14 files changed, 71843 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6833f05
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+* text=auto
+*.txt text
+*.md text
diff --git a/38811-8.txt b/38811-8.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..72ced62
--- /dev/null
+++ b/38811-8.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,17495 @@
+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]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WORKS OF INGERSOLL ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by David Widger
+
+
+
+
+
+
+THE WORKS OF ROBERT G. INGERSOLL
+
+By Robert G. Ingersoll
+
+"TO PLOW IS TO PRAY; TO PLANT IS TO PROPHESY, AND THE HARVEST ANSWERS
+AND FULFILLS."
+
+IN TWELVE VOLUMES, VOLUME XI.
+
+MISCELLANY
+
+1900
+
+DRESDEN EDITION
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS OF VOLUME XI.
+
+
+ADDRESS ON THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT.
+
+Introduction by Frederick Douglass("Abou Ben Adhem")--Decision of
+the United States Supreme Court pronouncing the Civil Rights Act
+Unconstitutional--Limitations of Judges--Illusion Destroyed by the
+Decision in the Dred Scott Case--Mistake of Our Fathers in adopting
+the Common Law of England--The 13th Amendment to the Constitution
+Quoted--The Clause of the Constitution upholding Slavery--Effect of
+this Clause--Definitions of a State by Justice Wilson and Chief Justice
+Chase--Effect of the Thirteenth Amendment--Justice Field on Involuntary
+Servitude--Civil Rights Act Quoted--Definition of the Word Servitude by
+the Supreme Court--Obvious Purpose of the Amendment--Justice Miller
+on the 14th Amendment--Citizens Created by this Amendment--Opinion
+of Justice Field--Rights and Immunities guaranteed by the
+Constitution--Opinion delivered by Chief-Justice Waite--Further Opinions
+of Courts on the question of Citizenship--Effect of the 13th, 14th and
+15th Amendments--"Corrective" Legislation by Congress--Denial of equal
+"Social" Privileges--Is a State responsible for the Action of its Agent
+when acting contrary to Law?--The Word "State" must include the People
+of the State as well as the Officers of the State--The Louisiana Civil
+Rights Law, and a Case tried under it--Uniformity of Duties essential to
+the Carrier--Congress left Powerless to protect Rights conferred by the
+Constitution--Definition of "Appropriate Legislation"--Propositions laid
+down regarding the Sovereignty of the State, the powers of the General
+Government, etc.--A Tribute to Justice Harlan--A Denial that Property
+exists by Virtue of Law--Civil Rights not a Question of Social
+Equality--Considerations upon which Social Equality depends--Liberty not
+a Question of Social Equality--The Superior Man--Inconsistencies of the
+Past--No Reason why we should Hate the Colored People--The Issues that
+are upon Us.
+
+TRIAL OF C. B. REYNOLDS FOR BLASPHEMY.
+
+ADDRESS TO THE JURY.
+
+Report of the Case from the New York Times (note)--The Right to express
+Opinions--Attempts to Rule the Minds of Men by Force--Liberty the
+Greatest Good--Intellectual Hospitality Defined--When the Catholic
+Church had Power--Advent of the Protestants--The Puritans, Quakers.
+Unitarians, Universalists--What is Blasphemy?--Why this Trial should not
+have Taken Place--Argument cannot be put in Jail--The Constitution of
+New Jersey--A higher Law than Men can Make--The Blasphemy Statute
+Quoted and Discussed--Is the Statute Constitutional?--The Harm done
+by Blasphemy Laws--The Meaning of this Persecution--Religions are
+Ephemeral--Let us judge each other by our Actions--Men who have braved
+Public Opinion should be Honored--The Blasphemy Law if enforced would
+rob the World of the Results of Scientific Research--It declares the
+Great Men of to-day to be Criminals--The Indictment Read and Commented
+upon--Laws that go to Sleep--Obsolete Dogmas the Denial of which was
+once punished by Death--Blasphemy Characterized--On the Argument
+that Blasphemy Endangers the Public Peace--A Definition of real
+Blasphemy--Trials for Blasphemy in England--The case of Abner
+Kneeland--True Worship, Prayer, and Religion--What is Holy and
+Sacred--What is Claimed in this Case--For the Honor of the State--The
+word Liberty--Result of the Trial (note).
+
+GOD IN THE CONSTITUTION.
+
+The Feudal System--Office and Purpose of our Constitution--Which God
+shall we Select?--The Existence of any God a Matter of Opinion--What is
+entailed by a Recognition of a God in the Constitution--Can the Infinite
+be Flattered with a Constitutional Amendment?--This government is
+Secular--The Government of God a Failure--The Difference between the
+Theological and the Secular Spirit--A Nation neither Christian nor
+Infidel--The Priest no longer a Necessity--Progress of Science and the
+Development of the Mind.
+
+A REPLY TO BISHOP SPALDING.
+
+On God in the Constitution--Why the Constitutional Convention ignored
+the Question of Religion--The Fathers Misrepresented--Reasons why the
+Attributes of God should not form an Organic Part of the Law of the
+Land--The Effect of a Clause Recognizing God.
+
+CRIMES AGAINST CRIMINALS.
+
+The Three Pests of a Community--I. Forms of Punishment and Torture--More
+Crimes Committed than Prevented by Governments--II. Are not Vices
+transmitted by Nature?--111. Is it Possible for all People to be
+Honest?--Children of Vice as the natural Product of Society--Statistics:
+the Relation between Insanity, Pauperism, and Crime--IV. The Martyrs of
+Vice--Franklin's Interest in the Treatment of Prisoners--V. Kindness
+as a Remedy--Condition of the Discharged Prisoner--VI. Compensation
+for Convicts--VII. Professional Criminals--Shall the Nation take
+Life?--Influence of Public Executions on the Spectators--Lynchers
+for the Most Part Criminals at Heart--VIII. The Poverty of the Many a
+perpetual Menace--Limitations of Land-holding.--IX. Defective Education
+by our Schools--Hands should be educated as well as Head--Conduct
+improved by a clearer Perception of Consequences--X. The Discipline of
+the average Prison Hardening and Degrading--While Society cringes before
+Great Thieves there will be Little Ones to fill the Jails--XI. Our
+Ignorance Should make us Hesitate.
+
+A WOODEN GOD.
+
+On Christian and Chinese worship--Report of the Select Committee
+on Chinese Immigration--The only true God as contrasted with
+Joss--Sacrifices to the "Living God"--Messrs. Wright, Dickey, O'Connor
+and Murch on the "Religious System" of the American Union--How to prove
+that Christians are better than Heathens--Injustice in the Name of
+God--An honest Merchant the best Missionary--A Few Extracts from
+Confucius--The Report proves that the Wise Men of China who predicted
+that Christians could not be Trusted were not only Philosophers but
+Prophets.
+
+SOME INTERROGATION POINTS.
+
+A New Party and its Purpose--The Classes that Exist in every
+Country--Effect of Education on the Common People--Wants Increased by
+Intelligence--The Dream of 1776--The Monopolist and the Competitor--The
+War between the Gould and Mackay Cables--Competition between
+Monopolies--All Advance in Legislation made by Repealing Laws--Wages
+and Values not to be fixed by Law--Men and Machines--The Specific of
+the Capitalist: Economy--The poor Man and Woman devoured by
+their Fellow-men--Socialism one of the Worst Possible forms of
+Slavery--Liberty not to be exchanged for Comfort--Will the Workers
+always give their Earnings for the Useless?--Priests, Successful Frauds,
+and Robed Impostors.
+
+ART AND MORALITY.
+
+The Origin of Man's Thoughts--The imaginative Man--"Medicinal View" of
+Poetry--Rhyme and Religion--The theological Poets and their Purpose in
+Writing--Moral Poets and their "Unwelcome Truths"--The really Passionate
+are the Virtuous--Difference between the Nude and the Naked--Morality
+the Melody of Conduct--The inculcation of Moral Lessons not contemplated
+by Artists or great Novelists--Mistaken Reformers--Art not a
+Sermon--Language a Multitude of Pictures--Great Pictures and Great
+Statues painted and chiseled with Words--Mediocrity moral from a
+Necessity which it calls Virtue--Why Art Civilizes--The Nude--The Venus
+de Milo--This is Art.
+
+THE DIVIDED HOUSEHOLD OF FAITH.
+
+The Way in which Theological Seminaries were Endowed--Religious
+Guide-boards--Vast Interests interwoven with Creeds--Pretensions of
+Christianity--Kepler's Discovery of his Three Great Laws--Equivocations
+and Evasions of the Church--Nature's Testimony against the
+Bible--The Age of Man on the Earth--"Inspired" Morality of the
+Bible--Miracles--Christian Dogmas--What the church has been Compelled to
+Abandon--The Appeal to Epithets, Hatred and Punishment--"Spirituality"
+the last Resource of the Orthodox--What is it to be Spiritual?--Two
+Questions for the Defenders of Orthodox Creeds.
+
+WHY AM I AN AGNOSTIC?
+
+Part I. Inharmony of Nature and the Lot of Man with the Goodness and
+Wisdom of a supposed Deity--Why a Creator is Imagined--Difficulty of the
+Act of Creation--Belief in Supernatural Beings--Belief and Worship among
+Savages--Questions of Origin and Destiny--Progress impossible without
+Change of Belief--Circumstances Determining Belief--How may the
+True Religion be Ascertained?--Prosperity of Nations nor Virtue
+of Individuals Dependent on Religions or Gods--Uninspired Books
+Superior--Part II. The Christian Religion--Credulity--Miracles cannot
+be Established--Effect of Testimony--Miraculous Qualities of all
+Religions--Theists and Naturalists--The Miracle of Inspiration--How
+can the alleged Fact of Inspiration be Established?--God's work and
+Man's--Rewards for Falsehood offered by the Church.
+
+HUXLEY AND AGNOSTICISM.
+
+Statement by the Principal of King's College--On the Irrelevancy of a
+Lack of Scientific Knowledge--Difference between the Agnostic and
+the Christian not in Knowledge but in Credulity--The real name of
+an Agnostic said to be "Infidel"--What an Infidel is--"Unpleasant"
+significance of the Word--Belief in Christ--"Our Lord and his Apostles"
+possibly Honest Men--Their Character not Invoked--Possession by evil
+spirits--Professor Huxley's Candor and Clearness--The splendid Dream
+of Auguste Comte--Statement of the Positive Philosophy--Huxley and
+Harrison.
+
+ERNEST RENAN.
+
+His Rearing and his Anticipated Biography--The complex Character of the
+Christ of the Gospels--Regarded as a Man by Renan--The Sin against the
+Holy Ghost--Renan on the Gospels--No Evidence that they were written
+by the Men whose Names they Bear--Written long after the Events they
+Describe--Metaphysics of the Church found in the Gospel of John--Not
+Apparent why Four Gospels should have been Written--Regarded as
+legendary Biographies--In "flagrant contradiction one with another"--The
+Divine Origin of Christ an After-growth--Improbable that he intended to
+form a Church--Renan's Limitations--Hebrew Scholarship--His "People of
+Israel"--His Banter and Blasphemy.
+
+TOLSTOY AND "THE KREUTZER SONATA."
+
+Tolstoy's Belief and Philosophy--His Asceticism--His View of Human
+Love--Purpose of "The Kreutzer Sonata"--Profound Difference between the
+Love of Men and that of Women--Tolstoy cannot now found a Religion, but
+may create the Necessity for another Asylum--The Emotions--The Curious
+Opinion Dried Apples have of Fruit upon the Tree--Impracticability of
+selling All and giving to the Poor--Love and Obedience--Unhappiness in
+the Marriage Relation not the fault of Marriage.
+
+THOMAS PAINE.
+
+Life by Moncure D. Conway--Early Advocacy of Reforms against Dueling
+and Cruelty to Animals--The First to write "The United States of
+America"--Washington's Sentiment against Separation from Great
+Britain--Paine's Thoughts in the Declaration of Independence--Author of
+the first Proclamation of Emancipation in America--Establishment of a
+Fund for the Relief of the Army--H's "Farewell Address"--The "Rights of
+Man"--Elected to the French Convention--Efforts to save the Life of the
+King--His Thoughts on Religion--Arrested--The "Age of Reason" and the
+Weapons it has furnished "Advanced Theologians"--Neglect by Gouverneur
+Morris and Washington--James Monroe's letter to Paine and to the
+Committee of General Safety--The vaunted Religious Liberty of
+Colonial Maryland--Orthodox Christianity at the Beginning of the 19th
+Century--New Definitions of God--The Funeral of Paine.
+
+THE THREE PHILANTHROPISTS.
+
+I. Mr. A., the Professional Philanthropist, who established a Colony
+for the Enslavement of the Poor who could not take care of themselves,
+amassed a large Fortune thereby, built several churches, and earned
+the Epitaph, "He was the Providence of the Poor"--II. Mr. B.,
+the Manufacturer, who enriched himself by taking advantage of the
+Necessities of the Poor, paid the lowest Rate of Wages, considered
+himself one of God's Stewards, endowed the "B Asylum" and the "B
+College," never lost a Dollar, and of whom it was recorded, "He Lived
+for Others." III. Mr. C., who divided his Profits with the People who had
+earned it, established no Public Institutions, suppressed Nobody; and
+those who have worked for him said, "He allowed Others to live for
+Themselves."
+
+SHOULD THE CHINESE BE EXCLUDED?
+
+Trampling on the Rights of Inferiors--Rise of the Irish and Germans
+to Power--The Burlingame Treaty--Character of Chinese Laborers--Their
+Enemies in the Pacific States--Violation of Treaties--The Geary Law--The
+Chinese Hated for their Virtues--More Piety than Principle among the
+People's Representatives--Shall we go back to Barbarism?
+
+A WORD ABOUT EDUCATION.
+
+What the Educated Man Knows--Necessity of finding out the Facts
+of Nature--"Scholars" not always Educated Men; from necessaries to
+luxuries; who may be called educated; mental misers; the first duty of
+man; university education not necessary to usefulness, no advantage in
+learning useless facts.
+
+WHAT I WANT FOR CHRISTMAS.
+
+Would have the Kings and Emperors resign, the Nobility drop their
+Titles, the Professors agree to teach only What they Know, the
+Politicians changed to Statesmen, the Editors print only the
+Truth--Would like to see Drunkenness and Prohibition abolished,
+Corporal Punishment done away with, and the whole World free.
+
+FOOL FRIENDS.
+
+The Fool Friend believes every Story against you, never denies a Lie
+unless it is in your Favor, regards your Reputation as Common Prey,
+forgets his Principles to gratify your Enemies, and is so friendly that
+you cannot Kick him.
+
+INSPIRATION.
+
+Nature tells a different Story to all Eyes and Ears--Horace Greeley and
+the Big Trees--The Man who "always did like rolling land"--What the
+Snow looked like to the German--Shakespeare's different Story for each
+Reader--As with Nature so with the Bible.
+
+THE TRUTH OF HISTORY.
+
+People who live by Lying--A Case in point--H. Hodson Rugg's Account of
+the Conversion of Ingersoll and 5,000 of his Followers--The "Identity of
+Lost Israel with the British Nation"--Old Falsehoods about Infidels--The
+New York Observer and Thomas Paine--A Rascally English Editor--The
+Charge that Ingersoll's Son had been Converted--The Fecundity of
+Falsehood.
+
+HOW TO EDIT A LIBERAL PAPER.
+
+The Editor should not narrow his Horizon so that he can see only
+One Thing--To know the Defects of the Bible is but the Beginning of
+Wisdom--The Liberal Paper should not discuss Theological Questions
+Alone--A Column for Children--Candor and Kindness--Nothing should be
+Asserted that is not Known--Above All, teach the Absolute Freedom of the
+Mind.
+
+SECULARISM.
+
+The religion of Humanity; what it Embraces and what it Advocates--A
+Protest against Ecclesiastical Tyranny--Believes in Building a Home
+here--Means Food and Fireside--The Right to express your Thought--Its
+advice to every Human Being--A Religion without Mysteries, Miracles, or
+Persecutions.
+
+CRITICISM OF "ROBERT ELSMERE," "JOHN WARD, PREACHER," AND "AN AFRICAN FARM."
+
+Religion unsoftened by Infidelity--The Orthodox Minister whose Wife has
+a Heart--Honesty of Opinion not a Mitigating Circumstance--Repulsiveness
+of an Orthodox Life--John Ward an Object of Pity--Lyndall of the
+"African Farm"--The Story of the Hunter--Death of Waldo--Women the
+Caryatides of the Church--Attitude of Christianity toward other
+Religions--Egotism of the ancient Jews.
+
+THE LIBEL LAWS.
+
+All Articles appearing in a newspaper should be Signed by the
+Writer--The Law if changed should throw greater Safeguards around the
+Reputation of the Citizen--Pains should be taken to give Prominence to
+Retractions--The Libel Laws like a Bayonet in War.
+
+REV. DR. NEWTON'S SERMON ON A NEW RELIGION.
+
+Mr. Newton not Regarded as a Sceptic--New Meanings given to Old
+Words--The vanishing Picture of Hell--The Atonement--Confidence being
+Lost in the Morality of the Gospel--Exclusiveness of the Churches--The
+Hope of Immortality and Belief in God have Nothing to do with Real
+Religion--Special Providence a Mistake.
+
+AN ESSAY ON CHRISTMAS.
+
+The Day regarded as a Holiday--A Festival far older
+than Christianity--Relics of Sun-worship in Christian
+Ceremonies--Christianity furnished new Steam for an old Engine--Pagan
+Festivals correspond to Ours--Why Holidays are Popular--They must be for
+the Benefit of the People.
+
+HAS FREETHOUGHT A CONSTRUCTIVE SIDE?
+
+The Object of Freethought--what the Religionist calls "Affirmative
+and Positive"--The Positive Side of Freethought--Constructive Work of
+Christianity.
+
+THE IMPROVED MAN.
+
+He will be in Favor of universal Liberty, neither Master nor Slave; of
+Equality and Education; will develop in the Direction of the Beautiful;
+will believe only in the Religion of this World--His Motto--Will not
+endeavor to change the Mind of the "Infinite"--Will have no Bells or
+Censers--Will be satisfied that the Supernatural does not exist--Will be
+Self-poised, Independent, Candid and Free.
+
+EIGHT HOURS MUST COME.
+
+The Working People should be protected by Law--Life of no particular
+Importance to the Man who gets up before Daylight and works till
+after Dark--A Revolution probable in the Relations between Labor and
+Capital--Working People becoming Educated and more Independent--The
+Government can Aid by means of Good Laws--Women the worst Paid--There
+should be no Resort to Force by either Labor or Capital.
+
+THE JEWS.
+
+Much like People of other Religions--Teaching given Christian Children
+about those who die in the Faith of Abraham--Dr. John Hall on
+the Persecution of the Jews in Russia as the Fulfillment of
+Prophecy--Hostility of Orthodox early Christians excited by Jewish
+Witnesses against the Faith--An infamous Chapter of History--Good
+and bad Men of every Faith--Jews should outgrow their own
+Superstitions--What the intelligent Jew Knows.
+
+CRUMBLING CREEDS.
+
+The Common People called upon to Decide as between the Universities and
+the Synods--Modern Medicine, Law, Literature and Pictures as against the
+Old--Creeds agree with the Sciences of their Day--Apology the Prelude
+to Retreat--The Presbyterian Creed Infamous, but no worse than
+the Catholic--Progress begins when Expression of Opinion is
+Allowed--Examining the Religions of other Countries--The Pulpit's
+Position Lost--The Dogma of Eternal Pain the Cause of the orthodox
+Creeds losing Popularity--Every Church teaching this Infinite Lie must
+Fall.
+
+OUR SCHOOLS.
+
+Education the only Lever capable of raising Mankind--The
+School-house more Important than the Church--Criticism of New York's
+School-Buildings--The Kindergarten System Recommended--Poor Pay of
+Teachers--The great Danger to the Republic is Ignorance.
+
+VIVISECTION.
+
+The Hell of Science--Brutal Curiosity of Vivisectors--The Pretence that
+they are working for the Good of Man--Have these scientific Assassins
+added to useful Knowledge?--No Good to the Race to be Accomplished by
+Torture--The Tendency to produce a Race of intelligent Wild Beasts.
+
+THE CENSUS ENUMERATOR'S OFFICIAL CATECHISM.
+
+Right of the Government to ask Questions and of the Citizen to refuse
+to answer them--Matters which the Government has no Right to pry
+into--Exposing the Debtor's financial Condition--A Man might decline to
+tell whether he has a Chronic Disease or not.
+
+THE AGNOSTIC CHRISTMAS.
+
+Natural Phenomena and Myths celebrated--The great Day of the first
+Religion, Sun-worship--A God that Knew no Hatred nor Sought Revenge--The
+Festival of Light.
+
+SPIRITUALITY.
+
+A much-abused Word--The Early Christians too Spiritual to be
+Civilized--Calvin and Knox--Paine, Voltaire and Humboldt not
+Spiritual--Darwin also Lacking--What it is to be really Spiritual--No
+connection with Superstition.
+
+SUMTER'S GUN.
+
+What were thereby blown into Rags and Ravelings--The Birth of a
+new Epoch announced--Lincoln made the most commanding Figure of the
+Century--Story of its Echoes.
+
+WHAT INFIDELS HAVE DONE.
+
+What might have been Asked of a Christian 100 years after
+Christ--Hospitals and Asylums not all built for Charity--Girard
+College--Lick Observatory--Carnegie not an Orthodox Christian--Christian
+Colleges--Give us Time.
+
+CRUELTY IN THE ELMIRA REFORMATORY.
+
+Brockway a Savage--The Lash will neither develop the Brain nor cultivate
+the Heart--Brutality a Failure--Bishop Potter's apostolical Remark.
+
+LAW'S DELAY.
+
+The Object of a Trial--Justice can afford to Wait--The right of
+Appeal--Case of Mrs. Maybrick--Life Imprisonment for Murderers--American
+Courts better than the English.
+
+BIGOTRY OF COLLEGES.
+
+Universities naturally Conservative--Kansas State University's
+Objection to Ingersoll as a commencement Orator--Comment by Mr. Depew
+(note)--Action of Cornell and the University of Missouri.
+
+A YOUNG MAN'S CHANCES TO-DAY.
+
+The Chances a few Years ago--Capital now Required--Increasing
+competition in Civilized Life--Independence the first Object--If he has
+something to say, there will be plenty to listen.
+
+SCIENCE AND SENTIMENT.
+
+Science goes hand in hand with Imagination--Artistic and Ethical
+Development--Science destroys Superstition, not true Religion--Education
+preferable to Legislation--Our Obligation to our Children.
+
+"SOWING AND REAPING."
+
+Moody's Belief accounted for--A dishonest and corrupting Doctrine--A
+want of Philosophy and Sense--Have Souls in Heaven no Regrets?--Mr.
+Moody should read some useful Books.
+
+SHOULD INFIDELS SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO SUNDAY SCHOOL?
+
+Teachings of orthodox Sunday Schools--The ferocious God of the
+Bible--Miracles--A Christian in Constantinople would not send his
+Child to a Mosque--Advice to all Agnostics--Strangle the Serpent of
+Superstition.
+
+WHAT WOULD YOU SUBSTITUTE FOR THE BIBLE AS A MORAL GUIDE?
+
+Character of the Bible--Men and Women not virtuous because of any
+Book--The Commandments both Good and Bad--Books that do not help
+Morality--Jehovah not a moral God--What is Morality?--Intelligence the
+only moral guide.
+
+GOVERNOR ROLLINS' FAST-DAY PROCLAMATION.
+
+Decline of the Christian Religion in New Hampshire--Outgrown
+Beliefs--Present-day Views of Christ and the Holy Ghost--Abandoned
+Notions about the Atonement--Salvation for Credulity--The Miracles
+of the New Testament--The Bible "not true but inspired"--The "Higher
+Critics" riding two Horses--Infidelity in the Pulpit--The "restraining
+Influences of Religion" as illustrated by Spain and Portugal--Thinking,
+Working and Praying--The kind of Faith that has Departed.
+
+A LOOK BACKWARD AND A PROPHECY.
+
+The _Truth Seeker_ congratulated on its Twenty-fifth Birthday--Teachings
+of Twenty-five Years ago--Dodging and evading--The Clerical Assault
+on Darwin--Draper, Buckle, Hegel, Spencer, Emerson--Comparison
+of Prejudices--Vanished Belief in the Devil--Matter and
+Force--Contradictions Dwelling in Unity--Substitutes for Jehovah--A
+Prophecy.
+
+POLITICAL MORALITY.
+
+Argument in the contested Election Case of Strobach against Herbert--The
+Importance of Honest Elections--Poisoning the Source of Justice--The
+Fraudulent Voter a Traitor to his Sovereign, the Will of the
+People--Political Morality Imperative.
+
+A FEW REASONS FOR DOUBTING THE INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE.
+
+Date and Manner of Composing the Old Testament--Other Books not now in
+Existence, and Disagreements about the Canon--Composite Character of
+certain Books--Various Versions--Why was God's message given to the Jews
+alone?--The Story of the Creation, of the Flood, of the Tower, and
+of Lot's wife--Moses and Aaron and the Plagues of Egypt--Laws of
+Slavery--Instructions by Jehovah Calculated to excite Astonishment and
+Mirth--Sacrifices and the Scapegoat--Passages showing that the Laws of
+Moses were made after the Jews had left the Desert--Jehovah's dealings
+with his People--The Sabbath Law--Prodigies--Joshua's Miracle--Damned
+Ignorance and Infamy--Jephthah's Sacrifice--Incredible Stories--The
+Woman of Endor and the Temptation of David--Elijah and Elisha--Loss of
+the Pentateuch from Moses to Josiah--The Jews before and after being
+Abandoned by Jehovah--Wealth of Solomon and other Marvels.
+
+
+
+
+
+ADDRESS ON THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT.
+
+
+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.
+
+Col. Robert G. Ingersoll was one of the speakers.
+
+The Hon. Frederick Douglass introduced him as follows:
+
+     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.
+
+I have the honor to introduce Robert G. Ingersoll.
+
+MR. INGERSOLL'S SPEECH.
+
+Ladies and Gentlemen:
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The Supreme Court has decided:
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+3. That the 13th Amendment relates only to slavery and involuntary
+servitude, which it abolishes.
+
+4. That the 13th Amendment establishes universal freedom in the United
+States.
+
+5. That Congress may probably pass laws directly enforcing its
+provisions.
+
+6. That such legislative power in Congress extends only to the subject
+of slavery, and its incidents.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+9. Neither does the Court decide whether the law, as it stands, is
+operative in the Territories and the District of Columbia.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Let us examine these amendments:
+
+"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.
+
+"Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate
+legislation."
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+You will observe the wording of this clause:
+
+"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."
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+These freed men became citizens--became a part of the State in which
+they lived.
+
+The highest and noblest definition of a State, in our Reports, was given
+by Justice Wilson, in the case of Chisholm, &c., vs. Georgia;
+
+"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."
+
+Chief Justice Chase declared that:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+Justice Field upon this very question, says:
+
+"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."
+
+Justice Field also quotes with approval the language of the counsel for
+the plaintiffs in the case:
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+The Supreme Court, in _The Slaughter-House Cases,_ (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.
+
+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.
+
+In the language of the Supreme Court:
+
+"It was the obvious purpose of the 13th Amendment to forbid all shades
+and conditions of African slavery."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The Supreme Court has admitted, in the very case we are now discussing,
+that:
+
+"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."
+
+Here we have the authority for dealing with individuals.
+
+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.
+
+In The United Slates vs. Harris, 106 U. S., 640, the Supreme Court says:
+
+"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."
+
+This declaration covers the entire case.
+
+I agree with Justice Field:
+
+"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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+Justice Miller, speaking for the entire court, tells us that:
+
+"In the struggle of the civil war, slavery perished, and perished as a
+necessity of the bitterness and force of the conflict."
+
+That:
+
+"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."
+
+He also admits that:
+
+"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."
+
+He also informs us that:
+
+"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."
+
+And he declares that:
+
+"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."
+
+And that:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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
+State wherein they reside."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In the case of Bartemeyer vs. Iowa, 18 Wall., p. 140, Justice Field, in
+a concurring opinion, speaking of the 14th Amendment, says:
+
+"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.".
+
+I cannot refrain from calling attention to the splendor and nobility of
+the truths expressed by Justice Field in this opinion.
+
+So, Justice Field, in his dissenting opinion in what are known as _The
+Slaughter-House Cases_, found in 16 Wallace, p. 95, still speaking of
+the 14th Amendment, says:
+
+"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.
+
+"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. * * *
+
+"They do not derive their existence from its legislation, and cannot be
+destroyed by its power."
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+These are all rights and immunities guaranteed by the Constitution of
+the United States.
+
+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?
+
+In the case of _The U. S. vs. Reese, et al._, 92 U. S., p. 207,
+the Supreme Court decided, the opinion having been delivered by
+Chief-Justice Waite, as follows:
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+So, in the same case, I find this language:
+
+"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."
+
+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"?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+What rights are within the protecting power of Congress? All the rights
+belonging to a free man.
+
+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.
+
+So, in the case of _Tennessee vs, Davis_, 100 U, S,, 263, the Supreme
+Court, held that:
+
+"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.
+
+"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."
+
+This opinion was given by Justice Strong, and acquiesced in by
+Chief-Justice Waite, Justices Miller, Swayne, Bradley and Harlan.
+
+So in the case of _Pensacola Tel. Co. vs. Western Union Tel. Co_., 96 U.
+S., p. 10, the opinion having been delivered by Chief-Justice Waite, I
+find this:
+
+"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."
+
+This was acquiesced in by Justices Clifford, Strong, Bradley, Swayne and
+Miller.
+
+So we are told by the entire Supreme Court in the case of _Tiernan vs.
+Rynker_, 102 U. S., 126, that:
+
+"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."
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+We are told by the Supreme Court, in the case under discussion, that:
+
+"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."
+
+We are told that:
+
+"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."
+
+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"?
+
+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?
+
+The 14th Amendment provides that:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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 _The License Cases_. The opinion may be
+found in the 5th of Howard, 583.
+
+"The nullity of any act inconsistent with the Constitution, is produced
+by the declaration that the Constitution is supreme."
+
+This was decided by the Supreme Court, the opinion having been delivered
+by Chief Justice Marshall, in the case of _Gibbons vs. Ogden_, 9 Wheat,
+210.
+
+The same doctrine was held in the case of _Henderson et al., vs. Mayor
+of New York, et al._, 92 U. S. 272--the opinion of the Court being
+delivered by Justice Miller.
+
+So it was held in the case of _The Board of Liquidation vs. McComb_--2
+Otto, 541.
+
+"That an unconstitutional law will be treated by the courts as null and
+void"--citing _Osborn vs. The Bank of the United States_, 9 Wheaton,
+859, and _Davis vs. Gray_, 16 Wallace, 220.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The Supreme Court asks, in this decision,
+
+"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?"
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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:
+
+"_There are certain physiological differences of race that cannot be
+ignored_."
+
+That phrase is a lamp, in the light of which the whole decision should
+be read.
+
+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:
+
+"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.
+
+The Supreme Court, some time ago, held that the 4th Section of the Civil
+Rights Act was constitutional. That section declares that:
+
+"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."
+
+It also provides that:
+
+"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."
+
+In the case known as _Ex-parte vs. Virginia_--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:
+
+"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."
+
+The Court further held that:
+
+"This aspect of the law was deemed sufficient to divest it of any
+unconstitutional character."
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+So it was held in the case of _Neal vs. Delaware_,--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.
+
+It is admitted, and expressly decided in the case of _The U. S. vs.
+Reese et al._, (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.
+
+With this statement I most heartily agree. I agree that:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+So the Constitution provides that:
+
+"Congress shall have power to regulate commerce among the several
+States."
+
+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.
+
+The Constitution also provides that:
+
+"Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with the Indian tribes."
+
+It was held in the case of _The United States vs. Holliday_, 3 Wall.,
+407, that:
+
+"Commerce with the Indian tribes means commerce with the individuals
+composing those tribes."
+
+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. _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._
+
+Now, if the word "tribe" includes individual Indians, may not the word
+"State" include citizens?
+
+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:
+
+"By its own unaided force and effect, abolished slavery and established
+universal freedom."
+
+The Court admits that:
+
+"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."
+
+The Court further admits:
+
+"And such legislation may be primary and direct in its character."
+
+And then gives the reason:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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 _Prigg vs. The
+Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,_ 16 Pet., 611, a rule laid down in the
+interest of slavery--laid down for the purpose of depriving human beings
+of their liberty:
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+I call attention in reply to this, to the case of _Hall vs. De Cuir,_
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+"That if the public good required such legislation, it must come from
+Congress and not from the State."
+
+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!
+
+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 _Hall
+vs. De Cuir_ 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:
+
+"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."
+
+And yet the Supreme Court said:
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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 _States could not_ legislate; and in 1883, that _Congress could
+not_, 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.
+
+It must be remembered, in this discussion, that the 8th Section of the
+Constitution conferred upon Congress the power:
+
+"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."
+
+So the 2nd Section of the 13th Article provides:
+
+"Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate
+legislation."
+
+The same language is used in the 14th and 15th Amendments.
+
+"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."
+
+This is the language of Chief Justice Marshall, in the case of
+_M'Caulay, vs. The State_, 4 Wheaton, 316.
+
+"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.
+
+Again:
+
+"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." _Prigs vs. The Commonwealth_, 16
+Peters, 539.
+
+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.
+
+Justice Story held in that case that:
+
+"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."
+
+He also held that:
+
+"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."
+
+"But," says Justice Story:
+
+"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."
+
+And he holds that:
+
+"Under that clause of the section Congress became clothed with the
+appropriate authority to legislate for its enforcement."
+
+Now let us look at the 13th and 14th Amendments in the light of that
+decision.
+
+First. Liberty and citizenship were given the colored people by this
+amendment. And Justice Story tells us that:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+Let us go further. Justice Story tells us that:
+
+"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."
+
+In the light of this remark, let us look at the 14th Amendment:
+
+"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."
+
+To which are added these words:
+
+"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."
+
+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?
+
+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 _M'Cauley vs.
+The State_, 4 Wheaton, 316, that:
+
+"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."
+
+Again:
+
+"The Government has the right to employ freely every means not
+prohibited, for the fulfillment of its acknowledged duties."
+
+_The Legal Tender Cases_--12 Wallace, 457.
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+The Supreme Court despairingly asks:
+
+"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?"
+
+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.
+
+After such examination of the authorities as I have been able to make, I
+lay down the following propositions, namely:
+
+1. The sovereignty of a State extends only to that which exists by its
+own authority.
+
+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.
+
+3. The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of each
+State.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+11. The 13th Amendment declares that neither slavery nor involuntary
+servitude shall exist within the jurisdiction of the United States.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+13. Congress can not shirk this responsibility by leaving citizens of
+the United States to the care and keeping of the several States.
+
+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.
+
+14. All statutes--all amendments to the Constitution--in derogation of
+natural rights, should be strictly construed.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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 _Civilization vs.
+Barbarism_, it has given the defendant a new trial.
+
+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.
