/*WV V-SfffrV %--f^--/ 
 
 J°* 
 
 
 X '-ME •' ^ ws^* ,/X •-?«*• v 
 
 ^ : 
 
 ^bv* 
 
 
 .# * Cilia* • **.„♦ *A\M/%,o % ^«c7 • ^Pfe5>- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 "*. 
 
 ... riv . o " «» * *o 
 
 ♦ AT <?> 
 
 
 
 ^* * v ^?> •> 
 
 
 * ^ 
 
 

 *. X 
 
 Kg? ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
LETTERS 
 
 TO 
 
 THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, 
 
 ON 
 
 CHRISTIANITY AND THE SABBATH, 
 
 BY 
 J 
 
 HORATIO PRATER, Esq. 
 
 " Religious insincerity — commonly called cant — is one of 
 our special vices." — Cox's Sabbath Laws, §c. 3 p. 214. 
 
 Les Mceurs, qui regnent aussi imperieusement que les lois." 
 
 Montesquieu. 
 
 *' Although faith and hope abide in the human mind, yet 
 greater than these is charity — and greater far than this favourite 
 sentiment of the Apostle, is justice."-— E. P. Hurlbut, Coun- 
 sellor at Law, New York, Of Constitutional Limitations, p. 26. 
 
 " Thou shalt not entertain, much less enforce any religious 
 dogmas, which divide mankind into distinct classes, and create 
 animosities between them." — Lewis Gompertz, Esq., Tract, 
 War Considered. 
 
 LONDON : 
 
 J. CLAYTON AND SON, 223, PICCADILLY ; HOLYOAKE AND CO., 
 
 147. FLEET STREET ; TRUELOVE, 240, STRAND, 
 
 TEMPLE BAR ; FARRER, 21, JOHN STREET, 
 
 FITZROY SQUARE. 
 
 1356. 
 
<»•<& 
 
 m'gQWAN AND CO., PRINTERS, LONDON, 
 
ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 I think it necessary to say, in reference to ths 
 defective arrangement of this work, — which is 
 perhaps more particularly visible in Letter IV. — ■ 
 that my general plan is to write commentaries, 
 or notes, on all the works I read. In conse- 
 quence, I found it difficult to separate some re- 
 flections on Lord Brougham's Political Philo- 
 sophy, and Sir A. Alison's History, only indirectly 
 connected with the subject, from others which 
 bore directly upon it. My views will be found to 
 be the Protestant principle properly carried 
 out, united to Catholic forms as at present ex- 
 isting; and in my attacks on the established 
 creed, I have purposely avoided ribaldry, and en- 
 deavoured to make my language as little offensive, 
 as a free, and I trust, impartial examination, ad- 
 mitted ; though probably, in the hurry of compo- 
 sition, I have not always succeeded on this point. 
 Anxious to seize any new idea before it flies, a 
 writer cannot be ever attentive to his mode of 
 expressing it. 
 
 I should not probably have published the pre- 
 sent work, had it not had a somewhat different 
 object than suggesting a change in our national 
 religion; for in the present age, suggestions for mere 
 demolition have often before been made uselessly 
 
IV ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 by many first rate authors. I have consequently 
 endeavoured to show what this change should be, 
 and thus attempted also the work of reconstruc- 
 tion ; hereby endeavouring to make my book 
 conservative. I beg the evangelical reader, there- 
 fore, to turn towards the close of Letter IV., to 
 see what these propositions are, when fatigued or 
 annoyed, he asks, " What have you put in its 
 place ?" 
 
 I have referred once or twice to my Historical 
 Sketches of some of the Roman Emperors, but 
 this Essay is at present in M.S. ; nor is it neces- 
 sary to read the passages referred to in this 
 M.S. Essay, in order to understand any part of 
 the present work. They are merely facts or de- 
 tails on which my opinions rest. 
 
 In conclusion, I feel that in this publication, I 
 address only the few ; but shall, like the eloquent 
 Beccaria, consider myself fortunate, if I obtain 
 even their secret thanks. " Me fortunato, si potro 
 ottenere, com'esso(Montesquieu),i segretiringrazia- 
 menti degli oscuri et pacifici seguaci della ra- 
 gione !" (Dei Delitti, Sect I. J 
 
 22, Beaumont Street, 
 
 Marylebone, Nov., 20th, 1855. 
 
TO THE MEMORY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE EMPEROR JULIAN, 
 
 / 
 
 THE 
 
 LAST OF THE ROMAN EMPERORS, 
 
 WHO RESTORED 
 
 THE POETICAL AND SO HIGHLY TOLERANT 
 PAGAN RELIGION: 
 
 THIS WORK 
 
 HUMBLY RECOGNIZING THE SUPERIORITY OF THIS 
 WORSHIP, 
 
 —ALL NATURE PERSONIFIED— 
 
 BOTH FOR ITS TRUTH AS WELL AS FOR ITS BEAUTY OVER 
 
 ETERY OTHER RELIGTON THAT HAS EYER 
 
 YET EXISTED, 
 
 IS INSCRIBED. 
 
ANALYTICAL TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 LETTER I. 
 
 As English divines and laymen have now for some years 
 written in favour of the Sabbath being not of divine in- 
 stitution, and as Puritanical Christianity is the estab- 
 lished religion of Great Britain, the American people are 
 addressed on the subject. 
 
 Quotations from Mr. Hurlbut's work, showing, as he says, 
 the " infant state of religious freedom in the cradle of 
 liberty." 
 
 Should a Republic enforce natural religion as the paid re- 
 ligion of the State, or not ? answered in the affirmative. 
 
 Hurlbut on the Sabbath in the United States, with the 
 author's remarks. — Pages 1 to 16. 
 
 LETTER n. 
 
 Christianity not a useful creed. — Reasons. — 1st. — The great 
 uncertainty as to its real meaning. 
 
 2ndly. — Christianity enslaves the immortal mind ; since 
 its mode of " purifying the thoughts," is on every point to 
 set up faith before reason. 
 
 3rdly. — The scriptures may induce savages to murder inno- 
 cent people, while such positive commands as — '• Thou 
 shalt not suffer a witch to live," remain in them. Mis- 
 sionary labours of Christians, therefore, deprecated, 
 particularly among ignorant nations, and Theism com- 
 bined with physical science, preferred as a means of 
 civilization. 
 
 4thly. — The belief in Christianity, existing as it does in 
 the United States, under the most favourable circum- 
 stances, is not conducive to human happiness. 
 
Till CONTENTS. 
 
 5thly. — Reasons for considering the Rev. Theodore Parker's 
 liberal view of Unitarianism, not so beneficial to the 
 world, as mere natural Theism. 
 
 6thly. — The belief of Christianity is at the bottom of the 
 very strict observance of the Sabbath in the United 
 States and Britain. This puritanical view is fraught with 
 the practical injustice of allowing debtors to escape on the 
 Sabbath — of preventing the poor man doing that work 
 on a Sunday, which the fatigue or want of time pre- 
 vents him doing on a week day, and also of avoiding to 
 take measures to suppress syphilis, which being heredi- 
 tary, causes the innocent to suffer for the guilty. Theism 
 adopted by Penn. The .^injustice to Catholics residing in 
 Protestant States, to leave no theatre open on Sunday 
 evenings. — Pages 17 to 34. 
 
 LETTER III. 
 
 The good that Christianity, with, the greatest show of 
 reason, may be said to have done in the world. 
 
 1st. — Its influence on despotic power, comparison ot the 
 reign of Henry VIII., with that of some of the worst 
 Roman Emperors, and the good influence of Christianity 
 in this respect, though acknowledged, considered to be 
 greatly over-rated. 
 
 Its exhorting to " obey the powers that be," and forbidding 
 tyrannicide, has caused it to be supported byTyrants, and 
 has given such tyrants a sort of justification, when they 
 themselves were disposed to evil. 
 
 2ndly. — The assertion that it has tended to abolish animal 
 and even human sacrifice ; and to introduce a more hu- 
 mane treatment to captives taken in war. 
 
 Quotation from the Middle Ages, showing that Paley has 
 over-rated the influence of Christianity on this latter 
 point. 
 
 Also in reference to polygamy, and its having u pro- 
 duced a greater regard to moral obligations." 
 
 Paley's sophistry when he attempts to show that Chris- 
 tianity has not added to the intolerance of human nature. 
 
 Religious fanaticism more unjustifiable than political fanati- 
 cism, in reference to the first French revolution. 
 
 Paley's observations on a day of rest. 
 
 The certainty with which a future state is advocated by 
 Christianity would be an excellent effect were it not 
 vitiated by promising too great reward to " faith." 
 
CONTENTS. 1% 
 
 Its denunciation of war also good, but altogether vitiated 
 by its reprobating even defensive war. 
 
 Commentary on Lord Brougham's opinions on religious 
 establishments, and attempted refutation of his view that 
 these " secure instruction," at least while Christianty is 
 the established religion of a country. Beccaria a freer 
 writer on religion than Brougham. — Pages 35 to 64. 
 
 LETTER IV. 
 
 Examination of the question whether the commencement 
 of the first French revolution was to be ascribed to the 
 diminution in the belief of Christianity by the influence 
 of the writings of Voltaire and Rousseau. 
 
 Decided by the author in the negative, with a quotation 
 from Lord Byron to the same effect : the most potent 
 causes of the outbreak being famine, national bankruptcy, 
 political tyranny of the bastile, &c, and the return of 
 a successful revolutionary army from the United States 
 under Lafayette. 
 
 Question, whether the legal suppression of Christianity 
 after the revolution had fairly begun, was the cause of the 
 wanton atrocities in question, also answered in the nega- 
 tive. Long quotations from Lord Brougham's Political 
 Philosophy in reference to the French Revolution. 
 
 The suppression of Christianity does not appear to be con- 
 sidered by him as connected with these atrocities : they 
 are ascribed to the too democratic form of constitution, 
 that of '93 being much more so than that of '95. 
 
 Extracts from Brougham's life of Carnot, in support of the 
 position that this defect rendered increased severity and 
 despotism necessary. 
 
 Details from Sir A. Alison's work, in which, generally 
 speaking, the same view is taken. His chapter on the 
 war in the Vendee in parts not favourable to this position, 
 examined, and refutation attempted. 
 
 His previous censure of the slaughter of 40,000 unresisting 
 inhabitants of Jerusalem by order of Godfrey de Bouillon 
 (in his own view a pious Christian), totally incompatible 
 with some passages in the chapter alluded to, and such mur- 
 der more unjustifiable than the slaughter in the Vendee, 
 since, in this case, the opposition was " most determined." 
 
 Evidence that a great number of Republicans were put to 
 death in cold blood, when at times the Royalists were suc- 
 cessful in the struggle ; that at the very commencement, 
 
X CONTENTS. 
 
 the former tried ineffectually means of conciliation, and 
 at all events did not resort to the horrors of the " Bap- 
 tisms, Marriages, &c," till, goaded almost to madness 
 by the approach of foreign armies, extreme severity 
 seemed absolutely necessary for the safety of the Re- 
 public. 
 
 The above atrocities, however, were the sole work of Car- 
 rier, whose " authority," Alison admits, " was un- 
 bounded " in the Vendee ; and he was subsequently 
 justly guillotined for these crimes, though, I admit, not 
 till Robespierre's fall. ISTo evidence, however, to show 
 that Robespierre would have recommended the putting 
 of women and children to death by wholesale, or any 
 cruelty (torture, &c, so prevalent in the Christian mid- 
 dle ages) in the mode of death to men, seeing the guil- 
 lotine was expressly adopted, as apparently the quickest 
 and easiest mode of execution for the real or supposed 
 criminal. 
 
 Increased humanity commenced in 1795, not because 
 Christianity was then allowed by law, but because the 
 constitution also was made less democratic, and because of 
 the reaction which always takes place in such circum- 
 stances. Humanity, however, only gained full force 
 when the supreme power of the state became still more 
 secure, by being placed in the hands of military leaders, 
 viz., Barras and Napoleon. 
 
 Outward forms of any new Theistic church should be simi- 
 lar rather to those of the Catholic than the Protestant, 
 as suggested by Sir T. More, who, in his Utopia, obvi- 
 ously prefers Theism and Plato to Christianity. . . . 
 
 Extracts from the work proving this curious point in re- 
 ference to the distinguished Chancellor under Henry VIII. 
 
 A brief outline of some general changes in the laws, which 
 appear necessary or expedient if a government substitute 
 Theism for Christianity. 
 
 Thus a reply found to the ignorant question — " What are 
 we to put in its place ?" and, in the author's opinion, afar 
 more just and useful code proposed. 
 
 Necessity for the use of moral restraint, or other " checks" 
 on population, according to the views of Malthus, Mill, 
 and others, before the condition of the poor can be 
 greatly ameliorated ; and of some alteration of opinion 
 generally on the sexual question, before the amount of 
 female prostitution can be diminished. Christianity has 
 done no good on this subject, or that of infanticide. 
 
 Pages 65 to 119. 
 
CONTENTS. XI 
 
 NOTES. 
 
 A. — Vindication of Roman toleration even as regards the 
 Druids. That Hume gives no solid reason why natural 
 Theism could not be a religion of the state. Religious 
 toleration probably less at Rome under the Republic than 
 under the Empire. 
 
 B. — That the imprisonment of Richard Carlile and others 
 contributed to the freedom of the press rather on poli- 
 tical than on religious matters ; but that Hartley's Will 
 case, &c, &c, shows that government retains still even 
 a legal power to punish the authors of writings against 
 Christianity. 
 
 C. — Details as to the punishment of death for witchcraft. 
 
 D. — Details as to the so-called Reformation. Vast supe- 
 riority of Gibbon in this respect to Luther and Calvin, 
 yet still does not go far enough. Charles V. and the 
 Reformation ; bad effect of Christianity on his mind, 
 Luther's absurd doctrine of justification by faith, without 
 works. D'Aubigne's and Scott's false views. The true, 
 yet remarkable confession of the latter, that infidel phi- 
 losophy and not Christianity diminished the number of the 
 victims of the Inquisition. The Reformation succeeded 
 because Henry VHL, Albert of Prussia, and others in 
 power chanced to advocate it ; and though it effected 
 some useful increase of civil liberty, it was no reforma- 
 tion in religion. Sir T. C. Morgan in 1822 justly wrote 
 the same. 
 
 E. — Remarks on the passages in Suetonius, Tacitus, and 
 Pliny, in reference to Christianity. 
 
 F. — State of debtor and creditor, and of lawyers, under the 
 ancient Roman government, 
 
LETTEES 
 
 TO 
 
 THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 
 
 LETTER I. 
 
 u It is not possible to destroy political servitude while 
 allowing religious servitude to remain ; the political springs 
 by necessity from religious slavery. In that place where 
 the priest may say to an entire people, l Surrender to me 
 your reason without conditions,' the Prince, by an infallible 
 logic, may repeat also, c Surrender to me your liberty with- 
 out control.' " — Quinet. 
 
 Citizens, — After having read the laborious 
 and learned work of Eobert Cox On Sabbath 
 Laws and Sabbath Duties, and observed therein 
 that Dr. Arnold, in 1834, and Archbishop Whately, 
 so late as 1849,* have both given their opinion 
 
 * Cox, p. 221. It is now a long while (viz., from Sep- 
 tember, 1853,) since Cox's admirable book has been pub- 
 lished ; and I am sorry to say that, although written in 
 such a spirit of moderation, that the author nowhere directly 
 puts scripture authority aside, yet scarcely one of our quar- 
 terly or monthly journals has ever mentioned the book ! ! 
 In consequence of this disposition to treat scripture with 
 respect. Cox has been often forced into those same ambi- 
 guous views, which we see in the scripture itself: and this 
 
 B 
 
2 LETTERS TO 
 
 that Sunday is a holiday, not by divine, but only 
 by ecclesiastical institution — an opinion amply 
 confirmed by others as well as by Cox himself — 
 it is, I think, useless to anticipate for the present 
 any change in the puritanical mode of keeping 
 that day in England ; or otherwise the writings 
 of men of such influence as Arnold and Whately 
 would long ago have tended to make it with Eng- 
 lish Protestants what it actually is with German 
 Protestants (their theatres being open on the Sab- 
 bath), a day of innocent recreation and amuse- 
 ment, as well as of rest.* The day, however, re- 
 is the great fault of his book. He, like most of us, has 
 been obliged to sacrifice to " conventional hypocrisy." 
 (p. 390-) Surely, then, if such amiable objections to our 
 creed are no better received by the press, it is time to 
 speak out the full truth. 
 
 * It is also to be remembered that George Combe's 
 Constitution of Man and also the Vestiges of Creation have 
 now been published many years, and both sold to the ex- 
 tent of many thousand copies, and though Deistical, have 
 not diminished clerical influence among us, or in the 
 slightest degree altered our gloomy Sunday. Chapman, 
 Watson, and Holyoake have also, for many years, sold 
 thousands of copies of free-thinking books and tracts (still 
 more confessedly Deistical and revolting to opinion than 
 the above,) without effecting an acknowledged and open 
 avowal of Deistical views in even what is worthy to be 
 called a minority of our population. Thousands, no doubt, 
 in this country are merely Deists in reality ; but as the 
 public confession of such views injures their reception in 
 society, they feel obliged to keep their views private. While 
 I admit, therefore, that the freedom of the press in these 
 matters, is now, and has been since the death of Carlile 
 (a martyr to the cause,) the M glory of England," I still 
 see no hopes of any great practical change in religion 
 among ourselves. We are. of course, in a u false position" 
 on account of our Established Church : so, indeed, I think 
 are you Americans, even without any national church esta- 
 blishment, solely on account of the public opinion in your 
 country being too favourable to, at all events, some form of 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 3 
 
 mains still with us a " heavy day " as even 
 Wilberforce, (Evidences of Christianity,) called 
 it, the Calvinistic moral gloom adding tenfold to 
 the physical gloom of our London fogs. 
 
 Under such circumstances, I propose to address 
 the "pars altera" of the Anglo-Saxon race on 
 this subject; I mean the American people, who, 
 having wisely separated Church and State, are 
 in a better position than ourselves to effect ecclesi- 
 astical reforms. And should they wisely attempt 
 such, I doubt not that the spirit of rivalry between 
 the two nations, will soon induce ourselves to 
 . strive to follow their example — at leasts indeed, I 
 should hope such would be the effect. 
 
 One of yourselves, my friends, in his Treatise 
 on the Philosophy of Evil, (Philadelphia, 1845,) 
 has a section on The Mischief of our Gloomy 
 Sunday ; and yet, though written so lately, has 
 produced no change in your Sabbath. Indeed, 
 Lyman Coleman publishes years afterwards, (in 
 1852,) in the same city of Philadelphia, his 
 Ancient Christianity, and says, M The whole 
 English race, wherever found, alone have a Sab- 
 Christianity. But the difference between us is, that it 
 seems far easier for you to effect reforms in this matter 
 than it is for us. 
 
 In vain again did the Edinburgh Revieio, for 1850, say 
 that free discussion on religion a is discountenanced on all 
 sides, and branded with reproachful names." It is the 
 same still ; though it is some years since a journal of such 
 great influence wrote as above ! In 1852 the Sabbath 
 Alliance boasted of our superiority over other countries, on 
 account of the ij freedom with order," attributing this 
 chiefly to our Puritanical observance of the Sabbath. But 
 The Edinburgh states what is still a fact. I deny our 
 4 * freedom" in reality. It also appears, that a reprehensible 
 pride, (viz., to be different from the continental people, 
 whether they be right or wrong,) is concerned in this strict 
 Sabbath observance. 
 
4 LETTERS TO 
 
 bath, a Christian Sabbath, holy unto the Lord. 
 With all else, throughout Christendom, the Sab- 
 bath is a holy day, a festival." (Quoted in Cox, 
 p. 536.) 
 
 Coleman rightly gives the Puritans " the im- 
 mortal honour," as he calls it, of introducing this 
 austerity into the i( States," which, no doubt, is 
 their due ; for Cox shows that even Knox and 
 Calvin could only have indirectly influenced the 
 custom. Of course Luther was too wise (though 
 not a liberal-minded man in reality) ever to have 
 given sanction to such a movement, and seems in- 
 stinctively to have adopted Burke's wise maxim, 
 viz., "That lawful enjoyment is the surest way to 
 prevent unlawful gratification. " (Cox, p. 448.) 
 Accordingly, as already observed, the Lutheran 
 Protestants have at this day their places of amuse- 
 ment open on Sunday evenings : by which means 
 no doubt, in accordance with Burke's maxim, they 
 prevent much of the drunkenness that vitiates a 
 little the sanctity of our English and American 
 Sabbath. Poor hard-worked wretches ! what re- 
 mains for them on a Sunday evening in a dense 
 London fog, but to dissipate the vast moral and 
 physical gloom by a little gin or more beer ; and 
 no wonder in such circumstances, after once feel- 
 ing the exhiliration, if they almost instinctively 
 take too much and retire to the new world of sleep 
 wholly or partially intoxicated ; and, of course, in 
 either case with more or less injury to their health. 
 
 Hence it is, all in accordance with this view, 
 that Cox has wisely put the following in succession 
 in his Table of Contents (p. xviii.) "Knowledge 
 of Human Nature needs to be diffused. Causes 
 of the comparative sobriety of the French. Im- 
 portance of recreation as a means of demolishing 
 intemperance. Gloomy religious views foster this 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 5 
 
 vice. Religious Insanity. Drunkenness can be 
 cured only in accordance with the maxim : Sub- 
 lata causa, tollitur effectusP 
 
 In the work itself the reader will find these 
 points fully elucidated, and will, I think, come to 
 the conclusion that " Temperance Societies" are 
 perfectly or nearly useless, while our "heavy 
 Sunday M is suffered to remain. 
 
 Drunkenness and illicit intercourse of the sexes, 
 and increased tendency to suicide and madness, 
 are the bad effects of Calvinistic austerity, and 
 perhaps the only shadow of any good in its favour 
 is, its supposed tendency to increase respect for 
 rational religion. 
 
 But while I acknowledge any institution that 
 has this effect is useful, I maintain that the auste- 
 rity in question overshoots the mark, and more 
 often produces mere national hypocrisy, or abso- 
 lute disgust, than additional respect for religious 
 worship. It may, to a certain extent, increase the 
 outward respect of religion in all classes, but this 
 is almost always purchased at the too dear price of 
 increased aversion to practice the moral duties of 
 life. It actually becomes a sort of substitute for 
 the same, as the Hon. W. Pitt says in his Letter 
 on Superstition* "by setting up something as 
 religion which shall atone and commute for the 
 want of virtue." It renders hypocrisy in fact 
 fashionable — no more. It affects the life, not the 
 heart ; and certainly has a tendency to produce 
 that most odious spectacle — a nation of sanctified 
 cheats. And, for my own part, I cannot help re- 
 garding the man who cheats you under the mask 
 of religion as a far greater villain than he who 
 
 * Holyoake, 147, Fleet Street. An unanswerable pro- 
 duction, and worthy the man who favoured the liberal- 
 minded Frederick the Great 
 
6 LETTERS TO 
 
 discards religion before he plunders his prey ; since 
 in the former case he is truly " taking God's name 
 in vain " in the strictest sense, and then adds one 
 sin to another. 
 
 As in England we have a national religion, 
 there is with us, my friends, perhaps more excuse 
 than with you for upholding our Puritanical Sab- 
 bath. Our very sovereign cannot turn Catholic 
 without acting illegally and risking her throne ; 
 and our saints would be sure to construe any re- 
 laxation of Sabbatarian discipline on her part, 
 into a secret leaning towards Catholicism. With 
 probably, therefore, the most liberal tendency in 
 this respect, Her Majesty feels herself compelled 
 to wear the gilded fetter in order to prevent any- 
 thing like civil commotion.* And as in Monar- 
 chies, the Sovereign is naturally enough, " the 
 fountain of honour," few of consideration in the 
 country feel inclined to do that which the Sove- 
 reign forbids herself to do. Our aristocracy, too, 
 here, cling to religion as to the firmest support of 
 the State ; and while reluctantly yielding to the 
 Corn Law Bill, they still refuse Jewish Emanci- 
 pation ; as if even the slightest alteration in the 
 Constitution, as regards religion, were a change 
 more to be deprecated than one which — as the 
 Corn Law Bill — more decidedly affected their 
 material interests. This prejudice extends — in a 
 feebler degree certainly — to the Commons, and 
 
 * We must also not forget that it was, in great part, for 
 attempting to do the very same thing, viz., promote rational 
 recreation for the Sunday, that Charles I. was beheaded. 
 Therefore, in Britain, any Sovereign who even indirectly 
 appeared to aid in such a change would, by the masses, 
 who seldom reason justly on nice moral points, be consi- 
 dered as wishing to restore Despotism. Yet, in reality, 
 such Sovereign would be acting just the contrary now. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 
 
 throughout the country generally ; and as a proof 
 of it, T may state that playing on the piano, or at 
 chess or draughts, on a Sunday is almost as much 
 in general abhorrence, in strict Protestant families, 
 as going to the theatre or a ball on the same day. 
 Now this shows the great influence of mere opinion 
 on the subject, (see Sir Robert Peel's speech, 1835 
 — quoted in Cox, p. 348,) as there is no actual 
 law to prevent such amusements in private. The 
 suppression of Sunday trains for passengers be- 
 tween Edinburgh and Glasgow (which caused 
 Cox's book to be written) was also effected by the 
 influence of opinion only, (the law itself rather in- 
 clining the opposite way,) which opinion has been 
 formed chiefly by the constant repetition in our 
 churches of the Jewish inscription : " Remember 
 thou keep holy the Sabbath day." Yet Sunday is 
 not the Sabbath day ! /* 
 
 Although in this latter respect, you Protestants 
 of the States are probably in the same predicament 
 as ourselves, this is not the case as regards your 
 temporary Sovereign or President. He, at least, 
 is free from all religious shackle ; and can conse- 
 quently exert little or no influence in that respect 
 on American society generally. He may be a 
 Catholic, he may be a Jew, Unitarian, or even 
 disguised Theist ;t and you wisely enough con- 
 
 * Cox shows tliis clearly enough ; yet half our popula- 
 tion, not daring to think for themselves on religious matters 
 conceive they really keep the Sabbath day. But the day 
 has been changed from Saturday to Sunday, without God's 
 command or permission. Now this in mortals, is as bad as 
 blasphemy. The Jews are much wiser on this point ; they 
 distinguish labour from amusement, and allow music, but 
 do not permit even Jewish servants to work. 
 
 t Such were the illustrious Washington and Jefferson ; 
 and I use the word " disguised" advisedly, as we shall ste 
 
8 LETTERS TO 
 
 sider him none the worse for that, or incapable, 
 from such circumstance, of holding the first office 
 in the State. In this, I must acknowledge, you 
 are far before us ; as also in many of the men you 
 send out as Ministers, being professed Unitarians, 
 and sometimes even professed Theists or Pantheists. 
 Show, then, I beseech you, that you are nationally 
 above any illiberal prejudices of being thought too 
 Catholic in your tastes, on a point in which reli- 
 gion is, in reality, not at all concerned ; I mean 
 the opening places of amusement and recreation 
 for the people on the Sabbath. 
 
 The real reason why these are closed among 
 you, is doubtless the same which has caused them 
 to be closed among us ; I mean a desire to " keep 
 holy the Sabbath day ;" but I have already briefly 
 stated that this reason is untenable, and must refer 
 you to Cox's large work itself for more ample 
 details and quotations on both sides of the 
 question. 
 
 But as man is the slave of habit and prejudice 
 much cftener than of reason, it seems not impos- 
 sible that with many of you, even Cox's arguments 
 may be considered inadequate ; and if you ask me 
 why, allow me say, that the real cause at the bot- 
 tom of this will be, that Christianity has gained an 
 undue and actually unjust ascendency over pure 
 natural Eeligion, or Deism, in your Eepublic. 
 This has been the invariable tendency of Christianity 
 whenever it has been in competition with other 
 religions ; alike at its origin with the graceful 
 mythology of the ancients* — under the Koman em- 
 hereafter, that religion is not perfectly free even in the 
 United States. 
 
 * All other religions, were content with the toleration — 
 far superior to our own Protestant so -called toleration — of 
 the state religion of Home ; and naturally enough ; for 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 9 
 
 perors, as under your Kepublic. It is in vain, 
 therefore, that your constitution says, all religions 
 are equal in the eye of the law, for all revealed 
 religions are necessarily intolerant, and will never 
 be contented with what they ought to be, viz , 
 just equality. I shall proceed to elucidate this 
 proposition by extracts from Human Rights and 
 their Political Guarantees* by your countryman, 
 Mr. Counsellor Hurlbut; and I shall then fol- 
 low up this Letter by an examination of the utility 
 of Christianity to Government, for the belief in 
 this opinion I doubt not is also at the bottom of 
 your great external respect for that religion, and 
 consequently concerned in keeping up your gloomy 
 Sunday. 
 
 " The constitution of North Carolina/' says 
 Mr. Hurlbut, " was amended in 1836, the word 
 Christian being substituted for the word Pro- 
 testant, in the following sentence : — " No person 
 who shall deny the truth of the Protestant Reli- 
 gion, shall be capable of holding any office, or 
 place of trust, or profit, in the civil department of 
 the state/ It is also stated in the same, that — 
 ' All men have a natural and unalienable right to 
 worship Almighty God according to the dictates of 
 their conscience/ — Thus," says Mr. H. ? (i they 
 may worship and the state will not interrupt them ; 
 but it will inquire as to the divinity they adore — 
 and if it be not the constitutional Jehovah, the 
 
 they had their niches in the Pantheon, and seemed placed 
 on actual equality with the heathen gods themselves. But 
 Christianity was not content until it could dethrone, so to 
 speak, those who were so liberal. Surely here was just 
 reason for persecuting it, especially since it was itself a dan- 
 gerous fiction. 
 
 * With notes by George Combe. — Edinburgh, 1847 
 Maclachlan. 
 
 b 2 
 
10 LETTERS TO 
 
 unlawful worshippers will be excluded from civil 
 offices. They may, however, hold military offices — 
 the state being content to have heathens bleed in 
 its defence/' (Of Constitutional Limitations, 
 p. 27 J 
 
 In Massachusetts again, the government has 
 the power to require, " Protestant teachers of 
 piety to be supported by the parishes, when provi- 
 sion shall not be made for them voluntarily." 
 Every Christian sect is to be equally protected by 
 the laws. 
 
 " This portrays" (continues Mr. H., justly,) 
 ic the infant state of religious freedom in the cradle 
 of liberty" — to wit — " A species of religious es- 
 tablishment and its compulsory support." Mr. H. 
 rightly says " a species," for equally, as in North 
 Carolina, some form of Christianity is obligatory, 
 or the penalty of what is really persecution by law, 
 as well as by opinion, must be borne. 
 
 It is consolatory to observe by an amendment 
 adopted in 1820, that the chief officers of 
 state are now not required to declare that they be- 
 lieve in Christianity :* but the above regulations 
 remain unchanged. 
 
 In New York too, f; the legislature may interfere 
 with the rights of opinion — and the courts in the 
 administration of the common law, may punish a 
 man for speaking against the prevailing religion 
 (i. e. Christianity) of the country ! !" {Ibid. 27.) 
 
 " But if," continues Mr. H., " law take into 
 
 * The revised constitution for New York for 1846, pro- 
 vides, " that no person shall be rendered incompetent to 
 be a witness on account of his religious belief." (Combe, 
 note, p. 81.) Thus perfect religious liberty is slowly but 
 happily progressing, though Combe does not know if the 
 above has passed the legislature. See also further on for confir- 
 mation of this reflection in reference to the State of New York 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 7 1 
 
 favour the religion of the majority, it tyrannizes 
 over the minority ; if it establishes the religion of the 
 Christian, it offends the Infidel, the Jew, and the 
 Heathen.'' As the majority make the laws, it was 
 to be expected that one like that of New York, 
 would sooner or later be made ; but while it exists, 
 let our worthy American friends confess, that reli- 
 gious liberty or equality is a mere hypocritical 
 farce among them. The punishment by opinion 
 was constitutional and not actually unjust in such 
 cases ; but when the majority go further and make 
 actual law on the subject, they then clearly become 
 tyrannical, and if they do not violate the constitu- 
 tion, they certainly violate the laws of eternal and 
 immutable justice. 
 
 Mr. Hurlbut mentions the statute of the State 
 of New York on common school education, enacted 
 only in 1844, in which we find, that if "books 
 containing sectarian doctrine of any particular 
 Christian or other religious sect are used in such 
 schools, these shall not be entitled to monies from 
 the school fund of the State ; yet it continues, 
 " nothing herein contained shall authorize the 
 exclusion of the Holy Scriptures without note or 
 comment ! /"* (p. 28.) Mr. H,, says, " 1 do not 
 perceive how the legislature obtained any idea as 
 to what Scriptures are holy and what are not — 
 
 * All this shows (even in its disguise), the inherent in- 
 tolerance of Christianity, -which induced Justinian to put 
 down even the venerable schools of Athens: u That," says 
 Gibbon, " which even Gothic arms did not do, was done by 
 a religion, whose ministry superseded the exercise of reason, 
 resolved every question by an article of faith, and con- 
 demned the sceptic to eternal flames /" (Chap. 40, Justinian.) 
 Paganism was in some degree compensated for its utter 
 downfall through the influence of Christianity, by Gibbon's 
 statement, " That its introduction, or, at least, abuse, had 
 some influence on the fall of the Roman Empire." * * * 
 
12 LETTERS TO 
 
 what are with, and what are without note and 
 comment/' 
 
 "It would seem that we need further constitu- 
 tional provisions, such as will render it impossible 
 for the religionist of any sect whatever to obtain 
 the least legal recognition, the adoption of his 
 sacred books, or any other favour from the state. 
 Until the State takes the position of perfect indif- 
 ference and impartiality, the rights of conscience 
 will not be secure, and that religious freedom so 
 much boasted of in America will rest upon an in- 
 secure foundation." 
 
 " While several of the States punish blasphemy, 
 declaring Sunday to be holy time, require officers 
 to believe in the Christian religion, the clergy who 
 teach all these things are disfranchised." (In New 
 York, for instance,, they can hold no civil office 
 or place within the state.") 
 
 " Democracy," he adds, " cuts an awkward 
 figure in coquetting with religion. It had better 
 assume at once an air of perfect indifference." 
 
 "But, it is inquired," says he, tC can a S r ,ate 
 exist which recognises no religion ? I answer that 
 it can as well as if it do not recognise music." 
 (p. 28.) 
 
