302 
Martyrs have often died for truth ; but let us not forget 
there have also been martyrs of delusion all over the world. 
A higher and surer test of honour and of nobleness, a better 
proof of honesty in man, must be looked for, and can only be 
found, in his every-day, straightforward candour towards those 
from whom he differs, and in the patience with which he bears 
neglect, misrepresentation, or even contempt. It is also to be 
seen in the openness with which a man fights chivalrously 
under his true colours, and the frankness with which he makes 
admissions, when, instead of having always been right, he 
knows he has often been wrong. And, indeed, upon the 
whole, in England, men who honestly have acted thus, have 
generally been duly respected. In our own day we have seen 
two brothers, both highly distinguished in their university, 
one leaving the Church of England for the Church of Rome, 
the other renouncing Christianity altogether ; and yet, though 
both have written bitterly against and ridiculed what they 
have repudiated, with all the earnestness of eager converts to 
new opinions, they are generally honoured and respected, and 
even sympathized with, by those who in controversy have been 
their uncompromising opponents. And this is what ever 
ought to be. If the names of others who have also changed 
their views, and denounced their former professions, have been 
held in less respect by their fellow-men, it is not because of 
their changes of opinion, or for the plainness with which they 
have spoken or written, but entirely upon other grounds, 
which I need not now particularize. 
I am sure that Professor Huxley needed not, in order to 
satisfy the clergy or any other honourable and fairly-educated 
class of the community, to make the least apology for speak- 
ing fully and fairly his convictions. I am quite sure the 
clergy as a body are as free from what was styled a sort of 
conventional dishonesty of society,” as any other class amongst 
us. And I venture to think that it was an unfortunate error 
on Professor Huxley's part — though it was explained to have 
been done for courtesy, and in order not to offend prejudice — 
that he failed to speak all he thought bearing on the subjects to 
which he called attention. Where he spoke plainest I feel 
certain he gave least offence; while his hinted reticence of 
expression and assumed moderation — as if something dreadful 
were kept back — only served to give an almost intolerable air 
of patronage to his tone, and converted what every one 
could see were intended to be his arguments, into a sorites of 
insinuations. 
After these remarks, I need scarcely add, that on the 
present occasion I intend to use all plainness of speech, 
