صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

the immediate agents are, in general, morally bad :-nor if it occasions needless pain and misery to men or to animals :-nor, lastly, if it occupies much time or is attended with much expense.-Respecting all amusements, the question is not whether, in their simple or theoretical character, they are defensible, but whether they are defensible in their actually existing state.

The Drama.

69. So that if a person, by way of showing the propriety of theatrical exhibitions, should ask whether there was any harm in a man's repeating a composition before others and accompanying it with appropriate gestures he would ask a very foolish question because he would ask a question that possesses little or no relevancy to the subject. What are the ordinary effects of the stage upon those who act on it? One and one only answer can be given that whatever happy exceptions there may be, the effect is bad; that the moral and religious character of actors is lower than that of persons in other professions. "It is an undeniable fact, for the truth of which we may safely appeal to every age and nation, that the situation of the performers, particularly of those of the female sex, is remarkably unfavourable to the maintenance and growth of the religious and moral principle, and, of course, highly dangerous to their eternal interests." 1

70. Therefore, if I take my seat in the theatre, I have paid three or five shillings as an inducement to a number of persons to subject their principles to extreme danger ;and the defence which I make is, that I am amused by it. Now, we affirm that this defence is invalid; that it is a defence which reason pronounces to be absurd, and morality to be vicious. Yet I have no other to make: it is the sum total of my justification.

71. But this, which is sufficient to decide the morality of the question, is not the only nor the chief part of the evil. The evil which is suffered by performers may be more intense, but upon spectators and others it is more extended. The night of a play is the harvest time of iniquity, where the profligate and the sensual put in their sickles and reap. It is to no purpose to say that a man may go to a theatre or parade a saloon without taking part in the surrounding licentiousness. All who are there promote the licentiousness, for if none was there, there would be no licentiousness; that is to say, if none purchased tickets there would be neither actors to be depraved, nor dramas to vitiate, nor

1 Wilberforce: Practical View, c. 4, S. 5.

saloons to degrade, and corrupt, and shock us.--The whole question of the lawfulness of the dramatic amusements, as they are ordinarily conducted, is resolved into a very simple thing :-After the doors on any given night are closed, have the virtuous or the vicious dispositions of the attenders been in the greater degree promoted? Every one knows that the balance is on the side of vice, and this conclusively decides the question-66 Is it lawful to attend?"

72. The same question is to be asked, and the same answer I believe will be returned, respecting various other assemblies for purposes of amusement. They do more harm than good. They please but they injure us; and what makes the case still stronger is, that the pleasure is frequently such as ought not to be enjoyed. A tippler enjoys pleasure in becoming drunk, but he is not to allege the gratification as a set-off against the immorality. And so it is with no small portion of the pleasures of an assembly. Dispositions are gratified which it were wiser to thwart; and, to speak the truth, if the dispositions of the mind were such as they ought to be, many of these modes of diversion would be neither relished nor resorted to. Some persons try to persuade themselves that charity forms a part of their motive in attending such places; as when the profits of the night are given to a benevolent institution. They hope, I suppose, that though it would not be quite right to go if benevolence were not a gainer, yet that the end warrants the means. But if these persons are charitable, let them give their guinea without deducting half for purposes of questionable propriety. Religious amusements, such as Oratorios and the like, form one of those artifices of chicanery by which people cheat, or try to cheat, themselves. The music, say they, is sacred, is devotional; and we go to hear it as we go to church it excites and animates our religious sensibilities. This, in spite of the solemnity of the association, is really ludicrous. These scenes subserve religion no more than they subserve chemistry. They do not increase its power any more than the power of the steam-engine. As it respects Christianity, it is all imposition and fiction ; and it is unfortunate that some of the most solemn topics of our religion are brought into such unworthy and debasing alliance.1

Masquerades.

