‘Genel Kültür’ Kategorisi için ArÅŸiv

[pg/etext94/bfaut10.txt]

Salı, 06 Kasım 2007

[pg/etext94/bfaut10.txt]

The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin

July, 1994 [Etext #148]

This text is in the PUBLIC DOMAIN.

THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF

BENJAMIN FRANKLIN

WITH INTRODUCTION AND NOTES

EDITED BY CHARLES W ELIOT LLD

P F COLLIER & SON COMPANY, NEW YORK (1909)

INTRODUCTORY NOTE

BENJAMIN FRANKLIN was born in Milk Street, Boston, on January

6, 1706. His father, Josiah Franklin, was a tallow chandler who

married twice, and of his seventeen children Benjamin was the youngest

son. His schooling ended at ten, and at twelve he was bound apprentice

to his brother James, a printer, who published the "New England

Courant." To this journal he became a contributor, and later was for

a time its nominal editor. But the brothers quarreled, and Benjamin

ran away, going first to New York, and thence to Philadelphia, where

he arrived in October, 1723. He soon obtained work as a printer,

but after a few months he was induced by Governor Keith to go to

London, where, finding Keith’s promises empty, he again worked as a

compositor till he was brought back to Philadelphia by a merchant

named Denman, who gave him a position in his business. On Denman’s

death he returned to his former trade, and shortly set up a printing

house of his own from which he published "The Pennsylvania Gazette,"

to which he contributed many essays, and which he made a medium for

agitating a variety of local reforms. In 1732 he began to issue his

famous "Poor Richard’s Almanac" for the enrichment of which he borrowed

or composed those pithy utterances of worldly wisdom which are the

basis of a large part of his popular reputation. In 1758, the year

in which he ceases writing for the Almanac, he printed in it "Father

Abraham’s Sermon," now regarded as the most famous piece of literature

produced in Colonial America.

Meantime Franklin was concerning himself more and more with

public affairs. He set forth a scheme for an Academy, which was

taken up later and finally developed into the University of Pennsylvania;

and he founded an "American Philosophical Society" for the purpose

of enabling scientific men to communicate their discoveries to one

another. He himself had already begun his electrical researches,

which, with other scientific inquiries, he called on in the intervals

of money-making and politics to the end of his life. In 1748 he

sold his business in order to get leisure for study, having now

acquired comparative wealth; and in a few years he had made discoveries

that gave him a reputation with the learned throughout Europe. In

politics he proved very able both as an administrator and as a

controversialist; but his record as an office-holder is stained by

the use he made of his position to advance his relatives. His most

notable service in home politics was his reform of the postal system;

but his fame as a statesman rests chiefly on his services in connection

with the relations of the Colonies with Great Britain, and later with

France. In 1757 he was sent to England to protest against the

influence of the Penns in the government of the colony, and for five

years he remained there, striving to enlighten the people and the

ministry of England as to Colonial conditions. On his return to

America he played an honorable part in the Paxton affair, through

which he lost his seat in the Assembly; but in 1764 he was again

despatched to England as agent for the colony, this time to petition

the King to resume the government from the hands of the proprietors.

In London he actively opposed the proposed Stamp Act, but lost the

credit for this and much of his popularity through his securing for

a friend the office of stamp agent in America. Even his effective

work in helping to obtain the repeal of the act left him still a

suspect; but he continued his efforts to present the case for the

Colonies as the troubles thickened toward the crisis of the Revolution.

In 1767 he crossed to France, where he was received with honor; but

before his return home in 1775 he lost his position as postmaster

through his share in divulging to Massachusetts the famous letter of

Hutchinson and Oliver. On his arrival in Philadelphia he was chosen

a member of the Continental Congress and in 1777 he was despatched

to France as commissioner for the United States. Here he remained

till 1785, the favorite of French society; and with such success did

he conduct the affairs of his country that when he finally returned

he received a place only second to that of Washington as the champion

of American independence. He died on April 17, 1790.

The first five chapters of the Autobiography were composed in

England in 1771, continued in 1784-5, and again in 1788, at which

date he brought it down to 1757. After a most extraordinary series

of adventures, the original form of the manuscript was finally printed

by Mr. John Bigelow, and is here reproduced in recognition of its

value as a picture of one of the most notable personalities of Colonial

times, and of its acknowledged rank as one of the great autobiographies

of the world.

BENJAMIN FRANKLIN

HIS AUTOBIOGRAPHY

1706-1757

TWYFORD, at the Bishop of St. Asaph’s,<0> 1771.

<0> The country-seat of Bishop Shipley, the good bishop,

as Dr. Franklin used to style him.–B.