 I may observe in reference to this point, that if 
 we leave the mind perfectly free, as believing or 
 not in a future state of rewards and punishments, 
 we ought to increase the severity of the laws, and 
 also, as Beccariaf suggested, establish institutions 
 for rewarding virtue. In a republic some form of 
 
 " Under it," says he, "the Roman world was oppressed by 
 a new species of tyranny." Yet, with philosophic impartiality 
 te admits further on, that it tended to diminish the ferocious 
 barbarity of the barbarians who conquered Rome. (Chap. 
 38— end.) 
 
 * Dei Delitti xli. — Come si prevengono i delitti. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 13 
 
 religion (pure Theism better than any) seems al- 
 most necessary, and has existed in all ancient 
 republics. Athens had too much superstition and per- 
 secuted those of true religion, viz., the philosophers, 
 including Socrates. Venice too was a very reli- 
 gious republic ; so at present is Switzerland. They 
 all seem to err, not in having respect for religion 
 itself — but in having had, and still having respect 
 for an intolerant and false religion. The Religion 
 of Nature is clearly the only true religion; and as 
 it existed before Christianity, so it will exist 
 after it. 
 
 I observe Mr. Combe, in his note on religious 
 education, [Op. Cit., p. 83), asks: — " Would not 
 Mr. Hurlbut's views tend to convert schools into 
 seminaries of Calvinism, Catholicism, and So- 
 cialism, &c, according to the opinions of the ma- 
 jority, and so to rear sects filled with inveterate 
 hostility to each other ? The government may 
 legitimately and beneficially aid, and sometimes 
 enforce, the active obedience of its subjects to the 
 natural laws. * * * ' Man has no right to be dirty or 
 grossly ignorant (because by being so, he justly 
 injures or offends those near him ) and, if so, has no 
 right to relief from the parish. He ought to be 
 forced to change.' * * * If we suppose a government 
 to possess a code of really pure morality and reli- 
 gion, clearly expressed and practically elucidated, 
 would not a people be in better condition at the 
 end of two centuries of teaching of this code by 
 force of law, than that in which they would be 
 found after the same period of sectarian teaching, 
 such as they would receive if left to the uncon- 
 trolled guidance of their clergy. After instancing 
 Prussia, (which though the best practical example, 
 is not to his point as being exclusively Christian), 
 he adds : — " If government be supposed in the 
 
14 LETTERS TO 
 
 right, is not the practice of right always be- 
 neficial ?" 
 
 I am inclined to believe these views of Combe 
 to be just : they were those of two sincere Repub- 
 licans living in different ages, Plato and Rousseau, 
 on this subject : they thought that Republicanism 
 might with justice try and enslave the mind to 
 virtue, by compelling sound religious belief, if it 
 left the laws otherwise free. We have only to look 
 at the United States now (the best educated 
 country in the world) — we have only, I say, to 
 reflect on her Quakers, Shakers, Rappites, Mor- 
 mans, and Spirit Rappers, and we may rationally 
 enough come to the conclusion, that the multitude 
 ought not to be left perfectly free as regards their 
 religious belief; since the state of that country 
 shows clearly enough, that a man's religion de- 
 pends far less on his reason, than on his hopes and 
 fears and prejudices, and the opinion of the 
 country : so that, in truth, he is enslaved on the 
 subject, when appearing to be left free. The false 
 •opinions on this subject to which he is thus forced, 
 increase the natural intolerance of human nature, 
 as no man can possibly be a sincere believer in 
 Christianity, and not feel more or less horror or 
 detestation of all " Jews, Turks, and Infidels." If 
 any Republic would make natural religion the re- 
 ligion of the State, and enforce payment to this, 
 it would be nothing else than diminishing the 
 temptation to adopt any other of the revealed re- 
 ligions, (always necessarily intolerant), and con- 
 sequently would be indirectly diminishing the 
 strong temptation to injustice which naturally 
 exists in human nature. 
 
 " As regards the observance of a day of rest," 
 says Mr. H., " the State has an undoubted authority 
 to abstain from all action on such a day ; but it 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 15 
 
 cannot rightfully compel any man to keep Sunday 
 as a religious institution ; nor can it require him 
 to cease from labour or recreation on that day, 
 since it cannot be shown that the ordinary exercise 
 of the human faculties on that day is in any way 
 an infringement on the rights of mankind. " 
 (p. 28.) 
 
 Combe, (in his Note F., p. 83,) says — "In the 
 recent discussions in Scotland, the Sabbatarian 
 party has strongly overlooked the right of those 
 who take a different view of the matter from theirs, 
 to act upon that view if they please. 5 ' 
 
 But supposing they do " act upon it," they are 
 still punished, as I conceive unjustly, though by 
 opinion only, as such opinion is founded on a 
 falsehood, — by which the multitude is in many cases 
 led involuntarily, — I mean that the scriptures are 
 the word of God, and that they inculcate the pu- 
 ritanical observance of Sunday, as a positive duty. 
 
 I believe with Mr. H., that the State cannot 
 rightfully compel any man to keep Sunday in this 
 way. But unjust as punishment by opinion only 
 is in such cases, government has still increased 
 the injustice in England, and the States by making 
 actual law on the subject, and compelling all 
 public places of amusement to be closed on a 
 Sunday evening. 
 
 Hurlbut very justly says, " there is in this 
 country, viz , the States, a species of religious 
 establishment^ notwithstanding the constitu- 
 tional provisions, for the free exercise of religious 
 beliefr (p. 26.) 
 
 Now I would beg to enquire whether such a 
 state of things may not be called actually illegal ? 
 Legal or illegal — this hermaphrodite condition in 
 reference to religion — fostering as it does through 
 the whole population a state of hypocrisy — which 
 
16 LETTERS TO 
 
 is necessarily carried in a greater or less degree 
 into all the affairs of life, and is continually 
 prompting to actual lying, and consequently to 
 dishonesty, is very disgusting to a candid and 
 honourable mind ; and must be inwardly so to 
 many of yourselves, American citizens. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 17 
 
 LETTER II. 
 
 Citizens, — I shall begin this letter by some con- 
 siderations as to the utility of Christianity to go- 
 vernment, being convinced it is the belief in its 
 supposed utility, far more than in the actual truth 
 of the religion, that causes it to remain still so 
 much respected even by some enlightened statesmen. 
 
 When I find such men as Frederick the Great 
 of Prussia, your late President, the illustrious 
 Jefferson, and I may, perhaps, add the late Lord 
 Chesterfield, holding such opinions as regards its 
 utility, I approach this topic with respect, but still 
 with the firm conviction that these distinguished 
 men were mistaken. 
 
 1st. — In the first place, an irremediable fault in 
 it is, the great uncertainty as to what it really 
 teaches; for by its endless contradictions, the 
 mind feels greater difficulty in seizing its real 
 tenets than those of mere natural religion for these 
 are written by nature herself in the consciences of 
 all mankind. 
 
 Hence it is, " that religious wars among chris- 
 tians, and deaths from the inquisition, have cost 
 the lives of 67,000,000 human beings ;" whereas 
 " the variety of religions and gods in the heathen 
 world neither produced wars, nor dissentions 
 among the different nations/'* 
 
 I admit, that by a wise separation of church 
 and state, you have prevented in a great measure 
 
 * Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History quoted in Trevelyan's 
 pamphlet, (p. 6.,) on the Insanity of Mankind. (Bailliere.) 
 
18 LETTERS TO 
 
 religious wars; but you have not been able to 
 effect impossibilities, and to eradicate the inherent 
 intolerant spirit from the Christian creed, as Mr. 
 Hurlbut's remarks just quoted show. You only 
 suffer from this, less than other nations. The flame 
 of opinion, increased by the hopes and fears of the 
 Christian's death, obliges the " pious" among you 
 to persecute socially 
 
 In consequence of preaching the eternity of 
 punishments, Christianity teaches intolerance more 
 clearly perhaps, than any other tenet; and yet 
 leaving its meaning, as to the trinity or unity, 
 election, justification by faith, real presence, &c, 
 &c, debateable points, itself tends to foster end- 
 less disputes between Catholics, Protestants, and 
 Unitarians. We have just seen what slaughter 
 it has caused in the world, and much undoubtedly 
 remains for tinhorn ages, who will have to go 
 through the same phases before they arrive at the 
 same civilisation, and consequently indifference 
 on the subject. In this respect, so far from sur- 
 passing the Eomans, we are only now gradually 
 coming near them in real civilisation. Let it, 
 however, be remembered, that there is even now 
 only one nation of any strength in the world — 
 (viz., your own), where all actual persecution by 
 law is difficult, and you will be convinced how 
 much misery is yet in store for mankind from such 
 uncertainty as to the meaning of this supposed 
 revelation. A Republic, with Church and State 
 separate, is the only means of completely taking 
 away the power of persecution from Christianity by 
 law, — I wish I could say also by opinion. To the end 
 of the Chapter there will likewise be Catholic Mis- 
 sionaries, as well as Protestant, anxious from the 
 mere spirit of selfishness to secure, as they conceive 
 their own salvation, by interfering with other 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 19 
 
 people's business, or, in fact, trying to make con- 
 verts among savage tribes. In consequence among 
 these real converts and believers, there will always 
 be war and discord ; for the odium theologicum 
 (among Christian Sects) cannot die, though it 
 may sleep for a time. 
 
 2ndly. — Christianity tends to enslave the immortal 
 mind, by assuming, as it does, a power over the 
 thoughts, (since even " looking on a woman to lust 
 after her," is absurdly enough put down in this 
 creed, as the same as actually committing adultery, 
 whereas it is clear that though a man " lust after 
 a woman/' yet still, by considerations of duty, he 
 might be prevented from desiring carnal knowledge 
 of her.) Thus, I say, under the profound cant of 
 purifying the mind, and censuring what none can 
 prevent, (for who can prevent mere desire for the 
 opposite sex ?) Christianity fosters the worst form 
 of slavery — that of the mind. We see this fea- 
 ture in taking other aspects of it, for it everywhere 
 puts faith before reason ; and consistently fol- 
 lowed, would lead all again to become ignorant 
 monks. 
 
 That it also sanctions bodily slavery is clear 
 enough ; and it is only by an advance in civilisa- 
 tion that the feeling against slavery has increased 
 of late years, for it existed for centuries after the 
 introduction of Christianity, and no one dreamt 
 that it was censured by this faith. Indeed, how 
 can it be, for the faith itself makes some of the 
 greatest virtues to consist in a base humility ? 
 Slavery is the essence of all real Christianity. 
 But on earth we have only a mock and spurious — 
 because really impracticable scheme. If born in 
 Heaven, it should have kept there, for it never has 
 been, and never can be acted on by the inhabitants 
 
20 LETTERS TO 
 
 of earth. And the attempt to keep up even the 
 appearance of being Christian, has been the secret 
 cause of all the cant which so eminently distin- 
 guishes the Anglo-Saxon race; since it tends to 
 make all of us found our opinions of real virtue 
 on the false standard contained in this system. 
 Consequently, no man among us is what he really 
 seems, or wishes to seem, for we are naturally 
 under the circumstances, anxious to have the merit 
 of i( piety and chastity," (I wish I could add 
 "poverty," and thus complete the Christian vow,) 
 that scarcely any of us merit. 
 
 All this it is that has produced such a difference 
 in our literature from that of the Greeks and 
 Romans. These men spoke out on all subjects, 
 especially those relating to the intercourse of the 
 sexes, and show mankind as it really is ; while to 
 read our literature one would go away with the 
 false idea that we were the most moral and modest 
 of people. But, as Voltaire says, this sort of 
 modesty often extends no farther than our lips. It 
 is really a pleasure to read the works of this 
 writer, Bayle, Rousseau, Gibbon, or Hume, in 
 comparison with the works of our very Christian 
 historians or philosophers — for it is like reading the 
 ancients instead of the moderns. Christianity, 
 you will say, has therefore elevated our literature ; 
 I rather think it has debased it by a perfectly un- 
 natural spirit of cant. Hume himself justly says, 
 hinting perhaps also to this point. " In general 
 there is more candour in ancient historians. Our 
 speculative factions, especially those of religion, 
 throw such an illusion over our minds, that men 
 seem to regard impartiality to their adversaries and 
 to heretics, as a vice or weakness." A man so lost 
 to all sense of natural religion as to regard " impar- 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 21 
 
 tiality as a weakness," is a perfect disgrace to any 
 free government.* 
 
 I have censured the Anglo-Saxon race more 
 particularly on this point, because somehow or 
 another, abroad, Protestant, or Koman Catholic 
 writers (especially the French) do not carry pru- 
 dery so far. We may witness this in our English 
 translations. Some time ago I bought t^o — one 
 of Faust, and one of Herodotus, — and it was not 
 until I had read the preface that I perceived that 
 many passages in each had been omitted, as im- 
 proper for English translation. Now as this was 
 not stated on the title page, it became something 
 
 * Essays, Vol. L, note EE., page 552. The probable 
 reason of this difference is, that we wish to be thought 
 more eminently Christian than the other church sects do ; 
 so we are striving after Christian appearances. Hence our 
 proverbial cant. Cox has some good observations which 
 will apply, though indirectly, to this point, and show how 
 it is that there is more of this religious pretension (cant) 
 among Protestants than among Catholics, for such I think 
 is the case. u There is no essential difference betwen a 
 claim of infallibility honestly expressed in words, and a 
 tacit assumption of infallibility, by our conduct towards 
 those who differing from us, commit precisely the offence 
 and no more, which we commit in differing from them. 
 That we may really be the Protestants we call ourselves, it is 
 not enough to abuse the Pope, and assert against Mm the 
 right of private judgement in religion, we must acknowledge 
 and respect in all others (whether Jews, Roman Catholics, 
 Deists, or even Atheists) the rights which in our own case we 
 hold so precious." (Op. Cit., p. 376.) The fact is, our En- 
 glish Protestantism is only a sort of half toleration, so that a 
 man who only goes as far as Unitarianism, is held — by Protes- 
 tants too — not to be a Christian, and of course to be a 
 Deist is to expose oneself to open persecution. Now the 
 Pope, admitting no dissent prevents all this cant which 
 among Protestants flourishes because Protestantism is now 
 our state religion, and because full toleration is not in 
 reality allowed by public opinion or even by law. 
 
22 LETTERS TO 
 
 more than a mere '' pious fraud/' and with all the 
 sanctity of religion, amounted to actual dishonesty. 
 That the same spirit of prudery animates Christi- 
 anity on the other side of the Atlantic is clear 
 from various facts, and though it may notbe true that 
 the legs of pianos are not allowed to be seen, still 
 I find it stated only in to-day's paper, that adver- 
 tisements occur in which shirt and chemise are 
 called men's and women's " under vests." There 
 is little harm in all this certainly, and only as far 
 as it seems to lead to actual falsehood and dis- 
 honesty, as mentioned at the end of Letter L, is it 
 reprehensible. But I cannot help thinking that 
 the tendency of a really i?npr actio able code which 
 necessarily leads to dishonesty in words, is to pro- 
 duce the same in acts. For it is in vain I look all 
 through the New Testament for that constant ex- 
 hortation to fair- dealing in business and the common 
 affairs of life, which is so admirably insisted on in 
 Plato's last and greatest work on government, viz., 
 his Laivs. 6i The foundation of virtue," justice, as 
 Mr. Hurlbut well insinuates, is completely forgot- 
 ten in the constant exhortation to an unreasonable, 
 and if I may so speak, often unjust " charity."* 
 
 * The philosopher will also remark, that after asserting 
 that u looking on a woman to lust after her," is committing 
 adultery with her, we find that Christ dismissed a woman 
 actually taken in adultery without punishment or even sta- 
 ting that she deserved any ! A specimen this of " uncertainty 
 of meaning." There is also no scale of punishment, but 
 sins of the most unequal magnitude are all grouped toge- 
 ther as if of equal magnitude. Witness, for instance, the 
 expression, u Whoremongers and adulterers God will 
 judge," and another where " fornication and unnatural 
 lust" are put on the very same category. Cox says, " for- 
 nication, in the abstract, was not forbidden to the Jews," 
 and quotes Bishop Horsley, who says, " In the heathen 
 world it was never thought a crime, except it was accom- 
 panied by injury to a virgin's honour, or the violation of 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 23 
 
 3rdly. — By the progress of the arts and sciences 
 among us, we have gradually come to make the 
 science, as taught in scripture, totally untenable. 
 Galileo long ago suffered for that absurd passage 
 which makes the sun turn round the earth ; and at 
 the present day, Dr. Buckland among ourselves 
 was persecuted by opinion, because he attempted 
 to show that geology is totally at variance with the 
 recent formation of the earth, as asserted in Scrip- 
 ture. 
 
 Other absurdities in respect to science still, how- 
 ever, remain almost unnoticed ; such, for instance, 
 as, " Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." But 
 as modern science has shown that il animal mag- 
 netism" is for the most part an absurdity, so it will 
 reasonably declare the same of witchcraft. Yet 
 the numbers who have been put to death all over 
 Europe for this purely imaginary crime, are almost 
 inconceivable 
 
 Now, I would beg to ask, what is to prevent the 
 same murder again, when our missionaries have 
 introduced the Scriptures among savages ? Many 
 of these u religious" men still believe in this in- 
 fernal art, notwithstanding its absurdity ; and even 
 
 the marriage bed." Horsley praises the Christian religion 
 for making it a breach of natural morality. (Cox, p. 515.) 
 But Christianity has no practical effect in diminishing it, 
 (witness our London streets at night,) and even now the 
 vast proportion of men of sense secretly (at all events) con- 
 sider this " heathen" view the only rational one on the 
 subject. I do not by these remarks attempt to justify even 
 mere fornication, but what I say is, that ivith the present sys- 
 tem of society it is a necessity as the world itself shows. 
 Under such circumstances, when our Litany couples it with 
 all other " deadly sin" we at once see the lamentable reign 
 of Ano'lo-Saxon cant. If the woman is well provided for, it 
 is often, even now, no sin at all, especially when married 
 parties cannot agree well enough to live together, and being 
 Catholics, cannot marry again. 
 
24 LETTERS TO 
 
 suppose none of them did, savages are sure to do 
 so long after the introduction of the Scriptures. 
 And there in the holy book is the command of 
 death to all witches. The consequence is clear, 
 viz., that as the intensity of .faith is always greater 
 at first, and particularly among barbarous, ignorant 
 nations, the mischief of introducing Scriptures 
 containing such commands* among such a people 
 is obvious. 
 
 * One of the most frequent vices among savages, and 
 even among civilised nations, is dishonesty or fraud. But 
 that religion which says, " Let not your right hand know 
 what your left doeth," and also exhorts us to be " mild as 
 doves, and cunning as serpents," is surely not the school for 
 teaching fair dealing. 
 
 Again, Paley says it does not forbid war. But if it did 
 certainly do so, it would, in tliis respect, be a benefactor to 
 mankind. But here, as elsewhere, its ambiguity is a con- 
 stant curse to its beneficial effects. Instead of having 
 " brought life and immortality to light," it has enveloped 
 them in double darkness when its whole narration is con- 
 sidered. 
 
 There is no doubt that the best religion that can be 
 preached to savages is Theism, and at the same time such a 
 degree of physical science as shall prevent that fear of su- 
 pernatural agency which has been a principal cause of human 
 sacrifices, and other abominable religious rites. The nature 
 of thunder and lightning should be most especially explained 
 to them in reference to diminishing all fear of this being 
 sent to punish sin by an offended God. 
 
 This seems a far better way of creating an opinion in a 
 savage country against human sacrifices than by preaching 
 Christianity. Such opinion will eventually cause a law to 
 be made against such abominations ; and it is in reality law 
 that puts down such enormities with the great majority, 
 for religion acts on the consciences of the few, its rewards 
 and punishments being so remote. 
 
 I may take this opportunity to state that I have recom- 
 mended physical science to be taught to savages at the same 
 time with Theism, chiefly in consequence of the many 
 proofs of superstition found in the otherwise pure system 
 of religion enounced by Plato in his Republic and Laws. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 26 
 
 4thly. — As to the question, whether or not the 
 belief in Christianity is conducive to human hap- 
 piness (always supposing the power of any great 
 degree of persecution is as effectually suppressed 
 as it is by the constitution of the United States,) 
 there may be difference of opinion. The ground 
 for supporting such opinion will principally be 
 that the Christian faith teaches the certainty of a 
 future life, in which we shall be sure to meet our 
 departed relatives and friends again. But against 
 this good point, we may place the following, which 
 will make us decide that the belief in Christianity 
 (even under such a favourable government, for its 
 most beneficial operation as the '* States,") is not 
 desirable for human happiness. 
 
 This opinion is grounded on the fact, that it is 
 impossible, on account of the uncertainty of its 
 doctrines as above stated, to separate only the 
 good from the bad, that it seems to teach — the 
 sins or faults, as some people say, of its professors, 
 from the " pure doctrine" itself. 
 
 Thus, for instance, we find that even in the 
 States what may be called the most rational and 
 purest forms of the creed (viz., Unitarianism and 
 
 In this latter work, for instance, (p. 351, Traduction de 
 Grou, 1851,) Plato recommends that whoever is well 
 skilled in Divination, &c, &c, and would use such arts to 
 hurt any one should be put to death ! Had Plato studied 
 physical science more, he would have seen the fallacy of 
 " the occult sciences," and consequently never would have 
 made such a barbarous law. The fault was however in the 
 age in which he lived, for Plato knew as much as most men 
 on such points. Neither should the Theism preached to 
 savage tribes inculcate more than remotely God's provi- 
 dence, and that virtue and vice are to be punished hereafter, 
 and not now, and also in another world ; for it was from 
 teaching God's constant interference in human affairs, that 
 the barbarous " trial by combat" of the middle ages arose. 
 c 
 
26 LETTERS TO 
 
 Universalism) are still very unfashionable, to say 
 the least ; so that, strangely enough, opinion 
 punishes the sects much in proportion as they 
 attempt to set reason above " faith," and that too 
 in the most educated country in the world ! You 
 need only read Theodore Parker's sermon, Some 
 Account of my Ministry * to be convinced of the 
 great social persecution he has had to undergo, 
 for attempting to proceed a few steps further than 
 common Unitarianism, though he still upholds his 
 creed as Christian. His sect is still much smaller 
 than that of Unitarians in general, because it is 
 still more reasonable ; but (I use the expression 
 with great respect) he dare not openly advocate 
 pure Deism, or he would probably have no congre- 
 gation at all. 
 
 The Trinitarians then, and that abominable 
 form of them the Oalvinistic, constitute the decided 
 majority of Christians in the States. Thus the 
 doctrine that " sins committed against an infinite 
 Being deserve infinite punishment," is uppermost 
 there — a doctrine which, as Mrs. Barbauld justly 
 says, ' c no persons can have often in their thoughts 
 and be cheerful. "t 
 
 The celebrated Pinel said, " Nothing is more 
 common in hospitals than madness, produced by 
 
 * Theism, &c, &c. pp. 256-278. (Chapman, London. 
 1853.) 
 
 t Cox, p. 230-2. He rightly adds : ■" Such views intro- 
 duce a standard of moral feeling, totally different from 
 those ideas of praise or blame, upon which we do, and must 
 act, in our commerce with our fellow -creatures." (p. 232.) 
 It is by such ideas, that men have come to the belief that 
 sins against God deserve greater human punishment than 
 those committed against their fellow-creatures — a most 
 monstrous doctrine. It were far better to be of no religion 
 at all, than believe in such a creed. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 27 
 
 too exalted devotion, or by religious terrors."* 
 The truth of these remarks is fully borne out by 
 the madness produced by Calvinism some years 
 back, which appeared under the guise of the (i un- 
 known tongues ;" and latterly in the " States" the 
 journals assert that a species of frenzy, often ac- 
 companied by suicide, has arisen from too vivid a 
 belief in revealed religion, and supposed u spirit 
 rappings," as if the old fallacious belief, taught 
 by Christ himself, and which contributed much to 
 the spread of Christianity, that the destruction of 
 the world was at hand ! was reviving on the other 
 side the Atlantic. 
 
 I say, as it is impossible to separate the idea of 
 " eternity of punishments, the existence of a 
 devil, and that Jesus should before long come 
 back in the clouds of Heaven," from the belief of 
 Christianity itself, that the idea that this religion 
 gives, and will always continue to give, to a great 
 proportion of those who believe in it of a future 
 state, is not, on the whole, conducive to human 
 happiness. 
 
 Theodore Parker, from whom the above quota- 
 tion is taken, says, " I do not accept such belief 
 on the authority of Jesus ; yet I am ready to he- 
 lieve he taught itJ'\ If, then, Parker was obliged 
 to believe (no doubt contrary to his own wish) that 
 Christ taught the above doctrines, of course those 
 who almost wholly put aside reason, when they 
 take up scripture, cannot for a moment doubt that 
 such is really scriptural doctrine ; and " a very 
 comfortable creed," (as Lord Byron says,) this 
 indeed for our missionaries to teach savages. The 
 belief of a future state, as taught by the ancients, J 
 
 * Cox, p. 418. 
 
 t Op. Cit., p. 264. 
 
 % I observe that Sir C. Lyell (2nd Visit to the United 
 
28 LETTERS TO 
 
 has something far less repulsive about it than that; 
 of our Orthodox Christian, as the reading of the 
 6th book of Virgil's JEneid will show. Yet the 
 species of "purgatory" therein described was a 
 real and equally effectual punishment for sin ; and 
 gives a far more favourable idea of the justice, 
 as well as the mercy, of God. 
 
 othly. — But, it may be asked, is not Theodore 
 Parker s very liberal form of Unitarianism — re- 
 jecting as he does the belief in miracles, eternity 
 of punishments, and even the Divinity of Christ 
 to a further extent (if I may so express myself) 
 than Unitarians generally* — better than rejecting 
 it in toto, and confessing at once to a belief in 
 Deism only ? I think it is not ; and for the fol- 
 lowing reasons. Because it is tending to keep up 
 that hypocritical spirit in the States to which I 
 have before alluded, as disposing to lead to actual 
 
 States) says, speaking of "the absence of genuine religious 
 liberty" there, in which Cox justly agrees with him (Sab- 
 hath Laws, fyc, p. 394,) " that this can only be reformed 
 by educating the millions and dispelling their ignorance, 
 prejudices, and bigotry." This will be insufficient, as Sir 
 C. should well know ; for America is now the best educated 
 country in the world. No amelioration ever can take place 
 on this subject, until the influence of Christianity is re- 
 strained, and Deism put in the place it is entitled to, and 
 in which it would be put, if the laws were properly carried 
 out, or at least not made null by opinion. Cox has come 
 very far nearer the mark, when he says, (p. 396,) u the 
 fetters o/the clergy must be struck off" Now, of course 
 they are bound to say they believe Christianity, whether 
 they do or not ; and being some of the best educated 
 people in the States, it is much by their influence that a 
 belief in Christianity is kept up in the country. 
 
 * " Christ is not without errors, not without the stain of 
 his times, and, I presume, of course, not without si?is." 
 (Parker on Deism, &c, &c. p. 264:.) This last expression 
 is indeed a "clencher" for our pious Trinitarians. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 29 
 
 dishonesty in the affairs of life ;* for it is pretty 
 clear that, though Mr. Parker thinks it a fit, or 
 perhaps necessary, sacrifice to public opinion to 
 put a scripture text to the head of each of his 
 Sermons, he puts little or no belief in the book 
 from which such texts are taken, any further than 
 as he conceives he finds in it better morality than 
 in the writings of the heathen philosophers. " I 
 reverence the Christian Church/' says he, " for 
 the great good it has done for mankind. So the 
 Mahomedan, for a far less good. I reverence the 
 scriptures for every word of truth they teach." 
 (Op. Cit., p. 264.) 
 
 Now mark the words, " every word of truth 
 they teach," and we shall be convinced he thinks 
 they teach a great deal that is not true. Indeed 
 he admits this by implication, and, to a certain 
 extent, by open confession, as we have already 
 seen. 
 
 * A good illustration of this is seen at p. 64 of Mr. 
 Parker's work. He says: "A man of property in Boston 
 dishonestly failed, 1 ' and yet legally secured considerable 
 property to himself, after having paid only sixpence or a 
 shilling on the dollar ; one creditor only not giving him a 
 discharge. Our bankrupt afterwards turned very religious, 
 and when, in consequence, was applied to again by the creditor 
 for payment, replied, " Business is business, and is for the 
 week, 1 ' and " Religion for Sunday;" and "paid him not 
 a cent." 
 
 Truly, in the States, as with us, more religion is wanted 
 behind the counter, and it should not be shut up six days 
 in the week with our churches. 
 
 Jesus told a rich man to sell all he had, to give to the 
 poor. Now the consideration of this fact, as it is called in 
 Christian history, will show equally as the above anecdote, 
 what profound hypocrisy is at the bottom of all the so- 
 called belief in Christianity. What rich man among our 
 most pious professing Christians does this? Yet he will 
 still presume to call himself a Christian ! 
 
30 LETTERS TO 
 
 Now, under such circumstances, may we not 
 reasonably ask, if Christ be wrong once or twice, 
 why may he not also be wrong in that most im- 
 portant doctrine of all that he teaches ; I mean a 
 state of future rewards and punishments ? Mr. 
 Parker's view, therefore, makes the authority of 
 Plato quite as great, as a teacher of a future state 
 of rewards and punishments, as that of Christ ; 
 and as, on the whole, I find a much better view 
 o$ justice in the "Laws" of Plato than in the 
 Old or New Testament, I prefer setting these aside 
 altogether, and at once stating that I think man- 
 kind in general would be happier in following the 
 same course ; since, either on Mr. Parkers view of 
 Christianity* or mine, a future state of being is 
 reduced only to & probability. 
 
 So far we are equal; but I conceive I have an 
 infinite advantage over him, because in adopting 
 the Natural Keligion of Plato, I get free in toto 
 of that latent spirit of persecution, which we have 
 already seen, attaches always more or less to a 
 belief in any form of Christianity. f In this re- 
 spect, while I give Mr. Parker's system credit for 
 
 * Another point on which I cannot exactly agree with 
 Mr. Parker is in his estimate of human nature. I am 
 afraid he thinks too highly of this. (See introduction, 
 p. xxv., and p. 77.) 
 
 t Philosophically considered, this makes Christianity the 
 inveterate and incurably mad foe of justice ; and thus its 
 advocacy even of charity becomes really pernicious, instead 
 of being (as it is considered by superficial thinkers) its 
 great merit. You need only look at the tendency many 
 children, and also grown up persons, have to begin injustice, 
 and when we consider that Christianity would have us be 
 charitable to theae, its tendency actually to increase the 
 amount of injustice in the world is clear. 
 
 Perhaps the account of the Devil's entering u the herd 
 of swine," by which means a man lost his property, may be 
 justly cited as evidence that Christianity tends actually to 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 31 
 
 less evil than any other view, I cannot exonerate 
 it altogether, since his followers will always, no 
 doubt, be comparatively few, and missionaries — 
 whether Protestant or Catholic — who go among 
 ignorant and barbarous savages, will ever, no 
 doubt, continue to do as they have already done, 
 viz.. to preach the scriptures as the inspired word 
 of God. 
 
 In reading Mr. Parker's Sermon on Practical 
 Theism, (Op. Git., pp. 125-149,^ I find not one 
 word about the superiority that his view of Chris- 
 tianity possesses over this of mere Natural Reli- 
 gion. I confess I am induced to regard such 
 silence as a proof, or least a presumption, that Mr. 
 Parker is, in reality, himself only a Theist ; and 
 that, like his distinguished predecessors — Wash- 
 ington and Jefferson — he thinks the scriptures 
 should not be put aside altogether, as the belief in 
 them by the multitude may be a public good. 
 With great respect for Mr. Parker, it is because I 
 cannot share in this opinion that I have written as 
 I have done.* 
 
 favour injustice and dishonesty. Particularly as no where 
 does it exhort to justice, but only to charity. 
 
 Again, unfortunately as Christians should return good 
 for evil, they too often determine to be beforehand* and 
 give evil unprovoked ! Our holy religion scarcely notices 
 this gross injustice as sin. Before being injured, annoyance 
 or injury is nothing ; 'tis after ! that we must turn meekly 
 our cheek. 
 
 * I observe at p. 281 of his work, that Mr. Parker con- 
 siders the idea of a finite God as an injurious tenet ; and 
 his reason for this is, that it has commonly caused priests 
 to make the Devil a more powerful being. But if we be- 
 lieve in the Devil only as a fable, then it seems rather advi- 
 sable to believe in a finite God ; for, unless we do this, 
 (and with Plato regard matter as a sort of Devil offering 
 obstruction to a perfect creation,) we can scarcely make out 
 by reason a truly benevolent deity — in fact, a Moral Power, 
 
32 LETTERS TO 
 
 6thly. — Id reviewing the pros and cons in 
 favour of Christianity, as useful to the world, the 
 annoyance or inconvenience caused by the strict 
 observance of the Sabbath is, perhaps, a matter of 
 secondary consideration to many. But it must be 
 remembered, that the absence of Sunday amuse- 
 ments, and also of slight Sunday labour (see 
 #0tebelow since added in reference to the labourer 
 fined), falls hardest on the poor man, and that 
 this hardship, so to call it, may be considered, as 
 at all events, an indirect consequence of a belief 
 in the scriptures,* since on account of the ambi- 
 
 * But a most important objection to our puritanical ob- 
 servance of this day is, as the Times lately said, (without 
 censure of course), that " the debtor walks free on a 
 Sunday, and on that day, no corn is carted, though it may 
 possibly be very wet on the Monday." In accordance with 
 this, I observe that an old labouring man is fined 12s. 6d. 
 for mowing his own field on that day. (Observer, Sept., 1855J 
 
 So under the cant of religion, even our government per- 
 mits an actual injustice to creditors ; clearly imbued with 
 the bad spirit of the religion adverted to lately in a note, 
 that it prefers u charity" — (i. e., a perversion of real 
 charity) to justice. If there was any really good religion as 
 to our Sabbath law, why are spirits and beer allowed to be 
 sold on a Sunday evening ? They no doubt, bring a revenue 
 to government ; but of course, in many cases, cause 
 drunkenness. And while all this is permitted, u by the 
 21 of George III., it is enacted, that no house be open for 
 entertainment or amusement, or publicly debating on any 
 subject." (Cox, p. 334.) So that even quiet rational 
 debate " De Officiis " — on the moral duties of life, — or 
 on the nature of justice — is illegal in what we call our free 
 and religious country ! More strictly " religious" than 
 moral, no doubt. Ye glorious shades of the ancients, who 
 spent your whole lives in the search after the honest and 
 the just, and found even these too short for your enquiries, 
 what must ye think of this separation of religion and 
 morality ! Modern civilisation, indeed ! it consists only in 
 our steam engines and railroads. I may conclude this 
 note by adverting to another positive injury, that this puri- 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 33 
 
 ^guity in the meaning of these, Puritanical or Cal- 
 vinistic Christians will probably always exist, and 
 will attempt to show by scripture, that the puri- 
 tanical observance of the Sabbath is the Christian's 
 duty. 
 