+
+We are told by the Supreme Court that:
+
+"Slavery cannot exist without law, any more than property and lands and
+goods can exist without law."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.".
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Nothing gives me more pleasure than to see your little children with
+books under their arms, going and coming from school.
+
+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.
+
+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!
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+TRIAL OF C. B. REYNOLDS FOR BLASPHEMY.
+
+Address to the Jury.
+
+     * 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.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.--
+
+"No law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or
+of the press."
+
+Can anything be plainer--anything be more forcibly stated?
+
+"No law shall be passed to abridge the liberty of speech."
+
+Now, while you are considering this statute, I want you to keep in mind
+this other statement:
+
+"No law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or
+of the press."
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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:
+
+"_If any person shall willfully blaspheme the holy name of God by
+denying, cursing, or contumeliously reproaching his being_"--
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+Let us read a little further:
+
+"--_Or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching Jesus Christ_."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Let me read you another line from this ignorant statute:--
+
+"_Or the Christian religion_."
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+"_Or the Word of God_--"
+
+What is that?
+
+"_The canonical Scriptures contained in the books of the Old and New
+Testaments_."
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+"_The Holy Scriptures_."
+
+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?
+
+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."
+
+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.".
+
+Now, let us see further:
+
+"_Or by profane scoffing expose them to ridicule_"
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+Let us read another clause:--
+
+"_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 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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+"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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+So with Huxley, so with Tyndall, so with Helmholtz--so with the greatest
+thinkers and greatest writers of modern times.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+"_This Bible describes God as so loving that he drowned the whole world
+in his mad fury_."
+
+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.
+
+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"?
+
+"_Because it was so much worse than he, knowing all things, ever
+supposed it could be._"
+
+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.
+
+The defendant further blasphemed and said that:--
+
+"_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!_"
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+This is the greatest crime that man has imagined, and this crime is
+called a deed of infinite mercy.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+And what else says the defendant?
+
+"_The Bible-God says that his people made him jealous." "Provoked him to
+anger._"
+
+Is that true? It is. If it is true, is it blasphemous?
+
+Let us read another line--
+
+"_And now he will raise the mischief with them; that his anger bums like
+hell_."
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+Let us read on:--
+
+"_He would destroy them all were it not that he feared the wrath of the
+enemy_."
+
+That is in the Bible--word for word. Then the defendant in astonishment
+says:
+
+"_The Almighty God afraid of his enemies!_"
+
+That is what the Bible says. What does it mean? If the Bible is true,
+God was afraid.
+
+"_Can the mind conceive of more horrid blasphemy?_"
+
+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.
+
+"_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_.".
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+But let us read further from this indictment:
+
+"The aforesaid printed document contains other scandalous, infamous and
+blasphemous matters and things, to the tenor and effect following, that
+is to say--"
+
+Then comes this particularly blasphemous line:
+
+"_Now, reader, take time and calmly think it over _."
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+"_Take time to calmly think it over: Was a Jewish girl the mother of
+God, the mother of your God?_"
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The defendant is also charged with having said that: "_God cried and
+screamed_."
+
+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
+
+"_God of the Universe kicked, and flung about his little arms, and made
+aimless dashes into space with his little fists_."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The defendant says more about the childhood of Christ. He goes so far as
+to say, that:
+
+"_He was found staring foolishly at his own little toes._"
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The defendant also says, speaking of the infant Christ, "_He was nursed
+at Mary's breast._"
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+But the defendant, still speaking of the infant Christ, is charged with
+having said:
+
+"_God smiled when he was comfortable. He lay in a cradle and was rocked
+to sleep._"
+
+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.
+
+The defendant also says, that:
+
+"_God was sick when cutting his teeth._"
+
+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.
+
+"_He caught the measles, the mumps, the scarlet fever and the whooping
+cough_."
+
+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.
+
+He has said, that:
+
+"_According to the Old Testament, the God of the Christian world
+commanded people to destroy each other._"
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+As long as the church has the power to close the lips of men, so long
+and no longer will superstition rule this world.
+
+"Blasphemy is the word that the majority hisses into the ear of the
+few."
+
+After every argument of the church has been answered, has been refuted,
+then the church cries, "blasphemy!"
+
+Blasphemy is what an old mistake says of a newly discovered truth.
+
+Blasphemy is what a withered last year's leaf says to a this year's bud.
+
+Blasphemy is the bulwark of religious prejudice.
+
+Blasphemy is the breastplate of the heartless.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+What is blasphemy? I will give you a definition; I will give you my
+thought upon this subject. What is real blasphemy?
+
+To live on the unpaid labor of other men--that is blasphemy.
+
+To enslave your fellow-man, to put chains upon his body--that is
+blasphemy.
+
+To enslave the minds of men, to put manacles upon the brain, padlocks
+upon the lips--that is blasphemy.
+
+To deny what you believe to be true, to admit to be true what you
+believe to be a lie--that is blasphemy.
+
+To strike the weak and unprotected, in order that you may gain the
+applause of the ignorant and superstitious mob--that is blasphemy.
+
+To persecute the intelligent few, at the command of the ignorant
+many--that is blasphemy.
+
+To forge chains, to build dungeons, for your honest fellow-men--that is
+blasphemy.
+
+To pollute the souls of children with the dogma of eternal pain--that is
+blasphemy.
+
+To violate your conscience--that is blasphemy.
+
+The jury that gives an unjust verdict, and the judge who pronounces an
+unjust sentence, are blasphemers.
+
+The man who bows to public opinion against his better judgment and
+against his honest conviction, is a blasphemer.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Labor is the only prayer that Nature answers; it is the only prayer that
+deserves an answer,--good, honest, noble work.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Whoever increases the sum of human joy, is a worshiper. He who adds to
+the sum of human misery, is a blasphemer.
+
+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.
+
+Let us take one more step.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+First. I claim that the constitution of New Jersey declares that:
+
+"_The liberty of speech shall not be abridged_." 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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+There is still another point. This statute says: "Whoever shall
+_willfully_ 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.
+
+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 _animus furandi_. 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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In my judgment, however, there would have been no harm in giving this
+pamphlet to every citizen of your place.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Liberty is the condition of progress. Without Liberty, there remains
+only barbarism. Without Liberty, there can be no civilization.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Without Liberty there can be no worship, no blasphemy--no love, no
+hatred, no justice, no progress.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+While I do not blame these people--they not being on trial--I do ask you
+to stand on the side of right.
+
+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."
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+     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.
+
+
+
+
+GOD IN THE CONSTITUTION.
+
+"_All governments derive their just powers from the consent of the
+governed_."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Those who promulgated the Declaration adopted a Constitution for the
+great Republic.
+
+What was the office or purpose of that Constitution?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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,
+_prima facie_ evidence that he did not desire to be there?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+'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.
+
+This is the difference between Theocracy and Democracy--between God and
+man.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+A REPLY TO BISHOP SPALDING.
+
+     * An unfinished reply to Bishop J. L. Spalding's article
+     "God in the Constitution," which appeared in the Arena.
+     Boston, Mass., April, 1890.
+
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+CRIMES AGAINST CRIMINALS.
+
+     * "An Address delivered before the State Bar Association at
+     Albany, N. Y., January 1, 1890."
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+I.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+II.
+
+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?
+
+Certain it is that men do not prefer unhappiness to joy.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+III.
+
+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?
+
+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."
+
+We know that there are deformed bodies, and we are equally certain that
+there are deformed minds.
+
+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?
+
+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:
+
+In 1850, we had twenty-three millions of people, and between six and
+seven thousand prisoners.
+
+In 1860--thirty-one millions of people, and nineteen thousand prisoners.
+
+In 1870--thirty-eight millions of people, and thirty-two thousand
+prisoners.
+
+In 1880--fifty millions of people, and fifty-eight thousand prisoners.
+
+It may be curious to note the relation between insanity, pauperism and
+crime:
+
+In 1850, there were fifteen thousand insane; in 1860, twenty-four
+thousand; in 1870, thirty-seven thousand; in 1880, ninety-one thousand.
+
+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.
+
+Is it possible that we must go to the same causes for these effects?
+
+IV.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?"
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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!
+
+Is there any remedy? Can anything be done for the reformation of the
+criminal?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+VI.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+VII.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+What shall be done with the slayers of their fellow-men--with murderers?
+Shall the nation take life?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The death penalty, inflicted by the Government, is a perpetual excuse
+for mobs.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+VIII.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+IX.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The more real education, the less crime--and the more homes, the fewer
+prisons.
+
+X.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+XI.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+We do not know. Our ignorance should make us hesitate. Our weakness
+should make us merciful.
+
+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."
+
+
+
+
+A WOODEN GOD.
+
+To the Editor:
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+*A letter to the Chicago Times, written at Washington, D. C., March
+27,1880.
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Rising with the subject, growing heated with a kind of holy indignation,
+these Christian representatives of a Christian people most solemnly
+declare that:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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 _superstition_. 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.
+
+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.
+
+Do not trample upon these people because they have a different
+conception of things about which even this committee knows nothing.
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Leaving their religious views, the members immediately betake themselves
+to philosophy and prediction. Listen:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+I am almost sure that I have read somewhere that "Christ died for _all_
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+"My doctrine is that man must be true to the principles of his nature,
+and the benevolent exercise of them toward others.
+
+With coarse rice to eat, with water to drink, and with my bended arm for
+a pillow, I still have joy.
+
+Riches and honor acquired by injustice are to me but floating clouds.
+
+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.
+
+Recompense injury with justice, and kindness with kindness.
+
+There is one word which may serve as a rule of practice for all one's
+life: Reciprocity is that word."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+SOME INTERROGATION POINTS.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+'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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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 _chevaux-de-frise_ of inferences and
+assertions. They understand the sophistries of those who have governed.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Is it possible to conceive of a despotism beyond this?
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+ART AND MORALITY.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Art has nothing to do directly with morality or immorality. It is its
+own excuse for being; it exists for itself.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The heart is softened by the pathos of the perfect.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+THE DIVIDED HOUSEHOLD OF FAITH.
+
+"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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+This is the worst side: There is a better.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+There is still another side.
+
+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.
+
+There is still another side.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The next question that arose was as to the origin of man.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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 _non sequitur._ 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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+It is, however, still insisted that the Bible is inspired in its
+morality. Let us examine this question.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+There is still another side to this question.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+This has made every Protestant brain "a house divided against itself."
+This planted in the Reformation the "irrepressible conflict."
+
+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.
+
+The intellectual world has abandoned the miraculous.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+We have at last ascertained that miracles can be perfectly understood;
+that there is nothing mysterious about them; that they are simply
+transparent falsehoods.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+We must rely upon the evidence of our senses, upon the conclusions of
+our reason.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The church defended its mistakes by every means within its power.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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."
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+The defenders of the orthodox faith, by this time, should know that the
+foundations are insecure.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+WHY AM I AN AGNOSTIC?
+
+I.
+
+"With thoughts beyond the reaches of our souls."
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The questions of origin and destiny seem to be beyond the powers of the
+human mind.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Passion often masters reason, and "the state of man, like to a little
+kingdom, suffers then the nature of an insurrection."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+North American Review, December, 1889.
+
+II.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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. Æschylus is
+superior to Jeremiah, and Shakespeare rises immeasurably above all the
+sacred books of the world.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+North American Review, March, 1890.
+
+
+
+
+HUXLEY AND AGNOSTICISM.
+
+
+PROFESSOR HUXLEY AND AGNOSTICISM.
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+Let us examine this statement, putting it in language that is easily
+understood; and for that purpose we will divide it into several
+paragraphs.
+
+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."
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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."
+
+Is this a difference in knowledge, or a difference in belief--that is to
+say, a difference in credulity?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+What knowledge has the Christian of another world? The senses of the
+Christian are the same as those of the Agnostic.
+
+He hears, sees, and feels substantially the same. His vision is limited.
+He sees no other shore and hears nothing from another world.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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."
+
+This is spoken in a kind of holy scorn. According to this gentleman, an
+unbeliever is, to a certain extent, a disreputable person.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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"?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+In this phase people talk about laws and principles as though laws and
+principles were forces capable of producing phenomena.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+After all, the Agnostic and the Positivist have the same end in
+view--both believe in living for this world.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+ERNEST RENAN.
+
+     "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."
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+"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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+TOLSTOÏ AND "THE KREUTZER SONATA."
+
+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.
+
+From the Mount of Olives he surveys the world.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+But even under such circumstances they might, like the Quakers, be proud
+of humility and become arrogantly meek.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Tolstoï seems to be a stranger to the heart of woman.
+
+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"?
+
+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;
+
+"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."
+
+The conclusion reached by the writer is that without faith in God,
+woman's love grovels in the mire.
+
+In this case the mire is made by the tears of mothers falling on the
+clay that hides their babes.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Only the conditionless can be the emotionless.
+
+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.
+
+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!
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Love is the perfume of the heart; it is not subject to the will of
+husbands or kings or God.
+
+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."
+
+This is the destruction of the family, the pollution of home, the
+crucifixion of love.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+THOMAS PAINE.
+
+A MAGAZINE ARTICLE.
+
+     "A great man's memory may outlive his life half a year,
+     But, by'r lady, he must build churches then."
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In the winter of 1774, Thomas Paine came to America. After a time he was
+employeed as one of the writers on the _Pennsylvania Magazine._
+
+Let us see what he did, calculated to excite the hatred of his
+fellow-men.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The good people of this world agree with Thomas Paine.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+"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."
+
+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."
+
+"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:
+
+"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."
+
+Paine had made some enemies, first, by attacking African slavery, and,
+second, by insisting upon the sovereignty of the Nation.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+He said:
+
+"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."
+
+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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+This was worthy of the man who had said: "Where Liberty is _not_, there
+is my country."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The "Age of Reason" was his crime.
+
+Franklin, Jefferson, Sumner and Lincoln, the four greatest statesmen
+that America has produced, were believers in the creed of Thomas Paine.
+
+The Universalists and Unitarians have found their best weapons, their
+best arguments, in the "Age of Reason."
+
+Slowly, but surely, the churches are adopting not only the arguments,
+but the opinions of the great Reformer.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In 1794 James Monroe had written to Paine these words:
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+Paine had insisted that men had the right to think for themselves. This
+so enraged the average American citizen that he longed for revenge.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:--_this was Calvinism_. "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. _This was orthodox Christianity_.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+On the 8th of June, 1809, death came--Death, almost his only friend.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+THE THREE PHILANTHROPISTS.
+
+     "Well, while I am a beggar, I will rail,
+     And say there is no sin but to be rich."
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+HE WAS THE PROVIDENCE OF THE POOR.
+
+
+II.
+
+     "And, being rich, my virtue then shall be
+     To say there is no vice but beggary."
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+HE LIVED FOR OTHERS.
+
+
+III
+
+     "But there are men who steal, and vainly try
+     To gild the crime with pompous charity."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+HE ALLOWED OTHERS TO LIVE FOR THEMSELVES.
+
+North American Review, December, 1831.
+
+
+
+
+SHOULD THE CHINESE BE EXCLUDED?
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The truth is that the Chinese came to this country by invitation. Under
+the Burlingame Treaty, China and the United States recognized:
+
+"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."
+
+And it was provided:
+
+"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."
+
+So, by the treaty of 1880, providing for the limitation or suspension of
+emigration of Chinese labor, it was declared:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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 _habeas corpus_, 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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Shall we now go back to barbarism?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+A WORD ABOUT EDUCATION.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+WHAT I WANT FOR CHRISTMAS.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+I would like to see drunkenness and prohibition both abolished.
+
+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.
+
+I would like to see the millionaires unite and form a trust for the
+public good.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+I would like to see the whole world free--free from injustice--free from
+superstition.
+
+This will do for next Christmas. The following Christmas, I may want
+more.--The Arena, Boston, December, 1897.
+
+
+
+
+FOOL FRIENDS.
+
+NOTHING hurts a man, nothing hurts a party so terribly as fool friends.
+
+A fool friend is the sewer of bad news, of slander and all base and
+unpleasant things.
+
+A fool friend always knows every mean thing that has been said against
+you and against the party.
+
+He always knows where your party is losing, and the other is making
+large gains.
+
+He always tells you of the good luck your enemy has had.
+
+He implicitly believes every story against you, and kindly suspects your
+defence.
+
+A fool friend is always full of a kind of stupid candor.
+
+He is so candid that he always believes the statement of an enemy.
+
+He never suspects anything on your side.
+
+Nothing pleases him like being shocked by horrible news concerning some
+good man.
+
+He never denies a lie unless it is in your favor.
+
+He is always finding fault with his party, and is continually begging
+pardon for not belonging to the other side.
+
+He is frightfully anxious that all his candidates should stand well with
+the opposition.
+
+He is forever seeing the faults of his party and the virtues of the
+other.
+
+He generally shows his candor by scratching the ticket.
+
+He always searches every nook and comer of his conscience to find a
+reason for deserting a friend or a principle.
+
+In the moment of victory he is magnanimously on your side.
+
+In defeat he consoles you by repeating prophecies made after the event.
+
+The fool friend regards your reputation as common prey for all the
+vultures, hyenas and jackals.
+
+He takes a sad pleasure in your misfortunes.
+
+He forgets his principles to gratify your enemies.
+
+He forgives your maligner, and slanders you with all his heart.
+
+He is so friendly that you cannot kick him.
+
+He generally talks for you but always bets the other way.
+
+
+
+
+INSPIRATION
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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."
+
+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!"
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+"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.
+
+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.
+
+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!"
+
+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.
+
+The inspiration of the Bible depends upon the ignorance of him who
+reads.--The Truth Seeker Annual, New York, 1885.
+
+
+
+
+THE TRUTH OF HISTORY.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+A few days ago the Matlock _Register_, a paper published in England,
+printed the following:
+
+CONVERSION OF THE ARCH ATHEIST.
+
+"Mr. Isaac Loveland, of Shoreham, desires us to insert the following:--
+
+"November 27, 1886.
+
+"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 _have been won for Christ_ 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.
+
+"Very faithfully yours,
+
+"H. HODSON RUGG.
+
+"Grove-road, St. John's Wood, London."
+
+How can we account for an article like that? Who made up this story? Who
+had the impudence to publish it?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+This letter, in my judgment, was published to be used by missionaries in
+China, Japan, India and Africa.
+
+If stories like this can be circulated about a living man, what may we
+not expect concerning the dead who have opposed the church?
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+A few years ago, I had a little controversy with the editor of the New
+York _Observer_, 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
+_Observer_ to admit that Paine did not recant, and compelled that paper
+to say that "Thomas Paine died a blaspheming Infidel."
+
+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 _Observer_ 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.
+
+This is another instance of what might be called the truth of history.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+The mendacity of superstition is almost enough to make a man believe in
+the supernatural.
+
+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.
+
+"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.
+
+
+
+
+HOW TO EDIT A LIBERAL PAPER.
+
+A LIBERAL paper should be edited by a Liberal man.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Secular Thought, Toronto, January 8,1887.
+
+
+
+
+SECULARISM.
+
+
+SEVERAL people have asked me the meaning of this term.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+CRITICISM OF "ROBERT ELSMERE," "JOHN WARD, PREACHER," AND "AN AFRICAN FARM."
+
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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:
+
+"Love you the man that wronged you?"
+
+And she replies:
+
+"Yes; as I love the woman that wronged him."
+
+The death of this wonderful girl is extremely pathetic.
+
+None but an artist could have written it:
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+THE LIBEL LAWS
+
+Question. Have you any suggestions to make in regard to remodeling the
+libel laws?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+--The Herald, New York, October 26,1888.
+
+
+
+
+REV. DR. NEWTON'S SERMON ON A NEW RELIGION.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+AN ESSAY ON CHRISTMAS.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+HAS FREETHOUGHT A CONSTRUCTIVE SIDE?
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+A man who compels this Deity to abdicate his throne renders a vast and
+splendid service to the human race.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+It will thus be seen that there is an affirmative, a positive, a
+constructive side to Freethought.
+
+What is the positive side?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+It is charged by the worshipers of the Jewish myth, that we destroy,
+that we do not build.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+THE IMPROVED MAN.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+EIGHT HOURS MUST COME.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Any man who wishes to force his brother to work--to toil--more than
+eight hours a day is not a civilized man.
+
+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.
+
+Neither labor nor capital should resort to force.--The Morning Journal,
+April 27, 1890.
+
+
+
+
+THE JEWS.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+I also found that Christians had committed more of these crimes than all
+other religionists put together.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+CRUMBLING CREEDS.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In other words, the days of authority are passing away.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+These are a few of the reasons why creeds are crumbling, and why such a
+change has taken place in the religious world.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The great reason why the orthodox creeds have become unpopular is, that
+all teach the dogma of eternal pain.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+OUR SCHOOLS.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The greatest danger to the Republic is ignorance. Intelligence is the
+foundation of free government.--The World, New York, September 7, 1800.
+
+
+
+
+VIVISECTION.
+
+     *A letter written to Philip G. Peabody. May 27, 1800.
+
+
+VIVISECTION is the Inquisition--the Hell--of Science.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Brain without heart is far more dangerous than heart without brain.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+Never can I be the friend of one who vivisects his fellow-creatures. I
+do not wish to touch his hand.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+THE CENSUS ENUMERATOR'S OFFICIAL CATECHISM.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+THE AGNOSTIC CHRISTMAS
+
+
+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.
+
+This is the festival of the sun-god, and as such let its observance be
+universal.
+
+This is the great day of the first religion, the mother of all
+religions--the worship of the sun.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+This bright God knew no hatred, no malice, never sought for revenge.
+
+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.
+
+Let us all hope for the triumph of Light--of Right and Reason--for the
+victory of Fact over Falsehood, of Science over Superstition.
+
+And so hoping, let us celebrate the venerable festival of the Sun.--The
+Journal, New York, December 25,1892.
+
+
+
+
+SPIRITUALITY.
+
+
+IF there is an abused word in our language, it is "spirituality."
+
+It has been repeated over and over for several hundred years by pious
+pretenders and snivelers as though it belonged exclusively to them.
+
+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.
+
+John Calvin was intensely "spiritual" when he warmed his fleshless hands
+at the flames that consumed Servetus.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+These "spiritual" mendicants hated laughter and smiles and dimples, and
+exhausted their diseased and polluted imaginations in the effort to make
+love loathsome.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+"Spirituality" for the most part is a mask worn by idleness, arrogance
+and greed.
+
+Some people imagine that they are "spiritual" when they are sickly.
+
+It may be well enough to ask: What is it to be really spiritual?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+There is no possible connection between superstition and the spiritual,
+or between theology and the spiritual.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Spirituality is the perfect health of the soul. It is noble, manly,
+generous, brave, free-spoken, natural, superb.
+
+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.'"
+
+Above all things, let us be sincere.--The Conservator, Philadelphia,
+1891.
+
+
+
+
+SUMTER'S GUN.
+
+
+1861--April 12th--1891
+
+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.
+
+Arrogance on one side, hypocrisy on the other.
+
+Right apologized to Wrong for the sake of the Union.
+
+The sources of justice were poisoned, and patriotism became the defender
+of piracy. In the name of humanity mothers were robbed of their babes.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+These echoes said marvelous things and uttered prophecies that none were
+wise enough to understand.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+WHAT INFIDELS HAVE DONE.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+CRUELTY IN THE ELMIRA REFORMATORY.
+
+
+IN my judgment, no human being was ever made better, nobler, by being
+whipped or clubbed.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+LAW'S DELAY.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The case of Mrs. Maybrick is exactly in point, and shows how dangerous
+it is to clothe the trial judge with supreme power.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In my judgment, defective as our criminal courts and methods are, they
+are far better than the English.
+
+Our judges are kinder, more humane; our juries nearer independent, and
+our methods better calculated to ascertain the truth.
+
+
+
+
+THE BIGOTRY OF COLLEGES.
+
+     * 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.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The Vanderbilt College, or University of Tennessee, discharged Professor
+Winchell because he differed with the author of Genesis on geology.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+A YOUNG MAN'S CHANCES TO-DAY.
+
+     * 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.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+SCIENCE AND SENTIMENT.
+
+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.
+
+So, some people imagine that science will do away with sentiment. In my
+judgment, science will not only increase sentiment but sense.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Sentiment can never be destroyed, and love will forever rule the human
+race.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Do I think that the marriage of the sickly and diseased ought to be
+prevented by law?
+
+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.
+
+We must rely on education instead of legislation.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+SOWING AND REAPING.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Poor man!
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+He really thinks that the Devil outwitted God and vaccinated the human
+race with the virus of total depravity.
+
+Poor man!
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+This doctrine, to my mind, is not only absurd, but dishonest and
+corrupting.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+Let us see how this works:
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Mr. Moody ought to have a little philosophy--a little good sense.
+
+So Mr. Moody says that only in this life can a man secure the reward of
+repentance.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+Every orthodox creed is savage, ignorant and idiotic.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+What will conscience trouble the people in hell about? They tell us that
+they will remember their sins.
+
+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?
+
+If this be so, heaven must be somewhat worse than hell.
+
+In old times, if people wanted to know anything they asked the preacher.
+Now they do if they don't.
+
+The Bible has, with intelligent men, lost its authority.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Let us hope that Mr. Moody will read some really useful books.
+
+
+
+
+SHOULD INFIDELS SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO SUNDAY SCHOOL?
+
+SHOULD parents, who are Infidels, unbelievers or Atheists, send their
+children to Sunday schools and churches to give them the benefit of
+Christian education?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+Why then should a free and sensible believer in Science, in the
+naturalness of the universe, send his child to a Catholic school?
+
+Nothing could be more irrational, foolish and absurd.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+WHAT WOULD YOU SUBSTITUTE FOR THE BIBLE AS A MORAL GUIDE?
+
+     * Written for The Boston Investigator.
+
+
+YOU ask me what I would "substitute for the Bible as a moral guide.".
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In Exodus we have an account of the manner in which Jehovah delivered
+the Jews from Egyptian bondage.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+Murder is, and always was, a crime, and always will be, as long as a
+majority of people object to being murdered.
+
+Industry always has been and always will be the enemy of larceny.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+So men and women are not virtuous because of anything in books or
+creeds.
+
+All the Ten Commandments that are good were old, were the result of
+experience. The commandments that were original with Jehovah were
+foolish.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Many of the regulations found in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and
+Deuteronomy, are good. Many are absurd and cruel.
+
+The entire ceremonial of worship is insane.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The story of Ruth is not particularly moral.
+
+In first and second Samuel there is not one word calculated to develop
+the brain or conscience.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The book of Esther is utterly absurd, and the only redeeming feature in
+the book is that the name of Jehovah is not mentioned.
+
+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.
+
+There are some wise and merciful Proverbs. Some are selfish and some are
+flat and commonplace.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In Ezekiel and Daniel we find only ravings of the insane.
+
+In some of the minor prophets there is now and then a good verse, now
+and then an elevated thought.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The stories that are told of Joseph, of Elisha, of Daniel and Gideon,
+and of many others, are hideous; hellish.
+
+On the whole, the Old Testament cannot be considered a moral guide.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+It may be that no book contains better passages than the New Testament,
+but certainly no book contains worse.
+
+Below the blossom of love you find the thorn of hatred; on the lips that
+kiss, you find the poison of the cobra.
+
+The Bible is not a moral guide.
+
+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.
+
+What is morality?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+What then is, or can be called, a moral guide? The shortest possible
+answer is one word: Intelligence.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+This is not only absurd, but it is immoral.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Again I say: Intelligence is the only moral guide.
+
+
+
+
+GOVERNOR ROLLINS' FAST-DAY PROCLAMATION.
+
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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?
+
+In order to answer this question we must state what Christianity is.
+
+Christians tell us that there are certain fundamental truths that must
+be believed.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+A few years ago most Christians believed that Christ was the son of God,
+and not only the son of God, but God himself.
+
+This belief is slowly fading from the minds of Christians, from the
+minds of those who have minds.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Salvation for credulity means damnation for investigation.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+At the same time these "Higher Critics," while they admit that the Bible
+is not true, still insist that it is inspired.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The horses they ride, sometimes get so far apart that it seems to me
+that walking would be easier on the legs.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Thousands of people who accept Christ as a moral guide have thrown, away
+the supernatural.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+The church teaches that God can and will forgive sins.
+
+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?
+
+What are the restraining influences of religion? Did anybody ever hear
+of a policeman being dismissed because a new church had been organized?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Prayer is beggary--an effort to get something for nothing. Labor is the
+honest prayer.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+That kind of faith has departed from the world.
+
+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.
+
+"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.
+
+
+
+
+A LOOK BACKWARD AND A PROPHECY.
+
+     * Written for the Twenty-fifth Anniversary Number of  the
+     New York Truth Seeker, September 3, 1898.
+
+
+I CONGRATULATE _The Truth Seeker_ 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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+In that they were right.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+This book satisfied the thoughtful.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Conditions had been reversed. The Bible had ceased to be the standard.
+Science was the supreme and final test.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The Devil is the keystone of the arch.
+
+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.
+
+The Devil has faded from his throne and the evil spirits have vanished
+from the air.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In the brain of the average Christian, contradictions dwell in unity.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The creator of anything is utterly unthinkable.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+This shows that even in the minds of Deists contradictions dwell in
+unity.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The great body of the church, however, held to the creed--not quite
+believing it, but still insisting that it was true.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+This is where we are now.
+
+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?
+
+Let me prophesy.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In my judgment, teachers will take the place of preachers and the
+interpreters of nature will be the only priests.
+
+
+
+
+POLITICAL MORALITY.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+A FEW REASONS FOR DOUBTING THE INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE.
+
+
+     * 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."
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+     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.
+
+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
+
+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.
+
+     1 Ex. xii, 37-39
+
+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.
+
+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
+
+     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
+
+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:
+
+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
+
+Do you really think that a man will be eternally damned for endeavoring
+to wipe from the record of God those barbaric words?
+
+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."
+
+     1 Ex. xix, 25, 26.  3 Ex. xxi, 20, 21
+
+     2 Ex. xxi, 2-6,     4 Ex, xxiii, 28
+
+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
+
+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?
+
+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
+
+    1 Ex. xxvii and xxviii.  3 Ex. xxx, 23.  5 Ex. xxxii, 11, 12
+
+    2 Ex. xxix, 19, 20       4 Ex. xxxi, 17.
+
+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.
+
+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
+
+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?
+
+     1 Ex. xxxii, 27-29.  2 Ex. xxxiii, 2, 3.
+
+     3 Ex. xxxiii, 11, 20.
+
+Why should the same God kill a man for eating the fat of an ox, a sheep,
+or a goat?
+
+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?
+
+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
+
+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.
+
+     1 Lev, xvi, 8.  2 Lev. xvi, 21, 22.  3 Lev. xix, 19, 27,
+
+     4 Lev. xxi, 18-20.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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
+
+     1 Num. v, 12-31.  2 Num. ix, 16-18.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+     1 Num. xiv, 15, 16.  2 Num. xiv. 32-33.
+
+Forty-seventh. "And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness
+they found a man that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath day.
+
+"And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and
+Aaron, and unto all the congregation.
+
+"And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be
+done to him.
+
+"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.
+
+"And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him
+with stones, and he died." 1
+
+When the last stone was thrown, and he that was a man was but a mangled,
+bruised, and broken mass, this God turned, and, _touched with pity_,
+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
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+     1 Num. xv, 32-36.  2 Num. xv, 38,  3 Num. xix, 2-10.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+     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.
+
+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.
+
+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
+
+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
+
+     1 Josh, x, 13.  2 Josh, xiii, 13.  3 Josh. xxiv, 13.
+
+     4 Judges i, 19.
+
+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
+
+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
+
+     1 Judges vi, 21.   2 Judges vi, 37.  3 Judges vii, 5.
+
+     4 Judges vii, 20.  5 I Sam. vi. 4.
+
+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
+
+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
+
+     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.
+
+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?
+
+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
+
+Fifty-sixth. It is hard to believe that a prophet by lying on a dead
+body could make it sneeze seven times.5
+
+     1 I Kings xviii.  3 2 Kings i.  5 2 Kings iv.
+
+     2 I Kings xix.    4 2 Kings ii.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+As soon as the Pentateuch was found Josiah began killing wizards and
+such as had familiar spirits.
+
+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.
+
+     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.
+
+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.
+
+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
+
+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
+
+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
+
+     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.