DEAR SON: I have ever had pleasure in obtaining any little

anecdotes of my ancestors. You may remember the inquiries I made

among the remains of my relations when you were with me in England,

and the journey I undertook for that purpose. Imagining it may be

equally agreeable to<1> you to know the circumstances of my life,

many of which you are yet unacquainted with, and expecting the enjoyment

of a week’s uninterrupted leisure in my present country retirement,

I sit down to write them for you. To which I have besides some

other inducements. Having emerged from the poverty and obscurity

in which I was born and bred, to a state of affluence and some

degree of reputation in the world, and having gone so far through

life with a considerable share of felicity, the conducing means

I made use of, which with the blessing of God so well succeeded,

my posterity may like to know, as they may find some of them

suitable to their own situations, and therefore fit to be imitated.

<1> After the words "agreeable to" the words "some of" were

interlined and afterward effaced.–B.

That felicity, when I reflected on it, has induced me sometimes

to say, that were it offered to my choice, I should have no objection

to a repetition of the same life from its beginning, only asking

the advantages authors have in a second edition to correct some faults

of the first. So I might, besides correcting the faults, change some

sinister accidents and events of it for others more favorable.

But though this were denied, I should still accept the offer.

Since such a repetition is not to be expected, the next thing

most like living one’s life over again seems to be a recollection

of that life, and to make that recollection as durable as possible

by putting it down in writing.

Hereby, too, I shall indulge the inclination so natural in old men,

to be talking of themselves and their own past actions; and I shall

indulge it without being tiresome to others, who, through respect

to age, might conceive themselves obliged to give me a hearing,

since this may be read or not as any one pleases. And, lastly (I may

as well confess it, since my denial of it will be believed by nobody),

perhaps I shall a good deal gratify my own vanity. Indeed, I scarce

ever heard or saw the introductory words, "Without vanity I may say,"

&c., but some vain thing immediately followed. Most people dislike

vanity in others, whatever share they have of it themselves;

but I give it fair quarter wherever I meet with it, being persuaded

that it is often productive of good to the possessor, and to others

that are within his sphere of action; and therefore, in many cases,

it would not be altogether absurd if a man were to thank God for his

vanity among the other comforts of life.

And now I speak of thanking God, I desire with all humility

to acknowledge that I owe the mentioned happiness of my past

life to His kind providence, which lead me to the means I used

and gave them success. My belief of this induces me to hope,

though I must not presume, that the same goodness will still be

exercised toward me, in continuing that happiness, or enabling

me to bear a fatal reverse, which I may experience as others

have done: the complexion of my future fortune being known

to Him only in whose power it is to bless to us even our afflictions.

The notes one of my uncles (who had the same kind of curiosity

in collecting family anecdotes) once put into my hands,

furnished me with several particulars relating to our ancestors.

From these notes I learned that the family had lived in the

same village, Ecton, in Northamptonshire, for three hundred years,

and how much longer he knew not (perhaps from the time when the name

of Franklin, that before was the name of an order of people,

was assumed by them as a surname when others took surnames

all over the kingdom), on a freehold of about thirty acres,

aided by the smith’s business, which had continued in the family

till his time, the eldest son being always bred to that business;

a custom which he and my father followed as to their eldest sons.

When I searched the registers at Ecton, I found an account

of their births, marriages and burials from the year 1555 only,

there being no registers kept in that parish at any time preceding.

By that register I perceived that I was the youngest son of the

youngest son for five generations back. My grandfather Thomas,

who was born in 1598, lived at Ecton till he grew too old to

follow business longer, when he went to live with his son John,

a dyer at Banbury, in Oxfordshire, with whom my father served

an apprenticeship. There my grandfather died and lies buried.

We saw his gravestone in 1758. His eldest son Thomas lived in

the house at Ecton, and left it with the land to his only child,

a daughter, who, with her husband, one Fisher, of Wellingborough,

sold it to Mr. Isted, now lord of the manor there. My grandfather

had four sons that grew up, viz.: Thomas, John, Benjamin and Josiah.

I will give you what account I can of them, at this distance from

my papers, and if these are not lost in my absence, you will among

them find many more particulars.

Thomas was bred a smith under his father; but, being ingenious,

and encouraged in learning (as all my brothers were) by an Esquire

Palmer, then the principal gentleman in that parish, he qualified

himself for the business of scrivener; became a considerable man

in the county; was a chief mover of all public-spirited undertakings

for the county or town of Northampton, and his own village,

of which many instances were related of him; and much taken notice

of and patronized by the then Lord Halifax. He died in 17O2,

January 6, old style, just four years to a day before I was born.

The account we received of his life and character from some old

people at Ecton, I remember, struck you as something extraordinary,

from its similarity to what you knew of mine.

"Had he died on the same day," you said, "one might have supposed

a transmigration."

John was bred a dyer, I believe of woolens. Benjamin was bred a silk

dyer, serving an apprenticeship at London. He was an ingenious man.

