i is 
 

RE VI E W 
 
 OF THE 
 
 REV. HUBBARD WINSLOW'S ORATION, 
 
 BEFORE THE BOSTOIV CITY «OVER]¥.TB]VET. 
 
 on the -whole, we thinlc it the best, perhaps, the 
 orator could do, and surclj'' he must not be blamed for 
 the publication. Our wise xity government must 
 own that paternity, and to iliem, we hope, all the 
 benefit of this partizaai carousal, at the public charge, 
 may enure. 
 
 This gentleman, it seems, could no more write an 
 oration, than he could preach a sermon, without a 
 text, and here we have Mr Wmslow's text or peg on 
 which his oration is to hang, viz : 
 
 ''The means of the perpetuity and prosperity of our 
 republic." And the first loop he makes to connect 
 the peg and the essay, is this: — "Fcllow-citizens : 
 The sentiment at th6 foundation of the remarks which 
 I propose to offer, /««.< Inng been firmhj established 
 in the minds of all whom Ihave the honor to address.^' 
 
 We are quite unable to perceive the affinity tljat 
 
 The City of Boston has long been in the practice 
 
 of celebrating the Anniversary of our National Inde- 
 pendence by a proce^?ion and a public oration, under 
 
 the direction of the Municipal OfTicers. For some 
 
 years past, these celebrations have assumed a mere 
 
 partizan character, and have been made the occasions 
 
 of bringing forward some aspiring strippling to abuse 
 
 our republican institutions — to vilify the rulers of 
 
 the people's choice, and to demonstrate, by bold and 
 
 impassioned invective, the incapacity of the people 
 
 for self-government, and then to print these green 
 
 and acrid effusions at the public charge. On the late 
 
 anniversary, the City Authorities made their celebra- 
 s tion a regular wassail at Faneuil Hall, where the 
 
 political partizan, including the. reverend orator, ca- 
 
 rojused ; and many gulphed down their anti-demo- 
 - cratic toasts in well laced Madeira, (the temperance joins the text and the comment. There is another 
 
 cause interposing no obstacle,) making the poor , difficulty, also, on which we have unfortunately 
 democrats pay for heating the poker. This, how- stumbled; if "the sentiment at the foundation of his 
 ever, is not only sanctioned by their principles and (remarks," and which he proposed to dwell upon in 
 their interest, but is fortified by what to them is of j his discourse, had ^'long been established in the minds 
 binding force, the law of English precedent. In Lf «« whom he had the honor to addre.ss," it would 
 London, whose aristocracy our city nabobs wish to | ^^eem to have been an ace of supererogation to tire 
 imitate— in London, where the tories hold, as the ' hig audience with his discourse, 
 lories hold here, that the people are good beasts of j ^hen the frog attempted, by swelling, to reach the 
 burden, the Judges dine once or more a-ycar at the ^Izq of the ox, he burst— when Wise's balloon became 
 public charge, in the Mansion House, which place ; ,00 „,u(.,i rarified, it exploded ; and Mr Winslow ha.<; 
 "IS then made the arena to exhibit .some new idol to' „,et a somewhat similar fate, in the following gran- 
 the worship of tory disciples." j dijoquent sentence, to be found in the 8th page of his 
 
 But to Mr Winslow's oration. It is a singular oration : 
 
 compound of extracts from Edmund Burke, the Eng- \ „Cast your eyes abroad over the length and the 
 li.sh tory, and from Daniel Webster, the American, breadth of this great territory, bounded only by the 
 of the slang of the partizan press of federalism, illu- sliorelcss ocean on either side, and by the torrid and 
 
 minated, occasionally, by coruscations from the mind "]° ^'If'^ '''"l]"^ «" ^'^''" extremity ; contemplate its 
 
 „ , ' , . , . ,. ,^ T ■ ff/mo.";^ boundless plains and vallies of richest virgin 
 
 of the Bowioin street divine himself. It is some- soil; behold its thousands of verdant hills and raoun- 
 
 \rhat annoying to be compelled to pay for re-publish, tains, Swelling up/vards towards the skies," &c. 
 
 ing the tory sentiments and vile slanders o{ Burke, | To bound a coast or country by "a shorelcsn 
 
 against democratic principles, and more especially as ocean," would sound better from the mouth of Saint 
 
 hashed over and chopped up by I\Ir Winslow ; bu' T'ffrnV/.- than from Mr Winslow's. We shonld like to 
 
El o-S^G 
 
 have Mr Win-low inform ns, in what direction hills 
 swell, except "towards the skies," if iliey swell "up- 
 ward ?" * 
 
 Perhaps genius and dulness, poetry and insipidi- 
 ty, cannot be shown in stronger contrast, than by 
 placing Jlr Forrest's illustration of this idea, the vast- 
 ness of our territory, by the side of Mr Winslow's, 
 Mr Forrest, in his oration, speaking of the extent of 
 the republic, says — 
 
 "From its borders, kissed by the waves of the At- 
 lantic, to 
 
 The continuous woods, 
 Where rolls the Oregon, and hears no sound, 
 isave his own dashing ; 
 
 from the inland oceans of the north, to the sparkling 
 surface of the tropical sea, rippled by breezes laden 
 with the perfumes of eternal summers, our vast the- 
 atre of national achievement extends. What a course 
 here for the grand race of democratic liberty!" 
 
 have always thought tht reverse — we have fhongl)! 
 and history confirms our views, that civil and reli- 
 gious liberty tended to invigorate the mind, to fortify 
 morality, to increase population, and to enable that 
 population to provide itself, through the means of 
 honestly acquired wealth, with the conveniences and 
 the luxuries of life. 
 
 Our population has increased, our wealth and lux- 
 uries have increased — but our population is not more 
 selfish than their fathers, and they have as much 
 morality, aye, "masculine morality," as their ances- 
 tors. What do we toil for — what does Mr Winslow 
 preach for, but to obtain wealth, with which to buy 
 luxuries, in other words, comforts and pleasures ? 
 Wealth and luxury and population will never destroy 
 our system — injustice and intolerance may do it, but 
 these can never permanently and extensively pre- 
 vail, where a free press exists. 
 
 IMr Winslow says — "Those who formed our gov- 
 
 Mr Winslow, however, has not made a "-reatcr eminent prized civil liberty, because it aflbrded them 
 
 bull than Edmund Burke made in his speech on the 
 trial of Warren Hastings, which MrWinslow quotes as 
 an exquisite specimen of the sublime, which the city 
 government print, and for which we poor democrats 
 are compelled to pay. 
 
 Burke say.s— "IMy Lords : when the devouring 
 flames shall have destroyed this perishable globe, 
 and it sinks into the aby.ss of nature, from whence," 
 vV-c. 
 
 Here, the perishable globe is first destroyed by the 
 devouring flames, and then when there is nothing 
 left of it, that nothing sinks into the abyss of nature. 
 And pray, where is the abyss of nature into which 
 this destroyed, devoured, biirnt-up world, this nothing 
 sinks? 
 
 Such is the choice specimen of Burke's eloquence, 
 selected by Mr Winslow, printed by order of the city 
 authorities, and paid for from the public purse ! 
 Surely Boston can now preeminently claim to be the 
 Athens of America. 
 
 We are not disposed, however, to pursue a course 
 of hyper-criticism. We have a^.verted to these liter- 
 ary blunders, to show that even in those things on 
 which a college-bred man often most prides himself, 
 Mr Winslow is loose and faulty. His place, even 
 here, ought rather to be that of a pupil than teacher. 
 
 The great features which mark the principles of 
 the whole tory race, are discernable throughout the 
 oration, viz : a distrust of the capacity of the people 
 for self-government — an over-weening egotism, that 
 makes his notion of things the only standard of right 
 — an intolerance of all freedom of thought — an incapa- 
 city to perceive clearly the truth, and an apparent dis- 
 like to regard it — add to these a profound reverence 
 for the opinions of distinguished absolutists, and we 
 have a synop,sis of his discourse. 
 
 Speaking of our country, Mr Winslow says — 
 
 '■Think of the hundreds of millions of people which 
 it is capable of sustaining, and which it promises to 
 sustain at no distant day ; observe its rapid increase 
 of population, wealth, luxuries — all those causes 
 which tend to enervate the mind, nourish selfish and 
 indomitable passions, and annihilate that severe, 
 masculine morality, essential to civil and religious 
 freedom— and it cannot fail to appear, that the great 
 experiment is but begun, and that its final result, to 
 human view, is quite problematical." 
 
 Is his conclusion a fair deduction from his prem- 
 ises ? Does an increase of population, of wealth and 
 luxuries, tend to enervate that masculine virtue, 
 which is essential to civil and religious freedom •' We 
 
 an opportunity to serve God according to the dictates 
 ol their consciences ; while they believed the actual 
 service of God was an essential means of sustaining civil 
 liberty." 
 
