God would do as they would do. If they had had + it in their power to keep the victim alive for years in the flames, they + would most cheerfully have supplied the fagots. They believed that God + could keep the victim alive forever, and that therefore his punishment + would be eternal. As man becomes civilized he becomes merciful, and the + time came when civilized Presbyterians and Congregationalists read their + own creeds with horror. + </p> + <p> + I am not saying that the Presbyterian creed is any worse than the + Catholic. It is only a little more specific. Neither am I saying that it + is more horrible than the Episcopal. It is not. All orthodox creeds are + alike infamous. All of them have good things, and all of them have bad + things. You will find in every creed the blossom of mercy and the oak of + justice, but under the one and around the other are coiled the serpents of + infinite cruelty. + </p> + <p> + The time came when orthodox Christians began dimly to perceive that God + ought at least to be as good as they were. They felt that they were + incapable of inflicting eternal pain, and they began to doubt the + propriety of saying that God would do that which a civilized Christian + would be incapable of. + </p> + <p> + We have improved in all directions for the same reasons. We have better + laws now because we have a better sense of justice. We are believing more + and more in the government of the people. Consequently we are believing + more and more in the education of the people, and from that naturally + results greater individuality and a greater desire to hear the honest + opinions of all. + </p> + <p> + The moment the expression of opinion is allowed in any department, + progress begins. We are using our knowledge in every direction. The + tendency is to test all opinions by the facts we know. All claims are put + in the crucible of investigation—the object being to separate the + true from the false. He who objects to having his opinions thus tested is + regarded as a bigot. + </p> + <p> + If the professors of all the sciences had claimed that the knowledge they + had was given by inspiration—that it was absolutely true, and that + there was no necessity of examining further, not only, but that it was a + kind of blasphemy to doubt—all the sciences would have remained as + stationary as religion has. Just to the extent that the Bible was appealed + to in matters of science, science was retarded; and just to the extent + that science has been appealed to in matters of religion, religion has + advanced—so that now the object of intelligent religionists is to + adopt a creed that will bear the test and criticism of science. + </p> + <p> + Another thing may be alluded to in this connection. All the countries of + the world are now, and have been for years, open to us. The ideas of other + people—their theories, their religions—are now known; and we + have ascertained that the religions of all people have exactly the same + foundation as our own—that they all arose in the same way, were + substantiated in the same way, were maintained by the same means, having + precisely the same objects in view. + </p> + <p> + For many years, the learned of the religious world were examining the + religions of other countries, and in that work they established certain + rules of criticism—pursued certain lines of argument—by which + they overturned the claims of those religions to supernatural origin. + After this had been successfully done, others, using the same methods on + our religion, pursuing the same line of argument, succeeded in overturning + ours. We have found that all miracles rest on the same basis—that + all wonders were born of substantially the same ignorance and the same + fear. + </p> + <p> + The intelligence of the world is far better distributed than ever before. + The historical outlines of all countries are well known. The arguments for + and against all systems of religion are generally understood. The average + of intelligence is far higher than ever before. All discoveries become + almost immediately the property of the whole civilized world, and all + thoughts are distributed by the telegraph and press with such rapidity, + that provincialism is almost unknown. The egotism of ignorance and + seclusion is passing away. The prejudice of race and religion is growing + feebler, and everywhere, to a greater extent than ever before, the light + is welcome. + </p> + <p> + These are a few of the reasons why creeds are crumbling, and why such a + change has taken place in the religious world. + </p> + <p> + Only a few years ago the pulpit was an intellectual power. The pews + listened with wonder, and accepted without question. There was something + sacred about the preacher. He was different from other mortals. He had + bread to eat which they knew not of. He was oracular, solemn, dignified, + stupid. + </p> + <p> + The pulpit has lost its position. It speaks no longer with authority. The + pews determine what shall be preached. They pay only for that which they + wish to buy—for that which they wish to hear. Of course in every + church there is an advance guard and a conservative party, and nearly + every minister is obliged to preach a little for both. He now and then + says a radical thing for one part of his congregation, and takes it mostly + back on the next Sabbath, for the sake of the others. Most of them ride + two horses, and their time is taken up in urging one forward and in + holding the other back. + </p> + <p> + The great reason why the orthodox creeds have become unpopular is, that + all teach the dogma of eternal pain. + </p> + <p> + In old times, when men were nearly wild beasts, it was natural enough for + them to suppose that God would do as they would do in his place, and so + they attributed to this God infinite cruelty, infinite revenge. This + revenge, this cruelty, wore the mask of justice. They took the ground that + God, having made man, had the right to do with him as he pleased. At that + time they were not civilized to the extent of seeing that a God would not + have the right to make a failure, and that a being of infinite wisdom and + power would be under obligation to do the right, and that he would have no + right to create any being whose life would not be a blessing. The very + fact that he made man, would put him under obligation to see to it that + life should not be a curse. + </p> + <p> + The doctrine of eternal punishment is in perfect harmony with the savagery + of the men who made the orthodox creeds. It is in harmony with torture, + with flaying alive and with burnings. The men who burned their fellow-men + for a moment, believed that God would burn his enemies forever. + </p> + <p> + No civilized men ever believed in this dogma. The belief in eternal + punishment has driven millions from the church. It was easy enough for + people to imagine that the children of others had gone to hell; that + foreigners had been doomed to eternal pain; but when it was brought home—when + fathers and mothers bent above their dead who had died in their sins—when + wives shed their tears on the faces of husbands who had been born but once—love + suggested doubts and love fought the dogma of eternal revenge. + </p> + <p> + This doctrine is as cruel as the hunger of hyenas, and is infamous beyond + the power of any language to express—yet a creed with this doctrine + has been called "the glad tidings of great joy"—a consolation to the + weeping world. It is a source of great pleasure to me to know that all + intelligent people are ashamed to admit that they believe it—that no + intelligent clergyman now preaches it, except with a preface to the effect + that it is probably untrue. + </p> + <p> + I have been blamed for taking this consolation from the world—for + putting out, or trying to put out, the fires of hell; and many orthodox + people have wondered how I could be so wicked as to deprive the world of + this hope. + </p> + <p> + The church clung to the doctrine because it seemed a necessary excuse for + the existence of the church. The ministers said: "No hell, no atonement; + no atonement, no fall of man; no fall of man, no inspired book; no + inspired book, no preachers; no preachers, no salary; no hell, no + missionaries; no sulphur, no salvation." + </p> + <p> + At last, the people are becoming enlightened enough to ask for a better + philosophy. The doctrine of hell is now only for the poor, the ragged, the + ignorant. Well-dressed people won't have it. Nobody goes to hell in a + carriage—they foot it. Hell is for strangers and tramps. No soul + leaves a brown-stone front for hell—they start from the tenements, + from jails and reformatories. In other words, hell is for the poor. It is + easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a poor man + to get into heaven, or for a rich man to get into hell. The ministers + stand by their supporters. Their salaries are paid by the well-to-do, and + they can hardly afford to send the subscribers to hell. Every creed in + which is the dogma of eternal pain is doomed. Every church teaching the + infinite lie must fall, and the sooner the better.—The Twentieth + Century, N, Y., April 21,1890. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0033" id="link0033"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + OUR SCHOOLS. + </h2> + <p> + I BELIEVE that education is the only lever capable of raising mankind. If + we wish to make the future of the Republic glorious we must educate the + children of the present. The greatest blessing conferred by our Government + is the free school. In importance it rises above everything else that the + Government does. In its influence it is far greater. + </p> + <p> + The schoolhouse is infinitely more important than the church, and if all + the money wasted in the building of churches could be devoted to education + we should become a civilized people. Of course, to the extent that + churches disseminate thought they are good, and to the extent that they + provoke discussion they are of value, but the real object should be to + become acquainted with nature—with the conditions of happiness—to + the end that man may take advantage of the forces of nature. I believe in + the schools for manual training, and that every child should be taught not + only to think, but to do, and that the hand should be educated with the + brain. The money expended on schools is the best investment made by the + Government. + </p> + <p> + The schoolhouses in New York are not sufficient. Many of them are small, + dark, unventilated, and unhealthy. They should be the finest public + buildings in the city. It would be far better for the Episcopalians to + build a university than a cathedral. Attached to all these schoolhouses + there should be grounds for the children—places for air and + sunlight. They should be given the best. They are the hope of the Republic + and, in my judgment, of the world. + </p> + <p> + We need far more schoolhouses than we have, and while money is being + wasted in a thousand directions, thousands of children are left to be + educated in the gutter. It is far cheaper to build schoolhouses than + prisons, and it is much better to have scholars than convicts. + </p> + <p> + The Kindergarten system should be adopted, especially for the young; + attending school is then a pleasure—the children do not run away + from school, but to school. We should educate the children not simply in + mind, but educate their eyes and hands, and they should be taught + something that will be of use, that will help them to make a living, that + will give them independence, confidence—that is to say, character. + </p> + <p> + The cost of the schools is very little, and the cost of land—giving + the children, as I said before, air and light—would amount to + nothing. + </p> + <p> + There is another thing: Teachers are poorly paid. Only the best should be + employeed, and they should be well paid. Men and women of the highest + character should have charge of the children, because there is a vast deal + of education in association, and it is of the utmost importance that the + children should associate with real gentlemen—that is to say, with + real men; with real ladies—that is to say, with real women. + </p> + <p> + Every schoolhouse should be inviting, clean, well ventilated, attractive. + The surroundings should be delightful. Children forced to school, learn + but little. The schoolhouse should not be a prison or the teachers + turnkeys. + </p> + <p> + I believe that the common school is the bread of life, and all should be + commanded to eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge. It would have been + far better to have expelled those who refused to eat. + </p> + <p> + The greatest danger to the Republic is ignorance. Intelligence is the + foundation of free government.—The World, New York, September 7, + 1800. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0034" id="link0034"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + VIVISECTION. + </h2> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + *A letter written to Philip G. Peabody. May 27, 1800. +</pre> + <p> + VIVISECTION is the Inquisition—the Hell—of Science. + </p> + <p> + All the cruelty which the human—or rather the inhuman—heart is + capable of inflicting, is in this one word. Below this there is no depth. + This word lies like a coiled serpent at the bottom of the abyss. + </p> + <p> + We can excuse, in part, the crimes of passion. We take into consideration + the fact that man is liable to be caught by the whirlwind, and that from a + brain on fire the soul rushes to a crime. But what excuse can ingenuity + form for a man who deliberately—with an unaccelerated pulse—with + the calmness of John Calvin at the murder of Servetus—seeks, with + curious and cunning knives, in the living, quivering flesh of a dog, for + all the throbbing nerves of pain? The wretches who commit these infamous + crimes pretend that they are working for the good of man; that they are + actuated by philanthropy; and that their pity for the sufferings of the + human race drives out all pity for the animals they slowly torture to + death. But those who are incapable of pitying animals are, as a matter of + fact, incapable of pitying men. A physician who would cut a living rabbit + in pieces—laying bare the nerves, denuding them with knives, pulling + them out with forceps—would not hesitate to try experiments with men + and women for the gratification of his curiosity. + </p> + <p> + To settle some theory, he would trifle with the life of any patient in his + power. By the same reasoning he will justify the vivisection of animals + and patients. He will say that it is better that a few animals should + suffer than that one human being should die; and that it is far better + that one patient should die, if through the sacrifice of that one, several + may be saved. + </p> + <p> + Brain without heart is far more dangerous than heart without brain. + </p> + <p> + Have these scientific assassins discovered anything of value? They may + have settled some disputes as to the action of some organ, but have they + added to the useful knowledge of the race? + </p> + <p> + It is not necessary for a man to be a specialist in order to have and + express his opinion as to the right or wrong of vivisection. It is not + necessary to be a scientist or a naturalist to detest cruelty and to love + mercy. Above all the discoveries of the thinkers, above all the inventions + of the ingenious, above all the victories won on fields of intellectual + conflict, rise human sympathy and a sense of justice. + </p> + <p> + I know that good for the human race can never be accomplished by torture. + I also know that all that has been ascertained by vivisection could have + been done by the dissection of the dead. I know that all the torture has + been useless. All the agony inflicted has simply hardened the hearts of + the criminals, without enlightening their minds. + </p> + <p> + It may be that the human race might be physically improved if all the + sickly and deformed babes were killed, and if all the paupers, liars, + drunkards, thieves, villains, and vivisectionists were murdered. All this + might, in a few ages, result in the production of a generation of + physically perfect men and women; but what would such beings be worth,—men + and women healthy and heartless, muscular and cruel—that is to say, + intelligent wild beasts? + </p> + <p> + Never can I be the friend of one who vivisects his fellow-creatures. I do + not wish to touch his hand. + </p> + <p> + When the angel of pity is driven from the heart; when the fountain of + tears is dry,—the soul becomes a serpent crawling in the dust of a + desert. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0035" id="link0035"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + THE CENSUS ENUMERATOR'S OFFICIAL CATECHISM. + </h2> + <p> + I SUPPOSE the Government has a right to ask all of these questions, and + any more it pleases, but undoubtedly the citizen would have the right to + refuse to answer them. Originally the census was taken simply for the + purpose of ascertaining the number of people—first, as a basis of + representation; second, as a basis of capitation tax; third, as a basis to + arrive at the number of troops that might be called from each State; and + it may be for some other purposes, but I imagine that all are embraced in + the foregoing. + </p> + <p> + The Government has no right to invade the privacy of the citizen; no right + to inquire into his financial condition, as thereby his credit might be + injured; no right to pry into his affairs, into his diseases, or his + deformities; and, while the Government may have the right to ask these + questions, I think it was foolish to instruct the enumerators to ask them, + and that the citizens have a perfect right to refuse to answer them. + Personally, I have no objection to answering any of these questions, for + the reason that nothing is the matter with me that money will not cure. + </p> + <p> + I know that it is thought advisable by many to find out the amount of + mortgages in the United States, the rate of interest that is being paid, + the general indebtedness of individuals, counties, cities and States, and + I see no impropriety in finding this out in any reasonable way. But I + think it improper to insist on the debtor exposing his financial + condition. My opinion is that Mr. Porter only wants what is perfectly + reasonable, and if left to himself, would ask only those questions that + all people would willingly answer. + </p> + <p> + I presume we can depend on medical statistics—on the reports of + hospitals, etc., in regard to diseases and deformities, without + interfering with the patients. As to the financial standing of people, + there are already enough of spies in this country attending to that + business. I don't think there is any danger of the courts compelling a man + to answer these questions. Suppose a man refuses to tell whether he has a + chronic disease or not, and he is brought up before a United States Court + for contempt. In my opinion the judge would decide that the man could not + be compelled to answer. It is bad enough to have a chronic disease without + publishing it to the world. All intelligent people, of course, will be + desirous of giving all useful information of a character that cannot be + used to their injury, but can be used for the benefit of society at large. + </p> + <p> + If, however, the courts shall decide that the enumerators have the right + to ask these questions, and that everybody must answer them, I doubt if + the census will be finished for many years. There are hundreds and + thousands of people who delight in telling all about their diseases, when + they were attacked, what they have taken, how many doctors have given them + up to die, etc., and if the enumerators will stop to listen, the census of + 1890 will not be published until the next century.—The World, New + York, June 8, 1890. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0036" id="link0036"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + THE AGNOSTIC CHRISTMAS + </h2> + <p> + AGAIN we celebrate the victory of Light over Darkness, of the God of day + over the hosts of night. Again Samson is victorious over Delilah, and + Hercules triumphs once more over Omphale. In the embrace of Isis, Osiris + rises from the dead, and the scowling Typhon is defeated once more. Again + Apollo, with unerring aim, with his arrow from the quiver of light, + destroys the serpent of shadow. This is the festival of Thor, of Baldur + and of Prometheus. Again Buddha by a miracle escapes from the tyrant of + Madura, Zoroaster foils the King, Bacchus laughs at the rage of Cadmus, + and Chrishna eludes the tyrant. + </p> + <p> + This is the festival of the sun-god, and as such let its observance be + universal. + </p> + <p> + This is the great day of the first religion, the mother of all religions—the + worship of the sun. + </p> + <p> + Sun worship is not only the first, but the most natural and most + reasonable of all. And not only the most natural and the most reasonable, + but by far the most poetic, the most beautiful. + </p> + <p> + The sun is the god of benefits, of growth, of life, of warmth, of + happiness, of joy. The sun is the all-seeing, the all-pitying, the + all-loving. + </p> + <p> + This bright God knew no hatred, no malice, never sought for revenge. + </p> + <p> + All evil qualities were in the breast of the God of darkness, of shadow, + of night. And so I say again, this is the festival of Light. This is the + anniversary of the triumph of the Sun over the hosts of Darkness. + </p> + <p> + Let us all hope for the triumph of Light—of Right and Reason—for + the victory of Fact over Falsehood, of Science over Superstition. + </p> + <p> + And so hoping, let us celebrate the venerable festival of the Sun.—The + Journal, New York, December 25,1892. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0037" id="link0037"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + SPIRITUALITY. + </h2> + <p> + IF there is an abused word in our language, it is "spirituality." + </p> + <p> + It has been repeated over and over for several hundred years by pious + pretenders and snivelers as though it belonged exclusively to them. + </p> + <p> + In the early days of Christianity, the "spiritual" renounced the world + with all its duties and obligations. They deserted their wives and + children. They became hermits and dwelt in caves. They spent their useless + years in praying for their shriveled and worthless souls. They were too + "spiritual" to love women, to build homes and to labor for children. They + were too "spiritual" to earn their bread, so they became beggars and stood + by the highways of Life and held out their hands and asked alms of + Industry and Courage. They were too "spiritual" to be merciful. They + preached the dogma of eternal pain and gloried in "the wrath to come." + They were too "spiritual" to be civilized, so they persecuted their + fellow-men for expressing their honest thoughts. They were so "spiritual" + that they invented instruments of torture, founded the Inquisition, + appealed to the whip, the rack, the sword and the fagot. They tore the + flesh of their fellow-men with hooks of iron, buried their neighbors + alive, cut off their eyelids, dashed out the brains of babes and cut off + the breasts of mothers. These "spiritual" wretches spent day and night on + their knees, praying for their own salvation and asking God to curse the + best and noblest of the world. + </p> + <p> + John Calvin was intensely "spiritual" when he warmed his fleshless hands + at the flames that consumed Servetus. + </p> + <p> + John Knox was constrained by his "spirituality" to utter low and loathsome + calumnies against all women. All the witch-burners and Quaker-maimers and + mutilators were so "spiritual" that they constantly looked heavenward and + longed for the skies. + </p> + <p> + These lovers of God—these haters of men—looked upon the Greek + marbles as unclean, and denounced the glories of Art as the snares and + pitfalls of perdition. + </p> + <p> + These "spiritual" mendicants hated laughter and smiles and dimples, and + exhausted their diseased and polluted imaginations in the effort to make + love loathsome. + </p> + <p> + From almost every pulpit was heard the denunciation of all that adds to + the wealth, the joy and glory of life. It became the fashion for the + "spiritual" to malign every hope and passion that tends to humanize and + refine the heart. Man was denounced as totally depraved. Woman was + declared to be a perpetual temptation—her beauty a snare and her + touch pollution. + </p> + <p> + Even in our own time and country some of the ministers, no matter how + radical they claim to be, retain the aroma, the odor, or the smell of the + "spiritual." + </p> + <p> + They denounce some of the best and greatest—some of the benefactors + of the race—for having lived on the low plane of usefulness—and + for having had the pitiful ambition to make their fellows happy in this + world. + </p> + <p> + Thomas Paine was a groveling wretch because he devoted his life to the + preservation of the rights of man, and Voltaire lacked the "spiritual" + because he abolished torture in France and attacked, with the enthusiasm + of a divine madness, the monster that was endeavoring to drive the hope of + liberty from the heart of man. + </p> + <p> + Humboldt was not "spiritual" enough to repeat with closed eyes the + absurdities of superstition, but was so lost to all the "skyey influences" + that he was satisfied to add to the intellectual wealth of the world. + </p> + <p> + Darwin lacked "spirituality," and in its place had nothing but sincerity, + patience, intelligence, the spirit of investigation and the courage to + give his honest conclusions to the world. He contented himself with giving + to his fellow-men the greatest and the sublimest truths that man has + spoken since lips have uttered speech. + </p> + <p> + But we are now told that these soldiers of science, these heroes of + liberty, these sculptors and painters, these singers of songs, these + composers of music, lack "spirituality" and after all were only common + clay. + </p> + <p> + This word "spirituality" is the fortress, the breastwork, the rifle-pit of + the Pharisee. It sustains the same relation to sincerity that Dutch metal + does to pure gold. + </p> + <p> + There seems to be something about a pulpit that poisons the occupant—that + changes his nature—that causes him to denounce what he really loves + and to laud with the fervor of insanity a joy that he never felt—a + rapture that never thrilled his soul. Hypnotized by his surroundings, he + unconsciously brings to market that which he supposes the purchasers + desire. + </p> + <p> + In every church, whether orthodox or radical, there are two parties—one + conservative, looking backward, one radical, looking forward, and + generally a minister "spiritual" enough to look both ways. + </p> + <p> + A minister who seems to be