+
+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
+
+     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.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+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 38811-8.txt or 38811-8.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.
diff --git a/38811-8.zip b/38811-8.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1fbf54f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/38811-8.zip
diff --git a/38811-h.zip b/38811-h.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..37cb257
--- /dev/null
+++ b/38811-h.zip
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">TOLSTO&Iuml; 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")&mdash;Decision
+        of<br /> the United States Supreme Court pronouncing the Civil Rights Act<br />
+        Unconstitutional&mdash;Limitations of Judges&mdash;Illusion Destroyed by
+        the<br /> Decision in the Dred Scott Case&mdash;Mistake of Our Fathers in
+        adopting<br /> the Common Law of England&mdash;The 13th Amendment to the
+        Constitution<br /> Quoted&mdash;The Clause of the Constitution upholding
+        Slavery&mdash;Effect of<br /> this Clause&mdash;Definitions of a State by
+        Justice Wilson and Chief Justice<br /> Chase&mdash;Effect of the
+        Thirteenth Amendment&mdash;Justice Field on Involuntary<br /> Servitude&mdash;Civil
+        Rights Act Quoted&mdash;Definition of the Word Servitude by<br /> the
+        Supreme Court&mdash;Obvious Purpose of the Amendment&mdash;Justice
+        Miller<br /> on the 14th Amendment&mdash;Citizens Created by this
+        Amendment&mdash;Opinion<br /> of Justice Field&mdash;Rights and
+        Immunities guaranteed by the<br /> Constitution&mdash;Opinion delivered
+        by Chief-Justice Waite&mdash;Further Opinions<br /> of Courts on the
+        question of Citizenship&mdash;Effect of the 13th, 14th and<br /> 15th
+        Amendments&mdash;"Corrective" Legislation by Congress&mdash;Denial of
+        equal<br /> "Social" Privileges&mdash;Is a State responsible for the
+        Action of its Agent<br /> when acting contrary to Law?&mdash;The Word
+        "State" must include the People<br /> of the State as well as the
+        Officers of the State&mdash;The Louisiana Civil<br /> Rights Law, and a
+        Case tried under it&mdash;Uniformity of Duties essential to<br /> the
+        Carrier&mdash;Congress left Powerless to protect Rights conferred by the<br />
+        Constitution&mdash;Definition of "Appropriate Legislation"&mdash;Propositions
+        laid<br /> down regarding the Sovereignty of the State, the powers of the
+        General<br /> Government, etc.&mdash;A Tribute to Justice Harlan&mdash;A
+        Denial that Property<br /> exists by Virtue of Law&mdash;Civil Rights not
+        a Question of Social<br /> Equality&mdash;Considerations upon which
+        Social Equality depends&mdash;Liberty not<br /> a Question of Social
+        Equality&mdash;The Superior Man&mdash;Inconsistencies of the<br /> Past&mdash;No
+        Reason why we should Hate the Colored People&mdash;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)&mdash;The Right to express<br /> Opinions&mdash;Attempts to
+        Rule the Minds of Men by Force&mdash;Liberty the<br /> Greatest Good&mdash;Intellectual
+        Hospitality Defined&mdash;When the Catholic<br /> Church had Power&mdash;Advent
+        of the Protestants&mdash;The Puritans, Quakers.<br /> Unitarians,
+        Universalists&mdash;What is Blasphemy?&mdash;Why this Trial should not<br />
+        have Taken Place&mdash;Argument cannot be put in Jail&mdash;The
+        Constitution of<br /> New Jersey&mdash;A higher Law than Men can Make&mdash;The
+        Blasphemy Statute<br /> Quoted and Discussed&mdash;Is the Statute
+        Constitutional?&mdash;The Harm done<br /> by Blasphemy Laws&mdash;The
+        Meaning of this Persecution&mdash;Religions are<br /> Ephemeral&mdash;Let
+        us judge each other by our Actions&mdash;Men who have braved<br /> Public
+        Opinion should be Honored&mdash;The Blasphemy Law if enforced would<br />
+        rob the World of the Results of Scientific Research&mdash;It declares
+        the<br /> Great Men of to-day to be Criminals&mdash;The Indictment Read
+        and Commented<br /> upon&mdash;Laws that go to Sleep&mdash;Obsolete
+        Dogmas the Denial of which was<br /> once punished by Death&mdash;Blasphemy
+        Characterized&mdash;On the Argument<br /> that Blasphemy Endangers the
+        Public Peace&mdash;A Definition of real<br /> Blasphemy&mdash;Trials for
+        Blasphemy in England&mdash;The case of Abner<br /> Kneeland&mdash;True
+        Worship, Prayer, and Religion&mdash;What is Holy and<br /> Sacred&mdash;What
+        is Claimed in this Case&mdash;For the Honor of the State&mdash;The<br />
+        word Liberty&mdash;Result of the Trial (note).<br />
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link0003">GOD IN THE CONSTITUTION.</a>
+      </p>
+      <p>
+        <br /> The Feudal System&mdash;Office and Purpose of our Constitution&mdash;Which
+        God<br /> shall we Select?&mdash;The Existence of any God a Matter of
+        Opinion&mdash;What is<br /> entailed by a Recognition of a God in the
+        Constitution&mdash;Can the Infinite<br /> be Flattered with a
+        Constitutional Amendment?&mdash;This government is<br /> Secular&mdash;The
+        Government of God a Failure&mdash;The Difference between the<br />
+        Theological and the Secular Spirit&mdash;A Nation neither Christian nor<br />
+        Infidel&mdash;The Priest no longer a Necessity&mdash;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&mdash;Why the Constitutional Convention
+        ignored<br /> the Question of Religion&mdash;The Fathers Misrepresented&mdash;Reasons
+        why the<br /> Attributes of God should not form an Organic Part of the
+        Law of the<br /> Land&mdash;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&mdash;I. Forms of Punishment and
+        Torture&mdash;More<br /> Crimes Committed than Prevented by Governments&mdash;II.
+        Are not Vices<br /> transmitted by Nature?&mdash;111. Is it Possible for
+        all People to be<br /> Honest?&mdash;Children of Vice as the natural
+        Product of Society&mdash;Statistics:<br /> the Relation between Insanity,
+        Pauperism, and Crime&mdash;IV. The Martyrs of<br /> Vice&mdash;Franklin's
+        Interest in the Treatment of Prisoners&mdash;V. Kindness<br /> as a
+        Remedy&mdash;Condition of the Discharged Prisoner&mdash;VI. Compensation<br />
+        for Convicts&mdash;VII. Professional Criminals&mdash;Shall the Nation
+        take<br /> Life?&mdash;Influence of Public Executions on the Spectators&mdash;Lynchers<br />
+        for the Most Part Criminals at Heart&mdash;VIII. The Poverty of the Many
+        a<br /> perpetual Menace&mdash;Limitations of Land-holding.&mdash;IX.
+        Defective Education<br /> by our Schools&mdash;Hands should be educated
+        as well as Head&mdash;Conduct<br /> improved by a clearer Perception of
+        Consequences&mdash;X. The Discipline of<br /> the average Prison
+        Hardening and Degrading&mdash;While Society cringes before<br /> Great
+        Thieves there will be Little Ones to fill the Jails&mdash;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&mdash;Report of the Select
+        Committee<br /> on Chinese Immigration&mdash;The only true God as
+        contrasted with<br /> Joss&mdash;Sacrifices to the "Living God"&mdash;Messrs.
+        Wright, Dickey, O'Connor<br /> and Murch on the "Religious System" of the
+        American Union&mdash;How to prove<br /> that Christians are better than
+        Heathens&mdash;Injustice in the Name of<br /> God&mdash;An honest
+        Merchant the best Missionary&mdash;A Few Extracts from<br /> Confucius&mdash;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&mdash;The Classes that Exist in every<br />
+        Country&mdash;Effect of Education on the Common People&mdash;Wants
+        Increased by<br /> Intelligence&mdash;The Dream of 1776&mdash;The
+        Monopolist and the Competitor&mdash;The<br /> War between the Gould and
+        Mackay Cables&mdash;Competition between<br /> Monopolies&mdash;All
+        Advance in Legislation made by Repealing Laws&mdash;Wages<br /> and
+        Values not to be fixed by Law&mdash;Men and Machines&mdash;The Specific
+        of<br /> the Capitalist: Economy&mdash;The poor Man and Woman devoured by<br />
+        their Fellow-men&mdash;Socialism one of the Worst Possible forms of<br />
+        Slavery&mdash;Liberty not to be exchanged for Comfort&mdash;Will the
+        Workers<br /> always give their Earnings for the Useless?&mdash;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&mdash;The imaginative Man&mdash;"Medicinal
+        View" of<br /> Poetry&mdash;Rhyme and Religion&mdash;The theological
+        Poets and their Purpose in<br /> Writing&mdash;Moral Poets and their
+        "Unwelcome Truths"&mdash;The really Passionate<br /> are the Virtuous&mdash;Difference
+        between the Nude and the Naked&mdash;Morality<br /> the Melody of Conduct&mdash;The
+        inculcation of Moral Lessons not contemplated<br /> by Artists or great
+        Novelists&mdash;Mistaken Reformers&mdash;Art not a<br /> Sermon&mdash;Language
+        a Multitude of Pictures&mdash;Great Pictures and Great<br /> Statues
+        painted and chiseled with Words&mdash;Mediocrity moral from a<br />
+        Necessity which it calls Virtue&mdash;Why Art Civilizes&mdash;The Nude&mdash;The
+        Venus<br /> de Milo&mdash;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&mdash;Religious<br />
+        Guide-boards&mdash;Vast Interests interwoven with Creeds&mdash;Pretensions
+        of<br /> Christianity&mdash;Kepler's Discovery of his Three Great Laws&mdash;Equivocations<br />
+        and Evasions of the Church&mdash;Nature's Testimony against the<br />
+        Bible&mdash;The Age of Man on the Earth&mdash;"Inspired" Morality of the<br />
+        Bible&mdash;Miracles&mdash;Christian Dogmas&mdash;What the church has
+        been Compelled to<br /> Abandon&mdash;The Appeal to Epithets, Hatred and
+        Punishment&mdash;"Spirituality"<br /> the last Resource of the Orthodox&mdash;What
+        is it to be Spiritual?&mdash;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&mdash;Why a Creator is Imagined&mdash;Difficulty
+        of the<br /> Act of Creation&mdash;Belief in Supernatural Beings&mdash;Belief
+        and Worship among<br /> Savages&mdash;Questions of Origin and Destiny&mdash;Progress
+        impossible without<br /> Change of Belief&mdash;Circumstances Determining
+        Belief&mdash;How may the<br /> True Religion be Ascertained?&mdash;Prosperity
+        of Nations nor Virtue<br /> of Individuals Dependent on Religions or Gods&mdash;Uninspired
+        Books<br /> Superior&mdash;Part II. The Christian Religion&mdash;Credulity&mdash;Miracles
+        cannot<br /> be Established&mdash;Effect of Testimony&mdash;Miraculous
+        Qualities of all<br /> Religions&mdash;Theists and Naturalists&mdash;The
+        Miracle of Inspiration&mdash;How<br /> can the alleged Fact of
+        Inspiration be Established?&mdash;God's work and<br /> Man's&mdash;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&mdash;On the
+        Irrelevancy of a<br /> Lack of Scientific Knowledge&mdash;Difference
+        between the Agnostic and<br /> the Christian not in Knowledge but in
+        Credulity&mdash;The real name of<br /> an Agnostic said to be "Infidel"&mdash;What
+        an Infidel is&mdash;"Unpleasant"<br /> significance of the Word&mdash;Belief
+        in Christ&mdash;"Our Lord and his Apostles"<br /> possibly Honest Men&mdash;Their
+        Character not Invoked&mdash;Possession by evil<br /> spirits&mdash;Professor
+        Huxley's Candor and Clearness&mdash;The splendid Dream<br /> of Auguste
+        Comte&mdash;Statement of the Positive Philosophy&mdash;Huxley and<br />
+        Harrison.<br />
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link0012">ERNEST RENAN.</a>
+      </p>
+      <p>
+        <br /> His Rearing and his Anticipated Biography&mdash;The complex
+        Character of the<br /> Christ of the Gospels&mdash;Regarded as a Man by
+        Renan&mdash;The Sin against the<br /> Holy Ghost&mdash;Renan on the
+        Gospels&mdash;No Evidence that they were written<br /> by the Men whose
+        Names they Bear&mdash;Written long after the Events they<br /> Describe&mdash;Metaphysics
+        of the Church found in the Gospel of John&mdash;Not<br /> Apparent why
+        Four Gospels should have been Written&mdash;Regarded as<br /> legendary
+        Biographies&mdash;In "flagrant contradiction one with another"&mdash;The<br />
+        Divine Origin of Christ an After-growth&mdash;Improbable that he
+        intended to<br /> form a Church&mdash;Renan's Limitations&mdash;Hebrew
+        Scholarship&mdash;His "People of<br /> Israel"&mdash;His Banter and
+        Blasphemy.<br /> TOLSTOY AND "THE KREUTZER SONATA."<br /> Tolstoy's Belief
+        and Philosophy&mdash;His Asceticism&mdash;His View of Human<br /> Love&mdash;Purpose
+        of "The Kreutzer Sonata"&mdash;Profound Difference between the<br /> Love
+        of Men and that of Women&mdash;Tolstoy cannot now found a Religion, but<br />
+        may create the Necessity for another Asylum&mdash;The Emotions&mdash;The
+        Curious<br /> Opinion Dried Apples have of Fruit upon the Tree&mdash;Impracticability
+        of<br /> selling All and giving to the Poor&mdash;Love and Obedience&mdash;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&mdash;Early Advocacy of Reforms against
+        Dueling<br /> and Cruelty to Animals&mdash;The First to write "The United
+        States of<br /> America"&mdash;Washington's Sentiment against Separation
+        from Great<br /> Britain&mdash;Paine's Thoughts in the Declaration of
+        Independence&mdash;Author of<br /> the first Proclamation of Emancipation
+        in America&mdash;Establishment of a<br /> Fund for the Relief of the Army&mdash;H's
+        "Farewell Address"&mdash;The "Rights of<br /> Man"&mdash;Elected to the
+        French Convention&mdash;Efforts to save the Life of the<br /> King&mdash;His
+        Thoughts on Religion&mdash;Arrested&mdash;The "Age of Reason" and the<br />
+        Weapons it has furnished "Advanced Theologians"&mdash;Neglect by
+        Gouverneur<br /> Morris and Washington&mdash;James Monroe's letter to
+        Paine and to the<br /> Committee of General Safety&mdash;The vaunted
+        Religious Liberty of<br /> Colonial Maryland&mdash;Orthodox Christianity
+        at the Beginning of the 19th<br /> Century&mdash;New Definitions of God&mdash;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"&mdash;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&mdash;Rise of the Irish and Germans<br /> to Power&mdash;The
+        Burlingame Treaty&mdash;Character of Chinese Laborers&mdash;Their<br />
+        Enemies in the Pacific States&mdash;Violation of Treaties&mdash;The
+        Geary Law&mdash;The<br /> Chinese Hated for their Virtues&mdash;More
+        Piety than Principle among the<br /> People's Representatives&mdash;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&mdash;Necessity of finding out the
+        Facts<br /> of Nature&mdash;"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&mdash;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&mdash;Horace
+        Greeley and<br /> the Big Trees&mdash;The Man who "always did like
+        rolling land"&mdash;What the<br /> Snow looked like to the German&mdash;Shakespeare's
+        different Story for each<br /> Reader&mdash;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&mdash;A Case in point&mdash;H. Hodson
+        Rugg's Account of<br /> the Conversion of Ingersoll and 5,000 of his
+        Followers&mdash;The "Identity of<br /> Lost Israel with the British
+        Nation"&mdash;Old Falsehoods about Infidels&mdash;The<br /> New York
+        Observer and Thomas Paine&mdash;A Rascally English Editor&mdash;The<br />
+        Charge that Ingersoll's Son had been Converted&mdash;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&mdash;To know the Defects of the Bible is but the Beginning of<br />
+        Wisdom&mdash;The Liberal Paper should not discuss Theological Questions<br />
+        Alone&mdash;A Column for Children&mdash;Candor and Kindness&mdash;Nothing
+        should be<br /> Asserted that is not Known&mdash;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&mdash;A<br />
+        Protest against Ecclesiastical Tyranny&mdash;Believes in Building a Home<br />
+        here&mdash;Means Food and Fireside&mdash;The Right to express your
+        Thought&mdash;Its<br /> advice to every Human Being&mdash;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&mdash;The Orthodox Minister
+        whose Wife has<br /> a Heart&mdash;Honesty of Opinion not a Mitigating
+        Circumstance&mdash;Repulsiveness<br /> of an Orthodox Life&mdash;John
+        Ward an Object of Pity&mdash;Lyndall of the<br /> "African Farm"&mdash;The
+        Story of the Hunter&mdash;Death of Waldo&mdash;Women the<br /> Caryatides
+        of the Church&mdash;Attitude of Christianity toward other<br /> Religions&mdash;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&mdash;The Law if changed should throw greater Safeguards around
+        the<br /> Reputation of the Citizen&mdash;Pains should be taken to give
+        Prominence to<br /> Retractions&mdash;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&mdash;New Meanings given to Old<br /> Words&mdash;The
+        vanishing Picture of Hell&mdash;The Atonement&mdash;Confidence being<br />
+        Lost in the Morality of the Gospel&mdash;Exclusiveness of the Churches&mdash;The<br />
+        Hope of Immortality and Belief in God have Nothing to do with Real<br />
+        Religion&mdash;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&mdash;A Festival far older<br /> than
+        Christianity&mdash;Relics of Sun-worship in Christian<br /> Ceremonies&mdash;Christianity
+        furnished new Steam for an old Engine&mdash;Pagan<br /> Festivals
+        correspond to Ours&mdash;Why Holidays are Popular&mdash;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&mdash;what the Religionist calls
+        "Affirmative<br /> and Positive"&mdash;The Positive Side of Freethought&mdash;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&mdash;His
+        Motto&mdash;Will not<br /> endeavor to change the Mind of the "Infinite"&mdash;Will
+        have no Bells or<br /> Censers&mdash;Will be satisfied that the
+        Supernatural does not exist&mdash;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&mdash;Life of no
+        particular<br /> Importance to the Man who gets up before Daylight and
+        works till<br /> after Dark&mdash;A Revolution probable in the Relations
+        between Labor and<br /> Capital&mdash;Working People becoming Educated
+        and more Independent&mdash;The<br /> Government can Aid by means of Good
+        Laws&mdash;Women the worst Paid&mdash;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&mdash;Teaching given Christian
+        Children<br /> about those who die in the Faith of Abraham&mdash;Dr. John
+        Hall on<br /> the Persecution of the Jews in Russia as the Fulfillment of<br />
+        Prophecy&mdash;Hostility of Orthodox early Christians excited by Jewish<br />
+        Witnesses against the Faith&mdash;An infamous Chapter of History&mdash;Good<br />
+        and bad Men of every Faith&mdash;Jews should outgrow their own<br />
+        Superstitions&mdash;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&mdash;Modern Medicine, Law,
+        Literature and Pictures as against the<br /> Old&mdash;Creeds agree with
+        the Sciences of their Day&mdash;Apology the Prelude<br /> to Retreat&mdash;The
+        Presbyterian Creed Infamous, but no worse than<br /> the Catholic&mdash;Progress
+        begins when Expression of Opinion is<br /> Allowed&mdash;Examining the
+        Religions of other Countries&mdash;The Pulpit's<br /> Position Lost&mdash;The
+        Dogma of Eternal Pain the Cause of the orthodox<br /> Creeds losing
+        Popularity&mdash;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&mdash;The<br />
+        School-house more Important than the Church&mdash;Criticism of New
+        York's<br /> School-Buildings&mdash;The Kindergarten System Recommended&mdash;Poor
+        Pay of<br /> Teachers&mdash;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&mdash;Brutal Curiosity of Vivisectors&mdash;The
+        Pretence that<br /> they are working for the Good of Man&mdash;Have these
+        scientific Assassins<br /> added to useful Knowledge?&mdash;No Good to
+        the Race to be Accomplished by<br /> Torture&mdash;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&mdash;Matters which the Government has no
+        Right to pry<br /> into&mdash;Exposing the Debtor's financial Condition&mdash;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&mdash;The great Day of the
+        first<br /> Religion, Sun-worship&mdash;A God that Knew no Hatred nor
+        Sought Revenge&mdash;The<br /> Festival of Light.<br />
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link0037">SPIRITUALITY.</a>
+      </p>
+      <p>
+        <br /> A much-abused Word&mdash;The Early Christians too Spiritual to be<br />
+        Civilized&mdash;Calvin and Knox&mdash;Paine, Voltaire and Humboldt not<br />
+        Spiritual&mdash;Darwin also Lacking&mdash;What it is to be really
+        Spiritual&mdash;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&mdash;The Birth of
+        a<br /> new Epoch announced&mdash;Lincoln made the most commanding Figure
+        of the<br /> Century&mdash;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&mdash;Hospitals and Asylums not all built for Charity&mdash;Girard<br />
+        College&mdash;Lick Observatory&mdash;Carnegie not an Orthodox Christian&mdash;Christian<br />
+        Colleges&mdash;Give us Time.<br />
+      </p>
+      <p class="toc">
+        <a href="#link0040">CRUELTY IN THE ELMIRA REFORMATORY.</a>
+      </p>
+      <p>
+        <br /> Brockway a Savage&mdash;The Lash will neither develop the Brain
+        nor cultivate<br /> the Heart&mdash;Brutality a Failure&mdash;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&mdash;Justice can afford to Wait&mdash;The
+        right of<br /> Appeal&mdash;Case of Mrs. Maybrick&mdash;Life Imprisonment
+        for Murderers&mdash;American<br /> Courts better than the English.<br />
+        BIGOTRY OF COLLEGES.<br /> Universities naturally Conservative&mdash;Kansas
+        State University's<br /> Objection to Ingersoll as a commencement Orator&mdash;Comment
+        by Mr. Depew<br /> (note)&mdash;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&mdash;Capital now Required&mdash;Increasing<br />
+        competition in Civilized Life&mdash;Independence the first Object&mdash;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&mdash;Artistic and
+        Ethical<br /> Development&mdash;Science destroys Superstition, not true
+        Religion&mdash;Education<br /> preferable to Legislation&mdash;Our
+        Obligation to our Children.<br /> "SOWING AND REAPING."<br /> Moody's
+        Belief accounted for&mdash;A dishonest and corrupting Doctrine&mdash;A<br />
+        want of Philosophy and Sense&mdash;Have Souls in Heaven no Regrets?&mdash;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&mdash;The ferocious God of
+        the<br /> Bible&mdash;Miracles&mdash;A Christian in Constantinople would
+        not send his<br /> Child to a Mosque&mdash;Advice to all Agnostics&mdash;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&mdash;Men and Women not virtuous because of
+        any<br /> Book&mdash;The Commandments both Good and Bad&mdash;Books that
+        do not help<br /> Morality&mdash;Jehovah not a moral God&mdash;What is
+        Morality?&mdash;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&mdash;Outgrown<br />
+        Beliefs&mdash;Present-day Views of Christ and the Holy Ghost&mdash;Abandoned<br />
+        Notions about the Atonement&mdash;Salvation for Credulity&mdash;The
+        Miracles<br /> of the New Testament&mdash;The Bible "not true but
+        inspired"&mdash;The "Higher<br /> Critics" riding two Horses&mdash;Infidelity
+        in the Pulpit&mdash;The "restraining<br /> Influences of Religion" as
+        illustrated by Spain and Portugal&mdash;Thinking,<br /> Working and
+        Praying&mdash;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&mdash;Teachings<br />
+        of Twenty-five Years ago&mdash;Dodging and evading&mdash;The Clerical
+        Assault<br /> on Darwin&mdash;Draper, Buckle, Hegel, Spencer, Emerson&mdash;Comparison<br />
+        of Prejudices&mdash;Vanished Belief in the Devil&mdash;Matter and<br />
+        Force&mdash;Contradictions Dwelling in Unity&mdash;Substitutes for
+        Jehovah&mdash;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&mdash;The<br /> Importance of Honest Elections&mdash;Poisoning
+        the Source of Justice&mdash;The<br /> Fraudulent Voter a Traitor to his
+        Sovereign, the Will of the<br /> People&mdash;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&mdash;Other Books not now
+        in<br /> Existence, and Disagreements about the Canon&mdash;Composite
+        Character of<br /> certain Books&mdash;Various Versions&mdash;Why was
+        God's message given to the Jews<br /> alone?&mdash;The Story of the
+        Creation, of the Flood, of the Tower, and<br /> of Lot's wife&mdash;Moses
+        and Aaron and the Plagues of Egypt&mdash;Laws of<br /> Slavery&mdash;Instructions
+        by Jehovah Calculated to excite Astonishment and<br /> Mirth&mdash;Sacrifices
+        and the Scapegoat&mdash;Passages showing that the Laws of<br /> Moses
+        were made after the Jews had left the Desert&mdash;Jehovah's dealings<br />
+        with his People&mdash;The Sabbath Law&mdash;Prodigies&mdash;Joshua's
+        Miracle&mdash;Damned<br /> Ignorance and Infamy&mdash;Jephthah's
+        Sacrifice&mdash;Incredible Stories&mdash;The<br /> Woman of Endor and the
+        Temptation of David&mdash;Elijah and Elisha&mdash;Loss of<br /> the
+        Pentateuch from Moses to Josiah&mdash;The Jews before and after being<br />
+        Abandoned by Jehovah&mdash;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&mdash;(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&mdash;supposed
+      that it was upheld by the 13th and 14th Amendments,&mdash;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&mdash;not motives, but reasons&mdash;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&mdash;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,"&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the distinction often exists only in the clothes. Take away the
+      crown&mdash;there is only a man. Remove the robe&mdash;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&mdash;including judges&mdash;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&mdash;a
+      law poisoned by kingly prerogative&mdash;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&mdash;a Constitution that recognized and
+      upheld slavery, protected the slave-trade, legalized piracy upon the high
+      seas&mdash;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&mdash;the 13th, 14th and 15th&mdash;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&mdash;the noblest spirits under the flag&mdash;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&mdash;as though they had always been
+      free&mdash;as though they had been white. They became citizens&mdash;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&mdash;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, &amp;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;excluding Indians not taxed&mdash;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&mdash;and to none other&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;not only of the
+      United States, but of the States in which they reside&mdash;if, behind
+      these declarations, there is no power to act&mdash;no duty for the General
+      Government to discharge?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Notwithstanding the 13th Amendment had been adopted&mdash;notwithstanding
+      slavery and involuntary servitude had been legally destroyed&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that they were
+      required to reside on the soil without the right to purchase or own it&mdash;that
+      they were excluded from many occupations of gain and profit&mdash;that
+      they were not permitted to give testimony in the courts where white men
+      were on trial&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;not to his State, but to the Republic.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      This clause of the 14th Amendment made us all citizens of the United
+      States&mdash;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&mdash;through Congress; and Congress,
+      by the Civil Rights Act, defined some of the rights, privileges and
+      immunities of a citizen of the United States&mdash;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&mdash;North and
+      South, East and West&mdash;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&mdash;which necessarily included those of every
+      race and color&mdash;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&mdash;if it does not create&mdash;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&mdash;an
+      agent of the State. It is under the control of the State&mdash;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&mdash;and it is the only question&mdash;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"&mdash;meaning the 15th&mdash;"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&mdash;that is, the right to vote&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the sceptre of authority&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;managers of
+      railways, and keepers of public inns, to discriminate between their
+      passengers and guests on account of race or color&mdash;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&mdash;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>&mdash;2
+      Otto, 541.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "That an unconstitutional law will be treated by the courts as null and
+      void"&mdash;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,&mdash;namely, that
+      it is a "social question," one not to be regulated by law, and not covered
+      in any way by the Constitution&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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>&mdash;found in 100 U. S.
+      339&mdash;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&mdash;or is the Government liable&mdash;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>,&mdash;103 U. S.,
+      307,&mdash;that an officer acting contrary to the laws of the State&mdash;in
+      defiance of those laws&mdash;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&mdash;full,
+      complete, and ample,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;provided he does not counterfeit any of the coins
+      or current money of the United States. Congress would have to deal&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, Liberty,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the entire trip being within the limits of the State. The
+      captain of the boat refused to give her equal accommodations with other
+      passengers&mdash;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&mdash;residing in the State of Louisiana&mdash;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&mdash;that the State of
+      Louisiana had no right to interfere&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;it enlarges&mdash;the powers vested in
+      the General Government. It is an additional power&mdash;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&mdash;let it be within the scope of the
+      Constitution, and all means which are appropriate&mdash;which are plainly
+      adapted to that end&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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>&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, on account of
+      race, color, or previous condition of servitude&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;all amendments to the Constitution&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;when they are refused admittance to
+      public inns and railway cars, on an equality with white persons&mdash;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&mdash;it is an end. Take from our history, our literature, our laws,
+      our hearts&mdash;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&mdash;it is the plant and
+      bud and flower and fruit&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;into
+      what we call forms of government&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the
+      most fiendish of all things. It is worse than slavery. Slavery is at least
+      justified by avarice&mdash;by a desire to get something for nothing&mdash;by
+      a desire to live in idleness upon the labor of others&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that colored waiters shall bring it to them&mdash;willing
+      to ride in the same cars with the porters and to be shown to their seats
+      in theatres by colored ushers&mdash;willing to be nursed in sickness by
+      colored servants. They see nothing dangerous&mdash;nothing repugnant, in
+      any of these relations,&mdash;but the idea of riding in the same car,
+      stopping at the same hotel, fills them with fear&mdash;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&mdash;no
+      two blades of grass&mdash;no two grains of sand&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;afraid
+      to admit that he was property&mdash;and so we called him "contraband." We
+      hesitated to allow the negro to fight for his own freedom&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;all that any reasonable man&mdash;can ask is, that you
+      continue doing as you have done. Above all things&mdash;educate your
+      children&mdash;strive to make yourselves independent&mdash;work for homes&mdash;work
+      for yourselves&mdash;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&mdash;their patience
+      to provoke, and their forgiveness to insult. Turn the tables&mdash;change
+      places&mdash;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&mdash;they simply ask for
+      justice. They are willing to forget the past&mdash;willing to hide their
+      scars&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,"&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;when you look at the solemn
+      splendors of the night&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;why
+      the brain of another so that he became a Mohammedan&mdash;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&mdash;more important than gold or houses or lands&mdash;more
+      important than art or science&mdash;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&mdash;gladly would I forget every invention that
+      has leaped from the brain of man&mdash;gladly would I see all books ashes,
+      all works of art destroyed, all statues broken, and all the triumphs of
+      the world lost&mdash;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&mdash;sought to prevent argument&mdash;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&mdash;that will make a woman a better wife, a better mother&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;because it is his
+      right&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;probably you think you are
+      all right,&mdash;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&mdash;while I am opposed to
+      Presbyterianism I am not opposed to Presbyterians. I do not fight people,&mdash;I
+      fight ideas, I fight principles, and I never go into personalities. As I
+      said, I do not hate Presbyterians, but Presbyterianism&mdash;that is, I am
+      opposed to their doctrine. I do not hate a man that has the rheumatism&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;I do not know. I think they were right in their
+      opposition to Catholicism&mdash;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&mdash;first rate&mdash;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,&mdash;and I always sided with the Pope in that war&mdash;but
+      it made no difference; and in a little while the Episcopalians turned out
+      to be just about like other folks&mdash;no worse&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;industrious,
+      frugal, gentle, kind and loving&mdash;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;"&mdash;but the world went on as usual, and the
+      Unitarians produced men like Channing&mdash;one of the tenderest spirits
+      that ever lived&mdash;they produced men like Theodore Parker&mdash;one of
+      the greatest brained and greatest hearted men produced upon this continent&mdash;a
+      good man&mdash;and yet they thought he was a blasphemer&mdash;they even
+      prayed for his death&mdash;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&mdash;everybody
+      will go to stealing just to enjoy themselves." But they did not. The
+      Universalists were good people&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;stripped naked&mdash;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&mdash;I do not know how it is&mdash;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&mdash;a
+      Presbyterian, over to Turkey. He goes there, and he tells the Mohammedans&mdash;and
+      he has it in a pamphlet and he distributes it&mdash;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&mdash;that it is
+      all a mistake&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the spirit of the Revolution at that time not having
+      permeated all classes of society&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;more
+      important than any other clause in that instrument&mdash;a clause that
+      shines in that constitution like a star at night.&mdash;
+    </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&mdash;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&mdash;the absolute consequences of certain acts&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;"No
+      law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Now let us come to this old law&mdash;this law that was asleep for a
+      hundred years before this constitution was adopted&mdash;this law coiled
+      like a snake beneath the foundations of the Government&mdash;this law,
+      cowardly, dastardly&mdash;this law passed by wretches who were afraid: to
+      discuss&mdash;this law passed by men who could not, and who knew they
+      could not, defend their creed&mdash;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&mdash;and yet, the moment he got in power he
+      used it: The people became civilized&mdash;but that law was on the statute
+      book. It simply remained. There it was, sound asleep&mdash;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>"&mdash;
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I want to say right here&mdash;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&mdash;charged them with
+      idolatry&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;when
+      they say, "if a man strike you on one cheek turn to him the other also&mdash;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>
+      "&mdash;<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&mdash;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&mdash;the
+      trouble is, the ministers&mdash;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&mdash;prays
+      that his little children may recover from the fever&mdash;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&mdash;would
+      never think of such a thing&mdash;even if he called the unbelievers of the
+      world "wretches," "dogs," and "devils." What would I do? I would simply
+      answer him&mdash;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&mdash;take the best ones&mdash;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&mdash;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:&mdash;
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "<i>Or the Christian religion</i>."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Well, what is the Christian religion? "If you scoff at the Christian
+      religion&mdash;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&mdash;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>&mdash;"
+    </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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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"&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;stop taking it from your priests&mdash;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&mdash;now I want your candid judgment."
+      So the Protestant Church says to a man, "This Bible is a message from your
+      Father,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;it sheds light. Humor is the
+      readiest test of truth&mdash;of the natural, of the sensible&mdash;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&mdash;no sense of
+      the absurd&mdash;the Presbyterian creed, fill his darkened brain with
+      superstition and his heart with hatred&mdash;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:&mdash;
+    </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&mdash;just in that language. The punishment, however, has been
+      somewhat changed. In the good old days when the king sat on the throne&mdash;in
+      the good old days when the altar was the right-bower of the throne&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;they must forswear
+      allegiance to every other potentate, prince and power&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;in Buddha. Now, I ask
+      you,&mdash;when that man comes here and becomes a citizen&mdash;when the
+      Constitution is about him, above him&mdash;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&mdash;there is no Savior except Buddha,
+      the Illuminated, Buddha the Blest"? I say that he has that right&mdash;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&mdash;the believer in Zoroaster, in the spirits of Good and
+      Evil, and that the spirit of Evil will finally triumph forever&mdash;if
+      that is his religion&mdash;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&mdash;and there is, in my judgment, only one
+      name on the page of American history greater than his&mdash;only one name
+      for which I have a greater and tenderer reverence&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;while his wife wept&mdash;while
+      his children clung to his hands&mdash;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&mdash;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?"&mdash;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&mdash;the same
+      spirit that did that, went before the grand jury in this case&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;a savage; any man
+      that would abuse him on that account, is a barbarian&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;I
+      can't tell. If I had been raised in Scotland, on oatmeal, I might have
+      been a Covenanter&mdash;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&mdash;no doubt of it. You see it depends on where you
+      were born&mdash;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&mdash;Methodists,
+      Unitarians, or Catholics, plenty of them, who are unbelievers&mdash;plenty
+      of them who deny the truth of the Scriptures&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;easy to sail the way the
+      boats are going&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;I love him myself&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;so with the
+      greatest thinkers and greatest writers of modern times.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      You may not agree with these men&mdash;and what does that prove? It simply
+      proves that they do not agree with you&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that
+      it covers simply speech&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;to open your mouth like a young robin, and
+      swallow&mdash;worms or shingle nails&mdash;no matter which.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The defendant further blasphemed and said that:&mdash;
+    </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&mdash;who would
+      be permitted to explain it&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the water rising hour by hour, and the
+      poor wretched children of God climbing to the tops of their houses&mdash;then
+      to the tops of the hills. The water still rising&mdash;no mercy. The
+      people climbing higher and higher, looking to the mountains for salvation&mdash;the
+      merciless rain still falling, the inexorable flood still rising. Children
+      falling from the arms of mothers&mdash;no pity. The highest hills covered&mdash;infancy
+      and old age mingling in death&mdash;the cries of women, the sobs and sighs
+      lost in the roar of waves&mdash;the heavens still relentless. The
+      mountains are covered&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;
+    </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&mdash;"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&mdash;and for that reason is a
+      "blasphemer."