 Our ancestors prized civil liberty, because it aflbrd- 
 ed them an opportunity of serving thtviselves ; and 
 we prize it, because it aflbrds every one the opportu- 
 nity of serving himself, while it deprives him of the 
 right of harming his fellow. 
 
 We are at a loss to divine Blr Winslow's meaning, 
 that our ancestors "believed that the actual service of 
 God required,'" 6cc. Does he ictend to say that a 
 union of Church and State is an essential means of 
 preserving civil liberty ? We suppose snch to be his 
 meaning, for he follows up the idea by the remark, 
 that our ancsstors "began [their government] with 
 prayer and praises; they acknowledged God in all 
 their ways, inscribing his hallowed name upon all 
 their social, secular, and public tran.tactioris. * * 
 
 "They held firmly to the Sacred Scriptures as an 
 infallible utterance of the divine mind lor our stand- 
 ard of moral truth and duty. * * 
 
 "They believed that we are a sinful race, needing 
 that dispensation of recuperative grace unfolded in 
 the gospel ; and that only the penitent and obedient 
 will enjoy the everlasting blessings of the divine fa- 
 vor. Such were their religious views, and upon 
 these they acted. They lived in the world 771 fiim 
 of living forever, under a government of righteous re- 
 tribution. * * 
 
 "To this, more than to any other human cause, are 
 we indebted for the civil and religious liberty we this 
 day enjoy. * * 
 
 "The same foundation [that is, the religion of our 
 fathers?] upon which the pillars of this republic were 
 reared, must continue to sustain them, or it will soon 
 be numbered with those of other ages. * * Be- 
 fore the celebration of another year, the tempestuous 
 elemeiis of unrestrained human passion would rise 
 above control — the sun of this nation would be turned 
 to darkness, and its moon to blood ; [who is its moon ?] 
 its stars would fall from heaven, as when a fig-tree 
 casteth her untimely y/"'.?, and the sanguinary history 
 of atheistical France notild be repeated. 
 -I. "But the permanent existence of general atheism 
 IS never to be anticipated. Its action is spasmodic 
 and temporary. [Then why so much outcry about 
 It ?] Religious sentiments are a part of our nature. * * 
 
 "The question with us, .then, is not whether the 
 people of this nation shall have a pure religion or 
 none ; for, a religion of some kind they will certainly 
 
 / 
 
3 
 
 hAve. The cnly quesiion is, whether ihcy shall have 
 religion pure orcorrupteil. {In olher words, whether 
 the government shall establish one, pure, according 
 to Mr VVinslow's standard, or whether people shall 
 be left, as they are now, free to proftfss and follow 
 what they believe.] * * 
 
 '•Adversaries of human accountability to God are 
 therefore enemies to our republic. [Very charitable! 
 extreme mark of humility !] It is not because they 
 {i, e. those who do not believe in future rewards and 
 punishments] exercise freedom of conscience, but be- 
 cause they outrage all conscience, not because they 
 «.<e the rights of men, but because they abuse the 
 rights of men ; alienate themselves from humanity, 
 and become as irresponsible brute beasts, thai they 
 forfeit all claims to the privileges of a free govern- 
 ment. * * 
 
 "Every enlighted and faithful patriot will there- 
 fore give his influence to hold the great principles of 
 moral accountability in contact with every mind. 
 Let them [let who?] be commissioned as ^et forth 
 and sanctioned in the sacred Scriptures, to enlighten 
 the understandings, invigorate the intellects, elevate 
 the aims, inspire the hearts and control the wills of 
 both subject and magistrate." 
 
 What a specimen of bombast and froth — of sacer» 
 <lotaI egoti.sm, intolerance, impudence and ignorance. 
 What stuff to be paid for from the public purse ! 
 
 If there be any one moral attribute more valuable 
 than another, it is tkuth. Unless our assumptions, 
 our arguments, and our information, which guide 
 our actions, are founded in truth, we can arrive at a 
 just result only by accident. God, we suppose to be 
 all truth and benevolence, and the nearer we ap- 
 proach them, the more we resemble Him. There is 
 evidently a desire on the part of the young and fash- 
 ionable clergy, to establish a religion of State, as the 
 only sure basis on which to rest our civil institutions ; 
 and as the only sure means, also, of securing to 
 themselves a certainty of rioting, permanently, in 
 wealth and lu.xuries. Hence, these efforts to cry up 
 their own belief, and their shameless abuse of all who 
 do not think as they think. 
 
 Christianity, as taught by the Saviour, is a lovely 
 code of moral truths — it was the democracy and the 
 radicalism of his day — it was tolerant and charitable 
 — meek and humble — assauging mi.sery — rei)uking 
 pride and insolence — succouring the needy — shield- 
 ing the oppressed. How changed ! It rests now, in 
 many instances, as we find it practically, on the frail 
 pr(»ps of error, intolerance, pride, cruelty, and men- 
 dicity. It is for "making the kingdoms of this world 
 the kingdoms of Christ." It raises costly churches — 
 it ilecorates them with vain and expensive trappings. 
 Its con.secrated vessels must be of embossed silver, 
 often inlaid with gold. The truths of Holy Writ 
 must be made more lovely by the gilded dross of 
 the earth upon the binding. It vauntcth itself. This 
 is practical, modern Christianity — not that pure and 
 holy religion taught by the Son of Purity himself, 
 some eighteen hundred years ago. 
 
 In all this, which we have quoted from Mr Wins- 
 low's address, he assumes the lofty ground, that the 
 religious man, religious in his sense of the word, is 
 the only good citizen. We are no advocates of athe- 
 ism, and yet we respect such a man, if he be benevo- 
 lent and virtuous, as much as we respect a Chris- 
 tian. 
 
 We are not of the Orthodox sect, but we venerate 
 one of that persuasion, if a good man ; if intolerant 
 and vicious, his religion will do him no good, in our 
 
 opinion. We do not believe that "adversaries of ac- 
 counlability to God," are enemies to our republic — 
 that they degenerate to a level with brute beasts, in 
 their moral leelings, or that they lose any claim, 
 either naturally, morally, or constitutionally, to the 
 privileges ol a free government. The intimation 
 that they do, it seems to us, can only emanat* from 
 an empty head and an intolerant heart. By "adver- 
 saries to human accountability to God," Mr Winslow 
 can only mean those who do not btlieve in future re- 
 wards and punishments, in the next world, for deeds 
 done in the body. There can be no other meaning 
 to his phrase. If he mean to confine this miserable 
 ebulition of intolerant invective to those he calls 
 atheists, let us see how much worse they are than 
 those called the most orthodox, the true believers in 
 the doctrine of election, eternal salvation, and eternal 
 mi.sery. The atheist believes in no God — in no fu- 
 ture existence. It is said that he has hence no mor- 
 al force to impel him to do right. But how is it with 
 the elect ? They believe that "the elect" never fall 
 from grace— that God, from all eternity, doomed 
 some to be saved and some to be lost. Each one 
 supposes that he himself is of the favored number, 
 and is only unhappy here, because some of his neigh- 
 bors, of different belief may, by possibility, be saved 
 also. A man, entertaining such a belief, can have 
 no more fear of future punishments than he who be- 
 lieves in no future existence at all. So, too, with the 
 Universalists, who believe in the salvation of all 
 men, through the atoning and propitiating power of 
 the Saviour, they are as obnoxious as the atheist to 
 the uncharitable and insolent charge of being ene- 
 mies to the republic. These attacks upon a class of 
 men, for a mere matter of belief, were they not the 
 emanations of a besotted intellect, would be impious. 
 There is neither merit in belief nor demerit in disbe- 
 lief Man must believe according to the laws by 
 which God has ordained he shall believe ; that is, 
 according to the convictions which fa^ts and argu- 
 ments impress upon his mind. We are created with 
 different reasoning powers, with different degrees of 
 acuteness in our perceptions ; therefore, what may 
 appear very clearly to be true to one mind, may not 
 appear so to another. One may suppose from the 
 tacts he knows and the reasons he has heard or con- 
 ceives, that there is one self-existent intelligence ; 
 another may believe there are three, that thf.«« 
 three are one, and this one is three; another, again, 
 may believe that the laws of cohesion, gravitation, 
 polarity, and so forth, are self-existent, and cons'i- 
 tute the Deity ; and each of these believers might be 
 a very honest man If their investigations, and the 
 light which God has given them, have really lead to 
 these beliefs in each, they cannot help it, and no act 
 of volition on their part can change such a convic- 
 tion. Such being our nature, constituted by God 
 himself, how in olcnint, nay, how impious, to say, 
 that 6e/jf/ degrades us to a level "of brute beasts." 
 That, by a particular belief on the subject of a future 
 state of existence, we "forfeit all claim to the privi- 
 leges of a free government." What impious non- 
 sense to be paid for from the public chest ! You may 
 punish men for illegal acfs, but God alone is answer- 
 able for their belief. 
 