a philosopher on the street, or in the home of + a sensible man, cannot withstand the atmosphere of the pulpit. The moment + he stands behind the Bible cushion, like Bottom, he is "translated" and + the Titania of superstition "kisses his large, fair ears." + </p> + <p> + Nothing is more amusing than to hear a clergyman denounce worldliness—ask + his hearers what it will profit them to build railways and palaces and + lose their own souls—inquire of the common folks before him why they + waste their precious years in following trades and professions, in + gathering treasures that moths corrupt and rust devours, giving their days + to the vulgar business of making money,—and then see him take up a + collection, knowing perfectly well that only the worldly, the very people + he has denounced, can by any possibility give a dollar. + </p> + <p> + "Spirituality" for the most part is a mask worn by idleness, arrogance and + greed. + </p> + <p> + Some people imagine that they are "spiritual" when they are sickly. + </p> + <p> + It may be well enough to ask: What is it to be really spiritual? + </p> + <p> + The spiritual man lives to his ideal. He endeavors to make others happy. + He does not despise the passions that have filled the world with art and + glory. He loves his wife and children—home and fireside. He + cultivates the amenities and refinements of life. He is the friend and + champion of the oppressed. His sympathies are with the poor and the + suffering. He attacks what he believes to be wrong, though defended by the + many, and he is willing to stand for the right against the world. He + enjoys the beautiful. In the presence of the highest creations of Art his + eyes are suffused with tears. When he listens to the great melodies, the + divine harmonies, he feels the sorrows and the raptures of death and love. + He is intensely human. He carries in his heart the burdens of the world. + He searches for the deeper meanings. He appreciates the harmonies of + conduct, the melody of a perfect life. + </p> + <p> + He loves his wife and children better than any god. He cares more for the + world he lives in than for any other. He tries to discharge the duties of + this life, to help those that he can reach. He believes in being useful—in + making money to feed and clothe and educate the ones he loves—to + assist the deserving and to support himself. He does not wish to be a + burden on others. He is just, generous and sincere. + </p> + <p> + Spirituality is all of this world. It is a child of this earth, born and + cradled here. It comes from no heaven, but it makes a heaven where it is. + </p> + <p> + There is no possible connection between superstition and the spiritual, or + between theology and the spiritual. + </p> + <p> + The spiritually-minded man is a poet. If he does not write poetry, he + lives it. He is an artist. If he does not paint pictures or chisel + statues, he feels them, and their beauty softens his heart. He fills the + temple of his soul with all that is beautiful, and he worships at the + shrine of the Ideal. + </p> + <p> + In all the relations of life he is faithful and true. He asks for nothing + that he does not earn. He does not wish to be happy in heaven if he must + receive happiness as alms He does not rely on the goodness of another. He + is not ambitious to become a winged pauper. + </p> + <p> + Spirituality is the perfect health of the soul. It is noble, manly, + generous, brave, free-spoken, natural, superb. + </p> + <p> + Nothing is more sickening than the "spiritual" whine—the pretence + that crawls at first and talks about humility and then suddenly becomes + arrogant and says: "I am 'spiritual.' I hold in contempt the vulgar joys + of this life. You work and toil and build homes and sing songs and weave + your delicate robes. You love women and children and adorn yourselves. You + subdue the earth and dig for gold. You have your theatres, your operas and + all the luxuries of life; but I, beggar that I am, Pharisee that I am, am + your superior because I am 'spiritual.'" + </p> + <p> + Above all things, let us be sincere.—The Conservator, Philadelphia, + 1891. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0038" id="link0038"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + SUMTER'S GUN. + </h2> + <p> + 1861—April 12th—1891 + </p> + <p> + FOR about three-quarters of a century the statesmen, that is to say, the + politicians, of the North and South', had been busy making compromises, + adopting constitutions and enacting laws; busy making speeches, framing + platforms and political pretences, to the end that liberty and slavery + might dwell in peace and friendship under the same flag. + </p> + <p> + Arrogance on one side, hypocrisy on the other. + </p> + <p> + Right apologized to Wrong for the sake of the Union. + </p> + <p> + The sources of justice were poisoned, and patriotism became the defender + of piracy. In the name of humanity mothers were robbed of their babes. + </p> + <p> + Thirty years ago to-day a shot was fired, and in a moment all the + promises, all the laws, all the constitutional amendments, and all the + idiotic and heartless decisions of courts, and all the speeches of orators + inspired by the hope of place and power, were blown into rags and + ravelings, pieces and patches. + </p> + <p> + The North and South had been masquerading as friends, and in a moment, + while the sound of that shot was ringing in their ears, they faced each + other as enemies. + </p> + <p> + The roar of that cannon announced the birth of a new epoch. The echoes of + that shot went out, not only over the bay of Charleston, but over the + hills, the prairies and forests of the continent. + </p> + <p> + These echoes said marvelous things and uttered prophecies that none were + wise enough to understand. + </p> + <p> + Who at that time had the slightest conception of the immediate future? Who + then was great enough to see the end? Who then was wise enough to know + that the echoes would be kept alive and repeated for years by thousands + and thousands of cannon, by millions of muskets, on the fields of ruthless + war? + </p> + <p> + At that time Abraham Lincoln, an Illinois lawyer, was barely a month in + the President's chair, and that shot made him the most commanding and + majestic figure of the nineteenth century—a figure that stands + alone. + </p> + <p> + Who could have guessed the names of the heroes to be repeated by countless + lips before the echoes of that shot should have died away? + </p> + <p> + There was at that time a young man at Galena, silent, unobtrusive, + unknown; and yet, the moment that shot was fired he was destined to lead + the greatest host ever marshaled on a field of war, destined to receive + the final sword of the Rebellion. + </p> + <p> + There was another, in the Southwest, who heard one of the echoes of that + shot, and who afterward marched from Atlanta to the sea; and another, far + away by the Pacific, who also heard one of the echoes, and who became one + of the immortal three. + </p> + <p> + But, above all, the echoes were heard by millions of men and women in the + fields of unpaid toil, and they knew not the meaning, but felt that they + had heard a prophecy of freedom. And the echoes told of death and glory + for many thousands—of the agonies of women—the sobs of orphans—the + sighs of the imprisoned, and the glad shouts of the delivered, the + enfranchised, the redeemed. + </p> + <p> + They who fired that gun did not dream that they were giving liberty to + millions of people, including themselves, white as well as black, North as + well as South, and that before the echoes should die away, all the + shackles would be broken, all the constitutions and statutes of slavery + repealed, and all the compromises merged and lost in a great compact made + to preserve the liberties of all. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0039" id="link0039"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + WHAT INFIDELS HAVE DONE. + </h2> + <p> + ONE HUNDRED years after Christ had died suppose some one had asked a + Christian, What hospitals have you built? What asylums have you founded? + They would have said "None." Suppose three hundred years after the death + of Christ the same questions had been asked the Christian, he would have + said "None, not one." Two hundred years more and the answer would have + been the same. And at that time the Christian could have told the + questioner that the Mohammedans had built asylums before the Christians. + He could also have told him that there had been orphan asylums in China + for hundreds and hundreds of years, hospitals in India, and hospitals for + the sick at Athens. + </p> + <p> + Here it may be well enough to say that all hospitals and asylums are not + built for charity. They are built because people do not want to be annoyed + by the sick and the insane. If a sick man should come down the street and + sit upon your doorstep, what would you do with him? You would have to take + him into your house or leave him to suffer. Private families do not wish + to take the burden of the sick. Consequently, in self-defence, hospitals + are built so that any wanderer coming to a house, dying, or suffering from + any disease, may immediately be packed off to a hospital and not become a + burden upon private charity. The fact that many diseases are contagious + rendered hospitals necessary for the preservation of the lives of the + citizens. The same thing is true of the asylums. People do not, as a rule, + want to take into their families, all the children who happen to have no + fathers and mothers. So they endow and build an asylum where those + children can be sent—and where they can be whipped according to law. + Nobody wants an insane stranger in his house. The consequence is, that the + community, to get rid of these people, to get rid of the trouble, build + public institutions and send them there. + </p> + <p> + Now, then, to come to the point, to answer the interrogatory often flung + at us from the pulpit, What institutions have Infidels built? In the first + place, there have not been many Infidels for many years and, as a rule, a + known Infidel cannot get very rich, for the reason that the Christians are + so forgiving and loving they boycott him. If the average Infidel, freely + stating his opinion, could get through the world himself, for the last + several hundred years, he has been in good luck. But as a matter of fact + there have been some Infidels who have done some good, even from a + Christian standpoint. The greatest charity ever established in the United + States by a man—not by a community to get rid of a nuisance, but by + a man who wished to do good and wished that good to last after his death—is + the Girard College in the city of Philadelphia. Girard was an Infidel. He + gained his first publicity by going like a common person into the + hospitals and taking care of those suffering from contagious diseases—from + cholera and smallpox. So there is a man by the name of James Lick, an + Infidel, who has given the finest observatory ever given to the world. And + it is a good thing for an Infidel to increase the sight of men. The reason + people are theologians is because they cannot see. Mr. Lick has increased + human vision, and I can say right here that nothing has been seen through + the telescope, calculated to prove the astronomy of Joshua. Neither can + you see with that telescope a star that bears a Christian name. The reason + is that Christianity was opposed to astronomy. So astronomers took their + revenge, and now there is not one star that glitters in all the vast + firmament of the boundless heavens that has a Christian name. Mr. Carnegie + has been what they call a public-spirited man. He has given millions of + dollars for libraries and other institutions, and he certainly is not an + orthodox Christian. + </p> + <p> + Infidels, however, have done much better even than that. They have + increased the sum of human knowledge. John W. Draper, in his work on "The + Intellectual Development of Europe," has done more good to the American + people and to the civilized world than all the priests in it. He was an + Infidel. Buckle is another who has added to the sum of human knowledge. + Thomas Paine, an Infidel, did more for this country than any other man who + ever lived in it. + </p> + <p> + Most of the colleges in this country have, I admit, been founded by + Christians, and the money for their support has been donated by + Christians, but most of the colleges of this country have simply + classified ignorance, and I think the United States would be more learned + than it is to-day if there never had been a Christian college in it. But + whether Christians gave or Infidels gave has nothing to do with the + probability of the Jonah story or with the probability that the mark on + the dial went back ten degrees to prove that a little Jewish king was not + going to die of a boil. And if the Infidels are all stingy and the + Christians are all generous it does not even tend to prove that three men + were in a fiery furnace heated seven times hotter than was its wont + without even scorching their clothes. + </p> + <p> + The best college in this country—or, at least, for a long time the + best—was the institution founded by Ezra Cornell. That is a school + where people try to teach what they know instead of what they guess. Yet + Cornell University was attacked by every orthodox college in the United + States at the time it was founded, because they said it was without + religion. + </p> + <p> + Everybody knows that Christianity does not tend to generosity. + Christianity says: "Save your own soul, whether anybody else saves his or + not." Christianity says: "Let the great ship go down. You get into the + little life-boat of the gospel and paddle ashore, no matter what becomes + of the rest." Christianity says you must love God, or something in the + sky, better than you love your wife and children. And the Christian, even + when giving, expects to get a very large compound interest in another + world. The Infidel who gives, asks no return except the joy that comes + from relieving the wants of another. + </p> + <p> + Again the Christians, although they have built colleges, have built them + for the purpose of spreading their superstitions, and have poisoned the + minds of the world, while the Infidel teachers have filled the world with + light. Darwin did more for mankind than if he had built a thousand + hospitals. Voltaire did more than if he had built a thousand asylums for + the insane. He will prevent thousands from going insane that otherwise + might be driven into insanity by the "glad tidings of great joy." Haeckel + is filling the world with light. + </p> + <p> + I am perfectly willing that the results of the labors of Christians and + the labors of Infidels should be compared. Then let it be understood that + Infidels have been in this world but a very short time. A few years ago + there were hardly any. I can remember when I was the only Infidel in the + town where I lived. Give us time and we will build colleges in which + something will be taught that is of use. We hope to build temples that + will be dedicated to reason and common sense, and where every effort will + be made to reform mankind and make them better and better in this world. + </p> + <p> + I am saying nothing against the charity of Christians; nothing against any + kindness or goodness. But I say the Christians, in my judgment, have done + more harm than they have done good. They may talk of the asylums they have + built, but they have not built asylums enough to hold the people who have + been driven insane by their teachings. Orthodox religion has opposed + liberty. It has opposed investigation and free thought. If all the + churches in Europe had been observatories, if the cathedrals had been + universities where facts were taught and where nature was studied, if all + the priests had been real teachers, this world would have been far, far + beyond what it is to-day. + </p> + <p> + There is an idea that Christianity is positive, and Infidelity is + negative. If this be so, then falsehood is positive and truth is negative. + What I contend is that Infidelity is a positive religion; that + Christianity is a negative religion. Christianity denies and Infidelity + admits. Infidelity stands by facts; it demonstrates by the conclusions of + the reason. Infidelity does all it can to develop the brain and the heart + of man. That is positive. Religion asks man to give up this world for one + he knows nothing about. That is negative. I stand by the religion of + reason. I stand by the dogmas of demonstration. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0040" id="link0040"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + CRUELTY IN THE ELMIRA REFORMATORY. + </h2> + <p> + IN my judgment, no human being was ever made better, nobler, by being + whipped or clubbed. + </p> + <p> + Mr. Brockway, according to his own testimony, is simply a savage. He + belongs to the Dark Ages—to the Inquisition, to the torture-chamber, + and he needs reforming more than any prisoner under his control. To put + any man within his power is in itself a crime. Mr. Brockway is a believer + in cruelty—an apostle of brutality. He beats and bruises flesh to + satisfy his conscience—his sense of duty. He wields the club himself + because he enjoys the agony he inflicts. + </p> + <p> + When a poor wretch, having reached the limit of endurance, submits or + becomes unconscious, he is regarded as reformed. During the remainder of + his term he trembles and obeys. But he is not reformed. In his heart is + the flame of hatred, the desire for revenge; and he returns to society far + worse than when he entered the prison. + </p> + <p> + Mr. Brockway should either be removed or locked up, and the Elmira + Reformatory should be superintended by some civilized man—some man + with brain enough to know, and heart enough to feel. + </p> + <p> + I do not believe that one brute, by whipping, beating and lacerating the + flesh of another, can reform him. The lash will neither develop the brain + nor cultivate the heart. There should be no bruising, no scarring of the + body in families, in schools, in reformatories, or prisons. A civilized + man does not believe in the methods of savagery. Brutality has been tried + for thousands of years and through all these years it has been a failure. + </p> + <p> + Criminals have been flogged, mutilated and maimed, tortured in a thousand + ways, and the only effect was to demoralize, harden and degrade society + and increase the number of crimes. In the army and navy, soldiers and + sailors were flogged to death, and everywhere by church and state the + torture of the helpless was practiced and upheld. + </p> + <p> + Only a few years ago there were two hundred and twenty-three offences + punished with death in England. Those who wished to reform this savage + code were denounced as the enemies of morality and law. They were regarded + as weak and sentimental. + </p> + <p> + At last the English code was reformed through the efforts of men who had + brain and heart. But it is a significant fact that no bishop of the + Episcopal Church, sitting in the House of Lords, ever voted for the repeal + of one of those savage laws. Possibly this fact throws light on the recent + poetic and Christian declaration by Bishop Potter to the effect that + "there are certain criminals who can only be made to realize through their + hides the fact that the State has laws to which the individual must be + obedient." + </p> + <p> + This orthodox remark has the true apostolic ring, and is in perfect accord + with the history of the church. But it does not accord with the + intelligence and philanthropy of our time. Let us develop the brain by + education, the heart by kindness. Let us remember that criminals are + produced by conditions, and let us do what we can to change the conditions + and to reform the criminals. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0041" id="link0041"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + LAW'S DELAY. + </h2> + <p> + THE object of a trial is not to convict—neither is it to acquit. The + object is to ascertain the truth by legal testimony and in accordance with + law. + </p> + <p> + In this country we give the accused the benefit of all reasonable doubts. + We insist that his guilt shall be really established by competent + testimony. + </p> + <p> + We also allow the accused to take exceptions to the rulings of the judge + before whom he is tried, and to the verdict of the jury, and to have these + exceptions passed upon by a higher court. + </p> + <p> + We also insist that he shall be tried by an impartial jury, and that + before he can be found guilty all the jurors must unite in the verdict. + </p> + <p> + Some people, not on trial for any crime, object to our methods. They say + that time is wasted in getting an impartial jury; that more time is wasted + because appeals are allowed, and that by reason of insisting on a strict + compliance with law in all respects, trials sometimes linger for years, + and that in many instances the guilty escape. + </p> + <p> + No one, so far as I know, asks that men shall be tried by partial and + prejudiced jurors, or that judges shall be allowed to disregard the law + for the sake of securing convictions, or that verdicts shall be allowed to + stand unsupported by sufficient legal evidence. Yet they talk as if they + asked for these very things. We must remember that revenge is always in + haste, and that justice can always afford to wait until the evidence is + actually heard. + </p> + <p> + There should be no delay except that which is caused by taking the time to + find the truth. Without such delay courts become mobs, before which, + trials in a legal sense are impossible. It might be better, in a city like + New York, to have the grand jury in almost perpetual session, so that a + man charged with crime could be immediately indicted and immediately + tried. So, the highest court to which appeals are taken should be in + almost constant session, in order that all appeals might be quickly + decided. + </p> + <p> + But we do not wish to take away the right of appeal. That right tends to + civilize the trial judge, reduces to a minimum his arbitrary power, puts + his hatreds and passions in the keeping and control of his intelligence. + That right of appeal has an excellent effect on the jury, because they + know that their verdict may not be the last word. The appeal, where the + accused is guilty, does not take the sword from the State, but it is a + shield for the innocent. + </p> + <p> + In England there is no appeal. The trials are shorter, the judges more + arbitrary, the juries subservient, and the verdict often depends on the + prejudice of the judge. The judge knows that he has the last guess—that + he cannot be reviewed—and in the passion often engendered by the + conflict of trial he acts much like a wild beast. + </p> + <p> + The case of Mrs. Maybrick is exactly in point, and shows how dangerous it + is to clothe the trial judge with supreme power. + </p> + <p> + Without doubt there is in this country too much delay, and this, it seems + to me, can be avoided without putting the life or liberty of innocent + persons in peril. Take only such time as may be necessary to give the + accused a fair trial, before an impartial jury, under and in accordance + with the established forms of law, and to allow an appeal to the highest + court. + </p> + <p> + The State in which a criminal cannot have an impartial trial is not + civilized. People who demand the conviction of the accused without regard + to the forms of law are savages. + </p> + <p> + But there is another side to this question. Many people are losing + confidence in the idea that punishment reforms the convict, or that + capital punishment materially decreases capital crimes. + </p> + <p> + My own opinion is that ordinary criminals should, if possible, be + reformed, and that murderers and desperate wretches should be imprisoned + for life. I am inclined to believe that our prisons make more criminals + than they reform; that places like the Reformatory at Elmira plant and + cultivate the seeds of crime. + </p> + <p> + The State should never seek revenge; neither should it put in peril the + life or liberty of the accused for the sake of a hasty trial, or by the + denial of appeal. + </p> + <p> + In my judgment, defective as our criminal courts and methods are, they are + far better than the English. + </p> + <p> + Our judges are kinder, more humane; our juries nearer independent, and our + methods better calculated to ascertain the truth. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0042" id="link0042"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + THE BIGOTRY OF COLLEGES. + </h2> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + * A newspaper dispatch from Lawrence, Kansas, published + yesterday, stated that Col. Robert O. Ingersoll had been + invited by the law students of the Kansas State University + to address them at the commencement exercises, and that the + faculty council had objected and had invited Chauncey M. + Depew instead. + + The dispatch also stared that the council had notified + representatives of the law school that if they insisted on + the great Agnostic speaking before the school, the faculty + would take heroic measures to thwart their design. + + It was also stated that the law students had made it clearly + understood that the lecture Ingersoll had been invited to + deliver was to be on the subject of law, and that his views + on religion, the Bible and the Deity were not to be alluded + to, and they considered that the faculty council had + "subjected them to an insult," and had gone out of its way, + also, to affront Colonel Ingersoll without cause. + + Colonel Ingersoll, when seen yesterday and questioned about + the matter, took it, as he does all things of that nature, + philosophically and in a true manly spirit. + + Chauncey M. Depew was seen at his residence, No. 43 West + Fifty-fourth Street, last night and asked if he had been + invited to address the students of the Kansas University in + the place of Colonel Ingersoll. He said he had not. + + "Would you go if you were invited?" he was asked. + + "No; I would not," he answered. "You see, I am so busy here; + besides, my social and semi-political engagements are such + that I would not have time to go to such a distant point, + anyhow. + + "No, I do not care to express any opinion regarding the + action of the faculty council of the Kansas University, but + I consider Colonel Ingersoll one of the greatest intellects + of the century, from whose teaching all can profit."