and freedom from severe labor and corroding anxieties. It would be easy to expatiate on these, were it necessary to defend what is so seldom attacked. It is not Christianity, but asceticism which imposes a vow of poverty. But the Christian teacher cannot forget that the dangers of the rich were most pointedly and solemnly exposed by Christ himself; and the experience of every age confirms the justice of the exposure. He only can be safe from these dangers, who strictly limits himself to such accumulation as shall best promote the real advantages which wealth confers; and whose moral sense is never bewildered by the factitious splendor which dazzles the crowd. To such a person labor cannot be debasing; he does not wish to unman himself by refusing the healthful exercise which God ordained for all. Neither can he esteem it brave or generous, to sink into luxurious indulgence, which would alike unfit him for rough contact with the world and for sympathy with the harder lot of his fellows. He places, moreover, this important limit to his acquisitions: - he will not take advantage of the favorable circumstances which his position in society may give him, at the expense of those who may depend on him for employment. The rate of wages, he thinks, should not be regulated by the necessities of the workman, but by some fair estimate of the value of his work; and since any such regulation is confessedly impracticable by law, he will be all the more scrupulous that no cupidity or cruel parsimony shall stint his compensation to the laborer; for he " is worthy of his hire." -We should be glad, if we had room, to dwell much more at length on this last point. The practical effect of adopting this principle, we believe, would be a far greater equality of advantages in the pursuit of wealth. For it applies not only to the relation between the operative and his employer, but also to trade and commerce with their thousand ramifications. A single question, for self-examination, includes, perhaps, the substance of what we could wish to urge: Do I give an equivalent for the labor on commodities which I procure; or am I trying to obtain them for the smallest possible compensation?'

The "rights of man," however, include somewhat more than the right to fair wages. And if we would apply the most thorough cure for these social inequalities, we must

1845.]

Intentions of Providence.

79

endeavor to impress deeply upon all, the sentiment of respect for man as man. It is in vain to trust to our political principles to effect this. The demagogue may profess to feel this sentiment, but with him it only means, respect for man as a voter. We have tacitly or openly interpreted the "self-evident" truth in the Declaration of Independence, as referring to political, not to social equality. It was a great step, undoubtedly, to declare so much as this. But when we ascend out of the sphere of politics, we see the far higher sense, in which all men are created free and equal. They are created free to use all their faculties, and are equally entitled to the use of whatever means are essential to their complete education. Whoever denies this, seems to us to charge God with injustice. For why should it be required of every human being that he become "perfect," if he have no right to such leisure and opportunity as are necessary to the free exercise of all his powers?

"Doth God exact day-labor, light denied?"

Nay, why should any soul be born into this world, if the Creator did not intend that it should have room to develop itself according to its original capacity?" Nihil agit frustra,' - he does nothing in vain, even a heathen could say. It is the most glaring impiety to believe, that the Divine Providence could destine any one to a condition of life which effectually crushes out of him all generous and lofty sentiments, and breeds the gloomiest discontent and despair. But we are instruments in the hands of this same Providence; and can we then be content to say, 'Let alone; time will correct these abuses, or self-interest will, or our political rulers will look to it.' Alas! such has ever been the excuse of the faithless and indolent. Paul, preached from quite a different text. strong, ought to bear the infirmities of the that very reason were we made strong. And if we, whoever we are that feel the injustice from which our brothers are suffering, and how contrary it is to the design of a Good Being, if we do not put our shoulders to this work, it will not be done. We talk of the healing power of time, as though "time" were some personal, concrete agency. We talk of self-interest, forgetting that however

An Apostle, "We that are weak." For

enlightened it may pretend to be, it is ever short-sighted and blind. And we "put our trust in promises," as though all experience had not demonstrated it to be leaning upon a broken reed.