I remember him well, for when I was a boy he came over to my father

in Boston, and lived in the house with us some years. He lived

to a great age. His grandson, Samuel Franklin, now lives in Boston.

He left behind him two quarto volumes, MS., of his own poetry, consisting

of little occasional pieces addressed to his friends and relations,

of which the following, sent to me, is a specimen.<2> He had formed

a short-hand of his own, which he taught me, but, never practising it,

I have now forgot it. I was named after this uncle, there being

a particular affection between him and my father. He was very pious,

a great attender of sermons of the best preachers, which he took

down in his short-hand, and had with him many volumes of them.

He was also much of a politician; too much, perhaps, for his station.

There fell lately into my hands, in London, a collection he had

made of all the principal pamphlets, relating to public affairs,

from 1641 to 1717; many of the volumes are wanting as appears

by the numbering, but there still remain eight volumes in folio,

and twenty-four in quarto and in octavo. A dealer in old books

met with them, and knowing me by my sometimes buying of him,

he brought them to me. It seems my uncle must have left them here,

when he went to America, which was about fifty years since.

There are many of his notes in the margins.

<2> Here follow in the margin the words, in brackets, "here

insert it," but the poetry is not given. Mr. Sparks

informs us (Life of Franklin, p. 6) that these volumes

had been preserved, and were in possession of Mrs. Emmons,

of Boston, great-granddaughter of their author.

This obscure family of ours was early in the Reformation,

and continued Protestants through the reign of Queen Mary,

when they were sometimes in danger of trouble on account of their

zeal against popery. They had got an English Bible, and to conceal

and secure it, it was fastened open with tapes under and within

the cover of a joint-stool. When my great-great-grandfather read

it to his family, he turned up the joint-stool upon his knees,

turning over the leaves then under the tapes. One of the children

stood at the door to give notice if he saw the apparitor coming,

who was an officer of the spiritual court. In that case the stool

was turned down again upon its feet, when the Bible remained concealed

under it as before. This anecdote I had from my uncle Benjamin.

The family continued all of the Church of England till about the end

of Charles the Second’s reign, when some of the ministers that had been

outed for nonconformity holding conventicles in Northamptonshire,

Benjamin and Josiah adhered to them, and so continued all their lives:

the rest of the family remained with the Episcopal Church.

Josiah, my father, married young, and carried his wife with three

children into New England, about 1682. The conventicles having

been forbidden by law, and frequently disturbed, induced some

considerable men of his acquaintance to remove to that country,

and he was prevailed with to accompany them thither, where they expected

to enjoy their mode of religion with freedom. By the same wife he

had four children more born there, and by a second wife ten more,

in all seventeen; of which I remember thirteen sitting at one time

at his table, who all grew up to be men and women, and married;

I was the youngest son, and the youngest child but two, and was born

in Boston, New England. My mother, the second wife, was Abiah Folger,

daughter of Peter Folger, one of the first settlers of New England,

of whom honorable mention is made by Cotton Mather in his church

history of that country, entitled Magnalia Christi Americana,

as ‘a godly, learned Englishman," if I remember the words rightly.

I have heard that he wrote sundry small occasional pieces,

but only one of them was printed, which I saw now many years since.

It was written in 1675, in the home-spun verse of that time and people,

and addressed to those then concerned in the government there.

It was in favor of liberty of conscience, and in behalf of the Baptists,

Quakers, and other sectaries that had been under persecution,

ascribing the Indian wars, and other distresses that had befallen

the country, to that persecution, as so many judgments of God

to punish so heinous an offense, and exhorting a repeal of those

uncharitable laws. The whole appeared to me as written with a good

deal of decent plainness and manly freedom. The six concluding lines

I remember, though I have forgotten the two first of the stanza;

but the purport of them was, that his censures proceeded from

good-will, and, therefore, he would be known to be the author.

"Because to be a libeller (says he)

I hate it with my heart;

From Sherburne town, where now I dwell

My name I do put here;

Without offense your real friend,

It is Peter Folgier."

My elder brothers were all put apprentices to different trades.

I was put to the grammar-school at eight years of age, my father

intending to devote me, as the tithe of his sons, to the service

of the Church. My early readiness in learning to read (which must

have been very early, as I do not remember when I could not read),

and the opinion of all his friends, that I should certainly make a

good scholar, encouraged him in this purpose of his. My uncle Benjamin,

too, approved of it, and proposed to give me all his short-hand

volumes of sermons, I suppose as a stock to set up with, if I would

learn his character. I continued, however, at the grammar-school

not quite one year, though in that time I had risen gradually

from the middle of the class of that year to be the head of it,

and farther was removed into the next class above it, in order to go

with that into the third at the end of the year. But my father,

in the meantime, from a view of the expense of a college education,

which having so large a family he could not well afford, and the mean

living many so educated were afterwards able to obtain–reasons that

be gave to his friends in my hearing–altered his first intention,

took me from the grammar-school, and sent me to a school for writing

and arithmetic, kept by a then famous man, Mr. George Brownell,

very successful in his profession generally, and that by mild,

encouraging methods. Under him I acquired fair writing pretty soon,

but I failed in the arithmetic, and made no progress in it.