—The + Journal, New York, January 24, im. +</pre> + <p> + UNIVERSITIES are naturally conservative. They know that if suspected of + being really scientific, orthodox Christians will keep their sons away, so + they pander to the superstitions of the times. + </p> + <p> + Most of the universities are exceedingly poor, and poverty is the enemy of + independence. Universities, like people, have the instinct of + self-preservation. The University of Kansas is like the rest. + </p> + <p> + The faculty of Cornell, upon precisely the same question, took exactly the + same action, and the faculty of the University of Missouri did the same. + These institutions must be the friends and defenders of superstition. + </p> + <p> + The Vanderbilt College, or University of Tennessee, discharged Professor + Winchell because he differed with the author of Genesis on geology. + </p> + <p> + These colleges act as they must, and we should blame nobody. If Humboldt + and Darwin were now alive they would not be allowed to teach in these + institutions of "learning." + </p> + <p> + We need not find fault with the president and professors. They want to + keep their places. The probability is that they would like to do better—that + they desire to be free, and, if free, would, with all their hearts, + welcome the truth. Still, these universities seem to do good. The minds of + their students are developed to that degree, that they naturally turn to + me as the defender of their thoughts. + </p> + <p> + This gives me great hope for the future. The young, the growing, the + enthusiastic, are on my side. All the students who have selected me are my + friends, and I thank them with all my heart. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0043" id="link0043"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + A YOUNG MAN'S CHANCES TO-DAY. + </h2> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + * Col. Robert G. Ingersoll represents what is intellectually + highest among the whole world's opponents of religion. He + counts theology as the science of a superstition. He decries + religion as it exists, and holds that the broadest thing a + man, or all human nature, can do is to acknowledge ignorance + when it cannot know. He accepts nothing on faith. He is the + American who is forever asking, "Why?"—who demands a reason + and material proof before believing. + + As Christianity's corner-stone is faith, he rejects + Christianity, and argues that all men who are broad enough + to know when to narrow their ideas down to fact or + demonstrable theory must reject it. Believe as he does or + not, all Americans must be interested in him. His mind is + marvelous, his tongue is silvern, his logic is invincible— + as logic. + + Col. Ingersoll is a shining example of the oft-quoted fact + that, given mental ability, health and industry, a young man + may make for himself whatever place in life he desires and + is fitted to fill. His early advantages were limited, for + his father, a Congregational minister whose field of labor + often changed, was a man of far too small an income to send + his sons to college. Whatever of mental training the young + man had he was obliged to get by reason of his own exertion, + and his splendid triumphs as an orator, and his solid + achievements as a lawyer are all the result of his own + efforts. The only help he had was that which is the common + heritage of all American young men—the chance to fight even + handed for success. It is not surprising, therefore, that + Col. Ingersoll feels a deep interest in every bright young + man of his acquaintance who is struggling manfully for the + glittering prize so brilliantly won by the great Agnostic + himself. He does not believe, however, that the young man + who goes out mto the world nowadays to seek his fortune has + so easy a battle to fight as had the young men of thirty + years ago. In conversation with the writer Col. Ingersoll + spoke earnestly upon this subject. + + Col. Ingersoll's views regarding the Bible and Christianity + were not generally understood by the public for some time + after he had become famous as an orator, although he began + to diverge from orthodoxy when quite young, and was as + pronounced an Agnostic when he went into the army, as he is + now. + + Col. Ingersoll is an inch less than six feet tall, and + weighs ten more than two hundred pounds. He will be sixty- + one next August, and his hair is snowy. His shoulders are + broad and as straight as they were eighteen years ago when + he electrified a people and place! his own name upon the + list of a nation's greatest orators with his matchless + "Plumed Knight" speech in nominating + + James G. Blaine for the presidency. His blue eyes look + straight into yours when he speaks to you, and his sentences + are punctuated by engaging little tricks of facial + expression—now the brow is criss-crossed with the lines of + a frown, sometimes quizzical and sometimes indignant—next, + the smooth-shaven lips break into a curving smile, which may + grow into a broad grin if the point just made were a + humorous one, and this is quite likely to be followed by a + look of sueh intense earnestness that you wonder if he will + ever smile again. And all the time his eyes flash, + illuminating, sometimes anticipatory, glances that add + immensely to the clearness with which the thought he is + expressing is set before you. He delights to tell a story, + and he never tells any but good ones, but—and in this he is + like Lincoln—he is apt to use his stories to drive some + proposition home. This is almost invariably true, even when + he sets out to spin a yarn for the story's simple sake. His + mentality seems to be duplex, quadruplex, multiplex, if you + please—and while his lips and tongue are effectively + delivering the story, his wonderful brain is, seemingly, + unconsciously applying the point of the story to the proving + of a pet theory, and when the tale has been told the verbal + application follows. + + His birthplace was Dresden, N. Y. His early boyhood was + passed in New York State and his youth and young manhood in + Illinois, Ohio and Wisconsin. + + His handgrasp is hearty and his manner and words are the + very essence of straightforward directness. I called at his + office once when the Colonel was closeted with a person who + wished to retain him in a law case involving a good deal of + money. After a bit I was told that I could see him, and as I + entered he was saying: "The case can't be won, for you are + in the wrong. I don't want it." + + "But," pleaded the would-be client, "It seems to me that a + good deal can be done in such a case by the way it is + handled before the jury, and I thought if you were to be the + man I might get a verdict." + + "No, sir," was the reply, and the words fell like the lead + of a plumb line; "I won't take it. Good morning, sir." + + It has been sometimes said, indulgently, of Col. Ingersoll + that he is indolent, but no one can hold that view who is at + all familiar with him or his work. As a matter of fact, his + industry is phenomenal, though, indeed, it is not carried on + after the fashion of less brainy men. When he has an + important case ahead of him his devotion to the mastery of + its details absorbs him at once and completely. It sometimes + becomes necessary for him to take up a line of chemical + inquiry entirely new to him; again, to elaborate + genealogical researches are necessary; still again, it may + be essential for him to thoroughly inform himself concerning + hitherto uninvestigated local historical records. But + whatever is needful to be studied he studies, and so + thoroughly that his mind becomes saturated with the + knowledge required. And once acquired no sort of information + ever leaves him, for he has a memory quite as marvelous as + any other of his altogether marvelous characteristics. + + It is the same when he has an address to prepare. Every + authority that can be consulted upon the subject to be + treated in the address, is consulted, and often the material + that suggests some of the most telling points is one which + no one but Ingersoll himself would think of referring to. + Here again his wonderful memory stands him in good stead for + he has packed away within the convolutions of his brain a + lot of facts that bear upon almost every conceivable branch + of human thought or investigation. + + His memory is quite as retentive of the features of a man he + has seen as of other matters; it retains voices also, as a + war time friend of his discovered last summer. It was a busy + day with the Colonel, who had given instructions to his + office boy that under no circumstances was he to be + disturbed; so when his old friend called he was told that + Col. Ingersoll could not see him "But," said the visitor: "I + must see him. I haven't seen him for twenty years; I am + going out of town this afternoon, and I wouldn't miss + talking with him for a few minutes for a good deal of + money." + + "Well," said the boy, "he wasn't to be disturbed by + anybody." + + At this moment the door of the Colonel's private office + opened, and the Colonel's portly form appeared upon the + scene. + + "Why, Maj. Blank," he said, "come in. I did tell the boy I + wouldn't see anybody, but you are more important than the + biggest law case in the world." + + The Colonel's memory had retained the sound of the major's + voice, and because of that, the latter was not obliged to + leave New York without seeing and renewing his old + acquaintance. + + Col. Ingersoll's retorts are as quick as a flash-light and + as searching. One of them was so startling and so effective + as to give a certain famous long drawn out railroad suit the + nickname. "The Ananias and Sapphira ease." Ingersoll was + speaking and had made certain statements highly damaging to + the other side, in such a way as to thoroughly anger a + member of the opposing counsel, who suddenly interrupted the + speaker with the abrupt and sarcastic remark: + + "I suppose the Colonel, in the nature of things, never heard + of the story of Ananias ana Sapphira." + + There were those present who expected to witness an angry + outburst on the part of Ingersoll in response to this plain + implication that his statement had not the quality of + veracity, but they were disappointed. Ingersoll didn't even + get angry. He turned slightly, fixed his limpid blue eyes + upon the speaker, and looked cherubically. Then he gently + drawled out. + + "Oh, yes, I have, yes, I have. And I've watched the + gentleman who has just spoken all through this case with a + curious Interest. I've been expecting every once in a while + to see him drop dead, but he seems to be all right down to + the present moment." + + Ingersoll never gets angry when he is interrupted, even if + it is in the middle of an address or a lecture. A man + interrupted him in Cincinnati once, cutting right into one + of the lecturer's most resonant periods with a yell: + + "That's a lie. Bob lngersoll, and you know it." + + The audience was in an uproar in an instant, and cries of + "Put him out!" "Throw him down stairs!" and the like were + heard from all parts of the house. Ingersoll stopped talking + for a moment, and held up his hands, smiling. + + "Don't hurt the man," he said. "He thinks he is right. But + let me explain this thing for his especial benefit." + + Then he reasoned the matter out in language so simple and + plain that no one of any intelligence whatever could fail to + comprehend. The man was not ejected, but sat through the + entire address, and at the close asked the privilege of + begging the lecturer's pardon. + + Like most men of genius, Colonel lngersoll is a passionate + lover of music, and the harmonies of Wagner seem to him to + be the very acme of musical expression.... + + Notwithstanding his thoroughly heretical beliefs or lack of + beliefs, or, as he would say, because of them, Colonel + lngersoll is a very tender-hearted man. No one has ever made + so strong an argument against vivisection in the alleged + interests of science as lngersoll did in a speech a few + years ago. To the presentation of his views against the + refinements of scientific cruelty he brought his most vivid + imagination, his most careful thought and his most + impassioned oratory. + + Colonel Ingersoll's popularity with those who know him is + proverbial. The clerks in his offices not only admire him + for his ability and his achievements, but they esteem him + for his kindliness of heart and his invariable courtesy in + his intercourse with them. His offices are located in one of + the buildings devoted to corporations and professional men + on the lower part of Nassau street and consist of three + rooms. The one used by the head of the firm is farthest from + the entrance. All are furnished in solid black walnut. In + the Colonel's room there is a picture of his loved brother + Ebon, and hanging below the frame thereof is the tin sign + that the two brothers hung out for a shingle when they went + into the law business in Peoria. There are also pictures of + a judge or two. The desks in all the rooms are littered with + papers. Books are piled to the ceiling. Everywhere there is + an air of personal freedom. There is no servility either to + clients or the head of the business, but there is everywhere + an informal courtesy somewhat akin to that which is born of + a fueling of great comradeship. + + Of the Colonel's ideal home life the world has often been + told. He lives during the winter at his town house in Fifth + Avenue; in the summer at Dobbs Ferry, a charming place a few + miles up the Hudson from New York.—Boston Herald, July, + 1894. +</pre> + <p> + A FEW years ago there were many thousand miles of railroads to be built, a + great many towns and cities to be located, constructed and filled; vast + areas of uncultivated land were waiting for the plow, vast forests the + axe, and thousands of mines were longing to be opened. In those days every + young man of energy and industry had a future. The professions were not + overcrowded; there were more patients than doctors, more litigants than + lawyers, more buyers of goods than merchants. The young man of that time + who was raised on a farm got a little education, taught school, read law + or medicine—some of the weaker ones read theology—and there + seemed to be plenty of room, plenty of avenues to success and distinction. + </p> + <p> + So, too, a few years ago a political life was considered honorable, and so + in politics there were many great careers. So, hundreds of towns wanted + newspapers, and in each of those towns there was an opening for some + energetic young man. At that time the plant cost but little; a few dollars + purchased the press—the young publisher could get the paper stock on + credit. + </p> + <p> + Now the railroads have all been built; the canals are finished; the cities + have been located; the outside property has been cut into lots, and sold + and mortgaged many times over. Now it requires great capital to go into + business. The individual is counting for less and less; the corporation, + the trust, for more and more. Now a great merchant employs hundreds of + clerks; a few years ago most of those now clerks would have been + merchants. And so it seems to be in nearly every department of life. Of + course, I do not know what inventions may leap from the brains of the + future; there may be millions and millions of fortunes yet to be made in + that direction, but of that I am not speaking. + </p> + <p> + So, I think that a few years ago the chances were far more numerous and + favorable to young men who wished to make a name for themselves, and to + succeed in some department of human energy than now. + </p> + <p> + In savage life a living is very easy to get. Most any savage can hunt or + fish; consequently there are few failures. But in civilized life + competition becomes stronger and sharper; consequently, the percentage of + failures increases, and this seems to be the law. The individual is + constantly counting for less. It may be that, on the average, people live + better than they did formerly, that they have more to eat, drink and wear; + but the individual horizon has lessened; it is not so wide and cloudless + as formerly. So I say that the chances for great fortunes, for great + success, are growing less and less. + </p> + <p> + I think a young man should do that which is easiest for him to do, + provided there is an opportunity; if there is none, then he should take + the next. The first object of every young man should be to be + self-supporting, no matter in what direction—be independent. He + should avoid being a clerk and he should avoid giving his future into the + hands of any one person. He should endeavor to get a business in which the + community will be his patron, and whether he is to be a lawyer, a doctor + or a day-laborer depends on how much he has mixed mind with muscle. + </p> + <p> + If a young man imagines that he has an aptitude for public speaking—that + is, if he has a great desire to make his ideas known to the world—the + probability is that the desire will choose the way, time and place for him + to make the effort. + </p> + <p> + If he really has something to say, there will be plenty to listen. If he + is so carried away with his subject, is so in earnest that he becomes an + instrumentality of his thought—so that he is forgotten by himself; + so that he cares neither for applause nor censure—simply caring to + present his thoughts in the highest and best and most comprehensive way, + the probability is that he will be an orator. + </p> + <p> + I think oratory is something that cannot be taught. Undoubtedly a man can + learn to be a fair talker. He can by practice learn to present his ideas + consecutively, clearly and in what you may call "form," but there is as + much difference between this and an oration as there is between a skeleton + and a living human being clad in sensitive, throbbing flesh. + </p> + <p> + There are millions of skeleton makers, millions of people who can express + what may be called "the bones" of a discourse, but not one in a million + who can clothe these bones. + </p> + <p> + You can no more teach a man to be an orator than you can teach him to be + an artist or a poet of the first class. When you teach him, there is the + same difference between the man who is taught, and the man who is what he + is by virtue of a natural aptitude, that there is between a pump and a + spring—between a canal and a river—between April rain and + water-works. It is a question of capacity and feeling—not of + education. There are some things that you can tell an orator not to do. + For instance, he should never drink water while talking, because the + interest is broken, and for the moment he loses control of his audience. + He should never look at his watch for the same reason. He should never + talk about himself. He should never deal in personalities. He should never + tell long stories, and if he tells any story he should never say that it + is a true story, and that he knew the parties. This makes it a question of + veracity instead of a question of art. He should never clog his discourse + with details. He should never dwell upon particulars—he should touch + universals, because the great truths are for all time. + </p> + <p> + If he wants to know something, if he wishes to feel something, let him + read Shakespeare. Let him listen to the music of Wagner, of Beethoven, or + Schubert. If he wishes to express himself in the highest and most perfect + form, let him become familiar with the great paintings of the world—with + the great statues—all these will lend grace, will give movement and + passion and rhythm to his words. A great orator puts into his speech the + perfume, the feelings, the intensity of all the great and beautiful and + marvelous things that he has seen and heard and felt. An orator must be a + poet, a metaphysician, a logician—and above all, must have sympathy + with all. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0044" id="link0044"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + SCIENCE AND SENTIMENT. + </h2> + <p> + IT was thought at one time by many that science would do away with poetry—that + it was the enemy of the imagination. We know now that is not true. We know + that science goes hand in hand with imagination. We know that it is in the + highest degree poetic and that the old ideas once considered so beautiful + are flat and stale. Compare Kepler's laws with the old Greek idea that the + planets were boosted or pushed by angels. The more we know, the more + beauty, the more poetry we find. Ignorance is not the mother of the poetic + or artistic. + </p> + <p> + So, some people imagine that science will do away with sentiment. In my + judgment, science will not only increase sentiment but sense. + </p> + <p> + A person will be attracted to another for a thousand reasons, and why a + person is attracted to another, may, and in some degree will, depend upon + the intellectual, artistic and ethical development of each. + </p> + <p> + The handsomest girl in Zululand might not be attractive to Herbert + Spencer, and the fairest girl in England might not be able to hasten the + pulse of a Choctaw brave. This does not prove that there is any lack of + sentiment. Men are influenced according to their capacity, their + temperament, their knowledge. + </p> + <p> + Some men fall in love with a small waist, an arched instep or curly hair, + without the slightest regard to mind or muscle. This we call sentiment. + </p> + <p> + Now, educate such men, develop their brains, enlarge their intellectual + horizon, teach them something of the laws of health, and then they may + fall in love with women because they are developed grandly in body and + mind. The sentiment is still there—still controls—but back of + the sentiment is science. + </p> + <p> + Sentiment can never be destroyed, and love will forever rule the human + race. + </p> + <p> + Thousands, millions of people fear that science will destroy not only + poetry, not only sentiment, but religion. This fear is idiotic. Science + will destroy superstition, but it will not injure true religion. Science + is the foundation of real religion. Science teaches us the consequences of + actions, the rights and duties of all. Without science there can be no + real religion. + </p> + <p> + Only those who live on the labor of the ignorant are the enemies of + science. Real love and real religion are in no danger from science. The + more we know the safer all good things are. + </p> + <p> + Do I think that the marriage of the sickly and diseased ought to be + prevented by law? + </p> + <p> + I have not much confidence in law—in law that I know cannot be + carried out. The poor, the sickly, the diseased, as long as they are + ignorant, will marry and help fill the world with wretchedness and want. + </p> + <p> + We must rely on education instead of legislation. + </p> + <p> + We must teach the consequences of actions. We must show the sickly and + diseased what their children will be. We must preach the gospel of the + body. I believe the time will come when the public thought will be so + great and grand that it will be looked upon as infamous to perpetuate + disease—to leave a legacy of agony. + </p> + <p> + I believe the time will come when men will refuse to fill the future with + consumption and insanity. Yes, we shall study ourselves. We shall + understand the conditions of health and then we shall say: We are under + obligation to put the flags of health in the cheeks of our children. + </p> + <p> + Even if I should get to heaven and have a harp, I know that I could not + bear to see my descendants still on the earth, diseased, deformed, crazed—all + suffering the penalties of my ignorance. Let us have more science and more + sentiment—more knowledge and more conscience—more liberty and + more love. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0045" id="link0045"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + SOWING AND REAPING. + </h2> + <p> + I HAVE read the sermon on "Sowing and Reaping," and I now understand Mr. + Moody better than I did before. The other day, in New York, Mr. Moody said + that he implicitly believed the story of Jonah and really thought that he + was in the fish for three days. + </p> + <p> + When I read it I was surprised that a man living in the century of + Humboldt, Darwin, Huxley, Spencer and Haeckel, should believe such an + absurd and idiotic story. + </p> + <p> + Now I understand the whole thing. I can account for the amazing credulity + of this man. Mr. Moody never read one of my lectures. That accounts for it + all, and no wonder that he is a hundred years behind the times. He never + read one of my lectures; that is a perfect explanation. + </p> + <p> + Poor man! He has no idea of what he has lost. He has been living on + miracles and mistakes, on falsehood and foolishness, stuffing his mind + with absurdities when he could have had truth, facts and good, sound + sense. + </p> + <p> + Poor man! + </p> + <p> + Probably Mr. Moody has never read one word of Darwin and so he still + believes in the Garden of Eden and the talking snake and really thinks + that Jehovah took some mud, moulded the form of a man, breathed in its + nostrils, stood it up and called it Adam, and that he then took one of + Adam's ribs and some more mud and manufactured Eve. Probably he has never + read a word written by any great geologist and consequently still believes + in the story of the flood. Knowing nothing of astronomy, he still thinks + that Joshua stopped the sun. + </p> + <p> + Poor man! He has neglected Spencer and has no idea of evolution. He thinks + that man has, through all the ages, degenerated, the first pair having + been perfect. He does not believe that man came from lower forms and has + gradually journeyed upward. + </p> + <p> + He really thinks that the Devil outwitted God and vaccinated the human + race with the virus of total depravity. + </p> + <p> + Poor man! + </p> + <p> + He knows nothing of the great scientists—of the great thinkers, of + the emancipators of the human race; knows nothing of Spinoza, of Voltaire, + of Draper, Buckle, of Paine or Renan. + </p> + <p> + Mr. Moody ought to read something besides the Bible—ought to find + out what the really intelligent have thought. He ought to get some new + ideas—a few facts—and I think that, after he did so, he would + be astonished to find how ignorant and foolish he had been. He is a good + man. His heart is fairly good, but his head is almost useless. + </p> + <p> + The trouble with this sermon, "Sowing and Reaping," is that he contradicts + it. I believe that a man must reap what he sows, that every human being + must bear the natural consequences of his acts. Actions are good or bad + according to their consequences. That is my doctrine. + </p> + <p> + There is no forgiveness in nature. But Mr. Moody tells us that a man may + sow thistles and gather figs, that having acted like a fiend tor seventy + years, he can, between his last dose of medicine and his last breath, + repent; that he can be washed clean by the blood of the lamb, and that + myriads of angels will carry his soul to heaven—in other words, that + this man will not reap what he sowed, but what Christ sowed, that this + man's thistles will be changed to figs. + </p> + <p> + This doctrine, to my mind, is not only absurd, but dishonest and + corrupting. + </p> + <p> + This is one of the absurdities in Mr. Moody's theology. The other is that + a man can justly be damned for the sin of another. + </p> + <p> + Nothing can exceed the foolishness of these two ideas—first: "Man + can be justly punished forever for the sin of Adam." Second: "Man can be + justly rewarded with eternal joy for the goodness of Christ." + </p> + <p> + Yet the man who believes this, preaches a sermon in which he says that a + man must reap what he sows. Orthodox Christians teach exactly the + opposite. They teach that no matter what a man sows, no matter how wicked + his life has been, that he can by repentance change the crop. That all his + sins shall be forgotten and that only the goodness of Christ will be + remembered. + </p> + <p> + Let us see how this works: + </p> + <p> + Mr. A. has lived a good and useful life, kept his contracts, paid his + debts, educated his children, loved his wife and made his home a heaven, + but he did not believe in the inspiration of Mr. Moody's Bible. He died + and his soul was sent to hell. Mr. Moody says that as a man sows so shall + he reap. + </p> + <p> + Mr. B. lived a useless and wicked life. By his cruelty he drove his wife + to insanity, his children became vagrants and beggars, his home was a + perfect hell, he committed many crimes, he was a thief, a burglar, a + murderer. A few minutes before he was hanged he got religion and his soul + went from the scaffold to heaven. And yet Mr. Moody says that as a man + sows so shall he reap. + </p> + <p> + Mr. Moody ought to have a little philosophy—a little good sense. + </p> + <p> + So Mr. Moody says that only in this life can a man secure the reward of + repentance. + </p> + <p> + Just before a man dies, God loves him—loves him as a mother loves + her babe—but a moment after he dies, he sends his soul to hell. In + the other world nothing can be done to reform him. The society of God and + the angels can have no good effect. Nobody can be made better in heaven. + This world is the only place where reform is possible. Here, surrounded by + the wicked in the midst of temptations, in the darkness of ignorance, a + human being may reform if he is fortunate enough to hear the words of some + revival preacher, but when he goes before his maker—before the + Trinity—he has no chance. God can do nothing for his soul except to + send it to hell. + </p> + <p> + This shows that the power for good is confined to people in this world and + that in the next world God can do nothing to reform his children. This is + theology. This is what they call "Tidings of great joy." + </p> + <p> + Every orthodox creed is savage, ignorant and idiotic. + </p> + <p> + In the orthodox heaven there is no mercy, no pity. In the orthodox hell + there is no hope, no reform. God is an eternal jailer, an everlasting + turnkey. + </p> + <p> + And yet Christians now say that while there may be no fire in hell—no + actual flames—yet the lost souls will feel forever the tortures of + conscience. + </p> + <p> + What will conscience trouble the people in hell about? They tell us that + they will remember their sins. + </p> + <p> + Well, what about the souls in heaven? They committed awful sins, they made + their fellow-men unhappy. They took the lives of others—sent many to + eternal torment. Will they have no conscience? Is hell the only place + where souls regret the evil they have done? Have the angels no regret, no + remorse, no conscience? + </p> + <p> + If this be so, heaven must be somewhat worse than hell. + </p> + <p> + In old times, if people wanted to know anything they asked the preacher. + Now they do if they don't. + </p> + <p> + The Bible has, with intelligent men, lost its authority. + </p> + <p> + The miracles are now regarded by sensible people as the spawn of ignorance + and credulity. On every hand people are looking for facts—for truth—and + all religions are taking their places in the museum of myths. + </p> + <p> + Yes, the people are becoming civilized, and so they are putting out the + fires of hell. They are ceasing to believe in a God who seeks eternal + revenge. + </p> + <p> + The people are becoming sensible. They are asking for evidence. They care + but little for the winged phantoms of the air—for the ghosts and + devils and supposed gods. The people are anxious to be happy here and they + want a little heaven in this life. + </p> + <p> + Theology is a curse. Science is a blessing. We do not need preachers, but + teachers; not priests, but thinkers; not churches, but schools; not + steeples, but observatories. We want knowledge. + </p> + <p> + Let us hope that Mr. Moody will read some really useful books. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0046" id="link0046"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + SHOULD INFIDELS SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO SUNDAY SCHOOL? + </h2> + <p> + SHOULD parents, who are Infidels, unbelievers or Atheists, send their + children to Sunday schools and churches to give them the benefit of + Christian education? + </p> + <p> + Parents who do not believe the Bible to be an inspired book should not + teach their children that it is. They should be absolutely honest. + Hypocrisy is not a virtue, and, as a rule, lies are less valuable than + facts. + </p> + <p> + An unbeliever should not allow the mind of his child to be deformed, + stunted and shriveled by superstition. He should not allow the child's + imagination to be polluted. Nothing is more outrageous than to take + advantage of the helplessness of childhood to sow in the brain the seeds + of falsehoods, to imprison the soul in the dungeon of Fear, to teach + dimpled infancy the infamous dogma of eternal pain—filling life with + the glow and glare of hell. + </p> + <p> + No unbeliever should allow his child to be tortured in the orthodox + inquisitions. He should defend the mind from attack as he would the body. + He should recognize the rights of the soul. In the orthodox Sunday + schools, children are taught that it is a duty to believe—that + evidence is not essential—that faith is independent of facts and + that religion is superior to reason. They are taught not to use their + natural sense—not to tell what they really think—not to + entertain a doubt—not to ask wicked questions, but to accept and + believe what their teachers say. In this way the minds of the children are + invaded, corrupted and conquered. Would an educated man send his child to + a school in which Newton's statement in regard to the attraction of + gravitation was denied—in which the law of falling bodies, as given + by Galileo, was ridiculed—Kepler's three laws declared to be + idiotic, and the rotary motion of the earth held to be utterly absurd? + </p> + <p> + Why then should an intelligent man allow his child to be taught the + geology and astronomy of the Bible? Children should be taught to seek for + the truth—to be honest, kind, generous, merciful and just. They + should be taught to love liberty and to live to the ideal. + </p> + <p> + Why then should an unbeliever, an Infidel, send his child to an orthodox + Sunday school where he is taught that he has no right to seek for the + truth—no right to be mentally honest, and that he will be damned for + an honest doubt—where he is taught that God was ferocious, + revengeful, heartless as a wild beast—that he drowned millions of + his children—that he ordered wars of extermination and told his + soldiers to kill gray-haired and trembling age, mothers and children, and + to assassinate with the sword of war the babes unborn? + </p> + <p> + Why should an unbeliever in the Bible send his child to an orthodox Sunday + school where he is taught that God was in favor of slavery and told the + Jews to buy of the heathen and that they should be their bondmen and + bondwomen forever; where he is taught that God upheld polygamy and the + degradation of women? + </p> + <p> + Why should an unbeliever, who believes in the uniformity of Nature, in the + unbroken and unbreakable chain of cause and effect, allow his child to be + taught that miracles have been performed; that men have gone bodily to + heaven; that millions have been miraculously fed with manna and quails; + that fire has refused to burn clothes and flesh of men; that iron has been + made to float; that the earth and moon have been stopped and that the + earth has not only been stopped, but made to turn the other way; that + devils inhabit the bodies of men and women; that diseases have been cured + with words, and that the dead, with a touch, have been made to live again? + </p> + <p> + The thoughtful man knows that there is not the slightest evidence that + these miracles ever were performed. Why should he allow his children to be + stuffed with these foolish and impossible falsehoods? Why should he give + his lambs to the care and keeping of the wolves and hyenas of + superstition? + </p> + <p> + Children should be taught only what somebody knows. Guesses should not be + palmed off on them as demonstrated facts. If a Christian lived in + Constantinople he would not send his children to the mosque to be taught + that Mohammed was a prophet of God and that the Koran is an inspired book. + Why? Because he does not believe in Mohammed or the Koran. That is reason + enough. So, an Agnostic, living in New York, should not allow his children + to be taught that the Bible is an inspired book. I use the word "Agnostic" + because I prefer it to the word Atheist. As a matter of fact, no one knows + that God exists and no one knows that God does not exist. To my mind there + is no evidence that God exists—that this world is governed by a + being of infinite goodness, wisdom and power, but I do not pretend to + know. What I insist upon is that children should not be poisoned—should + not be taken advantage of—that they should be treated fairly, + honestly—that they should be allowed to develop from the inside + instead of being crammed from the outside—that they should be taught + to reason, not to believe—to think, to investigate and to use their + senses, their minds. + </p> + <p> + Would a Catholic send his children to a school to be taught that + Catholicism is superstition and that Science is the only savior of + mankind? + </p> + <p> + Why then should a free and sensible believer in Science, in the + naturalness of the universe, send his child to a Catholic school? + </p> + <p> + Nothing could be more irrational, foolish and absurd. + </p> + <p> + My advice to all Agnostics is to keep their children from the orthodox + Sunday schools, from the orthodox churches, from the poison of the + pulpits. + </p> + <p> + Teach your children the facts you know. If you do not know, say so. Be as + honest as you are ignorant. Do all you can to develop their minds, to the + end that they may live useful and happy lives. + </p> + <p> + Strangle the serpent of superstition that crawls and hisses about the + cradle. Keep your children from the augurs, the soothsayers, the + medicine-men, the priests of the supernatural. Tell them that all + religions have been made by folks and that all the "sacred books" were + written by ignorant men. + </p> + <p> + Teach them that the world is natural. Teach them to be absolutely honest. + Do not send them where they will contract diseases of the mind—the + leprosy of the soul. Let us do all we can to make them intelligent. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0047" id="link0047"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + WHAT WOULD YOU SUBSTITUTE FOR THE BIBLE AS A MORAL GUIDE? + </h2> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + * Written for The Boston Investigator. +</pre> + <p> + YOU ask me what I would "substitute for the Bible as a moral guide.". + </p> + <p> + I know that many people regard the Bible as the only moral guide and + believe that in that book only can be found the true and perfect standard + of morality. + </p> + <p> + There are many good precepts, many wise sayings and many good regulations + and laws in the Bible, and these are mingled with bad precepts, with + foolish sayings, with absurd rules and cruel laws. + </p> + <p> + But we must remember that the Bible is a collection of many books written + centuries apart, and that it in part represents the growth and tells in + part the history of a people. We must also remember that the writers treat + of many subjects. Many of these writers have nothing to say about right or + wrong, about vice or virtue. + </p> + <p> + The book of Genesis has nothing about morality. There is not a line in it + calculated to shed light on the path of conduct. No one can call that book + a moral guide. It is made up of myth and miracle, of tradition and legend. + </p> + <p> + In Exodus we have an account of the manner in which Jehovah delivered the + Jews from Egyptian bondage. + </p> + <p> + We now know that the Jews were never enslaved by the Egyptians; that the + entire story is a fiction. We know this, because there is not found in + Hebrew a word of Egyptian origin, and there is not found in the language + of the Egyptians a word of Hebrew origin. This being so, we know that the + Hebrews and Egyptians could not have lived together for hundreds of years. + </p> + <p> + Certainly Exodus was not written to teach morality. In that book you + cannot find one word against human slavery. As a matter of fact, Jehovah + was a believer in that institution. + </p> + <p> + The killing of cattle with disease and hail, the murder of the first-born, + so that in every house was death, because the king refused to let the + Hebrews go, certainly was not moral; it was fiendish. The writer of that + book regarded all the people of Egypt, their children, their flocks and + herds, as the property of Pharaoh, and these people and these cattle were + killed, not because they had done anything wrong, but simply for the + purpose of punishing the king. Is it possible to get any morality out of + this history? + </p> + <p> + All the laws found in Exodus, including the Ten Commandments, so far as + they are really good and sensible, were at that time in force among all + the peoples of the world. + </p> + <p> + Murder is, and always was, a crime, and always will be, as long as a + majority of people object to being murdered. + </p> + <p> + Industry always has been and always will be the enemy of larceny. + </p> + <p> + The nature of man is such that he admires the teller of truth and despises + the liar. Among all tribes, among all people, truth-telling has been + considered a virtue and false swearing or false speaking a vice. + </p> + <p> + The love of parents for children is natural, and this love is found among + all the animals that live. So the love of children for parents is natural, + and was not and cannot be created by law. Love does not spring from a + sense of duty, nor does it bow in obedience to commands. + </p> + <p> + So men and women are not virtuous because of anything in books or creeds. + </p> + <p> + All the Ten Commandments that are good were old, were the result of + experience. The commandments that were original with Jehovah were foolish. + </p> + <p> + The worship of "any other God" could not have been worse than the worship + of Jehovah, and nothing could have been more absurd than the sacredness of + the Sabbath. + </p> + <p> + If commandments had been given against slavery and polygamy, against wars + of invasion and extermination, against religious persecution in all its + forms, so that the world could be free, so that the brain might be + developed and the heart civilized, then we might, with propriety, call + such commandments a moral guide. + </p> + <p> + Before we can truthfully say that the Ten Commandments constitute a moral + guide, we must add and subtract. We must throw away some, and write others + in their places. + </p> + <p> + The commandments that have a known application here, in this world, and + treat of human obligations are good, the others have no basis in fact, or + experience. + </p> + <p> + Many of the regulations found in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and + Deuteronomy, are good. Many are absurd and cruel. + </p> + <p> + The entire ceremonial of worship is insane. + </p> + <p> + Most of the punishment for violations of laws are un-philosophic and + brutal.... The fact is that the Pentateuch upholds nearly all crimes, and + to call it a moral guide is as absurd as to say that it is merciful or + true. + </p> + <p> + Nothing of a moral nature can be found in Joshua or Judges. These books + are filled with crimes, with massacres and murders. They are about the + same as the real history of the Apache Indians. + </p> + <p> + The story of Ruth is not particularly moral. + </p> + <p> + In first and second Samuel there is not one word calculated to develop the + brain or conscience. + </p> + <p> + Jehovah murdered seventy thousand Jews because David took a census of the + people. David, according to the account, was the guilty one, but only the + innocent were killed. + </p> + <p> + In first and second Kings can be found nothing of ethical value. All the + kings who refused to obey the priests were denounced, and all the crowned + wretches who assisted the priests, were declared to be the favorites of + Jehovah. In these books there cannot be found one word in favor of + liberty. + </p> + <p> + There are some good Psalms, and there are some that are infamous. Most of + these Psalms are selfish. Many of them, are passionate appeals for + revenge. + </p> + <p> + The story of Job shocks the heart of every good man. In this book there is + some poetry, some pathos, and some philosophy, but the story of this drama + called Job, is heartless to the last degree. The children of Job are + murdered to settle a little wager between God and the Devil. Afterward, + Job having remained firm, other children are given in the place of the + murdered ones. Nothing, however, is done for the children who were + murdered. + </p> + <p> + The book of Esther is utterly absurd, and the only redeeming feature in + the book is that the name of Jehovah is not mentioned. + </p> + <p> + I like the Song of Solomon because it tells of human love, and that is + something I can understand. That book in my judgment, is worth all the + ones that go before it, and is a far better moral guide. + </p> + <p> + There are some wise and merciful Proverbs. Some are selfish and some are + flat and commonplace. + </p> + <p> + I like the book of Ecclesiastes because there you find some sense, some + poetry, and some philosophy. Take away the interpolations and it is a good + book. + </p> + <p> + Of course there is nothing in Nehemiah or Ezra to make men better, nothing + in Jeremiah or Lamentations calculated to lessen vice, and only a few + passages in Isaiah that can be used in a good cause. + </p> + <p> + In Ezekiel and Daniel we find only ravings of the insane. + </p> + <p> + In some of the minor prophets there is now and then a good verse, now and + then an elevated thought. + </p> + <p> + You can, by selecting passages from different books, make a very good + creed, and by selecting passages from different books, you can make a very + bad creed. + </p> + <p> + The trouble is that the spirit of the Old Testament, its disposition, its + temperament, is bad, selfish and cruel. The most fiendish things are + commanded, commended and applauded. + </p> + <p> + The stories that are told of Joseph, of Elisha, of Daniel and Gideon, and + of many others, are hideous; hellish. + </p> + <p> + On the whole, the Old Testament cannot be considered a moral guide. + </p> + <p> + Jehovah was not a moral God. He had all the vices, and he lacked all the + virtues. He generally carried out his threats, but he never faithfully + kept a promise. + </p> + <p> + At the same time, we must remember that the Old Testament is a natural + production, that it was written by savages who were slowly crawling toward + the light. We must give them credit for the noble things they said, and we + must be charitable enough to excuse their faults and even their crimes. + </p> + <p> + I know that many Christians regard the Old Testament as the foundation and + the New as the superstructure, and while many admit that there are faults + and mistakes in the Old Testament, they insist that the New is the flower + and perfect fruit. + </p> + <p> + I admit that there are many good things in the New Testament, and if we + take from that book the dogmas of eternal pain, of infinite revenge, of + the atonement, of human sacrifice, of the necessity of shedding blood; if + we throw away the doctrine of non-resistance, of loving enemies, the idea + that prosperity is the result of wickedness, that poverty is a preparation + for Paradise, if we throw all these away and take the good, sensible + passages, applicable to conduct, then we can make a fairly good moral + guide,—narrow, but moral. + </p> + <p> + Of course, many important things would be left out. You would have nothing + about human rights, nothing in favor of the family, nothing for education, + nothing for investigation, for thought and reason, but still you would + have a fairly good moral guide. + </p> + <p> + On the other hand, if you would take the foolish passages, the extreme + ones, you could make a creed that would satisfy an insane asylum. + </p> + <p> + If you take the cruel passages, the verses that inculcate eternal hatred, + verses that writhe and hiss like serpents, you can make a creed that would + shock the heart of a hyena. + </p> + <p> + It may be that no book contains better passages than the New Testament, + but certainly no book contains worse. + </p> + <p> + Below the blossom of love you find the thorn of hatred; on the lips that + kiss, you find the poison of the cobra. + </p> + <p> + The Bible is not a moral guide. + </p> + <p> + Any man who follows faithfully all its teachings is an enemy of society + and will probably end his days in a prison or an asylum. + </p> + <p> + What is morality? + </p> + <p> + In this world we need certain things. We have many wants. We are exposed + to many dangers. We need food, fuel, raiment and shelter, and besides + these wants, there is, what may be called, the hunger of the mind. + </p> + <p> + We are conditioned beings, and our happiness depends upon conditions. + There are certain things that diminish, certain things that increase, + well-being. There are certain things that destroy and there are others + that preserve. + </p> + <p> + Happiness, including its highest forms, is after all the only good, and + everything, the result of which is to produce or secure happiness, is + good, that is to say, moral. Everything that destroys or diminishes + well-being is bad, that is to say, immoral. In other words, all that is + good is moral, and all that is bad is immoral. + </p> + <p> + What then is, or can be called, a moral guide? The shortest possible + answer is one word: Intelligence. + </p> + <p> + We want the experience of mankind, the true history of the race. We want + the history of intellectual development, of the growth of the ethical, of + the idea of justice, of conscience, of charity, of self-denial. We want to + know the paths and roads that have been traveled by the human mind. + </p> + <p> + These facts in general, these histories in outline, the results reached, + the conclusions formed, the principles evolved, taken together, would form + the best conceivable moral guide. + </p> + <p> + We cannot depend on what are called "inspired books," or the religions of + the world. These religions are based on the supernatural, and according to + them we are under obligation to worship and obey some supernatural being, + or beings. All these religions are inconsistent with intellectual liberty. + They are the enemies of thought, of investigation, of mental honesty. They + destroy the manliness of man. They promise eternal rewards for belief, for + credulity, for what they call faith. + </p> + <p> + This is not only absurd, but it is immoral. + </p> + <p> + These religions teach the slave virtues. They make inanimate things holy, + and falsehoods sacred. They create artificial crimes. To eat meat on + Friday, to enjoy yourself on Sunday, to eat on fast-days, to be happy in + Lent, to dispute a priest, to ask for evidence, to deny a creed, to + express your sincere thought, all these acts are sins, crimes against some + god. To give your honest opinion about Jehovah, Mohammed or Christ, is far + worse than to maliciously slander your neighbor. To question or doubt + miracles, is far worse than to deny known facts. Only the obedient, the + credulous, the cringers, the kneelers, the meek, the unquestioning, the + true believers, are regarded as moral, as virtuous. It is not enough to be + honest, generous and useful; not enough to be governed by evidence, by + facts. In addition to this, you must believe. These things are the foes of + morality. They subvert all natural conceptions of virtue. + </p> + <p> + All "inspired books," teaching that what the supernatural commands is + right, and right because commanded, and that what the supernatural + prohibits is wrong, and wrong because prohibited, are absurdly + unphilosophic. + </p> + <p> + And all "inspired books," teaching that only those who obey the commands + of the supernatural are, or can be, truly virtuous, and that unquestioning + faith will be rewarded with eternal joy, are grossly immoral. + </p> + <p> + Again I say: Intelligence is the only moral guide. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0048" id="link0048"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + GOVERNOR ROLLINS' FAST-DAY PROCLAMATION. + </h2> + <p> + THE Governor of New Hampshire, undoubtedly a good and sincere man, issued + a Fast-Day Proclamation to the people of his State, in which I find the + following paragraph: + </p> + <p> + "The decline of the Christian religion, particularly in our rural + communities, is a marked feature of the times, and steps should be taken + to remedy it. No matter what our belief may be in religious matters, every + good citizen knows that when the restraining influences of religion are + withdrawn from a community, its decay, moral, mental and financial, is + swift and sure. To me this is one of the strongest evidences of the + fundamental truth of Christianity. I suggest to-day, as far as possible on + Fast-Day, union meetings be held, made up of all shades of belief, + including all who are interested in the welfare of our State, and that in + your prayers and other devotions and in your mutual councils you remember + and consider the problem of the condition of religion in the rural + communities. There are towns where no church bell sends forth its solemn + call from January to January. There are villages where children grow to + manhood unchristened. There are communities where the dead are laid away + without the benison of the name of the Christ, and where marriages are + solemnized only by Justices of the Peace. This is a matter worthy of your + thoughtful consideration, citizens of New Hampshire. It does not augur + well for the future. You can afford to devote one day in the year to your + fellow-men, to work and thought and prayer for your children and your + children's children." + </p> + <p> + These words of the Governor have caused surprise, discussion and danger. + Many ministers have denied that Christianity is declining, and have + attacked the Governor with the malice of meekness and the savagery of + humility. The question is: Is Christianity declining? + </p> + <p> + In order to answer this question we must state what Christianity is. + </p> + <p> + Christians tell us that there are certain fundamental truths that must be + believed. + </p> + <p> + We must believe in God, the creator and governor of the universe; in Jesus + Christ, his only begotten son; in the Holy Ghost; in the atonement made by + Christ; in salvation by faith; in the second birth; in heaven for + believers, in hell for deniers and doubters, and in the inspiration of the + Old and New Testaments. They must also believe in a prayer-hearing and + prayer-answering God, in special providence, and in addition to all this + they must practice a few ceremonies. This, I believe, is a fair skeleton + of Christianity. Of course I cannot give an exact definition. Christians + do not and never have agreed among themselves. They have been disputing + and fighting for many centuries, and to-day they are as far apart as ever. + </p> + <p> + A few years ago Christians believed the "fundamental truths" They had no + doubts. They knew that God existed; that he made the world. They knew when + he commenced to work at the earth and stars and knew when he finished. + They knew that he, like a potter, mixed and moulded clay into the shape of + a man and breathed into its nostrils the breath of life. They knew that he + took from this man a rib and framed the first woman. + </p> + <p> + It must be admitted that sensible Christians have outgrown this belief. + Jehovah the gardener, the potter, the tailor, has been dethroned. The + story of creation is believed only by the provincial, the stupid, the + truly orthodox. People who have read Darwin and Haeckel and had sense + enough to understand these great men, laugh at the legends of the Jews. + </p> + <p> + A few years ago most Christians believed that Christ was the son of God, + and not only the son of God, but God himself. + </p> + <p> + This belief is slowly fading from the minds of Christians, from the minds + of those who have minds. + </p> + <p> + Many Christians now say that Christ was simply a man—a perfect man. + Others say that he was divine, but not actually God—a union of God + and man. Some say that while Christ was not God, he was as nearly like God + as it is possible for man to be. + </p> + <p> + The old belief that he was actually God—that he sacrificed himself + unto himself—that he deserted himself; that he bore the burden of + his own wrath; that he made it possible to save a few of his children by + shedding his own blood; that he could not forgive the sins of men until + they murdered him—this frightful belief is slowly dying day by day. + Most ministers are ashamed to preach these cruel and idiotic absurdities. + The Christ of our time is not the Christ of the New Testament—not + the Christ of the Middle Ages; nor of Luther, Wesley or the Puritan + fathers. + </p> + <p> + The Christ who was God—who was his own son and his own father—who + was born of a virgin, cast out devils, rose from the dead, and ascended + bodily to heaven—is not the Christ of to-day. + </p> + <p> + The Holy Ghost has never been accurately defined or described. He has + always been a winged influence—a divine aroma; a disembodied + essence; a spiritual climate; an enthusiastic flame; a something sensitive + and unforgiving; the real father of Jesus Christ. + </p> + <p> + A few years ago the clergy had a great deal to say about the Holy Ghost, + but now the average minister, while he alludes to this shadowy deity to + round out a prayer, seems ta have but little confidence in him. This deity + is and always has been extremely vague. He has been represented in the + form of a dove; but this form is not associated with much intelligence. + </p> + <p> + Formerly it was believed that all men were by nature wicked, and that it + would be perfectly just for God to damn the entire human race. In fact, it + was thought that God, feeling that he had to damn all his children, + invented a scheme by which some could be saved and at the same time + justice could be satisfied. God knew that without the shedding of blood + there could be no remission of sin. For many centuries he was satisfied + with the blood of oxen, lambs and doves. But the sins continued to + increase. A greater sacrifice was necessary. So God concluded to make the + greatest possible sacrifice—to shed his own blood, that is to say, + to have it shed by his chosen people. This was the atonement—the + scheme of salvation—a scheme that satisfied justice and partially + defeated the Devil. + </p> + <p> + No intelligent Christians believe in this atonement. It is utterly + unphilosophic. The idea that man made salvation possible by murdering God + is infinitely absurd. This makes salvation the blossom of a crime—the + blessed fruit of murder. According to this the joys of heaven are born of + the agonies of innocence. If the Jews had been civilized—if they had + believed in freedom of conscience and had listened kindly and calmly to + the teachings of Christ, the whole world, including Christ's mother, would + have gone to hell. + </p> + <p> + Our fathers had two absurdities. They balanced each other. They said that + God could justly damn his children for the sin of Adam, and that he could + justly save his children on account of the sufferings and virtues of + Christ; that is to say, on account of his own sufferings and virtues. + </p> + <p> + This view of the atonement has mostly been abandoned. It is now preached, + not that Christ bought souls with his blood, but that he has ennobled + souls by his example. The supernatural part of the atonement has, by the + more intelligent, been thrown away. So the idea of imputed sin—of + vicarious vice—has been by many abandoned. + </p> + <p> + Salvation by faith is growing weak. People are beginning to see that + character is more important than belief; that virtue is above all creeds. + Civilized people no longer believe in a God who will damn an honest, + generous man. They see that it is not honest to offer a reward for belief. + The promise of reward is not evidence. It is an attempt to bribe. + </p> + <p> + If God wishes his children to believe, he should furnish evidence. He + should not endeavor to make promises and threats take the place of facts. + To offer a reward for credulity is dishonest and immoral—infamous. + </p> + <p> + To say that good people who never heard of Christ ought to be damned for + not believing on him is a mixture of idiocy and savagery. + </p> + <p> + People are beginning to perceive that happiness is a result, not a reward; + that happiness must be earned; that it is not alms. It is also becoming + apparent that sins cannot be forgiven; that no power can step between + actions and consequences; that men must "reap what they sow;" that a man + who has lived a cruel life cannot, by repenting between the last dose of + medicine and the last breath, be washed in the blood of the Lamb, and + become an angel—an angel entitled to an eternity of joy. + </p> + <p> + All this is absurd, but you may say that it is not cruel. But to say that + a man who has lived a useful life; who has made a happy home; who has + lifted the fallen, succored the oppressed and battled to uphold the right; + to say that such a man, because he failed to believe without evidence, + will suffer eternal pain, is to say that God is an infinite wild beast. + </p> + <p> + Salvation for credulity means damnation for investigation. + </p> + <p> + At one time the "second birth" was regarded as a divine mystery—as a + miracle—a something done by a supernatural power; probably by the + Holy Ghost. Now ministers are explaining this mystery. A change of heart + is a change of ideas. About this there is nothing miraculous. + </p> + <p> + This happens to most men and women—happens many times in the life of + one man. If this happens without excitement—as the result of thought—it + is called reformation. If it occurs in a revival—if it is the result + of fright—it is called the "second birth." + </p> + <p> + A few years ago Christians believed in the inspiration of the Bible. They + had no doubts. The Bible was the standard. If some geologist found a fact + inconsistent with the Scriptures he was silenced with a text. If some + doubter called attention to a contradiction in the Bible he was denounced + as an ungodly and blaspheming wretch. Christians then knew that the + universe was only about six thousand years old, and any man who denied + this was an enemy of Christ and a friend of the Devil. + </p> + <p> + All this has changed. The Bible is no longer the standard. Science has + dethroned the inspired volume. Even theologians are taking facts into + consideration. Only ignorant bigots now believe in the plenary inspiration + of the Bible. + </p> + <p> + The intelligent ministers know that the Holy Scriptures are filled with + mistakes, contradictions and interpolations. They no longer believe in the + flood, in Babel, in Lot's wife or in the fire and brimstone storm. They + are not sure about the burning bush, the plagues of Egypt, the division of + the Red Sea or the miracles in the wilderness. All these wonders are + growing foolish. They belong to the Mother Goose of the past, and many + clergymen are ashamed to say that they believe them. So, the lengthening + of the day in order that General Joshua might have more time to kill, the + journey of Elijah to heaven, the voyage of Jonah in the fish, and many + other wonders of a like kind, have become so transparently false that even + a theologian refuses to believe. + </p> + <p> + The same is true of many of the miracles of the New Testament. No sensible + man now believes that Christ cast devils and unclean spirits out of the + bodies of men and women. A few years ago all Christians believed all these + devil miracles with all the mind they had. A few years ago only Infidels + denied these miracles, but now the theologians who are studying the + "Higher Criticism" are reaching the conclusions of Voltaire and Paine. + They have just discovered that the objections made to the Bible by the + Deists are supported by the facts. + </p> + <p> + At the same time these "Higher Critics," while they admit that the Bible + is not true, still insist that it is inspired. + </p> + <p> + The other evening I attended Forepaugh & Sell's Circus at Madison + Square Garden and saw a magnificent panorama of performances. While + looking at a man riding a couple of horses I thought of the "Higher + Critics." They accept Darwin and cling to Genesis. They admit that Genesis + is false in fact, and then assert that in a higher sense it is absolutely + true. + </p> + <p> + A lie bursts into blossom and has the perfume of truth. These critics + declare that the Bible is the inspired word of God, and then establish the + truth of the declaration by showing that it is filled with contradictions, + absurdities and false prophecies. + </p> + <p> + The horses they ride, sometimes get so far apart that it seems to me that + walking would be easier on the legs. + </p> + <p> + So, I saw at the circus the "Snake Man." I saw him tie himself into all + kinds of knots; saw him make a necktie of his legs; saw him throw back his + head and force it between his knees; saw him twist and turn as though his + bones were made of rubber, and as I watched him I thought of the mental + doublings and contortions of the preachers who have answered me. + </p> + <p> + Let Christians say what they will, the Bible is no longer the actual word + of God; it is no longer perfect; it is no longer quite true. + </p> + <p> + The most that is now claimed for the Bible by the "Higher Critics" is, + that some passages are inspired; that some passages are true, and that God + has left man free to pick these passages out. + </p> + <p> + The ministers are preaching Infidelity. What would Lyman Beecher have + thought of a man like Dr. Abbott? he would have consigned him to hell. + What would John Wesley have thought of a Methodist like Dr. Cadman? He + would have denounced him as a child of the Devil. What would Calvin have + thought of a Presbyterian like Professor Briggs? He would have burned him + at the stake, and through the smoke and flame would have shouted, "You are + a dog of Satan." How would Jeremy Taylor have treated an Episcopalian like + Heber Newton? + </p> + <p> + The Governor of New Hampshire is right when he says that Christianity has + declined. The flames of faith are flickering, zeal is cooling and even + bigotry is beginning to see the other side. I admit that there are still + millions of orthodox Christians whose minds are incapable of growth, and + who care no more for facts than a monitor does for bullets. Such + obstructions on the highway of progress are removed only by death. + </p> + <p> + The dogma of eternal pain is no longer believed by the reasonably + intelligent. People who have a sense of justice know that eternal revenge + cannot be enjoyed by infinite goodness. They know that hell would make + heaven impossible. If Christians believed in hell as they once did, the + fagots would be lighted again, heretics would be stretched on the rack, + and all the instruments of torture would again be stained with innocent + blood. Christianity has declined because intelligence has increased. + </p> + <p> + Men and women who know something of the history of man, of the horrors of + plague, famine and flood, of earthquake, volcano and cyclone, of religious + persecution and slavery, have but little confidence in special providence. + They do not believe that a prayer was ever answered. + </p> + <p> + Thousands of people who accept Christ as a moral guide have thrown, away + the supernatural. + </p> + <p> + Christianity does not satisfy the brain and heart. It contains too many + absurdities. It is unphilosophic, unnatural, impossible. Not to resist + evil is moral suicide. To love your enemies is impossible. To desert wife + and children for the sake of heaven is cowardly and selfish. To promise + rewards for belief is dishonest. To threaten torture for honest unbelief + is infamous. Christianity is declining because men and women are growing + better. + </p> + <p> + The Governor was not satisfied with saying that Christianity had declined, + but he added this: "Every good citizen knows that when the restraining + influences of religion are withdrawn from a community, its decay, moral, + mental and financial is swift and sure." + </p> + <p> + The restraining influences of religion have never been withdrawn from + Spain or Portugal, from Austria or Italy. The "restraining influences" are + still active in Russia. Emperor William relies on them in Germany, and the + same influences are very busy taking care of Ireland. If these influences + should be withdrawn from Spain there would be "mental, moral and financial + decay." Is not this statement perfectly absurd? + </p> + <p> + The fact is that religion has reduced Spain to a guitar, Italy to a hand + organ and Ireland to exile. What are the restraining influences of + religion? I admit that religion can prevent people from eating meat on + Friday, from dancing in Lent, from going to the theatre on holy days and + from swearing in public. In other words, religion can restrain people from + committing artificial offences. But the real question is: Can religion + restrain people from committing natural crimes? + </p> + <p> + The church teaches that God can and will forgive sins. + </p> + <p> + Christianity sells sin on a credit. It says to men and women, "Be good; do + right; but no matter how many crimes you commit you can be forgiven." How + can such a religion be regarded as a restraining influence! There was a + time when religion had power; when the church ruled Christendom; when + popes crowned and uncrowned kings. Was there at that time moral, mental + and financial growth? Did the nations thus restrained by religion, + prosper? When these restraining influences were weakened, when popes were + humbled, when creeds were denied, did morality, intelligence and + prosperity begin to decay? + </p> + <p> + What are the restraining influences of religion? Did anybody ever hear of + a policeman being dismissed because a new church had been organized? + </p> + <p> + Christianity teaches that the man who does right carries a cross. The + exact opposite of this is true. The cross is carried by the man who does + wrong. I believe in the restraining influences of intelligence. + Intelligence is the only lever capable of raising mankind. If you wish to + make men moral and prosperous develop the brain. Men must be taught to + rely on themselves. To supplicate the supernatural is a waste of time. + </p> + <p> + The only evils that have been caused by the decline of Christianity, as + pointed out by the Governor, are that in some villages they hear no solemn + bells, that the dead are buried without Christian ceremony, that marriages + are contracted before Justices of the Peace, and that children go + unchristened. + </p> + <p> + These evils are hardly serious enough to cause moral, mental and financial + decay. The average church bell is not very musical—not calculated to + develop the mind or quicken the conscience. The absence of the ordinary + funeral sermon does not add to the horror of death, and the failure to + hear a minister say, as he stands by the grave, "One star differs in glory + from another star. There is a difference between the flesh of fowl and + fish. Be not deceived. Evil communications corrupt good manners," does not + necessarily increase the grief of the mourners. So far as children are + concerned, if they are vaccinated, it does not make much difference + whether they are christened or not. + </p> + <p> + Marriage is a civil contract, and God is not one of the contracting + parties. It is a contract with which the church has no business to + interfere. Marriage with us is regulated by law. The real marriage—the + uniting of hearts, the lighting of the sacred flame in each—is the + work of Nature, and it is the best work that nature does. The ceremony of + marriage gives notice to the world that the real marriage has taken place. + Ministers have no real interest in marriages outside of the fees. + Certainly marriages by Justices of the Peace cannot cause the mental, + moral and financial decay of a State. + </p> + <p> + The things pointed out by the Governor were undoubtedly produced by the + decline of Christianity, but they are not evils, and they cannot possibly + injure the people morally, mentally or financially. The Governor calls on + the people to think, work and pray. With two-thirds of this I agree. If + the people of New Hampshire will think and work without praying they will + grow morally, mentally and financially. If they pray without working and + thinking, they will decay. + </p> + <p> + Prayer is beggary—an effort to get something for nothing. Labor is + the honest prayer. + </p> + <p> + I do not think that the good and true in Christianity are declining. The + good and true are more clearly perceived and more precious than ever. The + supernatural, the miraculous part of Christianity is declining. The New + Testament has been compelled to acknowledge the jurisdiction of reason. If + Christianity continues to decline at the same rate and ratio that it has + declined in this generation, in a few years all that is supernatural in + the Christian religion will cease to exist. There is a conflict—a + battle between the natural and the supernatural. The natural was baffled + and beaten for thousands of years. The flag of defeat was carried by the + few, by the brave and wise, by the real heroes of our race. They were + conquered, captured, imprisoned, tortured and burned. Others took their + places. The banner was kept in the air. In spite of countless defeats the + army of the natural increased. It began to gain victories. It did not + torture and kill the conquered. It enlightened and blessed. It fought + ignorance with science, cruelty with kindness, slavery with justice, and + all vices with virtues. In this great conflict we have passed midnight. + When the morning comes its rays will gild but one flag—the flag of + the natural. + </p> + <p> + All over Christendom religions are declining. Only children and the + intellectually undeveloped have faith—the old faith that defies + facts. Only a few years ago to be excommunicated by the pope blanched the + cheeks of the bravest. Now the result would be laughter. Only a few years + ago, for the sake of saving heathen souls, priests would brave all dangers + and endure all hardships. + </p> + <p> + I once read the diary of a priest—one who long ago went down the + Illinois River, the first white man to be borne on its waters. In this + diary he wrote that he had just been paid for all that he had suffered. He + had added a gem to the crown of his glory—had saved a soul for + Christ. He had baptized a papoose. + </p> + <p> + That kind of faith has departed from the world. + </p> + <p> + The zeal that flamed in the hearts of Calvin, Luther and Knox, is cold and + dead. Where are the Wesleys and Whitfields? Where are the old evangelists, + the revivalists who swayed the hearts of their hearers with words of + flame? The preachers of our day have lost the Promethean fire. They have + lost the tone of certainty, of authority. "Thus saith the Lord" has + dwindled to "perhaps." Sermons, messages from God, promises radiant with + eternal joy, threats lurid with the flames of hell—have changed to + colorless essays; to apologies and literary phrases; to inferences and + peradventures. + </p> + <p> + "The blood-dyed vestures of the Redeemer are not waving in triumph over + the ramparts of sin and rebellion," but over the fortresses of faith float + the white flags of truce. The trumpets no longer sound for battle, but for + parley. The fires of hell have been extinguished, and heaven itself is + only a dream. The "eternal verities" have changed to doubts. The torch of + inspiration, choked with ashes, has lost its flame. There is no longer in + the church "a sound from heaven as of a rushing, mighty wind;" no "cloven + tongues like as of fire;" no "wonders in the heaven above," and no "signs + in the earth beneath." The miracles have faded away and the sceptre is + passing from superstition to science—science, the only possible + savior of mankind. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0049" id="link0049"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + A LOOK BACKWARD AND A PROPHECY. + </h2> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + * Written for the Twenty-fifth Anniversary Number of the + New York Truth Seeker, September 3, 1898. +</pre> + <p> + I CONGRATULATE <i>The Truth Seeker</i> on its twenty-fifth birthday. It + has fought a good fight. It has always been at the front. It has carried + the flag, and its flag is a torch that sheds light. + </p> + <p> + Twenty-five years ago the people of this country, for the most part, were + quite orthodox. The great "fundamental" falsehoods of Christianity were + generally accepted. Those who were not Christians, as a rule, admitted + that they ought to be; that they ought to repent and join the church, and + this they generally intended to do. + </p> + <p> + The ministers had few doubts. The most of them had been educated not to + think, but to believe. Thought was regarded as dangerous, and the clergy, + as a rule, kept on the safe side. Investigation was discouraged. It was + declared that faith was the only road that led to eternal joy. + </p> + <p> + Most of the schools and colleges were under sectarian control, and the + presidents and professors were defenders of their creeds. The people were + crammed with miracles and stuffed with absurdities. They were taught that + the Bible was the "inspired" word of God, that it was absolutely perfect, + that the contradictions were only apparent, and that it contained no + mistakes in philosophy, none in science. The great scheme of salvation was + declared to be the result of infinite wisdom and mercy. Heaven and hell + were waiting for the human race. Only those could be saved who had faith + and who had been born twice. + </p> + <p> + Most of the ministers taught the geology of Moses, the astronomy of + Joshua, and the philosophy of Christ. They regarded scientists as enemies, + and their principal business was to defend miracles and deny facts. They + knew, however, that men were thinking, investigating in every direction, + and they feared the result. They became a little malicious—somewhat + hateful. With their congregations they relied on sophistry, and they + answered their enemies with epithets, with misrepresentations and + slanders; and yet their minds were filled with a vague fear, with a + sickening dread. Some of the people were reading and some were thinking. + Lyell had told them something about geology, and in the light of facts + they were reading Genesis again. The clergy called Lyell an Infidel, a + blasphemer, but the facts seemed to care nothing for opprobrious names. + Then the "called," the "set apart," the "Lord's anointed" began changing + the "inspired" word. They erased the word "day" and inserted "period," and + then triumphantly exclaimed: "The world was created in six periods." This + answer satisfied bigotry, hypocrisy, and honest ignorance, but honest + intelligence was not satisfied. + </p> + <p> + More and more was being found about the history of life, of living things, + the order in which the various forms had appeared and the relations they + had sustained to each other. Beneath the gaze of the biologist the fossils + were again clothed with flesh, submerged continents and islands + reappeared, the ancient forest grew once more, the air was filled with + unknown birds, the seas with armored monsters, and the land with beasts of + many forms that sought with tooth and claw each other's flesh. + </p> + <p> + Haeckel and Huxley followed life through all its changing forms from monad + up to man. They found that men, women, and children had been on this poor + world for hundreds of thousands of years. + </p> + <p> + The clergy could not dodge these facts, this conclusion, by calling "days" + periods, because the Bible gives the age of Adam when he died, the lives + and ages to the flood, to Abraham, to David, and from David to Christ, so + that, according to the Bible, man at the birth of Christ had been on this + earth four thousand and four years and no more. + </p> + <p> + There was no way in which the sacred record could be changed, but of + course the dear ministers could not admit the conclusion arrived at by + Haeckel and Huxley. If they did they would have to give up original sin, + the scheme