PUBLISHED WEDNESDAYS AND SATURDAYS BY JOHN fENNO,.No. 4 t, BROAD-STREET, N£AR THE EXCHANGE, NEW-YORK
[No. 16, cf Vol. ll.]
THE TABLET. No. CXX.
" It is not improbable that if all parts of the world
were equally enlightened by science, all nations
would embrace articles of faith, nearly fnntlar to each
other.' 1 -«
(Continuation of the arguments in support of the position, that the
universal diffufion of literature will precede aud prepare the
way ior the universal prevalence of religion.)
THO mankind, in their native date of igno
rance, have always Tome imprefiions of duty,
yet so incapable are they of reasoning, or think
ing beyond the reach of their senses, that the
founders of rriigious fyfteins have ever represen
ted the Supreme Being through the mfcdium of
images, a» the only method by which they could
gain credit with the fliort-fighted multitude. If
Mahomet be considered as an exception, and his
religion as an improvement upon rank idolatry,
this willaifift the argument; since it is well known
the Arabians had made great improvements in
several branches of literature, and of course were
fitted to embrace a religion more rational than
Paganism—With refpecl to Africa it is to be ob
served, that cliriftianity was never received in
that quarter of the earth, except by the nations
bordering upon the Mediterranean, which by
their intercourse with the Greeks and Romans,
had made some progress towards civilization.
The Greeks and Romans, it is true, previous
to the publication of christianity, were like the
reft of the world, wrapt up in the absurdities of
Paganifin, and doubtless the bulk of them reposed
implicit confidence in the myfteriesoftheZW/'Art:
Oracle. But in justice to the wiser part of tliofe
nations, wemuft allow, that they entertained as
rational ideas of a Deity, and of human obligati
ons, as the modern christians, in proportion to
their improvements in literature. And we may
venture to aflert, that, so far as *e are nble to
judge from their writings, the morality of So
cratrs and PtiTP Uir ts-ue proportion to
that of our best christian divines, as the phylical
knowledge of Hy pocratEs doesto that of Boer
have ; the mathematical inveftigatiohs of Arc
himt.des to those of Sir Issac Newton; or the
politics of Solon and Lycurgus to those of Fe
terthe G*eat, and of Mo n r esqu ie v. There
fore fettiug aside all regard to revelation, and
supposing morality to be a part of religion, this
remark proves, beyond dispute, that the progress
of religion, will naturally be proportioned to im
provements in literature.
I proceed to consider more particularly the
propagation of christianity, which will furni(h a
decisive argument in our favor, if we can prove
what appears to be true, that literature has, in
every instance, preceded the reception and esta
blishment of that religion ; and that wherever it
has been embraced, its general purity has ever
been proportioned to the national state of litera
ture.
It is a remark of all ecclefialiical hifl oriaiis, and
of all tire advocates of chriftiavtity, as a inoft in
conteftible proof of its divine origin, that it was
publiffaed at a time, and in a part of the world,
where mankind had made cli<° greatest proficiency
in human knowledge—where rliey were most ca
pable of comprehending the (fcblHriity of its doc
trines and precepts ; and of detecting the fraud
and expofingits absurdities. I would extend this
remark iiill farther, and observe that this im
provement of the human mind was a cirpuniftance
most favorable to the propagation of religion—
and that to this natural cause only cap weafcribe
its rapid and extensive diffufion, in opposition to
the malice and power of its enemies. Had the
Greeks and Ramans been a3 ignorant as the Hot.
tentots of Cafftavia, or as servile as the of
Indoßao, Nekv, '!>,* jrw and.Da mi it .an would
have crushed christianity in its infancy, with the
fame eafc, fhat Tamerlane could fupprefsit in
Alia. (To be cintinmed.)
DISCOURSES ON DA VILA.
This mortrnful truth is every ; wh*re confcfoVl,
Slow rifts Worth ky Poverty itpnfs'd.