At ten years old I was taken home to assist my father in his business,

which was that of a tallow-chandler and sope-boiler; a business he

was not bred to, but had assumed on his arrival in New England,

and on finding his dying trade would not maintain his family,

being in little request. Accordingly, I was employed in cutting wick

for the candles, filling the dipping mold and the molds for cast candles,

attending the shop, going of errands, etc.

I disliked the trade, and had a strong inclination for the sea,

but my father declared against it; however, living near the water,

I was much in and about it, learnt early to swim well, and to

manage boats; and when in a boat or canoe with other boys, I was

commonly allowed to govern, especially in any case of difficulty;

and upon other occasions I was generally a leader among the boys,

and sometimes led them into scrapes, of which I will mention

one instance, as it shows an early projecting public spirit, tho’

not then justly conducted.

There was a salt-marsh that bounded part of the mill-pond,

on the edge of which, at high water, we used to stand to fish

for minnows. By much trampling, we had made it a mere quagmire.

My proposal was to build a wharff there fit for us to stand upon,

and I showed my comrades a large heap of stones, which were intended

for a new house near the marsh, and which would very well suit

our purpose. Accordingly, in the evening, when the workmen

were gone, I assembled a number of my play-fellows, and working

with them diligently like so many emmets, sometimes two or three

to a stone, we brought them all away and built our little wharff.

The next morning the workmen were surprised at missing the stones,

which were found in our wharff. Inquiry was made after the removers;

we were discovered and complained of; several of us were corrected

by our fathers; and though I pleaded the usefulness of the work,

mine convinced me that nothing was useful which was not honest.

I think you may like to know something of his person and character.

He had an excellent constitution of body, was of middle stature,

but well set, and very strong; he was ingenious, could draw prettily,

was skilled a little in music, and had a clear pleasing voice,

so that when he played psalm tunes on his violin and sung withal,

as he sometimesdid in an evening after the business of the day was over,

it was extremely agreeable to hear. He had a mechanical genius too,

and, on occasion, was very handy in the use of other tradesmen’s tools;

but his great excellence lay in a sound understanding and solid

judgment in prudential matters, both in private and publick affairs.

In the latter, indeed, he was never employed, the numerous

family he had to educate and the straitness of his circumstances

keeping him close to his trade; but I remember well his being

frequently visited by leading people, who consulted him for his

opinion in affairs of the town or of the church he belonged to,

and showed a good deal of respect for his judgment and advice:

he was also much consulted by private persons about their affairs

when any difficulty occurred, and frequently chosen an arbitrator

between contending parties.

At his table he liked to have, as often as he could, some sensible

friend or neighbor to converse with, and always took care to start

some ingenious or useful topic for discourse, which might tend

to improve the minds of his children. By this means he turned

our attention to what was good, just, and prudent in the conduct

of life; and little or no notice was ever taken of what related

to the victuals on the table, whether it was well or ill dressed,

in or out of season, of good or bad flavor, preferable or inferior

to this or that other thing of the kind, so that I was bro’t up

in such a perfect inattention to those matters as to be quite

indifferent what kind of food was set before me, and so unobservant

of it, that to this day if I am asked I can scarce tell a few hours

after dinner what I dined upon. This has been a convenience to me

in travelling, where my companions have been sometimes very unhappy

for want of a suitable gratification of their more delicate,

because better instructed, tastes and appetites.

My mother had likewise an excellent constitution: she suckled

all her ten children. I never knew either my father or mother

to have any sickness but that of which they dy’d, he at 89,

and she at 85 years of age. They lie buried together at Boston,

where I some years since placed a marble over their grave,

with this inscription:

JOSIAH FRANKLIN,

and

ABIAH his Wife,

lie here interred.

They lived lovingly together in wedlock

fifty-five years.

Without an estate, or any gainful employment,

By constant labor and industry,

with God’s blessing,

They maintained a large family

comfortably,

and brought up thirteen children

and seven grandchildren

reputably.

From this instance, reader,

Be encouraged to diligence in thy calling,

And distrust not Providence.

He was a pious and prudent man;

She, a discreet and virtuous woman.

Their youngest son,

In filial regard to their memory,

Places this stone.

J.F. born 1655, died 1744, AEtat 89.

A.F. born 1667, died 1752, —– 95.

By my rambling digressions I perceive myself to be grown old.

I us’d to write more methodically. But one does not dress for private

company as for a publick ball. ‘Tis perhaps only negligence.