 When in 1681, Penn was made sovereign of the 
 settlement in the United States, by Charles II, he 
 required that the inhabitants should only acknow- 
 ledge their belief in the existence of God, and 
 fulfil all the duties of civil society, and that thev 
 were left at liberty to join in public worship or 
 not. (Voltaire's Phil. Diet., Art , Church. J 
 
 It is singular, that in a colony belonging to a 
 monarchy with an established church, perhaps 
 more toleration in religion was then allowed by 
 opinion, than at present under a Eepublic. 
 
 Voltaire properly prefers such toleration to that 
 allowed by Locke in his constitution for Carolina. 
 
 tanical Christianity has inflicted on mankind, and conse- 
 quently, I may also put this evil along with those which 
 Christianity itself has inflicted, since while it exists, there 
 will no doubt always exist some sects who will embrace 
 such puritanical view of it. 
 
 I allude to our refusing in Britain, equally as they do in 
 the " States," to have medical examinations of the public 
 women. Religion, as it is called, is at the bottom of 
 this false delicacy with us no doubt ; for since even for- 
 nication is such " deadly sin," and as the existence of 
 siphilitic disease may tend in a degree to stop fornication, our 
 government being founded on such views of religion, will 
 not sanction the examination in question, as they do on the 
 continent, where there is less prof ession of religion. I al- 
 lude to this point chiefly, because the disease in question 
 being more or less hereditary as all medical men know, the 
 innocent are made by such false religion to suffer ior the 
 guilty, (see Lancet, 1847.) 
 
 Again — without pretending to justify Lord Nelson in toto, 
 it is clear the country was unjust to his innocent daughter, 
 chieflv in consequence of our Christianity, 
 c 2 
 
34 LETTERS TO 
 
 In this, (< no public religions, but such as were 
 approved of by seven fathers of families, were to 
 be permitted. " (Op. cit. idem,) 
 
 Eeligious toleration, (if changed) has probably 
 rather diminished, than increased in the United 
 States since the time of Penn — since the theatres 
 remain closed on Sundays in all the Protestant 
 States. As this depends on a majority of votes, 
 it seems strictly constitutional in this sense ; but 
 in point of religious justice, it may be fairly con- 
 sidered, that the Catholic part of the population — 
 though of course in the minority — should have the 
 power of keeping one theatre open for themselves, 
 otherwise all religions are not equal in the United 
 States. If it be said ; on this principle, Maho- 
 medanism and its polygamy might be admitted as 
 equal to Christianity; I reply no; because poly- 
 gamy is contrary to the civil laiv of the country, 
 and besides, this would be altering the idea of 
 duty between the sexes. But merely giving a re- 
 ligious community the power to pass the Sabbath 
 according to their interpretation of scripture, 
 when such interpretation does not alter the idea 
 of duty or justice among the sexes, is altogether 
 different, since theatrical representation does not 
 infringe upon any of the practical duties of life 
 between man and man, or man and woman. 
 
 Besides, be it remembered, that the Protestants 
 of Germany, (the country where Luther arose), 
 have their theatres and public ball-rooms open on 
 the Sabbath evenings, when divine service is over. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 35 
 
 LETTER TIT. 
 
 Citizens, — I shall now proceed to consider the 
 good that Christianity, with the greatest show of 
 reason, may be considered to have done in the 
 world, and weigh this against the evil already 
 spoken of. 
 
 1st.— As despotism or a government nearly 
 allied to it, must always be that of the vast ma- 
 jority of mankind, does not Christianity exercise 
 a salutary influence in checking the licentiousness 
 of absolute power ? 
 
 2ndly. — Has not Christianity tended to abolish 
 animal and even human sacrifices ? and has it not, 
 as Paley (Evidences, Chap, vii.) says — tended 
 to diminish the horrors of war by increasing hu- 
 manity to captives ? And has it in reality produced 
 some other good effects he mentions ? 
 
 3rdly — Is not the inculcation of the certainty 
 of a future state of rewards and punishments, one 
 good it has done ? 
 
 In reference to the first point, it may be ob- 
 served, that when we consider the atrocities of 
 Nero, Caligula, and id genus omne, of Eoman 
 Emperors, and compare such conduct with the 
 course of life of the Emperors of Russia and 
 Austria at the present day, the advantage on some 
 points is so mach in favour of these latter, that at 
 first sight, we are apt to say this difference can 
 only be owing to the Christianity of our days. 
 
36 LETTERS TO 
 
 Some years back, I took this view myself; but 
 that it is not the correct one is shown when we 
 reflect that the atrocities of our own " most Chris- 
 tian" Henry VIII. rival those of the Eoman 
 Emperors alluded to. At the present day, then, 
 we have no more Henry VIII. s in England, nor 
 even in Russia or Austria, on account, not of the 
 Christianity of Europe, but because of the spirit 
 of the age dependant on the progress the arts 
 and sciences have inade — those real and true 
 civilisers of mankind. That mere Christianity 
 cannot civilise, is shown by the barbarism of the 
 Abyssinians of the present day, who have long 
 been Christians ; it is shown-also by the barbarism 
 of the " Middle Ages," still more eminently 
 Christian. Nobody doubts the Christianity of 
 Calvin ; yet we find a follower of the lowly Jesus 
 ordering Servetus to be burnt, because he differed 
 from him merely in the interpretation of the 
 ' scriptures. In like manner, as in the Spanish In- 
 quisition, we have evidence of atrocious murders 
 committed by Catholics on Protestants : so even 
 under the Protestant Elizabeth, we have similar, 
 though less numerous instances, as the Rev. 
 Sidney Smith (a Protestant) justly says,* of Pro- 
 testants ordering the death, or expatriation and 
 confiscation of the goods of Catholics. These, 
 no doubt, are deaths and persecutions on account 
 of differences in religious opinions; but as the 
 
 * Letter on the Catholic question — quoted in Cox's 
 work, from p. 462 to 467. The whole number of Catholics 
 who have suffered death in England, for the exercise of 
 their rzligion! since the reformation, he makes to be 319, 
 204 of these being under the reign of Elizabeth, so that 
 Lord Brougham in his Political Philosophy, p. 263, vol. Ill 
 justly says, this is proof how little real progress in " con- 
 stitutional liberty" was made even in her reign. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 37 
 
 whole of the criminal jurisprudence of these ages 
 still Christian, was equally despotic and severe,* 
 it is a proof that it is not Christianity but the 
 spirit of the age, that makes the despotic power of 
 the Emperors of Russia and Austria at the present 
 day, less formidable than was that of the Roman 
 Emperors. 
 
 Another cause for this, still quite independant of 
 Christianity is, that in modern times, despotic 
 power is restrained by the division of Europe into 
 different States, some like France, Switzerland, and 
 our own country, governed with a greater or less 
 degree of liberty. The consequence is, .that 
 public opinion emanating from these, influences or 
 restrains any disposition to very gross acts of 
 tyranny and injustice in the more purely despotic 
 Empires. But, as Gibbon says — since Rome, under 
 the Emperors comprised the whole of the known 
 civilised world, the despotism of a Nero could 
 receive no salutary check from the opinion of 
 foreign and independent States. 
 
 Lord Brougham (Political Philosophy .Vol. III., 
 p. 104. London, 1846.) says, in reference to this 
 point, (and mark he does not place Chris tianity 
 among the causes) , " It is quite impossible that 
 in any government, however despotically framed, 
 the sciences, the arts, the learning, the moral and 
 political knowledge of the people should increase, 
 and with these their comforts, possessions, and 
 enjoyments, without the wish being communicated 
 to them of bettering their conditions politically. 
 * * To imagine that if Turkey were completely 
 civilised, and men possessed the wealth and the 
 knowledgef that bless Western Europe even under 
 
 * Torture and death were common for comparatively 
 slight offences. 
 
 t We find here he says " knowledge," and justly ; for 
 
38 LETTERS TO 
 
 its most absolute monarchies, a Bashaw could be 
 sent into any province to enrich himself by plunder 
 and confiscation, securing impunity by suffering 
 the common master to pillage him in turn, is 
 wholly absurd. * * It is not going too far to 
 affirm that the Sultan, it is certain that the 
 Bashaw of Egypt, rules by himself and his officers 
 very different from the Tamerlanes of a former age. 
 Compare the mild reign of the present Prussian 
 sovereign with that of his predecessors a century 
 ago, and you will be satisfied that however little 
 the form of that great military monarchy has 
 changed, no prince royal could now be called forth 
 to see his favourite strangled beneath his window 
 for the gratification of a father's splenetic humour. 
 No Baron Trenck could be immured in a dungeon 
 
 I have always maintained, although their polygamy is 
 an evil, that the main cause of the decline of the Turkish 
 Empire, is in their not having favoured the progress of the 
 sciences ; for now the art of war depends more on chemistry 
 and mathematics than it did formerly. Religion has had 
 nothing to do with it farther than that Christianity, in re- 
 commending as it does, ignorance and self-abasement, has 
 never teen followed by Protestant Christians, or even by 
 Catholic Christians in France. Had Christianity been fol- 
 lowed to the letter it would have kept mankind in a worse 
 state than the Mahomedan religion has kept it. The Em- 
 peror of Russia has encouraged the progress of the sciences, 
 and well I remember meeting at Constantinople a professor 
 sent out by him to explore and write about the unknown 
 parts of Asia Minor. So that no doubt this gentleman re • 
 turned home with more information about the country than 
 the Turks themselves who lived there. u Ignorance is the 
 mother of devotion," and though I don't think the Koran 
 is more inimical to knowledge than our Scriptures are, still, 
 in consequence of their ignorance, the Turks having had 
 stronger faith in it, have followed their religion more to the 
 letter, and, consequently, to their own disadvantage. The 
 absolute Russian Emperor's religion, like our own, is fol- 
 lowed only so far as interest or expediency dictates, though, 
 of course, professed to be followed to the letter. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 39 
 
 for twenty years because he found favour in the 
 eyes of a princess. Eussia is as despotically go- 
 verned as any European prince could now venture 
 to rule his people ; yet there is no possibility of a 
 Czar beheading his mutinous guards with his own 
 hand, or of a prime minister being sent in the 
 night to Siberia with his family, because a new 
 cabinet had been called into office. 
 
 " The first step in the general and inevitable 
 change has been made in all these countries. The 
 government generally remains the same, but the 
 exercise of absolute power is tempered and re- 
 strained by the improved spirit of the age, by the 
 force of opinion abroad as well as at home, and 
 above all, by the great improvement in the know- 
 ledge, manners, and character of the people over 
 whom those governments are established." 
 
 I may observe that the father of Frederick the 
 Great, who ordered the unjust execution alluded to, 
 was so pious a Christian, that he obliged. a Unitarian 
 to be imprisoned for his heresy ; * yet Nero him- 
 self could hardly have behaved more brutally or 
 unjustly than the Prussian king in ordering the 
 execution in question. 
 
 Further on in the same volume, Lord Brougham, 
 after noticing the abominable murders (so to call 
 them) committed by order of Henry VIII., viz^oi 
 Bishop Fisher, Sir Thomas More, Dr. Barnes, 
 Cromwell, and others, male and female — makes 
 the following statements, which will fully bear us 
 out in our argument, viz., that the atrocities com- 
 mitted by some Christian kings, often in reality 
 for causes quite independent of differences in reli- 
 gious faith, have been quite as unjustifiable and 
 
 * See Life and Times of Frederick the Great, in 4 vols 
 edited by Thomas Campbell. (Shoberl, London.) 
 
40 LETTERS TO 
 
 criminal,* as many of the acts of the worst of the 
 Pagan emperors of Rome. Hence, whatever ame- 
 lioration there is now, must not be ascribed, as is 
 insidiously and falsely done by most writers^ Vj 
 Christianity, that religion having existed in even 
 stronger force then, than it does at present. 
 
 " The king," says Brougham, (p. 255), " by 
 proclamation, might make any opinion heretical, 
 and might denounce death as the penalty of hold- 
 ing it." And to increase this infamy, Cromwell 
 and Barnes were " allowed no hearing ;" the im- 
 imputed " treason and heresy " of the former only 
 beginning to appear when Henry VIII. got tired 
 
 * Under the tyranny of the Norman governors, u the 
 Saxons in 1124, particularly, were despoiled of their pos- 
 sessions, then butchered. Whoever had any property lost 
 it by heavy taxes and unjust decrees." (Hallani's Middle 
 Ages, Chap, viii., p. 31.). So " Peter the Cruel of Spain, 
 (1350.) is said to have murdered his wife, most of his brothers 
 and sisters, withEleonorGusman their mother, many Casti- 
 lian nobles, and multitudes of the commonalty." (Hallam's 
 Middle Ages, chap, iv., p. 277). So " Charlemagne, 
 (a. d. 800), ordered 4000 Saxons to be beheaded in one 
 day ; and (to recur to the bad effects of Christianity), pro- 
 nounced pain of death against those who refused baptism, 
 or who ate flesh during lent." (Do. p. 9.) A proof that 
 force of the strongest kind was used at that time to convert 
 to Christianity. We find too that the sovereign, u rather 
 encouraged, and the clergy for the most part approved ," of 
 that gross injustice, trial by combat. (Do. p. 134, note.) 
 
 u During the time that a crusader bore the cross, he was 
 free from suit for his debts, and the interest of them was 
 entirely abolished. He could not be impleaded, except on 
 criminal charges." Such was the spirit of legislation due to 
 Christianity; not much restraining murder in these ages, and 
 greatly (p. 24.) encouraging such injustice as would not for a 
 moment have been tolerated by the good Pagan emperors, 
 neither would dispensations from oaths ; and we find 
 Edward I. seeking such from Clement V., who grants the 
 king power not to observe his oath in reference to arbitrary 
 taxation. (Chap, vii,, p. 411.) So also Henry III., chap. viii. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 41 
 
 of Anne of Cleves, whom Cromwell had recom- 
 mended him to marry. This word " heresy," so 
 misused indeed, gave the hypocritical tyrant a 
 show of reason on his side with the ignorant mul- 
 titude, which might contribute to strengthen his 
 power with them — the most numerous class, and 
 which moral power, the Koman emperors neither 
 got, nor tried to get on their side.* Accordingly 
 we find this monster, quietly having his own way 
 to the last, (above thirty years,) and dying a na- 
 tural death ! while some of the worst of the Eoman 
 emperors — as Caligula, Nero, Tiberius,f Domitian, 
 
 * The Romans saw, after the murder of Caligula, how diffi- 
 cult it was to produce that unanimity essential to a republic, 
 and accordingly Claudius was almost forced against his 
 will, to succeed as emperor. (Suetonius. Claudius.) The 
 army, generally speaking, prefered the " Empire ;" they 
 elected those they pleased, and if the new emperor became 
 very bad, he was assassinated. Doubtless the army in this, 
 had too much power ; but still it was a system of wild 
 justice ; and being in some little degree elective kept up the 
 idea of liberty, (and men are governed by words), which 
 idea was supported by their assumed right, if he proved bad, 
 of putting him aside by death. 
 
 t This emperor reigned, indeed, twenty-three years. 
 living seventy-eight years ; and was smothered by Macro. 
 But even Taci«Vus says, that " he was amiable when a private 
 man, and esteemed under the reign of Augustus. " (Annals 
 vi. end.) It is also to be observed, that for many years, 
 (at least nine), after he became emperor, he governed with 
 great moderation, and assumed humility, refusing twice the 
 title of emperor. One of the worst laws in his reign, (but 
 acted on slightly towards the close of the reign of Augustus,) 
 as far as the great majority of the people were concerned, 
 was the system of " informing," whereby a person might be 
 arrested for mere words of disrespect towards the emperor. 
 But even in this case, Gibbon tells us (chap, xliv.) that, 
 " when they committed suicide to escape capital punish- 
 ment, their wills were valid, and their act was applauded." 
 
 These reflections will account in a measure for so long a 
 reign ; and without attempting to justify many of the acts 
 
42 LETTERS TO 
 
 and Commodus, at least suffered a just death by the 
 hands of their oppressed subjects. I maintain, 
 therefore, that since these monsters were made to 
 suffer for their crimes on earth, the Roman popu- 
 
 of the latter part of this emperor's reign, it is obvious that 
 his suspicion and hatred of mankind, began on the solid 
 grounds of the poisoning of his worthy and innocent son, 
 and was subsequently strengthened by the conspiracy of 
 Sejanus (the man whom he had loaded with honours) 
 against him. As he was sixty -six or sixty -seven when he 
 went to live at Capri, it may also be asked, whether the 
 accounts of his licentiousness there, were not a little (to say 
 the least) exaggerated? 
 
 It is worthy of observation, that Pliny the younger, and 
 the moral Tacitus himself lived during the whole reign of 
 Domitian, (fifteen years), we may almost say at court ; for 
 Murphy observes, (p. viii.) both of them " rose to emi- 
 nence" under him. It may, therefore be asked, whether 
 the crimes, even of this man, have not rather been over- 
 charged, or would it have been possible for a person like 
 Tacitus especially, to suffer " his fortune to be advanced " 
 (Murphy) by him? (See my remarks on the reign of 
 Domitian. — Roman Emperors). On this subject we must never 
 forget, that even under the worst emperors, there was no reli- 
 gious despotism. Tacitus complains, in reference to " infor- 
 mers," (book i., sec. 72), that " till the latter part of the reign 
 of Augustus, men were arraigned for their actions, but 
 their thoughts were free.'''' But these " informers" were not 
 anything like so intolerable as " inquisitors ," and much more 
 justifiable, since they arose from the natural tendency of all 
 power to wish to keep so. The ancients then were free even 
 from the milder inquisition by opinion of Protestantism. 
 Besides, we have already seen, that the natural liberty of 
 man in regard to suicide was respected ; and it is singular, 
 that there was a mixture of quasi generosity, even with the 
 very crimes of Tiberius and Nero, in this respect, for says 
 Tacitus, (An. vi. — 29.) u those who waited incurred a for- 
 feiture, and were deprived of sepulture, while to such as 
 died by their own hand, funeral ceremonies were allowed, 
 (in my late quotation from Gibbon, this favour is not named 
 by him, yet it should have been), and wills were valid." 
 Such," adds Tacitus, (in the spirit of an ancient Roman, 
 applauding such liberty), " was the reward of despatch." 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 43 
 
 lation was not as a whole so oppressed by them as 
 our population was under the Christian Henry the 
 VIII. This view again, is generally completely 
 overlooked by our ex-parte Christian historians. 
 
 In allusion to the Star Chamber under this mo- 
 narch, Brougham justly observes ; — " Not only 
 did the Plantagenets and Tudors commit to prison, 
 or ransom for heavy fines, those against whom 
 they conceived an ill will, thus signally violating 
 the most remarkable provisions of the Great 
 Charter ; but they exercised a like control over 
 Members of Parliament who had offended them, 
 and jurors who had given verdicts displeasing to 
 them. A capital jurisdiction was never exercised 
 by them, at least, directly ; but it really amounted 
 to the same thine/, whether they sentenced ob- 
 noxious men to death, or compelled timid jurors 
 to find them guilty through dread of personal con- 
 sequences." {Op. Cit., p. 258). 
 
 No doubt, it amounted to the same thing. Even 
 after the monster had reigned thirty years ! and 
 separated from Rome, as he called it, five years, 
 " his submissive parliament," enabled him to pass 
 the " bloody act," in which it was stated, that 
 " if any person once denied the real presence, 
 though he afterwards confessed his error and re- 
 canted, he was liable to be burnt."* {Op. Cit. 
 p. 262.) 
 
 I may observe, that bad as such " informing'' was, it still 
 tended, as respects suicide, to keep up the Roman 
 courage. u That act was never " (says Murphy) " punished 
 by law, or opinion, among the Romans." Antoninus, how- 
 ever, in the case of a convicted criminal, punished it by 
 confiscation ; and if a man had been guilty of murder, &c, 
 this was a wise andjust check on it. 
 
 *. Voltaire's opinion of the Parliament of Henry VUL, 
 and the king himself, is similar to that of Brougham. " He 
 had his brother beheaded," says he, " for incest, when 
 
44 LETTERS TO 
 
 The <c submissive parliament," in such a case, 
 was, as already hinted at, an advantage to a bloody 
 despot, which the Roman emperors had not, since 
 it gave a certain degree of moral support to 
 the greatest villany. Men are far better off un- 
 der an absolute despotism, than under a hypocri- 
 tical mixed monarchy, in which the parliament 
 has in reality no power ; for in the former case, 
 even the most ignorant know at once the origin of 
 their ills, and can sooner or later find time or op- 
 portunity to strike accordingly, as we find they 
 did under some of the worst of the Roman empe- 
 rors. Nay, as the impunity with which this English 
 monster reigned, was probably much more owing to 
 the influence of the Christian priesthood in the 
 country, than to actual fear of his subjects to 
 revolt, we have here an instance probably of the 
 baneful effects of this religion on a despotism, 
 rather than the contrary. It was the duty of the 
 clergy, no doubt, to read as the direct command of 
 God — ft Thou shalt do no murder/' and also 
 (Romans xiii., c. 2.) fi be subject to the higher 
 powers ; for the powers that be are ordained of 
 God, * * and they that resist shall receive to them- 
 selves damnation. " So that under such circum- 
 stances, an ignorant population might actually 
 have the desire to injure the crowned monster, 
 taken away or diminished, even if it had the 
 courage. 
 
 '• The experience or the humanity of the last 
 century/' says Professor F. W. Newman,* " has 
 
 there was not the least proof of guilt." (Essai sur les 
 Mceurs. Henry VIII.) 
 
 * Contrasts of Ancient and Modern History, p. 79. — 
 Taylor, Gower Street ; and Holyoake, Fleet Street, 1847. 
 For my part, I will " contrast " Henry VIII. with any of 
 the worst of the Pagan Roman emperors, and of the two, I 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 45 
 
 led moralists and all educated persons, heartily to 
 renounce the ancient and once current doctrine of 
 Tyrannicide, and upon this has followed the 
 adoption of milder measures towards unconstitu- 
 tional statesmen. Men possessed of arbitrary 
 2)0 wer are no longer driven to despair : and even 
 the unprincipled become less dangerous." 
 
 Although Professor Newman does not mention 
 Christianity, yet it seems probable that this has, 
 in the case in question, really had an influence ;_ 
 for surely Tyrannicide is an ti- scriptural, and it has 
 not been so common for only " one century," but 
 for many, as it was under Paganism. But when 
 reflecting on the conduct of Henry VIII., I cannot 
 agree with the learned Professor, that the change 
 in opinion on this matter is an advantage to the 
 community.* Probably be is right in the Eoman 
 
 think should have preferred their rule. Under such go- 
 vernment, I should at least have avoided that most disgust- 
 ing and annoying spectacle of every day occurrence, viz., the 
 sight of people really or only hypocritically religious, and 
 whose religion taught them that it was right to " obey a 
 ruler," however great a villain he might be ! The Pagans, 
 at least, were free from such insensate cant. " The dis- 
 tinction of spiritual and temporal powers," says Gibbon, 
 (Chap. xx.). " which had never been imposed on the free 
 spirit of Greece and Rome, was introduced by the legal 
 establishment of Christianity." According to the same his- 
 torian, (Chap, xvi.) even the Jews, (even after their fre- 
 quent rebellions), were probably still better off than they 
 are now under our government, since under Antoninus 
 Pius, they " could enjoy municipal honours, &c, &c.," 
 whereas a Jew cannot sit in our parliament. 
 
 * As since 1847, the Professor seems to have become 
 less inclined to adopt even the Unitarian view of Chris- 
 tianity, it is not impossible, that if the work quoted reap- 
 pears in a second edition, he will modify this and many 
 other opinions in it, which appears to me inseparable from 
 even the Unitarian belief of Christianity. 
 
46 LETTERS TO 
 
 and Greek tyrants having been driven " to (the 
 ferocity of) despair* by it ; but still, as I apprehend, 
 the crimes of Henry VIII., (though necessarily on 
 a smaller scale as being in a smaller country), are 
 fully equal to those of the worst of the Pagan 
 Koman emperors, I think as the English people 
 could not have suffered much more by such 
 " despair " they would have been better off in 
 not having regarded Tyrannicide in such a case, 
 as a heinous sin. 
 
 On this point then, again, I insist that Chris- 
 tianity has, in reality, been actually disadvantageous 
 to the world ; though I would by no means be 
 understood as considering Tyrannicide justifiable, 
 except in such extreme cases as those of a 
 Henry VEIL, a Nero, or Caligula.* Nor even, 
 
 * Another point that suggests itself is, the very short 
 time, (as likewise Elagabalus after him), that this emperor 
 was allowed to pursue his enormities, viz., only four years, 
 being killed at the age of twenty-nine ; and even the first 
 years of this short reign were passed in doing good, 
 viz., suppressing " informers," and by repealing some of 
 the unjust convictions produced by the suspicion that poi- 
 soned the mind of Tiberius in his latter years. Again — 
 though Nero, at the age of thirty -three, was forced to 
 suicide, and reigned (like Domitian) 14 or 15 years, yet 
 all agree that the first years of both these emperors also, 
 were passed in doing good to the empire. It was the same 
 with Commodus, who only reigned fourteen years before he 
 was killed, and probably would not have been tolerated so 
 long, had he not been the son of Marcus Aurelius, for his 
 unprovoked cruelty was abominable. I assert then, that the 
 reign of all the really bad Roman emperors was, comparatively 
 speaking, short ; and even the one (Tiberius), who reigned 
 like our Henry VIII. , above thirty years, did not, like him, 
 die quietly in bed. To be sure, now and then, some of the 
 good emperors (as Pertinax and Aurelian) were assassi- 
 nated ; but not more frequently than happens in Christian times 
 and the long reigns of Augustus, the Antonines, Trajan, 
 Adrian, Septimius Severus, and Diocletian, show, that the 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 47 
 
 indeed, with such characters as these, if the go- 
 vernment be sufficiently strong to punish them hy 
 exile, as the French government proved itself to be 
 in the case of Charles X. and Louis Philippe, and 
 subsequently (in reference to the people) under 
 Napoleon III., in the case of the exiles to Cayenne. 
 Professor Newman's opinion, then, and my own, 
 on this head, may not be different, supposing by 
 " milder measures/' he means exile ; but not so, 
 if he would advocate the Christian system taken 
 literally, viz., unconditional submission as a duty. 
 It is fair, however, to state in reference to this 
 point, that as some degree of good seems inevitably 
 mixed with the bad in all sublunary things — in all 
 schemes of government, and in all religions — so it 
 must be admitted, that the same Christian influ- 
 ence which has diminished Tyrannicide, has also 
 been far more beneficial in rendering it more diffi- 
 cult for a despotic ruler to take away the life of an 
 innocent man, than it was formerly under the 
 Pagan system. He must at present pursue the 
 more round- about plan, and often be obliged to 
 diminish the number of his victims. I do not, 
 however, apprehend, that this good can be put in 
 competition with the evil produced by the very 
 same influence, viz., the prohibition of Tyrannicide, 
 under any circumstance whatever, and also of 
 Infanticide, where infants are born even in a state 
 of deformity. On the whole, I must decidedly 
 place the greater respect to preserving human life 
 among the evil effects of Christianity. 
 
 Turning now to the question, whether Chris- 
 tianity has not effected good by abolishing animal 
 
 assassination of the good was perhaps even still less com- 
 mon than under Christianity. Had Charles I. and Louis 
 XVI., been less humane, they would probably not have 
 been killed. 
 
48 LETTERS TO 
 
 and even human sacrifice, I am inclined to reply 
 in the affirmative, considering the world generally, 
 and not the Roman empire in particular. Paley,* 
 on this point, merely says : — "It has suppressed the 
 combats of gladiators, and the impurities of reli- 
 gious rites." He does not advert in any other 
 words to the abominable human sacrifices that pre- 
 vailed, more or less, all over the world before its 
 introduction. At Carthage, among the Druids, the 
 Hindoos, &c, the introduction of such a religious 
 system as prohibited these sacrifices was obviously 
 a benefit, and though Mahomedanism did the same, 
 it was after Christianity, and perhaps borrowed 
 from it. But unfortunately Spain in introducing 
 Christianity into the new world, proceeded by a 
 system of butchery which was as bad, or worse, 
 than the human sacrifices the new religion put down. 
 In admitting the utility of Christianity as a 
 general principle on this point, I have excluded, 
 as just stated, all reference to the Eoman Empire ; 
 and as the object of this Essay was more especi- 
 ally to compare Pagan with Christian civilization, 
 this is equivalent to admitting that the introduc- 
 tion of Christianity in the Eoman Empire did, in 
 reality, little good on this point, and for the 
 simple reason, that the Romans scarcely ever re- 
 sorted to such barbarities, and even when they did, 
 prisoners of war (who would otherwise have been 
 put to death) were used. As, however, when a 
 
 * (Supposed Effects of Christianity. — Chap, vii.) As 
 gladiators, generally speaking, were criminals condemned 
 to death, some of them probably preferred to perish 
 during the excitement of fighting rather than await a passive 
 execution. This system likewise afforded amusement to the 
 people, and perhaps tended to keep up the courage, more 
 essential at that period before the use of fire arms. I am 
 not inclined, therefore, to consider that Christianity was of 
 service to the world in putting down this custom. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 49 
 
 somewhat superstitious Emperor, as Aurelian for 
 instance, came to the throne, human sacrifices 
 might be ordered on a severe occasion, Christianity- 
 has the merit of having attacked the very idea, 
 as unjust or injurious. However, Aurelian only- 
 ordered "some prisoners of war" to be sacrificed. 
 (See my Remarks on Roman History?) 
 
 Although I am inclined to agree with Paley, 
 that Christianity has had a beneficial influence in 
 tending to humanize war ; yet even this has been 
 over-rated ; for a change in the spirit of the age 
 has been very influential, and also for some time, 
 the fact mentioned by Hallam, viz., the existence 
 of " companies of adventure, who, in expectation 
 of enriching themselves by the ransom of prisoners, 
 were anxious to save their lives." He adds : 
 " Much of the humanity of modern warfare w r as 
 originally due to this motive."* Thus he informs 
 us that, in the battle of Zagonara (1423), and 
 Mohnilla (1467,) not half a dozen! lives were 
 lost. 
 
 This statement of facts will enable us to judge 
 of the value of Paley's off-hand assertion on this 
 point, viz., " that it has mitigated the treatment 
 of captives ;"f and " ex ano, disce ommes* 'in re- 
 ference also to — "It has abolished polygamy." 
 Now polygamy did not exist under the Koman 
 
 * Middle Ages. Chapter III. p. 246. 
 
 f Paley, towards the end of Chapter VII., "Finally, 
 &c, &c," introduces u perhaps, 1 ' in reference to its having 
 u mitigated the conduct of war." His assertion, shortly 
 afterwards, that "it hath ceased to excite wars," is not 
 true, as the late religious wars between Catholics and Pro- 
 testants in Switzerland prove. He had better not have 
 alluded to this subject, as the less frequency of such wars 
 now depends on " faith having evaporated," as Valerj 
 says. 
 
 D 
 
50 LETTERS TO 
 
 government, either before the introduction of 
 Christianity, more than after; and Luther himself 
 seemed inclined to sanction it as not inconsistent 
 with the Christian faith. Here, then, as well as 
 in the above case, other causes have assisted more 
 or less in the present system of monogamy. 
 
 But some of Paley's assertions are altogether 
 false ; such as his quotation from Clarke, stating 
 that " Christianity has produced a greater regard 
 to moral obligations/' He had previously himself 
 said, " It begets a general probity in the transac- 
 tion of business ;" altogether forgetting "Boman 
 faith," before its introduction. I have already 
 said enough to show that it has produced, by 
 its hypocrisy, exactly the contrary effect. 
 
 He puts down, "The influence of Christianity 
 is not to be sought in the conduct of governments 
 towards their subjects * * * but in the silent 
 course of private and domestic life." Certainly, 
 it from the beginning always seemed to " support 
 the powers that be," even under Nero ; but it was 
 secretly trying to upset them. But the truth is, 
 it has vastly influenced " the conduct of govern- 
 ments ;" for, when Constantine was converted, we 
 find great changes in all the Boman laws, and 
 often less value put on probity and good faith. 
 
 Again : " Christianity is charged with many 
 consequences for which it is not responsible. I 
 believe that religious motives have had no more to 
 do in the formation of nine-tenths of the intole- 
 rant and persecuting laws, which in different coun- 
 tries have been established on the subject of reli- 
 gion, than they have had to do in England with 
 the making of the game-laws." He then proceeds 
 to say, that " Christianity did not plant " the 
 principle which is at the bottom of all persecu- 
 
THE AMEKICAN PEOPLE. 51 
 
 tion, viz., that "they who are in possession of 
 power do what they can to keep it."* 
 
 No — but Christianity has increased and strength- 
 ened, though it has not planted, the intolerant 
 principle. I no more deny than Paley that some 
 little of this principle does good (just as does that 
 of anger or pride) ; but what I contend for is that, 
 in regard to these two principles of human 
 nature, the business of the philosopher is to ap- 
 prove of a system that tends to diminish rather 
 than increase them. He, therefore, cannot approve 
 of Christianity on this point. 
 
 But, though agreeing with Paley, that some 
 degree of intolerance "is not universally wrong," 
 still I must continue to censure the degree of per- 
 plexity which he still further on infuses into this 
 subject, in order to try and make out that there is 
 no intolerant spirit in the Christian creed. He 
 continues: "Believing certain articles of faith to 
 be highly conducive, or perhaps essential, to salva- 
 tion, they thought themselves bound to bring all 
 they could, by every means, into them. * * * 
 Had there been in the New Testament precepts 
 authorizing coercion in the propagation of the 
 religion, and the use of violence towards unbe- 
 lievers, this distinction could not have been taken, 
 nor this defence made." 
 
