it all it can be!”
made him one of the most American
of all Americans
Some five years later, when he sounded the bugle-note in his letter to the London Times
, some critics who knew his early mood, but not its change, suspected there might be a taint of ambition in what they thought so sudden a conversion.
I could testify that the mood was five years old,--years before the slightest shadow of political expectation had dusked the clear mirror of his scholar life.
This distrust shows itself in the growing dislike of universal suffrage, and the efforts to destroy it made of late by all our easy classes.
The white South
hates universal suffrage; the so-called cultivated North distrusts it. Journal and college, social-science convention and the pulpit, discuss the propriety of restraining it. Timid scholars tell their dread of it. Carlyle
, that bundle of sour prejudices, flouts universal suffrage with a blasphemy that almost equals its ignorance.
See his words: “Democracy will prevail when men believe the vote of Judas
as good as that of Jesus Christ
No democracy ever claimed that the vote of ignorance and crime was as good in any sense as that of wisdom and virtue.
It only asserts that crime and ignorance have the same right to vote that virtue has. Only by allowing that right, and so appealing to their sense of justice, and throwing upon them the burden of their full responsibility, can we hope ever to raise crime and ignorance to the level of self-respect.
The right to choose your governor rests on precisely the same foundation as the right to choose your religion; and no more arrogant or ignorant arraignment of all that is noble in the civil and religious Europe
of the last five hundred years ever came from the triple crown on the Seven Hills
than this sneer of the bigot Scotsman
Protestantism holds up its hands in holy horror, and tells us that the