 Mr Winslow intimates that France, at one time, 
 was atheistical, and that, consequently, she was more 
 sanguinary. During the French revolution, the 
 dominant Roman Catholic religion, which had long 
 been the prop of the throne and the scourge of the 
 people, fell w ith the expulsion of the royal family. 
 
\ 
 
 and some mummery of an infidel character was unsuc 
 cessfully attempted to be substituted. There is no 
 evidence of any general prevalence of irreligion at 
 that time among the people. The corruptions of a 
 dominant church, and the oppressions of a debauched 
 and lazy priesthood, had called forth the vengeance 
 of an irritated people against the religion of a sect. 
 If religious sentiments are parts of our nature, as 
 Mr Wins'low admits, does it appear very likely that 
 atheism would universally or even extensively pre- 
 vail? But even if it did, if atheism proved sanguin- 
 ary — if it caused the execuiions and massacres of 
 that bloody period, it lies not in the mouth of modern, 
 practical, Christianity to reproach it. The whole 
 number, executed and massacred during the reign of 
 terror, we believe, has never been rated at over three 
 hundred thousand, throughout all France, and proba- 
 bly was not a third of this number. We suppose 
 Mr Winslow may have heard of St Bartholomew's 
 day — it is noted in the annals of Christian France — it 
 is the 24th of August, and on this day 1572 — the 
 Catholics, the then dominant sect, butchered, in three 
 days in Paris, above ten thousand, lords, gentlemen, 
 presidents, and people of all ranks, for not being 
 Catholics like themselves. A horrid scene of things, 
 says Thuanus, the historian, when the very streets 
 and passages resounded with the noise of those that 
 met together for murder and plunder ; the groans of 
 those who were dying and the shrieks of those who 
 were going to be butchered, were every where heard 
 — the bodies of the slain thrown out of the windows, 
 the courts and chambers of the houses filled with 
 them — the dead bodies »f others dragged through tlie 
 streets ; their blood running in torrents through the 
 channels into the Seine. An innumerable number 
 of men, women with child, maidens and children, 
 were all involved in one common destruction ; and 
 the gates of the King's palace were all besmeared 
 with human gore. In the city of Maux, two hun- 
 dred men were imprisoned, and after great numbers 
 of females had been ravished and murdered, these 
 two hundred were called, one by one, from the pris- 
 on, and butchered as if they had been beasts ; the 
 murderers plundering, as well as slaying, their vie- 
 tims. One hundred thousand persons are estimated 
 to have fallen in this massacre." 
 
 When the Pope of Rome heard that this butchery 
 was executed by order of the hing, Charles the 9th, 
 of France, he marched to the church of St ]\Iark, and 
 in the most solemn manner, returned thanks to God 
 for $0 great a blessing conferred on the Christian world. 
 The Pope thought these heretics unworthy to enjoy 
 the blessings of life; .Mr Winslow, somewhat more 
 mild, thinks his unbelievers, his heretics, only mere 
 brute beasts, who, for their opinions, have forfeited 
 all claims to the privileges of a free government. 
 
 Grolius informs us that one hunilred thousand per- 
 sons suffered by the hand of the execiiiioner, in Bel- 
 gium, for religious opinions, about the same period. 
 Forty thousand persons were massacred in Ireland 
 for religious opinions, beginning October 20, 1611, 
 in the reign of Charles I. 
 
 It is said that the Spaniards, in the first forty years 
 after the discovery of tin? New World, sacrificed fif- 
 teen MILLIONS OF THE NATIVES tO the gCuiUS of /5/-ffC- 
 
 rica? Christianity, as expounded by Pojiery. What- 
 ever may have been the sanguinary character of 
 "atheistical" France, "Christian" France offers a 
 bloodier and a more atrocious page. But it was not 
 Christianity, nor Atheism, that produced ihe blood- 
 shed, in either case. It was fraud and intolerance — 
 
 it was that spirit which brands a man as a "brute 
 beast"— as forfeiting all claims to the privileges of a 
 free government for an unimportant difference of 
 opinion, for a mere matter of belief, over which no 
 man has volition. 
 
 "Atheistical France" executed the wretches, who, 
 not content to enjoy equal rights with other citizens, 
 attempted to subvert the liberties which the people 
 had just then regained. 
 
 Christian France massacred her victims, because 
 they expressed an opinion which was impressed on 
 their minds thrcrugh the power of Omnipotence. Mr 
 Winslow insults, abuses, and libels people for the 
 like reasons, and our City Authorities pay for printing 
 this intolerant trash, liom the public purse. 
 
 We have no idea of permitting any man, who as- 
 sumes tke garb of piety, to claim, in consequence, 
 any preeminence in virtue. We prize truth above 
 all things, and it is quite time that we understood the 
 ust distinction between virtue and religion. 
 
 We consider, then, that religion is not even pre- 
 sumptive evidence of vihue. Religion is a belief in 
 a superintending Providence, who is propitiated by 
 sacrifices and rites, who is swerved by prayer, and 
 who yields to the supplications of the penitent. This 
 belief is compatible, as all experience teaches, with 
 great moral obliquity, in the same individual — or it 
 may unite with great virtue in the same person. Re- 
 ligion, therefore, offers no proof of a good life; but it 
 is evidence of great selfishness. The Creator has 
 made self-interest the only rule of action in man — to 
 say that a man acts without self-interest, is to say 
 that he moves without a motive power. The broad, 
 natural distinction, therefore, all men being equally 
 selfish, between virtue and vice — that distinction 
 which is founded in the nature of things, we take to 
 be this — the virtuous man pursues his self-interest, 
 his sp.lf gratification, so as never to invade the rights 
 of others, and to administer as much to the happiness 
 of his fellows as is in his power. The vitwus man 
 pursues his self-interest, his self-gratification, regard- 
 less of the rights and interests of hi.-? fellows. 
 
 If this definition be founded in natute, it follows 
 that religion is not evidence of virtue. The re- 
 ligious man works for his reward, and, like the 
 adventurous merchant, makes a long investment-r- 
 he is willing to endure much here, for the ben- 
 efit of the long and happ}' hereafter, which lies 
 in prospect. Let us, then, take religious people 
 as we find them — try them by their conduct towards 
 mankind, and not by their belief, or their rites to- 
 wards their God. If you find a kind, benevolent, 
 jnst-dealing man, call him what he is — a virtuous, 
 good citizen. If you see an intolerant, egotis'ical, 
 vain, persecuting, man, though he beat the pulpit for 
 a living and i)r.-ys load at conference meetings, class 
 him among tlic vicious. It is his natural rank. 
 
 Mr Winr-low says — 
 
 "Let them [the principles of moral accountability] 
 be commissioned, as set forth and sanctioned in the 
 Sacred Scriptures, to enlighten the understanding, 
 invigorate the intellects, elevate the aim, inspire the 
 hearts, and control the n^ills of both subject and magis- 
 trate." 
 
 Ay ! but who is to say what is "set forth and 
 sanctioned in the Sacred Scriptures?" who is to say 
 in what manner they are to "control the wills of sub- 
 ^ ject and viugist7ate .'" Surely, it is Mr Winslow and 
 those who believe as he believes. He has already 
 denounced "the adversaries of human accountability 
 to God," that is, those who do not believe as he be- 
 
heves, as enemies to the republic, as "brute beasts," 
 as having "forfeited all claims to the privileges of a 
 free government." Give to him, or to any one else, 
 the "commission" to decide what is set forth and 
 sanctioned in the Sacred Scriptures, by which "to 
 control the wills of subjects and magistrates," and 
 we should have at once an hierarchy as odious as 
 Popery. The Sacred Scriptures are before the peo- 
 ple, each can read, and each will — aj'e, must — believe 
 as he is convinced. This does not suit the Christian 
 charity and self-complacency of Mr Winslow — a dif- 
 ference of opinion, no vicious act, no invasion of a 
 fellow-being's right, a mere difference of belief, leads 
 him to denounce his opponent as an enemy to the 
 republic — a brute beast — as having forfeited all 
 claims to the privileges of a free government. But 
 who, let us ask, is really the most of a "brute beast," 
 the author or the object of such a vile denuncia- 
 tion ? 
 
