of; matters op selief, 65 



leration in our times, and, what is ftill more mocking, 

 of the thing itfelf. What is called, to tolerate ? Man- 

 kind would always be well enough difpofed to tolerate one 

 another on the furface of the globe, if there were no 

 other relation and no other name to abfolve them from 

 the duties of humanity. Who will dare to teach the con- 

 trary-; though, to our for row, the contrary appears 

 daily in practice ? But is it not abominable, that, 

 what all men indifpenfably owe to each other — namely, 

 fo to treat each other, as each would defire to be treated 

 by the other — mould be extenuated and reduced al~ 

 moft to nothing by fuch a paltry term as toleration ? — - 

 What an inconiiftency, more than chiidim ! We re- 

 gard it as a duty of a fuperior clafs, to be complaifant 

 and obliging towards each other in a thoufand nugatory 

 matters : and in affairs that nearly concern our convic- 

 tion, our confeience, our peace of mind, and our inte- 

 grity, we arrogate to ourfelves a right to tyrannize over 

 others ! I can require of any one that he let me pais 

 on my way along the ftreet unmolefted : and yet I ihall 

 efteern it a favour, if he tolerate me in thinking dif- 

 ferently from him on things se beyond the viiible diur- 

 nal fphere," in raving or dreaming differently from 

 him ; though he himfelf be not the better for it, whe- 

 ther I think of thefe things in one manner or the other ! 



Fools and bad men are intolerant by nature ; the 

 former cannot endure that any one mould think diffe- 

 rently from them, and the latter would, if poffible, 

 compel the whole world to do and to fufFer what they 

 would have them. Had thefe two claries of people al- 

 ways been able to . lord it over the earth, it would 

 long ago haye been a fcene of frightful defolation and 



vol.' 1 1. f favage 



