Such is the commencement of this celebrated book, it is base

ANCIENT AND MODERN

CELEBRATED FREETHINKERS.

REPRINTED FROM AN ENGLISH WORK, ENTITLED

"HALF-HOURS WITH THE FREETHINKERS."

By "Iconoclast.", A. Collins, and J. Watts

("Iconoclast", pseud. of Charles Bradlaugh.)

Edited by "Iconoclast,"

Boston

Published By J. P. Mendum

1877.

CONTENTS:

EDITORS' PREFACE.

THOMAS HOBBES.

LORD BOLINGBROKE.

CONDORCET.

SPINOZA.

ANTHONY COLLINS.

DES CARTES.

M. DE VOLTAIRE.

JOHN TOLAND.

COMPTE DE VOLNEY.

CHARLES BLOUNT.

PERCY BYSSHE SHELLEY.

CLAUD ARIAN HELVETIUS.

FRANCES W. D'ARUSMONT.

EPICURUS

ZENO, THE STOIC

MATTHEW TINDAL.

DAVID HUME

DR. THOMAS BURNET

THOMAS PAINE.

BAPTISTE DE MIRABAUD

BARON D'HOLBACH.

ROBERT TAYLOR.

JOSEPH BARKER.

EDITORS' PREFACE.

In these pages, appearing under the title of "Half-Hours with the

Freethinkers," are collected in a readable form an abstract of the lives

and doctrines of some of those who have stood foremost in the ranks of

Free-thought in all countries and in all ages; and we trust that our

efforts to place in the hands of the poorest of our party a knowledge

of works and workers--some of which and whom would otherwise be out of

their reach--will be received by all in a favorable light. We shall,

in the course of our publication, have to deal with many writers whose

opinions widely differ from our own, and it shall be our care to deal

with them _justly_ and in all cases to allow them to utter in their own

words their essential thinkings.

We lay no claim to originality in the mode of treatment--we will

endeavor to cull the choicest flowers from the garden, and if others

can make a brighter or better bouquet, we shall be glad to have their

assistance. We have only one object in view, and that is, the presenting

of free and manly thoughts to our readers, hoping to induce like

thinking in them, and trust-ing that noble work may follow noble

thoughts. The Freethinkers we intend treating of have also been Free

Workers, endeavoring to raise men's minds from superstition and bigotry,

and place before them a knowledge of the real.

We have been the more inclined to issue the "Half-Hours with the

Freethinkers" in consequence, not only of the difficulty which many have

in obtaining the works of the Old Freethinkers, but also as an effective

answer to some remarks which have lately appeared in certain religious

publications, implying a dearth of thought and thinkers beyond the pale

of the Church. We wish all men to know that great minds and good men

_have_ sought truth apart from faith for many ages, and that it is

because few were prepared to receive them, and many united to _crush_

them, their works are so difficult of access to the general mass at the

present day.

THOMAS HOBBES.

This distinguished Freethinker was born on the 5th of April, 1588, at

Malmesbury; hence his cognomen of "the philosopher of Malmesbury." In

connection with his birth, we are told that his mother, being a loyal

Protestant, was so terrified at the rumored approach of the Spanish

Armada, that the birth of her son was hastened in consequence. The

subsequent timidity of Hobbes is therefore easily accounted for. The

foundation of his education was laid in the grammar school of his native

town, where most probably his father (being a clergyman) would officiate

as tutor. At the age of fifteen he was sent to Oxford. Five years of

assiduous study made him proficient as a tutor; this, combined with his

amiability and profound views of society, gained him the respect of the

Earl of Devonshire, and he was appointed tutor to the Earl's son, Lord

Cavendish. From 1610 to 1628, he was constantly in the society of this

nobleman, in the capacity of secretary. In the interval of this time he

travelled in France, Germany, and Italy; cultivating in each capital

the society of the leading statesmen and philosophers. Lord Herbert, of

Cherbury, the first great English Deist, and Ben Jonson, the dramatist,

were each his boon companions. In the year 1628, Hobbes again made the

tour of the Continent for three years with another pupil, and became

acquainted at Pisa with Galileo. In 1631 he was entrusted with the

education of another youth of the Devonshire family, and for near five

years remained at Paris with his pupil.

