in the form of hard words, and secondly, by personal disparagement of those who are engaged in it. 1. The hard words are manifold as the passions and prejudices of men; but they generally end in the imputation of ‘fanaticism.’ In such a cause, I am willing to be called ‘fanatic,’ or what you will; I care not for aspersions, nor shall I shrink before hard words, either here or elsewhere. I have learned from that great Englishman, Oliver Cromwell, that no man can be trusted ‘who is afraid of a paper pellet;’ and I am too familiar with history not to know, that every movement for reform, in Church or State, every endeavor for Human Liberty or Human Rights, has been thus assailed. I do not forget with what facility and frequency hard words have been employed—how that grandest character of many generations, the precursor of our own Washington, without whose example our Republic might have failed—the great William, Prince of Orange, the founder of the Dutch Republic, the United States of Holland—I do not forget how he was publicly branded as ‘a perjurer and a pest of society;’ and, not to dwell on general instances, how the enterprise for the abolition of the slave-trade was characterized on the floor of Parliament by one eminent speaker as ‘mischievous,’ and by another as ‘visionary and delusive;’ and how the exalted characters which it had enlisted were arraigned by still another eminent speaker—none other than that Tarleton, so conspicuous as the commander of the British horse in the southern campaigns of our Revolution, but more conspicuous in politics at home,—‘as a junto of sectaries, sophists, enthusiasts and fanatics;’ and also were again arraigned by no less person than a prince of the blood, the Duke of Clarence, afterwards William IV. of England, as ‘either fanatics or hypocrites,’ in one of which classes he openly placed William Wilberforce. But impartial history, with immortal pen, has redressed these impassioned judgments; and the same impartial history will yet rejudge the impassioned judgments of this hour. 2. Hard words have been followed by personal disparagement, and the sneer is often launched that our Enterprise lacks the authority of names eminent in Church and State. If this be so, the more is the pity on their account; for our cause is needed to them more than they are needed to our cause. But alas! it is only according to the example of history that it should be so. It is not the eminent in Church and State, the rich and powerful, the favorites of fortune and of place, who most promptly welcome Truth, when she heralds change in the existing order of things. It is others in poorer condition who throw open their hospitable
This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.