To return: I continued thus employed in my father’s business for

two years, that is, till I was twelve years old; and my brother John,

who was bred to that business, having left my father, married, and set

up for himself at Rhode Island, there was all appearance that I

was destined to supply his place, and become a tallow-chandler.

But my dislike to the trade continuing, my father was under

apprehensions that if he did not find one for me more agreeable,

I should break away and get to sea, as his son Josiah had done,

to his great vexation. He therefore sometimes took me to walk with him,

and see joiners, bricklayers, turners, braziers, etc., at their work,

that he might observe my inclination, and endeavor to fix it on some

trade or other on land. It has ever since been a pleasure to me

to see good workmen handle their tools; and it has been useful to me,

having learnt so much by it as to be able to do little jobs myself

in my house when a workman could not readily be got, and to construct

little machines for my experiments, while the intention of making

the experiment was fresh and warm in my mind. My father at last

fixed upon the cutler’s trade, and my uncle Benjamin’s son Samuel,

who was bred to that business in London, being about that time

established in Boston, I was sent to be with him some time on liking.

But his expectations of a fee with me displeasing my father,

I was taken home again.

From a child I was fond of reading, and all the little money

that came into my hands was ever laid out in books. Pleased with

the Pilgrim’s Progress, my first collection was of John Bunyan’s

works in separate little volumes. I afterward sold them to enable

me to buy R. Burton’s Historical Collections; they were small

chapmen’s books, and cheap, 40 or 50 in all. My father’s little

library consisted chiefly of books in polemic divinity, most of

which I read, and have since often regretted that, at a time when I

had such a thirst for knowledge, more proper books had not fallen

in my way since it was now resolved I should not be a clergyman.

Plutarch’s Lives there was in which I read abundantly, and I still

think that time spent to great advantage. There was also a book of De

Foe’s, called an Essay on Projects, and another of Dr. Mather’s,

called Essays to do Good, which perhaps gave me a turn of thinking

that had an influence on some of the principal future events of my life.

This bookish inclination at length determined my father to make me

a printer, though he had already one son (James) of that profession.

In 1717 my brother James returned from England with a press and

letters to set up his business in Boston. I liked it much better

than that of my father, but still had a hankering for the sea.

To prevent the apprehended effect of such an inclination, my father

was impatient to have me bound to my brother. I stood out some time,

but at last was persuaded, and signed the indentures when I was yet

but twelve years old. I was to serve as an apprentice till I was

twenty-one years of age, only I was to be allowed journeyman’s wages

during the last year. In a little time I made great proficiency

in the business, and became a useful hand to my brother. I now

had access to better books. An acquaintance with the apprentices

of booksellers enabled me sometimes to borrow a small one, which I

was careful to return soon and clean. Often I sat up in my room

reading the greatest part of the night, when the book was borrowed

in the evening and to be returned early in the morning, lest it

should be missed or wanted.

And after some time an ingenious tradesman, Mr. Matthew Adams, who had

a pretty collection of books, and who frequented our printing-house,

took notice of me, invited me to his library, and very kindly lent

me such books as I chose to read. I now took a fancy to poetry,

and made some little pieces; my brother, thinking it might turn

to account, encouraged me, and put me on composing occasional ballads.

One was called The Lighthouse Tragedy, and contained an account

of the drowning of Captain Worthilake, with his two daughters:

the other was a sailor’s song, on the taking of Teach (or Blackbeard)

the pirate. They were wretched stuff, in the Grub-street-ballad style;

and when they were printed he sent me about the town to sell them.

The first sold wonderfully, the event being recent, having made

a great noise. This flattered my vanity; but my father discouraged

me by ridiculing my performances, and telling me verse-makers

were generally beggars. So I escaped being a poet, most probably

a very bad one; but as prose writing bad been of great use to me

in the course of my life, and was a principal means of my advancement,

I shall tell you how, in such a situation, I acquired what little

ability I have in that way.

There was another bookish lad in the town, John Collins by name,

with whom I was intimately acquainted. We sometimes disputed,

and very fond we were of argument, and very desirous of confuting

one another, which disputatious turn, by the way, is apt to become

a very bad habit, making people often extremely disagreeable in company

by the contradiction that is necessary to bring it into practice;

and thence, besides souring and spoiling the conversation,

is productive of disgusts and, perhaps enmities where you may have

occasion for friendship. I had caught it by reading my father’s

books of dispute about religion. Persons of good sense, I have

since observed, seldom fall into it, except lawyers, university men,

and men of all sorts that have been bred at Edinborough.

A question was once, somehow or other, started between Collins

and me, of the propriety of educating the female sex in learning,

and their abilities for study. He was of opinion that it was improper,

and that they were naturally unequal to it. I took the contrary side,

perhaps a little for dispute’s sake. He was naturally more eloquent,

had a ready plenty of words; and sometimes, as I thought, bore me

down more by his fluency than by the strength of his reasons.