 Now the Catholics, or any others that helieve 
 
 * This mode of expression is very objectionable in refe- 
 rence to the intolerant principle, for it would tend to make 
 out, that all persons, or at least parties, are equally intole- 
 rant, which is certainly not the case. Evm when in power, 
 some certainly are far more disposed than others to princi- 
 ples of justice and toleration* But such way of putting the 
 case shows an ex-parte lawyer, rather than an impartial 
 philosopher. It seems written with the intention to intro- 
 duce perplexity into the argument, and to draw from such 
 perplexity, advantage to his side of the question. 
 
52 LETTERS TO 
 
 the scriptures, must believe that " certain articles 
 of faith are essential to salvation ;" and this 
 underhand attempt of Paley to say they do not 
 find such doctrine there, is unworthy of him. 
 Moreover, Christians are " bound to bring all they 
 could" into them, for they are commanded to 
 preach the gospel to the Heathen, and directly or 
 indirectly made to believe that they themselves will 
 benefit hereafter, by every such conversion they 
 make. I do not say scripture exhorts them to do 
 this (i by every means," by " the use of violence ;" 
 yet it most decidedly advocates mental, though 
 not bodily, coercion on this point. But this Paley 
 says nothing about. It suits his side of the argu- 
 ment to forget that ideas govern the material world, 
 and that when the strongest of all motives, viz., 
 eternal happiness hereafter, is inseparably attached 
 to such ideas, these must sooner or later, some- 
 where or somehow, enforce " the use of violence-" 
 Indeed, the Spanish Inquisition was not only 
 logical, lat sincerely and piously Christian, in 
 attempting to enforce belief by " the use of vio- 
 lence," even though this should not be found in 
 direct term,s in the scriptures ; for as God, in 
 these, commands all to believe or to " perish 
 hereafter," it is the duty of man as His creature 
 to believe; and consequently, if he does not, it 
 seems that a Cliristian government, to be conse- 
 quent 3 should punish him, at all events, by im- 
 prisonment — perhaps even by torture — till he be- 
 lieved. As to actually taking away his life, even 
 this would seem to be as justifiable as it ever can 
 be in a truly Cliristian government, even for the 
 crimes of robbery or murder.* 
 
 * As one of the chief peculiarities of Christianity is its 
 greater regard for human life generally than Paganism, I 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 53 
 
 Again — Paley remarking and justly, that poli- 
 tical fanaticism, even under Paganism, produced 
 an immense amount of intolerance that led to 
 much injustice and bloodshed, says, this was not 
 due to religious fanaticism, and adds, Ci if the 
 malevolent passions are there, the world will never 
 want occasions." 
 
 This, too, is a fallacious argument. The ques- 
 tion is still, whether Christianity has not added, 
 " by the distinction of spiritual and temporal 
 powers/' (Gibbon,) a new element of fanaticism,, 
 and that, too, without diminishing the old one. 
 As it has, it has vastly added to the amount of 
 that pernicious element — intolerant fanaticism — 
 "planted" in the mind to be diminished rather 
 than increased, as the Eomans wisely observed 
 when they allowed no such spiritual element in 
 their institutions. Paley's argument, then, here 
 again falls to the ground, though he finishes with 
 the following passage of great beauty, the reason- 
 ing in which is answered by the above reflections : 
 
 " Hath Poland fallen by a Christian crusade ? 
 Hath the overthrow in France, of civil order and 
 security, been effected by the votaries of our reli- 
 gion or the foes ? Amongst the awful lessons 
 which the crimes and miseries of that country 
 afford to mankind, this is one ; that in order to be 
 a persecutor, it is not necessary to be a bigot ; 
 that in rage and cruelty, in mischief and destruc- 
 tion, fanaticism itself can be outdone by infidelity." 
 
 conceive that no truly Christian government is authorized 
 to use capital punishments, for any offence or crime what- 
 ever. So called Christian governments have acted no doubt 
 in this case from what tliey consider motives of actual neces- 
 sity for the good of society. But, perhaps, the more perfect 
 Christian should not even recognize this as an adequate 
 reason, for " his kingdom is not of this world." 
 
54 LETTERS TO 
 
 As the reader will find this assertion, that the 
 French Kevolution, and the crimes that attended 
 it, depended on a want of faith in Christianity, 
 refuted I think fully in my next Letter, I shall 
 only now state, that religious C( fanaticism was 
 not outdone in this case by infidelity ;" because, 
 though the atrocities committed seemed as great 
 as in some of the religious wars, yet there is this 
 essential distinction between them, viz., that they 
 seemed necessary, in the opinion of those in power, 
 for the very existence of the republic ; and. con- 
 sequently, to the improvement which was at least 
 attempted in the condition of the great mass of 
 the people by this change of government ; whereas 
 all the atrocities committed in the religious wars 
 of Christians, have, of course, never had the 
 praiseworthy motive of an attempt to benefit the 
 temporal interests of the masses for their cause : 
 no, it has, even in the best way of viewing it, been 
 a desire to benefit their supposed eternal and 
 spiritual interests. Now, as the possibility of 
 this is mere matter of conjecture — however much 
 to be wished — it is clear that there is less reason 
 than eloquence in the passage of Paley last quoted. 
 
 " Christianity," says Paley, "has greatly me- 
 liorated the condition of the mass of every com- 
 munity, by procuring for them a day of weekly 
 rest." 
 
 I have already said enough to show that the 
 way in which the British and American govern- 
 ments enforce the observance of this day, render 
 it little advantage to the labouring classes, com- 
 pared with what it is in Eoman Catholic, and even 
 the Lutheran countries on the continent. Paley, 
 himself, ought to have said this even as a Protes- 
 tant ; on the contrary, his way of writing might 
 almost induce an ignorant person to conceive that 
 
THE AMEEICAN PEOPLE. 55 
 
 our government gave the populace wages on this 
 day, in order to live without work. Compared 
 with Paganism, it did no good in this respect, for 
 Pagans had their fixed festas. 
 
 Although Paley notices the certainty of a future 
 state, among the benefits promised by Christianity, 
 yet he does not state it so pointedly as might have 
 been expected from him. 
 
 For my own part, I should have placed this 
 among its very greatest benefits, if, instead of re- 
 wards for mere faith, it had promised with certainty 
 rewards for virtuous deeds. And it is singular 
 that this otherwise useful doctrine should be 
 preached with such certainty in the New Testa- 
 ment, when almost every other point, which might 
 be useful, is left in so much ambiguity, that it 
 loses its value as a divine command. This doctrine 
 is vitiated, then, in another way, viz., by the pre- 
 sumed merit of mere faith. 
 
 When I reflect on this, I must prefer the future 
 state proclaimed by Paganism, notwithstanding its 
 defect of not having apparently been so certainly 
 set forth as a means of rewarding virtue or punish- 
 ing crime. Christianity, in this case, errs, by 
 making that virtue, which is not so ; and the 
 same in regard to vice. 
 
 I have already been obliged to remark on the 
 great disadvantage the ambiguity in the meaning 
 of the scriptures has occasioned to the world. 
 This has, in a great measure, been the cause of 
 the enormous amount of slaughter between Chris- 
 tian sects. And, in closing these remarks on 
 Paley, I feel myself called on again to state ano- 
 ther evil occasioned by this ambiguity ; I allude 
 to the opposite opinions whether Christianity 
 forbids war altogether, only in some degree, or 
 not at all. 
 
56 LETTERS TO 
 
 Paley, finding that Jesus Christ dismisses the 
 Roman Centurion without censuring his profession 
 as a soldier, embraces the opinion commonly held 
 by Christians on this point, viz., that Christianity 
 does not forbid war. 
 
 For my own part, I think he might, with the 
 Quakers, more reasonably have embraced the 
 opposite view. At all events, had he placed the 
 denunciation of all but defensive war among the 
 doctrines of Christianity, he would have added a 
 point in its favour, greater perhaps than any of 
 those he has mentioned in such an off-hand way, 
 as though clearly preached by it, when in reality 
 they admit of as much, or even more, doubt than 
 this in regard to war. 
 
 Perhaps Paley, however, justly omitted it ; for 
 he could not but observe, that had he taken the 
 literal interpretation of scripture (as a mere theo- 
 logical writer is bound to do) he would find on 
 this point, equally as I have said in regard to a 
 future state, a radical defect, viz., that it would 
 not even allow mere defensive war. Surely no 
 one can doubt that this is a fair inference, when a 
 man struck on one cheek is commanded to turn 
 the other also. 
 
 I shall terminate this third Letter by some re- 
 marks on a writer who has written after Paley, 
 and "illustrated" him. 
 
 Lord Brougham's Chapter on Religious Estab- 
 lishments* comprises only about nine pages. In 
 it we find the heads " Established Religion In- 
 compatible with Democracy/' and that " Estab- 
 lished Religion secures Instruction. " In reference 
 to this last point, I may observe, that no doubt it 
 does, but not always that kind of instruction which 
 
 * Political Philosophy, vol. iii., p. 125. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 57 
 
 is most desirable for the good of the community, 
 as I shall presently show more in detail. 
 
 I shall now proceed to make some extracts 
 which will give an idea of his opinions on this 
 most important subject, annexing thereto my own 
 humble comments. 
 
 1. — " Experience proves that religion is a sub- 
 ject on which the bulk of men feel, and do not 
 reason."* (128.) We have found, and shall find 
 further on, proofs enough of the truth of this 
 maxim ; and I am sorry to add in Lord Brougham's 
 own case. It is perhaps in consequence of a belief 
 in this melancholy truth, that Lord B. has always 
 laid aside his reason, for the time, when he has 
 ventured to speak on the subject of religion. 
 
 2. — None of Brougham's three objections to a 
 church establishment (and which, be it observed, 
 he himself refutes)f will apply to Deism, consi- 
 dered as the religion of the state. It is to be observed 
 that he does not place among the objections the 
 Dissenter having to contribute to a church estab- 
 lishment in which he has no faith, because this 
 may be supposed applicable to a purely voluntary 
 system ; " for the dissenters," says he, " pay if 
 they choose, and the persons who do pay, (sup- 
 posing there is no establishment) pay by so much 
 the more than those who do not?' (p. 129.) 
 
 3. — "In several of the American Commonwealths 
 every one was obliged to pay his tax to the state, 
 which gave it over to the minister of whose sect the 
 
 * And the worst feature in our " Protestantism" is, that 
 it has pretended to use full reason on the subject, yet has 
 only gone half way, and hence increased the amount of 
 cant and self-importance with us, and in reality contributed 
 little to the freedom of the mind. 
 
 t I say " refutes," because, as lie puts the case, he does 
 refute them, but not so in reality. It is all sophistry. 
 D % 
 
58 LETTERS TO 
 
 contributor was a member." This Brougham* con- 
 siders the only state religion possible in a Demo- 
 cracy. But as it compels every man to choose a 
 sect, it might, says he, be objected to by advocates 
 of a pure Democracy. 
 
 Brougham finds the same injustice in the per- 
 fectly voluntary principle (No. 2) that has been 
 attributed to church establishments, viz., that 
 i( whoever wishes to save his money, will be able 
 to benefit by the churches which his more liberal 
 neighbour supports" (p. 130.) 
 
 But as I do not approve of a perfectly volun- 
 tary system, neither this objection nor the one 
 mentioned in the last page (2) will apply to that 
 still voluntary system (so to call it) in which a 
 man is only obliged to pay to the form of religion 
 in which lie believes, or if he confess himself an 
 Atheist, let him pay to the professors of morality in 
 the university, whose teachings benefit him as well 
 as the community at large. Brougham, finding that 
 the voluntary system (No. 3) cannot be attacked on 
 the same grounds, has, in his feeble defence of 
 church establishments, quite left this out of his 
 argument ! 
 
 One would think on reading this section, that 
 there could be no other form of Christianity than 
 Trinitarian Protestantism, and, of course, no other 
 religion than Christianity itself. Deism, or at 
 least Unitarianism, (which yet is probably the 
 religion of Lord Brougham, as it always has been 
 of the leading thinkers in all ages,) is not even 
 alluded to. Now, I maintain that his argument 
 would have been much stronger had he said a 
 rational religion should be the religion of the 
 state, for then, as every person must, or ought to 
 
 * Political Philosophy, vol. iii., p. 127. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 59 
 
 believe in it, he will be only paying to a religion 
 in which he has, or ought to have, faith. Every 
 man — even an Atheist — must, in a certain sense, 
 be a Deist, for he must acknowledge the existence 
 of a Power he cannot wholly comprehend, or else 
 he is mad. But when Christianity, and above all, 
 Trinitarianism, is made the state religion, and we 
 are required to believe in this, and also that the 
 morality Christianity teaches is always more just 
 and pure than that of natural religion, and to 
 pay for such church establishment because it con- 
 fers an advantage on us, the case is perfectly 
 altered. The doctrine of the most heinous sins 
 being expiated by repentance, and that uncon- 
 ditional submission is virtue, are tenets which tend 
 to increase the mass of crime in the world, as Lord 
 Brougham would no doubt admit, did his position 
 as a peer allow him to do so. His words, then, 
 " religious instruction, and the moral instruction 
 that always accompanies it," (p. 129,) are a mere 
 specimen of the cant in matters of religion that per- 
 vades his class, and which even he — bold thinker 
 as he is in political matters — is not bold enough 
 to oppose. It is the same with Cobden and others 
 — all fear to attack the Christian religion more than 
 other grievances^ for this is the foundation one. 
 
 We must, however, mark with care his conclud- 
 ing passage on this subject. " In the deductions 
 which we have stated * * we have made no allow- 
 ance for the ultimate effects of education, In no 
 respect are these more fit to be considered than in 
 their connection with religion, * * But this forms 
 a separate subject, and as yet we have been through- 
 out considering the state of society as we at pre- 
 sent find it" (p. 134.) 
 
 This extract will prepare us for the following, 
 which is perhaps the most truly eloquent passage 
 
60 LETTERS TO 
 
 in the volume. It is at the close of this that his 
 real views seem almost unconsciously forced out 
 by the momentary fervour of his soul.* 
 
 Looking forward, like Condorcet, to the future, 
 when "popular education" shall have done its 
 utmost, he says, it is pleasing to anticipate that 
 period, in which f c graceless zealots should con- 
 tend no more for useless forms of faith, nor 
 political fanatics for forms of government ; when 
 devotion to the Creator should cease to be testified 
 by clischarity towards His creatures, and wretched 
 abstract dogmas to obstruct the progress of all the 
 
 * A truly Ciceronian passage, which should be read from 
 the beginning. I am glad also to be able to agree with 
 Lord Brougham in the following, where he calls bribery 
 a the pest of corruption, which now threatens our national 
 morals, as well as the purity of our parliamentary system, 
 and the existence of our free constitution ; nay, which 
 makes many good men, in balancing the advantages of a 
 free and an absolute government, hesitate which to prefer, 
 while they find that a popular constitution can only oe pur- 
 chased by the ruin of all morals." (Vol. III., p. 318.) 
 These remarks were written in 1846 ; and our recent elec- 
 tions show that we are just as bad in respect to bribery 
 now, viz., in 1854. Writers may talk as they please of the 
 dishonesty pervading the United States ; it cannot well be 
 worse than among ourselves, including all ranks, classes, 
 and sexes ; there being of course many honourable excep- 
 tions in both countries. And yet with all this, the American 
 population and ourselves are ostensibly the most demure 
 and pious Christians in the world ! This consideration 
 should have induced Lord Brougham to make some free 
 remarks on the connexion of the Christian religion with 
 morality, instead of writing down, as we have seen he has 
 done, " The established religion secures instruction !" I 
 apprehend he could have found (strange to say) very little 
 in it which tended to forbid cheating (or bribery) or false- 
 hood of any kind. Charity and chastity and faith, are no 
 doubt eulogised; but justice — the u queen of virtues " — 
 is forgotten ! Surely, after this, no candid man will say 
 reform is not wanted in religion. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE^ 61 
 
 light that most improves, refines, and exalts our 
 species." (p. 170.) 
 
 Now, I will put it to any impartial person, 
 whether the passages which I have purposely- 
 marked in italics, do not lead to the belief that, 
 in his sincere and reasonable moments, when un- 
 oppressed by the conventionalisms around him, 
 the noble Lord acknowledges only the sublime 
 religion of the Deist ; and that he embraces the 
 absurdity of the Trinity himself, and recommends 
 it as a religion for the multitude, only so long as 
 popular ignorance continues. 
 
 Although, therefore, he has not said so, it 
 appears he may be regarded as considering Chris- 
 tianity a salutary " check" on our mixed govern- 
 ment, under which great ignorance prevails among 
 the masses, and great knowledge among isolated 
 individuals. In this view he may be conscientious, 
 but I think wrong ; but it is certain, that the state 
 of public opinion on matters of religion in Britain, 
 has made him far too concise, ambiguous, and I 
 might add insincere, on this subject generally. 
 
 But as education has been so widely diffused 
 among the Americans, the remark just made will 
 not apply to them ; and their leading men ought 
 at once boldly to confess their true religious senti- 
 ments to the masses of the people. 
 
 In confirmation of what was said above, I ob- 
 serve the following passage, which tends also to 
 show what Lord Brougham's real opinions are on 
 the subject. 
 
 " The existence of a state church may therefore 
 become much less indispensable when the people 
 are so much improved (by education) as to remove 
 those mischiefs and dangers, which we had occa- 
 sion to contemplate." (p. 171.) He alludes to 
 pages 125, &c. 
 
62 LETTERS TO 
 
 But if a nation is to improve gradually in such 
 matters, it is surely high time that our form of 
 Christianity for the State should be Unitarian, 
 and that Lord Brougham himself advocate this 
 change (or reform) ; supposing him to hold the 
 opinion that Deism is at present too metaphysical 
 a religion for a people even perfectly educated. 
 
 Our populace were spurred, in a great measure, 
 to the revolution under Charles the First, and 
 also to that of 1688, by a fear of the return of 
 Popery (Brougham,* p. 277-291) ; it remains to 
 be seen how they would receive a religion of 
 reason in reality, for the present Protestantism is 
 only so in appearance, and that only to the most 
 superficial thinkers. 
 
 I cannot close this Letter better than by a re- 
 flection, drawn fairly I think from the preceding 
 summary of Lord Brougham's printed opinions on 
 Religious Establishments. It is this, viz., that 
 with all our boasted freedom of the press in this 
 a Protestant country, as compared with Catholic 
 countries, we are still wrong in holding the opinion 
 without admitting the exception of members of 
 the House of Lords and of the Commons, and 
 also the vast majority of the British nation. 
 
 I say it with no disrespect to Lord Brougham, 
 but it is clear from the guarded and almost ambi- 
 guous way in which this writer ventures his very 
 freest views on religion, that opinion has not 
 
 * u Religious /wn/." So much for the blessing of Chris- 
 tianity to Britain. It had a great share in our two revolu- 
 tions, and in its practical operation as regards the people 
 and their amusements, the conquered form of Christianity 
 (viz., Catholicism) was the most rational and liberal. 
 Witness also the wars between Catholics and Protestants 
 in Switzerland, caused, however, partly by faults in the 
 constitution. (Brougham, p. 402.) 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 63 
 
 allowed him in this Protestant country to write as 
 freely as Beccaria did in a Catholic country. To 
 give only two or three examples. 
 
 " 77 suicidio e un delitto die semhra non potere 
 ammettere una pena propriamente detta" i.e., 
 that suicide does not justly appear to admit of 
 punishmeut. To showing this he devotes Sect. 
 xxxv., Dei Delitti. 
 
 Again — " Allora religione, dc , dc," i.e., " the 
 Christian religion, by holding up to the criminal 
 such an easy repentance, tends to diminish the 
 power of human laws to punish crime." (Sect, 
 xvi.) This is clearly his meaning. 
 
 Again, in his preface — " Non tutto cio, dc," i.e., 
 natural religion does not require all that revealed 
 religion does. 
 
 Again — he objects to the discretionary power of 
 the sovereign to pardon crimes. {Idem., Sect, 
 xx.) 
 
 But, above all, to shovv the admirable frankness 
 and honesty of the Catholic above the Protestant 
 writer, I would refer to Sect, xxxvii. " Ma gli 
 nomini, dc, dc," i.e., "but reasonable men will 
 see that the place, the age, and the subject, do 
 not permit me to speak plainly." He is speaking 
 " against all attempts to use force on the mind in 
 matters of religion, of which the sole effects, says 
 he, are first dissimulation, then base avilement." 
 These words were written so long ago, in " a des- 
 potic and Catholic country," and apparently too 
 without injury to Beccaria, (who, be it also re- 
 membered, belonged like Brougham to the upper 
 class,) even by opinion, as he died at Milan, and 
 a statue has been placed to his honour on the 
 staircase of the public Library there. They 
 apply equally even now to the Christian oath re- 
 quired by our House of Commons^ as the Jews 
 
64 LETTERS TO 
 
 know too well. On the contrary, Lord Brougham, 
 who could not have written as freely as the above, 
 never hints a word about opinion not allowing him 
 to speak out ! This again comes from our self- 
 sufficiency and Protestant cant — this real mockery 
 of real liberty ! 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 65 
 
 LETTEE IV. 
 
 Citizens, — If, in the heat of composition, I have 
 let a few expressions drop that may appear wanting 
 in courtesy, I beg you now not to take the same in 
 bad part, since I am well aware that you drew your 
 religion from the "Old Mother Country/' and 
 that your separation from it was very shortly 
 afterwards followed by the French [Revolution, in 
 which some of the leaders openly denounced 
 religion of every description. 
 
 Now, it is natural for us all to respect the reli- 
 gion of our parents, be it right or wrong ; and as 
 it was the fashion of many writers, both here and 
 in America, to attribute the unjustifiable scenes in 
 France to the writings of the Deists and Atheists, 
 who preceded the outbreak, (but as I shall show 
 presently without foundation,) it was no wonder 
 that during the Presidency of Washington and 
 Adams, your more just and virtuous citizens, in- 
 sisted on the recognition — at least by opinion — of 
 some form or other of Christianity, as absolutely 
 necessary to the foundation of your Republic. 
 
 But I beg you to remember that, supposing this 
 reasoning were just in 1794, it will not at all 
 events be so to the same extent now. At that 
 time there was a well grounded fear that the Re- 
 public itself, even with this supposed assistance 
 from Christianity, was impossible ; now it is esta- 
 blished beyond any fear of its falling, at all events 
 
66 LETTERS TO 
 
 from external foes. Consequently, now seems the 
 time for the nation which has done so much to- 
 wards establishing a system of political justice, to 
 attempt a real advancement in the same direction 
 in matters of religious liberty.* 
 
 On this subject Cox justly says, that in some 
 respects " our Sabbath sanctity " took its rise 
 about sixty years ago, when the atrocities and 
 follies of the French Eevolution, and especially 
 the abolition for a time of the hebdomadal festival 
 of Christians, gave an impulse in this country to 
 unwonted strictness in the observance of religious 
 ordinances. (Cox, p. 335.) 
 
 Again — George Combe to the same effect, (p. 
 338,) " People at that time thought that by such 
 Puritanical conduct they tended to give greater 
 security to property by preventing revolution ;" 
 and, adds Combe, " one or probably two genera- 
 tions must pass, before reason will again exert 
 any salutary influence over religious opinion in 
 Scotland." 
 
 Bishop Watson also was prevented by this re- 
 vulsion in public feeling from introducing " a 
 Bill for Expunging the Athanasian Creed from 
 our Liturgy," (Op. Cit.,^. 338;) and so it re- 
 mains there unheeded still — an example of the 
 slowness with which reason always marches in the 
 
 * The misunderstanding between Thomas Paine and 
 Washington was also to be deplored for the interests of 
 rational Theism ; since the Americans naturally enough 
 take the side of the latter, (as the great man who emanci- 
 pated them,) and as he at least publicly (though not pri- 
 vately) supported Christianity, this increases the disposition 
 of Americans to do the same, and make them think this 
 hypocrisy is really for the public good. Although pious 
 Christians will, of course, dislike the style of Paine's Age 
 of Reason, there is no doubt of its literary merit or its 
 reason. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 67 
 
 world. Cox furnishes three or four pages, show- 
 ing the prevalence of the same feeling, until at 
 last we find the Scotch Assembly actually wished 
 to prevent the population "from wandering in the 
 fields or frequenting scenes of recreation " on the 
 Sabbath, (p. 341,) and that too so late as 1884! 
 What would the rational Catholicism of France, 
 and let me now add Piedmont, (at least in many 
 practical points,) think of such twattle ? I 
 consider, Protestants as we call ourselves, we are 
 in very many respects behind Catholics like these. 
 
 It is clear, then, that Britain, even at the pre- 
 sent time, has scarcely got free from the effects on 
 her religion of that nightmare — the first French 
 Eevolution; and no doubt the same may be said 
 of the United States. But, at all events, it is 
 time they both should ; and the late immense asso- 
 ciation (1855) in Hyde Park on a Sunday, to pro- 
 test against all such barbarous cant, was a good 
 omen, and an honour to the British public. 
 
 I shall now proceed to show briefly the errone- 
 ousness and short-sightedness of the view which 
 attributes the revolution in question to the writings 
 of Montesquieu, Eousseau, Diderot, Voltaire, and 
 others. 
 
 And, in the first place, I would ask, — if these 
 writings induced men to act as well as to think, — 
 how is it that the writings of Bolinbroke, Hume, 
 Gibbon, Earl of Chatham,* George Combe, the 
 
 * His Letter on Superstition, (already alluded to, p. 5,) 
 and he too with his vast influence, as Prime Minister ! As 
 I see no notice of this Letter in Lord Brougham's States- 
 men, and as one of his last speeches contains thoughts at 
 least rather favourable to Christianity than otherwise, it 
 seems right to consider this Letter as private ; or written 
 for posthumous publication. Would that all the Peers and 
 Commons, who thought like him, did the same ! and then 
 what volumes on volumes we should have ! 
 
<58 LETTERS TO 
 
 author of the Vestiges, (and others, as Paine s in 
 a more offensive style to orthodox Christians,) 
 though in circulation to the extent of thousands 
 of thousands of copies for very many years past, 
 have not been sufficient to produce any change 
 whatever in the laws affecting Christianity in this 
 country, or hardly even in those usages w T hich 
 depend on opinion only ? A revolution in reli- 
 gion indeed ! — why they have not sufficed, even in 
 those who are converts to the rational and just 
 views of these writers ! to make the majority of 
 such people, or even the minority, change the 
 hypocritical system of considering music, draughts, 
 or chess on the Sunday improper.* The common 
 cry with such men (in private) is, our religion is 
 no doubt not of divine origin, but what harm does 
 it do ? Let us, therefore, follow it, and respect 
 all the prejudices of the vulgar as regards the 
 Sabbath. I will venture to say that this 
 is still the reasoning, of at least ninety out 
 of every hundred of confirmed unhelievers in 
 Britain, such great penalties are attached socially 
 to disbelief. As already observed, the same views 
 
 Posthumous confessions are better than none at all ; and 
 become a man's duty, when opinion forces us to live in 
 such miserable hypocrisy. Volume of truth after volume 
 would surely at last conquer even opinion ! 
 
 " Gutta cavat lapidem, non vi, sed soepe cadendo." 
 
 My chief motive for publishing this Work is to add a 
 drop or mite, fully satisfied that thousands more will be 
 wanting. 
 
 * In the prospectus of the St. James's Club, opened 
 about three years ago in St. James's Square, was printed : — 
 No games (including the above) allowed on Sunday. On 
 meeting one of the members some time after, I was sur- 
 prised to find the house shut up, but not so surprised at 
 the cause of it, which was, that the saintly manager who 
 penned, or was concerned in penning, the above, was off 
 with all the funds he could collect. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 69 
 
 prevail in the States — upheld too by opinion 
 only ! 
 
 Now all this shows that the Anglo-Saxons are, 
 as Parker says — in opposition to the Germans — 
 a practical people. They have hitherto had an 
 idea that Christianity does good, as the unbelievers 
 Frederick the Great, Washington, and perhaps 
 Jefferson had ; and, consequently, that it is for 
 the public benefit, that such religion should be 
 dominant. 
 
 Even Voltaire, in comparing the Stoicism of 
 the Ancients with primitive Christianity, speaks 
 favourably of the latter ; and Rousseau does the 
 same in his Emile. Voltaire's satire was aimed 
 chiefly at the Catholics ; and Rousseau's eloquence 
 directed rather against the truth than the utility 
 of the creed. Accordingly, his apostle Robespierre 
 was very tolerant to Christians, and all who pro- 
 fessed religion of some sort, even when himself 
 advocating the Deistic form of worship. The 
 massacres which took place while he was in power 
 and cast such a blot on his name, seem the off- 
 spring of fear and suspicion, in consequence of 
 the want of confidence in the strength of his own 
 government. Certainly religion was scarcely at 
 all concerned in them.* 
 
 * Lewis's Life of Robespierre, (with my commentary 
 M.S.) Robespierre's hatred was directed only against the 
 Atheistic party — the party who bad, in 1793, so shamelessly 
 set up the " Goddess of Reason " in the shape of a beau- 
 tiful woman crowned with evergreens, and in apparent 
 mockery of all religious service, as well also as of Reason 
 itself, and consequently of themselves, made it a part of 
 this religious service ! for the President publicly to embrace 
 her. This blasphemy fortunately only lasted a few months ; 
 and I must consider that D'Holbac, Diderot, and Meslier, 
 whose writings probably led to it, would, as conscientious 
 Atheists, have been as much disgusted at such an indirect 
 
70 LETTERS TO 
 
 Thus much by way of showing that in France 
 as in Britain, Christianity was not, even by its 
 most determined opponents, regarded with aversion 
 as doing actual harm ; for these men naturally 
 enough, blinded by the force of opinion of the 
 age, could not see it as Tacitus could in its true 
 colours, when he called it a " pernicious super- 
 stition." (Exitiabilis Supers titio.) (Ann., Book 
 xv.) Suetonius too speaks of it in a similar spirit 
 of reprobation, and calls it malefica, and seems 
 by such term to think it merited either punish- 
 ment or contempt. {Life of Nero, Sect. 16.) 
 These writers had clearly scarcely heard of Christ, 
 and as Tacitus* puts down the supposed miracles 
 of Vespasian, he was the man to have inserted 
 those of Jesus, had they bee?i known to the edu- 
 cated. 
 
 Our French neighbours, though less practical 
 than ourselves, would never have been inclined to 
 fight to put down a mere opinion, especially when 
 their great literary champions, Voltaire and Kous- 
 seau, told them such opinion did no harm. All 
 in accordance with this, we find it was rather the 
 large sums they had to pay such Christian priests 
 than the Theology of these men, that most in- 
 
 mockery of their system, as the Deists themselves were at 
 such scoffing at all religion ; since they wrote in earnest, 
 and were men of conviction, who at least saw nothing 
 ridiculous in Deism. Thiers, justly therefore, considers it 
 was a great change for the better when the inscription on 
 the churches " To Eeason " was effaced, and that to " The 
 Supreme Being " substituted. But Robespierre himself 
 fell very soon after this change, (in July, 1794,) hated and 
 plotted against, by this Atheistic party, to the last — a proof 
 of the great intolerance in human nature, and that Chris- 
 tianity does not cause it, though it vastly increases it. 
 
 * He clearly believed in Divination, (Ann. vi., 22,) 
 hence probably in Prophecy. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 71 
 
 creased the discontent, as Mignet properly says in 
 his History of this French Revolution. In con- 
 sequence, ameliorations were made in this respect 
 even before Louis XVI. was beheaded; and we 
 also find before that event, that " a majority of 
 the clergy, chiefly parish priests, joined the nation 
 or the tiers etatV* It is true we find lower down 
 in the same page, that " a minority of the clerical 
 chamber chiefly bishops, and high beneficed 
 clergy," refused to do so, and opposed the King, 
 whom Paine calls " a man of a good heart/' when 
 he attempted to promote ie fusion " between the 
 higher, middle, and lower classes. This took 
 place in 1789-90, and shows that the majority of 
 the clergy were favourable to a free constitution ;f 
 and that the part which opposed it, did so for the 
 same reason that some of the nobles opposed it, 
 and quite irrespective of the question of religion. 
 
 As the bulk of the clergy, then, joined the tiers 
 etat or the popular side, at the very beginning of 
 the revolution, this must naturally have disposed 
 the revolutionary leaders, if not to friendship, at 
 all events to a sort of indifference or non-hostility 
 to them. And, consequently, a desire to upset 
 the Christian religion and to establish another in 
 its place, cannot be numbered among the actual 
 causes of the revolution. 
 
 I have admitted that the more material question 
 (to the populace always so) of the pay of the 
 clergy, might have been so concerned. The other 
 causes concerned were, like this, of a completely 
 
 * Vales's Life of Paine. {Steps to the French Revolution.) 
 p. 87. 
 
 f " The clergy who had proved themselves the earliest 
 and steadiest friends of freedom," (viz., by junction with 
 the Tiers-Etat.) Sir A. Alison's History of Europe^ chap. 
 xv.) 
 
72 LETTERS TO 
 
 practical character, and still less connected with 
 the philosophy of Eousseau or Voltaire. They 
 were, 1 and 2, the great scarcity of bread, and 
 the embarrassed state of the government finances ;* 
 so that while the lower classes could not get food, 
 the higher classes could not get money — the 
 money owed to them by government. Add to 
 these the Sovereign's power of sending parties to 
 the bastile without trial, the fact that all classes 
 considered themselves over- taxed, and that 
 Lafayette with victorious troops had just arrived 
 from a successful revolutionary war in America, 
 and we shall have adequate causes for revolution, 
 in any country, and still more so in the military 
 and highly susceptible French nation. 
 
 We flatter ourselves with the idea, that no revo- 
 lution takes place in Britain, in consequence, as 
 
 * " Within six months after the revolution broke out, 
 the revenue bad fallen from £24,000,000 to £17,000,000 
 a year, and that at the very time when the embarassment 
 of the finances had been the principal cause of the convo- 
 cation of the States -General. No resource could be found 
 to meet the pressing difficulties of the Exchequer, hut the 
 confiscation of the property of the church, and subsequently 
 that of the emigrant nobles." (Sir A. Alison's History, 
 chap, xv., p. 225.) This confirms what I have before said, 
 viz., that the state of the finances (conjoined with famine 
 and general political tyranny) was the cause of the out- 
 break, and at this time the property of the clergy was only 
 taken, ''because no other resource could be found" to 
 meet the difficulty. 
 