Hobbes returned to England in 1636. The troublous politics of this age,

with its strong party prejudices, made England the reverse of a pleasant

retirement, for either Hobbes or his patrons; so, perceiving the

outbreak of the Revolution, he emigrated to Paris. There in the

enjoyment of the company of Gassendi and Descartes, with the _elite_ of

Parisian genius, he was for awhile contented and happy. Here he engaged

in a series of mathematical quarrels, which were prolonged throughout

the whole of his life, on the quadrature of the circle. Seven years

after, he was appointed mathematical tutor to the Prince of Wales,

afterwards Charles II. In 1642, Hobbes published the first of his

principal works, "De Cive, or Philosophical Rudiments Concerning

Government and Society." It was written to curb the spirit of anarchy,

then so rampant in England, by exposing the inevitable results which

must of necessity spring from the want of a coherent government amongst

a people disunited and uneducated. The principles inculcated in this

work were reproduced in the year 1651, in the "Leviathan, or the Matter,

Form, and Power of a Commonwealth, Ecclesiastical and Civil;" this,

along with a "Treatise on Human Nature," and a small work on "The

Body Politic," form the groundwork of the "selfish schools" of moral

philosophy. As soon as they were published, they were attacked by the

clergy of every country in Europe. They were interdicted by the Pontiffs

of the Roman and Greek Church, along with the Protestants scattered over

Europe, and the Episcopal authorities of England. Indeed, to such an

extent did this persecution rise, that even the royalist exiles

received warning that there was no chance for their ostracism being

removed, unless "the unclean thing (Hobbes) was put away from their

midst." The young prince, intimidated by those ebullitions of vengeance

against his tutor? was obliged to withdraw his protection from him, and

the old man, then near seventy years of age, was compelled to escape

from Paris by night, pursued by his enemies, who, according to Lord

Clarendon, tracked his footsteps from France. Fortunately for Hobbes, he

took refuge with his old protectors, the Devonshire family, who were too

powerful to be wantonly insulted. While residing at Chatsworth, he would

no doubt acutely feel the loss of Descartes, the Cardinal de Richelieu,

and Gassendi; in the place of those men he entered into a warm

friendship with Cowley, the poet, Selden, Harvey, the discoverer of

the circulation of the blood, Charles Blount, and the witty Sir Thomas

Brown.

In 1654, he published a "Letter upon Liberty and Necessity;" this

brief tractate is unsurpassed in Free-thought literature for its clear,

concise, subtle, and demonstrative proofs of the self-determining power

of the will, and the truth of philosophical necessity. All subsequent

writers on this question have largely availed themselves of Hobbes's

arguments, particularly the pamphleteers of Socialism. It is a fact no

less true than strange, that Communism is derived from the system of

Hobbes, which has always been classed along with that of Machiavelli, as

an apology for despotism. The grand peculiarity of Hobbes is his method.

Instead of taking speculation and reasoning upon theories, he carried

out the inductive system of Bacon in its entirety, reasoning from

separate generic facts, instead of analogically. By this means he

narrowed the compass of knowledge, and made everything demonstrative

that was capable of proof. Belief was consequently placed upon its

proper basis, and a rigid analysis separated the boundaries of Knowing

and Being. Hobbes looked at the great end of existence and embodied it

in a double axiom. 1st. The desire for self-preservation. 2nd. To render

ourselves happy. From those duplex principles which are inherent in

all animals, a modern politician has perpetrated a platitude which

represents in a sentence the end and aim of all legislation, "the

greatest happiness for the greatest number." This is the _ultimatum_

of Hobbes's philosophy. Its method of accomplishment was by treating

society as one large family, with the educated and skilled as governors,

having under their care the training of the nation. All acting from

one impulse (self-preservation,) and by the conjoint experience of all,

deriving the greatest amount of happiness from this activity. Hobbes

opposed the Revolution, because it degenerated into a faction; and

supported Charles Stuart because there were more elements of cohesion

within his own party, than amongst his enemies. It was here where the

cry of despotism arose; the "Round-heads" seeing they could not detach

the ablest men from the King's party, denounced their literary opponents

as "lovers of Belial, and of tyranny." This was their most effective

answer to the "Leviathan." In after years, when the Episcopal party no

longer stood in need of the services of Hobbes, they heaped upon him the

stigma of heresy, until his _ci-devant_ friends and enemies were united

in the condemnation of the man they most feared. Mr. Owen, in his schema

of Socialism, took his leading idea on non-responsibility from Hobbes's

explanation of necessity, and the freedom of the will. The old divines

had inculcated a doctrine to the effect that the "will" was a separate

entity of the human mind, which swayed the whole disposition, and was of

itself essentially corrupt. Ample testimony from the Bible substantiated

this position. But in the method of Hobbes, he lays down the facts that

we can have no knowledge without experience, and no experience without

sensation. The mind therefore is composed of classified sensations,

united together by the law of an association of ideas. This law was

first discovered by Hobbes, who makes the human will to consist in

the strongest motive which sways the balance on any side. This is the

simplest explanation which can be given on a subject more mystified than

any other in theology.