As we parted without settling the point, and were not to see one

another again for some time, I sat down to put my arguments in writing,

which I copied fair and sent to him. He answered, and I replied.

Three or four letters of a side had passed, when my father happened

to find my papers and read them. Without entering into the discussion,

he took occasion to talk to me about the manner of my writing;

observed that, though I had the advantage of my antagonist in correct

spelling and pointing (which I ow’d to the printing-house), I fell

far short in elegance of expression, in method and in perspicuity,

of which he convinced me by several instances. I saw the justice

of his remark, and thence grew more attentive to the manner in writing,

and determined to endeavor at improvement.

About this time I met with an odd volume of the Spectator.

It was the third. I had never before seen any of them. I bought it,

read it over and over, and was much delighted with it. I thought

the writing excellent, and wished, if possible, to imitate it.

With this view I took some of the papers, and, making short hints

of the sentiment in each sentence, laid them by a few days, and then,

without looking at the book, try’d to compleat the papers again,

by expressing each hinted sentiment at length, and as fully as it

had been expressed before, in any suitable words that should

come to hand. Then I compared my Spectator with the original,

discovered some of my faults, and corrected them. But I found I wanted

a stock of words, or a readiness in recollecting and using them,

which I thought I should have acquired before that time if I

had gone on making verses; since the continual occasion for words

of the same import, but of different length, to suit the measure,

or of different sound for the rhyme, would have laid me under a constant

necessity of searching for variety, and also have tended to fix

that variety in my mind, and make me master of it. Therefore I took

some of the tales and turned them into verse; and, after a time,

when I had pretty well forgotten the prose, turned them back again.

I also sometimes jumbled my collections of hints into confusion,

and after some weeks endeavored to reduce them into the best order,

before I began to form the full sentences and compleat the paper.

This was to teach me method in the arrangement of thoughts.

By comparing my work afterwards with the original, I discovered

many faults and amended them; but I sometimes had the pleasure

of fancying that, in certain particulars of small import,

I had been lucky enough to improve the method or the language,

and this encouraged me to think I might possibly in time come to be

a tolerable English writer, of which I was extremely ambitious.

My time for these exercises and for reading was at night,

after work or before it began in the morning, or on Sundays,

when I contrived to be in the printing-house alone, evading as much

as I could the common attendance on public worship which my father

used to exact on me when I was under his care, and which indeed

I still thought a duty, though I could not, as it seemed to me,

afford time to practise it.

When about 16 years of age I happened to meet with a book,

written by one Tryon, recommending a vegetable diet. I determined

to go into it. My brother, being yet unmarried, did not keep house,

but boarded himself and his apprentices in another family. My refusing

to eat flesh occasioned an inconveniency, and I was frequently chid

for my singularity. I made myself acquainted with Tryon’s manner

of preparing some of his dishes, such as boiling potatoes or rice,

making hasty pudding, and a few others, and then proposed to my brother,

that if he would give me, weekly, half the money he paid for my board,

I would board myself. He instantly agreed to it, and I presently

found that I could save half what he paid me. This was an additional

fund for buying books. But I had another advantage in it.

My brother and the rest going from the printing-house to their meals,

I remained there alone, and, despatching presently my light repast,

which often was no more than a bisket or a slice of bread, a handful

of raisins or a tart from the pastry-cook’s, and a glass of water,

had the rest of the time till their return for study, in which I

made the greater progress, from that greater clearness of head

and quicker apprehension which usually attend temperance in eating

and drinking.

And now it was that, being on some occasion made asham’d of my

ignorance in figures, which I had twice failed in learning when

at school, I took Cocker’s book of Arithmetick, and went through

the whole by myself with great ease. I also read Seller’s and

Shermy’s books of Navigation, and became acquainted with the little

geometry they contain; but never proceeded far in that science.

And I read about this time Locke On Human Understanding,

and the Art of Thinking, by Messrs. du Port Royal.

While I was intent on improving my language, I met with an English

grammar (I think it was Greenwood’s), at the end of which there were

two little sketches of the arts of rhetoric and logic, the latter

finishing with a specimen of a dispute in the Socratic method;

and soon after I procur’d Xenophon’s Memorable Things of Socrates,

wherein there are many instances of the same method. I was

charm’d with it, adopted it, dropt my abrupt contradiction and

positive argumentation, and put on the humble inquirer and doubter.