 Mr Winslow continues, as follows : — 
 
 "The doctrine is becoming somewhat prevalent, 
 and is incorporated in many of the most popular and 
 imposing theories of our day, that all men have the 
 same identical rights and liberties ; that it is only 
 needful to be a human being to possess all the quali- 
 ties requisite for one to govern himself and others. If 
 this is so, why is there any need of civil government ? 
 Indeed, what is government in any form, human or 
 divine, but usurpation ? [God a usurper ?] * * 
 
 "Our excellent ancestors entertained no such 
 views. Fathers and benefactors of human liberty, 
 they neither acknowledged nor sought such liberty 
 as this ! That they were sometimes intolerant, we 
 all admit. But there is an apology for them in the 
 fact, that they considered they were making a mo- 
 mentous experiment for all succeeding generations, 
 in which they had no hope of success but in the 
 prevalence of what they considered sound moral and 
 religious principles ; that they had adventured every 
 thing in this great enterprise ; that they had the prior 
 occupancy of the soil ; and that if men wished to try an 
 experiment of another kind, this great western world 
 was before them, and they could go and secure a 
 place for themselves. Whatever may be thought of 
 some of the measures of the Puritans, the principles 
 by which they were actuated, and the general course 
 of their conduct, as well as the fruits of their labors, 
 have rendered their names and their example worthy 
 of everlastmg remembrance and imitation." 
 
 Mr Winslow says, then, that the doctrine is becom- 
 ing somewhat prevalent, that all men have the same 
 identical rights and liberties, but that our excellent 
 ancestors entertained no such views. 
 
 We had thought that this doctrine was long ago 
 well established, recognised in the declaration of our 
 National Independence, and incorporated into our 
 State Constitution as the fundamental law of the 
 Commonwealth. The Constitution says — 
 
 *^AU men are bom free and equal, and have certain 
 natural, essential and unalienable rights ; among 
 which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and de- 
 fending their lives and liberties ; that of acquiring, 
 possessing and protecting property ; in fine, that of 
 seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness." * * 
 
 "The end of the institution, maintenance and ad- 
 ministration of government, (says the Constitution) 
 is, to furnish the individuals who compose it (^the 
 body politic) with the power of enjoying in salety 
 and tranquillity, their natural rights and the bless- 
 ings of life,"ias described above in the Constitution.] 
 
 We have no comment to offer on the impious sug- 
 
 gestion, that the divine government, the government 
 of God, is a usurpation ; but in regard to Mr Wins- 
 low's other idea, that all human government is a 
 usurpation, we oppose to it the declaration in the 
 Constitution on the same subject, as follows : — 
 
 "The body politic is formed by the voluntary asso- 
 ciation of individuals ; it is a social compact, by 
 which the whole people covenants with each citizen, 
 and each citizen with the whole people, that all shall 
 be governed by certain laws for the common good." 
 
 Mr Winslow's idea, that government of all kinds 
 is usurpation, finds, we thus see, no sanction in the 
 Constitution, an instrument framed by our fathers, 
 and recently amended and confirmed by our citizens. 
 
 But perhaps he intends to go back to the Puritants, 
 the Pilgrims, for his model. Though descended from 
 one of the passengers in the Slayflower, we have less 
 respect for the motives of the Pilgrim^, and less vene- 
 ration for their conduct than Mr Winslow seems to en- 
 tertain. Mr Winslow admits their intolerance, and of- 
 fers what he calls an apology for it, but what seems to 
 us, a justification of it. The apology we offer for their 
 intolerance is an utter ignorance, on their part, of 
 any correct notions of religious liberty or of tolera- 
 tion. A liberty to express their own belief and to 
 repress the expression of all other, seems to have 
 been the lull extent of their ideas and knowledge of 
 religious liberty. 
 
 Mr Winslow traces the great results of their set- 
 tlement to their moral and religious virtues. We 
 ascribe them to their free system of civil government, 
 and this, it appears by the testimony of history, they 
 adopted rather by accident and from the force of 
 circumstances, than by reflection and design. Mr 
 Morton, who published his Memorial in 1670, tells 
 us that "he had then lately sure intelligence that the 
 Dutch, intending to settle a colony to the southward 
 of the Hudson, where the charter of the Pilgrims 
 authorised them to go, privately hired the master of 
 the ship [in which they embarked] to contrive delays 
 in England, then to steer them to these northern 
 coasts, and there, under pleas of shoals and M'lnter, 
 to discourage them from venturing farther." *' * 
 
 "Being thus, beside their intention, brought to the 
 New England coast, where their patent gave them 
 no right or porter, they were in a sort reduced to a 
 state of nature ; and some of the strangers received at 
 London, dropping some mutinous speeches, as if there 
 rvere now no authority over them ; this people, therefore, 
 before landing, itisely formed themselves into a body 
 politic" — conditioned to be ruled by fixed laws, enact- 
 ed by the majority. 
 
 It was this democratic principle, thus, as it seems, 
 accidentally forced upon them, which laid the foun- 
 dation of their succeeding improvements. They owe 
 their prosperity more to their democracy, than to 
 their theocracy. 
 
 The pilgrims, their associates, and their succes- 
 sors, appear to have been bigoted and intolerant. 
 Their feehng and measures, however, in regard to 
 religion, were the natural offspring of the darkness 
 and ignorance of the age and of themselves. 
 
 Their transatlantic pastor, Mr Robinson, who did 
 not come over with them, held to different and more 
 liberal views than iheir's — views not only in advance 
 of the opinions of his age, but of our day — worthy, 
 however, of the most profound consideration of every 
 good and liberal-minded man of every era of the 
 world. 
 
 The historian says — 
 
 "Mr Robinson was always against separation from 
 
6 
 
 any of the churches of Christ ; holding communion 
 with the reformed churches, both in Scotland, France, 
 and the Netherlands ; his study was for peace and 
 union " 
 
 In our day, the study of each sect is more for su- 
 premacy than for union, often hating each other in 
 all bitterness and uncharitablcness. 
 
 In parting with his flock, Governor Winslow in. 
 forms us, tiiat 31 r Robinson 
 
 "Charged us if God should reveal anything to us 
 by any other instrument of his, to be as ready to 
 receive it as ever we were to receive any truth from 
 him ; for he was confident that the Lord had 7nore 
 truth and light yet to break out of his holy word. He 
 took occasion, also, miserably to bewail the state of 
 the reformed churches, who were come to a period in 
 religion, and would go no further than the instruments 
 of thtir reformation. As, for example, the Lutherans 
 could not be drawn to go beyond what Luther saw ; 
 for whatever part of God's word He had further re- 
 vealed to Calvin, they had rather die than embrace 
 it ; and so, said he, you see the Calviuists, they stick 
 where he left them ; a mi^eri/ much to be lamented. For 
 though they were precious shming lights in their 
 times, yet God had ?iot revealed h\v, n-hole will to them. 
 And were they now alive, said he, thty would be as 
 re.ndy to emhv^cc further light as that they had re- 
 ceived. * * But withal, he exhorted us to take 
 heed what we receive for truth, and well to exam- 
 ine, compare and weigh it with the Scriptures, before 
 we receive it. For, said he, it is not possible that the 
 Christian world should come so lately out of such anti- 
 Christian darkncse. and that fidt perfection of knoiv- 
 ledge should break forth at once, &c. — "words," 
 says the ancient historian, "almost astonishing in 
 that age of /ow fln</ universal bigotry which then •pre- 
 vailed in the English nation ; wherein this truly great 
 and learned man seems to be almost the o)dy divine 
 who was capable of rising into a noble freedom of think- 
 ing and practising in religious matters, and even of urg- 
 . ing such an equal liberty on his own people." 
 
 There can be no justification for tne bigotry and 
 intolerance of the Pilgrims, and no apology except 
 their ignorance in common with that of their age, of 
 any enlarged principles of religious liberty. 
 
 Mr Robinson, it will be seen from the loregomg 
 account of him, sought to find tkutu ; the Pilgrims 
 sought to maintain conformity. The same distinction 
 still marks the characters of the opposing parties of 
 the present day — the liberal and the illiberal. The 
 liberal party seek for truth — they wish that our 
 Christian community should exemplify in their lives 
 the charity they profess on their lips — they demand 
 that all citizens abide by the principles of the govern- 
 ment they have adopted, until those principles are 
 legally changed The illiberals, on the other hand, 
 assume all knowledge — to be themselves, instead of 
 the Constitution, the standard of orthodoxy and ex- 
 cellence — and to denounce, as "brute beasts," those 
 who difler from them in opinion — they demand acts 
 of conformity, and scoff at the solemn constitutional 
 comixicts into which they have entered — they put to 
 scorn all the charitable precepts, all the humility, of 
 the religion they profess. 
 