A long controversy betwixt Bishop Bramhall, of Londonderry, followed the

publication of Hobbes's views on Liberty and Necessity. Charles II. on

his restoration, bestowed an annual pension of £100 on Hobbes, but this

did not prevent the parliament, in 1666, censuring the "De Cive" and

"Leviathan," besides his other works. Hobbes also translated the Greek

historian, Thucydides, Homer's Odyssey, and the Illiad. The last years

of his life were spent in composing "Behemoth; or, a History of the

Civil Wars from 1640 to 1660," which was finished in the year he died,

but not published until after his death. At the close of the year 1679,

he was taken seriously ill. At the urgent request of some Christians,

they were permitted to intrude their opinions upon his dying bed,

telling him gravely that his illness would end in death, and unless he

repented, he would go straight to hell. Hobbes calmly replied, "I shall

be glad then to find a hole to creep out of the world." For seventy

years he had been a persecuted man, but during that time his enemies

had paid him that tribute of respect which genius always extorts from

society. He was a man who was hated and dreaded. He had reached the age

of ninety-two when he died. His words were pregnant with meaning; and

he never used an unnecessary sentence. A collection of moral apothegms

might be gathered from his table-talk. When asked why he did not read

every new book which appeared, he said, "If I had read as much as other

men, I should have been as ignorant." His habits were simple; he

rose early in the morning, took a long walk through the grounds of

Chatsworth, and cultivated healthful recreation. The after part of the

day was devoted to study and composition. Like Sir Walter Raleigh, he

was a devoted admirer of the "fragrant herb." Charles II.'s constant

witticism, styled Hobbes as "a bear against whom the Church played their

young dogs, in order to exercise them."

If there had been a few more similar "bears," the priestly "dogs" would

long since have been exterminated, for none of them escaped unhurt from

their encounters with the "grizzly" of Malmesbury, except it was in the

mathematical disputes with Dr. Wallis.

He was naturally of a timid disposition: this was the result of the

accident which caused his premature birth, and being besides of a

reserved character, he was ill-fitted to meet the physical rebuffs of

the world. It is said that he was so afraid of his personal safety, that

he objected to be left alone in an empty house; this charge is to some

extent true, but we must look to the mitigating circumstances of the

case. He was a feeble man, turned the age of three-score and ten, with

all the clergy of England hounding on their dupes to murder an old

philosopher because he had exposed their dogmas. It was but a few years

before, that Protestants and Papists had complimented each other's

religion by burning those who were the weakest, and long after Hobbes's

death, Protestants murdered, ruined, disgraced, and placed in the

pillory Dissenters and Catholics alike, and Thomas Hobbes had positive

proof that it was the intention of the Church of England to _burn

him alive_, on the stake, a martyr for his opinions. This, then, is a

sufficient justification for Hobbes feeling afraid, and instead of

it being thrown as a taunt at this illustrious Freethinker, it is a

standing stigma on those who would re-enact the tragedy of persecution,

if public opinion would allow it.

Sir James Mackintosh says: * "The style of Hobbes is the very perfection

of didactic language. Short, clear, precise, pithy, his language never

has more than one meaning, which never requires a second thought to

find. By the help of his exact method, it takes so firm a hold on the

mind, that it will not allow attention to slacken. His little tract on

human nature has scarcely an ambiguous or a needless word. He has so

great a power of always choosing the most significant term, that he

never is reduced to the poor expedient of using many in its stead. He

had so thoroughly studied the genius of the language, and knew so well

how to steer between pedantry and vulgarity, that two centuries have not

superannuated probably more than a dozen of his words."

* Second Dissertation: Encyclopaedia Brit., p. 318.

Lord Clarendon describes the personal character of Hobbes as "one for

whom he always had a great esteem as a man, who besides his eminent

parts of learning and knowledge, hath been always looked upon as a man

of probity, and a life free from scandal."

We now proceed to make a selection of quotations from the works of this

writer, commencing with those on the "Necessity of the Will," in reply

to Bishop Bramhall.

"The question is not whether a man be a free agent--that is to say,

whether he can write, or forbear, speak, or be silent, according to his

will; but whether the will to write, and the will to forbear, come upon

him according to his will, or according to anything else in his own

power. I acknowledge this liberty, that I can _do_, if I _will_, but to

say, I can _will_ if I _will_, I take to be an absurd speech." Further

replying to Bramhall's argument, that we do not learn the "idea of the

freedom of the will" from our tutors, but we know it intuitively, Hobbes

says, "It is true very few have learned from tutors that a man is not

free to will; nor do they find it much in books. That they and in books

that which the poets chaunt in the theatres, and the shepherds on the

mountains, that which the pastors teach in the churches, and the doctors

in the universities; and that which the common people in the markets,

and all the people do assent unto, is the same that I assent unto;

namely, that a man hath freedom to do if he will; but whether he hath

freedom to will, is a question which it seems neither the Bishop nor

they ever thought of.... A wooden top that is lashed by the boys, and

runs about, sometimes to one wall, sometimes to another, sometimes

spinning, sometimes hitting men on the shins, if it were sensible of its

own motion, would think it proceeded from its own will, unless it felt

what lashed it. And is a man any wiser when he runs to one place for a

benifice, to another for a bargain, and troubles the world with writing

errors, and requiring answers, because he thinks he does it without

other cause than his own will, and seeth not what are the lashings which

cause that will?"