73. Masquerades are of a more decided character. If the pleasure which people derive from meeting in disguises consisted merely in the "fun and drollery" of the

1 See also Essay 2, c. I.

thing, we might wonder to see so many children of five and six feet high, and leave them perhaps to their childishness :-but the truth is, that to many the zest of the concealment consists in the opportunity which it gives of covert licentiousness; of doing that in secret of which, openly, they would profess to be ashamed. Some men and some women who affect propriety when the face is shown, are glad of a few hours of concealed libertin ism. It is a time in which principles are left to guard the citadel of virtue without the auxiliary of public opinion. And ill do they guard it! It is no equivocal indication of the slender power of a person's principles, when they do not restrain him any longer than his misdeeds will produce exposure. She who is immodest at a masquerade, is modest nowhere. She may affect the language of delicacy and maintain external decorum, but she has no purity of mind.

The Field.

the benefits and mischiefs of Field Sports, 74. If we proceed with the calculation of

in the merchant-like manner of debtor and

And then

creditor, the balance is presently found to be greatly against them. The advantages to him who rides after hounds and shoots pheasants, are that he is amused, and possibly that his health is improved; some of the disadvantages are that it is unpropitious to the influence of religion and the dispositions which religion induces ; that it expends money and time which a man ought to be able to employ better; and that it inflicts gratuitous misery upon the inferior animals. The value of the pleasure cannot easily be computed, and as to health it may pass for nothing; for if a man is so little concerned for his health that he will not take exercise without dogs and guns, he has no reason to expect other men to concern themselves for it in remarking upon his actions. for the other side of the calculation. That field sports have any tendency to make a man better, no one will pretend; and no one who looks around him will doubt that their tendency is in the opposite direction. It is not necessary to show that every one who rides after the dogs is a worse man in the evening than he was in the morning the influence of such things is to be sought in those with whom they are habitual. Is the character of the sportsman, then, distinguished by religious sensibility? No. By activity of benevolence? No. By intellectual exertion? No. By purity of manners? No. Sportsmen are not the persons who diffuse the light of Christianity, or endeavour to rectify the public morals, or to extend the empire of knowledge. Look again at the clerical sportsman. Is he usually as exemplary in the discharge of his functions as

:

those who decline such diversions? His parishioners know that he is not. So, then, the religious and moral tendency of Field Sports is bad. It is not necessary to show how the ill effect is produced. It is sufficient that it actually is produced.

75. As to the expenditure of time and money, I dare say we shall be told that a we have heretofore seen that he has no such man has a right to employ both as he chooses. right. Obligations apply just as truly to the mode of employing leisure and property, as of arsenic. The obligations are not indeed to the use which a man may make of a pound alike enforced in a court of justice: the misuser of arsenic is carried to prison, the misuser of time and money awaits as sure an But no folly is more absurd than that of supposing we inquiry at another tribunal. have a right to do whatever the law does not punish. Such is the state of mankind, so great is the amount of misery and degradacondition of our species, that it is no light tion, and so great are the effects of money and active philanthropy in meliorating this thing for a man to employ his time and property upon vain and needless gratifications. It is no light thing to keep a pack of hounds, them. As to the torture which field sports and to spend days and weeks in riding after inflict upon animals, it is wonderful to observe our inconsistencies. He who has, in the day, much torture as they are capable of sustaininflicted upon half a dozen animals almost as ing, and who has wounded perhaps half a dozen more, and left them to die of pain or starvation, gives in the evening a grave reproof to his child, whom he sees amusing himself with picking off the_wings of flies! The infliction of pain is not that which gives pleasure to the sportsman (this were ferocious depravity), but he voluntarily inflicts the pain in order to please himself. Yet this man sighs and moralises over the cruelty of children ! would be a pair of balances, on which one An appropriate device for a sportsman's dress scale was laden with "Virtue and Humanity," and the other with "Sport"; the latter should be preponderating and lifting the other into

the air.

The Turf.