 Let us, when we are scanning the character and 
 history of the Pilgrims, look at them as they really 
 were, an enterprising, selfish, opinionated, intolerant, 
 society of religious people, whose theological views 
 and systems retarded, rather than promoted, the in- 
 crease of the colony, and the diffusion of freedom; 
 and which thus, for a lime, in some degree, defeated 
 
 the purposes of society and the ordinance of scrip- 
 ture, to "Be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the 
 earth and subdue it." 
 
 Let us not, lor the purpose of magnifying our own 
 consequence and favoring illiberal systems, give to 
 the character and conduct of the Pilgrims a gloss not 
 sanctioned by history. 
 
 We should keep their example in remembrance, 
 imitate their good deeds, but we desire no "imitation" 
 of their religious mtolerance. 
 
 ]\Ir Winslow quotes from a London tory writer 
 the following, page 14 of his oration : — 
 
 "The disruption of the United Stales from the 
 mother country, and the outburst of the French revo. 
 lution, were the first effects, on a large scale, of those 
 principles, which, in America, had their bi:th in the 
 love of liberty, but debased by their mixture with 
 atheism and a spirit of anarchy, which had long been 
 brooding on the continent, began to threaten the very 
 foundations of social order." 
 
 Here is the old cant about infidelity and libert}', 
 fresh from the tory fountain, shining black, with the 
 smoke of London. 
 
 The French revolution, like the American, restored 
 the principles of social order. The Americans first 
 proclaimed the equality of human rights — they first 
 asserted that one people had no right to bind another 
 free people — that they themselves had a right to be 
 governed by their own laws — and that, as all men 
 had equal rights, those laws ought to be framed to 
 promote the general good, under the sanction of the 
 majority. France had groaned for ages under a 
 despotism — for nearly two centuries no representa- 
 tive assembly had been convened — the wealth of the 
 nation, earned by the labor of the people, had been 
 engrossed by the privileged classes, the mere drones 
 of society, who rioted in luxuries and wasted in de- 
 j baucheries, that which had been earned by others. 
 j The people rose to recover their rights and their 
 I property. The conflict was long aitd sanguinary — 
 villar.y, in his sacerdotal robes — injustice, in his er- 
 1 mine — the king, with his sceptre, all combined 
 against the people — treachery, fraud, fal.>iehood, as- 
 : sassination, all the vile engines which pride, avarice 
 i and power, throughout all Europe, could command, 
 were brought to bear against the struggling people ot 
 , France — struggling, not as Mr Winslow would make 
 us believe, to sap the foundations of social order, bui 
 to restore them — to fix them on just principles, the 
 j will of the majority. The overthrow of a vicious 
 I priesthood is by no means the overthrow of religion. 
 , The overthrow of a privileged class is not the over- 
 iThrow of social order. To award the achievement of 
 the French revolution to ilie iniiuence of athei.sm, is 
 I to give to atheism a merit to which it can lay no 
 claim. The French revolution was a great and glo- 
 I rious step in the march of freedom — all was not 
 , achieved, we grant, that ought to have been realised, 
 ; and that would have been realised but for foreign 
 interference ; and but for that, its history would not 
 have been marked with those atrocities at which hu- 
 manity may well weep. But these atrocities are 
 chargable to the legitimates — to the party of privilege 
 — to those who cling to the pepctuitiesof the old sys- 
 tem — not to atheists, not to liberal men. Notwith- 
 standing all this interference from abroad, the people 
 broke down the privileges of classes, they regained 
 i the property of which they had been robbed, they 
 \ recovered the rights of which they had been dispoil- 
 ed, and inflicted a just, salutary, and signal ven- 
 ' geance on the usurpers, their oppressors. To the 
 
li*gmmates, the French revolution ofltrs a terrible 
 rxample, an awful warning. Hence, in all Clirisifii- 
 dom, at all times, the bigoted and illiberal portion of 
 mankind point to its bloody rharacter, as if blood 
 and anarchy were the necessary fruits of liberty. 
 They denounce it as atheiani) and endeavor to make 
 ntheism, bloodshed, anarchy, and injustice, synony- 
 mous with liberty and the French revolution. The 
 finer sensibilities of our nature, our religious preju- 
 dices, everything is brought lorih to distract the 
 mind from the true merits of this queilion, and to 
 make the principles of liberty odious by means of the 
 French revolution. In this spirit, the tory Burke 
 describes, in impassioned language, and with poetic 
 license, the fall of the royal family of France, and 
 Mr VV'inslow appends it to his oration, to be printed 
 and circulated at the public charge. 
 
 "History ('says BurkeJ will record, that on the 
 •morningof the ()th of October, 1789, the king and 
 queen of France, after a day of confusion, alarm, 
 dismay and slaughter, lay down, under the pledged 
 security of public faith, to indulge nature in a few 
 hours of respite, and troubled melancholy repose. 
 From this sleep the queen was first startled by the 
 voice of the sentinel at her door, who cried out to her 
 to save herself by flight. * * This king, to say no 
 more of him, and this queen, and their infant chil- 
 dren, were then forced to abandon the sanctuary of 
 ihe most splendid palace in the world, w-hich they 
 left swimming in blood, polluted by massacre, and 
 strewed with scattered limbs and mutilated carcasses. 
 Thence they were conducted into the capital of their 
 kingdom. Two had been selected from the unpro- 
 voked, 'unresisted, promiscuous slaughter, which was 
 made of the gentlemen of birth and family who com- 
 posed the king's body guard. These two gentlemen, 
 with all the parade of an execution of justice, were 
 cruelly and publicly dragged to the block, and be- 
 headed in the great cowrt of the palace. Their heads 
 %vere stuck upoii spears, and led the procession, 
 whilst the royal captives who followed in the train 
 were slowly moved along, amid the horrid yells, and 
 thrilling screams, and frantic dances, and infamous 
 contumelies, and all the unutterable abominations of 
 the furies of hell, in the abused shape of the vilest ot 
 women. * * It is now sixteen or seventeen years since 
 I saw the queen of France, then the dauphine.ss, at 
 Versailles; and surely never lighted on this orb, 
 which she hardly seemed to touch, a more delightful 
 vision I saw her just above the horizon, decorating 
 and cheering the elevated sphere she just began to 
 move in — glittering like the morning star; full of 
 life, and splendor, and joy. Oh ! what a revolution ! 
 and what an heart must I have, to contemplate with- 
 out emotion that elevation and that fall ! Little did 
 f dream when she added titles of veneration to those 
 of enthusiastic, distant, respectful love, that she 
 should ever be obliged to carry the sharp antidote 
 against disgrace concealed in that bosom ; little did I 
 dream that I should have lived to see such disasters 
 fallen upon her in a nation of gallant men — 
 in a nation of men of honor and of cavaliers. I 
 tJiowght ten thousand swords must have leaped 
 from their scabbards to avenge even a look that 
 threatened her >wiih in.sult. But the age of chi- 
 valry is gone ; that of sopfiislers, economists, and 
 calculators has succeeded ; and the ^lory of Euniy.e is 
 eztinguished for ever. Never, never more, shall we 
 
 servitude itself, the spirit of an exalted Aetdom. The 
 unbought grarc-c of lilc, tirc cheap defence of nations, 
 the nurse of manly sentiment and heroic enterprise 
 is gone " * * 
 
 This is all very pretty declamation, and would 
 have been very well for the time and place in which 
 it was spoken, had it contained more truth and less 
 fhcticKi, and had it also traced the causes which led 
 to the scenes it describes. But how misplaced at 
 this time, and on this occasion. How unwi.se aiid 
 unfair to hold it as proof of the incapacity of the peo- 
 pie for self-govern merit, to otlcr it as evidence in fa- 
 vour of a monarchical system. We have no desire 
 to detract from the personal mciits of Louis the Six- 
 teenth, nor from the personal charms of his Queen. 
 Those, however, ought to hav«, and could have, little 
 influence in defining and fixing the political rights ol 
 a great people. 
 
 The tumult of the 6th of October, 1789, was brought 
 upon Ver.sailies by the indiscretion of the Queen and 
 ot the ladies of her court, and by the pride, folly, con- 
 spiracy, and treachery oi'the nobles who congregated 
 at Versailles. 
 
