Current:

Leader (1850-1860), 29th June 1850, Edition Town of 1, Page 327

Page 327
Page 15
15 of 24

On this page

  • Text (3)

      Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    • Untitled Article

      Untitled Article

    • Untitled Article

      Untitled Article

    • Untitled Article

      Untitled Article

  • Transcript

    • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

      Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

      Untitled Article

      I hold to Scripture , as an immediate source of knowledge , more than to Nature , because I deem it equally divine , and much more easy of access to common understandings . I do not cling to special creeds , confessions , or theologies , but to the Word of God itself , as a true revelation : I do not cling to special systems of astrology or Ptolomean explanations of the heavens , but to the sidereal universe and visible Creations .

      There may be many truths in special creeds and doctrines of theology , as there were many mathematical verities in the Ptolomeian system of astronomy ; but I believe appearances have led the mind astray on fundamental facts in many instances . I believe there is but one universal Good and no Evil ; one God and no Devil , in the highest acceptation of these words . The spiritual world revolves around one spiritual sun , just as the natural world revolves around one central orb . It is , however , quite legitimate to say , in harmony with ocular and auricular appearances , " the sun rises in the east and sets in the west ; God is good and Satan evil . " The understanding , properly enlightened , will correct inversions of reality in the phenomenal display of appearances , before the senses .

      The systems of theology and creeds as they now stand , are based upon the literal appearances of Scripture , as the Ptolomean system of astronomy was based upon the natural appearances of the heavens . The Devil seems to be more powerful than God in the literal economy of Scripture ; Hell more universal and overpowering than Heaven . Such is not the case . There is but one God , one law , one providence ; one spiritual sun of the spiritual universe . Light and darkness—good and evil are as light and darkness in the revolutions of our planet .

      I will not touch upon the parallel of natural and spiritual solar systems in the providential unity of the universe . These questions are too abstruse for newspaper dissertations . My chief object here is to call the attention of your readers to the danger of preconceived opinions or the conceits of conscience , as substitutes for faith in the critical study of Nature and of Scripture . We may reject Ptolomean systems of astronomy without denying Nature ; Roman , or Greek , or Anglican systems of theology , without denying Scripture .

      The Wollston theory of criticism adopted by Strauss and Newman is a very defective theory . I call it the Wollston theory because Thomas Wollston ' s dissertation on the miracles is the first book I read on that method , and , I think , the best . The method may , however , not be entirely of Wollston ' s invention . It is well to know that the numerous books of Scripture are not regularly brought together , and that some editorial confusion has been introduced into the Bible by placing under one head revelations made by different men , as in the Pentateuch attributed to Moses ; but that is not a spiritual question : it is a question of collecting , editing , labelling , and binding . When this editorial question has been settled , and

      the various defects of literal and logical discrepancy made evident , then comes the question of prophecy and revelation ; the real power and meaning of the Word of God , the basis of religion . Did angels ever speak to prophets in the name of God ? If not , were prophets otherwise sufficiently inspired with truth to build up faith in men , and constitute the churches ? Is religion a necessary part of man ' s nature , a natural part of society ? and if so , what is the true basis of religion ? Could any modern man of science make a new religion without any help from Scripture ? Would a new revelation from Heaven prove the falsehood of the present Scriptures , otherwise than the present animal creation proves the non-existence of antedeluvian fossils ?

      Is a new scheme of theology tantamount to a new religion ? or merely to a new doctrinal science ? Is there no difference between doctrine and devotion ? May not any church be good for devotion , though fanatical in doctrine ? May not devotional religion thrive as doctrinal religion wanes ? and may not higher doctrines of theology spring from one same revelation as higher views of science spring from deeper studies of one same creation ? These are suggestive questions , meant to bring forth their own answers in the reader ' s mind , without involving wordy disputations .

      I will not here enlarge upon the growth of science . There is a want of higher truths in natural and spiritual doctrine , and this want is baulked by men ' s conceits usurping in the mind the throne of faith . The soul of man is dark to doctors of divinity ; the body is a mystery to doctors of physiology , for want of faith in Providence and common sense .