 M. Mounier, Lords Jeffrey and Brougham, though differ- 
 ing on some minor points, may be said to agree as to the 
 principal causes being those given in the text, and also to 
 agree in considering the writings of Voltaire, Rousseau, 
 and others, as little, if at all, concerned in the outbreak. 
 Neither does Lord Brougham, in his notice of Robespierre, 
 ascribe the subsequent murderous scenes of the revolution 
 to the want of faith in Christianity of those in power. 
 (Brougham's French Revolution and its Leaders, pp. 4, 7.) 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 73 
 
 our journalists say, of the " great national respect 
 for law/' and some add for religion. Now, all 
 this is fallacy, as the unsuccessful Kennington 
 Common Demonstration in 1848 sufficiently 
 evinced. It is at once refuted by the immense 
 extent of poverty in this country ; for it would 
 be absurd to suppose that our labourers and 
 mechanics would not better by revolution their too 
 often truly miserable condition — if they thought 
 they would he able. Here lies the secret of tran- 
 quillity with us. It too is material. It is want 
 of power. Our British mobs have never been 
 able to succeed against our disciplined British 
 military. 
 
 Favourable circumstances make revolutions 
 much oftener than abstract writers. If Lafayette 
 and his soldiers had not returned victorious to 
 France, it is not improbable, even with famine and 
 debt staring them in the face, the French might 
 have been quiet. But here were means to an end. 
 And certainly Voltaire and Eousseau might have 
 written with the same result to France, that our 
 own philosophical writers, formerly named, have 
 done to Britain, had not famine and debt arrived 
 at the same time, and caused much more general 
 discontent, than a false system of Theology. 
 
 Southey was one who considered the toleration 
 of such writings as those of the French philoso- 
 phers led to the French revolution. But this is 
 not true, said Lord Byron. " Every French 
 writer of any freedom was persecuted. Voltaire 
 and Eousseau were exiles ; Marmontel and Diderot 
 were sent to the bastile. In the next place, the 
 French Revolution was not occasioned by any 
 writings whatever, but must have occurred had no 
 such writers ever existed. The cause of it is ob- 
 vious — the government exacted too much, and the 
 
74 LETTERS TO 
 
 people could neither bear nor give more. Without 
 this the Encyclopedists might have written their 
 fingers off, without the slightest alteration. * * 
 Acts, on the part of government, and not writings 
 against them, have caused the past convulsions "* 
 
 I have little doubt that neither the religious 
 writings of Voltaire nor of Rousseau, were con- 
 cerned in this outbreak, as is commonly asserted. 
 Neither certainly were the political writings of 
 Voltaire ; for, like myself, he seems to have advo- 
 cated a strong government, and perfect equality 
 of all religions only, and not of men. But as 
 regards the political writings of Rousseau, I am 
 not quite so certain. I think his doctrine of the 
 " equality of men " may have tended to produce 
 the outbreak, as I have admitted further on, Robes- 
 pierre's very high admiration of these political 
 writings tended to increase the amount of whole- 
 sale murders and atrocities. But as this doctrine 
 of equality had been advocated by Lycurgus, by 
 Plato, by Sir T. More, {Utopia,) and to still fur- 
 ther extent, and still more ably perhaps, by these 
 men than by Rousseau, we must not put too much 
 stress even on these political writings : and though 
 we admit some influence to them, still this does 
 not affect my argument, which is, that Rousseau 
 and Voltaire's religious (or irreligious) writings 
 were not the cause of it, in other words that it 
 was not caused by a general disbelief in Chris- 
 tianity. 
 
 Having made it appear clear that the theological 
 writings of the French philosophers did not cause 
 the revolution, we may now enter more in detail 
 into that second most important point of inquiry, 
 viz., whether the suppression of Christianity after 
 
 * Notes to the Vision of Judgment. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 75 
 
 the revolution had fairly began, was the cause of 
 the wholesale murders and atrocities committed. 
 
 And, in the first place, that this was not the 
 cause of Louis the XVI. being so unjustly put to 
 death, (any more so than in the case of our own 
 Charles I.,) is clear from the fact, that it was not 
 till after this period that Christianity was sup- 
 pressed in France. 
 
 We come, then, at once to the constitution of 
 1793. But, as Lord Brougham says, this was far 
 more Democratic than the one of 1795, which 
 succeeded it ; and both were far more so than the 
 present constitution of the United States. {Poli- 
 tical Philosophy, vol. iii., p. 105.) 
 
 Now, if Legislators can be so absurd as to at- 
 tempt to launch a people into the wildest Demo- 
 cracy immediately after such people have only 
 been used to a monarchy, does it not follow at once 
 (setting all change of religion aside for the mo- 
 ment) that such a people, especially those of 
 so excitable a nature as the French, must at once 
 launch into the wildest and most criminal ex- 
 cesses ? Jefferson, and all the best writers, have 
 held the opinion that people should be gradually 
 accustomed to liberty. Yet in open defiance of 
 this wise truth, the French in their revolution of 
 1793, equally as in the last of 1848 ! attempted 
 to rush at once from Monarchy to Bed Kepubli- 
 canism, or Socialism ! The consequence has been 
 they have as signally failed the last as the first 
 time; the only difference is, that they have im- 
 proved in humanity by the sad experience of '93.* 
 
 * I feel that Christian opponents may, with an appear- 
 ance of justice, ascribe this amelioration to the open pro- 
 fession of Catholicism which was made by Lamartine and 
 some of the other leaders of the Revolution of 1848. But 
 still we must not forget the improved spirit of the age 
 
76 LETTERS TO 
 
 The bloody murders, then, in this year were the 
 consequence of a first clumsy experiment in new 
 government, and the necessary consequence not 
 of the absence of the Christian religion, but of 
 the presence of actual anarchy. 
 
 In order to consider this point fully, I shall 
 refer again to the Political Philosophy \ (p. 116,) 
 where we find it asserted that " the worst effect of 
 popular government is, that the supreme power is 
 placed in irresponsible hands. The people exer- 
 cise their office, accountable to no earthly tribunal. 
 Each individual, too, forms so inconsiderable a 
 part in the body which decides in any instance, 
 that he feels little or no responsibility to rest upon 
 him even as regards his own conscience. As for 
 public opinion, from the nature of the thing, it 
 exists not, the people themselves being those 
 whose sentiments are meant when public opinion 
 is spoken of. * * The people can only dread 
 having their conduct exposed, or made hateful or 
 despicable in their own eyes, in a moment of calm 
 reflection. This resembles rather the feeble check 
 which conscience imposes upon a tyrant or a 
 
 already alluded to, and also the history of the Republic 
 of 1795, in which a great improvement took place as re- 
 gards humanity, and which Republic lasted without any 
 established religion at all for some years, till it was put 
 down by actual force on the part of Buonaparte. And, 
 after all, the amelioration in 1848 was not all that could 
 be wished, for there were many brutal individual murders 
 committed, and the mass of the Socialists who fought 
 against the illustrious General Cavaignac, (a moderate, 
 rational, and honest Republican,) were perhaps in reality 
 little better than well disciplined robbers, (if they will excuse 
 me the expression.) Instead of many murders at the 
 Guillotine, in detail so to speak, in this revolution, there 
 were many on a wholesale scale, which removes our horror 
 at them in some respect, as we seem to contemplate two 
 armies fighting against each other. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 77 
 
 patrician oligarchy, than the restraining voice of 
 public opinion* It would be exactly the same in 
 its operation, with that shadowy restraint of con- 
 science, were it not that men are prone to suspect 
 and distrust each other, and that people will 
 naturally enough look forward to the risk that 
 some of their own body may reprobate the pro- 
 ceeding in contemplation. But it is not only" that 
 the holders of supreme power in a Democracy are 
 placed beyond the reach of censure ; they are like- 
 wise secure from all personal risk. * * Their 
 excesses may prove in the result detrimental to 
 themselves, but they can never be visited with 
 vengeance by the victims of their wrong. The 
 tyrant most fenced about with guards, is always 
 in proportion to his supremacy subject to fear — 
 
 * In p. 118 he applies all this to the " popular leader." 
 " He is secure of the approval of his own side, and he 
 looks not beyond it. For him, therefore, there exists no 
 such tribunal as the public, and no public opinion can have 
 any influence in controlling his proceedings ." 
 
 I consider all this as somewhat inconsistent with what he 
 says at p. 121, viz., that a Democracy is often unfavourable 
 to "free discussion in points of their highest interest." In 
 truth, all writers on America, as Brougham admits else- 
 where, say and say justly, that the tyranny of opinion is 
 the greatest defect of the Republican form of government. 
 Jefferson himself calls it the "Lord of the Universe." 
 The President of the States, far from being too little, is far 
 too much, under the influence of this power ; by it, he is 
 often degraded to yield to the most unjust and lowest pre* 
 judices of the mob. The great Jefferson, though a Deist, 
 could not make public profession beyond Unitarianism ; 
 and no President could go further in free thought on this 
 subject, even at the present day. However, this defect is 
 not confined to a Republic ; it will exist also in any govern- 
 ment that considers itself free. For instance, in England, 
 the power of opinion is still greater (as the late " beard 
 and moustache movement " shows) than in the States on 
 such minor points as these, equally as on religious 
 questions. 
 
78 
 
 LETTERS TO 
 
 his appointed punishment. Many an act is thus 
 prevented, and many a pain is thus endured. * * 
 " The sufferer who is oppressed by a tyrant or 
 an oligarchy has the sympathy of the people. 
 This is withheld from him who is the people's 
 victim ; and this has always been felt as an aggra- 
 vation of the wrongs which popular caprices in- 
 flict. * * The cruelty of the Parisian multi- 
 tude, during the reign of Terror, w^as raised to a 
 pitch altogether unendurable by their savage 
 exultation in the destruction of those patriots and 
 sages who had devoted the best energies of their 
 lives to the service of the people. 
 
 -*■ * * * 
 
 " No man dares breathe a whisper against the 
 prevailing sentiments, (when one party in a Demo- 
 cracy has been fully established.*) * * The 
 agitators in the French Revolution were only safe 
 if they adopted the most violent causes that were 
 propounded. Eobespierre succeeded by going 
 beyond all others, (Lord Brougham means in 
 public executions,) in his public life/* (The in- 
 ference from this passage, then, is that Eobespierre 
 was goaded to such excesses by fear of the people.) 
 
 * In allusion to this mob despotism, he asks in the next 
 page, (121,) " Who in England will show the difficulty of 
 carrying on the government without some nomination 
 boroughs? No one has dared,— and why? Because 
 the people, whose highest interests require full and deliberate 
 discussion (on this point,) will not permit it to be so much 
 as mentioned." This remark seems far more applicable to 
 the question of reform in religion, both in England and 
 America : yet with his usual caution on this topic, (as we 
 shall see further on,) it is altogether overlooked by Lord 
 Brougham. Even he, who alludes to " nomination 
 boroughs," says, like the multitude in general, " let us 
 leave the question of religion alone." I repeat, when we 
 hear such expressions as these, we are right with Mr. 
 Arthur Trevelyan to talk of the " insanity of mankind." 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 79 
 
 Again, at p. 182 — " Nothing can be more certain 
 than that the worst excesses of the French Kevo- 
 lution were occasioned by the interference of the 
 people with the proceedings of the Legislative 
 Assembly first, and afterwards of the National 
 Convention. Hardly a day passed without some 
 popular commotion ; and it was the ordinary 
 spectacle to see mobs enter the Hall, and demand 
 the adoption of certain favourite measures. It 
 was, I remember, usual to say in those days that 
 the whole of the mischief arose from suffering the 
 galleries to interfere with their plaudits or their 
 hisses. * * The people, both in Paris and the 
 great provincial towns, had only partially given 
 over their power to the Assembly or the Conven- 
 tion. * * They accordingly were distributed 
 in societies or clubs : they had nightly meetings 
 to discuss the proceedings taken by their deputies 
 during the morning : they arrogated to themselves 
 the right of approving or rejecting all that was 
 done by the constituted authorities: and they 
 knew their own power from the physical force in 
 their hands, well enough to rest satisfied with 
 nothing short of a direct control over those autho- 
 rities." * * He proceeds to say, these clubs 
 also communicated through the municipality with 
 the rabble of the streets, and the control of the 
 government was thus in their hands. " The 
 reign of terror strengthened whatever constitution 
 succeeded that of '93 : and the horror of mob- 
 violence continued, not only throughout the 
 directorial government to prevent all direct inter- 
 ference of the people, but was the main proof of 
 the consular and then of the imperial regimen,* 
 
 * Brougham had previously, at p. 60, stated the same. 
 
80 LETTERS TO 
 
 in both of which the people were deprived of all 
 influence, direct or indirect."* (p. 184.) 
 
 As neither in the above extracts, nor in any 
 other part of his work, do I perceive that Lord 
 Brougham even hints at the suppression of Chris- 
 tianity, as one of the causes of the excesses in 
 the French Eevolution, I presume I may place 
 him by the side of Lord Byron and others w T ho 
 do not consider that such excesses arose from any 
 such cause. Indeed, although in my opinion 
 Lord Brougham speaks in far too guarded and 
 ambiguous a manner for an impartial man on the 
 subject of religion generally, still it is remarkable 
 that he does not even mention religion even as a 
 " check " upon the Democratic form of govern- 
 ment, although he has a long section showing, in 
 such case, that " checks" are absolutely necessary ; 
 and have properly been resorted to at present by 
 the United States, with the same view that they 
 were formerly by the turbulent Democracy of 
 Athens, (pp. 99 to 167.) And, indeed, religion 
 is no doubt with the masses a much more feeble 
 " check " than actual law. 
 
 It will result I think from a careful perusal of 
 the part of Brougham's work just mentioned, that 
 he would attribute the excesses in question to the 
 absence of legal or political checks only. At 
 p. 101 he tells us, that triennial elections "seem 
 most desirable as a protection to representatives 
 for their indep en dance ,\ and to the people for 
 
 * I have sometimes abridged these quotations, where I 
 could do so without altering the meaning. Lord Brougham 
 and all who aim at occasional eloquence, necessarily say more 
 than the exact sense requires. 
 
 f These words of Brougham, which I have put in italics^ 
 sufficiently show that Rousseau was nearly right (at all 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 81 
 
 their power ;" and that annual elections, by 
 making delegates " mere agents/' do not oppose 
 a sufficiently strong " check" to Democracy. 
 In noticing the Athenian constitution, he says, 
 
 events) when he said the representative system, except 
 under annual election, was, as regards actual liberty of the 
 electors, a sort of sham or humbug. The precise words of 
 Rousseau, indeed, are only during election. (Contrat Social, 
 quoted by Brougham, p. 60.) Brougham, in reply to this, 
 says, the people only temporarily lose some power, and not 
 liberty. Brougham, in this remark, is endeavouring to 
 alter the meaning that Rousseau attached to the word 
 liberty. I believe Rousseau to be right in his assertion, at 
 the same time that with Brougham, I believe that the 
 people are much better off, and, considering the chances of 
 anarchy, practically speaking more free, when such checks 
 as he mentions are put upon their power or liberty, using 
 these words in the same sense ; for it seems to me to be 
 merely an attempt to humbug the people, by refining too 
 much on words. Tell them at once, you may lose or you 
 may not lose, (as the case turns out,) some liberty by the 
 representative system, but you will be better for it. As 
 Lord Brougham is very properly for giving the Suffrage to 
 all who can read and write, and are not under criminal dis- 
 ability, (Op. Cit., pp. 81-2,) I think his work would 
 have had higher merit if he had been equally liberal in 
 speaking truth more plainly on this subject, and also on 
 matters of religion. But, unfortunately, under our pseudo- 
 Protestant system, (itself the origin of all our cant,) the 
 habit we are all more or less obliged to contract of speak- 
 ing only half the truth in matters of religion, insinuates 
 itself, as in our present author's case, into other subjects, 
 and contributes to keep up the actor all through life. 
 
 I am not to be understood by the above remarks as 
 agreeing with all Rousseau's political opinions. In his 
 Contrat Social he seems rather inconsistent with his Con- 
 fessions, when, in his chapter De la Censure, he seems to 
 approve of having a very strong public opinion in a coun- 
 try. And though he seems right in considering that Theism 
 or u religion civile™ as he calls it, is necessary to all good 
 government, yet I would not banish those (as he would, 
 p. 285) who did not believe even in this : still less have 
 " those put to death (idem.) who, having sworn they be 
 E 2 
 
82 LETTERS TO 
 
 " no law inconsistent with an old one could be 
 proposed without directly repealing the old one ; — 
 an admirable rule for any Legislature/' (p. 103.) 
 And, I may remark, one which we ourselves should 
 do well to observe — we, who multiply laws ad i?i- 
 Jinitum to the advantage of lawyers, and injury of 
 the public. Although Lord Brougham censures 
 the " check/' which allowed the Athenian to pro- 
 secute the author of a law " found detrimental on 
 trial," (p. 104,) still it may be a debatable point 
 whether some very slight punishment (such as fine) 
 should not be inflicted on the authors of some of 
 our absurd laws, where the mere vanity of wishing 
 to be known as a new member often prompts the 
 illiterate man to propose a most unjust, as well as 
 absurd, change. 
 
 Turning to the " checks" in the United States, 
 we find that the one House is only elected for 
 two years, the other is elected for six, (and that 
 both are paid ;) and that the President is allowed 
 very great patronage and power. (104.) Further 
 on (p. 837) the following law is stated, which, if 
 not a check on the people, is, as Brougham says, 
 a wise check on the Legislature. The Supreme 
 Courts have the power to decide whether any pro- 
 position that has passed both Houses, is constitu- 
 tional or not ; and if considered not so, is pre- 
 prevented by these judges from becoming a law. 
 
 Brougham (at p. 105) enumerates in detail the 
 "checks" on the French Constitution of 1793, 
 without saying a word about the suppression of 
 Christianity. Again — " That of ? 95 was less 
 purely Democratic," (p. 105,) w T ith the same 
 
 lieved it, acted as if they did not." This was the unnatural 
 Theistic intolerance, that caused the Atheistic party to fear 
 and hate Robespierre so much ; and is too Christian and 
 tyrannical. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 83 
 
 silence as to religion. In this we find that both 
 Chambers were only elected for three j>ears, and 
 the Directors (or Presidents) for five years, (p. 
 105.) Hence, as in the United States, the Senate 
 is elected for six years, this constitution of '95 
 was still far more Democratic than that of America, 
 which had the advantage too of an additional 
 "check" against anarchy, viz , the having sepa- 
 rated from a less despotic Monarchy than had 
 existed in France. The Americans had thus been 
 gradually accustomed to a certain degree of liberty. 
 But the good influence even of this constitution 
 of '95 (too Democratic as it still was; over that 
 of '93, is shown by the wholesale murders and 
 other excesses for the most part ceasing after it 
 came into force.* If it be said that shortly after 
 this, (viz., in 1795,) Christianity was allowed to 
 make its appearance again, and this was the cause 
 of the great diminution in the amount of judicial 
 
 * Its faults are pointed out more in detail in Lord 
 Brougham's work. (pp. 350-353.) I do not, however, 
 observe that he passes a very decided opinion on the unity 
 or divisibility (so to speak) of the Executive. He, how- 
 ever, seems to prefer unity in this case ; and justly, for we 
 find in 1797 that three of the Directors (the Executive 
 consisted of five) combined against the other two, Carnot 
 and Barthelemy, and by the aid of military force succeeded 
 " in expelling and transporting" (p. 353) many members of 
 the Council ; so that, having destroyed this party, they 
 continued to govern the country for two years more by the 
 constitution of '95. The advantage of unity in the Exe- 
 cutive is shown by the present constitution of the United 
 States ; and if calculated to pi event discord among Ame- 
 ricans, was doubly necessary among such an excitable 
 people as the French. The election of many Royalists 
 was the chief cause of this outbreak : a cause which will 
 always continue to render the establishment of a Republic 
 in France next to impossible. Even America would pro- 
 bably not have continued so stable, if she had at first been 
 more than a Colony — a distant part of a Monarchy. 
 
84 LETTERS TO 
 
 murders, I reply by admitting the fact that the 
 people, in consequence of their petition to the new 
 Convention, were permitted to frequent the Catho- 
 lic churches, provided they consented to li main- 
 tain them at their own expense/'* I must admit, 
 therefore, that at this period there existed on the 
 part of the government a spirit of indifference in 
 matters of religion, (since we find they only yielded 
 to the wishes of the Catholics on this point,) in 
 which Christianity was tolerated as well as Robes- 
 pierre's Deism, or Theophilanthropism. But I 
 cannot attribute the increased humanity, as regards 
 the bloody scenes in question, to the influence of 
 Christianity, because this religion was not allowed 
 to have any power over the others, or to become 
 the national religion, until its final re-establish- 
 ment to that position by Napoleon, after he became 
 Emperor, It is quite clear, then, that the bene- 
 ficial change in question, after '95, arose from the 
 suppression of the spirit of anarchy among the 
 masses, by a less Democratic form of government 
 —in fact, by the direct influence of law, and not 
 by the ever indirect and uncertain influence of 
 religion. At the same time, I will admit that, 
 possibly this less inimical view, with which Chris- 
 tianity was regarded by the government, tended 
 to make the Christian part of the population less 
 disposed to change, or to run any chance of 
 anarchy. Kobespierre wished to make Deism the 
 State Religion ; his successors to raise Christianity 
 at all events to a level with it. But as I do not 
 attribute the murderous scenes during Robes- 
 pierre's tenure of office to his religion, but his too 
 great fear of the people, in consequence of the 
 government being too Democratic; so neither do 
 
 * Alison's French Revolution, p. 551. Again in chap. xix. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 85 
 
 I attribute the diminution in these massacres in 
 9 95 and the few following years* to any great in- 
 fluence from Christianity, which was only just be 
 ginning to show its head again. There are coinci- 
 dences in the moral equally as in the physical 
 world, which the mass of superficial thinkers are 
 apt to mistake for connexions ; and such has been, 
 and still is the case, I am sorry to say, on this 
 subject, both in Britain and the United States. 
 It is this fallacy, put forth with all the eloquence 
 of truth, by such men as Burke, that has contri- 
 buted to keep both these nations, as Hurlbut says 
 of the latter, (and might have said still more truly 
 of the former,) in such " an infant state of reli- 
 gious freedom." 
 
 To show the utter absurdity of the above opinion, 
 it is only necessary to reflect how superior the 
 government of the Roman Empire was under the 
 Pagans, Augustus, Trajan, Adrian, the Anto- 
 nines, &c, &c, to what it was under the Christian 
 Constantine a?id some of his Christian successors. 
 Or that of modern Prussia under the "infidel" 
 Frederick the Great, to that of his Christian 
 father. Now, as Christianity did not exist in 
 these cases just instanced, of course the good 
 government I allude to was not dependant on any 
 supposed " humanising effect" of such religion. 
 
 Lord Brougham in his Lives of Statesmen 
 passes the warmest eulogy on the character of 
 
 * No doubt the principle of re-action operated also. 
 Even the most Democratic must have perceived that whole- 
 sale murder had been carried much further than the stabi- 
 lity of the Republic required, and that many illustrious, 
 and at the same time harmless, men had been most unjustly 
 sacrificed, by (to put the best construction on the case) a 
 talse idea of utility. Accordingly, we find that in the out- 
 break in 1797 Carnot and others were only banished or 
 transported, and not guillotined. (See late Note.) 
 
86 LETTERS TO 
 
 Oarnot, who was at the head of the French army 
 during the time of Eobespierre ; and, as it seems 
 certain that he opposed no active opposition to 
 the "judicial murders " of this individual, I must 
 here adduce this fact in favour of my argument, 
 viz., that if not absolutely necessary, they seemed 
 expedient, in that very critical conjuncture of 
 affairs, and had nothing whatever to do with the 
 suppression of Christianity. Carnot's defence, 
 says Brougham, that " he remained in office with 
 such detestable men as his colleagues ; that he 
 even signed the orders of execution in his turn," 
 &c, &c, is, " that he began to administer the war 
 department, and had gained brilliant success, 
 before his colleagues commenced their reign of 
 terror. That had he followed his own inclinations 
 and opposed this, the country was conquered, 
 possibly portioned — far more blood spilt — far 
 more lasting disgrace incurred by the nation — far 
 more permanent disasters entailed upon all classes 
 of the people — than all that the terrorist execu- 
 tions and confiscations could produce. Was it 
 not enough for him to know, that his retirement 
 would certainly not have stayed the proscription, 
 while it most probably would have opened the 
 gates of Paris to the allies ?" (p. 365.) 
 
 Such are some of the leading arguments made 
 use of by Lord Brougham to justify the compara- 
 tively speaking passive part that Carnot took in 
 the so-called judicial proceedings of the reign of 
 terror. And when we remember, that " two 
 Spanish armies attacked the line of the Pyrenees, 
 that another was advancing from Piedmont ; that 
 La Vendee was in the hands of the rebels, with 
 40,000 armed peasantry ; that Marseilles and 
 Lyons had separated themselves from the re- 
 publican government, and that an English fleet 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 87 
 
 rode in the harbour of Toulon ; and nevertheless 
 that, in less than a year and a half of Carnot' s mi- 
 litary administration, twenty-seven victories had 
 been gained; 80,000 of the enemy slain, and 
 91,000 made prisoners, &c, &c." (Brougham, 
 p. 369) we must feel inclined to argue that 
 Carnot required every possible assistance from at 
 least wholesale banishment — if not from wholesale 
 slaughter by the guillotine — in order to diminish 
 the number of internal royalist French foes, 
 when so many external foreign ones threatened on 
 all sides. 
 
 This assertion is clearly true, since further on, 
 (p. 371,) Lord Brougham says, "It is believed 
 that at every period of the Kevolution. the great 
 majority of the French people, except in the ca- 
 pital were averse to republican principles ; and the 
 elections of 1797, (the first under the new consti- 
 tution,) returned a majority of royalists and mo- 
 derate reformers." When Pichegru, a royalist was 
 elected President of the Five Hundred, and Carnot 
 knew that insurrection was plotting against him- 
 self and the republican party generally, " he was 
 still above/' says Brougham, " all acts that wore 
 even the semblance of treachery, and became the 
 sacrifice to his unchangeable integrity," (being 
 banished as we have already observed.) 
 
 When another revolution destroyed the directo- 
 rial power, and placed Napoleon as First Consul, 
 Carnot was recalled by him from exile and became 
 war minister ; but " he resigned the office/' says 
 Brougham, " when he perceived that Napoleon 
 harboured projects hostile to liberty, having voted 
 against the Consulship for life and the Imperial 
 title." (p. 372.) All this shows the disinterestedness 
 of the man, and is favourable to the view that the 
 
88 LETTERS TO 
 
 present writer, following Brougham in this re- 
 spect, takes of his indirect support of the reign of 
 terror ; viz., he must have regarded it at the time 
 as a sort of necessary evil. 
 
 Sir Archibald Alison, in one of the most elo- 
 quent passages of his History of Europe, (vol. ii., 
 p 144.), supports Lord Brougham in the above 
 view of Carnot's character, and concludes this 
 eulogy on his " real greatness," by noticing the 
 fact that should never be lost sight of in attempt- 
 ing to form an impartial judgment of Robespierre, 
 and all concerned in the government in 1793-4, 
 viz., that France on this occasion, resisted success- 
 fully a more formidable attack — especially when 
 the immense opposition of the Vendee is re- 
 membered, than Napoleon, with his <( veterans/' 
 was able to do in 1815. " And this," says Alison, 
 was due to the ability of the Committee of Public 
 Safety, " and the despotic power wielded by 
 the Convention." (Op. Git., p. 145 J " "Fear be- 
 came the great engine for filling the ranks ; the 
 bayonets of the allies appeared less formidable, 
 than the guillotine of the Convention." (p. 144 ) 
 
 Alison takes a fairer view of Robespierre's cha- 
 racter, than a writer so opposed to him in religion 
 and politics could perhaps, generally speaking, 
 have been expected to take. " He and his party 
 deemed the blood that was spilt essential to the 
 success of freedom. * * In arriving at this 
 conclusion, they were doubtless mainly influenced 
 by the perils of their own situation ; they mas- 
 sacred others, because they were conscious that 
 death, if vanquished, justly awaited themselves; 
 but still the weakness of humanity in their, as in 
 many similar cases, deluded them by the magic of 
 words, or the supposed influence of power motives, 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 89 
 
 and led them to commit the greatest crimes, while 
 constantly professing the noblest intentions.* 
 There is nothing surprising in this; we have only 
 to recollect, that all France joined in a crusade 
 against the Albigeois, and that its bravest men 
 deemed themselves secure from eternal, by con- 
 signing thousands of wretches to temporal, flames : 
 we have only to go back to Godfrey de Bouillon, 
 and the Christian warriors putting 40,000 unresist- 
 ing citizens to death on the storming of Jerusalem, 
 to be convinced that such delusions are not pecu- 
 liar to any particular age or country, but that they 
 are the universal offspring of fanaticism, whether 
 in political or religious contests. The writers, who 
 represent the Jacobins as mere blood thirsty 
 wretches, are well meaning and amiable, but weak 
 and ignorant men." (Op. Cit., p. 209. J In a 
 note he says, that Napoleon and Cambaceres took 
 a similar view of Robespierre's character, i( that 
 he had not attended the Committees for six weeks 
 before his fall," and " was at last desirous to stop 
 the executions." (Las Cases. J 
 
 * I believe they actually liad also good " intentions ;" 
 but Robespierre's principles obliging him to live in the 
 humblest manner, (as Lamartine shows,) he, of course, 
 could create no fear by moral means, i.e., by external 
 pomp. And having not enough physical power at his com- 
 mand, (as he was not a military man,) his position was a 
 false one, and instead of wholesale slaughter by cannon, 
 (as used in a subsequent revolution by Napoleon,) he was 
 driven to the same by the guillotine. The United States 
 have wisely given great power and patronage to their 
 president, and hence, although he has little moral power 
 from the effect of pomp in subduing the mind, he has what 
 is at the bottom of all good government, much physical 
 power. The very democratic French government allowing 
 little or none of this to Robespierre, his intentions, even 
 when noble, often became useless, and he was driven on by 
 a sort of desperation, which, at times, lost sight of justice 
 entirely. 
 
90 LETTERS TO 
 
 I shall now enter into more details with respect 
 to the war in the Vendee, and first attempt to show 
 that Alison's conclusion against Republicans gene- 
 rally, and more especially against Deism, from the 
 atrocities committed in this war, is not only erro- 
 neous, but incompatible with the quotation just 
 given, in which we find 40 5 000 unresisting citi- 
 zens were put to death by men, with all their faults, 
 who were Christians in earnest* — inclined to 
 practice, what they at least conceived to be directly 
 or indirectly commanded by scripture, and not 
 of the present hypocritical and sanctified class, 
 (I speak generally), who make their religion to 
 consist in mere assertions and appearances, while 
 their every day conduct is such, that it is obvious 
 they do not even attempt to practice some of its 
 very easiest duties. 
 
 He says, " this contest first put the cause of re- 
 volution openly and irrevocably at war with that of 
 religion ; the friends of real freedom ! (sic. J 
 (he should have said slavery) for permanently en- 
 listing on their side, a power which will never be 
 subdued." (p. 140). 
 
 I may observe here, that by " religion," he means 
 of course Christianity; for Robespierre's Deism 
 seems regarded by him little better than Atheism. 
 As to Christianity " never being subdued," that 
 remains to be seen when it has lasted as long as 
 the Egyptian and Pagan religions lasted. 
 
 " Religions take their turns ; 'twas Jove, 'tis Jesus," 
 
 says Lord Byron. Religion itself " will never be 
 subdued;" but Christianity is not this eternal 
 natural religion. 
 
 " From the atrocious severities of the Republi- 
 
 * " The faith which then filled the souls of men, says 
 Valery, (Travels, p. 406,) is evaporated." 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 91 
 
 can's sway in this province, has arisen the profound 
 hatred of all the believers in the Christian faith at 
 their rule/' f idem J 
 
 He should, perhaps, have said Deistical Repub- 
 lican sway to make the sense of this passage 
 clearer; for the Christian world seems to have no 
 objection to Eepublicanism as it exists in Switzer- 
 land, and the United States, because the vast ma- 
 jority in both these Republics profess Christianity, 
 and opinion is against Deism. 
 
 Alison, then, clearly means, that all believers 
 in the Christian faith, ascribe those monstrous 
 enormities, (i the Republican baptisms and mar- 
 riages'/ to the proscription of Christianity from 
 the French Republican government at this time. 
 
 As I believe this is the general sentiment, I do 
 not object to his stating it as such, but to his 
 appearing to embrace such belief himself, after 
 having made the statement we see he has done, in 
 reference to 40,000 unresisting citizens put to 
 death by pious Christians as they called, and no 
 doubt thought themselves. He might, moreover, 
 have added to these, the slaughter by Christian 
 armies, after the taking of Mexico and Peru, &c, 
 &c, &c. 
 
 But it is now time to make some statements, 
 which will show that the slaughter, (I do not mean 
 by this to include wanton cruelty) in the Vendee was 
 even more justifiable than that in Jerusalem, for 
 in the last case, we find the citizens " unresisting ;" 
 whereas in the Vendee, the people were urged on 
 by the Priests, and resisted with such success, that 
 they were very near destroying the embryo Re- 
 public itself, as the following extract from Alison's 
 chapter on this subject, evinces : — 
 
 "Thus was the invasion of six armies, amount- 
 ing to 100.000 ! (sic J regular troops, part of 
 
92 LETTERS TO 
 
 whom were the best soldiers of France defeated, 
 and losses inflicted on the Republicans, incompara- 
 bly greater than they had suffered from all the allies 
 put together since the commencement of the war" — 
 viz., by the Vendeans. (Op. Cit., Ch. xii., p. 117.) 
 We find subsequently, that the Republicans were 
 successful, but the above extract will show the 
 immense difficulty put in their way by the Ven- 
 deans. (See also p. 189 to same effect.) 
 
 But the causes of this war — which subsequently 
 assumed all the character of a war of Christian fana- 
 ticism against natural religion, and not as formerly 
 against Mahoramedanism — were like those of the 
 revolution itself, of a far more material character, 
 than we might be at first inclined to believe. 
 " The confiscation of the church property, says 
 Alison, rendered necessary the laws against the 
 refractory priests, and thereby lighted the flames 
 of civil war in La Vendee. " (Op. Cit., p. 225.) 
 The Christian priests then, when like the curate 
 of St. Maria de Re, to be noticed presently, with 
 the cross in their hands, they harangued the ig- 
 norant but loyal peasants about to combat, were 
 seeking revenge for loss of their property,* (in 
 this respect, perhaps justly), as well as to revenge 
 the attempt that Robespierre, as far as he indivi- 
 dually was concerned, had made, to put Deism 
 somewhat above Christianity ; for he as already 
 stated, was not of those who insanely attempted to 
 drive all religion from the earth. 
 