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I say to you now, gentlemen,&mdash;and I shall argue to the Court,&mdash;that
+      there is not in what I have read a solitary blasphemous word&mdash;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:&mdash;
+    </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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;no doubt of that. Sarah
+      could have obtained a divorce in this State&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;"
+    </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&mdash;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.&mdash;Millions believe, that this is
+      true&mdash;I do not believe,&mdash;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,&mdash;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,&mdash;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"?&mdash;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,&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;a
+      picture that was a likeness,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;it being a law in favor of a
+      defendant&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;that is blasphemy.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      To enslave your fellow-man, to put chains upon his body&mdash;that is
+      blasphemy.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      To enslave the minds of men, to put manacles upon the brain, padlocks upon
+      the lips&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that is blasphemy.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      To persecute the intelligent few, at the command of the ignorant many&mdash;that
+      is blasphemy.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      To forge chains, to build dungeons, for your honest fellow-men&mdash;that
+      is blasphemy.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      To pollute the souls of children with the dogma of eternal pain&mdash;that
+      is blasphemy.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      To violate your conscience&mdash;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,&mdash;and
+      that is the country that our ancestors fought in the sacred name of
+      liberty,&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;a wife prematurely
+      old and gray,&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;these are sacred. The
+      liberty of man is of far more importance than any book; the rights of man
+      more sacred than any religion&mdash;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&mdash;that the mysteries of the whole world are
+      explained by one volume?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      All that is&mdash;all that conveys information to man&mdash;all that has
+      been produced by the past&mdash;all that now exists&mdash;should be
+      considered by an intelligent man. All the known truths of this world&mdash;all
+      the philosophy, all the poems, all the pictures, all the statues, all the
+      entrancing music&mdash;the prattle of babes, the lullaby of mothers, the
+      words of honest men, the trumpet calls to duty&mdash;all these make up the
+      bible of the world&mdash;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,&mdash;if we wish to benefit our
+      fellow-men&mdash;if we wish to live honorable lives&mdash;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&mdash;even if it be
+      constitutional&mdash;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&mdash;how good it is, or how bad it
+      is&mdash;no matter what the Court may instruct you on that subject&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;do not
+      forget that you have no right to take one word into account except the
+      exact words set out in this indictment&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;"willfully" telling his real opinion&mdash;"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&mdash;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&mdash;has there been any&mdash;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&mdash;that is all.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It was claimed, among other things, that the defendant circulated this
+      pamphlet among children. There was no such evidence&mdash;not the
+      slightest. The only evidence about schools, or school-children was, that
+      when the defendant talked with the bill-poster,&mdash;whose business the
+      defendant was interfering with,&mdash;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,&mdash;laid the pamphlets on a show case, or
+      threw them upon a desk&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;no civilized man ever did do it&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;any case in which a man
+      has been punished for speaking his sentiments. The records have not been
+      stained&mdash;have not been polluted&mdash;with such a verdict.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Keep such a verdict from the Reports of your State&mdash;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&mdash;that there is a manacle upon the
+      brain.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      For the sake of your State&mdash;for the sake of her reputation throughout
+      the world&mdash;for your own sakes&mdash;and those of your children, and
+      their children yet to be&mdash;say to the world that New Jersey shares in
+      the spirit of this age,&mdash;that New Jersey is not a survival of the
+      Dark Ages,&mdash;that New Jersey does not still regard the thumbscrew as
+      an instrument of progress,&mdash;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&mdash;for the sake of
+      something of more importance to mankind than this continent&mdash;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&mdash;and not only so, but I insist&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;all good,
+      all bad&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;but with that word realized&mdash;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&mdash;gave their testimony, and upon that
+      testimony, under this statute, the indictment was found.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      While I do not blame these people&mdash;they not being on trial&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;only two words&mdash;and these
+      two words will fill an anxious heart with joy. They will fill a soul with
+      light. It is a very short message&mdash;only two words&mdash;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&mdash;that flag for which has been shed the bravest and
+      best blood of the world&mdash;under that flag maintained by Washington, by
+      Jefferson, by Franklin and by Lincoln&mdash;under that flag in defence of
+      which New Jersey poured out her best and bravest blood&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;of developing the mind
+      of a laborer. The people were created to support thrones and altars. Their
+      destiny was to toil and obey&mdash;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&mdash;one
+      deformed his body, the other his mind&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;no
+      room for patriotic gods or supernatural beings&mdash;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&mdash;the
+      pope was his agent, and every priest and bishop and cardinal was armed
+      with credentials from the Most High&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;millions who have fought
+      for the rights of man&mdash;but churches as organizations, have been on
+      the other side. It is true that churches have fought churches&mdash;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&mdash;that
+      is to say, by the "Triumphant Beast." This man had committed certain
+      crimes&mdash;he had publicly stated that there were other worlds than this&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, there are seven natural persons
+      and one artificial&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;we will attend to the affairs of this."
+      Equal liberty was given to all. But the ultra theologian is not satisfied
+      with this&mdash;he wishes to destroy the liberty of the people&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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."&mdash;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"&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;as bishops usually are&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that the unrelated is the absolute&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;given to wild beasts&mdash;molten lead was poured in their
+      ears&mdash;their eye-lids were cut off and, the wretches placed with their
+      faces toward the sun&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that they are actually possessed by devils;
+      and others will declare that all these people act from choice&mdash;that
+      they are possessed of free wills, of intelligence&mdash;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&mdash;the sick desire
+      health&mdash;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&mdash;that the child is the heir of physical
+      deformity. Are diseases of the brain&mdash;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&mdash;that everything is natural&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that it is inherited from parents, or the result of
+      unconscious negligence, or it may be of recklessness&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;thirty-one millions of people, and nineteen thousand
+      prisoners.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      In 1870&mdash;thirty-eight millions of people, and thirty-two thousand
+      prisoners.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      In 1880&mdash;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&mdash;no deterrent
+      power&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;when he was tortured in every possible way&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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?&mdash;has it the right to
+      degrade?&mdash;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&mdash;he loses his name&mdash;he is designated by
+      a number. He is no longer treated as a human being&mdash;he becomes the
+      slave of the State. Nothing is done for his improvement&mdash;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&mdash;that
+      he has been subjected to the torture of perpetual humiliation&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;no reason for
+      doing the best they can&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;in which they were redeemed&mdash;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&mdash;as a
+      profession&mdash;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&mdash;compel them to
+      produce what they eat and use&mdash;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&mdash;by justice&mdash;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&mdash;with
+      murderers? Shall the nation take life?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      It has been contended that the death penalty deters others&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;we know the man is guilty&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;and as it seems to me especially of
+      every lawyer&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;as long as they sustain
+      the relations of savages to each other&mdash;as long as they put the
+      laurel and the oak on the brows of those who kill&mdash;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&mdash;the man
+      looks down&mdash;he has neither hope nor courage. He becomes sinister&mdash;he
+      envies the prosperous&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, a nation composed of a few landlords and of
+      many tenants&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;so that these poor people would feel that they were in
+      partnership with nature&mdash;that some of the land was absolutely theirs,
+      and that no one could drive them from their home&mdash;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&mdash;and it is not yet dead&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;would ascertain what
+      they were fitted for&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;and
+      surely there is no better reformation than this. Some may be, and probably
+      millions have been, reformed, through kindness, through gratitude&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that nothing is done for revenge&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the facts of mind&mdash;the
+      power of temptation&mdash;the limitations of the intellect&mdash;the force
+      of habit&mdash;the result of heredity&mdash;the power of passion&mdash;the
+      domination of want&mdash;the diseases of the brain&mdash;the tyranny of
+      appetite&mdash;the cruelty of conditions&mdash;the results of association&mdash;the
+      effects of poverty and wealth, of helplessness and power.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Until these subtle things are understood&mdash;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&mdash;of the average man&mdash;of his
+      thoughts, passions, fears and aspirations&mdash;something of his sorrows
+      and his joys, his weakness, his liability to fall&mdash;something of what
+      he resists&mdash;the struggles, the victories and the failures of his
+      life. We know something of the tides and currents of the mysterious sea&mdash;something
+      of the circuits of the wayward winds&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;and the only
+      religion established by the "living God," head of the American system&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;to become acquainted with
+      facts&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that they were part
+      of a divine plan, and that all would be adjusted in some other world&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that when
+      the demand fails, the producer, the laborer, must suffer, must perish&mdash;that
+      the law feels neither pity nor malice&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;if a judgment for so many dollars could be
+      discharged by so many days of labor,&mdash;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&mdash;the very
+      people who are depended upon to enforce this law&mdash;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&mdash;burdens taken from the backs of wives and
+      mothers&mdash;houses made wholesome, food healthful&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;what it always will be&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;everything eating something else&mdash;everything
+      at the mercy of beak and claw and hoof and tooth&mdash;of hand and club,
+      of brain and greed&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;who goes to the grave without even
+      having had one luxury&mdash;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&mdash;the number of failures,
+      the poverty, the anxiety, the tears, the withered hopes, the bitter
+      realities, the hunger, the crime, the humiliation, the shame&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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?&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, those who have some object
+      besides that of art&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say the artist&mdash;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&mdash;this
+      is Art.&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;like
+      the fact of the attraction of gravitation&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;no matter how honestly they originated&mdash;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&mdash;twenty
+      or thirty at a time&mdash;are driven to the place of slaughter. This ox
+      leads the way&mdash;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&mdash;the real
+      and only faith&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;bad as well as good&mdash;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&mdash;political, social, artistic, and individual&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the inspired prophets&mdash;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&mdash;old theories were put aside&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;to the
+      deposits by volcanoes&mdash;to the sedimentary rocks&mdash;to the vast
+      reefs that had been built by the coral, and to the countless evidences of
+      age, of the lapse of time&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;according to the inspired
+      figures&mdash;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&mdash;the serpent&mdash;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&mdash;that
+      he has been slowly produced through countless years&mdash;that the story
+      of Eden is a childish myth&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that did not account for everything&mdash;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&mdash;about
+      what we call facts. Slowly it dawned upon the mind that force is
+      indestructible&mdash;that we cannot imagine force as existing apart from
+      matter&mdash;that we cannot even think of matter existing apart from force&mdash;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&mdash;that it can have no father,
+      no mother&mdash;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&mdash;in
+      chemical affinities&mdash;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&mdash;not
+      simply the immortality of joy&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;afterward with hatred. They are
+      hardly courageous enough to admit that they are wrong.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Once the pulpit was the leader&mdash;it spoke with authority. By its side
+      was the sword of the state, with the hilt toward its hand. Now it is
+      apologized for&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;it cannot come to us&mdash;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&mdash;or rather our ignorance&mdash;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&mdash;we should combat error. We
+      should hate hypocrisy, but not the hypocrite&mdash;larceny, but not the
+      thief&mdash;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;&mdash;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"&mdash;that they are "of the earth, earthy"&mdash;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&mdash;who denied the
+      liberty of thought and expression&mdash;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&mdash;who lives in accordance with his highest ideal&mdash;who loves
+      his wife and children&mdash;who discharges his obligations&mdash;who makes
+      a happy fireside for the ones he loves&mdash;who succors the oppressed&mdash;who
+      gives his honest opinions&mdash;who is guided by principle&mdash;who is
+      merciful and just?
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Is the man spiritual who loves the beautiful&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;and can be none&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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,&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;he feels. He does not investigate&mdash;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&mdash;that is, believing
+      other religions&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;more that is of use, ten thousand times&mdash;than
+      all the writers of the sacred books.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      I believe in the religion of reason&mdash;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,&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;or, rather, by uncertain
+      writers&mdash;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&mdash;including ourselves&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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. &#65533;?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&mdash;anything that really happened&mdash;by what is called a
+      miracle. It is easy to understand how that which was common became
+      wonderful by accretion,&mdash;by things added, and by things forgotten,&mdash;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&mdash;unconsciously, perhaps&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;"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&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;where
+      belief is a condition to salvation&mdash;supply the evidence? Certainly
+      the Creator of man&mdash;if such exist&mdash;knows the exact nature of the
+      human mind&mdash;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,&mdash;for enthusiasm, for fear,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;for neither of them has any knowledge on this
+      subject,&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;so
+      would the tribes of Central Africa,&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;a man who swapped religions for the sake of
+      exchanging wives&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;if they have the argument,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;we
+      know that the intellectual light is greater&mdash;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&mdash;if he is to stand
+      with the great and splendid of the earth&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;faith in this world&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;"In the supernatural phase the mind seeks causes&mdash;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.&mdash;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.&mdash;"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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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?&mdash;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&mdash;clothing
+      all in the poetry born of a delightful union of heart and brain&mdash;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&mdash;a dangerous thing for a Catholic to do. Thought
+      leads to doubt, doubt to investigation, investigation to truth&mdash;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&mdash;a soul of the universe&mdash;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 F&eacute;, 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&mdash;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&mdash;the God-Providence, does not show himself in the
+      universe"&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;if we know anything&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, the four gospels&mdash;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,"&mdash;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&mdash;and this was after the Gospel "according to St. John" had
+      been written&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;hopeful and serene&mdash;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.&mdash;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>
+      TOLSTO&Iuml; AND "THE KREUTZER SONATA."
+    </h2>
+    <p>
+      COUNT TOLSTO&Iuml; is a man of genius. He is acquainted with Russian life
+      from the highest to the lowest&mdash;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&mdash;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 Tolsto&iuml;, 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&mdash;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&mdash;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 Tolsto&iuml; 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&mdash;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 Tolsto&iuml; 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>
+      Tolsto&iuml; 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
+      Tolsto&iuml; 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&mdash;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&mdash;that
+      is to say, we are emotional beings. The generalization of Tolsto&iuml;,
+      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&mdash;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 Tolsto&iuml; 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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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 Tolsto&iuml; 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>
+      Tolsto&iuml;, 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 Tolsto&iuml; 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&mdash;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. Tolsto&iuml; 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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the
+      real love, mother of every virtue and of every joy.&mdash;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&mdash;that he was a philanthropist&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;afterwards the bank of North America&mdash;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,&mdash;a Declaration of Independence.&mdash;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&mdash;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"&mdash;a
+      book that laid the foundation for all the real liberty that the English
+      now enjoy&mdash;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&mdash;a great man had
+      shed light&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that the tiger was already crouching for a spring&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;in favor
+      of life&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;clinging to the toggery of theology&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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"&mdash;if he
+      had cared nothing for the liberties of men in other lands&mdash;if he had
+      said that the state could not live without the church&mdash;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&mdash;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:&mdash;<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&mdash;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"&mdash;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&mdash;to throw off some
+      foreign yoke&mdash;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&mdash;his virtues denounced as vices&mdash;his
+      services forgotten&mdash;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&mdash;the friend of the whole world&mdash;with all
+      their hearts.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      On the 8th of June, 1809, death came&mdash;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&mdash;On horseback, a Quaker, the humanity of whose heart
+      dominated the creed of his head&mdash;and, following on foot, two negroes
+      filled with gratitude&mdash;constituted the funeral cortege of Thomas
+      Paine.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      He who had received the gratitude of many millions, the thanks of generals
+      and statesmen&mdash;he who had been the friend and companion of the wisest
+      and best&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that he was original, sincere, intrepid, and that
+      he could truthfully say: "The world is my country, to do good my religion"&mdash;if
+      the people only knew all this&mdash;the truth&mdash;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."&mdash;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&mdash;&mdash;&mdash;&mdash;. 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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;and he always said this as though it ended the
+      argument,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;citizens of a friendly nation&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;the object of life&mdash;is happiness. Nothing can
+      be better than that&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;no matter
+      how much he may have studied&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;is not
+      infallible&mdash;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,&mdash;to men
+      who long to make their country great and free,&mdash;to men who care more
+      for public good than private gain&mdash;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&mdash;free from injustice&mdash;free
+      from superstition.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      This will do for next Christmas. The following Christmas, I may want more.&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;the more the statue, the star, the painting,
+      the violet, has to tell. Nature says to me all that I am capable of
+      understanding&mdash;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&mdash;he may know a few&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;thought&mdash;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.&mdash;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:&mdash;
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "November 27, 1886.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      "Dear Mr. Loveland.&mdash;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 C&aelig;sarian
+      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&mdash;a religious
+      paper&mdash;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,&mdash;that
+      is to say, from missionary to Hottentot&mdash;without the slightest
+      evidence of fatigue&mdash;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,&mdash;a story without the slightest foundation&mdash;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&mdash;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."&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;I mean that
+      religion unsoftened by Infidelity, by doubt&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;follow thou me. Desert wife and child. Human love is
+      nothing&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that all
+      thoughts and dreams have been naturally produced&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;like one who had guessed the riddle of the Sphinx.
+      She, too, is overwhelmed with the injustice of the world&mdash;with the
+      negligence of nature&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that he can obtain good&mdash;gives him courage&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the only one to whom God
+      had condescended to make known his will&mdash;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"&mdash;the only ones in whom God took the slightest
+      interest! Imagine the egotism of the Catholic Church, claiming that it is
+      the only church&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;great enough to
+      know that they are not bound by the mistakes of their ancestors&mdash;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&mdash;these trends&mdash;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&mdash;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>
+      &mdash;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&mdash;no reformation, no good to be accomplished&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the workingmen&mdash;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&mdash;from the employeer class&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, a day
+      of rest and pleasure&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the
+      ministers of our day close their eyes in prayer. When men worshiped the
+      sun&mdash;when they looked at that luminary and implored its assistance&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;the
+      conditions of well-being&mdash;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&mdash;of one who is glad that he has passed the
+      day without a beating&mdash;one who is happy because he has had enough to
+      eat&mdash;but the highest possible idea of happiness is freedom.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      All religious systems enslave the mind. Certain things are demanded&mdash;certain
+      things must be believed&mdash;certain things must be done&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;if the dogma be true&mdash;that every decent human being
+      should hate, with every drop of his blood, the creator of the universe. He
+      also knows&mdash;if he knows anything&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;another kind of work. The Freethinker knows that the
+      universe is natural&mdash;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&mdash;if there be gods.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The positive side is this: That every good action has good consequences&mdash;that
+      it bears good fruit forever&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;they
+      know nothing about gods or angels or heavens or hells&mdash;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&mdash;from pope to priest, from bishop to parson, do not the
+      slightest good in this world&mdash;that they live upon the labor of others&mdash;that
+      they earn nothing themselves&mdash;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&mdash;and he also knows that in every religion the priest
+      insists on five things&mdash;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&mdash;the facts
+      of nature&mdash;to the end that we may take advantage of those truths, of
+      those facts&mdash;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&mdash;that
+      which will prevent or kill disease&mdash;that which will do away with pain&mdash;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&mdash;that we may have good houses
+      that protect us from heat and cold. And beyond this&mdash;beyond these
+      simple necessities&mdash;there are still wants and aspirations, and
+      free-thought will give us the highest possible in art&mdash;the most
+      wonderful and thrilling in music&mdash;the greatest paintings, the most
+      marvelous sculpture&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the religion of this world&mdash;the religion of the family&mdash;the
+      love of husband for wife, of wife for husband&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;to correct
+      these mistakes&mdash;to build the fabric of civilization on the foundation
+      of demonstrated truth&mdash;is the task of the Freethinker. To destroy
+      guide-boards that point in the wrong direction&mdash;to correct charts
+      that lure to reef and wreck&mdash;to drive the fiend of fear from the mind&mdash;to
+      protect the cradle from the serpent of superstition and dispel the
+      darkness of ignorance with the sun of science&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;of the highest art&mdash;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&mdash;and
+      no other&mdash;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&mdash;that majorities in this mental world can
+      settle nothing&mdash;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&mdash;that is
+      beautiful&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;all
+      I can say is that I hope it will. I cannot see how any man who does
+      nothing&mdash;who lives in idleness&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;they are better educated&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;they who make the money&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;if they will stand together&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;of those who
+      produce the real wealth of the world&mdash;of those who carry the burdens
+      of mankind.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      Any man who wishes to force his brother to work&mdash;to toil&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, philosophers&mdash;that is to say,
+      men who knew that the chief priests were hypocrites&mdash;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&mdash;not enough to obey the Ten
+      Commandments&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, he must be
+      regenerated&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;those
+      who love their enemies&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that the
+      universities dispute each other&mdash;that the synod attacks the
+      ecumenical council&mdash;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&mdash;he
+      simply opened his mouth and took the dose. If he died, it was simply a
+      dispensation of Providence&mdash;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&mdash;not only asks what medicine will be good for him,&mdash;but
+      insists on knowing the philosophy of the cure&mdash;asks the doctor why he
+      gives it&mdash;what result he expects&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that Dante is prolix&mdash;that they
+      deal with subjects having no human interest. He laughs at Young's "Night
+      Thoughts" and Pollok's "Course of Time"&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say,
+      the creeds&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;their
+      congregations became so intelligent&mdash;that it was necessary to give
+      new meanings to the old words. The cruel was softened&mdash;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&mdash;the creeds must be changed&mdash;they
+      were no longer believed&mdash;only occasionally were they preached. The
+      ministers became a little ashamed&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;their theories, their religions&mdash;are now known; and we
+      have ascertained that the religions of all people have exactly the same
+      foundation as our own&mdash;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&mdash;pursued certain lines of argument&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;when
+      fathers and mothers bent above their dead who had died in their sins&mdash;when
+      wives shed their tears on the faces of husbands who had been born but once&mdash;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&mdash;yet a creed with this doctrine
+      has been called "the glad tidings of great joy"&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;they foot it. Hell is for strangers and tramps. No soul
+      leaves a brown-stone front for hell&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;with the conditions of happiness&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, character.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The cost of the schools is very little, and the cost of land&mdash;giving
+      the children, as I said before, air and light&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, with
+      real men; with real ladies&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;the Hell&mdash;of Science.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      All the cruelty which the human&mdash;or rather the inhuman&mdash;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&mdash;with an unaccelerated pulse&mdash;with
+      the calmness of John Calvin at the murder of Servetus&mdash;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&mdash;laying bare the nerves, denuding them with knives, pulling
+      them out with forceps&mdash;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,&mdash;men
+      and women healthy and heartless, muscular and cruel&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;of Right and Reason&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;these haters of men&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;some of the benefactors
+      of the race&mdash;for having lived on the low plane of usefulness&mdash;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&mdash;that
+      changes his nature&mdash;that causes him to denounce what he really loves
+      and to laud with the fervor of insanity a joy that he never felt&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;ask
+      his hearers what it will profit them to build railways and palaces and
+      lose their own souls&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;in
+      making money to feed and clothe and educate the ones he loves&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;April 12th&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;of the agonies of women&mdash;the sobs of orphans&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;or, at least, for a long time the
+      best&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;an apostle of brutality. He beats and bruises flesh to
+      satisfy his conscience&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that
+      he cannot be reviewed&mdash;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."&mdash;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&mdash;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?"&mdash;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&mdash;
+     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&mdash;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&mdash;now the brow is criss-crossed with the lines of
+     a frown, sometimes quizzical and sometimes indignant&mdash;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&mdash;and in this he is
+     like Lincoln&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;some of the weaker ones read theology&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that
+      is, if he has a great desire to make his ideas known to the world&mdash;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&mdash;so that he is forgotten by himself;
+      so that he cares neither for applause nor censure&mdash;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&mdash;between a canal and a river&mdash;between April rain and
+      water-works. It is a question of capacity and feeling&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;with
+      the great statues&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;still controls&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;all
+      suffering the penalties of my ignorance. Let us have more science and more
+      sentiment&mdash;more knowledge and more conscience&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;ought to find
+      out what the really intelligent have thought. He ought to get some new
+      ideas&mdash;a few facts&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;loves him as a mother loves
+      her babe&mdash;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&mdash;before the
+      Trinity&mdash;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&mdash;no
+      actual flames&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;for truth&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that
+      evidence is not essential&mdash;that faith is independent of facts and
+      that religion is superior to reason. They are taught not to use their
+      natural sense&mdash;not to tell what they really think&mdash;not to
+      entertain a doubt&mdash;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&mdash;in which the law of falling bodies, as given
+      by Galileo, was ridiculed&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;no right to be mentally honest, and that he will be damned for
+      an honest doubt&mdash;where he is taught that God was ferocious,
+      revengeful, heartless as a wild beast&mdash;that he drowned millions of
+      his children&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;should
+      not be taken advantage of&mdash;that they should be treated fairly,
+      honestly&mdash;that they should be allowed to develop from the inside
+      instead of being crammed from the outside&mdash;that they should be taught
+      to reason, not to believe&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;a perfect man.
+      Others say that he was divine, but not actually God&mdash;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&mdash;that he sacrificed himself
+      unto himself&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;not
+      the Christ of the Middle Ages; nor of Luther, Wesley or the Puritan
+      fathers.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      The Christ who was God&mdash;who was his own son and his own father&mdash;who
+      was born of a virgin, cast out devils, rose from the dead, and ascended
+      bodily to heaven&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;to shed his own blood, that is to say,
+      to have it shed by his chosen people. This was the atonement&mdash;the
+      scheme of salvation&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;of
+      vicarious vice&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;as a
+      miracle&mdash;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&mdash;happens many times in the life of
+      one man. If this happens without excitement&mdash;as the result of thought&mdash;it
+      is called reformation. If it occurs in a revival&mdash;if it is the result
+      of fright&mdash;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 &amp; 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&mdash;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&mdash;the
+      uniting of hearts, the lighting of the sacred flame in each&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the flag of
+      the natural.
+    </p>
+    <p>
+      All over Christendom religions are declining. Only children and the
+      intellectually undeveloped have faith&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;of doubt&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;of
+      evil spirits&mdash;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&mdash;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. B&uuml;chner'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&mdash;that they
+      were incapable of examining the other side&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;on
+      the development of the brain&mdash;to the end that he may take advantage
+      of the forces of nature&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;there must be&mdash;such a thing as political morality so
+      far as voting is concerned.&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;six hundred thousand men, besides women and
+      children&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;never was
+      such directions about kidneys and blood, ashes and fat, about curtains,
+      tongs, fringes, ribands, and brass pins&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the
+      same God who said, "Suffer little children to come unto me"&mdash;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&mdash;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
new 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
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..38fe04e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/38811-h/images/titlepage.jpg
diff --git a/38811.txt b/38811.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0be902c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/38811.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,17495 @@
+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]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ASCII
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK WORKS OF INGERSOLL ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by David Widger
+
+
+
+
+
+
+THE WORKS OF ROBERT G. INGERSOLL
+
+By Robert G. Ingersoll
+
+"TO PLOW IS TO PRAY; TO PLANT IS TO PROPHESY, AND THE HARVEST ANSWERS
+AND FULFILLS."
+
+IN TWELVE VOLUMES, VOLUME XI.
+
+MISCELLANY
+
+1900
+
+DRESDEN EDITION
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS OF VOLUME XI.
+
+
+ADDRESS ON THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT.
+
+Introduction by Frederick Douglass("Abou Ben Adhem")--Decision of
+the United States Supreme Court pronouncing the Civil Rights Act
+Unconstitutional--Limitations of Judges--Illusion Destroyed by the
+Decision in the Dred Scott Case--Mistake of Our Fathers in adopting
+the Common Law of England--The 13th Amendment to the Constitution
+Quoted--The Clause of the Constitution upholding Slavery--Effect of
+this Clause--Definitions of a State by Justice Wilson and Chief Justice
+Chase--Effect of the Thirteenth Amendment--Justice Field on Involuntary
+Servitude--Civil Rights Act Quoted--Definition of the Word Servitude by
+the Supreme Court--Obvious Purpose of the Amendment--Justice Miller
+on the 14th Amendment--Citizens Created by this Amendment--Opinion
+of Justice Field--Rights and Immunities guaranteed by the
+Constitution--Opinion delivered by Chief-Justice Waite--Further Opinions
+of Courts on the question of Citizenship--Effect of the 13th, 14th and
+15th Amendments--"Corrective" Legislation by Congress--Denial of equal
+"Social" Privileges--Is a State responsible for the Action of its Agent
+when acting contrary to Law?--The Word "State" must include the People
+of the State as well as the Officers of the State--The Louisiana Civil
+Rights Law, and a Case tried under it--Uniformity of Duties essential to
+the Carrier--Congress left Powerless to protect Rights conferred by the
+Constitution--Definition of "Appropriate Legislation"--Propositions laid
+down regarding the Sovereignty of the State, the powers of the General
+Government, etc.--A Tribute to Justice Harlan--A Denial that Property
+exists by Virtue of Law--Civil Rights not a Question of Social
+Equality--Considerations upon which Social Equality depends--Liberty not
+a Question of Social Equality--The Superior Man--Inconsistencies of the
+Past--No Reason why we should Hate the Colored People--The Issues that
+are upon Us.
+
+TRIAL OF C. B. REYNOLDS FOR BLASPHEMY.
+
+ADDRESS TO THE JURY.
+
+Report of the Case from the New York Times (note)--The Right to express
+Opinions--Attempts to Rule the Minds of Men by Force--Liberty the
+Greatest Good--Intellectual Hospitality Defined--When the Catholic
+Church had Power--Advent of the Protestants--The Puritans, Quakers.
+Unitarians, Universalists--What is Blasphemy?--Why this Trial should not
+have Taken Place--Argument cannot be put in Jail--The Constitution of
+New Jersey--A higher Law than Men can Make--The Blasphemy Statute
+Quoted and Discussed--Is the Statute Constitutional?--The Harm done
+by Blasphemy Laws--The Meaning of this Persecution--Religions are
+Ephemeral--Let us judge each other by our Actions--Men who have braved
+Public Opinion should be Honored--The Blasphemy Law if enforced would
+rob the World of the Results of Scientific Research--It declares the
+Great Men of to-day to be Criminals--The Indictment Read and Commented
+upon--Laws that go to Sleep--Obsolete Dogmas the Denial of which was
+once punished by Death--Blasphemy Characterized--On the Argument
+that Blasphemy Endangers the Public Peace--A Definition of real
+Blasphemy--Trials for Blasphemy in England--The case of Abner
+Kneeland--True Worship, Prayer, and Religion--What is Holy and
+Sacred--What is Claimed in this Case--For the Honor of the State--The
+word Liberty--Result of the Trial (note).
+
+GOD IN THE CONSTITUTION.
+
+The Feudal System--Office and Purpose of our Constitution--Which God
+shall we Select?--The Existence of any God a Matter of Opinion--What is
+entailed by a Recognition of a God in the Constitution--Can the Infinite
+be Flattered with a Constitutional Amendment?--This government is
+Secular--The Government of God a Failure--The Difference between the
+Theological and the Secular Spirit--A Nation neither Christian nor
+Infidel--The Priest no longer a Necessity--Progress of Science and the
+Development of the Mind.
+
+A REPLY TO BISHOP SPALDING.
+
+On God in the Constitution--Why the Constitutional Convention ignored
+the Question of Religion--The Fathers Misrepresented--Reasons why the
+Attributes of God should not form an Organic Part of the Law of the
+Land--The Effect of a Clause Recognizing God.
+
+CRIMES AGAINST CRIMINALS.
+
+The Three Pests of a Community--I. Forms of Punishment and Torture--More
+Crimes Committed than Prevented by Governments--II. Are not Vices
+transmitted by Nature?--111. Is it Possible for all People to be
+Honest?--Children of Vice as the natural Product of Society--Statistics:
+the Relation between Insanity, Pauperism, and Crime--IV. The Martyrs of
+Vice--Franklin's Interest in the Treatment of Prisoners--V. Kindness
+as a Remedy--Condition of the Discharged Prisoner--VI. Compensation
+for Convicts--VII. Professional Criminals--Shall the Nation take
+Life?--Influence of Public Executions on the Spectators--Lynchers
+for the Most Part Criminals at Heart--VIII. The Poverty of the Many a
+perpetual Menace--Limitations of Land-holding.--IX. Defective Education
+by our Schools--Hands should be educated as well as Head--Conduct
+improved by a clearer Perception of Consequences--X. The Discipline of
+the average Prison Hardening and Degrading--While Society cringes before
+Great Thieves there will be Little Ones to fill the Jails--XI. Our
+Ignorance Should make us Hesitate.
+
+A WOODEN GOD.
+
+On Christian and Chinese worship--Report of the Select Committee
+on Chinese Immigration--The only true God as contrasted with
+Joss--Sacrifices to the "Living God"--Messrs. Wright, Dickey, O'Connor
+and Murch on the "Religious System" of the American Union--How to prove
+that Christians are better than Heathens--Injustice in the Name of
+God--An honest Merchant the best Missionary--A Few Extracts from
+Confucius--The Report proves that the Wise Men of China who predicted
+that Christians could not be Trusted were not only Philosophers but
+Prophets.
+
+SOME INTERROGATION POINTS.
+
+A New Party and its Purpose--The Classes that Exist in every
+Country--Effect of Education on the Common People--Wants Increased by
+Intelligence--The Dream of 1776--The Monopolist and the Competitor--The
+War between the Gould and Mackay Cables--Competition between
+Monopolies--All Advance in Legislation made by Repealing Laws--Wages
+and Values not to be fixed by Law--Men and Machines--The Specific of
+the Capitalist: Economy--The poor Man and Woman devoured by
+their Fellow-men--Socialism one of the Worst Possible forms of
+Slavery--Liberty not to be exchanged for Comfort--Will the Workers
+always give their Earnings for the Useless?--Priests, Successful Frauds,
+and Robed Impostors.
+
+ART AND MORALITY.
+
+The Origin of Man's Thoughts--The imaginative Man--"Medicinal View" of
+Poetry--Rhyme and Religion--The theological Poets and their Purpose in
+Writing--Moral Poets and their "Unwelcome Truths"--The really Passionate
+are the Virtuous--Difference between the Nude and the Naked--Morality
+the Melody of Conduct--The inculcation of Moral Lessons not contemplated
+by Artists or great Novelists--Mistaken Reformers--Art not a
+Sermon--Language a Multitude of Pictures--Great Pictures and Great
+Statues painted and chiseled with Words--Mediocrity moral from a
+Necessity which it calls Virtue--Why Art Civilizes--The Nude--The Venus
+de Milo--This is Art.
+
+THE DIVIDED HOUSEHOLD OF FAITH.
+
+The Way in which Theological Seminaries were Endowed--Religious
+Guide-boards--Vast Interests interwoven with Creeds--Pretensions of
+Christianity--Kepler's Discovery of his Three Great Laws--Equivocations
+and Evasions of the Church--Nature's Testimony against the
+Bible--The Age of Man on the Earth--"Inspired" Morality of the
+Bible--Miracles--Christian Dogmas--What the church has been Compelled to
+Abandon--The Appeal to Epithets, Hatred and Punishment--"Spirituality"
+the last Resource of the Orthodox--What is it to be Spiritual?--Two
+Questions for the Defenders of Orthodox Creeds.
+
+WHY AM I AN AGNOSTIC?
+
+Part I. Inharmony of Nature and the Lot of Man with the Goodness and
+Wisdom of a supposed Deity--Why a Creator is Imagined--Difficulty of the
+Act of Creation--Belief in Supernatural Beings--Belief and Worship among
+Savages--Questions of Origin and Destiny--Progress impossible without
+Change of Belief--Circumstances Determining Belief--How may the
+True Religion be Ascertained?--Prosperity of Nations nor Virtue
+of Individuals Dependent on Religions or Gods--Uninspired Books
+Superior--Part II. The Christian Religion--Credulity--Miracles cannot
+be Established--Effect of Testimony--Miraculous Qualities of all
+Religions--Theists and Naturalists--The Miracle of Inspiration--How
+can the alleged Fact of Inspiration be Established?--God's work and
+Man's--Rewards for Falsehood offered by the Church.
+
+HUXLEY AND AGNOSTICISM.
+
+Statement by the Principal of King's College--On the Irrelevancy of a
+Lack of Scientific Knowledge--Difference between the Agnostic and
+the Christian not in Knowledge but in Credulity--The real name of
+an Agnostic said to be "Infidel"--What an Infidel is--"Unpleasant"
+significance of the Word--Belief in Christ--"Our Lord and his Apostles"
+possibly Honest Men--Their Character not Invoked--Possession by evil
+spirits--Professor Huxley's Candor and Clearness--The splendid Dream
+of Auguste Comte--Statement of the Positive Philosophy--Huxley and
+Harrison.