Hobbes casually mentions the subject of "praise or dispraise," in

reference to the will; those who are old enough will remember this was

one of the most frequent subjects of discussion amongst the earlier

Socialists. "These depend not at all in the necessity of the action

praised or dispraised. For what is it else to praise, but to say _a

thing is good?_ Good, I say, for me, or for somebody else, or for the

State and Commonwealth. And what is it to say an action is good, but to

say it is as I would wish, or as another would have it, or according

to the will of the State--that is to say, according to the law! Does

my lord think that no action could please me, or the commonwealth, that

should proceed from necessity! Things may be therefore necessary, and

yet praiseworthy, as also necessary, and yet dispraised, and neither of

them both in vain; because praise and dispraise, and likewise reward and

punishment, do, by example, make and conform the will to good or evil.

It was a very great praise, in my opinion, that Vellerius Paterculus

gives Cato, where he says that he was good by nature, '_et quia aliter

esse non potuit_.''--'And because he could not do otherwise.'" This able

treatise was reprinted, and extensively read about twenty years ago;

but, like many other of our standard works, it is at present out of

print.

The "Leviathan" is still readable, a bold masculine book. It treats

everything in a cool, analytic style. The knife of the Socialist is

sheathed in vain; no rhapsody can overturn its impassioned teachings.

Rhetoric is not needed to embellish the truths he has to portray, for

the wild flowers of genius but too frequently hide the yawning chasms

in the garden of Logic. It is not to be expected that this book will be

read now with the interest with which it was perused two centuries ago;

then every statement was impugned, every argument denied, and the very

tone of the book called forth an interference from parliament to stop

the progress of its heresies. Now the case is widely different, and the

general tenor of the treatise is the rule in which are illustrated alike

the works of the philosophers and the dreams of the sophists (priests.)

We give part of the introduction. "Nature (the art whereby God hath made

and governs the world) is, by the art of man, as in many other things,

so in this also, imitated, that it can make an artificial animal. For

seeing life is but a motion of limbs, the beginning whereof is in some

principal part within; why may we not say that all automata (engines

that move themselves by springs and wheels, as doth a watch) have an

artificial life? For what is the heart but a spring; and the nerves but

so many strings; and the joints but so many wheels, giving motion to the

whole body, such as was intended by the Artificer? Art goes yet further,

imitating that rational and most excellent work of nature, man. For by

art is created that great leviathan, called a Commonwealth, or State,

which is but an artificial man though of greater stature and strength

than the natural, for whose protection and defence it was intended,

and the sovereignty of which is an artificial soul, as giving life and

motion to the whole body. To describe the nature of this artificial man,

I will consider,

"1st. The _matter_ thereof, and the _artificer_, both which is man.

"2nd. _How_, and by what _covenants_ it is made, what are the _rights_

and _just_ power or authority of a sovereign; and what it is that

_preserveth_ and dissolveth it.

"3rd. What is a Christian Commonwealth.

"Lastly, what is the kingdom of darkness.

"The first chapter treats of 'Senses.' Concerning the thoughts of man, I

will consider them first singly, and afterwards in train, or dependence

upon one another. Singly, they are every one a representation, or

appearance, of some quality or accident of a body without us, which is

commonly called an object. Which object worketh on the eyes, ears, and

other parts of a man's body, and by diversity of working, produceth

diversity of appearances. The original of them all is that which we call

sense, for there is no conception in a man's mind, which hath not at

first totally or by parts been begotten upon the organs of sense; the

rest are derived from that original."

Speaking of "Imagination," Hobbes says, "That when a thing lies still,

unless somewhat else stir it, it will lie still forever, is a truth no

one doubts of. But that when a thing is in motion, it will eternally

be in motion, unless somewhat else stay it, though the reason be the

same--namely, that nothing can change itself--is not so easily assented

to. For men measure not only other men, but all other things, by

themselves; and because they find themselves subject after motion to

pain and lassitude, think everything else grows weary of motion, and

seeks repose of its own accord--little considering whether it be not

some other motion, wherein that desire of rest they find in themselves

consisteth.... When a body is once in motion, it moveth (unless

something else hinder it) eternally, and whatsoever hindereth it, cannot

in an instant, but in time, and by degrees, quite extinguish it; and

as we see in the water, though the wind cease, the waves give not over

rolling for a long time after; so also it happeneth in that motion which

is made in the internal parts of man, then, when he sees, dreams, etc.

For after the object is removed, or the eye shut, we still retain an

image of the thing seen, though more obscure than when we see it....