 " My children," said de Re, " I will march at 
 your head with the crucifix in my hands ; let those 
 who follow me fall on their knees, and / will give 
 
 * u The levy of 300,000 men ordered by the Convention 
 in February, 1793," was also greatly concerned, as Alison 
 informs us. (Op. Cit., p. 98.) 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 93 
 
 them absolution : if they fall, they will be received, 
 into Paradise; but the cowards who betray God 
 and their families, will be massacred by the blues, 
 and their souls consigned to hell" (Op. Cit. 5 
 p. 127., Chap, xiij Above 2.000 men fell on 
 their knees, received absolution and returned to 
 battle, the curate at their head, exclaiming — " Vive 
 le Moi, nous allons en Paradis." (Op. Cit., ib.J 
 
 I have purposely marked in italics passages in 
 this address, similar to those addressed to men in 
 the earlier times of Mahommedanism, and equally 
 well calculated to urge them on to far more despe- 
 rate combat, than any w T ords with which an 
 Atheist, or even conscientious Deist, could possibly 
 speak to them. But as every impartial man, must 
 I apprehend regard such words in the light of rank 
 blasphemy, in which the creature assumes the 
 power of the Creator, and of obvious fraud,* for 
 the sake of taking an advantage of the Eepublican 
 enemy, we have, perhaps, some little justification 
 for the fierce paroxysms of rage— little short of in- 
 sanity — with which they must have filled the bosom 
 of an almost beaten Eepublican army, and conse- 
 quently for the subsequent crimes of Carrier in his 
 s; baptisms and marriages." 
 
 We find that, after the above quoted address of 
 De Ee, the Eoyalists won the battle, leaving 6,000 
 killed and wounded on the field ; and that such 
 was the rancour inspired by fanaticism, that " they 
 seized each other and tore their bodies with their 
 hands after the ammunition had ceased/' (Op. Git., 
 p. 127.) 
 
 * Yet Alison passes over this address, rather with seem- 
 ing approval than otherwise ; so impossible is it for the 
 most disinterested Christian writer, in the present tyranni- 
 cal state of opinion on the subject, to be as impartial as he 
 otherwise, no doubt, would be ! 
 
94 LETTERS TO 
 
 Alison, on a former occasion, forgetting, per- 
 haps, what he was afterwards to assert as facts, 
 p. 96) tal ks about " this superstition being of so 
 gentle and holy a kind," and endeavours through 
 this chapter to make out that the cruelty was on 
 the Republican side. Admitting that it was so to 
 a greater extent, the following passages will show 
 that the Royalist peasants, with all their " holy 
 superstition," were not always so " gentle 5 ' as he 
 asserts. " When Machecoul was captured, the 
 prisons was forced by a furious mob, and above 
 eighty Republicans massacred in one day." Again, 
 f< nearly 500 Republicans fell victims to the rage 
 of a Royalist Committee." (Chap, xii., p. 104.) 
 Again, (chap, xvi., p. 274) " Charette stormed 
 three of the intrenched camps, and put their gar- 
 risons to the sword." Yet this was the very Cha- 
 rette who he says, at p. 104, " was horror-struck" 
 at the murder of the 500 Republicans just men- 
 tioned, and a man who often " had recourse to the 
 clergy" to instil obedience into his men, and who 
 " took an oath to be faithful to the cause of God 
 (as he called it) and the throne." (p. 107.) 
 
 Perhaps, from the history of this brave man, 
 (such he was, certainly,) may be gleaned one of 
 the best arguments to show that even the Repub- 
 licans tried to begin by being mild, for " when 
 he was at the head of only fourteen followers 
 (he subsequently had 20,000 under him alone) the 
 Convention offered him a million of francs if he 
 would retire to England." (p. 107.) Again, (p. 108) 
 " It is painful, said the Republican Commis- 
 sioners, to be obliged to proceed to extremities, 
 but they cannot be avoided, from the fanaticism of 
 the peasants, who, in no one instance, have been 
 known to betray their landlords/' 
 
 After the fall of Robespierre, and the just exe- 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. ■ 95 
 
 cution of Carrier,* by whose orders the " mar 
 riages and baptisms" took place, we find a treaty 
 (January 1795) was concluded between the Ven- 
 deans and Republican government, in which the 
 former were allowed the free exercise of Chris- 
 tianity, two millions of francs for their war ex- 
 penses and various indemnities, pardons, almost 
 total exemption from taxes, &c, &c, and they were 
 to submit to the Eepublic. But even this did not 
 satisfy them, for we find Charette, in the July 
 following, joining other Royalists ; and they were 
 scarcely even put down by Hoche and the great 
 army in 1796 ! (Alison, chap, xviii.,) for we find 
 them subsequently, in two years or so, breaking 
 out again. (Idem.) 
 
 Thus we observe that, notwithstanding Carrier's 
 atrocities, intended to extend the " reign of terror ' 
 to the Vendue, and only resorted to towards the 
 close of that reign after other more conciliatory 
 measures had failed, Charette may still be said to 
 have beaten Robespierre's government ! Thus, 
 though nothing can justify the murder of the 
 women and children (37,000 according to Alison, 
 p. 207) and Carrier's other victims in the Vendue, 
 still I have said enough to show that these mur- 
 ders, unlike those at Jerusalem, were caused by 
 most determined opposition on the part of the 
 Royalists, and consequently were, in this respect, 
 more justifiable than these and many others that 
 have taken place in the world. 
 
 Moreover, it is clear that the Vendeans were not 
 murdered because they were fanatical Christians, 
 and that the Republicans would certainly not have 
 
 * ("Chap, xix., p. 333, &c.) As " his authority was un- 
 bounded," (p. 333) of course Robespierre had little to do 
 with the murders in this remote district, any more than his 
 Deism had. 
 
03 LETTERS TO 
 
 troubled themselves about their exercising their 
 religion in private (nor perhaps even in public,* 
 though their churches had been shut by go- 
 vernment) ; whereas, the 40,000 were murdered by 
 the Christians in Jerusalem solely on account of 
 their being of a different religion — viz., Mahom- 
 medans ! 
 
 These reflections will at once show that the brutal 
 murders in the Vendee were not caused by the 
 absence of all belief in Christianity in the minds 
 of the Eepublicans, as a former quotation from 
 Alison shows us the world at large, including 
 himself, inclines to believe ; and, consequently, 
 were, in reality, not near of so atrocious a cha- 
 racter as those in Jerusalem. 
 
 And now let any impartial man go back to the 
 following quotations, and mark the gross injustice 
 with which one of the most impartial of the Chris- 
 tian writers is obliged, by his creed, to terminate 
 his paragraph. 
 
 " After seven years, viz., in 1800, the worship 
 of Christianity was restored by Napoleon ; but a 
 great portion of the youth of France had been 
 brought up, without receiving any religious impres- 
 
 * I set down this as possible, because Robespierre's object 
 was merely to put Deism as the state religion in place of 
 Christianity, at the same time, as I have observed, evincing 
 a disposition to tolerate this latter as well as Judaism, &c. 
 I observe, in Lord Brougham's Robespierre, (p. 32) that his 
 lordship says, the effort of Robespierre to introduce Theism 
 " was wholly unnecessary for re-establishing religion, and 
 gained no object but that of exciting distrust, &c, among 
 the infidel part of the community, without at all reconciling 
 the votaries of Christianity." No doubt such was the case 
 as to these two latter effects, but Lord Brougham, like the 
 other " votaries of Christianity," would probably as soon 
 see Atheism as any religion except Christianity prevail. 
 Hence this indifference, amounting to injustice, to the man 
 on this point. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 97 
 
 sions in early life." * * " This, has for ever 
 disqualified the French for the enjoyment of free- 
 dom, because it has extinguished the feelings of 
 duty, on which alone it can be founded in the 
 young and influential part of the people." (Chap, i, 
 p. 47.) 
 
 Where were the " feelings of duty," when the 
 pious Christians murdered the 40,000 at Jeru- 
 salem ? If it had not been for their religion, they 
 would never have thought this to be a duty. Hence 
 it is clear, that at least sometimes, Christianity 
 may come to make sincere men consider the very 
 greatest of all human crimes, a positive duty ! /"* 
 I hold, also, that " feelings of duty" are necessary 
 to " freedom ;" but maintain that Christianity gives 
 wrong feelings of duty, and that they should be 
 founded on Theism, or the reason given by God to 
 correct any errors of conscience. On the contrary, 
 " impressions" of Calvinism, instilled " in early 
 life," are the origin of our self-sufficiency, cant, 
 and really irreligious conduct in the daily affairs of 
 life, because they cause the intolerance of public 
 opinion. 
 
 I have already observed the Convention of 1795 
 repealed the law of !793, which actually prohi- 
 bited Christian worship. This, it must be con- 
 fessed, seems a more equitable system, than the 
 
 * Along with the minor vices of this creed may be 
 noticed the following from Hume's Dialogues concerning 
 natural religion, (p. 105.) u Among ourselves, some 
 (probably he means the Calvinists) have been guilty of that 
 atrociousness, unknown to the Egyptian and Greek supersti- 
 tions, of declaiming, in express terms, against morality." 
 All Christian sects do more or less, when they place so 
 much merit in faith. 
 
 Another vice in Christianity, unknown to the ancient 
 superstitions, is the doctrine of repentance atoning for sin 
 — a doctrine still more probably, " against morality." 
 F 
 
98 LETTERS TO 
 
 mere private sort of toleration of Christianity by 
 Kobespierre ; yet, nevertheless, we can also infer 
 from what took place after this change, the erro- 
 neousness of Alison's assertion, that the mildness 
 of the treatment of the Kepublican prisoners by 
 the Koyalists in the war of La Vendee, was due 
 to their strong faith in Christianity . since we find 
 that just after! the above decree too, some of 
 this very religious party did not scruple to exercise 
 their revenge on the Terrorists, and (( that eighty 
 Jacobins only escaped execution, by secreting 
 themselves." (Chap, xix., p. 348.) " At Lyons, 
 Aix, &c, they (the Eoyalists) massacred, the pri- 
 soners without either trial or discrimination.'* 
 " The re-action was terrible/' (p. 347.) Thus, 
 by the above words, he contradicts himself.* 
 
 Humanity did not thoroughly begin to reign 
 till after Napoleon and Barras had secured the 
 power: of the Convention by their victory over the 
 National Guards towards the end of October, in 
 1795; and this humanity had little to do with 
 religion, for many members of the Convention 
 were Jacobins, Theists, and Atheists, and Chris- 
 
 * The impartial reader will also observe that I have 
 taken only the numbers as stated by Alison, (which may be 
 perfectly correct,) without consulting the opposite, or my 
 own party, on this particular point. 
 
 Another consideration is, that there is somewhat more 
 excuse for the atrocities of " infidels " in this war, because 
 they saw that the Christian party took advantage of some 
 of the most bigotted passages in their creed to cause their 
 party to fight well. Now, perhaps, sometimes this was 
 from faith ; but as it was also often probably from mere 
 fraud to increase courage, the Republicans found they had 
 nothing to oppose to this falsehood, but to endeavour to 
 inspire terror into the minds of the Royalists by the 
 severity of the punishments they inflicted on prisoners. The 
 Mahommedan lie so excited fanaticism, that at first this 
 sect conquered everywhere. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 99 
 
 tianity was only on a sort of level with Theism, 
 &c, till 1800. A more humane spirit had, indeed, 
 began to show itself in April, when some Jacobin 
 insurgents were transported to Cayenne, instead 
 of being guillotined. The government was, how- 
 ever, hardly yet strong enough for such a measure, 
 for a successful attempt at rescue was made by 
 their comrades, and they were not retaken till 300 
 of the military had been called out. No doubt 
 Robespierre thought that his government was not 
 strong enough for such a measure. And such 
 opinion might have been supported by a subse- 
 quent Jacobin insurrection, which took place on 
 the 24th of May ; for on this occasion we find 
 the guillotine was again resorted to in the end of 
 June, 1795, and that "three who tried to stab 
 themselves were led, still bleeding, to execution!' 
 (Chap. xix. 5 p. 341.) Thus it was only, in fact, 
 when the government came into the hands of 
 military men, (Napoleon and Barras,) at the end 
 of October, '95, that a more lenient mode of 
 punishment could be judiciously resorted to. Thus 
 we see that a mild, yet perfectly Democratic govern* 
 ment (such as under Robespierre) is next to im- 
 possible, unless we give military men a preponde- 
 rance in the rule, and then it is only one remove 
 from a despotism, and is in the power of such 
 military men to convert it to such, if it 
 pleases them. Such did Napoleon shortly after- 
 wards. This reflection will, like former ones, 
 bring us to the conclusion that Robespierre's 
 cruelty was necessary for such a very Democratic 
 Constitution to stand its ground ; and not in the 
 slightest degree dependant on his want of belief 
 in Christianity.* At the same time, I will admit 
 
 * Again to the same purpose. From October 1795 to 
 1800 France existed without Christianity as the established 
 
100 LETTEKS TO 
 
 that the attempt to suppress this by force, was 
 very impolitic, to say the least ; and, if I may 
 use the expression, an attempt to be as foolishly 
 Democratic in matters of religion, as they had 
 been in civil government. Had they begun with 
 the constitution of '95, as regarded religion, and 
 allowed the Vendee peasants to attend Christian 
 worship in their churches, if they consented to 
 pay for it, we should not probably have had 
 De Be addressing them, as we find he did, or a 
 peasant on another occasion, noticed by Alison, 
 fighting furiously to the last, though desperately 
 wounded, and exclaiming to the Eepublicans 
 before he fell — " Restore to me my God." 
 
 Such, at least, would have been the more just 
 and milder system ; and as it might have prevented 
 so much opposition on their part at first, might, 
 as a consequence, have also prevented the " Bap- 
 tisms and Marriages," and other atrocities of the 
 Republicans. I am not, however, prepared to 
 speak with certainty on this point ; since we find 
 that under the Roman Empire, Christianity never 
 was content until it had put all other religions 
 beneath itself; and since we find that even after 
 1795, when it had acquired this equality with 
 
 religion, its belief or profession being voluntary. Yet during 
 these years the " atrocities" were not repeated. But why not, 
 if the absence of Christianity had previously caused these? 
 The fact is, the French people acted with more humanity and 
 justice during this period, than often subsequently when 
 Napoleon — forgetting somewhat his splendid address, "My 
 empire ends where that of conscience begins " — restored 
 Catholicism. Our fanatically or hypocritically Christian 
 Cromwell, too, sent his prisoners of war to be slaves in 
 the West Indies. (Guizot's Cromwell. 1855.) Some 
 men would have thought this a more severe punishment 
 than Robespierre's guillotine. It shows, at all events, that 
 Christianity in its Puritanical form, is little more humane 
 than Theism, or than Catholicism. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 101 
 
 Deism, and the Vendeans had, as already men- 
 tioned, obtained a treaty, the most honourable that 
 could possibly have been granted by any govern- 
 ment which still continued ^Republican and not 
 Eoyalist, they were dissatisfied, and took up arms 
 again on the first favourable occasion. 
 
 Whether, therefore, this more just system would 
 have succeeded better may be somewhat doubtful ; 
 but we must not probably put the blame on Eobes- 
 pierre and the Deists, that it was not introduced 
 at first ; for they took the government as they 
 found it, and it was no doubt their great enemies 
 — the Atheistic party — who had been mainly in- 
 strumental in prohibiting Christian worship by 
 actual law. Eobespierre, probably, would not 
 have dared to have favoured Christianity thus far, 
 seeing that his restoring the worship of God only, 
 met with great opposition from the Atheists, and 
 was more or less instrumental in his fall. 
 
 I may close these remarks on Eobespierre by 
 saying, that while I believe the religious creed he 
 had taken from Eousseau had nothing to do with 
 the massacres in question, I cannot perhaps say 
 the same for Eousseau's political creed, viz., the 
 " equality of men." Fanaticism on this point 
 spurred Eobespierre on ; but, strange to say, this 
 was Sir T. More's creed as a Christian. 
 
 I have now given my matured and settled 
 opinion, that the enormities committed in the first 
 French Eevolution did not arise from the suppres- 
 sion of Christianity as the religion of the State. 
 In a former publication, before I had investigated 
 this subject, I asked — Was not the slaughter in 
 question due to this absence of Christianity ? 
 deeming that it probably was. This query it was 
 that induced me to investigate the subject fully, 
 in order to remove one prejudice that still adheres 
 
102 LETTERS TO 
 
 to the minds even of some liberal and intelligent 
 men on this subject, and is perhaps at the bottom 
 of the strong respect of the vast unreflecting 
 multitude in England and America for the Christian 
 faith. But being fully satisfied I have said enough 
 to show it is not essential to social order, I now 
 close this point. 
 
 Another seeming objection alone remains. I 
 allude to the fact that none of the enormities of 
 the French Eevolution took place in the American 
 Revolution, and as the Americans always respected 
 Christianity, and public opinion in the country 
 was in favour of it, was not this the cause of the 
 difference ? Probably such is still the opinion in 
 America— indeed, I have heard an American assert 
 it ; but that it is fallacious, is clear, not only from 
 the example of ancient Eome, already instanced^ 
 but also from the different position France was in 
 at the time of her revolution from America ; for 
 here there was no Vendee with its 100,000 
 Royalists to oppose ; nor the foreign armies of 
 all Europe. Neither had the Americans Red 
 Republicanism for their government; and conse- 
 quently they had a Democracy more easily 
 managed. It is no doubt their merit to have fixed 
 on this less Democratic form of government. But 
 such choice and the above different position, aided 
 perhaps also by a less excitable nature, were no 
 doubt the cause of the far less amount of atrocity 
 in their revolution. I assert their Christianity 
 was totally or nearly unconcerned in it. 
 
 I have made this solemn appeal chiefly to you, 
 Citizens of the United States, to know whether the 
 insanity of mankind* as Mr. Trevelyan justly 
 
 * A man who asserts that mankind in general are mad, 
 doubtless will be considered to be so himself; but I agree 
 with Mr. Trevelyan that they are so, and for this simple 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 103 
 
 designates it, is to continue for ever, and to re- 
 main incurable ? In consequence of the universal 
 diffusion of education among you, you are prepared 
 for a really rational form of religion, I mean pure 
 Theism ; and if you cannot get a majority of your 
 citizens to confess, what they must I think now 
 really believe on religious matters, cannot you, at 
 all events, get a law enacted for making this a 
 state religion, to which every one of you should be 
 obliged to contribute ? I think the intelligent 
 among you would not consider this an abridge- 
 ment of rational liberty any more than Plato or 
 Eousseau (those well-known apostles of political 
 liberty) did formerly. I see that a Mr. Eussell of 
 Cincinnati,* thinks you would be better for some 
 state religion, as the poorer classes could then 
 attend a place of worship with more satisfaction to 
 themselves. I conjure you, then, in case of any 
 change in your system, to make thai religion a 
 religion of state, which alone is worthy to be so 
 among a really sane and intellectual people. 
 
 As outward forms and ceremonies in religion 
 ever have been, and ever will be of importance as 
 influencing the imagination, and by this the feeling 
 of veneration inherent in the human soul, I shall 
 here state that I think the establishment of the 
 Theistic form of worship should by no means be 
 accompanied with the simplicity and tyrannical 
 spirit of order and separation of poor and rich, 
 
 reason, viz., that, compared with custom and fashion, reason 
 has little or no power over their actions. Such madness 
 in lesser matters is not of much consequence ; but when it 
 shows itself, as it does now, among the most civilised 
 nations existing, in regard to religion, the case is altered. 
 Lord Byron said, " Turn Bedlam out ;" and this playful 
 instinct of the poet seems almost approved by reason. 
 
 * England and America Compared. Watson. Holyoake 
 147, Fleet Street. 
 
104 LETTERS TO 
 
 which prevails especially in Calvinistic Protestant- 
 ism, hut, on the contrary, with all the externals 
 of Eoman Catholicism. In this respect, I hold 
 this religion to he perfect ; and when also accom- 
 panied with the toleration that existed perhaps 
 in still more perfection under the reign of Louis 
 Philippe than it does even at present in France, 
 I could even subscribe to its mysteries, taken in a 
 very general sense. It was, and still is, or ought to 
 be, far more tolerant than our Protestantism. 
 
 I observe that the author of Quinquenergia* 
 while proposing the Theistic form of worship — 
 which is the only true part of any ''revealed" 
 religion — also seems in favour of the externals 
 of Catholicism, in which much of the classical 
 Pagan system is very properly followed. Pro- 
 cessions, incense, splendid cathedrals, — open, too, 
 every day, — in order to afford the poor and weary 
 man an asylum and better home than his own, 
 and where he can pray in peace, whether the priest 
 be there or not, — such are some of the outlines 
 for " Deo erexit Voltaire " establishments. 
 
 I feel the more confidence in proposing the 
 Theistic form of worship, as the same may be said 
 to have been done by Sir Thomas More in his 
 Utopia, who seems, even at that period, to have 
 thought it preferable to literal Christianity, and 
 who, doubtless, had he lived to see the subsequent 
 massacres caused by this, would have considered 
 it doubly so afterwards. 
 
 It was probably the advantage that many pas- 
 sages in scripture gave to those who say that into- 
 lerance is the basis of Christianity, that led More 
 to prefer Theism, t for he says, p. 173, "one 
 
 * Chapman, London. 1854. 
 
 t I know that the charge of intolerance in practice has 
 been brought against More, and perhaps justly ; but when 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 105 
 
 Christian was punished by the Utopians because 
 he cried out that ' they were impious and damned 
 to everlasting burnings/'' He was "banished" 
 for thus attempting to inflame the people to 
 " sedition ;" and in this case I do not perceive 
 any intolerant feeling in More, for the Christian 
 in question uttered words without solid evidence 
 of their truth, and which were well calculated to 
 cause civil discord and revolution. Had the 
 ancient Eoman government punished fanaticism 
 in this summary way, Christianity would probably 
 never have upset Paganism. Occasionally, no 
 doubt, it was too severe to those professing Chris- 
 tianity, but taken in its whole course too tolerant. 
 More would have the priests elected by ballot, 
 and required to preach only the doctrines of Pro- 
 vidence and a future state. He tolerates all reli- 
 gions, and Christianity among them, because, 
 says he, this favours " community of goods," 
 which he, like Plato, thought should exist in every 
 system of perfect* justice. Thanks to the ambi- 
 guity of the creed, scarcely a single Christian has 
 ever adopted such view ! Yet I think with More, 
 that the general tenor of scripturef is to support 
 
 the passions are excited, a man is sometimes led to acts his 
 reason condemns. This, then, is no argument against the 
 views of his cooler moments. 
 
 * I also hold this opinion as far as abstract justice is 
 concerned ; but maintain that such pure justice cannot be 
 put in practice on earth on any large scale, and that, con- 
 sequently, perhaps the best form of government is 'perfect 
 equality (not mere toleration) of all religions, and strong 
 executive power — hereditary probably the best. It is sin- 
 gular that this was adopted in Sparta, as regarded their 
 King, and that even the Senators there were elected for 
 life. (Plutarch. Polybius.) Thus we find a thorough 
 aristocratic ! principle, even in this very small Social Re- 
 public; otherwise, probably, it would not have lasted so long. 
 
 t It may be said such opinion of equality is incompatible 
 f 2 
 
106 LETTERS TO 
 
 this said doctrine of the "natural equality of 
 man." 
 
 "No prayers are permitted among the Utopians, 
 but such as every one (all the different religious 
 sects) may use without prejudice to his own opi- 
 nions." (p. 185.) This is admirable, and is the 
 only manner to unite all the different religions as 
 far as they can be so ; and to reconcile different 
 sects to worship in the same church. Dr. Arnold, 
 when he wished to see this in reference to Protes- 
 tants and Catholics, forgot the definite and often 
 intolerant prayers and creeds which are frequently 
 repeated in so formal a manner in our Protestant 
 churches, as if expressly to exclude Unitarians 
 and Catholics from repeating them. More, on 
 the contrary, like Pope, prefers a sort of " univer- 
 sal prayer." 
 
 More would also justly have the different sexes 
 occupy different parts of the same cathedral , and 
 the young women in company with the old, to 
 
 with the assertion of "damnation" denounced against 
 those who u resist the powers that be." No doubt: and 
 here is another specimen of ambiguity. But I consider this 
 last as a proof rather of that subservience of Christianity 
 to the temporal power of the Caesars at the time, which we 
 observe in the reply, " Render unto Caesar the things 
 which are Caesars," &c, than to its true and proper charac- 
 ter and meaning. At its origin, property was common 
 among Christians, and all was real equality among them ; 
 for Christ himself seemed to order this equality, when he 
 told the rich man u to sell all he had to give to the poor." 
 It was enab'ed to get itself adopted by Emperors, because 
 it seemed not to interfere with politics, and also because it 
 seemed to sanction their divine right to power. But once 
 adopted by Monarchs its doctrines of equality were for- 
 gotten, as being incompatible with those advocating 
 " divine" right ; and this last doctrine is no doubt the cause 
 why it has reigned so long on earth, as Monarchs have the 
 physical force at their disposal. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 107 
 
 keep them serious, (p. 187.) Also incense, as a 
 sort of sacrifice during worship ; and after prayers, 
 amusements on the Sunday evening. (Idem. J 
 
 To conclude : while he thus makes a liberal 
 Theism the religion of the State, he may no doubt 
 be accused of some degree of intolerance in ex- 
 cluding, as he does, Atheists from all public 
 offices ; but Plato, and after him Kousseau, were 
 probably still more severe on this point. 
 
 Here, then, is the religion I propose as an 
 answer to the infidel Lord Chesterfield's question 
 — " Madam, what are we Legislators to put in the 
 place of Christianity ?" 
 
 I also allude to the existence of the Koman 
 Empire — and in its greatest glory too — up to the 
 time of Constantine without it ; and also suggest 
 the following outlines as auxiliary reforms, premis- 
 ing that the principle of all reforms, where only 
 natural religion is professed, will be to increase the 
 power of the government and the police, since 
 some restraint, though very small, is taken away 
 when we reject revealed religion. 
 
 1. — In consequence — to consider health first — 
 all provisions and drinks should especially be sub- 
 ject to government supervision previous to their 
 sale In England lately (1855) many of the 
 ornaments in cakes and pastry, many fish sauces 
 and pickles, and, less to be expected, many pre- 
 served fruits, have been found adulterated with 
 actually poisonous ingredients, to the disgrace of 
 our trading community ;* and I observe in the 
 
 * Very large quantities of alum also in bread, and 
 chicory in coffee. Mr. Graham, in stating he did not ob- 
 ject to this last adulteration, totally omitted to advert to 
 the cases where poisons had been used. (Proceedings of 
 the British Association.) 
 
108 LETTERS TO 
 
 French journals, that five or six butchers have 
 been justly punished for selling animals that have 
 died by diseases, and that, too, at a time when a 
 malignant diarrhoea prevailed. The power now 
 proposed ought to extend to punishing numerous 
 advertisers of food, drinks, or medicines, where 
 by falsehood they attempt to cheat the public. 
 The poor, honest, and ignorant man, is at present 
 often fairly robbed of his property, and often of 
 his health, by these lying advertisements. 
 
 Although it would be well that a similar force 
 should attempt to prevent fraud in all other trades 
 and professions, still as in these cases the health 
 of the public is not endangered, less rigorous 
 measures will perhaps suffice in such cases. 
 
 It appears that our laws against fraudulent 
 bankrupts are somewhat more severe than formerly; 
 but some recent cases which have occurred in men 
 of large property, make still more stringent laws 
 on this subject desirable. 
 
 2. — Eewards for virtue should be instituted as 
 Beccaria long ago suggested. Under this head 
 something should be done towards the adequate 
 remuneration of those who are honest enough to 
 restore the property &c, &c, they havefound, to the 
 owners. At present the paltry rewards given by 
 some individuals are a disgrace to humanity and 
 an encouragement to theft. 
 
 3. — Some form of sumptuary law seems desira- 
 ble to check the immense power of monopoly, 
 which prevents the poorer men competing suc- 
 cessfully with the large capitalist. " If laws were 
 made determining at how great an extent of land, 
 and at how much money, every man should stop," 
 at least some of the evils of the present system 
 would be diminished, says Sir T. More. (Op. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 109 
 
 Cit., p. 71. J I agree with him, and think thus 
 far only, Communism is desirable.* 
 
 In reference to this point, the effect of fixing 
 the prices of the necessaries of life, such as bread 
 and meat, which has just been done by the French 
 government, should be watched. One plan or 
 the other ought, in justice to the poor, to be 
 adopted. 
 
 4. — It were good that either the suggestions of 
 Sir T. More or Lord Bacon, to prevent much of 
 the mutual deception that often takes place in 
 marriages, were followed. But as such suggestions 
 seem only easily practicable in a savage state of 
 society, we must be content to let custom remain 
 as it is on such points. The Eomans seem to 
 have obviated the deception in question in a great 
 measure, by the facility they allowed to divorce ; 
 and our modern Beformers have done well in 
 endeavouring to extend this privilege to the lower 
 classes of both sexes of the community. 
 
 5. — Lord John Russell, in his speech on the 
 Jewish Bill in 1854, observed that Lord Halifax 
 formerly proposed, or submitted for consideration, 
 the propriety of compelling the whole of the 
 population to take an oath never to defraud their 
 fellow- creatures, observing that, if such were law, 
 it would not hinder us from bolting our doors at 
 
 * With all our profession of Christianity and Christian 
 charity, it would he desirable to know whether there is not 
 more abject poverty in this country than in almost any 
 other in Europe ? and, if so, as appears probable, whether 
 much at least of it cannot be traced to monopolies ? As 
 the poor man is also not allowed to do work for himself on 
 a Sunday, (see Note, end of Letter II.,) it may also be 
 asked, if this law does not contribute ? The man in this case 
 justly said he was too tired on a week-day to work in the 
 evening. 
 
110 LETTERS TO 
 
 night, and taking the same precautions against 
 theft and fraud as at present.* 
 
 I pause to decide whether or not this suggestion 
 might not be usefully added to the above, in case 
 they were found inadequate to supply the place of 
 a revealed religion. 
 
 I have little doubt that unreflecting Whigs and 
 Democrats will say all the above is rank tyranny. 
 Perhaps so ; but never mind, so that it is not rank 
 injustice; and I maintain such regulations would 
 tend to cause the practice of a much greater 
 amount of justice than we find at present existing 
 perhaps under any government, Eepublican or 
 Monarchical. As Plato said formerly, so I say 
 now, that no existing government perfectly satisfies 
 
 * I observe that Beccaria is against the setting of much 
 value on religious oaths, even in a court of justice, urging 
 justly, like the avowed Pantheist — Meslier — that the fears 
 and hopes of religion are too remote (troppo remoti) to 
 have much influence on the actions of the great mass of 
 mankind. (Sect, xi ) Nevertheless, I do not apprehend 
 he would have objected to the above suggestion by way of 
 oath or affirmation for mankind of all religions. His views 
 were directed against the oath of the Christian as such; 
 and are sufficiently obvious, and as clear as the age allowed 
 him to speak. 
 
 Polybius justly praises the Romans for their great respect 
 for their oaths, and also for the punishment they inflicted 
 on those who either broke or tried to break such oaths. 
 (Hampton's Translation. Book vi., pp. 406-410.) TJie 
 common soldiers, too, were obliged to take an oath of 
 obedience to their commanders, (idem, p. 352,) and also 
 (in reference to Lord Halifax's suggestion) that " they 
 would not steal, or even if they found anything that they 
 would bring it to the Tribunes." (p. 369.) 
 
 The worst of many of the cases in which oaths are now 
 required is, that like that " on the faith of a Christian" the 
 form is not only useless, but injurious to honesty. How 
 different that of the Romans ! Our system, too, diminishes 
 even the value set on an oath. 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. Ill 
 
 my mind, (though France in some points and the 
 United States in others comes nearest;) and like 
 him I shall console myself, though the present 
 suggestions never be put in practice, (as they 
 probably never will be,) that I have at least worked 
 disinterestedly for the public good, and that some 
 share of praise ought to follow, whether it does 
 or not. 
 
 Although in the present bigotted age, this is 
 out of the question, still as like Gibbon, I wish 
 to part on good terms not only with the Catholic, 
 but also with the Protestant clergy, I shall here 
 state that this work is not intended to censure 
 them particularly, since, speaking generally, I 
 consider all of them in a forced and false position. 
 My pen has only attacked the measures and not 
 the men, except perhaps in some rare cases, where 
 these have been able to become more free agents 
 than usual, and have used such power to the detri- 
 ment of truth and justice, or have given outward 
 approval to a faith in which they cannot believe. 
 There is, however, more excuse for the clergy 
 doing this by writing their Evidences of Christia- 
 nity and of Prophecy, &c, than for men of science 
 and letters among laymen doing the same. It is 
 double hypocrisy in these men to write in favour 
 of an obvious fallacy ; and as they are not neces- 
 sarily called upon to do so, they, more especially 
 of all others 9 deserve to have their writings keenly 
 criticised. 
 
 As to the clergy — seeing their false position — 
 though I feel no ill-will towards the quiet part of 
 them — yet I shall not forget that there are a 
 number of them roaming about, or settled on the 
 continent, and who make it a part of their profes- 
 sion to commence their verbal war against Catho- 
 lics, or unbelievers generally. I speak from expe- 
 
112 LETTERS TO 
 
 rience, having lately on the continent been drawn 
 into arguments by two such men, at what might 
 almost be called a public table, and during which 
 arguments fas usual) the laymen present took 
 the side of the church. On one of these occasions 
 I felt at last obliged to tell my adversary that I 
 thought it a dishonour to our English government 
 that such a man as Gibbon {known as an infidel) 
 could not sit in the <c House ;" for even the ad- 
 mission of the Jews to Parliament only goes half- 
 way. Our worthy clergyman then called Gibbon 
 " an insincere man," forgetting that not one of 
 our Legislators is allowed by opinion, or even law, 
 to be even half as sincere as he ! 
 
 These are the sort of men, too, that try often 
 to insinuate, and if that fail, to push themselves 
 into the sick infidel's or Dissenter's room uncalled 
 for ; an instance of which I knew in the case of 
 an artist who died rather suddenly in Italy, and 
 who, in my presence, never expressed more than 
 a modest doubt on the subject. I see also by the 
 Advertiser, (October 2nd, 1855,) that this sort of 
 conduct was attempted ineffectually in the case of 
 the Lord Chesterfield, whose " infidelity" has been 
 alluded to in these Letters. 
 