A S no appetite in human nature is more uni
*■ verfal than that for honor, and real merit is
confined to a very few,, the numbers who thirst
for reijJeit, are out of all proportion to those who
leek it only by merit. Ihe great majority trou
ble themselves little about merit, but apply them
selves to seek for honor by means which they fee
will moreeafily and certainly obtain it ; by dis
playing their taste and address, then- wealth anjl
No. VIII
coNcmsm
SATURDAY, JUNE 5, 179°?
magnificence ; their ancient parchments,pictures,
and statues, and the virtues of their ancestors ;
and if these fail, as they seldom have done, they
have recourse to artifices,difiimulation,hypocrify, ]
flattery, impoftnre, empiricifin, quackery and
bribery. What chance has humble, modest, ob
scure and poor merit, in futh a fcra-mble ? Na
tions,perceiving that the still faiall voice of merit
was drowned in the insolent r< . • of such impos
tures: and that they were cwi''antly the dupes
of impudence and knavery, in national elections,
without a polfibility of a reiliedy, have fought
for something more permanent than the popular
voice to designate honor. Many nations have
attempted to annex it to land, presuming that a
good estate would at least furniih the means of a
good education ; and have resolved that thdfe
who ihould poflefs certain territories, ihould have
certain legillative, executive and judicial powers,
over the people. Other nations have endeavor
ed to connect honor with offices ; and the names
and ideas at least of certain moral virtues and in
tellectual qualities have been by law annexed to
certain offices, as veneration, grace, excellence,
honor, serenity, majesty.—Other nations ha+e at
tempted to annex honor to families, without any
regard to lands or offices. The Romans allowed
none, but those who had polfelfed curule offices,
to have statues or portraits. He, Whc*. had ima
ges or pictures of his ancestors, was called noble.
He who had no statue or picture but his own,
was called a new man. Those who had none at
all, were ignoble. Other nations have united all
those ihftitutions : connected lands, offices and
families—made them all delcend together, and
honor, public attention, conlideration and con
gratulation along with them. This lids been the
policy of Europe : and it is to this institution
which she owes her fnperiority, nwaraud peace,
in legislation and commerce, in agriculture, na
vigation, arts fciencesand niami "actures, to Asia
and Africa. TheP: families il.'m diftinguifhcd
by property, honors and privileges, by defend
ing themselves have been obliged to defend the
people agaiult the encroachments of despotism.
They have been a civil and political militia, con ■
ftantly watching the designs of the standing ar
mies, and courts ; and by defending their own
rights, liberties, properties and privileges, they
have been obliged,in fame degree,to defend thole
of the people. iJut there were several eflential
defects in this policy : one was that the people
took rto rational defend themselves,
either against these great families or the courts.
They had no adequate reprefenration of them
selves in the fovereiguty. Another was that it
never was determined \v'a 'e the sovereignty re-,
sided—generally it was claimed by Kings; but
not admitted by the nobles. Sometimes every
Baron pretended to be sovereign in his own ter
ritory-; at other times the sovereignty was claim
ed by an aflembly of the nobles, under the name
of States or Cortes. Sometimes the United au
thority of the King and the Stares was called the
sovereignty. The common people had no ade
quate and independent (hare in the legislature,
and found themselves harrdfled to difeover who
was the sovereign, and whom they ought to o
bey, as much as they ever had been or could be
to determine who had the ntoft merit. A thou
sand years of Baron's wars, cauling universal
darknels, ignorance and barbarity, etlded at last
in simple monarchy, not by express stipulation,
but by tacit acquiescence, in aluioft ail Europe ;
the people prefering a certain -sovereignty in a
single person, to endless disputes, about merit and
sovereignty, which never did and never will
produce any thing but ariftocratical anarchy ;
and the nobles contenting themselves with a fecu
rity of their property privileges, by a govern
ment of fixed law-s, registered tvnd interpreted
by a judicial power, which they called fo-Vereign
tribunals, thpugh the legislation and execution
were in a single person. In this system to con
troul the nobles, the church joined the Kings and
common people.
The progress of reason, letters aiul isience,
has weakened the church and ftrfengthenpd the
common people ; who, if they,are lioneftly asd
prudently c'ondudled by thafe who hav-e their
confidence, will moll infallibly obtain a ihare in
every legillature. But if the common people are
advifedto aim at colletiing the whole sovereignty
in single national aflembUes, as they are by the
Duke de la Rochefoucault and the Marquis of]
Cordercet ; or at the abolition of the Regal ex
ecutive authority ; or at a division of the execu
tive power, as they are by a posthumous publics-
477
I tion oftheAbby de Mablv, the/ will fail of their
I delired liberty as certainly as emulation and ri
valry are founded in human nature and inlepara
ble from civil affairs. It is not to flatter the paf
fidns of the people to be sure, nor it; it the way to
obtain a present enthusiastic popularity to tell
them that in a single aflembly, they will act as
arbitrarily and tyrannically as any despot, but
it is a sacred truth, and as demonstrable as any
proposition whatever, that i sovereignty in a iin
gle aflembly must neceflarily, and will certainly
be exercised by a majority as tyrannically as any
sovereignty was ever exercised by Kings or No
bles. , And if a ballance of paffipiis and interest
is not fcientiflically concerted, the present strug
gle in Europe will be little beneficial to mankind,
and produce nothing but another thoul'and yerrs
of feudal fanaticifm under new and strange names.