      I do not speak irreverently of priests , philosophers , and men of science . They have done all they could , and arc continually labouring for good . I merely ¦ wish to indicate one cause of error in the temper of the mind . I have found the highest views of physiology where doctors generally deign not to observe , because , forsooth , some foolish theories have been derived from hypothetical descriptions of the " vital principle . ' The living fact has been rejected with unsound theories . I have also found the highest > visdom where philosophers refuse to look , because , forsooth , some foolish doctrines have been drawn from

      certa in texts of Scripture . The living facts of revelation have been thrown away , with the discrepancies of literal and logical agglomeration . That is what I wish to say to those who are in search of a new faith and a new doctrine . The very highest doctrines of religious truth and worldly wisdom are given in the Scriptures . The deepest studies of Nature and society , corroborate , without surpassing them . No modern science can surpass the wisdom of the first divine injunction : " Be fruitful and multiply , and replenish the earth , and subdue it . " That is the first law of progress . The

      earth must be replenished before it can possibly be subdued ; it must be subdued , before man can be happy , or society at peace . Those who are seemingly unjust , are often more obedient to this law of necessity than those who rail against injustice . Conquering races which monopolize the land and force their slaves either to cultivate it , or move into other lands in search of freedom , are more useful to humanity than roaming savages , who neither occupy nor cultivate the earth . The present policy of

      England would be wiser in maintaining the monopoly of land and privilege to force the working population to replenish and subdue the earth , now lying waste in foreign climes , than in returning to the common right of property in land , which is the final law of justice in society . The latter policy would tend to equalize men ' s fortunes for a time , without preventing population from out-growing territory ; the necessity of emigration would be thus deferred , but not diminished .

      England will improve internally , I doubt not , but she must extend herself externally , as well . There is no help for it . The aristocracy will drive the landless people over the sea , to seek for liberty and labour in our colonies or in America . The Saxon race is not a match for Norman blood , in military and political audacity and enterprize , though probably superior in mercantile and mechanical ingenuity . The farmers who have anything to lose at present , should sell their stock and emigrate before free trade and heavy rents have ruined them . Protectionists

      will only lull them with false hopes of retrograde reform , until the rents have swallowed up the farmers ' stock , and then employ their tenants as farm bailiffs . The farmers should migrate at once in numbers , and buy land where land is cheap , before they come to poverty at home . Working men who pant for liberty should do the same . They cannot hope for freedom in this country . Property and labour may contend for mastery , but property will gain the day . Everything is in its favour ; prejudice and social habits , military force and law .

      The conquered races of this country who prefer social slavery at home , to liberty abroad , are fit for their position , and should cling to it ; but those who cannot brook poverty and labouring dependency with temper and goodwill , should emigrate to other climes . They would be following the law of God more strictly than by spiritlessly remaining here . The Norman race will drive the Saxon and the Celtic o ' er the sea , from sheer necessity , and do a holy work withal , unless the latter show more spirit than they have done hitherto , and force the Norman race to share the difficulties and the burdens of colonial settlements . Hugh Doheutv .

      Untitled Article

      RIGHTS : RIGHT OF THE SUFFRAGE . Juno 23 , 1850 . Sir , —Your correspondent P ., in your paper of the 15 th inst . asserts that the suffrage is " the absolute natural right of every sound-minded adult man . " I am an advocate for a large extension of the suffrage , and am not much alarmed at the idea even of universal suffrage ; and as the suffrage question must soon occupy a prominent place in the public mind , I am anxious to see it put on its true basis , which it is very far from being in such dogmata as that quoted above .

      To sift thoroughly the question of rights we must first determine what a right is . I hope P . and those who think with him will agree with me in defining a right as " that which it would be wrong in those who have the power to take or withhold from any one . " If they agree to this it must be observed that we have only shifted the question a step back , for we must immediately settle how we are to determine what is wrong in such cases . By what standard of right and wrong , morally or politically , can it be shown that I , who may have the power , am doing wrong in not endeavouring to get the privilege of voting for all my unenfranchised brethren . Is it the

      law of God on which the right to the suffrage rests ? Then let the passage in the Scriptures on which it rests be pointed out . I have not hitherto been able to discover any such injunction in Holy Writ , nor anything from which such an injunction can be drawn . The most that I can find there bearing on such questions is the general command to do the best you can to promote the welfare of your fellowcreatures . Whether this should lend you to extend to them the suffrage or not is another question , left to be decided by men ' s judgment in the circumstances of the case . It may here bo observed also that it is essential to a system of political rights and