 Now, of course, anything like friendship is im- 
 possible with such characters as these, and as at 
 the serious period in question a man may not 
 always, from acquiescence of relatives or friends, 
 be in a position to keep these possibly well-mean- 
 ing persons at a distance, I consider it right here 
 to state that these Letters contain my matured 
 opinions — after an examination of the " religious 
 question " at different intervals, and with some- 
 what different results for the last twenty years. 
 I say this now, while, thank God, I feel my intel- 
 lect clear, and as strong as ever. Although phi- 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 118 
 
 losophers, put little confidence in the change of opi- 
 nions said to have been brought about in several un- 
 believers when on their death-bed, yet the clergy 
 ever appeal to these cases — where human reason 
 is almost always injured, often nearly annihilated 
 — as the best evidence that the man changed his 
 opinions ! They thus show how weak is their cause. 
 
 I, an humble individual, mindful I hope, in the 
 words of Thomas Carlyle, of the " Duties of Man" 
 as- well as the "Eights of Man/' put down this, 
 out of no spirit of bravado, but merely as a check 
 on that foolish desire even of " home conversion" 
 which animates the great proportion of our clergy. 
 I am sorry to say that these gentlemen are too 
 often only thinking of their own eternal interest, 
 when, at the serious period in question, they seem 
 to be thinking alone of that of the sick man. As 
 believers in the scriptures — when, indeed, they are 
 so in reality — they do not forget the reward held 
 out hereafter to those who make converts of the 
 Heathen. 
 
 Since, in the reforms proposed in this Letter, I 
 have not alluded in a sufficiently clear manner to 
 the " population question," and since a work* 
 treating more especially on this topic, has only 
 fallen into my hands after all the above was 
 written, I propose here to add a few remarks on 
 the Chapter, Poverty, its only cause mid only 
 cure, apprising the reader that this is ascribed to 
 over-population, and, consequently, that its " only 
 cure" is the use of some of the " checks" enume- 
 rated in the work quoted. As I cannot here 
 discuss this subject at length, I shall content my- 
 self by recommending it to the attention of the 
 
 * Physical, Sexual, and Natural Religion, By a Medical 
 Student, (p. 449. Price 2s. Published by E. Truelove, 
 240, Strand, Temple-bar. 1855.) 
 
1J4 LETTERS TO 
 
 poorer part of the public in general, as a work 
 containing a greater amount of " free thought" 
 and general information on these — with us — sacred 
 subjects, than is probably elsewhere to be found. 
 
 Notwithstanding, that " war, pestilence, and 
 famine/' have decimated the human race, a philo- 
 sopher cannot but remark, that even these causes 
 seem hardly to have been considered by nature, 
 adequate to keep down population, since she has 
 almost everywhere, at different times of the earth's 
 history, prompted legislators to recommend, and 
 parents to commit, what we now consider so fearful 
 a crime, viz., that of infanticide. In Sparta alone 
 — of all civilised antiquity — was it confined more 
 especially within what might appear the just limits 
 of humanity, viz., where infants were mal-formed. 
 Solon recommended infanticide ; Aristotle, abor- 
 tion ; and Plato seems in a great measure to have 
 anticipated Malthus, for he, also, is for limiting, 
 as well as improving the physical condition of the 
 population, of course by one of the above means. 
 
 Such general consent among sages and savages 
 (for infanticide, has prevailed almost always in 
 barbarous countries,) might well have turned 
 Malthus's powerful mind to this subject ; for no 
 doubt the wise Romans would never have tolerated 
 it — particularly as in population consisted their 
 strength for war — had they not considered it some- 
 what in the light of necessary evil for greater 
 good. 
 
 Of course, neither Malthus, nor any at the pre- 
 sent day, could suggest to a government the legali- 
 sation of a limited amount of abortion produced 
 artificially, nor of infanticide ; neither probably 
 would the ancients have permitted anything of the 
 kind, had what are called " checks" been known 
 to them. These are the substitutes for it, and far 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. 115 
 
 superior, inasmuch of the two. it is better to pre- 
 vent life, than to take it away even before it can 
 hardly be called life. 
 
 Malthus's check — abstinence from marriage till 
 a person can support a family — becomes often a 
 peculiar hardship to the poor man; indeed, it is 
 almost insulting him under the name of Chris- 
 tianity. No doubt, it is strictly in accordance with 
 this faith, which makes, as already stated, forni- 
 cation " deadly sin;" but if it be so, then surely 
 it is the duty of a government to do something 
 more towards bettering the condition of the poor, 
 that they may have it in their power to marry with- 
 out actually bringing additional beggars into the 
 world. 
 
 Doubtless, other checks noticed as efficacious in 
 the work in question, would not be tolerated as 
 moral by our religion ; but the author also men- 
 tions that one somewhat recently discovered by Ra • 
 ciborski, viz., " abstinence from sexual intercourse, 
 from the third day before menstruation, till the 
 eighth day after it," (p. 348) ; and this might 
 even be used by married people, who firmly be- 
 lieved in Christianity. Professor Muller, some 
 few years back, (see Physiology) mentioned this 
 discovery ; and it is right to say, that even now 
 it seems only highly probable as such, but cer- 
 tainly worth attending to by the religious with 
 large families, who are in poor circumstances, as 
 giving a good chance. 
 
 As this last check is the only one, the very 
 strict believer in Christianity would use, and as 
 this party constitutes at the very least more than 
 three fourths of our population, we see clearly 
 that if over-population be the " only cause" of 
 poverty, as our author asserts, there is very little 
 chance in this " religious country" at least, of his 
 
116 LETTERS TO 
 
 remedy being followed. Indeed, even if all the 
 checks he suggests were pretty generally followed, 
 I apprehend, that still the destruction of mono- 
 polies, or the regulation of prices, as already ad- 
 vocated in this Letter, would be requisite to 
 equalise property to a reasonable extent. I however, 
 admit, that a general use of his " checks," would 
 tend to diminish poverty to a very considerable 
 extent. 
 
 As then, while Christianity is the established 
 religion, it is in vain to expect any diminution of 
 poverty by a general use of this author's checks ; 
 we have here, again, another injurious effect of 
 this creed to add to those already mentioned in 
 this work. 
 
 I believe I may also enumerate among these, its 
 tendency, by its opposition to Burke's wise maxim, 
 (see p. 4), to increase the number of the very 
 worst cases of prostitution, viz., those in which a 
 woman is left totally without means of support. 
 The author of the work now noticed, says justly, 
 " only by allowing greater sexual freedom, is it 
 possible to eradicate prostitution." (p. 369.) I 
 have long been of this opinion, and there was an 
 otherwise good article on the subject in the West- 
 mister Review some years ago, but it it did not 
 make the above suggestion. The Turkish Empire, 
 however, shows its truth, where fornication on the 
 part of the man and adultery on that of the wo- 
 man or man, is very severely punished. Tf we 
 punished adultery by imprisonment and hard 
 labour, and opinion passed a less severe sentence 
 on illegitimate connexions, (which nevertheless 
 exist clandestinely to an enormous extent in this 
 country), I believe our social liberty would be 
 vastly improved, and our female population less 
 often driven to prostitution. Gibbon and Crevier 
 
THE AMEEICAN PEOPLE , 117 
 
 both speak of connexions without actual marriage 
 recognised by law among the Eomans ; and the 
 former writer says justly of this concubinage (as 
 it was called in legal terms), that i( m it the two 
 Antonines, the best of princes and of men, en- 
 joyed the comforts of domestic love/' ( Decline 
 and Fall, ch. xliv.) I may add that Antoninus 
 Pius was the more justified in such a step as the 
 Empress Faustina seems to have been unfaithful 
 to him. This concabi?ie of the Eomans was com- 
 monly of the lower classes of life, but she very 
 properly had legal rights, and her children also, 
 who were " capable of succeeding to a sixth part 
 of the inheritance of their reputed father." 
 (Idem.) I observe that the author of the work 
 very properly published by Mr. Truelove for promo- 
 ting discussion on these sacred matters, says justly, 
 without indeed alluding to the concubinage above 
 noticed of the Romans, or " secondary marriage" 
 as Gibbon also calls it, and which seems similar 
 to what our author suggests for Britain, — •■ that 
 all parents should be legally forced to support 
 their children/' {Op. Cit., p. 368.) The only 
 objection I can perceive to the utility of the above 
 suggestions is, that such " secondary marriages" 
 might in some cases tend to prevent marriages 
 justly so called ; but I apprehend only in a very 
 limited degree, and perhaps it would be unfair to 
 put this one bad effect in opposition to the nume- 
 rous good ones the author of the work in question 
 attempts to show would follow were opinion less 
 severe on all cases of illicit sexual intercourse. 
 
 I do not think when the ls population question" 
 is thus widely considered, not only as to the mere 
 permission of abortion or infanticide, but also as 
 regards checks, that Christianity has done any 
 real good on this subject. At the present day, 
 
118 LETTERS TO 
 
 certainly, infanticide should be put down by severe- 
 law, since checks supply its place ; but since Chris- 
 tianity would not consider this as a reason, or in- 
 Jluence legislation on any such principle, I see no 
 reason to praise Christianity on this point, even 
 though I freely give it and Judaism the credit, if 
 any there really be, of having changed the world's 
 ideas on this subject. " Christianity," says Gibbon, 
 (chap, xliv.) had been insufficient (till the time of 
 Valentinian) to eradicate this inhuman practice, 
 until its gentle influence was fortified by the ter- 
 rors of capital punishment." Nevertheless, as it 
 fortified the original Jewish idea, it must, I con- 
 ceive, lay claim to any merit attached to such 
 change of ideas ; though such came near half 
 a century after the time of Constantine. Bat, as 
 Gibbon hints, it was actual law that put down the 
 practice ; and if there be anything really good in 
 Christianity, this can always be resorted to by a 
 government to punish such crime or sin. As law 
 can always thus seize the kernel, we should do 
 well to throw the shell with its ambiguity, and 
 other bad qualities away, i. e., the so-called re- 
 vealed religion itself. 
 
 After having suggested what may probably be 
 called Utopian and impracticable, and too vast 
 changes in our social system, and that of the 
 United States, I shall close this letter by referring 
 to a minor reform that is, at least, not impractica- 
 ble. I allude to the multiplication of places of 
 accomodation for the relief of the urinary organs, 
 &c, &c, as Mr. Lewis Gompertz, (the liberal- 
 minded originator, along with Mr. Martin, Sir J. 
 Mackintosh and others of our laws against cruelty 
 to animals) justly observed in a letter which some 
 time back he printed and sent to the journals on 
 this subject, stating that by the absence of the places 
 
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. {[() 
 
 alluded to, disease is often slowly produced in the or- 
 gans in question. In the city during late years there 
 has been great improvement, but such has not ex- 
 tended to the West End. This neglect is the less jus- 
 tifiable in this country, because we have a law 
 against " exposure of person," and because we 
 often find convictions under this law printed up 
 at our park gates. Now it seems very difficult 
 occasionally to decide whether such " exposure" 
 may not have been a case almost of necessity, mis- 
 taken for one of express intention ; and if so, it 
 shows that prudery, or economy, here sometimes 
 defeats its object, and becomes a source of injus- 
 tice to the public. 
 
NOTES. 
 
 Note A., page 13. — I find Hume seems to doubt the 
 utility of Theism as a State Religion. He says, (Natural 
 History of Religion,^. 468) "If we should suppose, what 
 never happens, that a popular religion were found, in which it 
 was declared that nothing but morality could gain the 
 divine favour ; if an order of priests were instituted to in- 
 culcate this opinion in sermons with all the arts of persua • 
 sion ; yet so inveterate are prejudices, that for want of 
 some other superstition, they would make the very attendance 
 on these sermons the essentials of religion, rather than place 
 them in virtue and good morals." 
 
 Again, (p. 469,) "The moral obligation (in the opinion 
 of the masses) removes all pretension to religious merit." 
 Again, in his Idea of a Perfect Commonwealth, (p. 523,) 
 we find him having so little regard to the religion of this, 
 that he actually says, "The Presbyterian government is 
 established." To be sure, he puts this ecclesiastical court 
 under the civil magistrate, by giving him "power to try, 
 depose, or suspend, any Presbyter." He adds, (p. 528,) 
 " Without dependance of the clergy on the civil magis- 
 trates, it is in vain to think that any free government will 
 have security." But, though good, this is not enough to 
 secure "free government," since, as the magistrates them- 
 selves, in all Christian countries, must adopt some form 
 of Christianity, they themselves are under its influence, 
 almost as much as the clergy are, as the example of Eng- 
 land, and even America, now shows ; and as Jefferson said, 
 Presbyterians have proved themselves the most intolerant 
 of the Protestant sects. I think, therefore, we must admit 
 that on the mere question of religion, Sir T. More, in his 
 Utopia, is wiser than Hume ; although Hume begins the 
 present Essay by saying, in reference to More, that " all 
 plans of government which suppose great reformation in 
 the manners of mankind, are plainly imaginary." (p. 516.) 
 Hence, perhaps, it was that he thought a revealed and in- 
 
NOTES. 121 
 
 tolerant religion was as good as a tolerant one laying no 
 claims to revelation, supposing the former were dependant 
 on the civil power. 
 
 But, if " manners cannot be reformed" by good laws, 
 what is the use of proposing these ? But that Hume errs 
 on this point, great as his talents are, I think is proved by 
 some nations surpassing others in civilisation now, just as 
 Greece and Rome did formerly. To be sure, Hume says, 
 " great reformation," and perhaps the history of the world 
 has proved him right in this respect. Still, I must consider 
 his u Commonwealth " very defective as regards religion. 
 In alluding to Plato, too, on this subject, it is singular that 
 he only mentions the Republic, (which he classes with the 
 Utopia) as " imaginary ;" while he does not mention the 
 Laws, the very last work of Plato, and as St • John justly 
 says, " a more really practical work." (Introduction to 
 More's Utopia.) 
 
 It might have been possible, after recommending Pres- 
 byterianism, to have classed Hume with Frederick the 
 Great and others, who thought Christianity at least a use- 
 ful creed, though they did not believe in it. But in the 
 following passage he justly enumerates its defects, and 
 though Catholicism only is alluded to, still the History even 
 of Elizabeth's reign shows, as Sydney Smith remarks, 
 (Edinburgh Review), that Protestantism at times has been 
 quite as intolerant. " Virtue, knowledge, love of liberty, 
 are the qualities which call down the fatal vengeance of 
 inquisitors." (p. 445.) And such being the case, he in 
 this page, most wisely and justly, places the atrocities com- 
 mitted by the followers of the Carthaginian and Mexican 
 religions in a more excusable light, than those committed 
 by Catholics. In his Commonwealth Hume forgets that 
 intolerance is directly preached by Christianity, and that 
 Catholics and Presbyterians are only more intolerant than 
 other sects, because they follow Christianity more to the 
 letter. All revealed religions are always more intolerant 
 than natural religion, as a matter of course : thus, as 
 Gibbon shows, the, in some respects, wise religion of 
 Zoroaster was more intolerant than Deism, because it pro- 
 fessed to be revealed. But as there was not any TEXT in 
 that religion, which expressly consigned heretics to damnation, 
 so, of course, even this religion would not be so intolerant 
 as Christianity, Mahommedanism, and Judaism. In like 
 manner, the Deism, said to have been revealed to Numa^ 
 was more tolerant than these. 
 
1£2 NOTES. 
 
 In consequence of these reflections, I find myself again 
 opposed to Hume, " The intolerance of almost all religions 
 which have maintained the unity of God, is as remarkable 
 as the contrary opinion of Polytheists." (p. 444.) We 
 have just seen there is a gradation in the tolerance even of 
 Revealed Religions which proclaim Monotheism : hut when 
 this doctrine is held merely as a consequence of induction 
 from the phenomena of Nature, it is certainly far more tole- 
 rant even than Polytheism. 
 
 In his remarks on toleration, in the Essay On a Parti- 
 cular Providence, (vol. ii., p. 149,) Hume says, "There 
 are scarcely any instances to be met with, in Ancient His- 
 tory, of this bigotted jealousy, with which the present age 
 is so much infested. Epicurus lived at Athens to an ad- 
 vanced age in peace ; Epicureans were even permitted to 
 officiate at the altar in the most sacred rites of the estab- 
 lished religion : and the public encouragement of pensions 
 and salaries was afforded equally by the wisest of the 
 Roman Emperors to the Professors of various sects of 
 philosophy, says Lucian."* Hume had just before stated, 
 that u The death of Socrates proceeded partly from other 
 motives," (probably his indulging in irony against powerful 
 individuals?) than a want of toleration in Polytheism. 
 But I think it is clear from Diogenes Laertius's Lives, that 
 there is a distinction to be made in this respect, and that 
 the Greeks were far more intolerant than the Romans ; for 
 we find that Stilpo, Protagoras, and Aristotle were 
 banished, and Theophrastus nearly so ; and that Anaxa- 
 goras killed himself to avoid further persecution ^for 
 religion's sake, 
 
 Hume would perhaps have us believe by his Note, (C. C, 
 vol. i., p. 535,) that the Romans were as bad in this re- 
 spect, since he mentions the Emperor Claudius abolishing 
 the superstition of the Druids by penal law. But Gibbon 
 takes a juster view of this supposed infringement on their 
 usual spirit of toleration, by stating that the religion of 
 the Druids was obviously highly immoral, since it enforced 
 on certain occasions, human sacrifices ; and yet, though 
 even this was the case, u the priests themselves, their gods, 
 and altars, subsisted in peaceful obscurity till the final de- 
 struction of Paganism." {Decline and Fall. Chap, ii., 
 sect. i.)f So that in fact, even in this case, it was Chris- 
 
 * Hume also, in his History of England, (vol. i.,) calls 
 the Romans " tolerating conquerors." 
 f Again — Diocletian (a. d. 284) frequently conferred 
 
NOTES. 123 
 
 tianity that may be said to have put down the religion : 
 Paganism, far more tolerant, left this free, after it had 
 wisely prohibited the bad moral part of it, viz., human 
 sacrifices. Gibbon, too, has so fully shown that Paganism 
 was obliged, for its own existence, to persecute Christianity, 
 that Hume's allusion to this case is not in point. Paganism 
 was still surely too lenient, for we see that in the end it 
 was actually exterminated by Christianity. 
 
 jtfow, in order to point out an oversight in Hume, I 
 must beg the reader to refer to my last quotations from his 
 Essays, and to compare with the following from the same, 
 placed at the head of his Note C, p. 535, vol. i. " It is a 
 vulgar error to imagine that the Ancients were as great 
 friends to toleration as the English or Dutch are at pre- 
 sent." But even the Athenians tolerated Epicurus, as he 
 informed us, and I think by the aid of Gibbon I have 
 shown these people were far less tolerant than the Romans. 
 It follows, then, clearly that the toleration at least of the 
 Romans was greater than that of the English or Dutch ; 
 and I doubt not, indeed, than even that of the Greeks was, 
 considered as mere religion. And, in fact, if we refer again 
 to the Natural History of Religion, p. 444, we shall find 
 the following passage : — "If among Christians the English 
 and Dutch have embraced the principles of toleration, this 
 has proceeded from the steady resolution of the civil magis- 
 trate, in opposition to the continued efforts of priests and 
 bigots." This is in fact saying that Christianity itself is 
 far more intolerant than Polytheism, which, in truth, is one 
 of the points for which he wrote his Essay in question, 
 directly to prove. 
 
 We now see the reason why Hume, in his Commonwealth, 
 makes Presbyterianism under the power of the " civil 
 magistrate;" because he had seen that such subjection 
 could diminish its persecuting spirit, as in England and 
 Holland. But the magistrate can only do this in part, and 
 that as far as actual laio goes. But Hume forgot theper- 
 secution by opinion — the social persecution which must ever 
 remain while so intolerant a religion is predominant, even 
 as a religion. Besides, this power of the magistrate only 
 
 16 most important offices" on people of ability, who even 
 4 ' avowed Atheism. " (Chap, xvi., Diocletian.') This fact 
 alone will induce any impartial person to believe that there 
 were urgent secular causes for his persecution of the Chris 
 iians, still much exaggerated, (See Gibbon.) 
 
J 24 NOTES. 
 
 remains as long as the laws remain: but as Christianity in- 
 fluences the very making of the laws, such laws stand a 
 chance of being repealed any day by the influence of some 
 bigots, or new ones made more in accordance with the strict 
 spirit of Christianity. Hume admits that priestly influence 
 has been set aside very judiciously by the civil power ; why, 
 then, if there must be a religion for the people, has he not 
 preferred the old Polytheism for his Commonwealth ? he 
 being a friend of toleration, and himself admitting that 
 such was the most tolerant form of religion. I say this on 
 the supposition that he thought pure Theism would not do 
 for the people. But I cannot think he is right on this point : 
 for a religion, under the control of the magistrate, may, 
 in fact, be said to be no religion, except that, to show its 
 intolerance and power, it will still always continue to per- 
 secute by opinion. Now, pure Theism would not do this. 
 
 I do not apprehend that Cicero was so much in favour 
 of religious toleration, as a consistent Republican should 
 be, for in his Republic or Laws he merely recommends 
 every citizen to profess the religion of his country. It 
 seems, indeed, probable from Adams's statement, that 
 under the Emperors, (as a sort of compensation for the 
 loss of much political liberty,) the spirit of religious tole- 
 ration increased. u If any one," says Adams, u intro- 
 duced foreign rites of himself they were publicly con- 
 demned by the Senate. But under the Emperors, all 
 superstition, (even of Isis, Serapis, and Anubis, from 
 Egypt,) flocked to Rome,"* 
 
 We must, however, bear in mind on this subject, that as 
 " iSTero repealed many of the decrees of Claudius," (Sueto- 
 nius's Nero, sect. 33) ; so one Emperor acted towards the 
 laws of another. Thus, although Augustus disliked the 
 Jewish and Egyptian rites, still it was only under Tiberius 
 we find something at all events like persecution ; both 
 
 * Roman Antiquities, (p. 56,) quoted from Livy. (Liv. 
 xxix., 11 and 12, — iv., 30, — xxv., 50.) In proof of this 
 greater tendency to toleration under the Emperors, I may 
 quote Gibbon, (chap, xi., Note,) who says, that "in the 
 year of Rome 701, the Temple of Isis was demolished by 
 order of the Senate : but after the death of Caesar it was 
 restored at the public expense.'''' (Dion Cassius, 1. xl., p. 
 252, et. 1. xlvii., p. 501.) These last words speak volumes 
 in favour of Pagan toleration ; and this we observe was 
 just as the Empire was beginning. 
 
NOTES. 125 
 
 Suetonius (Tiberius, 36 J and Tacitus, (Annals, s. 11 85.) 
 agreeing that he made the Jews undergo a sort of banish- 
 ment. But it seems most probable, even at this time, that their 
 hatred of Paganism (strongly disposing them to actual 
 revolt) was the cause of this severity, for we know that 
 Tiberius was indifferent to all religions ; and Suetonius 
 further on, (Life of Claudius, sect 25,) expressly says, 
 ** this Emperor banished the Jews out of Rome, ivho were 
 perpetually making disturbances.™ But we observe here, 
 they were banished even a very little way, viz., " out of 
 Home" only. Vespasian obliged the Jews, after the des- 
 truction of Jerusalem, to pay a slight tribute, and was 
 otherwise severe. But all this was not on account of Ju- 
 daism, as a religion, but because we see that, even from the 
 time of Claudius, such religion had " caused disturbances.'' 1 
 Under Domitian, (Suetonius, sect 12,) it appears some of 
 them had their estates confiscated, " because they did not 
 pay the tribute laid upon that nation/** But before the 
 Jews forced Vespasian into that war, by which Jerusalem 
 fell, there seems no evidence that they had any tribute laid 
 upon themselves as Jews. Rome seems to have left re- 
 ligion, even in this case, free ; and the Jews were justly 
 punished, because they wanted their religion to be above 
 Paganism. 
 
 " The only direct tribute imposed by the Romans," says 
 Lord Brougham, {Nature of Democracy. Roman Polity, 
 chap, v., p. 244), " upon a conquered people, was a tax of 
 one-twentieth on the sale of -all slaves. f * * They were 
 allowed to retain their own laws, form of government, and 
 magistrates. Xo Governor was sent from Rome, and the 
 Senate and Consuls exercised no authority except in mat- 
 ters of peace, and war, and alliances, except, that the 
 
 * " Imposita genti tributa, nan pependissent." See my 
 
 Historical Sketches of some of the Roman Emperors, or 
 Crevier's learned Trench work on the same subject. 
 
 f TTe here observe that Lord Brougham says nothing 
 about the conquered nations being obliged to pay a tribute 
 towards the support of a religion they often (as regarded 
 its details) might not believe in. viz., the state religion of 
 Rome. Rousseau also says {Control Social, liv. iv.) " a 
 crown to Jupiter of the Capitol was often the only tribute 
 they imposed." This was in fact only obhging men to 
 acknowledge subjection to one Supreme God (T>. 0. M.) 
 or powe\ which all must, or ought, to acknowledge. I find 
 
126 NOTES. 
 
 troops for the wars of the Republic were paid, as well a* 
 raised, by the conquered districts. * * * The con- 
 quered people were not allowed to intermarry with Romans, 
 nor to dwell in the city, nor to hold any offices, nor to have 
 any voice in elections, nor to enjoy any intercourse of sacred 
 rites." 
 
 It is from this last passage, which I have marked in italics, 
 that we may, I think, infer that Polytheism and Christianity 
 seemed to have directly opposite tendencies as to the desire 
 to extend themselves, and, consequently, as to toleration. 
 Paganism seemed to say, worship your own Gods, we can- 
 not permit you to worship ours, which are either too 
 food for you, or superior to your comprehension. The 
 'agans wisely would have scouted our modern ideas of 
 " missionaries," or our constant attempts even at home 
 conversion. Under such circumstances, it was not very 
 likely they would have forced the Jews to pay for the sup- 
 port of the Pagan religion, viz., as religion * 
 
 It was not till after the insurrection, A. U. C, 658, that 
 the whole ofltaly, south of the Arno and Rubicon, was com- 
 prehended in the Roman State, and the above restrictions 
 were removed. Julius Cagsar, A. U. C, 705, added Gaul, 
 and Caracalla all the provinces of the Roman Empire to 
 the citizenship. 
 
 Recurring again more especially to religious toleration, 
 I may perhaps urge the less amount of this under the 
 Athenian Republic (already alluded to), than under the 
 Roman government generally, whether Republican or Im- 
 perial, in confirmation of my opinion that religious tolera- 
 
 nothing in the Empire under Paganism like forcing men to 
 pay to an " established church," in the doctrines of which 
 they cannot believe. This acme of tyranny (see Ireland 
 especially) vitiates all the glory of our too highly extolled 
 civil liberty. 
 
 * There can be no doubt that it was only because the 
 Romans saw that the nature of the Jewish religion was most 
 intolerant to all other religions, and hence, consequently, 
 often exciting the Jews to revolt, that at last they were 
 obliged to act with great seeming intolerance to them. 
 Under Trajan again they tried to revolt, and under Adrian 
 succeeded in keeping up a formidable war against the 
 Empire two years. (See Crevier's Adrian.) These remarks 
 apply also to Christians, who seem at this time to have often 
 been called Jews. 
 
NOTES. 127 
 
 tion was greater at Rome under the Empire than under the 
 Republic. The Athenians no doubt found that their 
 amount of political liberty was so great, that they dared 
 not, for the safety of the Republic, allow too great religious 
 liberty. Probably the Romans, under their Republic, 
 thought so too ; and the opinion seems wise that a Republic 
 should not allow such perfect religious toleration as a more 
 despotic government can well afford to do. 
 
 It is true that the grand Atheistic or Pantheistic poem of 
 Lucretius was written under the Republic before the time 
 of Cicero, and this may seem to go against the opinion of 
 the greater amount of religious liberty under the Empire. 
 But even supposing the poem was circulated as widely as 
 any other works, and by a similar number of copies under 
 the Republic, still this would only show that from first to 
 last, the expression of thought on religious matters was free 
 at Rome (Cassar's assertions in the open Senate seem to 
 show the same) ; but under the Empire, religious rites or 
 practices, (as already stated in regard to Isis) were per- 
 mitted, which the Republic would not tolerate. Freedom 
 of thought shows great toleration in religious matters no 
 doubt, but freedom of practice still greater. 
 
 Since writing the [above, I have re-read Montesquieu's 
 Dissertation sur la Politique des Romains dans la Religion, 
 and find in it, on the authority of Cicero, (JDe Leg., 1. 2, c. 9) 
 that " Augurs could pronounce nothing on public affairs 
 without the permission of the magistrates ; and that it was so 
 ordered in the books of the Pontiffs." As we have already 
 seen that Hume was in favour of ecclesiastical power being 
 under civil, he probably adopted this wise view from the 
 Romans, but he forgot the British people had a far more 
 intolerant religion to deal with, and this, I think, should 
 have induced him to have wished to have seen the old 
 Pagan religion back again along with the wise regulation 
 just mentioned. 
 
 On much the same principle, I think, Roman Catholics 
 should do the same, for, strange to say, they also have only 
 borrowed half — unfortunately the worst half — and it would 
 have been well for toleration had they borrowed the whole. 
 We know that their priests object to the Bible being read 
 generally, and Montesquieu tells us that the Senate did the 
 same with regard to the sibillyne books, and would not allow 
 them to be read, except under the pressure of some great 
 public calamity . Again, like the Catholics, " ^interpretations 
 of these sacred books were forbid," and, adds Montesquieu, 
 
128 NOTES; 
 
 " by so wise a precaution, arms were taken out of the 
 hands of fanaticism and sedition." No doubt any exami^ 
 nation of the details of Polytheism would have injured the 
 stability of the government ; and as these details were in 
 fact the religion of the people — who were too ignorant at 
 that time to appreciate the generalities — so true — on which 
 Polytheism is founded, the Senate were wise in making the 
 above regulations. 
 
 I apprehend the Catholics are so too in the present day 
 in these respects ; for they also allow no " interpretations" 
 of scripture. But the vast superiority of Polytheism over 
 Catholicism is clear from two considerations — 1st, as I just 
 observed, its generalities are true ; for, as Montesquieu 
 says, the Pagans thought it mattered little whether we 
 adored the Divinity itself or the manifestations of the 
 Divinity ; for example, Venus, as the passive generative 
 power of nature, and the sun as the active power," &c, &c. 
 Thus Cicero says (De. Nat. Deorum, b. 2, chap, xxviii.) 
 the Supreme Power on land is worshipped under the name 
 of Ceres ; on sea, under that of Neptune. 2ndly, There 
 was no intolerance in Polytheism. 
 
 Now even the generalities of scripture will not bear any 
 philosophical examination of the above kind ; and of course, 
 both the Jewish and Christian religions have filled the 
 world with dissention and bloodshed by their great intoler- 
 ance. 
 
 I say, then, I think the Catholics right in allowing little 
 examination and no dissent, because, as reasonable men, 
 they must be convinced that the generalities, as well as the 
 details of their religion, have no solid foundation ; and, 
 consequently, that philosophical examination can only lead 
 to discord, and a fatal development of that intolerent spirit 
 which is the very essence of all real Christianity. The im- 
 mense number of sects, and the intolerant state of opinion 
 in the " States," although not having led to much blood- 
 shed, will, I think, also favour the wisdom of the Catholics 
 on these points ; and I much query whether the sort of 
 half-toleration (or even less) of the reformation, admitting 
 its good in some respects, was worth the immense amount 
 of bloodshed it has cost the world. 
 
 Montesquieu does not say that the Romans imposed any 
 tax on conquered nations for the support of their (so to call 
 it) u established Church." On the contrary, he asserts 
 that they found, or always tried to find, their own Gods, out 
 assuming a different name, in all the conquered districts ; and 
 
NOTES, 1.2.9 
 
 tlius were enabled to give them the strongest possible claim 
 to that actual equality which, provided they were not 
 themselves intolerant, they in fact acquired at Rome. Now 
 this system was not only wise and just r but it was true ; 
 for God is everywhere. " Thus," says Montesquieu, with 
 real eloquence, " conquered nations regarded Rome rather 
 as the sanctuary of religion, than the mistress of the 
 world." 
 
 To sum up, recurring again to Hume. I think he should 
 have seen in Paganism itself, that Theism (at all events 
 when graced with a little poetry, so to call it,) was a possi- 
 ble religion for the people. Lord Brougham (Paley's 
 Natural Theology Illustrated, Notes viii. and ix., pp. 273 
 to 296) shows well that Plato and Cicero held very ra- 
 tional opinions on a future state, and that these, Strabo, and 
 I might add Polybius, regarded Theism as the foundation 
 of Paganism, (Jupiter was always the chief God, see Tay- 
 lor's Diegesis, pp. 14-15) ; and that the Mythological fables 
 were merely added as being more suited to the comprehen- 
 sion of the vulgar — much in the same way as Catholics of 
 the present day have by similar embellishments and fiction 
 made their faith, replete with male and female saints, like the 
 14 lesser Deities" of Paganism — more adapted to the devo- 
 tional feelings of the mass of the community. Certainly, the 
 poet will, also, rather praise such additions, ( u pious frauds" 
 if you like so to call them) for by them Paganism and Catho- 
 licism have both become far more poetical religions than 
 Protestantism. In consequence, (speaking generally) they 
 may be said almost to have given birth to poetry, painting, 
 and sculpture. If the Pope would but separate intolerance, 
 &c, from Catholicism, I should regard that as a system of 
 pure Theism, and the best of any at present existing. 
 
 Note B., page 18. — While laws exist in the statute hook, 
 as they do still with us in England in favour of Christi- 
 anity, our still very useful martyrs in the cause of free - 
 thought, can scarcely say they have forced the government 
 to its present very laudable spirit of toleration in matters 
 of religion. The government has only given way from 
 otives of policy, and on emergency could still if it thought 
 fit, resort to its former disgraceful course of persecution, 
 which, indeed, was only following Christianity in its real 
 spirit. To-day, the government is wisely, only nominally 
 Christian in ignoring (for it cannot be said absolutely to 
 sanction) the attacks of free-thinkers. 
 
 It seems to me a mistake to suppose that Richard Carlile 
 
 « S 
 
ISO NOTES. 
 