Let man be respected as man, for his intrinsic worth, instead of his outward trappings, and we shall secure perhaps all that is essential to social reform. To bring about so desirable an end, two things seem to us especially requisite, the first relating to individual, and the second to social action. First, we are to feel respect for character and worth, however concealed beneath outward distinctions, and then we can hope to impress this feeling upon others. The general manifestation of this sentiment would do more than all other causes, to dispel bitterness and estrangement between the more and the less prosperous classes of society. How much contentment, how much abatement of the eagerness to be rich, should we find, if poverty and a lowly condition were no bar whatever to the respect of our fellow-men, but all were uniformly treated with the consideration due to their personal merits. We are not so unreasonable as to expect or require that one's associates should always be chosen from sole regard to their intellectual or moral character. There are other differences among men, which, though they do not affect the more momentous interests of life, have necessarily much to do with our social intimacies. Congenial tastes and manners, to say nothing of more accidental disparities, make men companions; and doubtless it is manners more than morals which determines one's social rank. There is no injustice in this, if it do not lead us to withhold the homage to virtue and nobleness of mind, wherever it may be found, and whether invested or not with the grace of polite behaviour. Miss Edgeworth, we believe it is, has somewhere said, that "to be good and disagreeable is high treason against virtue." Let those be convicted of such a crime, whose external rudeness or coarseness has repelled men from the lofty principles which they have professed and practised. But they who could be thus repelled are not wholly guiltless of disloyalty to such a majestic presence. Had they been true subjects, they would have recognised their sovereign under any garb or in any place.

The other way in which we would hope to secure respect

1845.]

Universal Education.

81

for man independently of his fortune, is by providing universal education, by which all may be enabled and encouraged to develop their minds in a natural and just order. We are aware that this string has been harped upon to the weariness of many. Let it continue to be struck till there shall be no soul in the land but shall vibrate in unison with it. How can a republic, to say nothing of a Christian people, be better employed in their social capacity, than by constant and unremitted endeavors to place so great a blessing as education above the accident of birth and fortune? What a noble achievement, to have secured for every aspiring youth, thirsting for knowledge and expansion of mind and heart, the opportunity to quench this thirst at the living waters which shall flow freely for all who desire to drink of them! It can hardly be necessary to say, that our idea of education includes the most thorough Christian training; we have no faith in intellectual, or moral, or religious culture alone. Abundant examples we could cite some from these volumes if we had room - prove the failure of any partial education. We rejoice that this is better understood and more frequently urged than formerly. It may awaken the slumbering liberality of the State or of wealthy individuals, when they become aware how much is demanded to carry out the true ideal of an educated Commonwealth. And they whose minds are most engrossed in plans for the removal of the contrasts between rich and poor, - who find the differences of condition to be chiefly important, — could take no more promising step in this reform, than by giving, as far as practicable, equal advantages of education to every class. The extremes of luxury and pauperism could not exist in a well educated community, because wealth would no longer be pursued with such insane and reckless haste. It would dazzle less. It would not vitiate the moral taste and blunt the moral sensibilities as it does now; but it would be sought for as one of the means, though far from the most essential, for the promotion of true social enjoyment and an approximation towards the ideal of a Christian society.

W. S.

ART. VI. — RIGHTS, CLAIMS, AND DUTIES OF OPINION.

[An Address delivered before the Berry Street Ministerial Conference, May 28, 1845. By Rev. ORVILLE DEWEY, D. D.]

THE relations into which men are brought by their opinions; the rights, claims, and duties of opinion; the rights personal, the claims reciprocal, the duties absolute; this is the subject, or class of subjects rather, on which I propose now to address you.

I suppose it is evident that we were made to think; that thinking in its very nature implies freedom of thought; and that from freedom of thought proceed inevitable differences of opinion. I suppose it is equally evident that opinion, the offspring of our thought, must be dear to us; that we cannot value our own opinion without disliking an adverse one, and that the expression of this disapprobation, if it is not inevitable, is at least a thing of simple sincerity. I suppose it to be undeniable moreover, whether we consult reason or Scripture, our own imperfection or the Divine commandment, that we are bound to entertain our own opinion with modesty, and to regard that of others with consideration and forbearance. Amidst these conflicting claims what is the just rule to walk by? What is charity? What is intolerance? What is persecution?

On these points there appears to be no little confusion of thought in the world. Persecution of opinion, for instance, is confounded with rejection of it; intolerance, with simple dislike; and charity, with good-natured indifference; so that you hear a man represented as a miracle of charity because he never spoke a word in his life against any sect, creed, faith or opinion whatever. Thus again, freedom of thought is sometimes held to be an immunity from all serious question; the right to think, to justify recklessness of thought; and the answerableness of a man to his own conscience, to exonerate him from all proper regard for the judgment of others. Thus the lawful tie to the past is nearly broken; the new-born thought of to-day, instead of careful and patient self-examination, has nothing to do but to get published; it is a piece of nature, let it come out; publication, ubiquitous publication of all that is in a man, vagary, dream, nonsense, is held to be the very sim