The decay of sense in men waking, is not the decay of the motion made

in sense, but an obscuring of it, in such manner as the light of the sun

obscureth the light of the stars; which stars do no less exercise their

virtue, by which they are visible in the day, than in the night. But

because amongst many strokes which our eyes, ears and other organs

receive from external bodies, the predominant only is sensible;

therefore the light of the sun being only predominant, we are not

affected with the actions of the stars.... This decaying sense, when

we would express the thing itself (I mean fancy itself), we call

imagination, as I said before, but when we would express the Decay, and

signify the sense is fading, old and past, it is called Memory: so

that imagination and memory are but one thing, which, for divers

considerations, hath divers names." *

Such is the commencement of this celebrated book, it is based upon

materialism; every argument must stand this test upon Hobbes's

principles, and characteristically are they elaborated. Hobbes ("De

Cive") says of the immortality of the soul, "It is a belief grounded

upon other men's sayings, that they knew it supernaturally; or that

they knew those who knew them, that knew others, that knew it

supernaturally." A sparkling sneer, and perhaps the truest answer to

so universal an error. Dugald Stewart, in his analysis of the works of

Hobbes, says, ** The fundamental doctrines inculcated in the political

works of Hobbes, are contained in the following propositions:--All men

are by nature equal, and, prior to government, they had all an equal

right to enjoy the good things of this world. Man, too, is by nature, a

solitary and purely selfish animal; the social union being entirely an

interested league, suggested by prudential views of personal advantage.

The necessary consequence is, that a state of nature must be a state of

perpetual warfare, in which no individual has any other means of safety

than his own strength or ingenuity; and in which there is no room

for regular industry, because no secure enjoyment of its fruits. In

confirmation of this view of the origin of society, Hobbes appeals to

facts falling daily within the cycle of our experience. "Does not a

man, (he asks) when taking a journey, arm himself, and seek to go well

accompanied? When going to sleep, does he not lock his doors? Nay, even

in his own house, does he not lock his chests? Does he not there accuse

mankind by his action, as I do by my words?" For the sake of peace and

security, it is necessary that each individual should surrender a part

of his natural right, and be contented with such a share of liberty

as he is willing to allow to others; or, to use Hobbes's own language,

"every man must divest himself of the right he has to all things by

nature; the right of all men to all things, being in effect no better

than if no man had a right to anything." In consequence of this

transference of natural rights to an individual, or to a body of

individuals, the multitude become one person, under the name of a State,

or Republic, by which person the common will and power are exercised for

the common defence. The ruling power cannot be withdrawn from those to

whom it has been committed; nor can they be punished for misgovern-ment.

The interpretation of the laws is to be sought, not from the comments

of philosophers, but from the authority of the ruler; otherwise society

would every moment be in danger of resolving itself into the discordant

elements of which it was at first composed.--The will of the magistrate,

therefore, is to be regarded as the ultimate standard of right and

wrong, and his voice to be listened to by every citizen as the voice of

conscience."

* Leviathan. Ed. 1651.

** Dissertation on the Progress of Ethical Science, p. 41.

Such are the words of one of Hobbes's most powerful opponents. Dr.

Warburton says, "The philosopher of Malmesbury was the terror of the

last age, as Tin-dal and Collins are of this. The press sweats with

controversy; and every young churchman militant would try his arms in

thundering on Hobbes's steel cap." This is a modest acknowledgment of

the power of Hobbes, from the most turbulent divine of the eighteenth

century.

Victor Comyin gives the following as his view of the philosophy of

Hobbes:--"There is no other certain evidence than that of the senses.

The evidence of the senses attests only the existence of bodies; then

there is no existence save that of bodies, and philosophy is only the

science of bodies.

"There are two sorts of bodies: 1st, Natural bodies, which are the

theatre of a multitude of regular phenomena, because they take place

by virtue of fixed laws, as the bodies with which physics are occupied;

2nd, Moral and political bodies, societies which constantly change and

are subject to variable laws.

"Hobbes's system of physics is that of Democritus, the atomistic and

corpuscular of the Ionic school.

"His metaphysics are its corollary; all the phenomena which pass in

the consciousness have their source in the organization, of which the

consciousness in itself is simply a result. All the ideas come from the

senses. To think, is to calculate; and intelligence is nothing else than

an arithmetic. As we do not calculate with out signs, we do not think

without words; the truth of the thought is in the relation of the words

among themselves, and metaphysics are reduced to a perfect language.