 (or Robert Taylor,) contributed much to the freedom 
 of the British Press as regarded Theology, since Hume and 
 Gibbon had previously found publishers. But Carlile, at 
 the same time, that he published against Christianity, ad- 
 vocated the freest political theories and practice, (short of 
 actual communism,) and this was probably very greatly 
 concerned in the violent government persecutions in this 
 case, though Messrs. Taylor's and Holyoake's imprisonments 
 show that lecturing against Christianity offended govern- 
 ment much at that time. Thomas Paine commenced writ- 
 ing in favour of Republics, and only years afterwards 
 attacked Christianity, which attack lost him the friendship 
 of Dr. Rush, (see Yale's Life of Paine,) and as Rush was 
 a most intimate friend of Jeffersons, caused, perhaps, even 
 this latter great man to regard Paine with less cordiality on 
 his return to America, than he otherwise would have done. 
 (See Memoirs of Jefferson, by Randolph, (in four vols.) 
 
 It was not till the Throne seemed attacked as well as the 
 Altar, that our government moved. Be it also remembered, 
 that America and France had actually succeeded in estab- 
 lishing Republics at the time Paine wrote, and when 
 Carlile began to reprint his works. Now, as there is no 
 fear of any party succeeding in establishing a Republic 
 here, further than on paper, government ignores political 
 writings that go even farther than Carlile thought desirable. 
 He did not advocate communism ; but many works now 
 left free do ; nor are the writers prosecuted. But, I ap- 
 prehend, the government has not lost the power to prose- 
 cute, should a change of circumstances seem to render such 
 a step desirable. Some old law exists in the statute book, 
 like the one in reference to Christianity, and like that 
 could be evoked on emergency. These spectres, too, might 
 not only " be called ;" but would actually " come," when 
 called for. That the British government merely ignores, 
 and can not in reality be said, even now actually to tolerate 
 writings against Christianity, the following case among 
 others, distinctly sbows. It is taken from Cox's Work, p. p. 
 477-8. 
 
 Alter stating that from policy, ( u as prohibition tends 
 rather to increase then diminish circulation,") the press is 
 left free, except in some peculiarly offensive cases, Cox 
 continues, " In England the celebrated maxim, that 
 Christianity is part and parcel of the law," continues to 
 operate as a bar to the free propagation of opinion, in a 
 manner which it is impossible for a moment to defend. On 
 
NOTES. 131 
 
 this principle, Lord Hardwicke in 1743, decided that a 
 sum of money left to found an institution for reading the 
 Jewish law, could not legally be so applied ; and so late as 
 June, |,1855 ! a similar decision was given by the Vice- 
 Chancellor,, and the following bequest was declared to be 
 null, as being " repugnant to revealed religion." 
 
 W. J. Hartley, by will, dated 1843, " gave to Major 
 General Briggs <£300 as a remuneration, for the best ori- 
 ginal essay on Natural Theology, treating it as a science, 
 &c. ; also demonstrating the adequacy of this, wheu so 
 treated and taught as a science, to constitute a true, perfect, 
 and philosophical system of universal religion, founded on 
 immutable facts, and the works of creation, and beautifully 
 adapted to man's reason, and tending as other sciences do, 
 but in a higher degree, to improve and elevate his nature, 
 and render him a wise, happy, and exalted being."* 
 
 The Yice- Chancellor said, that in his opinion, the above 
 words which the testator had chosen to adopt, could not 
 mean anything that was at all consistent with Christianity. 
 
 In this respect, no doubt, he was right ; but his decision 
 shows, that even now, as Cox justly says, the supposed non- 
 belief in Christianity operates on a person's interest in a 
 " manner which it is impossible to defend." For here we 
 see, that although a person uses no disrespect whatever to 
 the prevailing creed, yet, because his views are considered 
 to be even secretly hostile to it, his bequest is made null. 
 This will be warning enough to those who believe only in 
 the one true religion, (viz., Theism,) to give anything they 
 wish for its support, during their life-time, since treat 
 Christianity as respectfully as you may, you cannot annihi- 
 late its inherent persecuting spirit. Had Theism, on the 
 contrary, been the religion of the State as I suggest, it 
 would have tolerated a bequest of this sort from any sec- 
 tarian to his sect, whether it were Jew, Christian, or In- 
 fidel. Cox goes on to say, that the same unjust decision 
 did not occur in Scotland in 1832 in Taylor's case. But 
 here the bequest was u to the general Unitarian Baptist 
 Assembly ;" and as Unitarians are admitted to our Parlia- 
 ment, as calling themselves Christians, the cases are totally 
 different ; and besides, this decision was made by Lord 
 Jeffery, who, as a writer for the Edinburgh Review, was as 
 
 * Cox justly praises this as appearing to have^ been 
 the religion of " Socrates, Cicero, Collins, Adam Smith, 
 Franklin, and Jefferson." (p. 480.) 
 
132 NOTES. 
 
 liberal as opinion allowed him to be. Therefore, I appre- 
 hend, Cox to be in error, when he considers Scotland, in 
 this respect, more free than England. (Op. Cit., p. 479.) 
 
 It follows, from all the above, that our free-thinkers 
 should not consider their victory complete, till they have 
 got the noxious laws in question out of the statute book. We 
 see obsolete laws (as we suppose,) almost every week 
 being attempted to be put in practice again, as for instance, 
 in reference to the labourer, (p. 32, note) : and though I 
 am glad to see, that Sir George Grey has reversed the de- 
 cision of those magistrates, it seems still, perhaps, doubt- 
 ful, whether their decision was not strictly legal ; and 
 whether or not, it is to be remembered, that this old man 
 lias been subjected to a vast deal of annoyance, on account 
 of our bad mode of legislation. This is anything but liberty. 
 
 The Athenian custom, noticed, p. 82, is clearly the 
 proper one ; and Lord Brougham is said to be now occu- 
 pied in endeavouring to get all the useless or injurious laws 
 on our statute book repealed. Doubtless, he deserves great 
 praise for such labour ; but time will show whether our 
 Christian, by necessity, legislature, will tolerate this blow 
 ■ — which alone can be called the death blow — against bigotry, 
 or if " things were called by their right names" — actual 
 
 IRRELIGION. 
 
 Note C, Page 23. — As the Bible expressly commands 
 death to witches, I have urged this in my third argument 
 (p. 23) as another objection against even the utility of the 
 scriptures. I propose here to enter into a few details of the 
 evils this scripture doctrine has caused. 
 
 1. — " The charge of witchcraft too commonly arose out 
 of the medical success of the offender." (Sandby's Mes- 
 merism, p. 40.) " The persecutions for witchcraft did not 
 commence till towards the close of the 15th century, i. e., 
 when what are called the dark or middle ages were rapidly 
 passing away !" 
 
 2. — " This persecution extended all over Europe, and by 
 it many thousands suffered death." 
 
 3. — u During the Puritanic supremacy of the famous long 
 parliament, 3,000 victims perished." (p. 41.) " The 
 General Assembly passed an act for all ministers to take 
 note of witches and charms." 
 
 In pp. 42 and 43, after many instances of the persecu- 
 ting spirit of the Presbyterian clergy on this point, we find 
 that u three poor women were executed in 1623 at Perth 
 for doctoring." (p. 44.) 
 
tfoTfcS. 133 
 
 u These charges were generally connected with cures 
 wrought, or attempted, for some severe disease. The igno- 
 rant prosecutors could not explain what they saw : it was 
 a paradox how an old woman could by f simples' cure dis- 
 eases which had resisted the wisdom of the professor." 
 Hence the charge of sorcery. 
 
 I am indebted to Mr. Sandby's work for the above facts ;* 
 but I shall no doubt draw a somewhat different conclusion 
 from them from what the rev. gentleman has done. 
 
 1st. — They show the danger there is to the public in ad- 
 mitting that anything like supernatural science is true, with- 
 out complete and impartial examination. Here we find 
 people punished for imaginary crimes. Individuals who 
 themselves professed to have the power of witchcraft, de- 
 served, no doubt, a lenient punishment (fine) for fraud ; 
 just as astrologers, and many mesmerists and somnambules 
 do at the present day. But those who did not themselves 
 profess to know such art, deserved no punishment. 
 
 2ndly. — They show that Protestantism can sometimes be 
 as intolerant as Catholicism ; and that the advantages of a 
 free form of government may be very materially diminished 
 by co-existence of superstition, or a pernicious senti- 
 ment which is the offspring of revealed religion. (See No. 
 3 above quotation.) 
 
 3rdly. — They confirm what I have said in this work in 
 reference to preaching Christianity to u the heathen," and 
 nations immersed in ignorance — nay perhaps even further — 
 to highly educated nations ; since the reader will ob- 
 serve the curious fact, viz., it was at " the close of the 15th 
 century," just about the time of the spread of knowledge by 
 printing and the so-called reformation, that believers in Chris- 
 tianity began to persecute for witchcraft 1 
 
 The present religious condition of the highly educated 
 United States, with its Shakers, Swedenbourgians, and 
 Spirit Eappers, &c, &c, (I speak with no disrespect) added 
 to the fact just noted, confirms me more and more in the 
 belief that every State should have an established religion ; 
 but also, that that religion should be natural Theism. The 
 command — " Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live," still 
 exists in the scriptures, nor can any man tell when opinion 
 
 * The student should also refer to a No. in the Edinburgh 
 some years ago for details of still further horrors, and to 
 mark the vast numbers executed. 
 
134 NOTES. 
 
 or clerical influence may again be powerful enough — at all 
 events in new and barbarous nations — to cause it to be 
 obeyed. 
 
 Note D., page 57. — As I have often called Protestantism 
 only a sort of half reformation, I shall here add some de- 
 tails on the subject by way of establishing my points. 
 
 Gibbon very justly calls the reformers of the 15th and 
 16th centuries u a set of fanatics."* That great historian 
 contented himself as a reformer in matters of religion, with 
 showing that Christianity was not altogether of divine 
 origin ; and as this was a vast step indeed in advance of 
 Luther and Calvin, he deserves immortal honour, yet is not 
 likely to get his statue in the u Abbey." However, he is 
 still too guarded in his remarks on the tendency of Chris- 
 tianity. In regard to " unconditional submission," his 
 views are clear enough as he prefers the views of Paganism to 
 Christianity on this point — the sway of the Antonines to that 
 of Constantine or Theodosius. But in different parts we 
 find him speaking of the " mild tendency of the gospel," 
 as if in approval of its true spirit,f in contradistinction to 
 the precept and practices of its degenerate professors. But 
 surely, when noticing the persecutions of Charles the Fifth, 
 he might justly have said, here we have an instance of its 
 bad tendency on a man of an enlarged and otherwise liberal 
 mind. 
 
 ]STo doubt, Charles V., began very mildly with Luther 
 
 * ISTo doubt they were, and some of the changes they 
 made were as foolish as they were unjust ; witness the 
 closed pew system, shutting up churches six days in the 
 week, and building such small ones. It is to be remarked, 
 too, that every form of Catholicism is of a more cheerful 
 character than of Calvinistic Protestantism, even to the 
 sound of the church bell. I have no doubt that ail except 
 fanatics would be very glad to find this, reminding one of 
 anything rather than heaven, tolling only ten minutes instead 
 of twenty minutes, or half an hour twice each Sunday — es- 
 pecially if they lived in the immediate vicinity of the Pro- 
 testant church. 
 
 t See end of chap. xvi. I think, too, that Gibbon was 
 deterred by the unjust clamour raised against this chapter, 
 from doing full justice afterwards to the life of the Em- 
 peror Julian (ch. xxiii.) Indeed, he almost says so himself 
 hy implication. (See Life by himself.) 
 
NOTES. 135 
 
 when lie summoned him to Worms ;* but afterwards we 
 find him approving of the punishment of death for heresy, 
 and asserting that " it was strange the German nation 
 should undertake to do what all other nations in the uni- 
 verse, even with the Pope, would not be authorised to do," 
 and concluding by censuring " the new Mahomet," as he 
 called Luther.f He did not resort to harsh measures, 
 certainly, before he found mild ones ineffectual to sup- 
 press the " movement :" but let us reflect that these harsh 
 measures were the stake, and that during his reign, (from 
 1545 to 1556) no less 1,320 were burnt alive, and 6,600 
 sentenced to the galleys or imprisonment for mere heresy. % 
 
 Although nothing can justify such barbarity, still it must 
 be confessed that Charles might have viewed one of Luther's 
 innovations, viz. — justification by faith, not only as un- 
 scriptural, but what is of vast more importance, as highly 
 immoral ; and this too in a man who professed to start a 
 purer view of Christianity. " Penance, says he, and such 
 sort of sacrifice is not wanted :" we are led by implication to 
 infer the #t sole sacrifice," Luther considered wanted, was 
 that of Reason!! This was to be sacrificed to what he 
 called Faith! (D'Aubigne, vol. 1, p. 73). Let us admit 
 on this subject, that if the Roman Catholics had pushed the 
 
 * D'Aubigne's History of the ^Reformation, (by Scott,) 
 vol. i., pp. 585-636. 
 
 f Idem., vol. ii., p. 305. 
 
 % Vol. ii., p. 626. The numbers burnt by order of 
 Torquemada between 1481 and 1498 were 10,220. It is 
 not till from 1759 till 1788, in the reign of Charles III., 
 that we find a very great diminution, the numbers burnt 
 being only four ; and from 1788 to 1808 none. 
 
 After giving the above and the other details, Scott re- 
 marks, " It is lamentable to think that infidel philosophy, not 
 evangelical Christianity, has been the grand agent in effecting 
 the diminution of victims. 11 So much for the blessings, then, 
 of mere Protestantism to the world ! This, for a time, 
 tended to increase the number of victims, giving indeed 
 some, but not very great, advantage to mankind for such 
 vast sacrifice. It was not till Montesquieu, Diderot, 
 Volney, Voltaire, Rousseau, Hume, Gibbon, and others 
 began to doubt or deny the truth of Christianity itself, viz., 
 irom before 1770 to 1788, that this bloody persecution was 
 changed to the milder form in which we see it exist at the 
 present, viz., censure by opinion. 
 
136 NOTES. 
 
 belief in the power of the Pope and their church to pardon 
 sins (after penance) too far, the Lutherans, on the other 
 side, insisted to an absurd and prejudicial extent, on the 
 text: — " If we confess our sins to God, he is faithful and 
 just to forgive us our sins." (p. 40). With the great mass, 
 this sort of confession is no confession at all ; and certainly 
 confession to a conscientious Roman Catholic priest (and 
 there are many such) would have been a greater check on 
 crime, had not that church unfortunately got into the 
 practice of selling indulgences. Here, I confess, Luther 
 justly attacked them; but when we find Leo X. making such 
 good use for the public of the vast sums acquired by the 
 sale of these, as building St. Peter's at Rome, and 
 buying M.S.S. of Livy, (p. 232), Tacitus, (Valery's Tra- 
 vels), and other classical authors, we must regard even 
 this abuse with more lenity than otherwise. The fault is 
 inherent in the creed itself, which tells us that by repen- 
 tance the reddest sins will be forgiven. Such belief will 
 ever be as much liable to abuse with Luther's views equally 
 as with those of the Roman Catholics, as the case (a few 
 years ago) of the wholesale Norwich murderer Rush — to 
 all appearance a very sincere Protestant — evinced. " No 
 man can prove from scripture, that God's justice requires 
 any satisfaction (except repentance) from the sinner," said 
 Luther, (p. 238), and perhaps he may be right ; but I ap- 
 prehend it would have been better for the community, had 
 Rush and similar characters, held the belief, that confession 
 and repentance openly to a priest, and even some payment 
 or penance, was necessary as a " satisfaction." Again, 
 (p. 599), Luther preaches : — " We are saved by the works 
 of Christ, not our own works." The Pope says something 
 very different, and he probably says something better, 
 though whether more strictly scriptural, I apprehend 
 neither he or any one else can truly decide, seeing how am- 
 biguous every point looks by scripture light. As our own 
 works cannot save us ; so thought Rush they cannot damn 
 us, provided we repent, or appear to do so, for (see his 
 trial) he seemed to expect salvation. 
 
 " People must first be made partakers of life by faith, 
 if they would do works pleasing to God," says D'Aubigne's 
 commentator, (p. 578,) in which the gross immorality and 
 injustice of Lutheran u justification by faith" may be said 
 to be summed up. Again, in Luther's own confession, 
 "Faith alone justifies "before God, without works!" 
 (p. 179.) Charles V. must indeed have looked with 
 
NOTES, 137 
 
 contempt on such pretended reforms in doctrine as these 
 words imply. 
 
 Again, from one of Luther's sermons, " We do not 
 become righteous, as Aristotle pretends, by doing works 
 of righteousness : but having become righteous, we do such 
 works! ! " (p. 193.) So Luther himself broke his vow as 
 a Monk and married ; justifying perhaps his falsehood by 
 his faith. On the same ground Rush might have said, 
 since I believe, my works must be good. I do not by this 
 mean to put these men in the same category certainly : and 
 I allow that Luther did good in spite of his doctrine, in 
 getting permission for priests to marry : but this does not 
 excuse him personally, for he was a Monk, and had made a 
 vow ; and if men or women (after a certain age and of their 
 own free choice) like even now to adopt such chastity, I do 
 not see why they should be prevented. 
 
 The revival of letters, the discovery of printing, and 
 the magnetic compass in the 15th century, preceded 
 Luther's Reformation in the 16th< The Medici family at 
 Florence, after learned Greek scholars had been forced 
 into Italy from Constantinople, in consequence of the con- 
 quest of this by the Turks in 1453, countenanced the 
 revival of the religion contained in Plato's works. ( Op. 
 Cit., p. 71.) It is a great pity for the world they did not 
 succeed in putting the religion of these in place of that of 
 the Reformation, which was partly occasioned by the above 
 discoveries. Mr. Scott, in the preface to D'Aubigne, p. 9, 
 opposes even this writer himself, when he says, as we have 
 just seen was the case, that the enfranchisement of the 
 human mind was begun by the discoveries of printing, the 
 compass, &c, &c. The Puritanical Scotch Translator, 
 however, will not allow these even to have played a minor 
 part in forwarding the Reformation ! He says — " take 
 from philosophy what she owes to the Gospel, and even 
 France will be found to owe little indeed to the natural 
 powers of the mind." Now I may reply, as I have done 
 before, that the state of the ancient Greek and Roman 
 Pagan world is a satisfactory answer to Mr. Scott's argu- 
 ment, that civil liberty, and order, and civilisation, cannot 
 exist without protestantism, and consequently without 
 Christianity. I am willing to admit, that Protestantism is 
 somewhat more favourable to civil liberty, than the pure 
 Catholicism of Italy and Spain is, though not so much so 
 as the reformed Catholicism, (so to call it,) at least was 
 under Louis Phillippe of France ; and I am also ready to 
 
138 NOTES. 
 
 allow, that as Luther preached — " none ought to suffer 
 constraint, liberty is the essence of the faith"* he deserves 
 credit on the score of having in respect to theoretical 
 toleration made a real improvement. But we must at the 
 same time remember, that Luther could scarcely attempt 
 any reform in the church, and preach otherwise ; since his 
 yery object was the liberty of changing. But to say that 
 he was preaching real Christianity — which expressly com- 
 mands unconditional submission, and was probably adopted 
 by Constantine and others on this account — when he was 
 preaching as above, is totally absurd. When we are told 
 to u obey the powers which be"— and when St. Paul tells 
 the fugitive slave to go back to his master — any attempt to 
 engraft the principles of civil liberty on such a creed, must 
 be clearly futile. The increase of such liberty, then in 
 Europe, after the Reformation, was caused in reality by the 
 Reformers declining to adhere to strict principles of 
 Christianity. The inventions of the 15th century show that 
 (contrary to Scott's view,) the human mind could, without 
 the assistance of scripture, contribute to civilisation ; and 
 though, as Mr. Hallam truly says, (Introduction to the 
 Literature of Europe,) " the doctrines of Luther, taken 
 together, are not more rational * * than those of the 
 church of Rome," still Luther was obliged to change some- 
 thing for the better to gain converts, and fortunately for 
 mankind, he preached against the supreme spiritual power 
 of the Pope — " the priest having the power to forgive sin," 
 (vol. ii, p. 292,) and against the celibacy of the clergy. 
 
 Let us add — Although it may be doubtful whether 
 " Luther contributed much to take learning out of the 
 hands of the priests, who had engrossed it to themselves, 
 as those of ancient Egypt did," we must, according to 
 D'Aubigne, give him credit for attempting (vol. ii., p. 331) 
 to do this. It was printing that did it in reality; and 
 contrary to Mr. Scott's opinion, Luther was, therefore, in 
 
 r * Vol. ii, p. 206. When Luther preached thus, too, he 
 was not in power. This consideration takes off much from 
 the merit of the man ; for, out of power, tolerance is a 
 much easier virtue. Accordingly, we find that, though 
 Protestantism at first was more tolerant than its enemy, 
 still when it got the ascendancy under Elizabeth, it was 
 sufficiently intolerant, (see p. 36,) and has only become 
 somewhat less so at present, in consequence of the spirit of 
 the age. 
 
NOTES. 139 
 
 t his respect, much indebted to this recent invention, for 
 power to carry on the work of the Reformation. But this 
 and the other inventions of the 15th century would, no 
 doubt, of themselves, eventually have brought about the 
 above useful practical changes, and the same increase in 
 the amount of civil liberty. D'Aubigne, indeed, thinks 
 not : but he is still far more sensible than his translator 
 who will not admit they had any influence whatever ! in 
 the work of the Reformation. It is not improbable that 
 this could not have taken place, even so easily as it did, 
 without some previous general improvement, in conse- 
 quence of the invention of printing, &c, &c. This inven- 
 tion, by enabling the middle and poorer class to get books, 
 would also enable them (after the revival of the study of 
 Greek and Roman authors) to perceive, that as good 
 government had existed before the appearance of Chris- 
 tianity, so it might exist with less of it than Catholicism 
 required; and such is, in fact, Protestantism, (I mean it 
 is a sort of half Christianity,) though of course Protes- 
 tants will deny such an obvious truth. 
 
 But one of the most powerful causes of the success of 
 the Reformation (1 think omitted by D'Aubigne?) was the 
 following, viz., that its principles were embraced by some of 
 those in power, viz., Albert, hereditary Duke of Prussia 
 the Elector of Saxony, and partly by our Henry VIII. 
 Frederick the Great justly said, he owed his ancestors 
 much for throwing off this thraldom ; and no doubt some 
 idea of personal interest contributed to make the above 
 sovereigns embrace Luther's views. And without this the 
 Reformation would probably have stopped ! So much for 
 Scott attributing the change solely to Divine interposition ! 
 Henry VIII. 's adoption of it arose from the very lowest 
 hind of personal interest. 
 
 I am glad to find that an author, who published in 1822 
 a bold and excellent reply to the Rev. T. Rennell's Essay 
 against Scepticism, — and which Essay, supported as it was 
 by opinion all through the country, may, perhaps, be said 
 to have forced Mr. Lawrence to a recantation dishonour- 
 able, if not to himself, at all events so to the opinion of 
 Britain, — holds the views of the Reformation advocated 
 in this note. I allude to Sir T. C. Morgan, who says, 
 (Philosophy of Morals, p. 289, note, — Colburn, 1822,) 
 44 Notwithstanding the number of sects, there are but three 
 modifications of opinion at all tenable : Deism, Unitarian- 
 ism, and Catholicism. The doctrines of the Churck of 
 
140 NOTES, 
 
 England are too much like Popery, under another name and 
 heady Such being the case, we may well, indeed, ask, if 
 Luther's so-called Reformation was worth even the blood 
 of the 70,000 Protestants (to name no other victims) it 
 caused to be butchered in France, on August 24th, 1572, 
 called the massacre of St. Bartholomew? (Taylor's 
 Diegesis. p. 137. Truelove and Holyoake.) Luther 
 would certainly have done far more good to humanity had 
 he at once preached Theism, and, probably, such religion 
 would have been quite as well received by the Roman 
 Catholics ; the vast extent of the above-named massacre, 
 shows it could scarcely have been worse received. 
 
 Sir C. Morgan, also like myself, has no great opinion of 
 Christian Missionary labours, and (p. 180) he calls them 
 4 1 ill-timed and irrational" In short, his is no doubt the 
 work of a Theist or Pantheist. Perhaps he speaks almost 
 as plainly as Gibbon, as to his own faith ; and certainly 
 more so than Mr. Robert Cox. So that the work deserves 
 to be studied attentively even now by all Statesmen, were 
 it, indeed, only for the following passage as to what the 
 Reformation, at all events, should have been. " The 
 punishment of libel against the established religion, (he 
 alludes probably to the cases of Paine and Richard Carlile,) 
 is a flat contradiction to the right of private judgment on 
 which Protestantism is founded." (p. 336.) The despotic 
 opinion of Britain will not even yet admit the truth of this, 
 but, as usual, is so much the more disposed to punish 
 socially, because Law at the present period, it seems, 
 will not imprison the supposed culprit. We have yet to 
 learn that political liberty constitutes only a part of real 
 freedom ; and that many nations behind us in this are yet 
 far before us in social, and, I may add, practical religious 
 liberty. I conclude this note, then, by referring the 
 reader to the quotation from Quinet with which I have 
 begun and by re-asserting that this applies in many re- 
 spects more forcibly to our Puritanical Protestantism than 
 to Catholicism. The latter is at least the open foe of 
 liberty ; while the former, by pretending to concede it, in- 
 sinuates its love of monotonous and strict order into our 
 every-day intercourse, and by its tyrannical influence leaves . 
 us scarcely a vestige of the most valuable perhaps of all 
 liberty, — I mean social liberty. 
 
 Note E, Page 70. — Since the remarks on the passages in 
 Tacitus and Suetonius were written, I find the Rev. Robert 
 Taylor in his Diegesis (pp. 372-9 ? ) endeavours to make out, 
 
NOTES. 241 
 
 1st, — that the passage in Tacitus is u a forgery or inter- 
 polation ;" and, 2ndly, — that " there is no reasonable 
 ground that by Chrestus, Suetonius meant Christus." 
 (p. 377.) 
 
 In regard to Tacitus, I have only to observe that Gib- 
 bon (chap, xvi.) considers it genuine ; and as to its having 
 been put into the text in order to favour the truth of the 
 evidences of Christianity as Taylor suggests, (p. 376), it 
 seems to make Tacitus speak more against the utility and 
 purity of this religion, than was necessary. Surely a skil- 
 ful interpolater would have been anxious to have got a 
 testimony of so mnch value as that of the great historian 
 somewhat less inimical to the very utility of the creed, 
 Without, therefore, denying merit to Taylor for his at- 
 tempts to get at truth on this point, and recommending 
 impartial men to read the twenty reasons he gives, I for 
 the present follow Gibbon on this head. 
 
 For similar reasons I follow him in considering that 
 Chrestus in Suetonius is synonymous with Christus, for 
 here again Gibbon in a note renders the term malefica (not 
 magical as he says some have done) but like exitiabilis — per- 
 nicious. Surely interpolators would not have spoken so 
 decidedly against the very utility of a creed they wished 
 future generations to adopt. 
 
 I now come to what Mr. Taylor says about the passage 
 in Pliny, who was the personal friend of Tacitus. He ob- 
 serves that, contrary to Dr. Semler, of Leipsic, and others, 
 he cannot " admit it to be fairly conquered." (p. 383.) 
 But this passage will tend then to favour the belief that the 
 foregoing in Tacitus is genuine, for the sentiments of Pliny 
 on the Christian faith, as I shall now proceed to state, are 
 very similar, as was to be expected, to those of Tacitus and 
 Suetonius, though, perhaps, he scarcely speaks so badly of 
 it as a creed, for, although in one place he calls it amentia, 
 and in another super stitio prava, (p. 380), yet he had, in a 
 passage just before, spoken well of its morality, (but be it 
 observed, in this latter respect only on the testimony of a 
 Christian, for he himself, as Gibbon says, (chap, xvi.), 
 seems to have known little or nothing about it !) Hence, 
 as the Christian under accusation was naturally enough 
 anxious" to make the new religion appear good, we 
 should not value this testimony too highly ; and certainly 
 not regard it as Pliny } s own opinion. 
 
 In this letter of Pliny we find two assertions that will, I 
 think, justify the Roman government in its somewhat harsh 
 
142 NOTES. 
 
 treatment of the Christians on this occasion. 1st, — They 
 seemed to have objected to recognise the Roman Emperors 
 as the head of the government, probably because they 
 were " required to invoke the image of the Emperor with 
 wine and frankincense," and this seemed to them more akin 
 to divine honours than what he was entitled to. Perhaps 
 in this they were partly right ; and yet they should have re- 
 membered that even such honours did not make the Em- 
 peror equal to Jupiter, the D. O. M., or Supreme God. - 
 
 2ndly. — As Mr. Taylor observes, they met in societies 
 before daylight (ante lucem), and the Romans might well 
 believe nocturnal meetings of bodies of men plotted 
 something " against the welfare and peace of society." 
 (p. 381.) Such nocturnal meetings had always been by the 
 xii tables considered illegal. (Gibbon, chap, xliv.) 
 
 I think when these two points are considered, we shall 
 see in the Roman apparent persecution, nothing more than 
 a mere political precaution for the safety of the state,,and with 
 Gibbon u be unable to discover any bigotry in the language 
 or proceedings of Pliny." (Note, chap, xvi.) He was only 
 doing his duty in requiring that the new infatuation 
 (amentia), as he justly called it, should not actually put down 
 the established divinities of the empire, and that this was 
 its object, the subsequent suppression of Paganism by force 
 — by the " punishment even of death," (Diegesis, p. 137) — 
 fully evinced. We can more easily excuse a little severity 
 of Pliny too, because, (as Gibbon observes), his father, 
 the naturalist, lived at the time of the supposed darkness 
 of the crucifixion, yet says nothing about it in his great 
 work which recorded all such wonders of nature ! The 
 learned son, then, might well call such creed an ^ u infatua- 
 tion." 
 
 As to the — at first sight — more reasonable objection of 
 the Jews and Christians to pay divine honours to the statue 
 of the Emperor, Pliny, in another passage, separates, in 
 some measure, the human and divine, and does not call 
 the Emperor a Deity. It was merely something on the 
 same principle as we say — " Fear God and honour the 
 King." 
 
 Note F, Page 110. — Having spoken of Roman oaths, I 
 may here add some remarks on the precautions the Romans 
 took to favour justice, in case also of debts. I shall with the 
 same view then allude to the state of lawyers. 
 
 In the early time of the Republic, the debtor was re- 
 tained in a state of slavery (Qwi'rc., vi., 3, 26) by his ere- 
 
NOTES. 143 
 
 ditor until he found means to discharge his debt. Subse- 
 quently, (A. U. 429), " the law only required that the 
 goods of the debtor, and not his person, should be given up 
 to the creditor." {Roman Antiquities, p. 40.) Subsequently, 
 " only one-fourth part of the debt" required to be paid by 
 law, which, with some little change, seems to have been in 
 force at the time of Julius Caesar and afterwards. If the 
 debtor were actually always obliged sooner or later to pay 
 even this one-fourth, it seems to have been better than 
 some of our modern laws, that allow the debtor to escape 
 without paying any part of his debt. 
 
 Lawyers, too, under the Eoman government seem to 
 have been in a better position for the public, though not 
 perhaps for themselves, than in modern times. u By the 
 Cincian law, lawyers were prohibited from taking fees or 
 presents from those who consulted them. * * * Hence 
 the law was studied from a desire of assisting fellow citi- 
 zens, and through their favour of rising to preferments." 
 (Roman Antiquities, p. 155.) " Afterwards, lawyers were 
 permitted to take fees, but not above a certain sum." (Idem.) 
 I apprehend while such laws are in force, there is at least 
 less temptation than there is at present, to make the worse 
 appear the better cause, and that no gentleman at that 
 period had much inducement to make a flaming speech in 
 favour of a murderer's innocence, when he had the man's 
 confession of guilt in his pocket, as one of our lawyers 
 (now noted among pious persecutors) is said to have done, 
 I know not with what truth. 
 
 I think when the above view as to the state of debtor and 
 creditor, and lawyers, is considered, and the fact added to 
 it of a distribution of corn gratuitously at stated periods 
 to the poorest classes (under Augustus 200,000 received 
 corn from the public," Op. CiL, p. 160), we shall be in- 
 clined to think with Adams, that "the bulk of the people 
 * * were not more oppressed under the Empire than they 
 had been under the Republic ;" (Op. Cit., p. 145) and fur- 
 ther, when their high state of religious freedom is added, 
 that ancient surpasses modern civilization as far as that 
 most important point, the moral and political state of the 
 world, is concerned. 
 
 I shall close this note by an allusion to a belief that seems 
 to!have somewhat increased even while this work has been 
 passing through the press — I mean " spirit-rapping." In a 
 work on Reforms, I am the more bound to notice this, as in 
 some cases too vivid a belief in this fallacy seems not only 
 
144 NOTES. 
 
 to have impaired the reason, but actually to have led to 
 suicide. I well know from the sacrifice of time and money 
 I was obliged to make to satisfy myself that clairvoyance is 
 a fallacy, that the same will be required as regards spirit- 
 rapping, since, of course, our American and other exhibi- 
 tors who come over here are not in general in a position to 
 work for nothing. But even when their belief is sincere, 
 and they are known as honest, this is very little more reason 
 for taking their exhibitions almost on trust, as many do, than 
 if they were known as pennyless impostors. Although I 
 do not approve of ridicule in such matters, yet (this apart) 
 I am glad to observe the "wizard of the north" is now 
 showing how all these " rappings" may be done by merely 
 natural means. The * c mysterious lady " did the same for- 
 merly as regards clairvoyance ; and it had a good effect, by 
 showing that such wonderful feats were not of necessity su- 
 pernatural. When this is clearly seen, men will soon begin 
 to investigate the matter more strictly, and no longer be 
 half frightened away from all investigation, as I have known 
 parties to be in regard to the far less awful pretentions of 
 clairvoyance. 
 
 THE END. 
 
 M 17 82 
 
•».o' 
 
 
 
 Deacidified using the Bookkeeper proa 
 Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
 Treatment Date: Feb. 2005 
 
 • **v ° 
 
 *tr> 9* y^^£/^C Q ^ K 5 ^ **J Treatment Date: Feb. 2005 
 
 v^ *°W§PP* ; PreservationTechnologi 
 
 '"^S IS?'** <& ^ • ^^V A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVE 
 
 \$ * o • » " 111 Thomson Park Drive 
 
 *** A V <r£* V r.ranhprrv TnwnshiD PA 16066 I 
 
 
 caDER IN PAPER PRESERVA1 
 
 1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
 Cranberry Township. PA 16066 1 
 (724)779-2111 
 
 "^O x j 
 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 013 774 467 3