of the atonement, and the consolation of eternal fire. + </p> + <p> + They took the only course they could. They promptly and solemnly, with + upraised hands, denied the facts, denounced the biologists as irreverent + wretches, and defended the Book. With tears in their voices they talked + about "Mother's Bible," about the "faith of the fathers," about the + prayers that the children had said, and they also talked about the + wickedness of doubt. This satisfied bigotry, hypocrisy, and honest + ignorance, but honest intelligence was not satisfied. + </p> + <p> + The works of Humboldt had been translated, and were being read; the + intellectual horizon was enlarged, and the fact that the endless chain of + cause and effect had never been broken, that Nature had never been + interfered with, forced its way into many minds. This conception of nature + was beyond the clergy. They did not believe it; they could not comprehend + it. They did not answer Humboldt, but they attacked him with great + virulence. They measured his works by the Bible, because the Bible was + then the standard. + </p> + <p> + In examining a philosophy, a system, the ministers asked: "Does it agree + with the sacred book?" With the Bible they separated the gold from the + dross. Every science had to be tested by the Scriptures. Humboldt did not + agree with Moses. He differed from Joshua. He had his doubts about the + flood. That was enough. + </p> + <p> + Yet, after all, the ministers felt that they were standing on thin ice, + that they were surrounded by masked batteries, and that something + unfortunate was liable at any moment to happen. This increased their + efforts to avoid, to escape. The truth was that they feared the truth. + They were afraid of facts. They became exceedingly anxious for morality, + for the young, for the inexperienced. They were afraid to trust human + nature. They insisted that without the Bible the world would rush to + crime. They warned the thoughtless of the danger of thinking. They knew + that it would be impossible for civilization to exist without the Bible. + They knew this because their God had tried it. He gave no Bible to the + antediluvians, and they became so bad that he had to destroy them. He gave + the Jews only the Old Testament, and they were dispersed. Irreverent + people might say that Jehovah should have known this without a trial, but + after all that has nothing to do with theology. + </p> + <p> + Attention had been called to the fact that two accounts of creation are in + Genesis, and that they do not agree and cannot be harmonized, and that, in + addition to that, the divine historian had made a mistake as to the order + of creation; that according to one account Adam was made before the + animals, and Eve last of all, from Adam's rib; and by the other account + Adam and Eve were made after the animals, and both at the same time. A + good many people were surprised to find that the Creator had written + contradictory accounts of the creation, and had forgotten the order in + which he created. + </p> + <p> + Then there was another difficulty. Jehovah had declared that on Tuesday, + or during the second period, he had created the "firmament" to divide the + waters which were below the firmament from the waters above the firmament. + It was found that there is no firmament; that the moisture in the air is + the result of evaporation, and that there was nothing to divide the waters + above, from the waters below. So that, according to the facts, Jehovah did + nothing on the second day or period, because the moisture above the earth + is not prevented from falling by the firmament, but because the mist is + lighter than air. + </p> + <p> + The preachers, however, began to dodge, to evade, to talk about "oriental + imagery." They declared that Genesis was a "sublime poem," a divine + "panorama of creation," an "inspired vision;" that it was not intended to + be exact in its details, but that it was true in a far higher sense, in a + poetical sense, in a spiritual sense, conveying a truth much higher, much + grander than simple, fact. The contradictions were covered with the mantle + of oriental imagery. This satisfied bigotry, hypocrisy, and honest + ignorance, but honest intelligence was not satisfied. + </p> + <p> + People were reading Darwin. His works interested not only the scientific, + but the intelligent in all the walks of life. Darwin was the keenest + observer of all time, the greatest naturalist in all the world. He was + patient, modest, logical, candid, courageous, and absolutely truthful. He + told the actual facts. He colored nothing. He was anxious only to + ascertain the truth. He had no prejudices, no theories, no creed. He was + the apostle of the real. + </p> + <p> + The ministers greeted him with shouts of derision. From nearly all the + pulpits came the sounds of ignorant laughter, one of the saddest of all + sounds. The clergy in a vague kind of way believed the Bible account of + creation; they accepted the Miltonic view; they believed that all animals, + including man, had been made of clay, fashioned by Jehovah's hands, and + that he had breathed into all forms, not only the breath of life, but + instinct and reason. They were not in the habit of descending to + particulars; they did not describe Jehovah as kneading the clay or + modeling his forms like a sculptor, but what they did say included these + things. + </p> + <p> + The theory of Darwin contradicted all their ideas on the subject, vague as + they were. He showed that man had not appeared at first as man, that he + had not fallen from perfection, but had slowly risen through many ages + from lower forms. He took food, climate, and all conditions into + consideration, and accounted for difference of form, function, instinct, + and reason, by natural causes. He dispensed with the supernatural. He did + away with Jehovah the potter. + </p> + <p> + Of course the theologians denounced him as a blasphemer, as a dethroner of + God. They even went so far as to smile at his ignorance. They said: "If + the theory of Darwin is true the Bible is false, our God is a myth, and + our religion a fable." + </p> + <p> + In that they were right. + </p> + <p> + Against Darwin they rained texts of Scripture like shot and shell. They + believed that they were victorious and their congregations were delighted. + Poor little frightened professors in religious colleges sided with the + clergy. Hundreds of backboneless "scientists" ranged themselves with the + enemies of Darwin. It began to look as though the church was victorious. + </p> + <p> + Slowly, steadily, the ideas of Darwin gained ground. He began to be + understood. Men of sense were reading what he said. Men of genius were on + his side. In a little while the really great in all departments of human + thought declared in his favor. The tide began to turn. The smile on the + face of the theologian became a frozen grin. The preachers began to hedge, + to dodge. They admitted that the Bible was not inspired for the purpose of + teaching science—only inspired about religion, about the spiritual, + about the divine. The fortifications of faith were crumbling, the old guns + had been spiked, and the armies of the "living God" were in retreat. + </p> + <p> + Great questions were being discussed, and freely discussed. People were + not afraid to give their opinions, and they did give their honest + thoughts. Draper had shown in his "Intellectual Development of Europe" + that Catholicism had been the relentless enemy of progress, the bitter foe + of all that is really useful. The Protestants were delighted with this + book. + </p> + <p> + Buckle had shown in his "History of Civilization in England" that + Protestantism had also enslaved the mind, had also persecuted to the + extent of its power, and that Protestantism in its last analysis was + substantially the same as the creed of Rome. + </p> + <p> + This book satisfied the thoughtful. + </p> + <p> + Hegel in his first book had done a great work and it did great good in + spite of the fact that his second book was almost a surrender. Lecky in + his first volume of "The History of Rationalism" shed a flood of light on + the meanness, the cruelty, and the malevolence of "revealed religion," and + this did good in spite of the fact that he almost apologizes in the second + volume for what he had said in the first. + </p> + <p> + The Universalists had done good. They had civilized a great many + Christians. They declared that eternal punishment was infinite revenge, + and that the God of hell was an infinite savage. + </p> + <p> + Some of the Unitarians, following the example of Theodore Parker, + denounced Jehovah as a brutal, tribal God. All these forces worked + together for the development of the orthodox brain. + </p> + <p> + Herbert Spencer was being read and understood. The theories of this great + philosopher were being adopted. He overwhelmed the theologians with facts, + and from a great height he surveyed the world. Of course he was attacked, + but not answered. + </p> + <p> + Emerson had sowed the seeds of thought—of doubt—in many minds, + and from many directions the world was being flooded with intellectual + light. The clergy became apologetic; they spoke with less certainty; with + less emphasis, and lost a little confidence in the power of assertion. + They felt the necessity of doing something, and they began to harmonize as + best they could the old lies and the new truths. They tried to get the + wreck ashore, and many of them were willing to surrender if they could + keep their side-arms; that is to say, their salaries. + </p> + <p> + Conditions had been reversed. The Bible had ceased to be the standard. + Science was the supreme and final test. + </p> + <p> + There was no peace for the pulpit; no peace for the shepherds. Students of + the Bible in England and Germany had been examining the inspired + Scriptures. They had been trying to find when and by whom the books of the + Bible were written. They found that the Pentateuch was not written by + Moses; that the authors of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Samuel, Kings, + Chronicles, Esther, and Job were not known; that the Psalms were not + written by David; that Solomon had nothing to do with Proverbs, + Ecclesiastes, or the Song; that Isaiah was the work of at least three + authors; that the prophecies of Daniel were written after the happening of + the events prophesied. They found many mistakes and contradictions, and + some of them went so far as to assert that the Hebrews had never been + slaves in Egypt; that the story of the plagues, the exodus, and the + pursuit was only a myth. + </p> + <p> + The New Testament fared no better than the Old. These critics found that + nearly all of the books of the New Testament had been written by unknown + men; that it was impossible to fix the time when they were written; that + many of the miracles were absurd and childish, and that in addition to all + of this, the gospels were found filled with mistakes, with interpolations' + and contradictions; that the writers of Matthew, Mark, and Luke did not + understand the Christian religion as it was understood by the author of + the gospel according to John. + </p> + <p> + Of course, the critics were denounced from most of the pulpits, and the + religious papers, edited generally by men who had failed as preachers, + were filled with bitter denials and vicious attacks. The religious editors + refused to be enlightened. They fought under the old flag. When dogmas + became too absurd to be preached, they were taught in the Sunday schools; + when worn out there, they were given to the missionaries; but the dear old + religious weeklies, the Banners, the Covenants, the Evangelists, continued + to feed their provincial subscribers with known mistakes and refuted lies. + </p> + <p> + There is another fact that should be taken into consideration. All + religions are provincial. Mingled with them all and at the foundation of + all are the egotism of ignorance, of isolation, the pride of race, and + what is called patriotism. Every religion is a natural product—the + result of conditions. When one tribe became acquainted with another, the + ideas of both were somewhat modified. So when nations and races come into + contact a change in thought, in opinion, is a necessary result. + </p> + <p> + A few years ago nations were strangers, and consequently hated each + other's institutions and religions. Commerce has done a great work in + destroying provincialism. To trade commodities is to exchange ideas. So + the press, the steamships, the railways, cables, and telegraphs have + brought the nations together and enabled them to compare their prejudices, + their religions, laws and customs. + </p> + <p> + Recently many scholars have been studying the religions of the world and + have found them much the same. They have also found that there is nothing + original in Christianity; that the legends, miracles, Christs, and + conditions of salvation, the heavens, hells, angels, devils, and gods were + the common property of the ancient world. They found that Christ was a new + name for an old biography; that he was not a life, but a legend; not a + man, but a myth. + </p> + <p> + People began to suspect that our religion had not been supernaturally + revealed, while others, far older and substantially the same, had been + naturally produced. They found it difficult to account for the fact that + poor, ignorant savages had in the darkness of nature written so well that + Jehovah thousands of years afterwards copied it and adopted it as his own. + They thought it curious that God should be a plagiarist. + </p> + <p> + These scholars found that all the old religions had recognized the + existence of devils, of evil spirits, who sought in countless ways to + injure the children of men. In this respect they found that the sacred + books of other nations were just the same as our Bible, as our New + Testament. + </p> + <p> + Take the Devil from our religion and the entire fabric falls. No Devil, no + fall of man. No Devil, no atonement. No Devil, no hell. + </p> + <p> + The Devil is the keystone of the arch. + </p> + <p> + And yet for many years the belief in the existence of the Devil—of + evil spirits—has been fading from the minds of intelligent people. + This belief has now substantially vanished. The minister who now seriously + talks about a personal Devil is regarded with a kind of pitying contempt. + </p> + <p> + The Devil has faded from his throne and the evil spirits have vanished + from the air. + </p> + <p> + The man who has really given up a belief in the existence of the Devil + cannot believe in the inspiration of the New Testament—in the + divinity of Christ. If Christ taught anything, if he believed in anything, + he taught a belief in the existence of the Devil..His principal business + was casting out devils. He himself was taken possession of by the Devil + and carried to the top of the temple. + </p> + <p> + Thousands and thousands of people have ceased to believe the account in + the New Testament regarding devils, and yet continue to believe in the + dogma of "inspiration" and the divinity of Christ. + </p> + <p> + In the brain of the average Christian, contradictions dwell in unity. + </p> + <p> + While a belief in the existence of the Devil has almost faded away, the + belief in the existence of a personal God has been somewhat weakened. The + old belief that back of nature, back of all substance and force, was and + is a personal God, an infinite intelligence who created and governs the + world, began to be questioned. The scientists had shown the + indestructibility of matter and force. Büchner's great work had + convinced most readers that matter and force could not have been created. + They also became satisfied that matter cannot exist apart from force and + that force cannot exist apart from matter. + </p> + <p> + They found, too, that thought is a form of force, and that consequently + intelligence could not have existed before matter, because without matter, + force in any form cannot and could not exist. + </p> + <p> + The creator of anything is utterly unthinkable. + </p> + <p> + A few years ago God was supposed to govern the world. He rewarded the + people with sunshine, with prosperity and health, or he punished with + drought and flood, with plague and storm. He not only attended to the + affairs of nations, but he watched the actions of individuals. He sank + ships, derailed trains, caused conflagrations, killed men and women with + his lightnings, destroyed some with earthquakes, and tore the homes and + bodies of thousands into fragments with his cyclones. + </p> + <p> + In spite of the church, in spite of the ministers, the people began to + lose confidence in Providence. The right did not seem always to triumph. + Virtue was not always rewarded and vice was not always punished. The good + failed; the vicious succeeded; the strong and cruel enslaved the weak; + toil was paid with the lash; babes were sold from the breasts of mothers, + and Providence seemed to be absolutely heartless. + </p> + <p> + In other words, people began to think that the God of the Christians and + the God of nature were about the same, and that neither appeared to take + any care of the human race. + </p> + <p> + The Deists of the last century scoffed at the Bible God. He was too cruel, + too savage. At the same time they praised the God of nature. They laughed + at the idea of inspiration and denied the supernatural origin of the + Scriptures. + </p> + <p> + Now, if the Bible is not inspired, then it is a natural production, and + nature, not God, should be held responsible for the Scriptures. Yet the + Deists denied that God was the author and at the same time asserted the + perfection of nature. + </p> + <p> + This shows that even in the minds of Deists contradictions dwell in unity. + </p> + <p> + Against all these facts and forces, these theories and tendencies, the + clergy fought and prayed. It is not claimed that they were consciously + dishonest, but it is claimed that they were prejudiced—that they + were incapable of examining the other side—that they were utterly + destitute of the philosophic spirit. They were not searchers for the + facts, but defenders of the creeds, and undoubtedly they were the product + of conditions and surroundings, and acted as they must. + </p> + <p> + In spite of everything a few rays of light penetrated the orthodox mind. + Many ministers accepted some of the new facts, and began to mingle with + Christian mistakes a few scientific truths. In many instances they excited + the indignation of their congregations. Some were tried for heresy and + driven from their pulpits, and some organized new churches and gathered + about them a few people willing to listen to the sincere thoughts of an + honest man. + </p> + <p> + The great body of the church, however, held to the creed—not quite + believing it, but still insisting that it was true. + </p> + <p> + In private conversation they would apologize and admit that the old ideas + were outgrown, but in public they were as orthodox as ever. In every + church, however, there were many priests who accepted the new gospel; that + is to say, welcomed the truth. + </p> + <p> + To-day it may truthfully be said that the Bible in the old sense is no + longer regarded as the inspired word of God. Jehovah is no longer accepted + or believed in as the creator of the universe. His place has been taken by + the Unknown, the Unseen, the Invisible, the Incomprehensible Something, + the Cosmic Dust, the First Cause, the Inconceivable, the Original Force, + the Mystery. The God of the Bible, the gentleman who walked in the cool of + the evening, who talked face to face with Moses, who revenged himself on + unbelievers and who gave laws written with his finger on tables of stone, + has abdicated. He has become a myth. + </p> + <p> + So, too, the New Testament has lost its authority. People reason about it + now as they do about other books, and even orthodox ministers pick out the + miracles that ought to be believed, and when anything is attributed to + Christ not in accordance with their views, they take the liberty of + explaining it away by saying "interpolation." + </p> + <p> + In other words, we have lived to see Science the standard instead of the + Bible. We have lived to see the Bible tested by Science, and, what is + more, we have lived to see reason the standard not only in religion, but + in all the domain of science. Now all civilized scientists appeal to + reason. They get their facts, and then reason from the foundation. Now the + theologian appeals to reason. Faith is no longer considered a foundation. + The theologian has found that he must build upon the truth and that he + must establish this truth by satisfying human reason. + </p> + <p> + This is where we are now. + </p> + <p> + What is to be the result? Is progress to stop? Are we to retrace our + steps? Are we going back to superstition? Are we going to take authority + for truth? + </p> + <p> + Let me prophesy. + </p> + <p> + In modern times we have slowly lost confidence in the supernatural and + have slowly gained confidence in the natural. We have slowly lost + confidence in gods and have slowly gained confidence in man. For the cure + of disease, for the stopping of plague, we depend on the natural—on + science. We have lost confidence in holy water and religious processions. + We have found that prayers are never answered. + </p> + <p> + In my judgment, all belief in the supernatural will be driven from the + human mind. All religions must pass away. The augurs, the soothsayers, the + seers, the preachers, the astrologers and alchemists will all lie in the + same cemetery and one epitaph will do for them all. In a little while all + will have had their day. They were naturally produced and they will be + naturally destroyed. Man at last will depend entirely upon himself—on + the development of the brain—to the end that he may take advantage + of the forces of nature—to the end that he may supply the wants of + his body and feed the hunger of his mind. + </p> + <p> + In my judgment, teachers will take the place of preachers and the + interpreters of nature will be the only priests. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0050" id="link0050"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + POLITICAL MORALITY. + </h2> + <p> + THE room of the House Committee on Elections was crowded this morning with + committeemen and spectators to listen to an argument by Col. Robert G. + Ingersoll in the contested election case of Strobach against Herbert, of + the IId Alabama district. Colonel Ingersoll appeared for Strobach, the + contestant. While most of his argument was devoted to the dry details of + the testimony, he entered into some discussion of the general principles + involved in contested election cases, and spoke with great eloquence and + force. + </p> + <p> + The mere personal controversy, as between Herbert and Strobach, is not + worth talking about. It is a question as to whether or not the republican + system is a failure. Unless the will of the majority can be ascertained, + and surely ascertained, through the medium of the ballot, the foundation + of this Government rests upon nothing—the Government ceases to be. I + would a thousand time rather a Democrat should come to Congress from this + district, or from any district, than that a Republican should come who was + not honestly elected. I would a thousand times rather that this country + should honestly go to destruction than dishonestly and fraudulently go + anywhere. We want it settled whether this form of government is or is not + a failure. That is the real question, and it is the question at issue in + every one of these cases. Has Congress power and has Congress the sense to + say to-day, that no man shall sit as a maker of laws for the people who + has not been honestly elected? Whenever you admit a man to Congress and + allow him to vote and make laws, you poison the source of justice—you + poison the source of power; and the moment the people begin to think that + many members of Congress are there through fraud, that moment they cease + to have respect for the legislative department of this Government—that + moment they cease to have respect for the sovereignty of the people + represented by fraud. + </p> + <p> + Now, as I have said, I care nothing about the personal part of it, and, + maybe you will not believe me, but I care nothing about the political + part. The question is, Who has the right on his side? Who is honestly + entitled to this seat? That is infinitely more important than any personal + or party question. My doctrine is that a majority of the people must + control—that we have in this country a king, that we have in this + country a sovereign, just as truly as they can have in any other, and, as + a matter of fact, a republic is the only country that does in truth have a + sovereign, and that sovereign is the legally expressed will of the people. + So that any man that puts in a fraudulent vote is a traitor to that + sovereign; any man that knowingly counts an illegal vote is a traitor to + that sovereign, and is not fit to be a citizen of the great Republic. Any + man who fraudulently throws out a vote, knowing it to be a legal vote, + tampers with the source of power, and is, in fact, false to our + institutions. Now, these are the questions to be decided, and I want them + decided, not because this case happens to come from the South any more + than if it came from the North. It is a matter that concerns the whole + country. We must decide it. There must be a law on the subject. We have + got to lay down a stringent rule that shall apply to these cases. There + should be—there must be—such a thing as political morality so + far as voting is concerned.