+
+ERNEST RENAN.
+
+His Rearing and his Anticipated Biography--The complex Character of the
+Christ of the Gospels--Regarded as a Man by Renan--The Sin against the
+Holy Ghost--Renan on the Gospels--No Evidence that they were written
+by the Men whose Names they Bear--Written long after the Events they
+Describe--Metaphysics of the Church found in the Gospel of John--Not
+Apparent why Four Gospels should have been Written--Regarded as
+legendary Biographies--In "flagrant contradiction one with another"--The
+Divine Origin of Christ an After-growth--Improbable that he intended to
+form a Church--Renan's Limitations--Hebrew Scholarship--His "People of
+Israel"--His Banter and Blasphemy.
+
+TOLSTOY AND "THE KREUTZER SONATA."
+
+Tolstoy's Belief and Philosophy--His Asceticism--His View of Human
+Love--Purpose of "The Kreutzer Sonata"--Profound Difference between the
+Love of Men and that of Women--Tolstoy cannot now found a Religion, but
+may create the Necessity for another Asylum--The Emotions--The Curious
+Opinion Dried Apples have of Fruit upon the Tree--Impracticability of
+selling All and giving to the Poor--Love and Obedience--Unhappiness in
+the Marriage Relation not the fault of Marriage.
+
+THOMAS PAINE.
+
+Life by Moncure D. Conway--Early Advocacy of Reforms against Dueling
+and Cruelty to Animals--The First to write "The United States of
+America"--Washington's Sentiment against Separation from Great
+Britain--Paine's Thoughts in the Declaration of Independence--Author of
+the first Proclamation of Emancipation in America--Establishment of a
+Fund for the Relief of the Army--H's "Farewell Address"--The "Rights of
+Man"--Elected to the French Convention--Efforts to save the Life of the
+King--His Thoughts on Religion--Arrested--The "Age of Reason" and the
+Weapons it has furnished "Advanced Theologians"--Neglect by Gouverneur
+Morris and Washington--James Monroe's letter to Paine and to the
+Committee of General Safety--The vaunted Religious Liberty of
+Colonial Maryland--Orthodox Christianity at the Beginning of the 19th
+Century--New Definitions of God--The Funeral of Paine.
+
+THE THREE PHILANTHROPISTS.
+
+I. Mr. A., the Professional Philanthropist, who established a Colony
+for the Enslavement of the Poor who could not take care of themselves,
+amassed a large Fortune thereby, built several churches, and earned
+the Epitaph, "He was the Providence of the Poor"--II. Mr. B.,
+the Manufacturer, who enriched himself by taking advantage of the
+Necessities of the Poor, paid the lowest Rate of Wages, considered
+himself one of God's Stewards, endowed the "B Asylum" and the "B
+College," never lost a Dollar, and of whom it was recorded, "He Lived
+for Others." III. Mr. C., who divided his Profits with the People who had
+earned it, established no Public Institutions, suppressed Nobody; and
+those who have worked for him said, "He allowed Others to live for
+Themselves."
+
+SHOULD THE CHINESE BE EXCLUDED?
+
+Trampling on the Rights of Inferiors--Rise of the Irish and Germans
+to Power--The Burlingame Treaty--Character of Chinese Laborers--Their
+Enemies in the Pacific States--Violation of Treaties--The Geary Law--The
+Chinese Hated for their Virtues--More Piety than Principle among the
+People's Representatives--Shall we go back to Barbarism?
+
+A WORD ABOUT EDUCATION.
+
+What the Educated Man Knows--Necessity of finding out the Facts
+of Nature--"Scholars" not always Educated Men; from necessaries to
+luxuries; who may be called educated; mental misers; the first duty of
+man; university education not necessary to usefulness, no advantage in
+learning useless facts.
+
+WHAT I WANT FOR CHRISTMAS.
+
+Would have the Kings and Emperors resign, the Nobility drop their
+Titles, the Professors agree to teach only What they Know, the
+Politicians changed to Statesmen, the Editors print only the
+Truth--Would like to see Drunkenness and Prohibition abolished,
+Corporal Punishment done away with, and the whole World free.
+
+FOOL FRIENDS.
+
+The Fool Friend believes every Story against you, never denies a Lie
+unless it is in your Favor, regards your Reputation as Common Prey,
+forgets his Principles to gratify your Enemies, and is so friendly that
+you cannot Kick him.
+
+INSPIRATION.
+
+Nature tells a different Story to all Eyes and Ears--Horace Greeley and
+the Big Trees--The Man who "always did like rolling land"--What the
+Snow looked like to the German--Shakespeare's different Story for each
+Reader--As with Nature so with the Bible.
+
+THE TRUTH OF HISTORY.
+
+People who live by Lying--A Case in point--H. Hodson Rugg's Account of
+the Conversion of Ingersoll and 5,000 of his Followers--The "Identity of
+Lost Israel with the British Nation"--Old Falsehoods about Infidels--The
+New York Observer and Thomas Paine--A Rascally English Editor--The
+Charge that Ingersoll's Son had been Converted--The Fecundity of
+Falsehood.
+
+HOW TO EDIT A LIBERAL PAPER.
+
+The Editor should not narrow his Horizon so that he can see only
+One Thing--To know the Defects of the Bible is but the Beginning of
+Wisdom--The Liberal Paper should not discuss Theological Questions
+Alone--A Column for Children--Candor and Kindness--Nothing should be
+Asserted that is not Known--Above All, teach the Absolute Freedom of the
+Mind.
+
+SECULARISM.
+
+The religion of Humanity; what it Embraces and what it Advocates--A
+Protest against Ecclesiastical Tyranny--Believes in Building a Home
+here--Means Food and Fireside--The Right to express your Thought--Its
+advice to every Human Being--A Religion without Mysteries, Miracles, or
+Persecutions.
+
+CRITICISM OF "ROBERT ELSMERE," "JOHN WARD, PREACHER," AND "AN AFRICAN FARM."
+
+Religion unsoftened by Infidelity--The Orthodox Minister whose Wife has
+a Heart--Honesty of Opinion not a Mitigating Circumstance--Repulsiveness
+of an Orthodox Life--John Ward an Object of Pity--Lyndall of the
+"African Farm"--The Story of the Hunter--Death of Waldo--Women the
+Caryatides of the Church--Attitude of Christianity toward other
+Religions--Egotism of the ancient Jews.
+
+THE LIBEL LAWS.
+
+All Articles appearing in a newspaper should be Signed by the
+Writer--The Law if changed should throw greater Safeguards around the
+Reputation of the Citizen--Pains should be taken to give Prominence to
+Retractions--The Libel Laws like a Bayonet in War.
+
+REV. DR. NEWTON'S SERMON ON A NEW RELIGION.
+
+Mr. Newton not Regarded as a Sceptic--New Meanings given to Old
+Words--The vanishing Picture of Hell--The Atonement--Confidence being
+Lost in the Morality of the Gospel--Exclusiveness of the Churches--The
+Hope of Immortality and Belief in God have Nothing to do with Real
+Religion--Special Providence a Mistake.
+
+AN ESSAY ON CHRISTMAS.
+
+The Day regarded as a Holiday--A Festival far older
+than Christianity--Relics of Sun-worship in Christian
+Ceremonies--Christianity furnished new Steam for an old Engine--Pagan
+Festivals correspond to Ours--Why Holidays are Popular--They must be for
+the Benefit of the People.
+
+HAS FREETHOUGHT A CONSTRUCTIVE SIDE?
+
+The Object of Freethought--what the Religionist calls "Affirmative
+and Positive"--The Positive Side of Freethought--Constructive Work of
+Christianity.
+
+THE IMPROVED MAN.
+
+He will be in Favor of universal Liberty, neither Master nor Slave; of
+Equality and Education; will develop in the Direction of the Beautiful;
+will believe only in the Religion of this World--His Motto--Will not
+endeavor to change the Mind of the "Infinite"--Will have no Bells or
+Censers--Will be satisfied that the Supernatural does not exist--Will be
+Self-poised, Independent, Candid and Free.
+
+EIGHT HOURS MUST COME.
+
+The Working People should be protected by Law--Life of no particular
+Importance to the Man who gets up before Daylight and works till
+after Dark--A Revolution probable in the Relations between Labor and
+Capital--Working People becoming Educated and more Independent--The
+Government can Aid by means of Good Laws--Women the worst Paid--There
+should be no Resort to Force by either Labor or Capital.
+
+THE JEWS.
+
+Much like People of other Religions--Teaching given Christian Children
+about those who die in the Faith of Abraham--Dr. John Hall on
+the Persecution of the Jews in Russia as the Fulfillment of
+Prophecy--Hostility of Orthodox early Christians excited by Jewish
+Witnesses against the Faith--An infamous Chapter of History--Good
+and bad Men of every Faith--Jews should outgrow their own
+Superstitions--What the intelligent Jew Knows.
+
+CRUMBLING CREEDS.
+
+The Common People called upon to Decide as between the Universities and
+the Synods--Modern Medicine, Law, Literature and Pictures as against the
+Old--Creeds agree with the Sciences of their Day--Apology the Prelude
+to Retreat--The Presbyterian Creed Infamous, but no worse than
+the Catholic--Progress begins when Expression of Opinion is
+Allowed--Examining the Religions of other Countries--The Pulpit's
+Position Lost--The Dogma of Eternal Pain the Cause of the orthodox
+Creeds losing Popularity--Every Church teaching this Infinite Lie must
+Fall.
+
+OUR SCHOOLS.
+
+Education the only Lever capable of raising Mankind--The
+School-house more Important than the Church--Criticism of New York's
+School-Buildings--The Kindergarten System Recommended--Poor Pay of
+Teachers--The great Danger to the Republic is Ignorance.
+
+VIVISECTION.
+
+The Hell of Science--Brutal Curiosity of Vivisectors--The Pretence that
+they are working for the Good of Man--Have these scientific Assassins
+added to useful Knowledge?--No Good to the Race to be Accomplished by
+Torture--The Tendency to produce a Race of intelligent Wild Beasts.
+
+THE CENSUS ENUMERATOR'S OFFICIAL CATECHISM.
+
+Right of the Government to ask Questions and of the Citizen to refuse
+to answer them--Matters which the Government has no Right to pry
+into--Exposing the Debtor's financial Condition--A Man might decline to
+tell whether he has a Chronic Disease or not.
+
+THE AGNOSTIC CHRISTMAS.
+
+Natural Phenomena and Myths celebrated--The great Day of the first
+Religion, Sun-worship--A God that Knew no Hatred nor Sought Revenge--The
+Festival of Light.
+
+SPIRITUALITY.
+
+A much-abused Word--The Early Christians too Spiritual to be
+Civilized--Calvin and Knox--Paine, Voltaire and Humboldt not
+Spiritual--Darwin also Lacking--What it is to be really Spiritual--No
+connection with Superstition.
+
+SUMTER'S GUN.
+
+What were thereby blown into Rags and Ravelings--The Birth of a
+new Epoch announced--Lincoln made the most commanding Figure of the
+Century--Story of its Echoes.
+
+WHAT INFIDELS HAVE DONE.
+
+What might have been Asked of a Christian 100 years after
+Christ--Hospitals and Asylums not all built for Charity--Girard
+College--Lick Observatory--Carnegie not an Orthodox Christian--Christian
+Colleges--Give us Time.
+
+CRUELTY IN THE ELMIRA REFORMATORY.
+
+Brockway a Savage--The Lash will neither develop the Brain nor cultivate
+the Heart--Brutality a Failure--Bishop Potter's apostolical Remark.
+
+LAW'S DELAY.
+
+The Object of a Trial--Justice can afford to Wait--The right of
+Appeal--Case of Mrs. Maybrick--Life Imprisonment for Murderers--American
+Courts better than the English.
+
+BIGOTRY OF COLLEGES.
+
+Universities naturally Conservative--Kansas State University's
+Objection to Ingersoll as a commencement Orator--Comment by Mr. Depew
+(note)--Action of Cornell and the University of Missouri.
+
+A YOUNG MAN'S CHANCES TO-DAY.
+
+The Chances a few Years ago--Capital now Required--Increasing
+competition in Civilized Life--Independence the first Object--If he has
+something to say, there will be plenty to listen.
+
+SCIENCE AND SENTIMENT.
+
+Science goes hand in hand with Imagination--Artistic and Ethical
+Development--Science destroys Superstition, not true Religion--Education
+preferable to Legislation--Our Obligation to our Children.
+
+"SOWING AND REAPING."
+
+Moody's Belief accounted for--A dishonest and corrupting Doctrine--A
+want of Philosophy and Sense--Have Souls in Heaven no Regrets?--Mr.
+Moody should read some useful Books.
+
+SHOULD INFIDELS SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO SUNDAY SCHOOL?
+
+Teachings of orthodox Sunday Schools--The ferocious God of the
+Bible--Miracles--A Christian in Constantinople would not send his
+Child to a Mosque--Advice to all Agnostics--Strangle the Serpent of
+Superstition.
+
+WHAT WOULD YOU SUBSTITUTE FOR THE BIBLE AS A MORAL GUIDE?
+
+Character of the Bible--Men and Women not virtuous because of any
+Book--The Commandments both Good and Bad--Books that do not help
+Morality--Jehovah not a moral God--What is Morality?--Intelligence the
+only moral guide.
+
+GOVERNOR ROLLINS' FAST-DAY PROCLAMATION.
+
+Decline of the Christian Religion in New Hampshire--Outgrown
+Beliefs--Present-day Views of Christ and the Holy Ghost--Abandoned
+Notions about the Atonement--Salvation for Credulity--The Miracles
+of the New Testament--The Bible "not true but inspired"--The "Higher
+Critics" riding two Horses--Infidelity in the Pulpit--The "restraining
+Influences of Religion" as illustrated by Spain and Portugal--Thinking,
+Working and Praying--The kind of Faith that has Departed.
+
+A LOOK BACKWARD AND A PROPHECY.
+
+The _Truth Seeker_ congratulated on its Twenty-fifth Birthday--Teachings
+of Twenty-five Years ago--Dodging and evading--The Clerical Assault
+on Darwin--Draper, Buckle, Hegel, Spencer, Emerson--Comparison
+of Prejudices--Vanished Belief in the Devil--Matter and
+Force--Contradictions Dwelling in Unity--Substitutes for Jehovah--A
+Prophecy.
+
+POLITICAL MORALITY.
+
+Argument in the contested Election Case of Strobach against Herbert--The
+Importance of Honest Elections--Poisoning the Source of Justice--The
+Fraudulent Voter a Traitor to his Sovereign, the Will of the
+People--Political Morality Imperative.
+
+A FEW REASONS FOR DOUBTING THE INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE.
+
+Date and Manner of Composing the Old Testament--Other Books not now in
+Existence, and Disagreements about the Canon--Composite Character of
+certain Books--Various Versions--Why was God's message given to the Jews
+alone?--The Story of the Creation, of the Flood, of the Tower, and
+of Lot's wife--Moses and Aaron and the Plagues of Egypt--Laws of
+Slavery--Instructions by Jehovah Calculated to excite Astonishment and
+Mirth--Sacrifices and the Scapegoat--Passages showing that the Laws of
+Moses were made after the Jews had left the Desert--Jehovah's dealings
+with his People--The Sabbath Law--Prodigies--Joshua's Miracle--Damned
+Ignorance and Infamy--Jephthah's Sacrifice--Incredible Stories--The
+Woman of Endor and the Temptation of David--Elijah and Elisha--Loss of
+the Pentateuch from Moses to Josiah--The Jews before and after being
+Abandoned by Jehovah--Wealth of Solomon and other Marvels.
+
+
+
+
+
+ADDRESS ON THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT.
+
+
+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.
+
+Col. Robert G. Ingersoll was one of the speakers.
+
+The Hon. Frederick Douglass introduced him as follows:
+
+     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.
+
+I have the honor to introduce Robert G. Ingersoll.
+
+MR. INGERSOLL'S SPEECH.
+
+Ladies and Gentlemen:
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The Supreme Court has decided:
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+3. That the 13th Amendment relates only to slavery and involuntary
+servitude, which it abolishes.
+
+4. That the 13th Amendment establishes universal freedom in the United
+States.
+
+5. That Congress may probably pass laws directly enforcing its
+provisions.
+
+6. That such legislative power in Congress extends only to the subject
+of slavery, and its incidents.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+9. Neither does the Court decide whether the law, as it stands, is
+operative in the Territories and the District of Columbia.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Let us examine these amendments:
+
+"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.
+
+"Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate
+legislation."
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+You will observe the wording of this clause:
+
+"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."
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+These freed men became citizens--became a part of the State in which
+they lived.
+
+The highest and noblest definition of a State, in our Reports, was given
+by Justice Wilson, in the case of Chisholm, &c., vs. Georgia;
+
+"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."
+
+Chief Justice Chase declared that:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+Justice Field upon this very question, says:
+
+"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."
+
+Justice Field also quotes with approval the language of the counsel for
+the plaintiffs in the case:
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+The Supreme Court, in _The Slaughter-House Cases,_ (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.
+
+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.
+
+In the language of the Supreme Court:
+
+"It was the obvious purpose of the 13th Amendment to forbid all shades
+and conditions of African slavery."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The Supreme Court has admitted, in the very case we are now discussing,
+that:
+
+"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."
+
+Here we have the authority for dealing with individuals.
+
+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.
+
+In The United Slates vs. Harris, 106 U. S., 640, the Supreme Court says:
+
+"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."
+
+This declaration covers the entire case.
+
+I agree with Justice Field:
+
+"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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+Justice Miller, speaking for the entire court, tells us that:
+
+"In the struggle of the civil war, slavery perished, and perished as a
+necessity of the bitterness and force of the conflict."
+
+That:
+
+"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."
+
+He also admits that:
+
+"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."
+
+He also informs us that:
+
+"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."
+
+And he declares that:
+
+"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."
+
+And that:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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
+State wherein they reside."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In the case of Bartemeyer vs. Iowa, 18 Wall., p. 140, Justice Field, in
+a concurring opinion, speaking of the 14th Amendment, says:
+
+"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.".
+
+I cannot refrain from calling attention to the splendor and nobility of
+the truths expressed by Justice Field in this opinion.
+
+So, Justice Field, in his dissenting opinion in what are known as _The
+Slaughter-House Cases_, found in 16 Wallace, p. 95, still speaking of
+the 14th Amendment, says:
+
+"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.
+
+"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. * * *
+
+"They do not derive their existence from its legislation, and cannot be
+destroyed by its power."
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+These are all rights and immunities guaranteed by the Constitution of
+the United States.
+
+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?
+
+In the case of _The U. S. vs. Reese, et al._, 92 U. S., p. 207,
+the Supreme Court decided, the opinion having been delivered by
+Chief-Justice Waite, as follows:
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+So, in the same case, I find this language:
+
+"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."
+
+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"?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+What rights are within the protecting power of Congress? All the rights
+belonging to a free man.
+
+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.
+
+So, in the case of _Tennessee vs, Davis_, 100 U, S,, 263, the Supreme
+Court, held that:
+
+"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.
+
+"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."
+
+This opinion was given by Justice Strong, and acquiesced in by
+Chief-Justice Waite, Justices Miller, Swayne, Bradley and Harlan.
+
+So in the case of _Pensacola Tel. Co. vs. Western Union Tel. Co_., 96 U.
+S., p. 10, the opinion having been delivered by Chief-Justice Waite, I
+find this:
+
+"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."
+
+This was acquiesced in by Justices Clifford, Strong, Bradley, Swayne and
+Miller.
+
+So we are told by the entire Supreme Court in the case of _Tiernan vs.
+Rynker_, 102 U. S., 126, that:
+
+"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."
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+We are told by the Supreme Court, in the case under discussion, that:
+
+"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."
+
+We are told that:
+
+"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."
+
+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"?
+
+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?
+
+The 14th Amendment provides that:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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 _The License Cases_. The opinion may be
+found in the 5th of Howard, 583.
+
+"The nullity of any act inconsistent with the Constitution, is produced
+by the declaration that the Constitution is supreme."
+
+This was decided by the Supreme Court, the opinion having been delivered
+by Chief Justice Marshall, in the case of _Gibbons vs. Ogden_, 9 Wheat,
+210.
+
+The same doctrine was held in the case of _Henderson et al., vs. Mayor
+of New York, et al._, 92 U. S. 272--the opinion of the Court being
+delivered by Justice Miller.
+
+So it was held in the case of _The Board of Liquidation vs. McComb_--2
+Otto, 541.
+
+"That an unconstitutional law will be treated by the courts as null and
+void"--citing _Osborn vs. The Bank of the United States_, 9 Wheaton,
+859, and _Davis vs. Gray_, 16 Wallace, 220.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The Supreme Court asks, in this decision,
+
+"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?"
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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:
+
+"_There are certain physiological differences of race that cannot be
+ignored_."
+
+That phrase is a lamp, in the light of which the whole decision should
+be read.
+
+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:
+
+"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.
+
+The Supreme Court, some time ago, held that the 4th Section of the Civil
+Rights Act was constitutional. That section declares that:
+
+"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."
+
+It also provides that:
+
+"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."
+
+In the case known as _Ex-parte vs. Virginia_--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:
+
+"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."
+
+The Court further held that:
+
+"This aspect of the law was deemed sufficient to divest it of any
+unconstitutional character."
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+So it was held in the case of _Neal vs. Delaware_,--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.
+
+It is admitted, and expressly decided in the case of _The U. S. vs.
+Reese et al._, (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.
+
+With this statement I most heartily agree. I agree that:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+So the Constitution provides that:
+
+"Congress shall have power to regulate commerce among the several
+States."
+
+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.
+
+The Constitution also provides that:
+
+"Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with the Indian tribes."
+
+It was held in the case of _The United States vs. Holliday_, 3 Wall.,
+407, that:
+
+"Commerce with the Indian tribes means commerce with the individuals
+composing those tribes."
+
+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. _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._
+
+Now, if the word "tribe" includes individual Indians, may not the word
+"State" include citizens?
+
+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:
+
+"By its own unaided force and effect, abolished slavery and established
+universal freedom."
+
+The Court admits that:
+
+"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."
+
+The Court further admits:
+
+"And such legislation may be primary and direct in its character."
+
+And then gives the reason:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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 _Prigg vs. The
+Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,_ 16 Pet., 611, a rule laid down in the
+interest of slavery--laid down for the purpose of depriving human beings
+of their liberty:
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+I call attention in reply to this, to the case of _Hall vs. De Cuir,_
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+"That if the public good required such legislation, it must come from
+Congress and not from the State."
+
+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!
+
+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 _Hall
+vs. De Cuir_ 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:
+
+"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."
+
+And yet the Supreme Court said:
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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 _States could not_ legislate; and in 1883, that _Congress could
+not_, 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.
+
+It must be remembered, in this discussion, that the 8th Section of the
+Constitution conferred upon Congress the power:
+
+"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."
+
+So the 2nd Section of the 13th Article provides:
+
+"Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate
+legislation."
+
+The same language is used in the 14th and 15th Amendments.
+
+"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."
+
+This is the language of Chief Justice Marshall, in the case of
+_M'Caulay, vs. The State_, 4 Wheaton, 316.
+
+"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.
+
+Again:
+
+"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." _Prigs vs. The Commonwealth_, 16
+Peters, 539.
+
+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.
+
+Justice Story held in that case that:
+
+"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."
+
+He also held that:
+
+"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."
+
+"But," says Justice Story:
+
+"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."
+
+And he holds that:
+
+"Under that clause of the section Congress became clothed with the
+appropriate authority to legislate for its enforcement."
+
+Now let us look at the 13th and 14th Amendments in the light of that
+decision.
+
+First. Liberty and citizenship were given the colored people by this
+amendment. And Justice Story tells us that:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+Let us go further. Justice Story tells us that:
+
+"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."
+
+In the light of this remark, let us look at the 14th Amendment:
+
+"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."
+
+To which are added these words:
+
+"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."
+
+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?
+
+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 _M'Cauley vs.
+The State_, 4 Wheaton, 316, that:
+
+"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."
+
+Again:
+
+"The Government has the right to employ freely every means not
+prohibited, for the fulfillment of its acknowledged duties."
+
+_The Legal Tender Cases_--12 Wallace, 457.
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+The Supreme Court despairingly asks:
+
+"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?"
+
+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.
+
+After such examination of the authorities as I have been able to make, I
+lay down the following propositions, namely:
+
+1. The sovereignty of a State extends only to that which exists by its
+own authority.
+
+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.
+
+3. The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of each
+State.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+11. The 13th Amendment declares that neither slavery nor involuntary
+servitude shall exist within the jurisdiction of the United States.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+13. Congress can not shirk this responsibility by leaving citizens of
+the United States to the care and keeping of the several States.
+
+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.
+
+14. All statutes--all amendments to the Constitution--in derogation of
+natural rights, should be strictly construed.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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 _Civilization vs.
+Barbarism_, it has given the defendant a new trial.
+
+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.
+
+We are told by the Supreme Court that:
+
+"Slavery cannot exist without law, any more than property and lands and
+goods can exist without law."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.".
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Nothing gives me more pleasure than to see your little children with
+books under their arms, going and coming from school.
+
+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.
+
+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!
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+TRIAL OF C. B. REYNOLDS FOR BLASPHEMY.
+
+Address to the Jury.
+
+     * 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.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.--
+
+"No law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or
+of the press."
+
+Can anything be plainer--anything be more forcibly stated?
+
+"No law shall be passed to abridge the liberty of speech."
+
+Now, while you are considering this statute, I want you to keep in mind
+this other statement:
+
+"No law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or
+of the press."
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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:
+
+"_If any person shall willfully blaspheme the holy name of God by
+denying, cursing, or contumeliously reproaching his being_"--
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+Let us read a little further:
+
+"--_Or by cursing or contumeliously reproaching Jesus Christ_."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Let me read you another line from this ignorant statute:--
+
+"_Or the Christian religion_."
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+"_Or the Word of God_--"
+
+What is that?
+
+"_The canonical Scriptures contained in the books of the Old and New
+Testaments_."
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+"_The Holy Scriptures_."
+
+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?
+
+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."
+
+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.".
+
+Now, let us see further:
+
+"_Or by profane scoffing expose them to ridicule_"
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+Let us read another clause:--
+
+"_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 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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+"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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+So with Huxley, so with Tyndall, so with Helmholtz--so with the greatest
+thinkers and greatest writers of modern times.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+"_This Bible describes God as so loving that he drowned the whole world
+in his mad fury_."
+
+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.
+
+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"?
+
+"_Because it was so much worse than he, knowing all things, ever
+supposed it could be._"
+
+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.
+
+The defendant further blasphemed and said that:--
+
+"_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!_"
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+This is the greatest crime that man has imagined, and this crime is
+called a deed of infinite mercy.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+And what else says the defendant?
+
+"_The Bible-God says that his people made him jealous." "Provoked him to
+anger._"
+
+Is that true? It is. If it is true, is it blasphemous?
+
+Let us read another line--
+
+"_And now he will raise the mischief with them; that his anger bums like
+hell_."
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+Let us read on:--
+
+"_He would destroy them all were it not that he feared the wrath of the
+enemy_."
+
+That is in the Bible--word for word. Then the defendant in astonishment
+says:
+
+"_The Almighty God afraid of his enemies!_"
+
+That is what the Bible says. What does it mean? If the Bible is true,
+God was afraid.
+
+"_Can the mind conceive of more horrid blasphemy?_"
+
+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.
+
+"_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_.".
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+But let us read further from this indictment:
+
+"The aforesaid printed document contains other scandalous, infamous and
+blasphemous matters and things, to the tenor and effect following, that
+is to say--"
+
+Then comes this particularly blasphemous line:
+
+"_Now, reader, take time and calmly think it over _."
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+"_Take time to calmly think it over: Was a Jewish girl the mother of
+God, the mother of your God?_"
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The defendant is also charged with having said that: "_God cried and
+screamed_."
+
+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
+
+"_God of the Universe kicked, and flung about his little arms, and made
+aimless dashes into space with his little fists_."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The defendant says more about the childhood of Christ. He goes so far as
+to say, that:
+
+"_He was found staring foolishly at his own little toes._"
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The defendant also says, speaking of the infant Christ, "_He was nursed
+at Mary's breast._"
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+But the defendant, still speaking of the infant Christ, is charged with
+having said:
+
+"_God smiled when he was comfortable. He lay in a cradle and was rocked
+to sleep._"
+
+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.
+
+The defendant also says, that:
+
+"_God was sick when cutting his teeth._"
+
+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.
+
+"_He caught the measles, the mumps, the scarlet fever and the whooping
+cough_."
+
+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.
+
+He has said, that:
+
+"_According to the Old Testament, the God of the Christian world
+commanded people to destroy each other._"
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+As long as the church has the power to close the lips of men, so long
+and no longer will superstition rule this world.
+
+"Blasphemy is the word that the majority hisses into the ear of the
+few."
+
+After every argument of the church has been answered, has been refuted,
+then the church cries, "blasphemy!"
+
+Blasphemy is what an old mistake says of a newly discovered truth.
+
+Blasphemy is what a withered last year's leaf says to a this year's bud.
+
+Blasphemy is the bulwark of religious prejudice.
+
+Blasphemy is the breastplate of the heartless.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+What is blasphemy? I will give you a definition; I will give you my
+thought upon this subject. What is real blasphemy?
+
+To live on the unpaid labor of other men--that is blasphemy.
+
+To enslave your fellow-man, to put chains upon his body--that is
+blasphemy.
+
+To enslave the minds of men, to put manacles upon the brain, padlocks
+upon the lips--that is blasphemy.
+
+To deny what you believe to be true, to admit to be true what you
+believe to be a lie--that is blasphemy.
+
+To strike the weak and unprotected, in order that you may gain the
+applause of the ignorant and superstitious mob--that is blasphemy.
+
+To persecute the intelligent few, at the command of the ignorant
+many--that is blasphemy.
+
+To forge chains, to build dungeons, for your honest fellow-men--that is
+blasphemy.
+
+To pollute the souls of children with the dogma of eternal pain--that is
+blasphemy.
+
+To violate your conscience--that is blasphemy.
+
+The jury that gives an unjust verdict, and the judge who pronounces an
+unjust sentence, are blasphemers.
+
+The man who bows to public opinion against his better judgment and
+against his honest conviction, is a blasphemer.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Labor is the only prayer that Nature answers; it is the only prayer that
+deserves an answer,--good, honest, noble work.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Whoever increases the sum of human joy, is a worshiper. He who adds to
+the sum of human misery, is a blasphemer.
+
+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.
+
+Let us take one more step.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+First. I claim that the constitution of New Jersey declares that:
+
+"_The liberty of speech shall not be abridged_." 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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+There is still another point. This statute says: "Whoever shall
+_willfully_ 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.
+
+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 _animus furandi_. 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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In my judgment, however, there would have been no harm in giving this
+pamphlet to every citizen of your place.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Liberty is the condition of progress. Without Liberty, there remains
+only barbarism. Without Liberty, there can be no civilization.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Without Liberty there can be no worship, no blasphemy--no love, no
+hatred, no justice, no progress.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+While I do not blame these people--they not being on trial--I do ask you
+to stand on the side of right.
+
+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."
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+     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.
+
+
+
+
+GOD IN THE CONSTITUTION.
+
+"_All governments derive their just powers from the consent of the
+governed_."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Those who promulgated the Declaration adopted a Constitution for the
+great Republic.
+
+What was the office or purpose of that Constitution?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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,
+_prima facie_ evidence that he did not desire to be there?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+'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.
+
+This is the difference between Theocracy and Democracy--between God and
+man.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+A REPLY TO BISHOP SPALDING.
+
+     * An unfinished reply to Bishop J. L. Spalding's article
+     "God in the Constitution," which appeared in the Arena.
+     Boston, Mass., April, 1890.
+
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+CRIMES AGAINST CRIMINALS.
+
+     * "An Address delivered before the State Bar Association at
+     Albany, N. Y., January 1, 1890."
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+I.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+II.
+
+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?
+
+Certain it is that men do not prefer unhappiness to joy.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+III.
+
+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?
+
+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."
+
+We know that there are deformed bodies, and we are equally certain that
+there are deformed minds.
+
+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?
+
+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:
+
+In 1850, we had twenty-three millions of people, and between six and
+seven thousand prisoners.
+
+In 1860--thirty-one millions of people, and nineteen thousand prisoners.
+
+In 1870--thirty-eight millions of people, and thirty-two thousand
+prisoners.
+
+In 1880--fifty millions of people, and fifty-eight thousand prisoners.
+
+It may be curious to note the relation between insanity, pauperism and
+crime:
+
+In 1850, there were fifteen thousand insane; in 1860, twenty-four
+thousand; in 1870, thirty-seven thousand; in 1880, ninety-one thousand.
+
+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.
+
+Is it possible that we must go to the same causes for these effects?
+
+IV.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?"
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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!
+
+Is there any remedy? Can anything be done for the reformation of the
+criminal?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+VI.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+VII.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+What shall be done with the slayers of their fellow-men--with murderers?
+Shall the nation take life?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The death penalty, inflicted by the Government, is a perpetual excuse
+for mobs.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+VIII.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+IX.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The more real education, the less crime--and the more homes, the fewer
+prisons.
+
+X.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+XI.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+We do not know. Our ignorance should make us hesitate. Our weakness
+should make us merciful.
+
+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."
+
+
+
+
+A WOODEN GOD.
+
+To the Editor:
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+*A letter to the Chicago Times, written at Washington, D. C., March
+27,1880.
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Rising with the subject, growing heated with a kind of holy indignation,
+these Christian representatives of a Christian people most solemnly
+declare that:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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 _superstition_. 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.
+
+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.
+
+Do not trample upon these people because they have a different
+conception of things about which even this committee knows nothing.
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Leaving their religious views, the members immediately betake themselves
+to philosophy and prediction. Listen:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+I am almost sure that I have read somewhere that "Christ died for _all_
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+"My doctrine is that man must be true to the principles of his nature,
+and the benevolent exercise of them toward others.
+
+With coarse rice to eat, with water to drink, and with my bended arm for
+a pillow, I still have joy.
+
+Riches and honor acquired by injustice are to me but floating clouds.
+
+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.
+
+Recompense injury with justice, and kindness with kindness.
+
+There is one word which may serve as a rule of practice for all one's
+life: Reciprocity is that word."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+SOME INTERROGATION POINTS.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+'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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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 _chevaux-de-frise_ of inferences and
+assertions. They understand the sophistries of those who have governed.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Is it possible to conceive of a despotism beyond this?
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+ART AND MORALITY.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Art has nothing to do directly with morality or immorality. It is its
+own excuse for being; it exists for itself.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The heart is softened by the pathos of the perfect.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+THE DIVIDED HOUSEHOLD OF FAITH.
+
+"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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+This is the worst side: There is a better.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+There is still another side.
+
+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.
+
+There is still another side.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The next question that arose was as to the origin of man.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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 _non sequitur._ 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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+It is, however, still insisted that the Bible is inspired in its
+morality. Let us examine this question.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+There is still another side to this question.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+This has made every Protestant brain "a house divided against itself."
