part18-第4章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



directly；　yet　I　always　supposed　him　to　be　of　the　school　of　Diderot；

D'Alembert；　D'Holbach；　the　first　of　whom　committed　their　system　of

atheism　to　writing　in　‘Le　bon　sens；'　and　the　last　in　his　‘Systeme　de

la　Nature。'　It　was　a　numerous　school　in　the　Catholic　countries；　while

the　infidelity　of　the　Protestant　took　generally　the　form　of　Theism。

The　former　always　insisted　that　it　was　a　mere　question　of　definition

between　them；　the　hypostasis　of　which　on　both　sides　was　‘Nature'　or

‘the　Universe：'　that　both　agreed　in　the　order　of　the　existing　system；

but　the　one　supposed　it　from　eternity；　the　other　as　having　begun　in

time。　　And　when　the　atheist　descanted　on　the　unceasing　motion　and

circulation　of　matter　thro'　the　animal　vegetable　and　mineral

kingdoms；　never　resting；　never　annihilated；　always　changing　form；　and

under　all　forms　gifted　with　the　power　of　reproduction；　the　Theist

pointing　‘to　the　heavens　above；　and　to　the　earth　beneath；　and　to　the

waters　under　the　earth；'　asked　if　these　did　not　proclaim　a　first

cause；　possessing　intelligence　and　power；　power　in　the　production；

and　intelligence　in　the　design　and　constant　preservation　of　the

system；　urged　the　palpable　existence　of　final　causes；　that　the　eye

was　made　to　see；　and　the　ear　to　hear；　and　not　that　we　see　because　we

have　eyes；　and　hear　because　we　have　ears；　an　answer　obvious　to　the

senses；　as　that　of　walking　across　the　room　was　to　the　philosopher

demonstrating　the　nonexistence　of　motion。　　It　was　in　D'Holbach's

conventicles　that　Rousseau　imagined　all　the　machinations　against　him

were　contrived；　and　he　left；　in　his　Confessions　the　most　biting

anecdotes　of　Grimm。　　These　appeared　after　I　left　France；　but　I　have

heard　that　poor　Grimm　was　so　much　afflicted　by　them；　that　he　kept　his

bed　several　weeks。　　I　have　never　seen　these　Memoirs　of　Grimm。　　Their

volume　has　kept　them　out　of　our　market。




　　　　　　　　I　have　been　lately　amusing　myself　with　Levi's　book　in　answer　to

Dr。　Priestley。　　It　is　a　curious　and　tough　work。　　His　style　is

inelegant　and　incorrect；　harsh　and　petulent　to　his　adversary；　and　his

reasoning　flimsey　enough。　　Some　of　his　doctrines　were　new　to　me；

particularly　that　of　his　two　resurrections：　the　first　a　particular

one　of　all　the　dead；　in　body　as　well　as　soul；　who　are　to　live　over

again；　the　Jews　in　a　state　of　perfect　obedience　to　god；　the　other

nations　in　a　state　of　corporeal　punishment　for　the　sufferings　they

have　inflicted　on　the　Jews。　　And　he　explains　this　resurrection　of

bodies　to　be　only　of　the　original　stamen　of　Leibnitz；　or　the

homunculus　in　semine　masculino；　considering　that　as　a　mathematical

point；　insusceptible　of　separation；　or　division。　　The　second

resurrection　a　general　one　of　souls　and　bodies；　eternally　to　enjoy

divine　glory　in　the　presence　of　the　supreme　being。　　He　alledges　that

the　Jews　alone　preserve　the　doctrine　of　the　unity　of　god。　　Yet　their

god　would　be　deemed　a　very　indifferent　man　with　us：　and　it　was　to

correct　their　Anamorphosis　of　the　deity　that　Jesus　preached；　as　well

as　to　establish　the　doctrine　of　a　future　state。　　However　Levi　insists

that　that　was　taught　in　the　old　testament；　and　even　by　Moses　himself

and　the　prophets。　　He　agrees　that　an　anointed　prince　was　prophecied

and　promised：　but　denies　that　the　character　and　history　of　Jesus　has

any　analogy　with　that　of　the　person　promised。　　He　must　be　fearfully

embarrassing　to　the　Hierophants　of　fabricated　Christianity；　because

it　is　their　own　armour　in　which　he　clothes　himself　for　the　attack。

For　example；　he　takes　passages　of　Scripture　from　their　context　（which

would　give　them　a　very　different　meaning）　strings　them　together；　and

makes　them　point　towards　what　object　he　pleases；　he　interprets　them

figuratively；　typically；　analogically；　hyperbolically；　he　calls　in

the　aid　of　emendation；　transposition；　ellipsis；　metonymy；　and　every

other　figure　of　rhetoric；　the　name　of　one　man　is　taken　for　another；

one　place　for　another；　days　and　weeks　for　months　and　years；　and