—New York Tribune, May 13, 1883. + </p> + <p> + <a name="link0051" id="link0051"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> + <h2> + A FEW REASONS FOR DOUBTING THE INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE. + </h2> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + * Printed from manuscript notes found among Colonel + Ingersoll's papers, evidently written in the early '80's. + While much of the argument and criticism will be found + embodied in his various lectures magazine articles and + contributions to the press, it was thought too valuable in + its present form to be left out of a complete edition of his + works, on account of too much repetition. Undoubtedly it was + the author's intention to go through the Bible in this same + manner and to publish in book form. "A few Reasons for + doubting the Inspiration of the Bible." +</pre> + <p> + THE Old Testament must have been written nearly two thousand years before + the invention of printing. There were but few copies, and these were in + the keeping of those whose interest might have prompted interpolations, + and whose ignorance might have led to mistakes. + </p> + <p> + Second. The written Hebrew was composed entirely of consonants, without + any points or marks standing for vowels, so that anything like accuracy + was impossible. Anyone can test this for himself by writing an English + sentence, leaving out the vowels. It will take far more inspiration to + read than to write a book with consonants alone. + </p> + <p> + Third. The books composing the Old Testament were not divided into + chapters or verses, and no system of punctuation was known. Think of this + a moment and you will see how difficult it must be to read such a book. + </p> + <p> + Fourth. There was not among the Jews any dictionary of their language, and + for this reason the accurate meaning of words could not be preserved. Now + the different meanings of words are preserved so that by knowing the age + in which a writer lived we can ascertain with reasonable certainty his + meaning. + </p> + <p> + Fifth. The Old Testament was printed for the first time in 1488. Until + this date it existed only in manuscript, and was constantly exposed to + erasures and additions. + </p> + <p> + Sixth. It is now admitted by the most learned in the Hebrew language that + in our present English version of the Old Testament there are at least one + hundred thousand errors. Of course the believers in inspiration assert + that these errors are not sufficient in number to cast the least suspicion + upon any passages upholding what are called the "fundamentals." + </p> + <p> + Seventh. It is not certainly known who in fact wrote any of the books of + the Old Testament. For instance, it is now generally conceded that Moses + was not the author of the Pentateuch. + </p> + <p> + Eighth. Other books, not now in existence, are referred to in the Old + Testament as of equal authority, such as the books of Jasher, Nathan, + Ahijah, Iddo, Jehu, Sayings of the Seers. + </p> + <p> + Ninth. The Christians are not agreed among themselves as to what books are + inspired. The Catholics claim as inspired the books of Maccabees, Tobit, + Esdras, etc. Others doubt the inspiration of Esther, Ecclesiastes, and the + Song of Solomon. + </p> + <p> + Tenth. In the book of Esther and the Song of Solomon the name of God is + not mentioned, and no reference is made to any supreme being, nor to any + religious duty. These omissions would seem sufficient to cast a little + doubt upon these books. + </p> + <p> + Eleventh. Within the present century manuscript copies of the Old + Testament have been found throwing new light and changing in many + instances the present readings. In consequence a new version is now being + made by a theological syndicate composed of English and American divines, + and after this is published it may be that our present Bible will fall + into disrepute. + </p> + <p> + Twelfth. The fact that language is continually changing, that words are + constantly dying and others being born; that the same word has a variety + of meanings during its life, shows hew hard it is to preserve the original + ideas that might have been expressed in the Scriptures, for thousands of + years, without dictionaries, without the art of printing, and without the + light of contemporaneous literature. + </p> + <p> + Thirteenth. Whatever there was of the Old Testament seems to have been + lost from the time of Moses until the days of Josiah, and it is probable + that nothing like the Bible existed in any permanent form among the Jews + until a few hundred years before Christ. It is said that Ezra gave the + Pentateuch to the Jews, but whether he found or originated it is unknown. + So it is claimed that Nehemiah gathered up the manuscripts about the kings + and prophets, while the books of Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ruth, + Ecclesiastes, and some others were either collected or written long after. + The Jews themselves did not agree as to what books were really inspired. + </p> + <p> + Fourteenth. In the Old Testament we find several contradictory laws about + the same thing, and contradictory accounts of the same occurrences. In the + twentieth chapter of Exodus we find the first account of the giving of the + Ten Commandments. In the thirty-fourth chapter another account is given. + These two accounts could never have been written by the same person. Read + these two accounts and you will be forced to admit that one of them cannot + be true. So there are two histories of the creation, of the flood, and of + the manner in which Saul became king. + </p> + <p> + Fifteenth. It is now generally admitted that Genesis must have been + written by two persons, and the parts written by each can be separated, + and when separated they are found to contradict each other in many + important particulars. + </p> + <p> + Sixteenth. It is also admitted that copyists made verbal changes not only, + but pieced out fragments; that the speeches of Elihu in the book of Job + were all interpolated, and that most of the prophecies were made by + persons whose names we have never known. + </p> + <p> + Seventeenth. The manuscripts of the Old Testament were not alike, and the + Greek version differed from the Hebrew, and there was no absolutely + received text of the Old Testament until after the commencement of the + Christian era. Marks and points to denote vowels were invented probably + about the seventh century after Christ. Whether these vowels were put in + the proper places or not is still an open question. + </p> + <p> + Eighteenth. The Alexandrian version, or what is known as the Septuagint, + translated by seventy learned Jews, assisted by "miraculous power," about + two hundred years before Christ, could not have been, it is said, + translated from the Hebrew text that we now have. The differences can only + be accounted for by supposing that they had a different Hebrew text. The + early Christian Churches adopted the Septuagint, and were satisfied for a + time. But so many errors were found, and so many were scanning every word + in search of something to sustain their peculiar views, that several new + versions appeared, all different somewhat from the Hebrew manuscripts, + from the Septuagint, and from each other. All these versions were in + Greek. The first Latin Bible originated in Africa, but no one has ever + found out which Latin manuscript was the original. Many were produced, and + all differed from each other. These Latin versions were compared with each + other and with the Hebrew, and a new Latin version was made in the fifth + century, but the old Latin versions held their own for about four hundred + years, and no one yet knows which were right. Besides these there were + Egyptian, Ethiopie, Armenian, and several others, all differing from each + other as well as from all others in the world. + </p> + <p> + It was not until the fourteenth century that the Bible was translated into + German, and not until the fifteenth that Bibles were printed in the + principal languages of Europe. Of these Bibles there were several kinds—Luther's, + the Dort, King James's, Genevan, French, besides the Danish and Swedish. + Most of these differed from each other, and gave rise to infinite disputes + and crimes without number. The earliest fragment of the Bible in the + "Saxon" language known to exist was written sometime in the seventh + century. The first Bible was printed in England in 1538. In 1560 the first + English Bible was printed that was divided into verses. Under Henry VIII. + the Bible was revised; again under Queen Elizabeth, and once again under + King James. This last was published in 1611, and is the one now in general + use. + </p> + <p> + Nineteenth. No one in the world has learning enough, nor has he time + enough even if he had the learning, and could live a thousand years, to + find out what books really belong to and constitute the Old Testament, the + authors of these books, when they were written, and what they really mean. + And until a man has the learning and the time to do all this he cannot + certainly tell whether he believes the Bible or not. + </p> + <p> + Twentieth. If a revelation from God was actually necessary to the + happiness of man here and to his salvation hereafter, it is not easy to + see why such revelation was not given to all the nations of the earth. Why + were the millions of Asia, Egypt, and America left to the insufficient + light of nature. Why was not a written, or what is still better, a printed + revelation given to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden? And why were the + Jews themselves without a Bible until the days of Ezra the scribe? Why was + nature not so made that it would give light enough? Why did God make men + and leave them in darkness—a darkness that he, knew would fill the + world with want and crime, and crowd with damned souls the dungeons of his + hell? Were the Jews the only people who needed a revelation? It may be + said that God had no time to waste with other nations, and gave the Bible + to the Jews that other nations through them might learn of his existence + and his will. If he wished other nations to be informed, and revealed + himself to but one, why did he not choose a people that mingled with + others? Why did he give the message to those who had no commerce, who were + obscure and unknown, and who regarded other nations with the hatred born + of bigotry and weakness? What would we now think of a God who made his + will known to the South Sea Islanders for the benefit of the civilized + world? If it was of such vast importance for man to know that there is a + God, why did not God make himself known? This fact could have been + revealed by an infinite being instantly to all, and there certainly was no + necessity of telling it alone to the Jews, and allowing millions for + thousands of years to die in utter ignorance. + </p> + <p> + Twenty-first. The Chinese, Japanese, Hindus, Tartars, Africans, Eskimo, + Persians, Turks, Kurds, Arabs, Polynesians, and many other peoples, are + substantially ignorant of the Bible. All the Bible societies of the world + have produced only about one hundred and twenty millions of Bibles, and + there are about fourteen hundred million people. There are hundreds of + languages and tongues in which no Bible has yet been printed. Why did God + allow, and why does he still allow, a vast majority of his children to + remain in ignorance of his will? + </p> + <p> + Twenty-second. If the Bible is the foundation of all civilization, of all + just ideas of right and wrong, of our duties to God and each other, why + did God not give to each nation at least one copy to start with? He must + have known that no nation could get along successfully without a Bible, + and he also knew that man could not make one for himself. Why, then, were + not the books furnished? He must have known that the light of nature was + not sufficient to reveal the scheme of the atonement, the necessity of + baptism, the immaculate conception, transubstantiation, the arithmetic of + the Trinity, or the resurrection of the dead. + </p> + <p> + Twenty-third. It is probably safe to say that not one-third of the + inhabitants of this world ever heard of the Bible, and not one-tenth ever + read it. It is also safe to say that no two persons who ever read it + agreed as to its meaning, and it is not likely that even one person has + ever understood it. Nothing is more needed at the present time than an + inspired translator. Then we shall need an inspired commentator, and the + translation and the commentary should be written in an inspired universal + language, incapable of change, and then the whole world should be inspired + to understand this language precisely the same. Until these things are + accomplished, all written revelations from God will fill the world with + contending sects, contradictory creeds and opinions. + </p> + <p> + Twenty-fourth. All persons who know anything of constitutions and laws + know how impossible it is to use words that will convey the same ideas to + all. The best statesmen, the profoundest lawyers, differ as widely about + the real meaning of treaties and statutes as do theologians about the + Bible. When the differences of lawyers are left to courts, and the courts + give written decisions, the lawyers will again differ as to the real + meaning of the opinions. Probably no two lawyers in the United States + understand our Constitution alike. To allow a few men to tell what the + Constitution means, and to hang for treason all who refuse to accept the + opinions of these few men, would accomplish in politics what most churches + have asked for in religion. + </p> + <p> + Twenty-fifth. Is it very wicked to deny that the universe was created of + nothing by an infinite being who existed from all eternity? The human mind + is such that it cannot possibly conceive of creation, neither can it + conceive of an infinite being who dwelt in infinite space an infinite + length of time. + </p> + <p> + Twenty-sixth. The idea that the universe was made in six days, and is but + about six thousand years old, is too absurd for serious refutation. + Neither will it do to say that the six days were six periods, because this + does away with the Sabbath, and is in direct violation of the text. + </p> + <p> + Twenty-seventh. Neither is it reasonable that this God made man out of + dust, and woman out of one of the ribs of the man; that this pair were put + in a garden; that they were deceived by a snake that had the power of + speech; that they were turned out of this garden to prevent them from + eating of the tree of life and becoming immortal; that God himself made + them clothes; that the sons of God intermarried with the daughters of men; + that to destroy all life upon the earth a flood was sent that covered the + highest mountains; that Noah and his sons built an ark and saved some of + all animals as well as themselves; that the people tried to build a tower + that would reach to heaven; that God confounded their language, and in + this way frustrated their design. + </p> + <p> + Twenty-eighth. It is hard to believe that God talked to Abraham as one man + talks to another; that he gave him land that he pointed out; that he + agreed to give him land that he never did; that he ordered him to murder + his own son; that angels were in the habit of walking about the earth + eating veal dressed with butter and milk, and making bargains about the + destruction of cities. + </p> + <p> + Twenty-ninth. Certainly a man ought not to be eternally damned for + entertaining an honest doubt about a woman having been turned into a + pillar of salt, about cities being destroyed by storms of fire and + brimstone, and about people once having lived for nearly a thousand years. + </p> + <p> + Thirtieth. Neither is it probable that God really wrestled with Jacob and + put his thigh out of joint, and that for that reason the Jews refused "to + eat the sinew that shrank," as recounted in the thirty-second chapter of + Genesis; that God in the likeness of a flame inhabited a bush; that he + amused himself by changing the rod of Moses into a serpent, and making his + hand leprous as snow. + </p> + <p> + Thirty-first. One can scarcely be blamed for hesitating to believe that + God met Moses at a hotel and tried to kill him that afterward he made this + same Moses a god to Pharaoh, and gave him his brother Aaron for a + prophet;2 that he turned all the ponds and pools and streams and all the + rivers into blood,3 and all the water in vessels of wood and stone; that + the rivers thereupon brought forth frogs;4 that the frogs covered the + whole land of Egypt; that he changed dust into lice, so that all the men, + women, children, and animals were covered with them;6 that he sent swarms + of flies upon the Egyptians;8 that he destroyed the innocent cattle with + painful diseases; that he covered man and beast with blains and boils;7 + that he so covered the magicians of Egypt with boils that they could not + stand before Moses for the purpose of performing the same feats, that he + destroyed every beast and every man that was in the fields, and every + herb, and broke every tree with storm of hail and fire;9 that he sent + locusts that devoured every herb that escaped the hail, and devoured every + tree that grew;10 that he caused thick darkness over the land and put + lights in the houses of the Jews;11 that he destroyed all of the firstborn + of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh upon the throne to the firstborn + of the maidservant that sat behind the mill,"12 together with the + firstborn of all beasts, so that there was not a house in which the dead + were not." + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 Ex. iv, 24. 5 Ex. viii, 16, 17. 9 Ex. ix, 25. + + 2 Ex. vii. 1. 6 Ex. viii, 21. 10 Ex. x, 15. + + 3 Ex. viii, 19. 7 Ex. ix, 9. 11 Ex. x, 22, 23. + + 4 Ex. viii, 3. 8 Ex. ix, 11. 12 Ex. xi, 5. + + 13 Ex. xii, 29. +</pre> + <p> + Thirty-second. It is very hard to believe that three millions of people + left a country and marched twenty or thirty miles all in one day. To + notify so many people would require a long time, and then the sick, the + halt, and the old would be apt to impede the march. It seems impossible + that such a vast number—six hundred thousand men, besides women and + children—could have been cared for, could have been fed and clothed, + and the sick nursed, especially when we take into consideration that "they + were thrust out of Egypt, and could not tarry, neither had they prepared + for themselves any victual." 1 + </p> + <p> + Thirty-third. It seems cruel to punish a man forever for denying that God + went before the Jews by day "in a pillar of a cloud to lead' them the way, + and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light to go by day and + night," or for denying that Pharaoh pursued the Jews with six hundred + chosen chariots, and all the chariots of Egypt, and that the six hundred + thousand men of war of the Jews were sore afraid when they saw the + pursuing hosts. It does seems strange that after all the water in a + country had been turned to blood—after it had been overrun with + frogs and devoured with flies; after all the cattle had died with the + murrain, and the rest had been killed by the fire and hail and the + remainder had suffered with boils, and the firstborn of all that were left + had died; that after locusts had devoured every herb and eaten up every + tree of the field, and the firstborn had died, from the firstborn of the + king on the throne to the firstborn of the captive in the dungeon; that + after three millions of people had left, carrying with them the jewels of + silver and gold and the raiment of their oppressors, the Egyptians still + had enough soldiers and chariots and horses left to pursue and destroy an + army of six hundred thousand men, if God had not interfered. + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 Ex. xii, 37-39 +</pre> + <p> + Thirty-fourth. It certainly ought to satisfy God to torment a man for four + or five thousand years for insisting that it is but a small thing for an + infinite being to vanquish an Egyptian army; that it was rather a small + business to trouble people with frogs, flies, and vermin; that it looked + almost malicious to cover people with boils and afflict cattle with + disease; that a real good God would not torture innocent beasts on account + of something the owners had done; that it was absurd to do miracles before + a king to induce him to act in a certain way, and then harden his heart so + that he would refuse; and that to kill all the firstborn of a nation was + the act of a heartless fiend. + </p> + <p> + Thirty-fifth. Certainly one ought to be permitted to doubt that twelve + wells of water were sufficient for three millions of people, together with + their flocks and herds,1 and to inquire a little into the nature of manna + that was cooked by baking and seething and yet would melt in the sun,2 and + that would swell or shrink so as to make an exact omer, no matter how much + or how little there really was.3 Certainly it is not a crime to say that + water cannot be manufactured by striking a rock with a stick, and that the + fate of battle cannot be decided by lifting one hand up or letting it + fall.4 Must we admit that God really did come down upon Mount Sinai in the + sight of all the people; that he commanded that all who should go up into + the Mount or touch the border of it should be put to death, and that even + the beasts that came near it should be killed?5 Is it wrong to laugh at + this? Is it sinful to say that God never spoke from the top of a mountain + covered with clouds these words to Moses, "Go down, charge the people, + lest they break through unto the Lord to gaze, and many of them perish; + and let the priests also, which come near to the Lord, sanctify + themselves, lest the Lord break forth upon them"?6 + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 Ex. xv, 27. 3 Ex. xix. 12. 5 Ex. xix, 13, 13. + + 2 Ex. xvi, 23, 21 4 Ex. xvii, 11, 13. 6 Ex. xix, 21, 22 +</pre> + <p> + Can it be that an infinite intelligence takes delight in scaring savages, + and that he is happy only when somebody trembles? Is it reasonable to + suppose that God surrounded himself with thunderings and lightnings and + thick darkness to tell the priests that they should not make altars of + hewn stones, nor with stairs? And that this God at the same time he gave + the Ten Commandments ordered the Jews to break the most of them? According + to the Bible these infamous words came from the mouth of God while he was + wrapped and clothed in darkness and clouds upon the Mount of Sinai: + </p> + <p> + If thou buy an Hebrew servant six years he shall serve: and in the seventh + he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself he shall go out + by himself; if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If + his master have given him a wife, and she have borne him sons or + daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall + go out by himself. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, + my wife, and my children; I will not go out free: then his master shall + bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door or unto the + doorpost; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he + shall serve him forever.2 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, + with a rod, and he die under his hand, he shall be surely punished. + Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished; + for he is his money.3 + </p> + <p> + Do you really think that a man will be eternally damned for endeavoring to + wipe from the record of God those barbaric words? + </p> + <p> + Thirty-sixth. Is it because of total depravity that some people refuse to + believe that God went into partnership with insects and granted letters of + marque and reprisal to hornets;4 that he wasted forty days and nights + furnishing Moses with plans and specifications for a tabernacle, an ark, a + mercy seat and two cherubs of gold, a table, four rings, some dishes and + spoons, one candlestick, three bowls, seven lamps, a pair of tongs, some + snuff dishes (for all of which God had patterns), ten curtains with fifty + loops, a roof for the tabernacle of rams' skins dyed red, a lot of boards, + an altar with horns, ash pans, basins, and flesh hooks, and fillets of + silver and pins of brass; that he told Moses to speak unto all the + wise-hearted that he had filled with wisdom, that they might make a suit + of clothes for Aaron, and that God actually gave directions that an ephod + "shall have the two shoulder-pieces thereof joined at the two edges + thereof." + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 Ex. xix, 25, 26. 3 Ex. xxi, 20, 21 + + 2 Ex. xxi, 2-6, 4 Ex, xxiii, 28 +</pre> + <p> + And gave all the orders concerning mitres, girdles, and onyx stones, + ouches, emeralds, breastplates, chains, rings, Urim and Thummim, and the + hole in the top of the ephod like the hole of a habergeon?1 + </p> + <p> + Thirty-seventh. Is there a Christian missionary who could help laughing if + in any heathen country he had seen the following command of God carried + out? "And thou shalt take the other ram; and Aaron and his sons shall put + their hands upon the head of the ram. Then shalt thou kill the ram and + take of his blood and put it upon the tip of the right ear of Aaron, and + upon the tip of the right ear of his sons, and upon the thumb of their + right hand, and upon the great toe of their right foot."2 Does one have to + be born again to appreciate the beauty and solemnity of such a + performance? Is not the faith of the most zealous Christian somewhat + shaken while reading the recipes for cooking mutton, veal, beef, birds, + and unleavened dough, found in the cook book that God made for Aaron and + his sons? + </p> + <p> + Thirty-eighth. Is it to be wondered at that some people have doubted the + statement that God told Moses how to make some ointment, hair oil, and + perfume, and then made it a crime punishable with death to make any like + them? Think of a God killing a man for imitating his ointment!3 Think of a + God saying that he made heaven and earth in six days and rested on the + seventh day and was refreshed!4 Think of this God threatening to destroy + the Jews, and being turned from his purpose because Moses told him that + the Egyptians might mock him!5 + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 Ex. xxvii and xxviii. 3 Ex. xxx, 23. 5 Ex. xxxii, 11, 12 + + 2 Ex. xxix, 19, 20 4 Ex. xxxi, 17. +</pre> + <p> + Thirty-ninth. What must we think of a man impudent enough to break in + pieces tables of stone upon which God had written with his finger? What + must we think of the goodness of a man that would issue the following + order: "Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his + side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay + every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his + neighbor. Consecrate yourselves to-day to the Lord, even every man upon + his son, and upon his brother; that he may bestow upon you a blessing this + day"?1 Is it true that the God of the Bible demanded human sacrifice? Did + it please him for man to kill his neighbor, for brother to murder his + brother, and for the father to butcher his sou? If there is a God let him + cause it to be written in the book of his memory, opposite my name, that I + refuted this slander and denied this lie. + </p> + <p> + Fortieth. Can it be true that God was afraid to trust himself with the + Jews for fear he would consume them? Can it be that in order to keep from + devouring them he kept away and sent one of his angels in his place?2 Can + it be that this same God talked to Moses "face to face, as a man speaketh + unto his friend," when it is declared in the same chapter, by God himself, + "Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live"?3 + </p> + <p> + Forty-first. Why should a man, because he has done a bad action, go and + kill a sheep? How can man make friends with God by cutting the throats of + bullocks and goats? Why should God delight in the shedding of blood? Why + should he want his altar sprinkled with blood, and the horns of his altar + tipped with blood, and his priests covered with blood? Why should burning + flesh be a sweet savor in the nostrils of God? Why did he compel his + priests to be butchers, cutters and stabbers? + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 Ex. xxxii, 27-29. 