+This planted in the Reformation the "irrepressible conflict."
+
+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.
+
+The intellectual world has abandoned the miraculous.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+We have at last ascertained that miracles can be perfectly understood;
+that there is nothing mysterious about them; that they are simply
+transparent falsehoods.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+We must rely upon the evidence of our senses, upon the conclusions of
+our reason.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The church defended its mistakes by every means within its power.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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."
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+The defenders of the orthodox faith, by this time, should know that the
+foundations are insecure.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+WHY AM I AN AGNOSTIC?
+
+I.
+
+"With thoughts beyond the reaches of our souls."
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The questions of origin and destiny seem to be beyond the powers of the
+human mind.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Passion often masters reason, and "the state of man, like to a little
+kingdom, suffers then the nature of an insurrection."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+North American Review, December, 1889.
+
+II.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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. AEschylus is
+superior to Jeremiah, and Shakespeare rises immeasurably above all the
+sacred books of the world.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+North American Review, March, 1890.
+
+
+
+
+HUXLEY AND AGNOSTICISM.
+
+
+PROFESSOR HUXLEY AND AGNOSTICISM.
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+Let us examine this statement, putting it in language that is easily
+understood; and for that purpose we will divide it into several
+paragraphs.
+
+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."
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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."
+
+Is this a difference in knowledge, or a difference in belief--that is to
+say, a difference in credulity?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+What knowledge has the Christian of another world? The senses of the
+Christian are the same as those of the Agnostic.
+
+He hears, sees, and feels substantially the same. His vision is limited.
+He sees no other shore and hears nothing from another world.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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."
+
+This is spoken in a kind of holy scorn. According to this gentleman, an
+unbeliever is, to a certain extent, a disreputable person.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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"?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+In this phase people talk about laws and principles as though laws and
+principles were forces capable of producing phenomena.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+After all, the Agnostic and the Positivist have the same end in
+view--both believe in living for this world.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+ERNEST RENAN.
+
+     "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."
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+"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.
+
+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.
+
+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 Fe, 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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+TOLSTOI AND "THE KREUTZER SONATA."
+
+COUNT TOLSTOI 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.
+
+From the Mount of Olives he surveys the world.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+But even under such circumstances they might, like the Quakers, be proud
+of humility and become arrogantly meek.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Count Tolstoi, 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.
+
+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."
+
+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?
+
+The "Fathers" of the church had the same opinion of marriage. They
+agreed with Saint Paul, and Tolstoi 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.
+
+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.
+
+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 Tolstoi looks forward with pleasure to the
+extinction of the human race.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Tolstoi seems to be a stranger to the heart of woman.
+
+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"?
+
+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 Tolstoi 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;
+
+"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."
+
+The conclusion reached by the writer is that without faith in God,
+woman's love grovels in the mire.
+
+In this case the mire is made by the tears of mothers falling on the
+clay that hides their babes.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Only the conditionless can be the emotionless.
+
+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
+Tolstoi, 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.
+
+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!
+
+Count Tolstoi 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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Love is the perfume of the heart; it is not subject to the will of
+husbands or kings or God.
+
+Count Tolstoi 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."
+
+This is the destruction of the family, the pollution of home, the
+crucifixion of love.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Tolstoi, 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.
+
+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 Tolstoi to express his
+opinions on all subjects, and the right of the men and women of America
+to read for themselves.
+
+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. Tolstoi 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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+THOMAS PAINE.
+
+A MAGAZINE ARTICLE.
+
+     "A great man's memory may outlive his life half a year,
+     But, by'r lady, he must build churches then."
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In the winter of 1774, Thomas Paine came to America. After a time he was
+employeed as one of the writers on the _Pennsylvania Magazine._
+
+Let us see what he did, calculated to excite the hatred of his
+fellow-men.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The good people of this world agree with Thomas Paine.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+"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."
+
+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."
+
+"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:
+
+"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."
+
+Paine had made some enemies, first, by attacking African slavery, and,
+second, by insisting upon the sovereignty of the Nation.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+He said:
+
+"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."
+
+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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+This was worthy of the man who had said: "Where Liberty is _not_, there
+is my country."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The "Age of Reason" was his crime.
+
+Franklin, Jefferson, Sumner and Lincoln, the four greatest statesmen
+that America has produced, were believers in the creed of Thomas Paine.
+
+The Universalists and Unitarians have found their best weapons, their
+best arguments, in the "Age of Reason."
+
+Slowly, but surely, the churches are adopting not only the arguments,
+but the opinions of the great Reformer.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In 1794 James Monroe had written to Paine these words:
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+Paine had insisted that men had the right to think for themselves. This
+so enraged the average American citizen that he longed for revenge.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:--_this was Calvinism_. "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. _This was orthodox Christianity_.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+On the 8th of June, 1809, death came--Death, almost his only friend.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+THE THREE PHILANTHROPISTS.
+
+     "Well, while I am a beggar, I will rail,
+     And say there is no sin but to be rich."
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+HE WAS THE PROVIDENCE OF THE POOR.
+
+
+II.
+
+     "And, being rich, my virtue then shall be
+     To say there is no vice but beggary."
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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:
+
+HE LIVED FOR OTHERS.
+
+
+III
+
+     "But there are men who steal, and vainly try
+     To gild the crime with pompous charity."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+HE ALLOWED OTHERS TO LIVE FOR THEMSELVES.
+
+North American Review, December, 1831.
+
+
+
+
+SHOULD THE CHINESE BE EXCLUDED?
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The truth is that the Chinese came to this country by invitation. Under
+the Burlingame Treaty, China and the United States recognized:
+
+"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."
+
+And it was provided:
+
+"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."
+
+So, by the treaty of 1880, providing for the limitation or suspension of
+emigration of Chinese labor, it was declared:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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 _habeas corpus_, 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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Shall we now go back to barbarism?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+A WORD ABOUT EDUCATION.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+WHAT I WANT FOR CHRISTMAS.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+I would like to see drunkenness and prohibition both abolished.
+
+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.
+
+I would like to see the millionaires unite and form a trust for the
+public good.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+I would like to see the whole world free--free from injustice--free from
+superstition.
+
+This will do for next Christmas. The following Christmas, I may want
+more.--The Arena, Boston, December, 1897.
+
+
+
+
+FOOL FRIENDS.
+
+NOTHING hurts a man, nothing hurts a party so terribly as fool friends.
+
+A fool friend is the sewer of bad news, of slander and all base and
+unpleasant things.
+
+A fool friend always knows every mean thing that has been said against
+you and against the party.
+
+He always knows where your party is losing, and the other is making
+large gains.
+
+He always tells you of the good luck your enemy has had.
+
+He implicitly believes every story against you, and kindly suspects your
+defence.
+
+A fool friend is always full of a kind of stupid candor.
+
+He is so candid that he always believes the statement of an enemy.
+
+He never suspects anything on your side.
+
+Nothing pleases him like being shocked by horrible news concerning some
+good man.
+
+He never denies a lie unless it is in your favor.
+
+He is always finding fault with his party, and is continually begging
+pardon for not belonging to the other side.
+
+He is frightfully anxious that all his candidates should stand well with
+the opposition.
+
+He is forever seeing the faults of his party and the virtues of the
+other.
+
+He generally shows his candor by scratching the ticket.
+
+He always searches every nook and comer of his conscience to find a
+reason for deserting a friend or a principle.
+
+In the moment of victory he is magnanimously on your side.
+
+In defeat he consoles you by repeating prophecies made after the event.
+
+The fool friend regards your reputation as common prey for all the
+vultures, hyenas and jackals.
+
+He takes a sad pleasure in your misfortunes.
+
+He forgets his principles to gratify your enemies.
+
+He forgives your maligner, and slanders you with all his heart.
+
+He is so friendly that you cannot kick him.
+
+He generally talks for you but always bets the other way.
+
+
+
+
+INSPIRATION
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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."
+
+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!"
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+"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.
+
+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.
+
+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!"
+
+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.
+
+The inspiration of the Bible depends upon the ignorance of him who
+reads.--The Truth Seeker Annual, New York, 1885.
+
+
+
+
+THE TRUTH OF HISTORY.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+A few days ago the Matlock _Register_, a paper published in England,
+printed the following:
+
+CONVERSION OF THE ARCH ATHEIST.
+
+"Mr. Isaac Loveland, of Shoreham, desires us to insert the following:--
+
+"November 27, 1886.
+
+"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 _have been won for Christ_ 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.
+
+"Very faithfully yours,
+
+"H. HODSON RUGG.
+
+"Grove-road, St. John's Wood, London."
+
+How can we account for an article like that? Who made up this story? Who
+had the impudence to publish it?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+This letter, in my judgment, was published to be used by missionaries in
+China, Japan, India and Africa.
+
+If stories like this can be circulated about a living man, what may we
+not expect concerning the dead who have opposed the church?
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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 Caesarian
+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.
+
+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.
+
+A few years ago, I had a little controversy with the editor of the New
+York _Observer_, 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
+_Observer_ to admit that Paine did not recant, and compelled that paper
+to say that "Thomas Paine died a blaspheming Infidel."
+
+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 _Observer_ 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.
+
+This is another instance of what might be called the truth of history.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+The mendacity of superstition is almost enough to make a man believe in
+the supernatural.
+
+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.
+
+"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.
+
+
+
+
+HOW TO EDIT A LIBERAL PAPER.
+
+A LIBERAL paper should be edited by a Liberal man.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Secular Thought, Toronto, January 8,1887.
+
+
+
+
+SECULARISM.
+
+
+SEVERAL people have asked me the meaning of this term.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+CRITICISM OF "ROBERT ELSMERE," "JOHN WARD, PREACHER," AND "AN AFRICAN FARM."
+
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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:
+
+"Love you the man that wronged you?"
+
+And she replies:
+
+"Yes; as I love the woman that wronged him."
+
+The death of this wonderful girl is extremely pathetic.
+
+None but an artist could have written it:
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+THE LIBEL LAWS
+
+Question. Have you any suggestions to make in regard to remodeling the
+libel laws?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+--The Herald, New York, October 26,1888.
+
+
+
+
+REV. DR. NEWTON'S SERMON ON A NEW RELIGION.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+AN ESSAY ON CHRISTMAS.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+HAS FREETHOUGHT A CONSTRUCTIVE SIDE?
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+A man who compels this Deity to abdicate his throne renders a vast and
+splendid service to the human race.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+It will thus be seen that there is an affirmative, a positive, a
+constructive side to Freethought.
+
+What is the positive side?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+It is charged by the worshipers of the Jewish myth, that we destroy,
+that we do not build.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+THE IMPROVED MAN.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+EIGHT HOURS MUST COME.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Any man who wishes to force his brother to work--to toil--more than
+eight hours a day is not a civilized man.
+
+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.
+
+Neither labor nor capital should resort to force.--The Morning Journal,
+April 27, 1890.
+
+
+
+
+THE JEWS.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+I also found that Christians had committed more of these crimes than all
+other religionists put together.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+CRUMBLING CREEDS.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In other words, the days of authority are passing away.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+These are a few of the reasons why creeds are crumbling, and why such a
+change has taken place in the religious world.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The great reason why the orthodox creeds have become unpopular is, that
+all teach the dogma of eternal pain.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+OUR SCHOOLS.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The greatest danger to the Republic is ignorance. Intelligence is the
+foundation of free government.--The World, New York, September 7, 1800.
+
+
+
+
+VIVISECTION.
+
+     *A letter written to Philip G. Peabody. May 27, 1800.
+
+
+VIVISECTION is the Inquisition--the Hell--of Science.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Brain without heart is far more dangerous than heart without brain.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+Never can I be the friend of one who vivisects his fellow-creatures. I
+do not wish to touch his hand.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+THE CENSUS ENUMERATOR'S OFFICIAL CATECHISM.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+THE AGNOSTIC CHRISTMAS
+
+
+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.
+
+This is the festival of the sun-god, and as such let its observance be
+universal.
+
+This is the great day of the first religion, the mother of all
+religions--the worship of the sun.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+This bright God knew no hatred, no malice, never sought for revenge.
+
+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.
+
+Let us all hope for the triumph of Light--of Right and Reason--for the
+victory of Fact over Falsehood, of Science over Superstition.
+
+And so hoping, let us celebrate the venerable festival of the Sun.--The
+Journal, New York, December 25,1892.
+
+
+
+
+SPIRITUALITY.
+
+
+IF there is an abused word in our language, it is "spirituality."
+
+It has been repeated over and over for several hundred years by pious
+pretenders and snivelers as though it belonged exclusively to them.
+
+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.
+
+John Calvin was intensely "spiritual" when he warmed his fleshless hands
+at the flames that consumed Servetus.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+These "spiritual" mendicants hated laughter and smiles and dimples, and
+exhausted their diseased and polluted imaginations in the effort to make
+love loathsome.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+"Spirituality" for the most part is a mask worn by idleness, arrogance
+and greed.
+
+Some people imagine that they are "spiritual" when they are sickly.
+
+It may be well enough to ask: What is it to be really spiritual?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+There is no possible connection between superstition and the spiritual,
+or between theology and the spiritual.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Spirituality is the perfect health of the soul. It is noble, manly,
+generous, brave, free-spoken, natural, superb.
+
+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.'"
+
+Above all things, let us be sincere.--The Conservator, Philadelphia,
+1891.
+
+
+
+
+SUMTER'S GUN.
+
+
+1861--April 12th--1891
+
+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.
+
+Arrogance on one side, hypocrisy on the other.
+
+Right apologized to Wrong for the sake of the Union.
+
+The sources of justice were poisoned, and patriotism became the defender
+of piracy. In the name of humanity mothers were robbed of their babes.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+These echoes said marvelous things and uttered prophecies that none were
+wise enough to understand.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+WHAT INFIDELS HAVE DONE.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+CRUELTY IN THE ELMIRA REFORMATORY.
+
+
+IN my judgment, no human being was ever made better, nobler, by being
+whipped or clubbed.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+LAW'S DELAY.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The case of Mrs. Maybrick is exactly in point, and shows how dangerous
+it is to clothe the trial judge with supreme power.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In my judgment, defective as our criminal courts and methods are, they
+are far better than the English.
+
+Our judges are kinder, more humane; our juries nearer independent, and
+our methods better calculated to ascertain the truth.
+
+
+
+
+THE BIGOTRY OF COLLEGES.
+
+     * 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.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The Vanderbilt College, or University of Tennessee, discharged Professor
+Winchell because he differed with the author of Genesis on geology.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+A YOUNG MAN'S CHANCES TO-DAY.
+
+     * 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.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+SCIENCE AND SENTIMENT.
+
+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.
+
+So, some people imagine that science will do away with sentiment. In my
+judgment, science will not only increase sentiment but sense.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Sentiment can never be destroyed, and love will forever rule the human
+race.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Do I think that the marriage of the sickly and diseased ought to be
+prevented by law?
+
+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.
+
+We must rely on education instead of legislation.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+SOWING AND REAPING.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Poor man!
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+He really thinks that the Devil outwitted God and vaccinated the human
+race with the virus of total depravity.
+
+Poor man!
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+This doctrine, to my mind, is not only absurd, but dishonest and
+corrupting.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+Let us see how this works:
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Mr. Moody ought to have a little philosophy--a little good sense.
+
+So Mr. Moody says that only in this life can a man secure the reward of
+repentance.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+Every orthodox creed is savage, ignorant and idiotic.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+What will conscience trouble the people in hell about? They tell us that
+they will remember their sins.
+
+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?
+
+If this be so, heaven must be somewhat worse than hell.
+
+In old times, if people wanted to know anything they asked the preacher.
+Now they do if they don't.
+
+The Bible has, with intelligent men, lost its authority.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Let us hope that Mr. Moody will read some really useful books.
+
+
+
+
+SHOULD INFIDELS SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO SUNDAY SCHOOL?
+
+SHOULD parents, who are Infidels, unbelievers or Atheists, send their
+children to Sunday schools and churches to give them the benefit of
+Christian education?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+Why then should a free and sensible believer in Science, in the
+naturalness of the universe, send his child to a Catholic school?
+
+Nothing could be more irrational, foolish and absurd.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+WHAT WOULD YOU SUBSTITUTE FOR THE BIBLE AS A MORAL GUIDE?
+
+     * Written for The Boston Investigator.
+
+
+YOU ask me what I would "substitute for the Bible as a moral guide.".
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In Exodus we have an account of the manner in which Jehovah delivered
+the Jews from Egyptian bondage.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+Murder is, and always was, a crime, and always will be, as long as a
+majority of people object to being murdered.
+
+Industry always has been and always will be the enemy of larceny.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+So men and women are not virtuous because of anything in books or
+creeds.
+
+All the Ten Commandments that are good were old, were the result of
+experience. The commandments that were original with Jehovah were
+foolish.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Many of the regulations found in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and
+Deuteronomy, are good. Many are absurd and cruel.
+
+The entire ceremonial of worship is insane.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The story of Ruth is not particularly moral.
+
+In first and second Samuel there is not one word calculated to develop
+the brain or conscience.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The book of Esther is utterly absurd, and the only redeeming feature in
+the book is that the name of Jehovah is not mentioned.
+
+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.
+
+There are some wise and merciful Proverbs. Some are selfish and some are
+flat and commonplace.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In Ezekiel and Daniel we find only ravings of the insane.
+
+In some of the minor prophets there is now and then a good verse, now
+and then an elevated thought.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The stories that are told of Joseph, of Elisha, of Daniel and Gideon,
+and of many others, are hideous; hellish.
+
+On the whole, the Old Testament cannot be considered a moral guide.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+It may be that no book contains better passages than the New Testament,
+but certainly no book contains worse.
+
+Below the blossom of love you find the thorn of hatred; on the lips that
+kiss, you find the poison of the cobra.
+
+The Bible is not a moral guide.
+
+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.
+
+What is morality?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+What then is, or can be called, a moral guide? The shortest possible
+answer is one word: Intelligence.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+This is not only absurd, but it is immoral.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Again I say: Intelligence is the only moral guide.
+
+
+
+
+GOVERNOR ROLLINS' FAST-DAY PROCLAMATION.
+
+
+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:
+
+"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."
+
+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?
+
+In order to answer this question we must state what Christianity is.
+
+Christians tell us that there are certain fundamental truths that must
+be believed.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+A few years ago most Christians believed that Christ was the son of God,
+and not only the son of God, but God himself.
+
+This belief is slowly fading from the minds of Christians, from the
+minds of those who have minds.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Salvation for credulity means damnation for investigation.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+At the same time these "Higher Critics," while they admit that the Bible
+is not true, still insist that it is inspired.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The horses they ride, sometimes get so far apart that it seems to me
+that walking would be easier on the legs.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Thousands of people who accept Christ as a moral guide have thrown, away
+the supernatural.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+The church teaches that God can and will forgive sins.
+
+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?
+
+What are the restraining influences of religion? Did anybody ever hear
+of a policeman being dismissed because a new church had been organized?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Prayer is beggary--an effort to get something for nothing. Labor is the
+honest prayer.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+That kind of faith has departed from the world.
+
+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.
+
+"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.
+
+
+
+
+A LOOK BACKWARD AND A PROPHECY.
+
+     * Written for the Twenty-fifth Anniversary Number of  the
+     New York Truth Seeker, September 3, 1898.
+
+
+I CONGRATULATE _The Truth Seeker_ 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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+In that they were right.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+This book satisfied the thoughtful.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+Conditions had been reversed. The Bible had ceased to be the standard.
+Science was the supreme and final test.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The Devil is the keystone of the arch.
+
+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.
+
+The Devil has faded from his throne and the evil spirits have vanished
+from the air.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In the brain of the average Christian, contradictions dwell in unity.
+
+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. Buechner'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.
+
+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.
+
+The creator of anything is utterly unthinkable.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+This shows that even in the minds of Deists contradictions dwell in
+unity.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+The great body of the church, however, held to the creed--not quite
+believing it, but still insisting that it was true.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+This is where we are now.
+
+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?
+
+Let me prophesy.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+In my judgment, teachers will take the place of preachers and the
+interpreters of nature will be the only priests.
+
+
+
+
+POLITICAL MORALITY.
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+
+
+
+A FEW REASONS FOR DOUBTING THE INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE.
+
+
+     * 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."
+
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+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."
+
+     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.
+
+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
+
+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.
+
+     1 Ex. xii, 37-39
+
+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.
+
+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
+
+     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
+
+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:
+
+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
+
+Do you really think that a man will be eternally damned for endeavoring
+to wipe from the record of God those barbaric words?
+
+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."
+
+     1 Ex. xix, 25, 26.  3 Ex. xxi, 20, 21
+
+     2 Ex. xxi, 2-6,     4 Ex, xxiii, 28
+
+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
+
+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?
+
+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
+
+    1 Ex. xxvii and xxviii.  3 Ex. xxx, 23.  5 Ex. xxxii, 11, 12
+
+    2 Ex. xxix, 19, 20       4 Ex. xxxi, 17.
+
+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.
+
+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
+
+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?
+
+     1 Ex. xxxii, 27-29.  2 Ex. xxxiii, 2, 3.
+
+     3 Ex. xxxiii, 11, 20.
+
+Why should the same God kill a man for eating the fat of an ox, a sheep,
+or a goat?
+
+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?
+
+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
+
+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.
+
+     1 Lev, xvi, 8.  2 Lev. xvi, 21, 22.  3 Lev. xix, 19, 27,
+
+     4 Lev. xxi, 18-20.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+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?
+
+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
+
+     1 Num. v, 12-31.  2 Num. ix, 16-18.
+
+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?
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+     1 Num. xiv, 15, 16.  2 Num. xiv. 32-33.
+
+Forty-seventh. "And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness
+they found a man that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath day.
+
+"And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and
+Aaron, and unto all the congregation.
+
+"And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be
+done to him.
+
+"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.
+
+"And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him
+with stones, and he died." 1
+
+When the last stone was thrown, and he that was a man was but a mangled,
+bruised, and broken mass, this God turned, and, _touched with pity_,
+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
+
+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."
+
+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.
+
+     1 Num. xv, 32-36.  2 Num. xv, 38,  3 Num. xix, 2-10.
+
+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.
+
+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?
+
+     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.
+
+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.
+
+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
+
+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
+
+     1 Josh, x, 13.  2 Josh, xiii, 13.  3 Josh. xxiv, 13.
+
+     4 Judges i, 19.
+
+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
+
+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
+
+     1 Judges vi, 21.   2 Judges vi, 37.  3 Judges vii, 5.
+
+     4 Judges vii, 20.  5 I Sam. vi. 4.
+
+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
+
+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
+
+     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.
+
+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?
+
+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
+
+Fifty-sixth. It is hard to believe that a prophet by lying on a dead
+body could make it sneeze seven times.5
+
+     1 I Kings xviii.  3 2 Kings i.  5 2 Kings iv.
+
+     2 I Kings xix.    4 2 Kings ii.
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+As soon as the Pentateuch was found Josiah began killing wizards and
+such as had familiar spirits.
+
+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.
+
+     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.
+
+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.
+
+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
+
+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
+
+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
+
+     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.
+
+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
+
+     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.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+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.txt or 38811.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.
diff --git a/38811.zip b/38811.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..22aa36a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/38811.zip
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7a1dc84
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #38811 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/38811)
diff --git a/old/orig38811-h/images/frontispiece.jpg b/old/orig38811-h/images/frontispiece.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a65bbd9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/orig38811-h/images/frontispiece.jpg
diff --git a/old/orig38811-h/images/titlepage.jpg b/old/orig38811-h/images/titlepage.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..38fe04e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/orig38811-h/images/titlepage.jpg
diff --git a/old/orig38811-h/main.htm b/old/orig38811-h/main.htm
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..833b571
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/orig38811-h/main.htm
@@ -0,0 +1,16777 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
+    "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
+<html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta name="generator" content="HTML-Kit Tools HTML Tidy plugin" />
+<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content=
+"text/html; charset=us-ascii" />
+<title>The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll, Vol. 11 (of 12) by Robert
+G. Ingersoll</title>
+
+<style type="text/css">
+/*<![CDATA[*/
+    <!--
+                body { text-align:justify}
+    P { margin:15%;
+        margin-top:    .75em;
+        margin-bottom: .75em; }
+    H1,H2,H3,H4,H5,H6 { text-align: center; margin-left: 15%; margin-right: 15%; }
+                hr  { width: 50%; text-align: center;}
+    hr.full { width: 100%; }
+    .foot { margin-left: 20%; margin-right: 20%; text-align: justify; text-indent: -3em; font-size: 90%; }
+                .play { margin-left: 15%; margin-right: 15%; text-align: justify; font-size: 100%; }
+                img {border: 0;}
+                blockquote {font-size: 97%; margin-left: 30%; margin-right: 20%;}
+                .pagenum  { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */
+            /*  visibility: hidden;  */
+                position: absolute;
+                left: 1%;
+                font-size: smaller;
+                text-align: left;
+                color: gray;
+              } /* page numbers */
+                .figleft   {float: left; margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 1%;}
+    .figright  {float: right; margin-right: 10%; margin-left: 1%;}
+                .mynote    {background-color: #DDE; color: #000; padding: .5em;
+                margin-left: 20%; margin-right: 20%; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 95%;}
+                .toc       { margin-left: 35%; margin-bottom: .75em; font-size: 110%;}
+    .toc2      { margin-left: 5%;}
+                .indent    {font-style: italic; font-size: 100%; margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%;}
+    CENTER { padding: 10px;}
+                PRE    { font-family: Times; font-style: italic; font-size: 100%; margin-left: 25%;}
+    -->
+/*]]>*/
+</style>
+</head>
+<body>
+<div style="height: 8em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<a name="title" id="title"></a>
+<h1>THE WORKS OF ROBERT G. INGERSOLL</h1>
+<br />
+<h2>By Robert G. Ingersoll</h2>
+<br />
+<h3>"TO PLOW IS TO PRAY; TO PLANT IS TO PROPHESY,<br />
+AND THE HARVEST ANSWERS AND FULFILLS."</h3>
+<br />
+<h3>IN TWELVE VOLUMES, VOLUME XI.</h3>
+<br />
+<h2>MISCELLANY</h2>
+<br />
+<h3>1900</h3>
+<br />
+<h3>DRESDEN EDITION</h3>
+<br />
+<center><img alt="titlepage (64K)" src="images/titlepage.jpg"
+height="958" width="607" /></center>
+<br />
+<br />
+<center><img alt="frontispiece (64K)" src="images/frontispiece.jpg"
+height="611" width="898" /></center>
+<br />
+<center>North View of "Walston," Dobbs Ferry-on-Hudson, New
+York</center>
+<br />
+<br />
+<hr />
+<br />
+<br />
+<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">TOLSTO&Iuml; 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>
+<br />
+<br />
+<hr />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="linkTOC" id="linkTOC"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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>
+<br />
+Introduction by Frederick Douglass("Abou Ben Adhem")&mdash;Decision
+of<br />
+the United States Supreme Court pronouncing the Civil Rights
+Act<br />
+Unconstitutional&mdash;Limitations of Judges&mdash;Illusion
+Destroyed by the<br />
+Decision in the Dred Scott Case&mdash;Mistake of Our Fathers in
+adopting<br />
+the Common Law of England&mdash;The 13th Amendment to the
+Constitution<br />
+Quoted&mdash;The Clause of the Constitution upholding
+Slavery&mdash;Effect of<br />
+this Clause&mdash;Definitions of a State by Justice Wilson and
+Chief Justice<br />
+Chase&mdash;Effect of the Thirteenth Amendment&mdash;Justice Field
+on Involuntary<br />
+Servitude&mdash;Civil Rights Act Quoted&mdash;Definition of the
+Word Servitude by<br />
+the Supreme Court&mdash;Obvious Purpose of the
+Amendment&mdash;Justice Miller<br />
+on the 14th Amendment&mdash;Citizens Created by this
+Amendment&mdash;Opinion<br />
+of Justice Field&mdash;Rights and Immunities guaranteed by
+the<br />
+Constitution&mdash;Opinion delivered by Chief-Justice
+Waite&mdash;Further Opinions<br />
+of Courts on the question of Citizenship&mdash;Effect of the 13th,
+14th and<br />
+15th Amendments&mdash;"Corrective" Legislation by
+Congress&mdash;Denial of equal<br />
+"Social" Privileges&mdash;Is a State responsible for the Action of
+its Agent<br />
+when acting contrary to Law?&mdash;The Word "State" must include
+the People<br />
+of the State as well as the Officers of the State&mdash;The
+Louisiana Civil<br />
+Rights Law, and a Case tried under it&mdash;Uniformity of Duties
+essential to<br />
+the Carrier&mdash;Congress left Powerless to protect Rights
+conferred by the<br />
+Constitution&mdash;Definition of "Appropriate
+Legislation"&mdash;Propositions laid<br />
+down regarding the Sovereignty of the State, the powers of the
+General<br />
+Government, etc.&mdash;A Tribute to Justice Harlan&mdash;A Denial
+that Property<br />
+exists by Virtue of Law&mdash;Civil Rights not a Question of
+Social<br />
+Equality&mdash;Considerations upon which Social Equality
+depends&mdash;Liberty not<br />
+a Question of Social Equality&mdash;The Superior
+Man&mdash;Inconsistencies of the<br />
+Past&mdash;No Reason why we should Hate the Colored
+People&mdash;The Issues that<br />
+are upon Us.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0002">TRIAL OF C. B. REYNOLDS FOR
+BLASPHEMY.</a></p>
+<br />
+ADDRESS TO THE JURY.<br />
+Report of the Case from the New York Times (note)&mdash;The Right
+to express<br />
+Opinions&mdash;Attempts to Rule the Minds of Men by
+Force&mdash;Liberty the<br />
+Greatest Good&mdash;Intellectual Hospitality Defined&mdash;When the
+Catholic<br />
+Church had Power&mdash;Advent of the Protestants&mdash;The
+Puritans, Quakers.<br />
+Unitarians, Universalists&mdash;What is Blasphemy?&mdash;Why this
+Trial should not<br />
+have Taken Place&mdash;Argument cannot be put in Jail&mdash;The
+Constitution of<br />
+New Jersey&mdash;A higher Law than Men can Make&mdash;The Blasphemy
+Statute<br />
+Quoted and Discussed&mdash;Is the Statute Constitutional?&mdash;The
+Harm done<br />
+by Blasphemy Laws&mdash;The Meaning of this
+Persecution&mdash;Religions are<br />
+Ephemeral&mdash;Let us judge each other by our Actions&mdash;Men
+who have braved<br />
+Public Opinion should be Honored&mdash;The Blasphemy Law if
+enforced would<br />
+rob the World of the Results of Scientific Research&mdash;It
+declares the<br />
+Great Men of to-day to be Criminals&mdash;The Indictment Read and
+Commented<br />
+upon&mdash;Laws that go to Sleep&mdash;Obsolete Dogmas the Denial
+of which was<br />
+once punished by Death&mdash;Blasphemy Characterized&mdash;On the
+Argument<br />
+that Blasphemy Endangers the Public Peace&mdash;A Definition of
+real<br />
+Blasphemy&mdash;Trials for Blasphemy in England&mdash;The case of
+Abner<br />
+Kneeland&mdash;True Worship, Prayer, and Religion&mdash;What is
+Holy and<br />
+Sacred&mdash;What is Claimed in this Case&mdash;For the Honor of
+the State&mdash;The<br />
+word Liberty&mdash;Result of the Trial (note).<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0003">GOD IN THE CONSTITUTION.</a></p>
+<br />
+The Feudal System&mdash;Office and Purpose of our
+Constitution&mdash;Which God<br />
+shall we Select?&mdash;The Existence of any God a Matter of
+Opinion&mdash;What is<br />
+entailed by a Recognition of a God in the Constitution&mdash;Can
+the Infinite<br />
+be Flattered with a Constitutional Amendment?&mdash;This government
+is<br />
+Secular&mdash;The Government of God a Failure&mdash;The Difference
+between the<br />
+Theological and the Secular Spirit&mdash;A Nation neither Christian
+nor<br />
+Infidel&mdash;The Priest no longer a Necessity&mdash;Progress of
+Science and the<br />
+Development of the Mind.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0004">A REPLY TO BISHOP
+SPALDING.</a></p>
+<br />
+On God in the Constitution&mdash;Why the Constitutional Convention
+ignored<br />
+the Question of Religion&mdash;The Fathers
+Misrepresented&mdash;Reasons why the<br />
+Attributes of God should not form an Organic Part of the Law of
+the<br />
+Land&mdash;The Effect of a Clause Recognizing God.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0005">CRIMES AGAINST
+CRIMINALS.</a></p>
+<br />
+The Three Pests of a Community&mdash;I. Forms of Punishment and
+Torture&mdash;More<br />
+Crimes Committed than Prevented by Governments&mdash;II. Are not
+Vices<br />
+transmitted by Nature?&mdash;111. Is it Possible for all People to
+be<br />
+Honest?&mdash;Children of Vice as the natural Product of
+Society&mdash;Statistics:<br />
+the Relation between Insanity, Pauperism, and Crime&mdash;IV. The
+Martyrs of<br />
+Vice&mdash;Franklin's Interest in the Treatment of
+Prisoners&mdash;V. Kindness<br />
+as a Remedy&mdash;Condition of the Discharged Prisoner&mdash;VI.
+Compensation<br />
+for Convicts&mdash;VII. Professional Criminals&mdash;Shall the
+Nation take<br />
+Life?&mdash;Influence of Public Executions on the
+Spectators&mdash;Lynchers<br />
+for the Most Part Criminals at Heart&mdash;VIII. The Poverty of the
+Many a<br />
+perpetual Menace&mdash;Limitations of Land-holding.&mdash;IX.
+Defective Education<br />
+by our Schools&mdash;Hands should be educated as well as
+Head&mdash;Conduct<br />
+improved by a clearer Perception of Consequences&mdash;X. The
+Discipline of<br />
+the average Prison Hardening and Degrading&mdash;While Society
+cringes before<br />
+Great Thieves there will be Little Ones to fill the Jails&mdash;XI.