 The National Assembly was arranging a constitu- 
 tion for France ; it was laboring to establish, on a 
 permanent loundation, afree and just government; 
 and had the nobility and clergy been content with an 
 equality of rights and privileges, with the rest of the 
 nation, bloodshed would have been avoided, and 
 France would have reposed in peace and liberty. 
 But such was uncongenial to their feelings — adverse, 
 as they thought, to their interests. They were pre- 
 paring plans for civil war — they were contriving 
 schemes for the dissolution of the National Assembly 
 — they were forming a plot at Versailles to carry the 
 King and Royal Family to Melz, to place him 
 under the control, and to use him as the head, of 
 the privilege parly, in a furious war upon the people. 
 These conspirators, confident in their own minds of 
 success, became bold and insolent, they openly wore 
 the cross of St. Louis in the streets of Paris, and at 
 the palace of Versailles, where swarms of them gath- 
 ered. Great efforts were made to conciliate and pre- 
 pare the body guard, the regiment of Flanders, and 
 seduce them to favour the outbreak. A splendid 
 banquet was given to the officers of this regiment, 
 on the first ot October, at Versailles, in the Hall of 
 Hercules, at wh ich, during the drunken revelry, the 
 King and Queen made their appearance — the tri- 
 colored cockade, the badge of the new order of things, 
 was insultetl — the officers and soldiers of the guard 
 continued to wear the white cockade — the badge of 
 Bourbons ; the females of the court were busy in dis- 
 tributing among the troops and the conspirators these 
 emblems of the ojiposing party. Everything indica- 
 ted a speedy attempt at a counter revolution, under 
 the sanction of the Queen, if not of the King. The 
 people of Paris, who had then but just tasted of liber- 
 ty, rushed to Versailles to nip this conspiracy in the 
 bud, and rescue the King from the hands of the con- 
 spirators. If the nobility and the royal family had 
 themselves acted in good faith, they might have re- 
 posed in safety under that of the people — they first 
 broke their faith — they first attempted to wrest from 
 the people their right of .self government— they were 
 plotting again to enslave France for their own ag- 
 grandizement, and because this handful of selfish, 
 "azy, dishonest people, from the privileged classes, 
 
 ^- v.. ,... ,..,... ».„,,.., ..^,... ...v'.,., ...lun »i t luiy, uiMiiJiifrsi people, iiom liie jiuviifgiu tiasac- 
 
 beVold that generous loyalty to rank and sex, that were checked in their projects of plunder, our sym 
 proud submission, that dignified obe<lience, that sub- 1 pathy is to be aroused, and appeals in the most 
 crJination of the heart, which kept alive, even in I thrilling eloquence are made, to persuade us that 
 
8 
 
 monarchy, after all, is the only right form of govern- 
 ment. 
 
 It is true, a mob assailed the palace, and entered 
 it, and it is equally true that the National Guards of 
 Paris, the troops of the people, under La Fayette, 
 marched to the rescue, and saved the royal family. 
 The Queen was not first aroused by a centinel at her 
 door, but this is of no importance, except to show 
 that Burke has adorned his eloquence by fiction. It 
 is the same when he says that two bloody heads, of 
 the massacred body guards, fed the procession. He 
 further says, the royal captives moved along in this 
 train " amid the horrid yells, and thrilling screams, 
 and frantic dances, and infamous contumelies, and 
 all the M?tM</er«6?e abominations of the furies of hell, 
 in the abused shape of the vilest of women." This 
 may be to some extent true, or it may not be : but 
 could Burke find no sympathy for these " vilest of 
 women," as he calls them ? Bid it never occur to him 
 that probably the very political system which had 
 just been overturned, had degraded and brutified 
 them — that they had been kept ignorant, the better 
 to enslave them — that the royal family, who had so 
 long held France in slavery — who had been faithless 
 to the trust reposed in them — who had done nothing 
 to elevate the character and equalize the rights of the 
 people, over -whom they ruled, were but reaping the 
 harvest of their own sowing ? Could we not have 
 learned from history, that all public oppressions 
 finally meet a signal punishment, however distant 
 the day of retribution may be— that the wheel of for- 
 tune is sure to revolve, relieve the oppressed, and 
 make the oppressor feel its weight ? These vile wo- 
 men, as Burke decribes them, now .so degraded, had 
 they and their kindred been permitted to control their 
 own industry, and enjoy the proceeds of their own 
 honest labor — had the royal family but have secured 
 to them this boon, as it was their duty to do — had their 
 earnings not been filched to swell iho useless splendor 
 of the throne, and the vain pomp of the privileged class- 
 es, they perhaps might have moved in the bright paths 
 of virtue, and adorned the halls of social enjoyment. 
 
 Burke's eloquent philanthropy was not broad and 
 expansive enough to embrace this view ; it was vSel- 
 fish, narrow, servile. Eloquence it may be, but it is 
 eloquence pleading for injustice — for slavery — it is 
 eloquence founded in falsehood and turned against 
 humanity. How ignorant, how short-sighted, to sup- 
 pose that the glory of Europe was ever extinguished 
 by iha French revolution. What a miserably degra- 
 ded sentiment to suppose, that proud submission, 
 dignified obedience, and loyalty {orank converts even 
 servitude itself into the spirit of exalted freedom. 
 Has the world lost, as Burke asserts, by loosing the 
 "chivalr}'" of Bourbon France ; has it not rather 
 gained by the reign of " sophisters, economists, and 
 calculators?" as Burke sneeringly describes the 
 friends of liberty. How stand the arts, the sciences, 
 learning, morals, the comfort, happiness, and well- 
 being of the people now, compared with the age of 
 "chivalry" so charming to the eye of Burke? Test 
 his views, test his eloquence by these standards, and 
 where shall we rank him ? Surely among the short- 
 sighted, selfish, slavish worshippers of royalty, among 
 those who distrust the capacity and deny the right of 
 the people to self-government; and yet he appears to 
 be a model lor many of our young pohtical aspirants. 
 Others may admire this specimen of his eloquence, 
 and of hi.s principles, but it has no charms for us. 
 
 We are no advocates of the excesses and atrocities 
 of the French revolution. We wish simply to ex- 
 
 plore the causes which produced them ; trace thefn 
 up to their source, and stamp the disgrace upon thr 
 rc^l ofienders. These offences were less the crimes of 
 the French people, than of the tyrannical govern- 
 ment — of the privikged class — that had for ages 
 trampled down their most sacred rights, and driven 
 the people themselves to desparation. Ground to the 
 dust by the most odious tyranny and injustice, the 
 people broke their chains over the heads of their op- 
 pressors, and gained thsir liberty before they were 
 prepared to use it with judgment. 
 
 But it is not pity for human misery, it is not sympa- 
 thy for men in distress, that calls forth the eloquence 
 of legitimacy against bloodshed anA anarchy. It is 
 self interest — not the Jives that were lost — but the 
 systems that were overthrown — the privileges destroy- 
 ed — the monopolies broken up — rank levelled. The 
 massacre of some 50,000 Janissaries, in Turkey, ten 
 years since — the constant oppressions and butcheries 
 of Ireland — the torrents of blood now being shed in 
 the civil wars in Spain, arouse no sympathy — com- 
 mand no attention from the partizans of power ; be- 
 cause in these bloody and ferocious conflicts privil- 
 eges lose and liberty gains nothing. Place their 
 noise, then, to the right account — to selfishness, and 
 not to humanity ; and let us bear in mind, that if the 
 vvralh of an enslaved and abused people is terrible, 
 the cold-blooded cruelty of despotism is still more 
 attrocious.* 
 
 Mr Winslow's idea of republican liberty and equal- 
 ity of rights is as follows — 
 
 " I conceive it to be summarily this, that all mem 
 have by nature the same right, and should have 
 equal liberty to serve their maker with all their pow- 
 ers in the way most conducive to their own welfare, 
 and that of their fellow beings. Under the control of 
 the divine government there can be no clashing be- 
 tween a man's interest and that of his neighbor." 
 
 Mr Winslow informs us how a man is to serve his 
 maker, viz : in a way most conducive to his own 
 welfare, and to that of his neighbor. But who is to 
 decide what is most conducive to one's own welfare, 
 the man himself, or his neighbor? If my neighbor 
 have the power to decide what is most fit for nie to 
 eat, to drink, to wear, and to do, there would be little 
 liberty left to me. Mr Winslow thinks there would 
 bo little clashing of interests "under the control of 
 the divine government. We do not know precisely 
 what he means by the divine government. If he 
 means a government of divines, in the worldly sense 
 of the term, bis views run counter to the testimony 
 of all history ; if by divine government, he mean 
 any special order of Providence, something out of 
 the course of nature, that being beyond the compre- 
 hension of mortals, we have no remarks to make 
 upon it. If he mean that the divine will shall be ex- 
 pounded by religious teachers, then the will of a class 
 becomes the law of the community. It seems, from 
 
 ♦ I'nder the feuilal system that prevailed in France before tho 
 revohstiori, the pea-santry must attend the mill and the furnace 
 of tho Seijnor when required— and under the term correV; they 
 were compelled to devote a certain portion of their lime, gratu- 
 itously, to the service of their Lord. The Sei?iior had also rights 
 over the persou.s of newly married females, which M. I.e Guen, 
 in his .speech before the National At5.senibly, saiil could not be 
 named without ofTending the cars of mode.sty and humanity. 
 