And being then, from reading Shaftesbury and Collins, become a real

doubter in many points of our religious doctrine, I found this method

safest for myself and very embarrassing to those against whom I used it;

therefore I took a delight in it, practis’d it continually, and grew

very artful and expert in drawing people, even of superior knowledge,

into concessions, the consequences of which they did not foresee,

entangling them in difficulties out of which they could not

extricate themselves, and so obtaining victories that neither myself

nor my cause always deserved. I continu’d this method some few years,

but gradually left it, retaining only the habit of expressing myself

in terms of modest diffidence; never using, when I advanced any thing

that may possibly be disputed, the words certainly, undoubtedly, or any

others that give the air of positiveness to an opinion; but rather say,

I conceive or apprehend a thing to be so and so; it appears to me,

or I should think it so or so, for such and such reasons;

or I imagine it to be so; or it is so, if I am not mistaken.

This habit, I believe, has been of great advantage to me when I

have had occasion to inculcate my opinions, and persuade men into

measures that I have been from time to time engag’d in promoting;

and, as the chief ends of conversation are to inform or to be informed,

to please or to persuade, I wish well-meaning, sensible men would

not lessen their power of doing good by a positive, assuming manner,

that seldom fails to disgust, tends to create opposition, and to

defeat every one of those purposes for which speech was given to us,

to wit, giving or receiving information or pleasure. For, if you

would inform, a positive and dogmatical manner in advancing your

sentiments may provoke contradiction and prevent a candid attention.

If you wish information and improvement from the knowledge of others,

and yet at the same time express yourself as firmly fix’d in your

present opinions, modest, sensible men, who do not love disputation,

will probably leave you undisturbed in the possession of your error.

And by such a manner, you can seldom hope to recommend yourself

in pleasing your hearers, or to persuade those whose concurrence

you desire. Pope says, judiciously:

"Men should be taught as if you taught them not,

And things unknown propos’d as things forgot;"

farther recommending to us

"To speak, tho’ sure, with seeming diffidence."

And he might have coupled with this line that which he has coupled

with another, I think, less properly,

"For want of modesty is want of sense."

If you ask, Why less properly? I must repeat the lines,

"Immodest words admit of no defense,

For want of modesty is want of sense."

Now, is not want of sense (where a man is so unfortunate as to want it)

some apology for his want of modesty? and would not the lines stand

more justly thus?

"Immodest words admit but this defense,

That want of modesty is want of sense."

This, however, I should submit to better judgments.

My brother had, in 1720 or 1721, begun to print a newspaper.

It was the second that appeared in America, and was called the New

England Courant. The only one before it was the Boston News-Letter. I

remember his being dissuaded by some of his friends from the undertaking,

as not likely to succeed, one newspaper being, in their judgment,

enough for America. At this time (1771) there are not less

than five-and-twenty. He went on, however, with the undertaking,

and after having worked in composing the types and printing off

the sheets, I was employed to carry the papers thro’ the streets

to the customers.

He had some ingenious men among his friends, who amus’d themselves

by writing little pieces for this paper, which gain’d it credit

and made it more in demand, and these gentlemen often visited us.

Hearing their conversations, and their accounts of the approbation their

papers were received with, I was excited to try my hand among them;

but, being still a boy, and suspecting that my brother would object

to printing anything of mine in his paper if he knew it to be mine,

I contrived to disguise my hand, and, writing an anonymous paper,

I put it in at night under the door of the printing-house. It was found

in the morning, and communicated to his writing friends when they

call’d in as usual. They read it, commented on it in my hearing, and I

had the exquisite pleasure of finding it met with their approbation,

and that, in their different guesses at the author, none were named

but men of some character among us for learning and ingenuity.

I suppose now that I was rather lucky in my judges, and that perhaps

they were not really so very good ones as I then esteem’d them.

Encourag’d, however, by this, I wrote and convey’d in the same way

to the press several more papers which were equally approv’d; and I

kept my secret till my small fund of sense for such performances was

pretty well exhausted and then I discovered it, when I began to be

considered a little more by my brother’s acquaintance, and in a manner

that did not quite please him, as he thought, probably with reason,

that it tended to make me too vain. And, perhaps, this might be one

occasion of the differences that we began to have about this time.

Though a brother, he considered himself as my master, and me

as his apprentice, and accordingly, expected the same services

from me as he would from another, while I thought he demean’d me

too much in some he requir’d of me, who from a brother expected

more indulgence. Our disputes were often brought before our father,

and I fancy I was either generally in the right, or else a

better pleader, because the judgment was generally in my favor.

But my brother was passionate, and had often beaten me, which I

took extreamly amiss; and, thinking my apprenticeship very tedious,

I was continually wishing for some opportunity of shortening it,

which at length offered in a manner unexpected.<3>

<3> I fancy his harsh and tyrannical treatment of me

might be a means of impressing me with that aversion

to arbitrary power that has stuck to me through my

whole life.