+Our<br />
+Ignorance Should make us Hesitate.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0006">A WOODEN GOD.</a></p>
+<br />
+On Christian and Chinese worship&mdash;Report of the Select
+Committee<br />
+on Chinese Immigration&mdash;The only true God as contrasted
+with<br />
+Joss&mdash;Sacrifices to the "Living God"&mdash;Messrs. Wright,
+Dickey, O'Connor<br />
+and Murch on the "Religious System" of the American Union&mdash;How
+to prove<br />
+that Christians are better than Heathens&mdash;Injustice in the
+Name of<br />
+God&mdash;An honest Merchant the best Missionary&mdash;A Few
+Extracts from<br />
+Confucius&mdash;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 class="toc"><a href="#link0007">SOME INTERROGATION
+POINTS.</a></p>
+<br />
+A New Party and its Purpose&mdash;The Classes that Exist in
+every<br />
+Country&mdash;Effect of Education on the Common People&mdash;Wants
+Increased by<br />
+Intelligence&mdash;The Dream of 1776&mdash;The Monopolist and the
+Competitor&mdash;The<br />
+War between the Gould and Mackay Cables&mdash;Competition
+between<br />
+Monopolies&mdash;All Advance in Legislation made by Repealing
+Laws&mdash;Wages<br />
+and Values not to be fixed by Law&mdash;Men and Machines&mdash;The
+Specific of<br />
+the Capitalist: Economy&mdash;The poor Man and Woman devoured
+by<br />
+their Fellow-men&mdash;Socialism one of the Worst Possible forms
+of<br />
+Slavery&mdash;Liberty not to be exchanged for Comfort&mdash;Will
+the Workers<br />
+always give their Earnings for the Useless?&mdash;Priests,
+Successful Frauds,<br />
+and Robed Impostors.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0008">ART AND MORALITY.</a></p>
+<br />
+The Origin of Man's Thoughts&mdash;The imaginative
+Man&mdash;"Medicinal View" of<br />
+Poetry&mdash;Rhyme and Religion&mdash;The theological Poets and
+their Purpose in<br />
+Writing&mdash;Moral Poets and their "Unwelcome Truths"&mdash;The
+really Passionate<br />
+are the Virtuous&mdash;Difference between the Nude and the
+Naked&mdash;Morality<br />
+the Melody of Conduct&mdash;The inculcation of Moral Lessons not
+contemplated<br />
+by Artists or great Novelists&mdash;Mistaken Reformers&mdash;Art
+not a<br />
+Sermon&mdash;Language a Multitude of Pictures&mdash;Great Pictures
+and Great<br />
+Statues painted and chiseled with Words&mdash;Mediocrity moral from
+a<br />
+Necessity which it calls Virtue&mdash;Why Art Civilizes&mdash;The
+Nude&mdash;The Venus<br />
+de Milo&mdash;This is Art.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0009">THE DIVIDED HOUSEHOLD OF
+FAITH.</a></p>
+<br />
+The Way in which Theological Seminaries were
+Endowed&mdash;Religious<br />
+Guide-boards&mdash;Vast Interests interwoven with
+Creeds&mdash;Pretensions of<br />
+Christianity&mdash;Kepler's Discovery of his Three Great
+Laws&mdash;Equivocations<br />
+and Evasions of the Church&mdash;Nature's Testimony against
+the<br />
+Bible&mdash;The Age of Man on the Earth&mdash;"Inspired" Morality
+of the<br />
+Bible&mdash;Miracles&mdash;Christian Dogmas&mdash;What the church
+has been Compelled to<br />
+Abandon&mdash;The Appeal to Epithets, Hatred and
+Punishment&mdash;"Spirituality"<br />
+the last Resource of the Orthodox&mdash;What is it to be
+Spiritual?&mdash;Two<br />
+Questions for the Defenders of Orthodox Creeds.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0010">WHY AM I AN AGNOSTIC?</a></p>
+<br />
+Part I. Inharmony of Nature and the Lot of Man with the Goodness
+and<br />
+Wisdom of a supposed Deity&mdash;Why a Creator is
+Imagined&mdash;Difficulty of the<br />
+Act of Creation&mdash;Belief in Supernatural Beings&mdash;Belief
+and Worship among<br />
+Savages&mdash;Questions of Origin and Destiny&mdash;Progress
+impossible without<br />
+Change of Belief&mdash;Circumstances Determining Belief&mdash;How
+may the<br />
+True Religion be Ascertained?&mdash;Prosperity of Nations nor
+Virtue<br />
+of Individuals Dependent on Religions or Gods&mdash;Uninspired
+Books<br />
+Superior&mdash;Part II. The Christian
+Religion&mdash;Credulity&mdash;Miracles cannot<br />
+be Established&mdash;Effect of Testimony&mdash;Miraculous Qualities
+of all<br />
+Religions&mdash;Theists and Naturalists&mdash;The Miracle of
+Inspiration&mdash;How<br />
+can the alleged Fact of Inspiration be Established?&mdash;God's
+work and<br />
+Man's&mdash;Rewards for Falsehood offered by the Church.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0011">HUXLEY AND AGNOSTICISM.</a></p>
+<br />
+Statement by the Principal of King's College&mdash;On the
+Irrelevancy of a<br />
+Lack of Scientific Knowledge&mdash;Difference between the Agnostic
+and<br />
+the Christian not in Knowledge but in Credulity&mdash;The real name
+of<br />
+an Agnostic said to be "Infidel"&mdash;What an Infidel
+is&mdash;"Unpleasant"<br />
+significance of the Word&mdash;Belief in Christ&mdash;"Our Lord and
+his Apostles"<br />
+possibly Honest Men&mdash;Their Character not
+Invoked&mdash;Possession by evil<br />
+spirits&mdash;Professor Huxley's Candor and Clearness&mdash;The
+splendid Dream<br />
+of Auguste Comte&mdash;Statement of the Positive
+Philosophy&mdash;Huxley and<br />
+Harrison.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0012">ERNEST RENAN.</a></p>
+<br />
+His Rearing and his Anticipated Biography&mdash;The complex
+Character of the<br />
+Christ of the Gospels&mdash;Regarded as a Man by Renan&mdash;The
+Sin against the<br />
+Holy Ghost&mdash;Renan on the Gospels&mdash;No Evidence that they
+were written<br />
+by the Men whose Names they Bear&mdash;Written long after the
+Events they<br />
+Describe&mdash;Metaphysics of the Church found in the Gospel of
+John&mdash;Not<br />
+Apparent why Four Gospels should have been Written&mdash;Regarded
+as<br />
+legendary Biographies&mdash;In "flagrant contradiction one with
+another"&mdash;The<br />
+Divine Origin of Christ an After-growth&mdash;Improbable that he
+intended to<br />
+form a Church&mdash;Renan's Limitations&mdash;Hebrew
+Scholarship&mdash;His "People of<br />
+Israel"&mdash;His Banter and Blasphemy.<br />
+TOLSTOY AND "THE KREUTZER SONATA."<br />
+Tolstoy's Belief and Philosophy&mdash;His Asceticism&mdash;His View
+of Human<br />
+Love&mdash;Purpose of "The Kreutzer Sonata"&mdash;Profound
+Difference between the<br />
+Love of Men and that of Women&mdash;Tolstoy cannot now found a
+Religion, but<br />
+may create the Necessity for another Asylum&mdash;The
+Emotions&mdash;The Curious<br />
+Opinion Dried Apples have of Fruit upon the
+Tree&mdash;Impracticability of<br />
+selling All and giving to the Poor&mdash;Love and
+Obedience&mdash;Unhappiness in<br />
+the Marriage Relation not the fault of Marriage.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0014">THOMAS PAINE.</a></p>
+<br />
+Life by Moncure D. Conway&mdash;Early Advocacy of Reforms against
+Dueling<br />
+and Cruelty to Animals&mdash;The First to write "The United States
+of<br />
+America"&mdash;Washington's Sentiment against Separation from
+Great<br />
+Britain&mdash;Paine's Thoughts in the Declaration of
+Independence&mdash;Author of<br />
+the first Proclamation of Emancipation in
+America&mdash;Establishment of a<br />
+Fund for the Relief of the Army&mdash;H's "Farewell
+Address"&mdash;The "Rights of<br />
+Man"&mdash;Elected to the French Convention&mdash;Efforts to save
+the Life of the<br />
+King&mdash;His Thoughts on Religion&mdash;Arrested&mdash;The "Age
+of Reason" and the<br />
+Weapons it has furnished "Advanced Theologians"&mdash;Neglect by
+Gouverneur<br />
+Morris and Washington&mdash;James Monroe's letter to Paine and to
+the<br />
+Committee of General Safety&mdash;The vaunted Religious Liberty
+of<br />
+Colonial Maryland&mdash;Orthodox Christianity at the Beginning of
+the 19th<br />
+Century&mdash;New Definitions of God&mdash;The Funeral of
+Paine.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0015">THE THREE
+PHILANTHROPISTS.</a></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"&mdash;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 class="toc"><a href="#link0016">SHOULD THE CHINESE BE
+EXCLUDED?</a></p>
+SHOULD THE CHINESE BE EXCLUDED?<br />
+Trampling on the Rights of Inferiors&mdash;Rise of the Irish and
+Germans<br />
+to Power&mdash;The Burlingame Treaty&mdash;Character of Chinese
+Laborers&mdash;Their<br />
+Enemies in the Pacific States&mdash;Violation of Treaties&mdash;The
+Geary Law&mdash;The<br />
+Chinese Hated for their Virtues&mdash;More Piety than Principle
+among the<br />
+People's Representatives&mdash;Shall we go back to Barbarism?<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0017">A WORD ABOUT EDUCATION.</a></p>
+<br />
+What the Educated Man Knows&mdash;Necessity of finding out the
+Facts<br />
+of Nature&mdash;"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 class="toc"><a href="#link0018">WHAT I WANT FOR
+CHRISTMAS.</a></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&mdash;Would like to see Drunkenness and Prohibition
+abolished,<br />
+Corporal Punishment done away with, and the whole World free.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0019">FOOL FRIENDS.</a></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 class="toc"><a href="#link0020">INSPIRATION.</a></p>
+<br />
+Nature tells a different Story to all Eyes and Ears&mdash;Horace
+Greeley and<br />
+the Big Trees&mdash;The Man who "always did like rolling
+land"&mdash;What the<br />
+Snow looked like to the German&mdash;Shakespeare's different Story
+for each<br />
+Reader&mdash;As with Nature so with the Bible.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0021">THE TRUTH OF HISTORY.</a></p>
+<br />
+People who live by Lying&mdash;A Case in point&mdash;H. Hodson
+Rugg's Account of<br />
+the Conversion of Ingersoll and 5,000 of his Followers&mdash;The
+"Identity of<br />
+Lost Israel with the British Nation"&mdash;Old Falsehoods about
+Infidels&mdash;The<br />
+New York Observer and Thomas Paine&mdash;A Rascally English
+Editor&mdash;The<br />
+Charge that Ingersoll's Son had been Converted&mdash;The Fecundity
+of<br />
+Falsehood.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0022">HOW TO EDIT A LIBERAL
+PAPER.</a></p>
+<br />
+The Editor should not narrow his Horizon so that he can see
+only<br />
+One Thing&mdash;To know the Defects of the Bible is but the
+Beginning of<br />
+Wisdom&mdash;The Liberal Paper should not discuss Theological
+Questions<br />
+Alone&mdash;A Column for Children&mdash;Candor and
+Kindness&mdash;Nothing should be<br />
+Asserted that is not Known&mdash;Above All, teach the Absolute
+Freedom of the<br />
+Mind.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0023">SECULARISM.</a></p>
+<br />
+The religion of Humanity; what it Embraces and what it
+Advocates&mdash;A<br />
+Protest against Ecclesiastical Tyranny&mdash;Believes in Building a
+Home<br />
+here&mdash;Means Food and Fireside&mdash;The Right to express your
+Thought&mdash;Its<br />
+advice to every Human Being&mdash;A Religion without Mysteries,
+Miracles, or<br />
+Persecutions.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0024">CRITICISM OF "ROBERT ELSMERE,"
+"JOHN WARD, PREACHER," AND "AN AFRICAN FARM."</a></p>
+<br />
+Religion unsoftened by Infidelity&mdash;The Orthodox Minister whose
+Wife has<br />
+a Heart&mdash;Honesty of Opinion not a Mitigating
+Circumstance&mdash;Repulsiveness<br />
+of an Orthodox Life&mdash;John Ward an Object of Pity&mdash;Lyndall
+of the<br />
+"African Farm"&mdash;The Story of the Hunter&mdash;Death of
+Waldo&mdash;Women the<br />
+Caryatides of the Church&mdash;Attitude of Christianity toward
+other<br />
+Religions&mdash;Egotism of the ancient Jews.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0025">THE LIBEL LAWS.</a></p>
+<br />
+All Articles appearing in a newspaper should be Signed by the<br />
+Writer&mdash;The Law if changed should throw greater Safeguards
+around the<br />
+Reputation of the Citizen&mdash;Pains should be taken to give
+Prominence to<br />
+Retractions&mdash;The Libel Laws like a Bayonet in War.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0026">REV. DR. NEWTON'S SERMON ON A
+NEW RELIGION.</a></p>
+REV. DR. NEWTON'S SERMON ON A NEW RELIGION.<br />
+Mr. Newton not Regarded as a Sceptic&mdash;New Meanings given to
+Old<br />
+Words&mdash;The vanishing Picture of Hell&mdash;The
+Atonement&mdash;Confidence being<br />
+Lost in the Morality of the Gospel&mdash;Exclusiveness of the
+Churches&mdash;The<br />
+Hope of Immortality and Belief in God have Nothing to do with
+Real<br />
+Religion&mdash;Special Providence a Mistake.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0027">AN ESSAY ON CHRISTMAS.</a></p>
+<br />
+The Day regarded as a Holiday&mdash;A Festival far older<br />
+than Christianity&mdash;Relics of Sun-worship in Christian<br />
+Ceremonies&mdash;Christianity furnished new Steam for an old
+Engine&mdash;Pagan<br />
+Festivals correspond to Ours&mdash;Why Holidays are
+Popular&mdash;They must be for<br />
+the Benefit of the People.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0028">HAS FREETHOUGHT A CONSTRUCTIVE
+SIDE?</a></p>
+<br />
+The Object of Freethought&mdash;what the Religionist calls
+"Affirmative<br />
+and Positive"&mdash;The Positive Side of
+Freethought&mdash;Constructive Work of<br />
+Christianity.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0029">THE IMPROVED MAN.</a></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&mdash;His
+Motto&mdash;Will not<br />
+endeavor to change the Mind of the "Infinite"&mdash;Will have no
+Bells or<br />
+Censers&mdash;Will be satisfied that the Supernatural does not
+exist&mdash;Will be<br />
+Self-poised, Independent, Candid and Free.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0030">EIGHT HOURS MUST COME.</a></p>
+<br />
+The Working People should be protected by Law&mdash;Life of no
+particular<br />
+Importance to the Man who gets up before Daylight and works
+till<br />
+after Dark&mdash;A Revolution probable in the Relations between
+Labor and<br />
+Capital&mdash;Working People becoming Educated and more
+Independent&mdash;The<br />
+Government can Aid by means of Good Laws&mdash;Women the worst
+Paid&mdash;There<br />
+should be no Resort to Force by either Labor or Capital.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0031">THE JEWS.</a></p>
+<br />
+Much like People of other Religions&mdash;Teaching given Christian
+Children<br />
+about those who die in the Faith of Abraham&mdash;Dr. John Hall
+on<br />
+the Persecution of the Jews in Russia as the Fulfillment of<br />
+Prophecy&mdash;Hostility of Orthodox early Christians excited by
+Jewish<br />
+Witnesses against the Faith&mdash;An infamous Chapter of
+History&mdash;Good<br />
+and bad Men of every Faith&mdash;Jews should outgrow their
+own<br />
+Superstitions&mdash;What the intelligent Jew Knows.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0032">CRUMBLING CREEDS.</a></p>
+CRUMBLING CREEDS.<br />
+The Common People called upon to Decide as between the Universities
+and<br />
+the Synods&mdash;Modern Medicine, Law, Literature and Pictures as
+against the<br />
+Old&mdash;Creeds agree with the Sciences of their Day&mdash;Apology
+the Prelude<br />
+to Retreat&mdash;The Presbyterian Creed Infamous, but no worse
+than<br />
+the Catholic&mdash;Progress begins when Expression of Opinion
+is<br />
+Allowed&mdash;Examining the Religions of other Countries&mdash;The
+Pulpit's<br />
+Position Lost&mdash;The Dogma of Eternal Pain the Cause of the
+orthodox<br />
+Creeds losing Popularity&mdash;Every Church teaching this Infinite
+Lie must<br />
+Fall.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0033">OUR SCHOOLS.</a></p>
+OUR SCHOOLS.<br />
+Education the only Lever capable of raising Mankind&mdash;The<br />
+School-house more Important than the Church&mdash;Criticism of New
+York's<br />
+School-Buildings&mdash;The Kindergarten System
+Recommended&mdash;Poor Pay of<br />
+Teachers&mdash;The great Danger to the Republic is Ignorance.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0034">VIVISECTION.</a></p>
+<br />
+The Hell of Science&mdash;Brutal Curiosity of Vivisectors&mdash;The
+Pretence that<br />
+they are working for the Good of Man&mdash;Have these scientific
+Assassins<br />
+added to useful Knowledge?&mdash;No Good to the Race to be
+Accomplished by<br />
+Torture&mdash;The Tendency to produce a Race of intelligent Wild
+Beasts.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0035">THE CENSUS ENUMERATOR'S OFFICIAL
+CATECHISM.</a></p>
+<br />
+Right of the Government to ask Questions and of the Citizen to
+refuse<br />
+to answer them&mdash;Matters which the Government has no Right to
+pry<br />
+into&mdash;Exposing the Debtor's financial Condition&mdash;A Man
+might decline to<br />
+tell whether he has a Chronic Disease or not.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0036">THE AGNOSTIC CHRISTMAS.</a></p>
+<br />
+Natural Phenomena and Myths celebrated&mdash;The great Day of the
+first<br />
+Religion, Sun-worship&mdash;A God that Knew no Hatred nor Sought
+Revenge&mdash;The<br />
+Festival of Light.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0037">SPIRITUALITY.</a></p>
+<br />
+A much-abused Word&mdash;The Early Christians too Spiritual to
+be<br />
+Civilized&mdash;Calvin and Knox&mdash;Paine, Voltaire and Humboldt
+not<br />
+Spiritual&mdash;Darwin also Lacking&mdash;What it is to be really
+Spiritual&mdash;No<br />
+connection with Superstition.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0038">SUMTER'S GUN.</a></p>
+<br />
+What were thereby blown into Rags and Ravelings&mdash;The Birth of
+a<br />
+new Epoch announced&mdash;Lincoln made the most commanding Figure
+of the<br />
+Century&mdash;Story of its Echoes.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0039">WHAT INFIDELS HAVE DONE.</a></p>
+<br />
+What might have been Asked of a Christian 100 years after<br />
+Christ&mdash;Hospitals and Asylums not all built for
+Charity&mdash;Girard<br />
+College&mdash;Lick Observatory&mdash;Carnegie not an Orthodox
+Christian&mdash;Christian<br />
+Colleges&mdash;Give us Time.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0040">CRUELTY IN THE ELMIRA
+REFORMATORY.</a></p>
+<br />
+Brockway a Savage&mdash;The Lash will neither develop the Brain nor
+cultivate<br />
+the Heart&mdash;Brutality a Failure&mdash;Bishop Potter's
+apostolical Remark.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0041">LAW'S DELAY.</a></p>
+<br />
+The Object of a Trial&mdash;Justice can afford to Wait&mdash;The
+right of<br />
+Appeal&mdash;Case of Mrs. Maybrick&mdash;Life Imprisonment for
+Murderers&mdash;American<br />
+Courts better than the English.<br />
+BIGOTRY OF COLLEGES.<br />
+Universities naturally Conservative&mdash;Kansas State
+University's<br />
+Objection to Ingersoll as a commencement Orator&mdash;Comment by
+Mr. Depew<br />
+(note)&mdash;Action of Cornell and the University of
+Missouri.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0043">A YOUNG MAN'S CHANCES
+TO-DAY.</a></p>
+<br />
+The Chances a few Years ago&mdash;Capital now
+Required&mdash;Increasing<br />
+competition in Civilized Life&mdash;Independence the first
+Object&mdash;If he has<br />
+something to say, there will be plenty to listen.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0044">SCIENCE AND SENTIMENT.</a></p>
+<br />
+Science goes hand in hand with Imagination&mdash;Artistic and
+Ethical<br />
+Development&mdash;Science destroys Superstition, not true
+Religion&mdash;Education<br />
+preferable to Legislation&mdash;Our Obligation to our
+Children.<br />
+"SOWING AND REAPING."<br />
+Moody's Belief accounted for&mdash;A dishonest and corrupting
+Doctrine&mdash;A<br />
+want of Philosophy and Sense&mdash;Have Souls in Heaven no
+Regrets?&mdash;Mr.<br />
+Moody should read some useful Books.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0046">SHOULD INFIDELS SEND THEIR
+CHILDREN TO SUNDAY SCHOOL?</a></p>
+<br />
+Teachings of orthodox Sunday Schools&mdash;The ferocious God of
+the<br />
+Bible&mdash;Miracles&mdash;A Christian in Constantinople would not
+send his<br />
+Child to a Mosque&mdash;Advice to all Agnostics&mdash;Strangle the
+Serpent of<br />
+Superstition.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0047">WHAT WOULD YOU SUBSTITUTE FOR
+THE BIBLE AS A MORAL GUIDE?</a></p>
+<br />
+Character of the Bible&mdash;Men and Women not virtuous because of
+any<br />
+Book&mdash;The Commandments both Good and Bad&mdash;Books that do
+not help<br />
+Morality&mdash;Jehovah not a moral God&mdash;What is
+Morality?&mdash;Intelligence the<br />
+only moral guide.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0048">GOVERNOR ROLLINS' FAST-DAY
+PROCLAMATION.</a></p>
+<br />
+Decline of the Christian Religion in New
+Hampshire&mdash;Outgrown<br />
+Beliefs&mdash;Present-day Views of Christ and the Holy
+Ghost&mdash;Abandoned<br />
+Notions about the Atonement&mdash;Salvation for Credulity&mdash;The
+Miracles<br />
+of the New Testament&mdash;The Bible "not true but
+inspired"&mdash;The "Higher<br />
+Critics" riding two Horses&mdash;Infidelity in the Pulpit&mdash;The
+"restraining<br />
+Influences of Religion" as illustrated by Spain and
+Portugal&mdash;Thinking,<br />
+Working and Praying&mdash;The kind of Faith that has
+Departed.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0049">A LOOK BACKWARD AND A
+PROPHECY.</a></p>
+<br />
+The <i>Truth Seeker</i> congratulated on its Twenty-fifth
+Birthday&mdash;Teachings<br />
+of Twenty-five Years ago&mdash;Dodging and evading&mdash;The
+Clerical Assault<br />
+on Darwin&mdash;Draper, Buckle, Hegel, Spencer,
+Emerson&mdash;Comparison<br />
+of Prejudices&mdash;Vanished Belief in the Devil&mdash;Matter
+and<br />
+Force&mdash;Contradictions Dwelling in Unity&mdash;Substitutes for
+Jehovah&mdash;A<br />
+Prophecy.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0050">POLITICAL MORALITY.</a></p>
+<br />
+Argument in the contested Election Case of Strobach against
+Herbert&mdash;The<br />
+Importance of Honest Elections&mdash;Poisoning the Source of
+Justice&mdash;The<br />
+Fraudulent Voter a Traitor to his Sovereign, the Will of the<br />
+People&mdash;Political Morality Imperative.<br />
+<p class="toc"><a href="#link0051">A FEW REASONS FOR DOUBTING THE
+INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE.</a></p>
+Date and Manner of Composing the Old Testament&mdash;Other Books
+not now in<br />
+Existence, and Disagreements about the Canon&mdash;Composite
+Character of<br />
+certain Books&mdash;Various Versions&mdash;Why was God's message
+given to the Jews<br />
+alone?&mdash;The Story of the Creation, of the Flood, of the Tower,
+and<br />
+of Lot's wife&mdash;Moses and Aaron and the Plagues of
+Egypt&mdash;Laws of<br />
+Slavery&mdash;Instructions by Jehovah Calculated to excite
+Astonishment and<br />
+Mirth&mdash;Sacrifices and the Scapegoat&mdash;Passages showing
+that the Laws of<br />
+Moses were made after the Jews had left the Desert&mdash;Jehovah's
+dealings<br />
+with his People&mdash;The Sabbath
+Law&mdash;Prodigies&mdash;Joshua's Miracle&mdash;Damned<br />
+Ignorance and Infamy&mdash;Jephthah's Sacrifice&mdash;Incredible
+Stories&mdash;The<br />
+Woman of Endor and the Temptation of David&mdash;Elijah and
+Elisha&mdash;Loss of<br />
+the Pentateuch from Moses to Josiah&mdash;The Jews before and after
+being<br />
+Abandoned by Jehovah&mdash;Wealth of Solomon and other
+Marvels.<br /></blockquote>
+<br />
+<br />
+<hr />
+<br />
+<br />
+<a name="link0001" id="link0001"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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>
+     Abou Ben Adhem&mdash;(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>
+<center>MR. INGERSOLL'S SPEECH.</center>
+<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&mdash;supposed that it was
+upheld by the 13th and 14th Amendments,&mdash;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&mdash;not motives, but reasons&mdash;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&mdash;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,"&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the distinction
+often exists only in the clothes. Take away the crown&mdash;there
+is only a man. Remove the robe&mdash;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&mdash;including judges&mdash;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&mdash;a law poisoned by kingly prerogative&mdash;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&mdash;a Constitution that recognized and upheld
+slavery, protected the slave-trade, legalized piracy upon the high
+seas&mdash;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&mdash;the 13th, 14th and 15th&mdash;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&mdash;the noblest
+spirits under the flag&mdash;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&mdash;as
+though they had always been free&mdash;as though they had been
+white. They became citizens&mdash;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&mdash;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, &amp;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;excluding Indians not taxed&mdash;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&mdash;and to none other&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;not only of the United States, but of the States in
+which they reside&mdash;if, behind these declarations, there is no
+power to act&mdash;no duty for the General Government to
+discharge?</p>
+<p>Notwithstanding the 13th Amendment had been
+adopted&mdash;notwithstanding slavery and involuntary servitude had
+been legally destroyed&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that they were required to reside on the soil
+without the right to purchase or own it&mdash;that they were
+excluded from many occupations of gain and profit&mdash;that they
+were not permitted to give testimony in the courts where white men
+were on trial&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;not to his State, but to the
+Republic.</p>
+<p>This clause of the 14th Amendment made us all citizens of the
+United States&mdash;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&mdash;through Congress; and Congress, by the Civil
+Rights Act, defined some of the rights, privileges and immunities
+of a citizen of the United States&mdash;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&mdash;North and South, East and West&mdash;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&mdash;which necessarily included those of
+every race and color&mdash;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&mdash;if it does not
+create&mdash;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&mdash;an agent of the State.
+It is under the control of the State&mdash;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&mdash;and it is the only question&mdash;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"&mdash;meaning the
+15th&mdash;"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&mdash;that is, the right to
+vote&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the
+sceptre of authority&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;managers of railways, and keepers of public inns, to
+discriminate between their passengers and guests on account of race
+or color&mdash;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&mdash;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>&mdash;2 Otto, 541.</p>
+<p>"That an unconstitutional law will be treated by the courts as
+null and void"&mdash;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,&mdash;namely, that it is a "social
+question," one not to be regulated by law, and not covered in any
+way by the Constitution&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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>&mdash;found in
+100 U. S. 339&mdash;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&mdash;or is the Government liable&mdash;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>,&mdash;103 U. S., 307,&mdash;that an officer acting
+contrary to the laws of the State&mdash;in defiance of those
+laws&mdash;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&mdash;full, complete, and ample,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;provided he does not counterfeit any of the
+coins or current money of the United States. Congress would have to
+deal&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say,
+Liberty,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the entire trip being within the limits of the
+State. The captain of the boat refused to give her equal
+accommodations with other passengers&mdash;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&mdash;residing in the State of
+Louisiana&mdash;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&mdash;that the State of Louisiana
+had no right to interfere&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;it enlarges&mdash;the powers
+vested in the General Government. It is an additional
+power&mdash;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&mdash;let it be
+within the scope of the Constitution, and all means which are
+appropriate&mdash;which are plainly adapted to that end&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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>&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, on account of race, color, or previous
+condition of servitude&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;all amendments to the
+Constitution&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;when they are refused admittance to public inns
+and railway cars, on an equality with white persons&mdash;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&mdash;it is an end. Take from our history, our
+literature, our laws, our hearts&mdash;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&mdash;it is the plant and bud and flower and
+fruit&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;into what we call forms of government&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the most fiendish of all things. It is worse than
+slavery. Slavery is at least justified by avarice&mdash;by a desire
+to get something for nothing&mdash;by a desire to live in idleness
+upon the labor of others&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that colored waiters shall bring it to
+them&mdash;willing to ride in the same cars with the porters and to
+be shown to their seats in theatres by colored ushers&mdash;willing
+to be nursed in sickness by colored servants. They see nothing
+dangerous&mdash;nothing repugnant, in any of these
+relations,&mdash;but the idea of riding in the same car, stopping
+at the same hotel, fills them with fear&mdash;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&mdash;no two blades of grass&mdash;no two grains of
+sand&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;afraid to admit that he was
+property&mdash;and so we called him "contraband." We hesitated to
+allow the negro to fight for his own freedom&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;all that any reasonable man&mdash;can ask is,
+that you continue doing as you have done. Above all
+things&mdash;educate your children&mdash;strive to make yourselves
+independent&mdash;work for homes&mdash;work for
+yourselves&mdash;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&mdash;their patience to provoke, and their forgiveness to
+insult. Turn the tables&mdash;change places&mdash;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&mdash;they simply ask
+for justice. They are willing to forget the past&mdash;willing to
+hide their scars&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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>
+<a name="link0002" id="link0002"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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>
+     * 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,"&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;when you look at the solemn splendors of the
+night&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;why the brain of
+another so that he became a Mohammedan&mdash;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&mdash;more important than gold or
+houses or lands&mdash;more important than art or science&mdash;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&mdash;gladly would I forget
+every invention that has leaped from the brain of man&mdash;gladly
+would I see all books ashes, all works of art destroyed, all
+statues broken, and all the triumphs of the world
+lost&mdash;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&mdash;sought to prevent argument&mdash;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&mdash;that will make a woman a
+better wife, a better mother&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;because it
+is his right&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;probably you think you are all
+right,&mdash;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&mdash;while I
+am opposed to Presbyterianism I am not opposed to Presbyterians. I
+do not fight people,&mdash;I fight ideas, I fight principles, and I
+never go into personalities. As I said, I do not hate
+Presbyterians, but Presbyterianism&mdash;that is, I am opposed to
+their doctrine. I do not hate a man that has the rheumatism&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;I do not
+know. I think they were right in their opposition to
+Catholicism&mdash;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&mdash;first rate&mdash;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,&mdash;and I always sided with the Pope in that
+war&mdash;but it made no difference; and in a little while the
+Episcopalians turned out to be just about like other folks&mdash;no
+worse&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;industrious, frugal, gentle, kind and
+loving&mdash;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;"&mdash;but the world went on as
+usual, and the Unitarians produced men like Channing&mdash;one of
+the tenderest spirits that ever lived&mdash;they produced men like
+Theodore Parker&mdash;one of the greatest brained and greatest
+hearted men produced upon this continent&mdash;a good man&mdash;and
+yet they thought he was a blasphemer&mdash;they even prayed for his
+death&mdash;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&mdash;everybody will go to stealing
+just to enjoy themselves." But they did not. The Universalists were
+good people&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;stripped
+naked&mdash;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&mdash;I do not know how it
+is&mdash;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&mdash;a Presbyterian, over to Turkey. He goes there, and
+he tells the Mohammedans&mdash;and he has it in a pamphlet and he
+distributes it&mdash;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&mdash;that it is all a
+mistake&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the
+spirit of the Revolution at that time not having permeated all
+classes of society&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;more important than any other clause in that
+instrument&mdash;a clause that shines in that constitution like a
+star at night.&mdash;</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&mdash;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&mdash;the absolute consequences of certain
+acts&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;"No law shall be passed to restrain or abridge
+the liberty of speech."</p>
+<p>Now let us come to this old law&mdash;this law that was asleep
+for a hundred years before this constitution was adopted&mdash;this
+law coiled like a snake beneath the foundations of the
+Government&mdash;this law, cowardly, dastardly&mdash;this law
+passed by wretches who were afraid: to discuss&mdash;this law
+passed by men who could not, and who knew they could not, defend
+their creed&mdash;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&mdash;and
+yet, the moment he got in power he used it: The people became
+civilized&mdash;but that law was on the statute book. It simply
+remained. There it was, sound asleep&mdash;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>"&mdash;</p>
+<p>I want to say right here&mdash;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&mdash;charged them with idolatry&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;when they say, "if a man strike you on one cheek
+turn to him the other also&mdash;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>"&mdash;<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&mdash;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&mdash;the trouble
+is, the ministers&mdash;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&mdash;prays that his little children may
+recover from the fever&mdash;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&mdash;would never think of such a thing&mdash;even if
+he called the unbelievers of the world "wretches," "dogs," and
+"devils." What would I do? I would simply answer him&mdash;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&mdash;take the best ones&mdash;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&mdash;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:&mdash;</p>
+<p>"<i>Or the Christian religion</i>."</p>
+<p>Well, what is the Christian religion? "If you scoff at the
+Christian religion&mdash;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&mdash;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>&mdash;"</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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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"&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;stop taking it
+from your priests&mdash;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&mdash;now I
+want your candid judgment." So the Protestant Church says to a man,
+"This Bible is a message from your Father,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;it sheds light.
+Humor is the readiest test of truth&mdash;of the natural, of the
+sensible&mdash;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&mdash;no sense of the absurd&mdash;the Presbyterian
+creed, fill his darkened brain with superstition and his heart with
+hatred&mdash;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:&mdash;</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&mdash;just in that language. The punishment,
+however, has been somewhat changed. In the good old days when the
+king sat on the throne&mdash;in the good old days when the altar
+was the right-bower of the throne&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;they must forswear allegiance to every other
+potentate, prince and power&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;in Buddha. Now, I
+ask you,&mdash;when that man comes here and becomes a
+citizen&mdash;when the Constitution is about him, above
+him&mdash;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&mdash;there is no Savior except Buddha, the
+Illuminated, Buddha the Blest"? I say that he has that
+right&mdash;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&mdash;the believer in Zoroaster, in the spirits
+of Good and Evil, and that the spirit of Evil will finally triumph
+forever&mdash;if that is his religion&mdash;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&mdash;and there is, in
+my judgment, only one name on the page of American history greater
+than his&mdash;only one name for which I have a greater and
+tenderer reverence&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;while his wife wept&mdash;while
+his children clung to his hands&mdash;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&mdash;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?"&mdash;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&mdash;the same spirit that
+did that, went before the grand jury in this case&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;a savage;
+any man that would abuse him on that account, is a
+barbarian&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;I can't tell. If I had been raised in Scotland, on
+oatmeal, I might have been a Covenanter&mdash;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&mdash;no
+doubt of it. You see it depends on where you were born&mdash;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&mdash;Methodists, Unitarians, or Catholics, plenty of
+them, who are unbelievers&mdash;plenty of them who deny the truth
+of the Scriptures&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;easy to sail the way the boats are going&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;I
+love him myself&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;so with
+the greatest thinkers and greatest writers of modern times.</p>
+<p>You may not agree with these men&mdash;and what does that prove?
