“340 
action, or which, when put in aétion, may 
poflefs the tremendous power of tearing up 
fociety by the roots. Like the chemitt, 
he is not fure in the moment of projeétion 
whether he fhall blow up his own dwel- 
ling and that of his neighbour, or whether 
he. fhall be rewarded with a diicovery 
which will fecure the health and proiong 
the exiftence of future generations. It 
~becomes-us therefore to examine with pe- 
culiar care thofe maxims,which, under the 
appearance of following a clofer train of 
~reafoning, militate againit the ufual prac- 
tices or genuine feelings of mankind. “No 
fubje&t has been more canvalied than ,edu- 
cation. With regard to that important 
objeé&t, there is 2 maxim avowed by many 
fenfible people, which ieems to me. to: de- 
ferve particular inveftigation: <“* Give 
your child,’” it is faid,. ** no prejudices : 
- det reafon be the only foundation of his 
opinions ; where he cannot reafon, let him 
Mafpend his belief. Let your great care 
be, that as he srows up, he has nothing 
to unlearn ; and never make ufe of autho- 
‘vity im matters of opinion, for authority 
as no teft of truth.’? The maxim tounds 
well, and flatters perhaps the fecret pride 
of man, in fuppofing him more the crea- 
‘ture of reafon than he really is; but, I 
fufpeéiy on examination we fhall find ‘it 
exceedingly fallacious. We mult firft con- 
fider what a prejudice is. A prejudice 
is a fentiment in favour or disfavour of 
any perfon, practice or opinion, previous 
to and independent of examining their me- 
rits by reafon and inveftigation. Preju- 
dice is pre-judging; that is, judging pre- 
vioully to evidence. It is therefore fufh- 
ciently apparent, that no philofophical be- 
dief can be founded on mere prejudice ; 
becaufe it is the bufinefs of philofophy to 
£0 deep into the nature and properties of 
things; nor can it be allowable for thofe 
to indulge prejudice who afpire to lead the 
public opinion, thofe to whom the high 
office is appointed of fifting truth from er- 
ror, of canvafling the claims of different 
fyftems, of explceding old and introducing 
new tenets. .Thefe muft inveftigate with 
a kind of audacious boldnefs every fabje& 
that comes before them; thefe, neither 
impreft with awe tor all that mankind 
have been taught to reverence, nor f{wayed 
by affection for whatever the fympathies 
of our nature incline us to love, muft hold 
‘the balance with a fevere and fteady hand 
while they are weighing the doubtful {cale 
of probabilities; and, witha ftoicalapathy 
of mind, yield their aflent to nothing but 
a preponderancy of-evidence. But is this 
an oihce fora child? Is it an office for 
The Enquirer, No. XX. 
[ March Ty 
more than oneor two men in a century? 
Ard is it defirable that a child fhould 
grow up without opinions to regulate his 
conduét, till he is able to form them fairly 
by the exerciie of his own abilities. Such 
an exercife requires at leaft the fober pe- 
riod of matured reafon: reafon net only 
fharpened by argumentative difcuffion, but 
informed by experience. The moft fpright- 
ly child can only pofiefs the former; for 
let it be remembered, that though the rea-~ 
foning powers put forth pretty early in 
lite, the faculty of ufing them to effeét does 
not come tilismuch later. The firft efforts 
of achiid in reafoning refemble thofe quick 
and detultory motions by which he gains 
the play of his limbs; they thew agility 
and grace, they are picafing to look ai, 
and neceflary for the gradual acquirement 
of his bodily powers ; but his joints muft 
be knit into more firmnefs, and his move- 
ments regulated with more precifion, be- 
fore he is capable of ufeful Jabour and 
manly exertion. A reafoning child is not 
yet a reafonable being. There is great 
propriety in the legal phrafeology which 
exprefles maturity, not by having arrived 
at the poffefiion of reafon, but of that 
power, the late refult ef information, 
thought, and experience—difcretion, which 
alone teaches with regard to reafim, its 
powers, its limits, and its ufe. This the 
child of the moft fprightly parts cannot 
have, and therefore his attempts at reafon- 
ing, whatever acutenefs they may thew, 
and how much foever they may pleafe.a 
parent with the early promife of future 
excellence, are of no account whatever in 
the fober fearch after truth. —.Befides, 
taking it for granted (which however is 
utterly impoflible) that a youth could be 
brought up to the age of fifteen or fixteen 
without prejudice in favour of any opi- 
nions, whatever, and that he is then fet to 
examine for himfelf fome important pro- 
pofition, how is he to fet about it? Whe 
is to recommend books tohim? Who is 
to give him.the previous information ne- 
ceflary to comprehend the queftion? Who 
is to tel] him whether or no it is impor- 
. tant? Whoever does thefe will infallibly 
lay a bias upon his mind according to the 
ideas he himfelt has received upon the fub- 
jet. Let us fuppote the pomt in debate 
was the preference between the Roman 
Catholic and Proteftant modes of religion. 
Can a youth in a Proteftant country, born 
of Proteftant parents, with accefs, proba- 
bly, to hardly a fingle controverfial book 
eon the Roman Catholic fide of the quef- 
tion, can fuch a one ftudy the fubje& with- 
out prejudice? His Knowledge of hif- 
tory, 