2 Ex. xxxiii, 2, 3. + + 3 Ex. xxxiii, 11, 20. +</pre> + <p> + Why should the same God kill a man for eating the fat of an ox, a sheep, + or a goat? + </p> + <p> + Forty-second. Could it be a consolation to a man when dying to think that + he had always believed that God told Aaron to take two goats and draw cuts + to see which goat should be killed and which should be a scapegoat?1 And + that upon the head of the scapegoat Aaron should lay both his hands and + confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all + their transgressions, and put them all on the head of the goat, and send + him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness; and that the goat + should bear upon him all the iniquities of the people into a land not + inhabited?2 How could a goat carry away a load of iniquities and + transgressions? Why should he carry them to a land uninhabited? Were these + sins contagious? About how many sins could an average goat carry? Could a + man meet such a goat now without laughing? + </p> + <p> + Forty-third. Why should God object to a man wearing a garment made of + woolen and linen? Why should he care whether a man rounded the corners of + his beard?3 Why should God prevent a man from offering the sacred bread + merely because he had a flat nose, or was lame, or had five fingers on one + hand, or had a broken foot, or was a dwarf? If he objected to such people, + why did he make them?4 + </p> + <p> + Forty-fourth. Why should we believe that God insisted upon the sacrifice + of human beings? Is it a sin to deny this, and to deny the inspiration of + a book that teaches it? Read the twenty-eighth and twenty-ninth verses of + the last chapter of Leviticus, a book in which there is more folly and + cruelty, more stupidity and tyranny, than in any other book in this world + except some others in the same Bible. Read the thirty-second chapter of + Exodus and you will see how by the most infamous of crimes man becomes + reconciled to this God. + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 Lev, xvi, 8. 2 Lev. xvi, 21, 22. 3 Lev. xix, 19, 27, + + 4 Lev. xxi, 18-20. +</pre> + <p> + You will see that he demands of fathers the blood of their sons. Read the + twelfth and thirteenth verses of the third chapter of Numbers, "And I, + behold, I have taken the Levites from among the children of Israel," etc. + </p> + <p> + How, in the desert of Sinai, did the Jews obtain curtains of fine linen? + How did these absconding slaves make cherubs of gold? Where did they get + the skins of badgers, and how did they dye them red? How did they make + wreathed chains and spoons, basins and tongs? Where did they get the blue + cloth and their purple? Where did they get the sockets of brass? How did + they coin the shekel of the sanctuary? How did they overlay boards with + gold? Where did they get the numberless instruments and tools necessary to + accomplish all these things? Where did they get the fine flour and the + oil? Were all these found in the desert of Sinai? Is it a sin to ask these + questions? Are all these doubts born of a malignant and depraved heart? + Why should God in this desert prohibit priests from drinking wine, and + from eating moist grapes? How could these priests get wine? + </p> + <p> + Do not these passages show that these laws were made long after the Jews + had left the desert, and that they were not given from Sinai? Can you + imagine a God silly enough to tell a horde of wandering savages upon a + desert that they must not eat any fruit of the trees they planted until + the fourth year? + </p> + <p> + Forty-fifth. Ought a man to be despised and persecuted for denying that + God ordered the priests to make women drink dirt and water to test their + virtue? 1 Or for denying that over the tabernacle there was a cloud during + the day and fire by night, and that the cloud lifted up when God wished + the Jews to travel, and that until it was lifted they remained in their + tents?2 + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 Num. v, 12-31. 2 Num. ix, 16-18. +</pre> + <p> + Can it be possible that the "ark of the covenant" traveled on its own + account, and that "when the ark set forward" the people followed, as is + related in the tenth chapter of the holy book of Numbers? + </p> + <p> + Forty-sixth. Was it reasonable for God to give the Jews manna, and nothing + else, year after year? He had infinite power, and could just as easily + have given them something good, in reasonable variety, as to have fed them + on manna until they loathed the sight of it, and longingly remembered the + fish, cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions, and garlic of Egypt. And yet when + the poor people complained of the diet and asked for a little meat, this + loving and merciful God became enraged, sent them millions of quails in + his wrath, and while they were eating, while the flesh was yet between + their teeth, before it was chewed, this amiable God smote the people with + a plague and killed all those that lusted after meat. In a few days after, + he made up his mind to kill the rest, but was dissuaded when Moses told + him that the Canaanites would laugh at him.1 No wonder the poor Jews + wished they were back in Egypt. No wonder they had rather be the slaves of + Pharaoh than the chosen people of God. No wonder they preferred the wrath + of Egypt to the love of heaven. In my judgment, the Jews would have fared + far better if Jehovah had let them alone, or had he even taken the side of + the Egyptians. + </p> + <p> + When the poor Jews were told by their spies that the Canaanites were + giants, they, seized with fear, said, "Let us go back to Egypt." For this, + their God doomed all except Joshua and Caleb to a wandering death. Hear + the words of this most merciful God: "But as for you, your carcasses they + shall fall in this wilderness, and your children shall wander in the + wilderness forty years and bear your sins until your carcasses be wasted + in the wilderness."2 And yet this same God promised to give unto all these + people a land flowing with milk and honey. + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 Num. xiv, 15, 16. 2 Num. xiv. 32-33. +</pre> + <p> + Forty-seventh. "And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness + they found a man that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath day. + </p> + <p> + "And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and + Aaron, and unto all the congregation. + </p> + <p> + "And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done + to him. + </p> + <p> + "And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death; all + the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp. + </p> + <p> + "And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him + with stones, and he died." 1 + </p> + <p> + When the last stone was thrown, and he that was a man was but a mangled, + bruised, and broken mass, this God turned, and, <i>touched with pity</i>, + said: "Speak unto the children of Israel, and bid them that they make them + fringes in the borders of their garments throughout their generations, and + that they put upon the fringe of the borders a riband of blue."2 + </p> + <p> + In the next chapter, this Jehovah, whose loving kindness is over all his + works, because Korah, Dathan, and Abiram objected to being starved to + death in the wilderness, made the earth open and swallow not only them, + but their wives and their little ones. Not yet satisfied, he sent a plague + and killed fourteen thousand seven hundred more. There never was in the + history of the world such a cruel, revengeful, bloody, jealous, fickle, + unreasonable, and fiendish ruler, emperor, or king as Jehovah. No wonder + the children of Israel cried out, "Behold we die, we perish, we all + perish." + </p> + <p> + Forty-eighth. I cannot believe that a dry stick budded, blossomed, and + bore almonds; that the ashes of a red heifer are a purification for sin;3 + that God gave the cities into the hands of the Jews because they solemnly + agreed to murder all the inhabitants; that God became enraged and induced + snakes to bite his chosen people; that God told Balaam to go with the + Princess of Moab, and then got angry because he did go; that an animal + ever saw an angel and conversed with a man. + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 Num. xv, 32-36. 2 Num. xv, 38, 3 Num. xix, 2-10. +</pre> + <p> + I cannot believe that thrusting a spear through the body of a woman ever + stayed a plague;1 that any good man ever ordered his soldiers to slay the + men and keep the maidens alive for themselves; that God commanded men not + to show mercy to each other; that he induced men to obey his commandments + by promising them that he would assist them in murdering the wives and + children of their neighbors; or that he ever commanded a man to kill his + wife because she differed with him about religion;2 or that God was + mistaken about hares chewing the cud;3 or that he objected to the people + raising horses 4 or that God wanted a camp kept clean because he walked + through it at night;5 or that he commanded widows to spit in the faces of + their brothers-in-law;6 or that he ever threatened to give anybody the + itch;7 or that he ever secretly buried a man and allowed the corpse to + write an account of the funeral. + </p> + <p> + Forty-ninth. Does it necessarily follow that a man wishes to commit some + crime if he refuses to admit that the river Jordan cut itself in two and + allowed the lower end to run away? Or that seven priests could blow seven + ram's horns loud enough to throw down the walls of a city;8 or that God, + after Achan had confessed that he had secreted a garment and a wedge of + gold, became good natured as soon as Achan and his sons and daughters had + been stoned to death and their bodies burned?10 Is it not a virtue to + abhor such a God? + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 Num. XXV, 8. 4 Deut. xvii, 16. 7 Deut. xxviii, 27. + + 2 Deut. xiii, 6-10. 5 Deut. xxiii, 13, 14. 8 Josh, iii, 16. + + 3 Deut. xiv, 7. 6 Deut. xxv, 9., 9 Josh. vi, 20. + + 10 Josh, vii, 24, 25. +</pre> + <p> + Must we believe that God sanctioned and commanded all the cruelties and + horrors described in the Old Testament; that he waged the most relentless + and heartless wars; that he declared mercy a crime; that to spare life was + to excite his wrath; that he smiled when maidens were violated, laughed + when mothers were ripped open with a sword, and shouted with joy when + babes were butchered in their mothers' arms? Read the infamous book of + Joshua, and then worship the God who inspired it if you can. + </p> + <p> + Fiftieth. Can any sane man believe that the sun stood still in the midst + of heaven and hasted not to go down about a whole day, and that the moon + stayed?1 That these miracles were performed in the interest of massacre + and bloodshed; that the Jews destroyed men, women, and children by the + million, and practiced every cruelty that the ingenuity of their God could + suggest? Is it possible that these things really happened? Is it possible + that God commanded them to be done? Again I ask you to read the book of + Joshua. After reading all its horrors you will feel a grim satisfaction in + the dying words of Joshua to the children of Israel: "Know for a certainty + that the Lord your God will no more drive out any of these nations from + before you; but they shall be snares and traps unto you, and scourges in + your sides, and thorns in your eyes, until ye perish from off this good + land."2 + </p> + <p> + Think of a God who boasted that he gave the Jews a land for which they did + not labor, cities which they did not build, and allowed them to eat of + oliveyards and vineyards which they did not plant.3 Think of a God who + murders some of his children for the benefit of the rest, and then kills + the rest because they are not thankful enough. Think of a God who had the + power to stop the sun and moon, but could not defeat an army that had iron + chariots.4 + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 Josh, x, 13. 2 Josh, xiii, 13. 3 Josh. xxiv, 13. + + 4 Judges i, 19. +</pre> + <p> + Fifty-first. Can we blame the Hebrews for getting tired of their God? + Never was a people so murdered, starved, stoned, burned, deceived, + humiliated, robbed, and outraged. Never was there so little liberty among + men. Never did the meanest king so meddle, eavesdrop, spy out, harass, + torment, and persecute his people. Never was ruler so jealous, + unreasonable, contemptible, exacting, and ignorant as this God of the + Jews. Never was such ceremony, such mummery, such stuff about bullocks, + goats, doves, red heifers, lambs, and unleavened dough—never was + such directions about kidneys and blood, ashes and fat, about curtains, + tongs, fringes, ribands, and brass pins—never such details for + killing of animals and men and the sprinkling of blood and the cutting of + clothes. Never were such unjust laws, such punishments, such damned + ignorance and infamy! Fifty-second. Is it not wonderful that the creator + of all worlds, infinite in power and wisdom, could not hold his own + against the gods of wood and stone? Is it not strange that after he had + appeared to his chosen people, delivered them from slavery, fed them by + miracles, opened the sea for a path, led them by cloud and fire, and + overthrown their pursuers, they still preferred a calf of their own + making? Is it not beyond belief that this God, by statutes and + commandments, by punishments and penalties, by rewards and promises, by + wonders and plagues, by earthquakes and pestilence, could not in the least + civilize the Jews—could not get them beyond a point where they + deserved killing? What shall we think of a God who gave his entire time + for forty years to the work of converting three millions of people, and + succeeded in getting only two men, and not a single woman, decent enough + to enter the promised land? Was there ever in the history of man so + detestible an administration of public affairs? Is it possible that God + sold his children to the king of Mesopotamia; that he sold them to Jabin, + king of Canaan, to the Philistines, and to the children of Ammon? Is it + possible that an angel of the Lord devoured unleavened cakes and broth + with fire that came out of the end of a stick as he sat under an + oak-tree?1 Can it be true that God made known his will by making dew fall + on wool without wetting the ground around it?2 Do you really believe that + men who lap water like a dog make the best soldiers?3 Do you think that a + man could hold a lamp in his left hand, a trumpet in his right hand, blow + his trumpet, shout "the sword of the Lord and of Gideon," and break + pitchers at the same time? 4 + </p> + <p> + Fifty-third. Read the story of Jephthah and his daughter, and then tell me + what you think of a father who would sacrifice his daughter to God, and + what you think of a God who would receive such a sacrifice. This one story + should be enough to make every tender and loving father hold this book in + utter abhorrence. Is it necessary, in order to be saved, that one must + believe that an angel of God appeared unto Manoah in the absence of her + husband; that this angel afterward went up in a flame of fire; that as a + result of this visit a child was born whose strength was in his hair? a + child that made beehives of lions, incendiaries of foxes, and had a wife + that wept seven days to get the answer to his riddle? Will the wrath of + God abide forever upon a man for doubting the story that Samson killed a + thousand men with a new jawbone? Is there enough in the Bible to save a + soul with this story left out? Is hell hungry for those who deny that + water gushed from a "hollow place" in a dry bone? Is it evidence of a new + heart to believe that one man turned over a house so large that over three + thousand people were on the roof? For my part, I cannot believe these + things, and if my salvation depends upon my credulity I am as good as + damned already. I cannot believe that the Philistines took back the ark + with a present of five gold mice, and that thereupon God relented.5 + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 Judges vi, 21. 2 Judges vi, 37. 3 Judges vii, 5. + + 4 Judges vii, 20. 5 I Sam. vi. 4. +</pre> + <p> + I can not believe that God killed fifty thousand men for looking into a + box.1 It seems incredible, after all the Jews had done, after all their + wars and victories, even when Saul was king, that there was not among them + one smith who could make a sword or spear, and that they were compelled to + go to the Philistines to sharpen every plowshare, coulter, and mattock.2 + Can you believe that God said to Saul, "Now go and smite Amalek, and + utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man + and woman, infant and suckling"? Can you believe that because Saul took + the king alive after killing every other man, woman, and child, the ogre + called Jehovah was displeased and made up his mind to hurl Saul from the + throne and give his place to another?3 I cannot believe that the + Philistines all ran away because one of their number was killed with a + stone. I cannot justify the conduct of Abigail, the wife of Nabal, who + took presents to David. David hardly did right when he said to this woman, + "I have hearkened to thy voice, and have accepted thy person." It could + hardly have been chance that made Nabal so deathly sick next morning and + killed him in ten days. All this looks wrong, especially as David married + his widow before poor Nabal was fairly cold.4 + </p> + <p> + Fifty-fourth. Notwithstanding all I have heard of Katie King, I cannot + believe that a witch at Endor materialized the ghost of Samuel and caused + it to appear with a cloak on.5 I cannot believe that God tempted David to + take the census, and then gave him his choice of three punishments: First, + Seven years of famine; Second, Flying three months before their enemies; + Third, A pestilence of three days; that David chose the pestilence, and + that God destroyed seventy thousand men.6 + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 I Sam. vi, 19. 3 I Sam. xv. 5 I Sam. xxviii. + + 2 I Sam. xiii, 19, 20. 4 I Sam. xxv. 6 2 Sam. xxiv. +</pre> + <p> + Why should God kill the people for what David did? Is it a sin to be + counted? Can anything more brutally hellish be conceived? Why should man + waste prayers upon such a God? + </p> + <p> + Fifty-fifth. Must we admit that Elijah was fed by ravens; that they + brought him bread and flesh every morning and evening? Must we believe + that this same prophet could create meal and oil, and induce a departed + soul to come back and take up its residence once more in the body? That he + could get rain by praying for it; that he could cause fire to burn up a + sacrifice and altar, together with twelve barrels of water?1 Can we + believe that an angel of the Lord turned cook and prepared two suppers in + one night for Elijah, and that the prophet ate enough to last him forty + days and forty nights?* Is it true that when a captain with fifty men went + after Elijah, this prophet caused fire to come down from heaven and + consume them all? Should God allow such wretches to manage his fire? Is it + true that Elijah consumed another captain with fifty men in the same way?3 + Is it a fact that a river divided because the water was struck with a + cloak? Did a man actually go to heaven in a chariot of fire drawn by + horses of fire, or was he carried to Paradise by a whirlwind? Must we + believe, in order to be good and tender fathers and mothers, that because + some "little children" mocked at an old man with a bald head, God—the + same God who said, "Suffer little children to come unto me"—sent two + she-bears out of the wood and tare forty-two of these babes? Think of the + mothers that watched and waited for their children. Think of the wailing + when these mangled ones were found, when they were brought back and + pressed to the breasts of weeping women. What an amiable gentleman Mr. + Elisha must have been.4 + </p> + <p> + Fifty-sixth. It is hard to believe that a prophet by lying on a dead body + could make it sneeze seven times.5 + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 I Kings xviii. 3 2 Kings i. 5 2 Kings iv. + + 2 I Kings xix. 4 2 Kings ii. +</pre> + <p> + It is hard to believe that being dipped seven times in the Jordan could + cure the leprosy.1 Would a merciful God curse children, and children's + children yet unborn, with leprosy for a father's fault?2 Is it possible to + make iron float in water?3 Is it reasonable to say that when a corpse + touched another corpse it came to life?4 Is it a sign that a man wants to + commit a crime because he refuses to believe that a king had a boil and + that God caused the sun to go backward in heaven so that the shadow on a + sun-dial went back ten degrees as a sign that the aforesaid would get + well?5 Is it true that this globe turned backward, that its motion was + reversed as a sign to a Jewish king? If it did not, this story is false, + and that part of the Bible is not true even if it is inspired. + </p> + <p> + Fifty-seventh. How did the Bible get lost?5 Where was the precious + Pentateuch from Moses to Josiah? How was it possible for the Jews to get + along without the directions as to fat and caul and kidney contained in + Leviticus? Without that sacred book in his possession a priest might take + up ashes and carry them out without changing his pantaloons. Such mistakes + kindled the wrath of God. + </p> + <p> + As soon as the Pentateuch was found Josiah began killing wizards and such + as had familiar spirits. + </p> + <p> + Fifty-eighth. I cannot believe that God talked to Solomon, that he visited + him in the night and asked him what he should give him; I cannot believe + that he told him, "I will give thee riches and wealth and honor, such as + none of the kings have had before thee, neither shall there any after thee + have the like."7 If Jehovah said this he was mistaken. It is not true that + Solomon had fourteen hundred chariots of war in a country without roads. + It is not true that he made gold and silver at Jerusalem as plenteous as + stones. There were several kings in his day, and thousands since, that + could have thrown away the value of Palestine without missing the amount. + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 2 Kings v. 3 2 Kings, vi. 6. 5 2 Kings xx, 1-11. + + 2 2 Kings v. 27. 4 2 Kings xiii, 21. 6 2 Kings xxii, 8. + + 7 2 Chron. i, 7, 12. +</pre> + <p> + The Holy Land was and is a wretched country. There are no monuments, no + ruins attesting former wealth and greatness. The Jews had no commerce, + knew nothing of other nations, had no luxuries, never produced a painter, + a sculptor, architect, scientist, or statesman until after the destruction + of Jerusalem. As long as Jehovah attended to their affairs they had + nothing but civil war, plague, pestilence, and famine. After he abandoned, + and the Christians ceased to persecute them, they became the most + prosperous of people. Since Jehovah, in anger and disgust, cast them away + they have produced painters, sculptors, scientists, statesmen, composers, + and philosophers. + </p> + <p> + Fifty-ninth. I cannot admit that Hiram, the King of Tyre, wrote a letter + to Solomon in which he admitted that the "God of Israel made heaven and + earth." 1 This King was not a Jew. It seems incredible that Solomon had + eighty thousand men hewing timber for the temple, with seventy thousand + bearers of burdens, and thirty-six hundred overseers.2 + </p> + <p> + Sixtieth. I cannot believe that God shuts up heaven and prevents rain, or + that he sends locusts to devour a land, or pestilence to destroy the + people.3 I cannot believe that God told Solomon that his eyes and heart + should perpetually be in the house that Solomon had built.4 + </p> + <p> + Sixty-first. I cannot believe that Solomon passed all the kings of the + earth in riches; that all the kings of the earth sought his presence and + brought presents of silver and gold, raiment, harness, spices, and mules—a + rate year by year.5 Is it possible that Shishak, a King of Egypt, invaded + Palestine with seventy thousand horsemen and twelve hundred chariots of + war?6 + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 2 Chron. ii, 12. 3 2 Chron. vii, 13. 5 2 Chron. ix, 22-24. + + 2 2 Chron. ii, 18. 4 2 Chron. vii, 16. 6 2 Chron. xii, 2, 3. +</pre> + <p> + I cannot believe that in a battle between Jeroboam and Abijah, the army of + Abijah actually slew in one day five hundred thousand chosen men.1 Does + anyone believe that Zerah, the Ethiopian, invaded Palestine with a million + men?2 I cannot believe that Jehoshaphat had a standing army of nine + hundred and sixty thousand men.3 I cannot believe that God advertised for + a liar to act as his messenger.4 I cannot believe that King Amaziah did + right in the sight of the Lord, and that he broke in pieces ten thousand + men by casting them from a precipice.5 I cannot think that God smote a + king with leprosy because he tried to burn incense.6 I cannot think that + Pekah slew one hundred and twenty thousand men in one day.7 + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + 1 2 Chron. xiii, 17. 3 2 Chron. xvii, 14-19. 5 2 Chron. xxv, 12. + + 2 2 Chron. xiv, 9. 4 2 Chron. xviii, 19-22. 6 2 Chron. xxvi, 19. + + 7 2 Chron. xxviii, 6. +</pre> + <div style="height: 6em;"> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + <table summary="" border="3" cellpadding="4"> + <tbody> + <tr> + <td> + <big><big><a + href="http://www.gutenberg.org/files/38813/38813-h/38813-h.htm"> + TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR ALL 12 EBOOKS IN THIS SET</a></big></big> + </td> + <td></td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> + </div> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll, Vol. +11 (of 12), by Robert G. Ingersoll + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WORKS OF INGERSOLL *** + +***** This file should be named 38811-h.htm or 38811-h.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + http://www.gutenberg.org/3/8/8/1/38811/ + +Produced by David Widger + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at +http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://pglaf.org + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://pglaf.org + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + + +</pre> + </body> +</html> diff --git a/38811-h/images/frontispiece.jpg b/38811-h/images/frontispiece.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..a65bbd9 --- /dev/null +++ b/38811-h/images/frontispiece.jpg diff --git a/38811-h/images/titlepage.jpg b/38811-h/images/titlepage.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..38fe04e --- /dev/null +++ b/38811-h/images/titlepage.jpg |