Hobbes is completely a nominalist. With Hobbes there are no other than

contingent ideas; the finite alone can be conceived; the infinite is

only a negation of the finite; beyond that it is a mere word invented to

honor a being whom faith alone can reach. The idea of good and evil

has no other foundation than agreeable or disagreeable sensations; to

agreeable or disagreeable sensation it is impossible to apply any.

other law than escape from the one and search after the other; hence

the morality of Hobbes, which is the foundation of his politics. Man

is capable of enjoying and of suffering; his only law is to suffer as

little, and enjoy as much, as possible. Since such is his only law, he

has all the rights that this law confers upon him; he may do anything

for his preservation and his happiness; he has the right to sacrifice

everything to himself. Behold? then, men upon this earth, where the

objects of desire are not superabundant, all possessing equal rights

to whatever may be agreeable or useful to them, by virtue of the same

capacity for enjoyment and suffering. This is a state of nature, which

is nothing less than a state of war, the anarchy of the passions, a

combat in which every man is arrayed against his neighbor. But this

state being opposed to the happiness of the majority of individuals who

share it, utility, the offspring of egotism itself, demands its

exchange for another, to wit, the social state. The social state is the

institution of a public power, stronger than all individuals, capable

of making peace succeed war, and imposing on all the accomplishment of

whatever it shall have judged to be useful, that is, just."

Before we dismiss the father of Freethought from our notice, there

remains a tribute of respect to be paid to one whom it is our duty

to associate with the author of the "Leviathan," and who has but

just passed away--one man amongst the British aristocracy with the

disposition of a tribune of the people, coupled with thoughts at once

elevated and free, and a position which rendered him of essential

service to struggling opinion. This man saw the greatness, the profound

depth, the attic style, and the immense importance of the works of

Hobbes, along with their systematic depreciation by those whose duty it

should be to explain them, especially at a time when those works were

not reprinted, and the public were obliged to glean their character

from the refutations (so called) by mangled quotations, and a distorted

meaning. Impelled by this thought, and anxious to protect the memory of

a philosopher, his devoted disciple, at a cost of £10,000, translated

the Latin, and edited the English works of Hobbes, in a manner worthy

alike of the genius of the author, and the discernment of his editor.

For this kindness, a seat in Parliament was lost by the organization of

the clergy in Cornwall. The name of this man was Sir William Molesworth.

Let Freethinkers cherish the memory of their benefactor.

We now take our leave of Thomas Hobbes. He had not the chivalry of

Herbert; the vivacity of Raleigh; the cumulative power of Bacon; or the

winning policy of Locke. If his physical deformities prevented him from

being as daring as Vane, he was as bold in thought and expression as

either Descartes, or his young friend Blount. He gave birth to the

brilliant constellation of genius in the time of Queen Anne. He did

not live to see his system extensively promulgated; but his principles

moulded the character of the men who formed the revolution of 1688,

equally as much as Hume established the Scotch and German schools of

philosophy; and Voltaire laid the train by which the French Revolution

was proclaimed. Peace to his memory! It was a stormy struggle during his

life; its frowns cannot hurt him now. Could we believe in the idea of

a future life, we should invoke his blessings on our cause. That cause

which for near two hundred years has successfully struggled into birth,

to youth, and maturity. Striking down in its onward course superstitions

which hath grown with centuries, and where it does not exterminate them,

it supplies a purer atmosphere, and extracts the upas-sting which has

laid low so many, and which must yet be finally exterminated. The day is

rapidly dawning when our only deities will be the works of genius, and

our only prayer the remembrance of our most illustrious chiefs.

A.C.

LORD BOLINGBROKE.

Henry St. John, Lord Bolingbroke, was born in his family seat at

Battersea, on the 1st of October 1672, and died there on November 15th,

1751, in his 79th year. He was educated by a clergyman in an unnatural

manner, and speedily developed himself accordingly. When he left Oxford,

he was one of the handsomest men of the day--his majestic figure,

refined address, dazzling wit, and classic eloquence, made him

irresistibly the "first gentleman in Europe." Until his twenty-fourth

year, he was renowned more for the graces of his person, and the

fascination of his wild exploits, rather than possessing a due regard

to his rank and abilities. His conduct, however, was completely changed

when he became a Member of Parliament. The hopes of his friends were

resuscitated when they discovered the aptitude for business--the ready

eloquence, and the sound reasoning of the once wild St. John. He soon

became the hardest worker and the leader of the House of Commons. The

expectations of the nation rose high when night after night he spoke

with the vivacity of a poet, and the profundity of a veteran statesman

on public affairs. In 1704, he received the seals as Secretary-of-War,

and was mainly instrumental in gaining Marlborough's victories, by the

activity with which he supplied the English General with munitions of

war. On the ascendency of the Whigs, St. John resigned his office, and

retired into privacy for two years, when the Whig administration was

destroyed, and St. John re-appeared as Secretary for Foreign Affairs.