76. The Turf is still worse, partly because it is a stronghold of gambling, and therefore an efficient cause of misery and wickedness. It is an amusement of almost unmingled evil. But upon whom is the evil chargeable? Upon the fifty or one hundred persons only who bring horses and make bets? No; every man participates who attends the course. The great attraction of many public spectacles, and of this amongst others, consists more in the company than in the ostensible object of

amusement. Many go to a race-ground who cannot tell when they return what horse has been the victor. Every one, therefore, who is present must take his share of the mischief and the responsibility.

77. It is the same with respect to the gross and vulgar diversions of boxing, wrestling, and feats of running and riding. There is the same almost pure and unmingled evilthe same popularity resulting from the concourses who attend, and, by consequence, the participation and responsibility in those who do attend. The drunkenness, and the profaneness, and the debauchery, lie in part at the doors of those who are merely lookers-on; and if these lookers-on make pretensions to purity of character, their example is so much the more influential and their responsibility tenfold increased. Defences of these gross amusements are ridiculous. One tells us of keeping up the national spirit, which is the same thing as to say, that a human community is benefited by inducing into it the qualities of the bulldog. Another expatiates upon invigorating the muscular strength of the poor, as if the English poor were under so little necessity to labour, and to strengthen themselves by labour, that artificial means must be devised to increase their toil.

78. The vicissitudes of folly are endless: the vulgar games of the present day may soon be displaced by others, the same in genus but differing in species. At the present moment, Wrestling has become the point of interest. A man is conveyed across the kingdom to try whether he can throw down another; and when he has done it, grave narratives of the feat are detailed in half the newspapers of the country! There is a grossness, a vulgarity, a want of mental elevation in these things, which might induce the man of intelligence to reprobate them even if the voice of morality were silent. They are remains of barbarism-evidences that barbarism still maintains itself amongst us-proofs that the higher qualities of our nature are not sufficiently dominant over

the lower.

79. These grossnesses will pass away, as the deadly conflicts of men with beasts are passed already. Our posterity will wonder at the barbarism of us, their fathers, as we wonder at the barbarism of Rome. Let him, then, who loves intellectual elevation advance beyond the present times, and anticipate, in the recreations which he encourages, that period when these diversions shall be regarded as indicating one of the intermediate stages between the ferociousness of mental darkness and the purity of mental light.

80. These criticisms might be extended to many other species of amusement; and it is humiliating to discover that the conclusion will very frequently be the same—that the evil outbalances the good, and that there are no grounds upon which a good man can cluding, it is possible that the reader may justify a participation in them. In thus conimagine that we would exclude enjoyment

from the world, and substitute a system of He who thinks irreproachable austerity. this is unacquainted with the nature and sources of our better enjoyments. It is an ordinary mistake to imagine that pleasure is great only when it is vivid or intemperate, devour a pound of sugar at once, than to eat as a child fancies it were more delightful to an ounce daily in his food. It is happily and kindly provided that the greatest sum of enjoyment is that which is quietly and constantly induced.

No men understand

the nature of pleasure so well, or possess it so much, as those who find it within their own doors. If it were not that Moral Education is so bad, multitudes would seek enjoyment and find it here, who now fancy that they never partake of pleasure except in scenes of diversion. It is unquestionably true that no community enjoys life more than that which excludes all these amusements from its sources of enjoyment. use therefore the language, not of speculation, but of experience, when we say, that none of them is, in any degree, necessary to the happiness of life.

CHAPTER XV. Duelling.

We

Pitt and Tierney-Duelling the offspring of intellectual meanness, fear, and servility-"A fighting man"-Hindoo immolations-WilberforceSeneca.

1. It is not to much purpose to show that this strange practice is in itself wrong, because no one denies it. Other grounds of defence are taken, although, to be sure, there is a plain absurdity in conceding that a thing is wrong in morals, and then trying to show that it is proper to practise it.