+It simply proves that they do not agree with you&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that it covers simply speech&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;to open your mouth like a young
+robin, and swallow&mdash;worms or shingle nails&mdash;no matter
+which.</p>
+<p>The defendant further blasphemed and said that:&mdash;</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&mdash;who would be permitted to
+explain it&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the water rising hour by
+hour, and the poor wretched children of God climbing to the tops of
+their houses&mdash;then to the tops of the hills. The water still
+rising&mdash;no mercy. The people climbing higher and higher,
+looking to the mountains for salvation&mdash;the merciless rain
+still falling, the inexorable flood still rising. Children falling
+from the arms of mothers&mdash;no pity. The highest hills
+covered&mdash;infancy and old age mingling in death&mdash;the cries
+of women, the sobs and sighs lost in the roar of waves&mdash;the
+heavens still relentless. The mountains are covered&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;</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&mdash;"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&mdash;and for
+that reason is a "blasphemer."</p>
+<p>I say to you now, gentlemen,&mdash;and I shall argue to the
+Court,&mdash;that there is not in what I have read a solitary
+blasphemous word&mdash;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:&mdash;</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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;no doubt of that. Sarah could have obtained a divorce
+in this State&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;"</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&mdash;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.&mdash;Millions believe, that this is true&mdash;I do not
+believe,&mdash;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,&mdash;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,&mdash;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"?&mdash;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,&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;a picture that was a
+likeness,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;it being a law in favor of a defendant&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;that is
+blasphemy.</p>
+<p>To enslave your fellow-man, to put chains upon his
+body&mdash;that is blasphemy.</p>
+<p>To enslave the minds of men, to put manacles upon the brain,
+padlocks upon the lips&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that is
+blasphemy.</p>
+<p>To persecute the intelligent few, at the command of the ignorant
+many&mdash;that is blasphemy.</p>
+<p>To forge chains, to build dungeons, for your honest
+fellow-men&mdash;that is blasphemy.</p>
+<p>To pollute the souls of children with the dogma of eternal
+pain&mdash;that is blasphemy.</p>
+<p>To violate your conscience&mdash;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,&mdash;and that is the country that our ancestors fought in
+the sacred name of liberty,&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;a wife
+prematurely old and gray,&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;these
+are sacred. The liberty of man is of far more importance than any
+book; the rights of man more sacred than any religion&mdash;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&mdash;that the mysteries of the
+whole world are explained by one volume?</p>
+<p>All that is&mdash;all that conveys information to man&mdash;all
+that has been produced by the past&mdash;all that now
+exists&mdash;should be considered by an intelligent man. All the
+known truths of this world&mdash;all the philosophy, all the poems,
+all the pictures, all the statues, all the entrancing
+music&mdash;the prattle of babes, the lullaby of mothers, the words
+of honest men, the trumpet calls to duty&mdash;all these make up
+the bible of the world&mdash;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,&mdash;if we wish to benefit
+our fellow-men&mdash;if we wish to live honorable lives&mdash;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&mdash;even if it be
+constitutional&mdash;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&mdash;how good it
+is, or how bad it is&mdash;no matter what the Court may instruct
+you on that subject&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;do
+not forget that you have no right to take one word into account
+except the exact words set out in this indictment&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;"willfully"
+telling his real opinion&mdash;"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&mdash;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&mdash;has there been any&mdash;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&mdash;that is all.</p>
+<p>It was claimed, among other things, that the defendant
+circulated this pamphlet among children. There was no such
+evidence&mdash;not the slightest. The only evidence about schools,
+or school-children was, that when the defendant talked with the
+bill-poster,&mdash;whose business the defendant was interfering
+with,&mdash;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,&mdash;laid the pamphlets on a show
+case, or threw them upon a desk&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;no civilized man
+ever did do it&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;any case in which a man has been punished
+for speaking his sentiments. The records have not been
+stained&mdash;have not been polluted&mdash;with such a verdict.</p>
+<p>Keep such a verdict from the Reports of your State&mdash;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&mdash;that
+there is a manacle upon the brain.</p>
+<p>For the sake of your State&mdash;for the sake of her reputation
+throughout the world&mdash;for your own sakes&mdash;and those of
+your children, and their children yet to be&mdash;say to the world
+that New Jersey shares in the spirit of this age,&mdash;that New
+Jersey is not a survival of the Dark Ages,&mdash;that New Jersey
+does not still regard the thumbscrew as an instrument of
+progress,&mdash;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&mdash;for
+the sake of something of more importance to mankind than this
+continent&mdash;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&mdash;and not only so, but I
+insist&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;all good, all bad&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;but with that word
+realized&mdash;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&mdash;gave their
+testimony, and upon that testimony, under this statute, the
+indictment was found.</p>
+<p>While I do not blame these people&mdash;they not being on
+trial&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;only two
+words&mdash;and these two words will fill an anxious heart with
+joy. They will fill a soul with light. It is a very short
+message&mdash;only two words&mdash;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&mdash;that flag for which has been
+shed the bravest and best blood of the world&mdash;under that flag
+maintained by Washington, by Jefferson, by Franklin and by
+Lincoln&mdash;under that flag in defence of which New Jersey poured
+out her best and bravest blood&mdash;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>
+     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.&mdash;C. P. Farrell.
+</pre>
+<a name="link0003" id="link0003"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;of developing the mind of a laborer. The people were
+created to support thrones and altars. Their destiny was to toil
+and obey&mdash;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&mdash;one deformed his body, the other his
+mind&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;no
+room for patriotic gods or supernatural beings&mdash;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&mdash;the pope was his agent, and every priest and
+bishop and cardinal was armed with credentials from the Most
+High&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;millions who have fought for the rights of
+man&mdash;but churches as organizations, have been on the other
+side. It is true that churches have fought churches&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, by the "Triumphant Beast."
+This man had committed certain crimes&mdash;he had publicly stated
+that there were other worlds than this&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, there are seven
+natural persons and one artificial&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;we will attend to the
+affairs of this." Equal liberty was given to all. But the ultra
+theologian is not satisfied with this&mdash;he wishes to destroy
+the liberty of the people&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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."&mdash;The Arena, Boston, Mass.,
+January, 1890.</p>
+<a name="link0004" id="link0004"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<div style="height: 4em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<h2>A REPLY TO BISHOP SPALDING.</h2>
+<pre>
+     * 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"&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;as bishops usually are&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that the unrelated
+is the absolute&mdash;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>
+<a name="link0005" id="link0005"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<div style="height: 4em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<h2>CRIMES AGAINST CRIMINALS.</h2>
+<pre>
+     * "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&mdash;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>
+<center>I.</center>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;given to wild beasts&mdash;molten lead was poured in
+their ears&mdash;their eye-lids were cut off and, the wretches
+placed with their faces toward the sun&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that they
+are actually possessed by devils; and others will declare that all
+these people act from choice&mdash;that they are possessed of free
+wills, of intelligence&mdash;that they know and appreciate
+consequences, and that, in spite of all, they deliberately prefer a
+life of crime.</p>
+<center>II.</center>
+<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&mdash;the sick desire health&mdash;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&mdash;that the child is the heir of physical deformity.
+Are diseases of the brain&mdash;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&mdash;that everything is natural&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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>
+<center>III.</center>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;that it is inherited
+from parents, or the result of unconscious negligence, or it may be
+of recklessness&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;thirty-one millions of people, and nineteen
+thousand prisoners.</p>
+<p>In 1870&mdash;thirty-eight millions of people, and thirty-two
+thousand prisoners.</p>
+<p>In 1880&mdash;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>
+<center>IV.</center>
+<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&mdash;no
+deterrent power&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;when he was tortured in
+every possible way&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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?&mdash;has it the right to degrade?&mdash;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&mdash;he loses his name&mdash;he is
+designated by a number. He is no longer treated as a human
+being&mdash;he becomes the slave of the State. Nothing is done for
+his improvement&mdash;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&mdash;that he
+has been subjected to the torture of perpetual
+humiliation&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;no reason for doing the best they can&mdash;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>
+<center>VI.</center>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;in which they were
+redeemed&mdash;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>
+<center>VII.</center>
+<p>There are, however, men who pursue crime as a vocation&mdash;as
+a profession&mdash;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&mdash;compel them
+to produce what they eat and use&mdash;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&mdash;by justice&mdash;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&mdash;with murderers? Shall the nation take life?</p>
+<p>It has been contended that the death penalty deters
+others&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;we know
+the man is guilty&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;and as it seems to me especially of every
+lawyer&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;as long as
+they sustain the relations of savages to each other&mdash;as long
+as they put the laurel and the oak on the brows of those who
+kill&mdash;just so long will citizens resort to violence, and the
+quarrels of individuals be settled by dagger and revolver.</p>
+<center>VIII.</center>
+<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&mdash;the man looks down&mdash;he has neither
+hope nor courage. He becomes sinister&mdash;he envies the
+prosperous&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, a
+nation composed of a few landlords and of many tenants&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;so that these poor people would
+feel that they were in partnership with nature&mdash;that some of
+the land was absolutely theirs, and that no one could drive them
+from their home&mdash;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>
+<center>IX.</center>
+<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&mdash;and it is not yet
+dead&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;would
+ascertain what they were fitted for&mdash;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&mdash;and the more
+homes, the fewer prisons.</p>
+<center>X.</center>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;and surely there is
+no better reformation than this. Some may be, and probably millions
+have been, reformed, through kindness, through gratitude&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that nothing is done for revenge&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;as long
+as society bows and cringes before the great thieves, there will be
+little ones enough to fill the jails.</p>
+<center>XI.</center>
+<p>All the penalties, all the punishments, are inflicted under a
+belief that man can do right under all circumstances&mdash;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&mdash;the
+facts of mind&mdash;the power of temptation&mdash;the limitations
+of the intellect&mdash;the force of habit&mdash;the result of
+heredity&mdash;the power of passion&mdash;the domination of
+want&mdash;the diseases of the brain&mdash;the tyranny of
+appetite&mdash;the cruelty of conditions&mdash;the results of
+association&mdash;the effects of poverty and wealth, of
+helplessness and power.</p>
+<p>Until these subtle things are understood&mdash;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&mdash;of the average man&mdash;of
+his thoughts, passions, fears and aspirations&mdash;something of
+his sorrows and his joys, his weakness, his liability to
+fall&mdash;something of what he resists&mdash;the struggles, the
+victories and the failures of his life. We know something of the
+tides and currents of the mysterious sea&mdash;something of the
+circuits of the wayward winds&mdash;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&mdash;thou hast already had pity on the virtuous by making
+them so."</p>
+<a name="link0006" id="link0006"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;and the only religion established by the "living
+God," head of the American system&mdash;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&mdash;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>
+<a name="link0007" id="link0007"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<div style="height: 4em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<h2>SOME INTERROGATION POINTS.</h2>
+<p>A NEW party is struggling for recognition&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;to become acquainted with facts&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that they were part of a divine plan, and that all
+would be adjusted in some other world&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that when the demand fails, the producer, the
+laborer, must suffer, must perish&mdash;that the law feels neither
+pity nor malice&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;if a judgment
+for so many dollars could be discharged by so many days of
+labor,&mdash;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&mdash;the very people who are depended
+upon to enforce this law&mdash;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&mdash;burdens taken from the backs of wives and
+mothers&mdash;houses made wholesome, food healthful&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;what it always
+will be&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;everything eating something else&mdash;everything at the
+mercy of beak and claw and hoof and tooth&mdash;of hand and club,
+of brain and greed&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;who goes to the grave
+without even having had one luxury&mdash;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&mdash;the number of failures, the poverty, the
+anxiety, the tears, the withered hopes, the bitter realities, the
+hunger, the crime, the humiliation, the shame&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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?&mdash;North American Review, March, 1887.</p>
+<a name="link0008" id="link0008"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, those who have some object besides
+that of art&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say the artist&mdash;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&mdash;this is
+Art.&mdash;North American Review, March, 1888.</p>
+<a name="link0009" id="link0009"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;like the fact of the attraction of
+gravitation&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;no matter how honestly they
+originated&mdash;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&mdash;twenty or thirty at a time&mdash;are driven to the
+place of slaughter. This ox leads the way&mdash;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&mdash;the real and only faith&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;bad as
+well as good&mdash;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&mdash;political, social, artistic, and
+individual&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the inspired
+prophets&mdash;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&mdash;old
+theories were put aside&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;to the deposits by volcanoes&mdash;to the
+sedimentary rocks&mdash;to the vast reefs that had been built by
+the coral, and to the countless evidences of age, of the lapse of
+time&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;according to the inspired figures&mdash;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&mdash;the serpent&mdash;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&mdash;that he has been slowly produced through
+countless years&mdash;that the story of Eden is a childish
+myth&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that
+did not account for everything&mdash;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&mdash;about what we call facts. Slowly it dawned upon the
+mind that force is indestructible&mdash;that we cannot imagine
+force as existing apart from matter&mdash;that we cannot even think
+of matter existing apart from force&mdash;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&mdash;that it can
+have no father, no mother&mdash;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&mdash;in chemical affinities&mdash;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&mdash;not simply the immortality of joy&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;afterward with
+hatred. They are hardly courageous enough to admit that they are
+wrong.</p>
+<p>Once the pulpit was the leader&mdash;it spoke with authority. By
+its side was the sword of the state, with the hilt toward its hand.
+Now it is apologized for&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;it cannot come to us&mdash;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&mdash;or rather our
+ignorance&mdash;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&mdash;we should combat
+error. We should hate hypocrisy, but not the
+hypocrite&mdash;larceny, but not the thief&mdash;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;&mdash;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"&mdash;that they are "of the earth,
+earthy"&mdash;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&mdash;who denied the
+liberty of thought and expression&mdash;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&mdash;who lives in accordance with his highest
+ideal&mdash;who loves his wife and children&mdash;who discharges
+his obligations&mdash;who makes a happy fireside for the ones he
+loves&mdash;who succors the oppressed&mdash;who gives his honest
+opinions&mdash;who is guided by principle&mdash;who is merciful and
+just?</p>
+<p>Is the man spiritual who loves the beautiful&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;North American Review, August, 1888.</p>
+<a name="link0010" id="link0010"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;and can be
+none&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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,&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;he feels. He does not
+investigate&mdash;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&mdash;that is, believing other
+religions&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;more that is of use, ten
+thousand times&mdash;than all the writers of the sacred books.</p>
+<p>I believe in the religion of reason&mdash;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,&mdash;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>
+<center>II.</center>
+<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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;or, rather, by uncertain writers&mdash;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&mdash;including
+ourselves&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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. &#65533;?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&mdash;anything that really happened&mdash;by what
+is called a miracle. It is easy to understand how that which was
+common became wonderful by accretion,&mdash;by things added, and by
+things forgotten,&mdash;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&mdash;unconsciously,
+perhaps&mdash;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>
+<a name="link0011" id="link0011"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<div style="height: 4em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<h2>HUXLEY AND AGNOSTICISM.</h2>
+<center>PROFESSOR HUXLEY AND AGNOSTICISM.</center>
+<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&mdash;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.&mdash;"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&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;where belief is a condition to
+salvation&mdash;supply the evidence? Certainly the Creator of
+man&mdash;if such exist&mdash;knows the exact nature of the human
+mind&mdash;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,&mdash;for enthusiasm, for fear,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;for neither of them
+has any knowledge on this subject,&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;so would the tribes of Central Africa,&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;a man who
+swapped religions for the sake of exchanging wives&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;if they have the
+argument,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;we know that the intellectual light
+is greater&mdash;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&mdash;if he
+is to stand with the great and splendid of the earth&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;faith in this
+world&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;"In the supernatural phase the mind seeks
+causes&mdash;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.&mdash;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.&mdash;"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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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?&mdash;North American Review, April,
+1889.</p>
+<a name="link0012" id="link0012"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<div style="height: 4em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<h2>ERNEST RENAN.</h2>
+<pre>
+     "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&mdash;clothing all in the poetry born of a
+delightful union of heart and brain&mdash;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&mdash;a dangerous thing for a Catholic to
+do. Thought leads to doubt, doubt to investigation, investigation
+to truth&mdash;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&mdash;a soul of the
+universe&mdash;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 F&eacute;, 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&mdash;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&mdash;the God-Providence, does not show himself in the
+universe"&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;if we know anything&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, the four
+gospels&mdash;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,"&mdash;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&mdash;and this was after the
+Gospel "according to St. John" had been written&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;hopeful and
+serene&mdash;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.&mdash;North American Review, November,
+1892.</p>
+<a name="link0013" id="link0013"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<div style="height: 4em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<h2>TOLSTO&Iuml; AND "THE KREUTZER SONATA."</h2>
+<p>COUNT TOLSTO&Iuml; is a man of genius. He is acquainted with
+Russian life from the highest to the lowest&mdash;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&mdash;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 Tolsto&iuml;, 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&mdash;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&mdash;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 Tolsto&iuml; 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&mdash;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 Tolsto&iuml;
+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>Tolsto&iuml; 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 Tolsto&iuml; 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&mdash;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&mdash;that
+is to say, we are emotional beings. The generalization of
+Tolsto&iuml;, 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&mdash;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 Tolsto&iuml; 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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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 Tolsto&iuml; 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>Tolsto&iuml;, 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
+Tolsto&iuml; 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&mdash;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. Tolsto&iuml; 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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the real
+love, mother of every virtue and of every joy.&mdash;North American
+Review, September, 1890.</p>
+<a name="link0014" id="link0014"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<div style="height: 4em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<h2>THOMAS PAINE.</h2>
+<h3>A MAGAZINE ARTICLE.</h3>
+<pre>
+     "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&mdash;that he was a philanthropist&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;afterwards the bank of
+North America&mdash;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,&mdash;a Declaration of Independence.&mdash;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&mdash;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"&mdash;a book that laid the foundation for all the real liberty
+that the English now enjoy&mdash;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&mdash;a great man had shed
+light&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that the tiger was
+already crouching for a spring&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;in favor of life&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;clinging to the
+toggery of theology&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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"&mdash;if he had cared nothing for the liberties of men
+in other lands&mdash;if he had said that the state could not live
+without the church&mdash;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&mdash;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:&mdash;<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&mdash;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"&mdash;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&mdash;to throw off some foreign yoke&mdash;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&mdash;his
+virtues denounced as vices&mdash;his services forgotten&mdash;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&mdash;the friend of the whole world&mdash;with all their
+hearts.</p>
+<p>On the 8th of June, 1809, death came&mdash;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&mdash;On horseback, a Quaker, the
+humanity of whose heart dominated the creed of his head&mdash;and,
+following on foot, two negroes filled with
+gratitude&mdash;constituted the funeral cortege of Thomas
+Paine.</p>
+<p>He who had received the gratitude of many millions, the thanks
+of generals and statesmen&mdash;he who had been the friend and
+companion of the wisest and best&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that he was original,
+sincere, intrepid, and that he could truthfully say: "The world is
+my country, to do good my religion"&mdash;if the people only knew
+all this&mdash;the truth&mdash;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."&mdash;North American Review, August, 1893.</p>
+<a name="link0015" id="link0015"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<div style="height: 4em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<h2>THE THREE PHILANTHROPISTS.</h2>
+<pre>
+     "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&mdash;&mdash;&mdash;&mdash;. 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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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>
+<center>HE WAS THE PROVIDENCE OF THE POOR.</center>
+<center>II.</center>
+<pre>
+     "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&mdash;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,&mdash;and he always said this as though it ended
+the argument,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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>
+<center>HE LIVED FOR OTHERS.</center>
+<center>III</center>
+<pre>
+     "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&mdash;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&mdash;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>
+<center>HE ALLOWED OTHERS TO LIVE FOR THEMSELVES.</center>
+<p>North American Review, December, 1831.</p>
+<a name="link0016" id="link0016"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;citizens of a friendly
+nation&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;North American Review, July, 1893.</p>
+<a name="link0017" id="link0017"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<div style="height: 4em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<h2>A WORD ABOUT EDUCATION.</h2>
+<p>THE end of life&mdash;the object of life&mdash;is happiness.
+Nothing can be better than that&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;no matter how much he may have
+studied&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;The
+High School Register, Omaha, Nebraska, January. 1891.</p>
+<a name="link0018" id="link0018"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;is not infallible&mdash;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,&mdash;to men who long to make their country great and
+free,&mdash;to men who care more for public good than private
+gain&mdash;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&mdash;free from
+injustice&mdash;free from superstition.</p>
+<p>This will do for next Christmas. The following Christmas, I may
+want more.&mdash;The Arena, Boston, December, 1897.</p>
+<a name="link0019" id="link0019"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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>
+<a name="link0020" id="link0020"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;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,&mdash;the more the statue,
+the star, the painting, the violet, has to tell. Nature says to me
+all that I am capable of understanding&mdash;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&mdash;he may know a few&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;thought&mdash;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.&mdash;The Truth Seeker Annual, New York, 1885.</p>
+<a name="link0021" id="link0021"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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>
+<center>CONVERSION OF THE ARCH ATHEIST.</center>
+<p>"Mr. Isaac Loveland, of Shoreham, desires us to insert the
+following:&mdash;</p>
+<p>"November 27, 1886.</p>
+<p>"Dear Mr. Loveland.&mdash;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>
+<center>"H. HODSON RUGG.</center>
+<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
+C&aelig;sarian 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&mdash;a
+religious paper&mdash;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,&mdash;that is to say, from
+missionary to Hottentot&mdash;without the slightest evidence of
+fatigue&mdash;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,&mdash;a story without the slightest
+foundation&mdash;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&mdash;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."&mdash;The Truth Seeker, New York, February, 19,1887.</p>
+<a name="link0022" id="link0022"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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>
+<a name="link0023" id="link0023"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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.&mdash;The Independent Pulpit, Waco, Texas,
+1887.</p>
+<a name="link0024" id="link0024"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;I
+mean that religion unsoftened by Infidelity, by doubt&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;follow thou me. Desert wife and child. Human
+love is nothing&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that all thoughts and dreams have been naturally
+produced&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;like one who had
+guessed the riddle of the Sphinx. She, too, is overwhelmed with the
+injustice of the world&mdash;with the negligence of
+nature&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that he can obtain good&mdash;gives him
+courage&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the only one to whom God had condescended to make
+known his will&mdash;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"&mdash;the only ones in whom God took the
+slightest interest! Imagine the egotism of the Catholic Church,
+claiming that it is the only church&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;great enough to know that they are not
+bound by the mistakes of their ancestors&mdash;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&mdash;these trends&mdash;bear fruit;
+that is to say, they produce the books about which I have spoken as
+well as many others.</p>
+<a name="link0025" id="link0025"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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>&mdash;The Herald, New York, October 26,1888.</p>
+<a name="link0026" id="link0026"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;no reformation, no
+good to be accomplished&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the workingmen&mdash;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&mdash;from the
+employeer class&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;New York
+Herald, December 13,1888.</p>
+<a name="link0027" id="link0027"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;that is to
+say, a day of rest and pleasure&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the ministers of our day close their eyes in prayer.
+When men worshiped the sun&mdash;when they looked at that luminary
+and implored its assistance&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;The Tribune, New York, December,
+1889.</p>
+<a name="link0028" id="link0028"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;the conditions of well-being&mdash;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&mdash;of one who is glad that
+he has passed the day without a beating&mdash;one who is happy
+because he has had enough to eat&mdash;but the highest possible
+idea of happiness is freedom.</p>
+<p>All religious systems enslave the mind. Certain things are
+demanded&mdash;certain things must be believed&mdash;certain things
+must be done&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;if the dogma be true&mdash;that
+every decent human being should hate, with every drop of his blood,
+the creator of the universe. He also knows&mdash;if he knows
+anything&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;another kind of work. The
+Freethinker knows that the universe is natural&mdash;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&mdash;if there
+be gods.</p>
+<p>The positive side is this: That every good action has good
+consequences&mdash;that it bears good fruit forever&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;they know nothing about gods or angels or
+heavens or hells&mdash;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&mdash;from pope to priest, from bishop to parson, do not the
+slightest good in this world&mdash;that they live upon the labor of
+others&mdash;that they earn nothing themselves&mdash;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&mdash;and he also knows that in every religion the priest
+insists on five things&mdash;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&mdash;the facts of nature&mdash;to the end that we may take
+advantage of those truths, of those facts&mdash;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&mdash;that which will prevent or kill disease&mdash;that
+which will do away with pain&mdash;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&mdash;that we may
+have good houses that protect us from heat and cold. And beyond
+this&mdash;beyond these simple necessities&mdash;there are still
+wants and aspirations, and free-thought will give us the highest
+possible in art&mdash;the most wonderful and thrilling in
+music&mdash;the greatest paintings, the most marvelous
+sculpture&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the religion of this world&mdash;the
+religion of the family&mdash;the love of husband for wife, of wife
+for husband&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;to correct these mistakes&mdash;to build the
+fabric of civilization on the foundation of demonstrated
+truth&mdash;is the task of the Freethinker. To destroy guide-boards
+that point in the wrong direction&mdash;to correct charts that lure
+to reef and wreck&mdash;to drive the fiend of fear from the
+mind&mdash;to protect the cradle from the serpent of superstition
+and dispel the darkness of ignorance with the sun of
+science&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;The Truth Seeker, New York 1890.</p>
+<a name="link0029" id="link0029"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;of the highest art&mdash;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&mdash;and no other&mdash;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&mdash;that majorities in this
+mental world can settle nothing&mdash;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&mdash;that is beautiful&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;The World, New York, February 28,1890.</p>
+<a name="link0030" id="link0030"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;all I can say is that I hope it will. I cannot see
+how any man who does nothing&mdash;who lives in idleness&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;they are better educated&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;they who make the money&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;if they will stand together&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;of
+those who produce the real wealth of the world&mdash;of those who
+carry the burdens of mankind.</p>
+<p>Any man who wishes to force his brother to work&mdash;to
+toil&mdash;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.&mdash;The
+Morning Journal, April 27, 1890.</p>
+<a name="link0031" id="link0031"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;that
+is to say, philosophers&mdash;that is to say, men who knew that the
+chief priests were hypocrites&mdash;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&mdash;not
+enough to obey the Ten Commandments&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, he must be regenerated&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;those who love their enemies&mdash;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&mdash;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>
+<a name="link0032" id="link0032"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that the universities dispute each
+other&mdash;that the synod attacks the ecumenical
+council&mdash;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&mdash;he simply opened his mouth and took the dose. If he
+died, it was simply a dispensation of Providence&mdash;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&mdash;not only asks
+what medicine will be good for him,&mdash;but insists on knowing
+the philosophy of the cure&mdash;asks the doctor why he gives
+it&mdash;what result he expects&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that Dante is prolix&mdash;that they deal with
+subjects having no human interest. He laughs at Young's "Night
+Thoughts" and Pollok's "Course of Time"&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, the creeds&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;their congregations became so
+intelligent&mdash;that it was necessary to give new meanings to the
+old words. The cruel was softened&mdash;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&mdash;the creeds
+must be changed&mdash;they were no longer believed&mdash;only
+occasionally were they preached. The ministers became a little
+ashamed&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;their theories, their
+religions&mdash;are now known; and we have ascertained that the
+religions of all people have exactly the same foundation as our
+own&mdash;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&mdash;pursued certain lines
+of argument&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;when fathers and mothers bent above their
+dead who had died in their sins&mdash;when wives shed their tears
+on the faces of husbands who had been born but once&mdash;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&mdash;yet a
+creed with this doctrine has been called "the glad tidings of great
+joy"&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;they foot it. Hell is for
+strangers and tramps. No soul leaves a brown-stone front for
+hell&mdash;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.&mdash;The Twentieth Century, N, Y., April 21,1890.</p>
+<a name="link0033" id="link0033"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;with the conditions of happiness&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, character.</p>
+<p>The cost of the schools is very little, and the cost of
+land&mdash;giving the children, as I said before, air and
+light&mdash;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&mdash;that is to say, with real men; with real
+ladies&mdash;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.&mdash;The World, New York,
+September 7, 1800.</p>
+<a name="link0034" id="link0034"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<div style="height: 4em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<h2>VIVISECTION.</h2>
+<pre>
+     *A letter written to Philip G. Peabody. May 27, 1800.
+</pre>
+<p>VIVISECTION is the Inquisition&mdash;the Hell&mdash;of
+Science.</p>
+<p>All the cruelty which the human&mdash;or rather the
+inhuman&mdash;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&mdash;with an unaccelerated pulse&mdash;with the
+calmness of John Calvin at the murder of Servetus&mdash;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&mdash;laying bare the nerves, denuding them with knives,
+pulling them out with forceps&mdash;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,&mdash;men and women healthy and
+heartless, muscular and cruel&mdash;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,&mdash;the soul becomes a serpent crawling
+in the dust of a desert.</p>
+<a name="link0035" id="link0035"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;The World, New York, June
+8, 1890.</p>
+<a name="link0036" id="link0036"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;of Right and
+Reason&mdash;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.&mdash;The Journal, New York, December 25,1892.</p>
+<a name="link0037" id="link0037"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;these haters of men&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;some of the
+benefactors of the race&mdash;for having lived on the low plane of
+usefulness&mdash;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&mdash;that changes his nature&mdash;that causes him to
+denounce what he really loves and to laud with the fervor of
+insanity a joy that he never felt&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;ask his hearers what it will profit them to build
+railways and palaces and lose their own souls&mdash;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,&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;in making money to feed and
+clothe and educate the ones he loves&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;The Conservator,
+Philadelphia, 1891.</p>
+<a name="link0038" id="link0038"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<div style="height: 4em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<h2>SUMTER'S GUN.</h2>
+<p>1861&mdash;April 12th&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;of the agonies of
+women&mdash;the sobs of orphans&mdash;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>
+<a name="link0039" id="link0039"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;or, at least, for a long
+time the best&mdash;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>
+<a name="link0040" id="link0040"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;an apostle of
+brutality. He beats and bruises flesh to satisfy his
+conscience&mdash;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&mdash;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>
+<a name="link0041" id="link0041"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<div style="height: 4em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<h2>LAW'S DELAY.</h2>
+<p>THE object of a trial is not to convict&mdash;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&mdash;that he cannot be reviewed&mdash;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>
+<a name="link0042" id="link0042"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<div style="height: 4em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<h2>THE BIGOTRY OF COLLEGES.</h2>
+<pre>
+     * 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."&mdash;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&mdash;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>
+<a name="link0043" id="link0043"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<div style="height: 4em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<h2>A YOUNG MAN'S CHANCES TO-DAY.</h2>
+<pre>
+     * 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?"&mdash;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&mdash;
+     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&mdash;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&mdash;now the brow is criss-crossed with the lines of
+     a frown, sometimes quizzical and sometimes indignant&mdash;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&mdash;and in this he is
+     like Lincoln&mdash;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&mdash;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.&mdash;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&mdash;some of the weaker ones read theology&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;that is, if he has a great desire to make his ideas
+known to the world&mdash;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&mdash;so that he
+is forgotten by himself; so that he cares neither for applause nor
+censure&mdash;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&mdash;between a canal and a
+river&mdash;between April rain and water-works. It is a question of
+capacity and feeling&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;with the great statues&mdash;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&mdash;and above all,
+must have sympathy with all.</p>
+<a name="link0044" id="link0044"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;still controls&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;all suffering the penalties of my ignorance.
+Let us have more science and more sentiment&mdash;more knowledge
+and more conscience&mdash;more liberty and more love.</p>
+<a name="link0045" id="link0045"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;ought
+to find out what the really intelligent have thought. He ought to
+get some new ideas&mdash;a few facts&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;loves him as a
+mother loves her babe&mdash;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&mdash;before
+the Trinity&mdash;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&mdash;no actual flames&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;for truth&mdash;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&mdash;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>
+<a name="link0046" id="link0046"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;that evidence is not essential&mdash;that faith is
+independent of facts and that religion is superior to reason. They
+are taught not to use their natural sense&mdash;not to tell what
+they really think&mdash;not to entertain a doubt&mdash;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&mdash;in which the law of falling bodies, as given by
+Galileo, was ridiculed&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;no right to be mentally honest, and that
+he will be damned for an honest doubt&mdash;where he is taught that
+God was ferocious, revengeful, heartless as a wild beast&mdash;that
+he drowned millions of his children&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;should not be taken advantage of&mdash;that
+they should be treated fairly, honestly&mdash;that they should be
+allowed to develop from the inside instead of being crammed from
+the outside&mdash;that they should be taught to reason, not to
+believe&mdash;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&mdash;the leprosy of the soul. Let us do all
+we can to make them intelligent.</p>
+<a name="link0047" id="link0047"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<div style="height: 4em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<h2>WHAT WOULD YOU SUBSTITUTE FOR THE BIBLE AS A MORAL GUIDE?</h2>
+<pre>
+     * 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,&mdash;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>
+<a name="link0048" id="link0048"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;a
+perfect man. Others say that he was divine, but not actually
+God&mdash;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&mdash;that he sacrificed
+himself unto himself&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;not the
+Christ of the Middle Ages; nor of Luther, Wesley or the Puritan
+fathers.</p>
+<p>The Christ who was God&mdash;who was his own son and his own
+father&mdash;who was born of a virgin, cast out devils, rose from
+the dead, and ascended bodily to heaven&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;to shed his own blood, that is to say, to have it
+shed by his chosen people. This was the atonement&mdash;the scheme
+of salvation&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;of vicarious vice&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;as a miracle&mdash;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&mdash;happens many times in
+the life of one man. If this happens without excitement&mdash;as
+the result of thought&mdash;it is called reformation. If it occurs
+in a revival&mdash;if it is the result of fright&mdash;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 &amp; 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&mdash;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&mdash;the uniting of hearts, the lighting of the
+sacred flame in each&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;the flag of the
+natural.</p>
+<p>All over Christendom religions are declining. Only children and
+the intellectually undeveloped have faith&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;science, the only
+possible savior of mankind.</p>
+<a name="link0049" id="link0049"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<div style="height: 4em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<h2>A LOOK BACKWARD AND A PROPHECY.</h2>
+<pre>
+     * 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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;of doubt&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;of evil spirits&mdash;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&mdash;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. B&uuml;chner'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&mdash;that they were incapable of examining the other
+side&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;on the
+development of the brain&mdash;to the end that he may take
+advantage of the forces of nature&mdash;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>
+<a name="link0050" id="link0050"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;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&mdash;there
+must be&mdash;such a thing as political morality so far as voting
+is concerned.&mdash;New York Tribune, May 13, 1883.</p>
+<a name="link0051" id="link0051"><!-- H2 anchor --></a>
+<div style="height: 4em;"><br />
+<br />
+<br />
+<br /></div>
+<h2>A FEW REASONS FOR DOUBTING THE INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE.</h2>
+<pre>
+     * 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&mdash;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&mdash;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>
+     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&mdash;six hundred
+thousand men, besides women and children&mdash;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&mdash;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>
+     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>
+     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>
+     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>
+    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>
+     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>
+     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>
+     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>
+     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>
+     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>
+     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>
+     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&mdash;never was such directions about
+kidneys and blood, ashes and fat, about curtains, tongs, fringes,
+ribands, and brass pins&mdash;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&mdash;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>
+     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>
+     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&mdash;the same God who
+said, "Suffer little children to come unto me"&mdash;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>
+     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>
+     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&mdash;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>
+     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>
+     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>
+</body>
+</html>