 M. La Poule, in the same debate, spoke of a feudal right, 
 ui\useil to be sure for centuries, but yet then .still existing in 
 some cantons of Fr.ince, by which theSeignor was authorised on 
 \m retuni from the chase, to embowel two of his vassals, for the 
 purpose of relaxin;: and warming his feet, by thrusting them 
 ijilo their warm and bloody carcasses. 
 
 It was such rights and privileges that produced tho French 
 revolution — it ia such that have been destroyed by it. 
 
9 
 
 iliis, as well as dilu-r passages in tlieomtion, that Mr 
 Winslow has iiu clear ulea.s in regaril lo republican 
 liberty, or the equalily of rif,'hls. 
 
 ftir Wiiislow's idea of religious liberty appears lo 
 be aKke confused, as arc his notions of republican 
 liberty. He is quite oracular, but, we think, not 
 quite sound. 
 
 " Religious liberty, (he says) allows the subject to 
 worship God according to the dictates of his own 
 conscience, directed and controlled onhj by the teachings 
 iiad authority of divine truth.'" 
 
 This is very like Mr Lothrop's and Judge Wilde's 
 notions of religious liberty. Religious liberty, they 
 say, is the liberty of being religious, and not ot being 
 irreligious, and they reserve to themselves the right 
 of saying what is religion and what irreligion. And, 
 so, too, we suppose Mr Winslow would claim the 
 right to decide what were the teachings and authority 
 ol^divine truth, that ought to direct and control the 
 worship of God. In other words, his idea of religious 
 liberty seems to be, to allow the "subject" to worship 
 God according to the dictates of his own conscience, 
 jirovided\i)^ conscience is directed and controlled by 
 the teachings and authority of divine truth, asex- 
 iwunded by Mr I Vinslow. 
 
 The Constitution views religious liberty in quite a 
 different light. It says— 
 
 " No subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, 
 in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping God 
 in the manner and season most agreeable lo his own 
 conscience, or for his religious professions and senti- 
 ments ; provided he doth not disturb the public peace 
 or obstruct others in their religious worship." 
 
 Mr Winslow was induced to offer this wise defini- 
 tion ; wise above the Constitution, because "the times 
 urgently demand that some cokrect views of the 
 rights and duties of republican citizens clearly de- 
 fined, and set forth in a popular form, should be dif- 
 fused through the nation." 
 
 " The nation," perhaps, if it ever hear of his pro- 
 found exposition, may suitably reward him. 
 
 In speaking against what he terms the levelling 
 system, (which is but a system of equality of rights,) 
 and in favor of different ranks and conditions of so- 
 ciety, Mr Winslow cites the case of the angels. 
 
 '<It was (he says,) the levelling dispostion that 
 cast down the shining angels from their starry 
 heights. If it was evil in heaven, it is not less evil 
 on earth." 
 
 We shall feel obliged lo I\Ir Winslow for a little 
 more information on this important case, thus cited 
 as a precedent. Some few more facts and details 
 seem necessary. We have not been able to find all 
 we need on this point in the bible, perhaps we have 
 not read it with sufficient care. Will Mr Winslow, 
 who, being a divine, ought to possess the informa- 
 tion, inform us, then, how many angels there are, 
 how many different ranks, and what their order of 
 precedence. What class attempted the levelling 
 system. Who begun the rebellion, and what the 
 cause. AVhat time in biblical history they were 
 created— for what purpose— what their powers— what 
 their duties — what their form — what their appearance 
 
 what their substance, etherial or material — what 
 
 their naturef immortal or mortal ? 
 
 We can judge better whether their precedent^ is as 
 the lawyers say, a case in point or not, when we 
 shall have been informed on these points. AVe trust 
 the reverend gentleman will think of the points here 
 named. 
 
 ?tlr Winslow courts popularity, by praising, with- 
 
 out much lact, however, all classes of our citi:^ens ; 
 the fanner, the meciianic, the man of the profession ^ 
 the artizan, the merchant, manufacturer, Sec , &;c. 
 He seems to be Ashing for praise in pay, rather than 
 to draw out truth. But even in this courting mood, 
 he could not refrain from a tilt with Satan, in the 
 garb of infidelity, though he had to pass his "friends," 
 the mechanics, through the body with his drawn 
 sword, to reach his foe. 
 
 "TAcjV (the mechanics) proverbial tendency to shep ~ 
 ticism, owing, in part, to their dealing exclusively 
 7cith cause ami effect in the material world — their op- 
 portunities of frequent intercourse with each other, 
 and the reckless and revolutionary spirit, engendered 
 by infidelity, render them, sometimes, dangerous men to 
 the republic." 
 
 So dealing with cause and effect, according to Mr 
 Winslow, tends to skepticism ; are we hence to infer 
 the converse of this proposition, that religious faith 
 best reposes in a disregard of cause and effect, We 
 do not so understand religion. Does the opportunity 
 of frequent intercourse with each other make me- 
 chanics more dangerous to the republic than other 
 tnen ? Do they, in fact, congregate more than pro- 
 fessional men, merchants, &cc. This fling at the me- 
 chanics, made at the expense both of religion and 
 veracity, is the offspring of political rancour, rather 
 than the child of fact. Mechanics, from the habit of 
 dealing with '•' cause and effect," become close rea- 
 soners, and good judges of truth, hence we very gen- 
 erally find them ranged on the side of democracy, 
 and iiExcE their denunciation as dangerous members 
 of society — that is, to the privileged cLisses, to the 
 monopolists of business and wealth. It is not this in- 
 tercourse, this combination, that is dangerous, but it 
 is the democracy of the mechanics that is feared. 
 
 Mr Winslow calls upon the college-bred men— 
 upon gentlemen, whose acquaintance, to use his latin 
 phrase, was formed inter sylvas academi — men devoted 
 to public life, and to the different learned professions, 
 to cherish personal attachments, and an esprit du 
 corps for their own benefit. 
 
 "Engaged (says he) in different departments ot the 
 same great work, they can do much (towards what ?) 
 towards creating public confidence in each other." 
 That is, he advices them to blow each others trum- 
 pets. The advice was needless. 
 
 In fulfilment, on his part, of this task, after abusing 
 the mechanics as infidels, and dangerous men to the 
 republic. He says — 
 
 " If any of our citizens deserve to be called work- 
 ing men. and public benefactors, tho.se who faithiul- 
 ly sustain the civil offices, and the learned profes- 
 sions, [and nearly all civil offices are filled from the 
 learned professions,] of the land, are surely of that 
 number. iMosl people have no adequate conception of 
 the severity of their labors or the value of their scrvi 
 ces." 
 
 If this be really so, then '-most people have (in 
 many cases) no adequate conception of the" extent of 
 decimal-fraction calculations. Following up the 
 idea against mechanics and men of humble condi- 
 tion, however good their minds and character, he 
 endorses the following lory sentiment of some idol of 
 his, viz : 
 
 I do not hesitate to say that the road to eminrnre 
 
 and power, from obscure condition, ought not to be 
 made too easy, nor a thing too much of course." 
 
 Mr Winslow gives us the following rema " 
 c.Kperimeuts— "r/<t; experiment"— we need 
 
10 
 
 where he found his ideas on this subjecl, bin here 
 they are — 
 
 " Among the greatest evils in legislation, are those 
 of innovation and experiments. The last place where 
 an experiment should be made is at the head of <x 
 State or nation. Experiments should always be made 
 on the smallest possible scale, that the risk may be as 
 small as possible." 
 
 So we suppose Sir Winslow would either never 
 have made the experiment of gaining our indepen- 
 dence, or if commenced, he would first have begun 
 with a town or parish. 
 
 So, too, with Luther's reformation, he would not, 
 like Luther, have taken the bull by the horns, but 
 would hteve plucked out a hair at a time. 
 