2. Public notions exempt a clergyman from the "necessity" of fighting duels, and they exempt other men from the "necessity" of demanding satisfaction for a clergyman's insult. Now, we ask the man of honour whether he would rather receive an insult from a military officer or from a clergyman? Which would give him the greater pain, and cause him the more concern and uneasiness? That from the military officer, certainly. But why? Because the officer's affront

leads to a duel, and the clergyman's does not. So, then, it is preferable to receive an insult to which the "necessity" of fighting is not attached than one to which it is attached. Why then attach the necessity to any man's affront? You say, that demanding satisfaction is a remedy for the evil of an insult. But we see that the evil, together with the remedy, is worse than the evil alone. Why then institute the remedy at all? It is not indeed to be questioned that some insults may be forborne, because it is known to what consequences they lead. But, on the other hand, for what purpose does one man insult another? To give him pain; now, we have just seen that the pain is so much the greater in consequence of the "necessity" of fighting, and therefore the motives to insult another are increased. A man who wishes to inflict pain upon another, can inflict it more intensely in consequence of the system of duelling.

3. The truth is, that men fancy the system is useful, because they do not perceive how Public Opinion has been violently turned out of its natural and its usual course?

[blocks in formation]

7. It is usual with those who do foolish and vicious things, or who do things from foolish or vicious motives, to invent some fiction, by which to veil the evil or folly, and to give it, if possible, a creditable appearance. This has been done in the case of duelling. We hear a great deal about honour, and spirit, and and as it respects the duellist, equally ficticourage, and other qualities equally pleasant, tious. The want of sufficient honour, and spirit, and courage, is precisely the very reason why men fight. Pitt fought with Tierney; upon which Pitt's biographer writes

When a military man is guilty of an insult, public disapprobation falls but lightly upon him. It reserves its force to direct against the insulted party if he does not demand satisfaction. But when a clergyman is guilty of an insult, Public disapprobation "A mind like his, cast in no common falls upon him with undivided force. The mould, should have risen superior to a low insulted party receives no censure. Now, if you take away the custom of demanding must have perceived, and the wickedness of and unworthy prejudice, the folly of which it satisfaction, what will be the result? Why, which it must have acknowledged. Could that public opinion will revert to its natural Mr. Pitt be led away by that false shame course; it will direct all its penalties to the which subjects the decisions of reason to the offending party, and by consequence restrain control of fear, and renders the admonitions him from offending. It will act towards all of conscience subservient to the powers of men as it now acts towards the clergy; and ridicule ?" 1 Low prejudice, folly, wickedness, if a clergyman were frequently to be guilty false shame, and fear, are the motives which of insults, his character would be destroyed. the complacent duellist dignifies with the The reader will perhaps more distinctly per- titles of honour, spirit, courage. This, to be ceive that the fancied utility of duelling in preventing insults, results from this mis-sure, is very politic: he would not be so silly direction of public opinion by this brief

argument.

4. An individual either fears public opinion, or he does not. If he does not fear it, the custom of duelling cannot prevent him from insulting whomsoever he pleases; because public opinion is the only thing which makes men fight, and he does not regard it. If he does fear public opinion, then the most effectual way of restraining him from insulting others, is by directing that opinion against the act of insulting--just as it is now directed in the case of the clergy.1

5. Thus it is that we find-what he knows

1 See West. Rev., No. 7, Art. 2.

as to call his motives by their right names. Others, of course, join in the chicanery. They reflect that they themselves may one day have “a meeting,” and they wish to keep up the credit of a system which they are conscious they have not principle enough to reject.

8. Put Christianity out of the question— Would not even the philosophy of paganism have despised that littleness of principle which would not bear a man up in adhering to conduct which he knew to be right—that littleness of principle which sacrifices the dictates of the understanding to an worthy fear?-When a good man, rather than conform to some vicious institution of the papacy, stood firmly against the frowns and 1 Gifford's Life, vol. i. p. 263

