1625.] — Strictures on our Remarks on Lord J. Russell's “ Memoirs.” 
indeed, in this case, is quite beside the 
question, since no man’s ignorance 
forms a specific objection, many of the 
lowest in the creation, being electors 
under our system, which has, with a 
real and statesman-like policy, con- 
trived, that no more should be admitted 
to the franchise than could be conve- 
niently managed. [Suffrage must not 
spread so far that bribery cannot cover 
it.] This despotism of influence will, 
inevitably, in the end, achieve its own 
ruin: but it may, first of all, ruin the 
country, which, whilst prosperity con- 
tinues, will remain deaf to every call 
and warning of patriotism. In the in- 
terim, the great leviathan, the sovereign 
people, will be cajoled and flattered 
with the most exalted effusions in fa- 
vour of human liberty, which cost only 
breath, and which, when they come to 
the crux patriotica, mean nothing be- 
yond that discreetly-moderated degree 
of freedom which may not make too 
free with the sacred claims of privilege. 
And on this point, as on almost every 
other, I agree with our great patriot— 
“I find no difference between Whigs 
and Tories.” 
* * * * * 
The sentiments expressed (Sup. p. 
584), considering whence they proceed- 
ed, have, I must confess, beyond all 
things excited my astonishment—* He 
who can believe that the mass of the 
population of any country can any more 
live without @ religion of some sort or 
other, any more than they can live with- 
out bread,” &c. This “ religion of 
some sort or other,’ coalesces well 
with the ancient and present popular 
notion, that “any religion is better 
than none at all.”” But what is the 
fair logical inference of all this? Why, 
that barefaced falsehood, | fabrications 
the most palpable and irrational, non- 
sense and absurdity the most ridicu- 
Jous and burlesque, enough to make the 
conscience of a’dog sick, and to excite 
broad grins and loud lauchter from a 
stoic, not only may minister to the 
cause of truth and utility, but are in- 
dispensably necessary thereto. For the 
effects of false and fabricated systems 
of religion on the morals and true in- 
terests of the human race, look into the 
pages of universal history, to the pre- 
sent hour, and they will be found sod- 
den with human blood, and engrossed 
with records of human  slavery.— 
How is it that men expect to gather figs 
from thorns, or grapes from’ thistles ? 
Had the-eminent critic, who, I suspect, 
was sacrificing at the fashionable ‘shrine 
519 
of complaisance, insisted that no social 
order could be upheld independently of 
the sanction and aid of true religion,* 
he 
* And who (among the multitude of opi- 
nions prevailing in the world) is to decide 
what true religionis? Every man supposes 
that the religion he clings to is a true reli- 
gion: and to him it is true, so long as he 
troweth it. Is our controversial corre- 
spondent the exclusively-inspired being; 
endowed with comprehensive infallibility 
to decide who it is that troweth rightly? 
Is he in possession of that hitherto undis- 
covered secret, of bringing metaphysical 
opinion to the test of mathematical demon- 
stration; and proving by the problems of 
a super-Euclid-like geometry what it is 
that ought to be universally trowed ? When 
he can satisfy us that he has reduced (or 
rather exalted) religious opinion into a ma- 
thematical science, then we will admit, and 
not till then, that there is any definable or 
influential meaning in the words “‘ true reli- 
gion,” as he here has used them. ‘Till then 
we shall be disposed to trust to those wn- 
mathematical things, called our feelings, for 
the conclusion, that the religion which goes 
farthest in diffusing the principle of uni- 
versal kindness and benevolence, is that 
which is most worthy to be universally 
trowed ; Or, as it would be generally ex- 
pressed, is most likely to be the true reli- 
gion. 
We enter into no controversy with 
Jew, Turk, or Deist; but we should say, 
that the simple axiom, or commandment 
of the founder of Christianity—‘ Love thy 
neighbour as thyself’’—(not in degree, of 
course, for that were impossible—but ac- 
cording to the same claims of reason, and 
the same standard of sympathy !) is a bet- 
ter argument of its divine origin, than has 
yet been drawn from all the researches of 
history, and all the evidence of miracles. 
And if its professors (its teachers especial- 
ly) will but act upon that principle; and 
remember that the beggar in the streets: is 
as much their neighbour as the king upon 
his throne, or their associate in rank or 
profession; we cannot. see why. any rea- 
sonable man should wish to shake its foun- 
dations. —We argue only the expediency, 
however, as an appeal to private judgment. 
We do not mean to deny, in all matters of 
opinion, the right of personal conscience 
or conviction ; with which, whenever au- 
thority coercively interferes, under what- 
ever pretence, it is tyranny and inquisitorial 
usurpation. 
We are protracting our note, we see, to 
an inordinate length ; but we must observe, 
that as the criticism animadyerted upon. in 
the text above is an editorial article, we 
have thought it necessary to insert so much 
of our correspondent’s communication, as 
seemed to have any reference to. that arti- 
cle, that we might not seem to shelter owr- 
selves ftom the controversial animadver- 
sion, 