 We must once more contrast genius and dulness. 
 I\Ir Forrest, speaking of the declaration of indepen- 
 dence, says — 
 
 " That was the grandest, most important exfeki- 
 ME.\T ever undertaken in the history of man. But 
 they that entered upon it were not afraid of new ex- 
 periments, if founded on the immutable principles of 
 right, and approved by the sober convictions of rea- 
 son. There were not wanting then, indeed, as there 
 are nol wanting now, pale counsellors to fear, who 
 would "have withheld them from the course they were 
 pursuing, because it tended in a direction hitherto un- 
 trod. But they were not to be deterred by the shad- 
 owy doubts and timid suggestions of craven spirits, 
 content to be lashed forever round the same circle of 
 miserable expedients, perpetually trying anew the 
 exploded shifts which had always proved lamentably 
 inade(:iuate before. To such men the very name of 
 experiment is a sound of horror. It is a spell which 
 conjurs up gorgons, hydras, and chimeras dire. They 
 seem not to know that all that is valuable in life — 
 that the acquisitions of learning, the discoveries in 
 science, and the refinements of art, are the result of 
 experiment. It was experiment that bestowed on 
 Cadmus those ke3's of knowledge with which we 
 unlock the treasure houses of immortal mind. It was 
 experiment that taught Bacon the futility of the 
 Grecian philosophy, and led him to the heaven-scal- 
 ing method of investigation and analysis on which 
 science has safely climbed to the proud eminence 
 where vShe now sits, despensingher blessings on man- 
 kind. It was experiment that lifted Newton above 
 the clouds and darkness of this diurnal sphere, ena- 
 bling him to explore the sublime mechanism of the 
 stars, and weigh the planets in their eternal rounds. 
 It was exp'-'„it»t that nerved the hand of FllANK- 
 L'liN to snatch the thunder from the armory of hea- 
 ven. It was experiment that gave this hemisphere 
 to the world. It was EXPERIMENT that gave this 
 country FREEDON. 
 
 "Let us not be afraid to try experiments, merely 
 because they are new, nor lavisli upon aged error 
 the veneration due only to truth. Let us not be 
 afraid to follow reasox, however far she may diverge 
 from the beaten path of opinion. All the inventions 
 which embellish life — all the discoveries which en- 
 large the field of human happiness, arc but various 
 results of the bold experimental excrcis» of that dis- 
 tinguished attribute of man." 
 
 Blr Winslow asks : 
 
 "And who are the men next to the profound and 
 experienced slatestnen, first to know, assuredly, 
 whether legislation is right or wrong ? Are they not 
 those whose eyes and hands arc actually upon the 
 great springs and wheels which move the enterprise 
 of the nation ? Such men arc the men who have the ' 
 
 direction of our commercial and manufacturing oper- 
 ations. When thc!/ begin to see the signs of unto- 
 ward causes in the doings of government, then let all 
 the citizens be assured that evil is approaching, and, 
 as they love their country, and themselves, hasten to 
 avert it by a prompt action at the polls. And as to 
 monopolies, of business and wealth, what of them V 
 
 These sentiments Mr Winslow has minced up and 
 warmed over from Mr Webster's speeches ; and in 
 another place he mouths over the epithets Burke ap- 
 plied to the liberal party, and like him avers, that 
 " the brief and troubled night of sophisters and ex- 
 perimenters will pass away." 
 
 We feel obliged, however, to Blr Winslow lor this 
 recliauffe of great men's speeches, being infinitely su- 
 perior to any of his original dishes. 
 
 So, next to Daniel Webster, the profound and expe- 
 rienced statesman, the merchants and manufactures 
 are the /rsMo know, that is, they are the second fo 
 ! know, whether legislation is right or wrong. They 
 I have "their eyes and hands upon the great springs 
 and wheels which move the enterprise of the nation." 
 And as to their •' monopolies of business and wealth, 
 what of them ?" Daniel Webster says they are all 
 right, and hence Mr Winslow believes them to be so, 
 and he begs leave to refer the reader to the argument 
 of Blr Webster in his " second speech on the Sub- 
 Treasury bill," * * Wherein * * he ^'demon- 
 strates" that instead of having anything to fear from 
 monopolies of busiaess and wealth ; all our citizens 
 who are true to their own welfare will sustain the 
 great interests of commerce, trade, and manufac- 
 tures ;" [by monopolies.] 
 
 Mr Webster is a very fortunate logician, to be able 
 to "demonstrate" all this. But the great difliculty 
 with Mr Webster is, that he supposes the interest of 
 all to be the same as his own. He has been, and 
 now is, the advocate and attorney of these monopoli- 
 zers of "business and wealth." He has changed his 
 principles of political economy, (but not his habits of 
 personal economy,) as the varying interests of these 
 classes required. He might well say, what Blr Win- 
 slow repeats, " as for monopolies of business and 
 wealth, what of them ? Do they not enable these 
 men to pay me belter fees — to make me, through 
 their banks, heavier loans, to raise for me among 
 their clamerous number larger contributions ?" 
 
 The people do not think as well of these monopolies. 
 
 The "great springs and wheels which move the 
 enterprise of the nation," we had supposed were the 
 intelligence and labor of the producing classes ; and 
 the great mass of the producing classes is to be found 
 among the farmers and mechanics. The monopo- 
 lists have their "ej'es and their hand.s" upon these, 
 it is true, and they know whether legislation is "right 
 or wrong ;" that is, whether it will or will not ena- 
 ble the monopolists to engross the business of the 
 country, and acquire the wealth labor has earned. 
 Legislation, in this country, has been prostituted to 
 the purposes of private gain, to that of monopolies of 
 business and wealth. One class has been plundered 
 to pamper another — the many have been made tribu- 
 tary to the few — agriculture, the mother of all indus- 
 try — tha:t support of life — that great interest, the 
 source and foundation of all others, has been made 
 to yield its constant and unequal tribute to the bank 
 er, the merchant, the manufacturer. In defiance of 
 all the true principles of political economy, in viola- 
 tion of every rule of right, all other interests have 
 been fostered at the expense of agriculture. Injudi- 
 cious legislation, unwisely appropriating wealth, has 
 
11 
 
 filled to overflowing the learned professions, leaving 
 halt" their number useless drones upon society, or 
 making them noisy office-seeking demagogues. It 
 has inflated the credit system, by the artificial means 
 of bank charters, monopolies for selling credit, k 
 has profusely wasted capital, by calling it from pro- 
 fitable to unprofitable investments, from productive 
 agriculture to unproductive manufactures, prema- 
 turely established ; and has taxed agriculture, by 
 means of imposts and prohibitory duties, to make up 
 the loss. It has drawn capital and talent from the 
 all-important pursuit of raising subsistence, until, 
 but for foreign supplies, the country would have 
 been on the brink of starvation. These results have 
 been realised fiora "the monopolies of wealth and 
 business," conferred by vicious legislation. Yet Mr 
 Winslow asks, "what of them ?" and declares, very 
 coolly, that 
 
 "The cry of monopolies is the most unmeaning 
 sound, with which envious indolence and disappoint- 
 ed ambition, in the haggard forms of paltroons and 
 demagogues, ever deceived a people." 
 
 Mr Webster, we believe, has pretty much the same 
 ideas in his "second speech on the Sub-Treasury 
 Bill," and Mr Winslow seems willing to endorse 
 them. 
 
 But we must part with Mr Winslow. Wa should 
 not have kept him company so long, had not the City 
 Authorities become his endorser. We would not, 
 however, wilhngly part his debtor — we have profited 
 so much from his opinions and advice, that we are 
 willing to pay him with a little of our own. Know- 
 ing him only through the medium of this discourse, 
 we have none but the most kindly personal feelings 
 towards him. His intentions we have no doubt are 
 good, but his head is filled with crudities and errors. I 
 
 His profession is meek and humble, but his spirit 
 appears proud and domineering. He professes to be 
 liberal, but makes war upon his own precepts. 
 Time, investigation, reflection, and expenence may 
 correct these faults. Our advice, then, to him is, to 
 stick to his sermons and let party politics alone — 
 strive to bring back Christianity to its original sim- 
 phcity, and give to it again its primeval lustre ^ 
 make it, in practice, what it is in theory and in truth, 
 meek, humble, charitable — a religion of allurment, 
 not of terrors and menace. Let him keep in mind 
 that acts, not opinions, define the character of an 
 individual — that man is not responsible for the belief 
 that facts impress upon his mind, to any being, ex- 
 cept to the Deity himself — that for one man or the 
 body politic to attempt to repress, by punishment or 
 by censure in any form, the expression of belief oa 
 speculative questions, is both sinful and silly. Let 
 him curb that personal vanity, which in the wicked 
 people and pharisees of oid, induced them to say, 
 scernfuUy — "Stand by thyself, come not near to me, 
 for 7 am holier than thou," Let him remember the 
 quaint axiom, embodying the wisdom and experience 
 of the whole community for ages, that "what is one 
 man's meat is another's poison" — bear in mind that 
 there may be great difference of opinion without 
 much difference of morals. Be content in the enjoy, 
 ment of his own opinion, without attempting to con- 
 trol the expression of his neighbor's. Be satisfied 
 with his own virtue and religion, and cease all at- 
 tempts to compel others to adopt his standard. Do 
 all the good he can to himself and others, but never 
 invade the rights and interest of his fellow ; finally, 
 attend to his own business, and leave his fellow mea 
 to their's, and we doubt not he will be happier and 
 wiser than he is now. 
 
 i 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 01 1 782 707 
 
LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 
 
 011 782 707 • 
 
 penmalipe* 
 pH83