un

66

Here

Here

persecutions of the world, against obloquy to his own, many become condescending, and infamy, we say that his mental principles which this man immediately construes into were great as well as good. If they were, the fear; and, presuming upon this, he acts as principles of the duellist are mean as well as if he imagined no one dare contradict him vicious. He is afraid to be good and great. but all must yield obedience to his will." He knows the course which dignity and Here the servile bondage of which we virtue prescribe, but he will not rise above speak is brought prominently out. those lower motives which prompt him to is the crouching and unmanly fear. deviate from that course. It does not affect is the abject submission of sense and reason these conclusions to concede, that he who is to the grossest vulgarity of insolence, folly, afraid to refuse a challenge may generally be and guilt. The officer presently gives an a man of elevated mind. He may be such; account of an instance in which the whole but his refusal is an exception to his general mess were domineered over by one of these character. It is an instance in which he fighting men ;—and a pitiably ludicrous acimpeaches his consistency in excellence. If count it is. The man had invited them to it were consistent, if the whole mind had dinner at some distance. "On the day apattained to the rightful stature of a Christian pointed, there came on a most violent snowman, he would assuredly contemn in his storm, and in the morning we despatched practice the conduct which he disapproved a servant with an apology.” But alas! in his heart. If you would show us a man these poor men could not use their own of courage, bring forward him who will say, judgments as to whether they should ride I will not fight. Suppose a gentleman who, in a most violent snowstorm " or not. upon the principles which Gifford says should The man sent back some rude message have actuated Pitt and all great minds, had that he "expected them." They were afraid thus refused to fight, and suppose him saying of what the fighting man would do next to his withdrawing friends-"I have acted morning; and so the whole mess, against with perfect deliberation: I knew all the con- their wills, actually rode near four miles sequences of the course I have pursued: but in a heavy snowstorm, and passed a day," I was persuaded that I should act most like says the officer, "that was, without excepa man of intellect, as well as like a Christian, tion, the most unpleasant I ever passed in by declining the meeting; and therefore I my life!" In the instance of these men, declined it. I feel and deplore the conse- the motives to duelling as founded upon quences, though I do not deprecate them. Fear, operated so powerfully that the officers I am not fearful, as I have not been fearful; were absolutely enslaved—driven against their for I appeal to yourselves whether I have will by Fear, as negroes are by a cartwhip. not encountered the more appalling alternative-whether it does not require a greater effort to do what I have done, and what I am at this moment doing, than to have met my opponent.”—Such a man's magnanimity might not procure for him the companionship of his acquaintance, but it would do much more; it would obtain the suffrages of their judgments and their hearts. Whilst they continued perhaps externally to neglect him, they would internally honour and admire. They would feel that his excellence was of an order to which they could make no pretensions; and they would feel, as they were practising this strange hypocrisy of vice, that they were the proper objects of contempt and pity.

[ocr errors]

9. The species of slavery to which a man is sometimes reduced by being, as he calls it, obliged to fight," is really pitiable. A British officer writes of a petulant and profligate class of men, one of whom is sometimes found in a regiment, and says, "Sensible that an officer must accept a challenge, he does not hesitate to deal them in abundance, and shortly acquires the name of a fighting man; but as every one is not willing to throw away his life when called upon by one who is indifferent

[ocr errors]

Of

10. We are shocked and disgusted at the immolation of women amongst the Hindoos, and think that, if such a sacrifice were attempted in England, it would excite feelings of the utmost repulsion and abhorrence. the custom of immolation, Duelling is the sister. Their parents are the same, and, like other sisters, their lineaments are similar. Why does a Hindoo mount the funeral pile? To vindicate and maintain her honour. Why does an Englishman go to the heath with his pistols? To vindicate and maintain his honour. What is the nature and character of the Hindoo's honour? Quite factitious. Of the duellist's? Quite factitious. How is the motive applied to the Hindoo? To her fears of reproach. To the duellist? To his fears of reproach. What then is the difference between the two customs? This-That one is practised in the midst of pagan darkness, and the other in the midst of Christian light. And yet these very men give their guineas to the Missionary Society, lament the degradation of the Hindoos, and expatiate upon the sacred duty of enlightening them with Christianity! "Physician! heal thyself."

[blocks in formation]
« السابقةمتابعة »