      duties that it should be founded on universally recognised data , that its principles should be applicable amongst all men , being both easily understood and readily assented to by all . Hence it cannot be founded on any one system of religion ; for its object is to be a law or standard of reference even amongst men of different religions . . Again , is it the law of conscience or the inward , moral sense to which the upholders of the absolute adult to tne

      natural right of every sound-minded suffrage , appeal ? The same remark may be made ot this as of the law of religion as a standard on such a subject . Our conscience is no guide on the subject till it is informed by our judgment that such a right would be for the advantage of our fellow-men . li the principle of utility be your standard , still the same preliminary question has to be resolved by the judgment . The law of the land is silent on the Mibject . Public opinion is yet unformed upon it . You will search in vain for anv rule of right or wrong by

      which to convince men that the suffrage should be extended to any class whatever , until you have previously shown that it is for the advantage both of that class and the community at large . # It is asserted that the suffrage is an absolute right . Why , even the right to life is not absolute . The laws of God and man , and the consciences ^ and usages of mankind in every age sanction the taking away of life , when it is considered to be for the interests of the community . If even that greatest and most sacred of all rights is subject to qualification , on what grounds can the suffrage be termed an absolute right ? It is called a " natural" right . This is a singular assertion . If there is such a natural right , in what stage of society does it exist ? Is it born with us ? Then it must have existed before the circumstances

      which develope it—before its parent—the representative system . Is it coeval with the representative system ? Then it must have existed for ages before it was known or felt ; for assuredly the founders of that system , and millions of Gurths and Wambas who lived then and since > had not the most faint conception of any such universal right . When , for ages , it is not claimed , nor felt , nor dreamed of by the people themselves , nor by any for them , surely it cannot , in any proper sense of the term , be called an absolute natural right . is the limi

      Again , if it be a natural right , whence - tation to sound-minded adult men derived ? Why is it denied to females , young persons , &c . ? On what possible ground can it be shown that every man has a right to a voice in the election of those who are to make laws for him , and that every woman , even unmarried female householders , many of whom are highly intelligent , heavily taxed , and perform useful service to society as schoolmistresses , &c , shall be denied such voice ? It may have been inexpedient , or not thought of hitherto , to confer votes on women ; but a more glaring inconsistency than for the upholders of the doctrine that the suffrage is an absolute natural right , to exclude females , is not to be found .

      The truth is , as laid down half a century since by an eminent political writer , " The moment you abate anything from the full rights of men , each to govern himself , and suffer any artificial positive limitation upon those rights , from that moment the whole organization of government becomes a consideration of convenience . " Would P . advise the Sultan , the Czar , the Queen of Otaheite , or the Hottentot chiefs of Africa to establish universal suffrage ? Ought Alfred , Cromwell , William III ., Walpolo , Pitt , Grey to have done so ? When did universal suffrage begin to be a right ? and why ? Where is it a right now ? Why not everywhere ?

      Sir , this letter has been devoted to the ungracious task of opposing and pulling down . Will you allow me a few lines in your next , when I hope to be able to show the real basis and extent of rights , and the true methods of proceeding in the assertion of them . Yours , &c , 11 . R .

      Untitled Article

      UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE . Exeter , June 25 , 1850 . Sir , —I know not whether a clergyman , and one who holds opinions on many points diametrically opposed to those of your principal contributors , is likely to obtain any hearing within your circle . If , however , I have underrated your moral courage and impartiality , then allow me thus publicly to express my Konso of the remarkable talent , and above all the honesty , which seem to me to be characteristic of your Leader . I do not write , however , for the sake of paying compliments . My particular object , on the present

      occasion , is to say a Jew words concerning universal suffrage , the justice or impropriety of which appears to have become a question betwixt certain of your correspondents . The two last who have written on the subjfflt , P . and C . F . N ., appear to be both possessed with the notion that universal Huffrago is the unalicnablc riyht of every man ; one of them sayp , of every man and woman . Will you then allo \* me to mention certain reasons for which I believe the suffrage to be no right at all , but simply a privilege ; and will you further allow me to say why I am convinced that universal suffrage must establish the

      Untitled Article

      June 29 , 1850 . ] Htf ) * & * && *?? 327

  • Citation
    • Leader (1850-1860), June 29, 1850, page 327, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1844/page/15/