Extract from a fpeculatkn ftgmd Caud'tdus in the
Farmer's Journal of May 17.
WHY is so mu'ch attention paid to trifling me
morials ? They are not matters ef general
concern. And why Ihould we (upport men at Con
gress to trifle away their time upon them ? The*
anfwertoqueltionsof this kind is obvious. Justice
is uniform. It is the fame wheil adininiftered to
an individual, a state, or a nation. If all contri
bute to the eftabliflimerlt and support of govern
ment in order that their persons and properties
may be protected : Have not ill a demand on gov
ernment for that protection ? The reciprocal
rights arid duties of the people, and the supreme
power of a nation constitute substantial justice.
There is a mutual dependence between the lu
preme power and the people. And since the
whole government is compol'ed of individuals,
does it appear inconsistent that individuals Ihould
be heard in thi public councils ? Much depends
on public Opinion in matters relating to govern.-
tnent. Some deference therefore liiould be paid
to it. In ordir .tb the confidents of the peo
ple they must be fully convinced that theit memo
rials and petitions will be duly attended to when
they are not directly repugnant torhe interest and
Welfare of the community. And better would it
be sot government, to expend 100 dollars in an
attempt to do justice to a man, or body of men,
than for them to defraud either of them ot 10
dollars by a direct relufal <of justice."
CONGRESS.
House of representatives.
THURSDAY, MAY 13.
Vn the proposition to encreafe the duty if tonnage on foreign bottom
MR. Madison said that he was friendly to the proportion,
as itsobje&was an extension ot the Anierican navigation,
but had very great doubts whether it would answer the design of gen
tlemen so far as it was pbinted against that nation, whose shipping
most interfered with the American shipping; we cannot at prefeflt
enter into a full competiori with theßritifh nation in this bufmefs.
—He entered into a general confederation of the influence this en
hanced duty would have on the navigation Of the European nai
tions—and doubted much the policy of laying this duty ori the
(hipping of France: By some reccnt tranfattions it appears that
oui commercial advantages with some of the powers of Europe
will be greatly encreafcd ; the trade of France will probably be of
three times the benefit to the United States with that of any other
commercial country whatever. He gave a detail ttf the encourage
aient which France gave to the oyl bufmefs, and in this encourage
ment he intimated that sentiments of friendfllip were mingled with
those of interest and policy—the exportation of tobacco to that
kingdom is an object of very great importance ; rice is another ar
ticle, which begins to be received under great advantages there ;
floUr and grain will always in 4 or 5 years find a great derriand in
that country ; this is at present thecale, and frorti the {late ot the
harvests from time to time the fame will frequently happen ; the
preference they give to (hips arid vessels biiilt in the United States
should be taken into consideration—this is a very important branch
of bufmefs—fait provision will become anothet- article of export—»
advantages of which will felt by the mod interior and re
mote parts of this country. The French Weft-India Islands
admit our veflelg ; it is true the access is contratted, but experi
ence wiU continue to point out their true policy; still the mode of
carrying on commerce with those islands 14 very advantageous to
us, as it is carried on in our own bottoms.—He much doubted the
eligibility of the measure as it might conduce to influence the na
tions of Europe to make a common cause of the reftri&ions laid
iridifcriminately on the maritime powers of Europf*.
The great object of this Qpeech wais a difcrimuiatlon between
BritiAi and other foreign (hipping of nations not fa alliance, and
that of those which are---andpurhiing the idea further he observed,
that a consuming country has tne advantage over a naanufa&uririg
country; wecan do better without Great-Britain than they can do
without us ; articles of luxury may be retrenched with advantage.
He attended to the objeftioafrom the Southern States who are
so deeply connected with the Britifli; said it was to ike lamented
that mcafures calculated to promote the general good ihotild mili
tate with any particular interdl—a maritime force in cafe of war is
the only hope of the Southern States—not that he was in favor of
a navy—but the eligibility of an increase of those resources which
might be converted into such a marine force as would be absolutely
necessary on such an emergency, must be obvious to every one.—
In cafe of war the Southern States would be the ftrft obje£l of at
tack.
The Squthern States may build fliips and ia this bufmefs enjoy
fame advantages over all the reft. There are cases in which it is
better to do nothing than not to da a great deal—b? intimated
[Whole No. 120.]