620 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



congruity *.<nnd absurdity so deeply in- 

 trenched as . in law and law administra- 

 tion, while th ,e acutest and most pow- 

 erful of the pro ^fessions forms the body- 

 guard and bulwi-irk of the system. But 

 of this we are li.ttle disposed to com- 

 plain. To conservv''^ the good we must 

 tolerate the concomiti-ant evil ; and there 

 is neither intelligence, n':isdom, nor hon- 

 esty enough in the countr^v to make a 

 better system. If we are CN-^er to get 

 out of it, we must slowly grow oui*^^; and 

 nothing will facilitate this more tlijan 

 such a shaking up and exposure of our 

 judicial doings before the world as this 

 remarkable trial has just eflected. 



But, aside from its personal issues, 

 the case has chiefly interested us as a 

 test of popular intelligence, and as af- 

 fording an instructive illustration of the 

 way people form opinions. The opin- 

 ions of the multitude are commonly 

 inherited or adopted ; they are rarely 

 " formed " by rational processes, and 

 whenever the attempt to form them is 

 made under proper circumstances, we 

 get the best possible measure of mental 

 capacity, integrity, and the efficacy 

 of education. The Beecher case was 

 well suited to be an ordeal of popular 

 judgment. It was a fresh question, 

 without precedents, and had to be ac- 

 cepted upon its merits. Then it was 

 an open question, or early so regarded 

 by the public, and so entertained by the 

 court. Besides, it was a complex ques- 

 tion, well fitted to task mental eftbrt, 

 and it dealt with human motives, con- 

 duct, and character, elements belonging 

 to the common experience of mankind. 

 The situation was thus favorable for 

 fair and intelligent judgment; and yet, 

 under these conditions, we get one of 

 the most unexampled lessons as to how 

 little of rationality there is in human 

 thinking, and how little evidence has 

 to do with the formation of popular 

 convictions. Our concern is not here 

 with the issue involved in the trial and 

 which preceded it, but with the way the 

 public approached and dealt with it. 



We shall be helped by reference to 

 a rudimentary bit of the science of 

 mind. When men are called rational 

 creatures, if it is meant that they have 

 a capacity of reason by which they can 

 arrive at the truth, the idea is correct ; 

 if it is meant that they are characteris- 

 tically rational or controlled by reason, 

 the idea is quite erroneous. Men are 

 habitually creatures of emotion rather 

 than of intellect. The emotions are the 

 motors or driving forces of our nature ; 

 in a few they are guided and governed 

 -by the intellect ; in the many they are 

 lawJess agencies, dominating the intel- 

 lect anu) enslaving the rational nature. 

 It is there-fore of immensely greater im- 

 portance to know how men feel than 

 what they thin-k ; in fact, the last is gen- 

 erally the conseq.uence of the first. That 

 wliich lies beyona^ the reason and the 

 will in the mental ccnstitution, and gets 

 vent continually unde r the pressure of 

 sentiment, impulse, pas-sion, love, hate, 

 habit, and prejudice, is ^of immensely 

 greater volume and momt^nt than all 

 that is said or done under the influence 

 of intelligent volition. The perverting 

 influence of passion is well kn ^)^n j but 

 it is equally true that emotions of every 

 kind and degree disturb the intellectual 

 balance. Sympathies and ant-jpathies 

 hates and admirations, blind tht'. reason 

 distort the judgment, and requce the 

 mental experience to the grade' of emo- 

 tional automatism. Men carry on their 

 mental intercourse in terms of i-eason 

 and delude themselves with th^3 fancy 

 that they are logical, when in fsjtct they 

 are only venting their preferences or 

 dislikes, or giving excuses for th^eir pre- 

 possessions, or exploding theiv invet- 

 erate prejudices. 



Now, probably no man has aj^peared 

 in this country wlio has stirred- up so 

 much adverse feeling of all ki'j^ds as 

 Henry Ward Beecher. For twenty- 

 five years he has been more heard and 

 more read than any other person, and 

 has stamped his personality deep it^ the 

 national mind. From the first he has 