finally　avails　himself　of　all　his　advantage　over　his　adversaries　by

his　superior　knolege　of　the　Hebrew；　speaking　in　the　very　language　of

the　divine　communication；　while　they　can　only　fumble　on　with

conflicting　and　disputed　translations。　　Such　is　this　war　of　giants。

And　how　can　such　pigmies　as　you　and　I　decide　between　them？　　For

myself　I　confess　that　my　head　is　not　formed　tantas　componere　lites。

And　as　you　began　your　Mar。　2。　with　a　declaration　that　you　were　about

to　write　me　the　most　frivolous　letter　I　had　ever　read；　so　I　will

close　mine　by　saying　I　have　written　you　a　full　match　for　it；　and　by

adding　my　affectionate　respects　to　Mrs。　Adams；　and　the　assurance　of

my　constant　attachment　and　consideration　for　yourself。







　　　　　　　　〃CONSTITUTIONALLY　AND　CONSCIENTIOUSLY　DEMOCRATS〃




　　　　　　　　_To　P。　S。　Dupont　de　Nemours_

　　　　　　　　_Poplar　Forest；　April　24；　1816_




　　　　　　　　I　received；　my　dear　friend；　your　letter　covering　the

constitution　for　your　Equinoctial　republsetting　out　for　this　place。

I　brought　it　with　me；　and　have　read　it　with　great　satisfaction。　　I

suppose　it　well　formed　for　those　for　whom　it　was　intended；　and　the

excellence　of　every　government　is　its　adaptation　to　the　state　of

those　to　be　governed　by　it。　　For　us　it　would　not　do。　　Distinguishing

between　the　structure　of　the　government　and　the　moral　principles　on

which　you　prescribe　its　administration；　with　the　latter　we　concur

cordially；　with　the　former　we　should　not。　　We　of　the　United　States；

you　know；　are　constitutionally　and　conscientiously　democrats。　　We

consider　society　as　one　of　the　natural　wants　with　which　man　has　been

created；　that　he　has　been　endowed　with　faculties　and　qualities　to

effect　its　satisfaction　by　concurrence　of　others　having　the　same

want；　that　when；　by　the　exercise　of　these　faculties；　he　has　procured

a　state　of　society；　it　is　one　of　his　acquisitions　which　he　has　a

right　to　regulate　and　control；　jointly　indeed　with　all　those　who　have

concurred　in　the　procurement；　whom　he　cannot　exclude　from　its　use　or

direction　more　than　they　him。　　We　think　experience　has　proved　it

safer；　for　the　mass　of　individuals　composing　the　society；　to　reserve

to　themselves　personally　the　exercise　of　all　rightful　powers　to　which

they　are　competent；　and　to　delegate　those　to　which　they　are　not

competent　to　deputies　named；　and　removable　for　unfaithful　conduct；　by

themselves　immediately。　　Hence；　with　us；　the　people　（by　which　is

meant　the　mass　of　individuals　composing　the　society）　being　competent

to　judge　of　the　facts　occurring　in　ordinary　life；　they　have　retained

the　functions　of　judges　of　facts；　under　the　name　of　jurors；　but　being

unqualified　for　the　management　of　affairs　requiring　intelligence

above　the　common　level；　yet　competent　judges　of　human　character；　they

chose；　for　their　management；　representatives；　some　by　themselves

immediately；　others　by　electors　chosen　by　themselves。　　Thus　our

President　is　chosen　by　ourselves；　directly　in　_practice_；　for　we　vote

for　A　as　elector　only　on　the　condition　he　will　vote　for　B；　our

representatives　by　ourselves　immediately；　our　Senate　and　judges　of

law　through　electors　chosen　by　ourselves。　　And　we　believe　that　this

proximate　choice　and　power　of　removal　is　the　best　security　which

experience　has　sanctioned　for　ensuring　an　honest　conduct　in　the

functionaries　of　society。　　Your　three　or　four　alembications　have

indeed　a　seducing　appearance。　　We　should　conceive　_prima　facie_；　that

the　last　extract　would　be　the　pure　alcohol　of　the　substance；　three　or

four　times　rectified。　　But　in　proportion　as　they　are　more　and　more

sublimated；　they　are　also　farther　and　farther　removed　from　the

control　of　the　society；　and　the　human　character；　we　believe；　requires

in　general　constant　and　immediate　control；　to　prevent　its　being

biased　from　right　by　the　seductions　of　self…love。　　Your　process

produces　therefore　a　structure　of　government　from　which　the

fundamental　principle　of　ours　is　excluded。　　You　first　set　down　as

zeros　all　individuals　not　having　l