His greatest work now was the negotiation of the treaty of Utrecht. This

treaty was signed by St. John (then Lord Bolingbroke,) he being sent to

Paris as the British Plenipotentiary, and was hailed by the Parisians

as a guardian angel. To such an extent was this feeling manifested, that

when he visited the theatres every one _rose_ to welcome him. So long as

Queen Anne lived, Bolingbroke's influence was paramount, but associated

with him was the Earl of Oxford, in opposition to the Whig party, and

serious differences had arisen between the rivals. Oxford-was dismissed

four days before the Queen's death, and Bolingbroke officiated in his

place, until Oxford's vacancy was filled, which all expected would be

given to himself. A stormy debate in the Privy Council so agitated the

Queen, that it shortened her life, and the Council recommended the Earl

of Shrewsbury as Premier, and with him the Whigs.

With the accession of George, came the impeachment of Bolingbroke by the

victorious Whigs. Knowing that it was their intention to sacrifice

him to party revenge, and that his accusers would likewise act as his

judges, he wisely withdrew himself to France. The Pretender held a

mimic court at Avignon, and a debating society at Lorraine, entitled

a Parliament. He offered Bolingbroke the office of Secretary of State,

which was accepted by him; and it was only at this time that the

emanations of the exiled Stuart's cabinet possessed either a solidity

of aim, or a definite purpose. If Louis XIV. had lived longer, he might

have assisted the Pretender, but with his death expired the hopes of

that ill-fated dynasty. Bolingbroke strove to husband the means which

the Chevalier's friends had collected, but the advice of the Duke of

Ormond was listened to in preference to Bolingbroke's. The results which

Bolingbroke foretold--proceeding rashly and failing ignominiously--both

occurred. The insurrection broke out, and failed--no other end could

have been anticipated. Intrigues were fast coiling themselves around the

secretary; he was openly blamed for the reverses in Scotland--but he was

alike careless of their wrath or its issue. One morning Ormond waited

upon him with two slips of paper from the Pretender, informing him

that his services were no longer required. After his dismissal he was

impeached by the lackeys of the Pretender under seven heads, which were

widely distributed throughout Europe. There is this anomaly in the life

of Bolingbroke, witnessed in no other Englishman: In one year he was the

most powerful man in England--Secretary of State--an exile--and then

in the same year he occupied a similar office to one who aimed at the

English throne, and was impeached by both parties.

For several years he occupied himself in France with philosophical

pursuits--until the year 1723--when he received a pardon, which allowed

him to return to England, but still his sequestered estates were not

returned, and this apology for a pardon was negotiated by a bribe of

£11,000 to the German Duchess of Kendal--one of the king's mistresses.

Alexander Pope was Bolingbroke's constant correspondent. Pope had

won the applause of England by his poems, and was then considered the

arbiter of genius. Voltaire occupied a similar position in France.

Since Pope first laid the copy of his greatest epic at the feet of

Bolingbroke, and begged of him to correct its errors, he had gradually

won himself that renown which prosperity has endorsed. But what a unity

in divergence did those philosophers present! The calm moralism of Pope,

his sweet and polished rhyme, contrasted with the fiery wit and hissing

sarcasm of the Frenchman, more trenchant than Pope's, yet wanting

his sparkling epigrams. The keen discernment of both these men saw in

Bolingbroke a master, and they ranked by his side as twin apostles of

a new and living faith. It was the penetration of true greatness which

discerned in the English peer that sublimity of intellect they possessed

themselves, without the egotism of an imbecile rival. Bolingbroke had

cherished the ethics of one, and restrained the rancor of the other--and

both men yielded to him whose system they worshipped; and this trinity

of Deists affords the noblest example which can be evoked to prove

the Harmony of Reason amidst the most varied accomplishments. Although

Pope's name occurs but seldom in the history of Freethought--while that

of Bolingbroke is emblazoned in all its glory, and Voltaire is enshrined

as its only Deity--yet we must not forget that what is now known as

the only collection of St. John's works (the edition in five volumes

by Mallet,) were written for the instruction of Pope--sent to him in

letters--discussed and agreed to by him--so that the great essayist is

as much implicated in them as the author of the Dictionary. It is

said, "In his society these two illustrious men felt and acknowledged a

superior genius; and if he had no claim to excellence in poetry--the

art in which they were so pre-eminent--he surpassed them both in the

philosophy they so much admired."

For ten years after this period, he devoted himself to various political

writings, which were widely circulated; but we must waive the pleasure

at present of analyzing those, and confine our attention to the alliance

between Pope and Bolingbroke, in the new school of philosophy.

