Emancipation of Belief 239 



seeks to influence them by other means. And, on the other 

 hand, a government which confessedly derives its morahty 

 from a free people has no sympathy with any sort of moral 

 education which can only be imparted by dictation. Thus 

 the control of religion disappears in either case. 



The governments constituted in democratic fashion give 

 attention as much as ever to the restraint of such conduct as 

 is offensive to the majority of right living members of the 

 community, but they seek less, and even lessening, control of 

 a class of actions which seem to concern the performer alone, 

 although this includes many which nevertheless have much 

 to do with his attitude toward his fellows. Broadly this 

 distinction may be stated as an increasing restraint upon 

 defined crime with a decreasing regard for moral sins not 

 charted upon the statutes. This is a logical result of the 

 growth of respect for the individual, which demands for him 

 liberty in his beliefs and freedom from restraint for any but 

 definite and well-founded offences. But in thus defining 

 offences for legal restriction, there is left a wide void where 

 lie many offences against morality. Most of these rest by 

 custom upon the same authority as the various theological 

 beliefs now in serious doubt. And with these there go also 

 those failings which consist not in positive ill doing, but in 

 a deficiency of affirmative virtues of altruistic character, 

 impossible of correction in compulsion or restraint. 



Then again there are many offences of clearly illegal 

 nature, which are ignored because they are small, and because 

 it would clog the machinery of justice to attend to all of 

 them. This condition is exaggerated by the persistence of 

 the antique methods and privileges attaching to the adminis- 