Bolingbroke's principal friends were Pope, Swift, Mallet, Wyndam, and

Atterbury. The first three were most in his confidence in regard

to religion: and although Pope was educated a Roman Catholic, and

occasionally conformed to that hierarchy (and like Voltaire, for peace,

died in it,) yet the philosophical letters which passed between Pope and

St. John, fully established him as a consistent Deist--an honor to which

Swift also attained, although being a dignitary of the Church: but

if doubts arise on the subject, they can easily be dispelled. General

Grimouard, in his "Essai sur Bolingbroke," says that "he was intimate

with the widow of Mallet, the poet, who was a lady of much talent and

learning, and had lived upon terms of friendship with Bolingbroke,

Swift, Pope, and many other distinguished characters of the day, who

frequently met at her house." The General adds, that the lady has been

frequently heard to declare, that these men were all equally deistical

in their sentiments (_que c'était une société de purs déistes_;) that

Swift from his clerical character was a little more reserved than the

others, but he was evidently of the same sentiments at bottom.

There is a remarkable passage in one of Pope's letters to Swift, which

seems rather corroborative of the General's. He is inviting Swift to

come and visit him. "The day is come," he says, "which I have often

wished, but never thought to see, when every mortal I esteem is of the

same sentiments in politics and religion." Dr. Warton remarks upon this

paragraph "At this time therefore (1733) he (Pope and Bolingbroke were

of the same sentiment in religion as well as politics);" * and Pope

writing to Swift is proof sufficient that Bolingbroke, Swift, and

himself, were united in opinions. Wherever Swift's name is known, it is

associated with his spleen on account of his not being elevated to the

Episcopal Bench, when he was promised a vacancy, which was reserved for

him; but Queen Anne absolutely refused to confer such a dignity upon the

author of "Gulliver's Travels"--that profound satire upon society and

religion; and this occurring at a time when his energetic services

were so much needed in defence of the government he so assisted by

pamphleteering, satire, and wholesale lampoons. Mr. Cooke says, "The

Earl of Nottingham, in the debate upon the Dissenters' Bill, chiefly

founded his objection to the provision that the Bishops should have the

only power of licensing tutors, upon the likelihood there was that a

man who was in a fair way for becoming a Bishop, was hardly suspected

of being a Christian." This pointed allusion to Swift passed without

comment or reply in a public assembly, composed in a great measure of

his private friends and associates. This seems to intimate that the

opinion of his contemporaries was not very strong in favor of Swift's

religious principles. This may suffice to prove the unanimity of

sentiment existing among this brilliant coterie--one a political

Churchman--another the greatest poet of his age--the third, the most

accomplished statesman of his country. Although they were united in

religious conviction, it would have been certain ruin to any of the

confederates if the extent of their thoughts had reached the public ear.

The Dean wrote for the present--the poet for his age--and the peer for

the immediate benefit of his friends and a record for the future. But

they were all agreed that some code of ethics should be promulgated,

which should embody the positive speculations of Bolingbroke, with the

easy grace of Pope--the elaborate research of the philosopher with

the rhetoric of the poet. Swift coalesced in this idea, but was, to a

certain extent, ignorant of its subsequent history. It was not thought

prudent to trust Mallet and others with the secret. For this purpose the

"Essay of Man" was designed on the principles elaborated by Bolingbroke

in his private letters to Pope. It was Bolingbroke who drew up the

scheme, mapped out the arguments, and sketched the similes--it was Pope

who embellished its beauties, and turned it into rhyme. Doctor Warton,

the editor of Pope, also proves this:--"Lord Bathurst told the Doctor

that he had read the whole of the 'Essay on Man' in _the handwriting of

Bolingbroke_, and drawn up in a series of propositions which Pope was

to amplify, versify, and to illustrate." If further proofs are required,

that Bolingbroke was not only a co-partner but coadjutor with Pope, it

is found in the opening of the poem, where the poet uses the plural in

speaking of Bolingbroke--

"Awake, my St. John, leave all meaner things

To low ambition, and the pride of kings.

Laugh when we must, be candid when you can,

And vindicate the ways of God to man."

* Cook's Life of Bolingbroke, 2nd vol., p. 97..

This is sufficient to prove the partnership in the poem, and from the

generally acknowledged fact of his connection, we have no hesitation in

declaring that this poem is the grand epic of Deism, and is as much the

offspring of Bolingbroke, as his own ideas when enunciated by others.

There is not a single argument in the Essay but what is much more

elaborated in the works of Bolingbroke, while every positive argument

is reduced to a few poetic maxims in the Essay. We may as well look here

for Bolingbroke's creed, rather than amongst his prose works. There

is, however, this difference, that in the Essay there is laid down an

ethical scheme of positivism--_i.e._, of everything in morals which

can be duly tested and nothing more: while in the prose writings of

Bolingbroke, the negative side of theology is discussed with an amount

of erudition which has never been surpassed by any of the great leaders

of Freethought. The first proposition of the Essay is based on a

postulate, upon which the whole reasoning is built. Overthrow this

substratum, and the philosophy of the Essay is overturned--admit it, and

its truth is evident; it is--

"What can we reason but from what we know?"

Ancient and Modern Celebrated Freethinkers Reprinted From an English Work, Entitled "Half-Hours With The Freethinkers." · 第 1 / 26 段