One of the pieces in our newspaper on some political point, which I

have now forgotten, gave offense to the Assembly. He was taken up,

censur’d, and imprison’d for a month, by the speaker’s warrant,

I suppose, because he would not discover his author. I too was taken

up and examin’d before the council; but, tho’ I did not give them

any satisfaction, they content’d themselves with admonishing me,

and dismissed me, considering me, perhaps, as an apprentice, who was

bound to keep his master’s secrets.

During my brother’s confinement, which I resented a good deal,

notwithstanding our private differences, I had the management

of the paper; and I made bold to give our rulers some rubs in it,

which my brother took very kindly, while others began to consider

me in an unfavorable light, as a young genius that had a turn

for libelling and satyr. My brother’s discharge was accompany’d

with an order of the House (a very odd one), that "James Franklin

should no longer print the paper called the New England Courant."

There was a consultation held in our printing-house among

his friends, what he should do in this case. Some proposed to

evade the order by changing the name of the paper; but my brother,

seeing inconveniences in that, it was finally concluded on as a

better way, to let it be printed for the future under the name

of BENJAMIN FRANKLIN; and to avoid the censure of the Assembly,

that might fall on him as still printing it by his apprentice,

the contrivance was that my old indenture should be return’d to me,

with a full discharge on the back of it, to be shown on occasion,

but to secure to him the benefit of my service, I was to sign new

indentures for the remainder of the term, which were to be kept private.

A very flimsy scheme it was; however, it was immediately executed,

and the paper went on accordingly, under my name for several months.

At length, a fresh difference arising between my brother and me,

I took upon me to assert my freedom, presuming that he would not

venture to produce the new indentures. It was not fair in me to

take this advantage, and this I therefore reckon one of the first

errata of my life; but the unfairness of it weighed little with me,

when under the impressions of resentment for the blows his passion

too often urged him to bestow upon me, though he was otherwise

not an ill-natur’d man: perhaps I was too saucy and provoking.

When he found I would leave him, he took care to prevent my getting

employment in any other printing-house of the town, by going round

and speaking to every master, who accordingly refus’d to give me work.

I then thought of going to New York, as the nearest place where

there was a printer; and I was rather inclin’d to leave Boston

when I reflected that I had already made myself a little obnoxious

to the governing party, and, from the arbitrary proceedings of the

Assembly in my brother’s case, it was likely I might, if I stay’d,

soon bring myself into scrapes; and farther, that my indiscrete

disputations about religion began to make me pointed at with horror

by good people as an infidel or atheist. I determin’d on the point,

but my father now siding with my brother, I was sensible that,

if I attempted to go openly, means would be used to prevent me.

My friend Collins, therefore, undertook to manage a little for me.

He agreed with the captain of a New York sloop for my passage,

under the notion of my being a young acquaintance of his, that had

got a naughty girl with child, whose friends would compel me to

marry her, and therefore I could not appear or come away publicly.

So I sold some of my books to raise a little money, was taken on

board privately, and as we had a fair wind, in three days I found

myself in New York, near 300 miles from home, a boy of but 17,

without the least recommendation to, or knowledge of any person in

the place, and with very little money in my pocket.

My inclinations for the sea were by this time worne out, or I

might now have gratify’d them. But, having a trade, and supposing

myself a pretty good workman, I offer’d my service to the printer

in the place, old Mr. William Bradford, who had been the first

printer in Pennsylvania, but removed from thence upon the quarrel

of George Keith. He could give me no employment, having little to do,

and help enough already; but says he, "My son at Philadelphia

has lately lost his principal hand, Aquila Rose, by death;

if you go thither, I believe he may employ you." Philadelphia was

a hundred miles further; I set out, however, in a boat for Amboy,

leaving my chest and things to follow me round by sea.

In crossing the bay, we met with a squall that tore our rotten sails

to pieces, prevented our getting into the Kill and drove us upon

Long Island. In our way, a drunken Dutchman, who was a passenger too,

fell overboard; when he was sinking, I reached through the water

to his shock pate, and drew him up, so that we got him in again.

His ducking sobered him a little, and he went to sleep, taking first

out of his pocket a book, which he desir’d I would dry for him.

It proved to be my old favorite author, Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress,

in Dutch, finely printed on good paper, with copper cuts, a dress better

than I had ever seen it wear in its own language. I have since found

that it has been translated into most of the languages of Europe,

and suppose it has been more generally read than any other book,

except perhaps the Bible. Honest John was the first that I know

of who mix’d narration and dialogue; a method of writing very engaging

to the reader, who in the most interesting parts finds himself,

as it were, brought into the company and present at the discourse.

De Foe in his Cruso, his Moll Flanders, Religious Courtship,

Family Instructor, and other pieces, has imitated it with success;

and Richardson has done the same, in his Pamela, etc.

When we drew near the island, we found it was at a place where there

could be no landing, there being a great surff on the stony beach.

So we dropt anchor, and swung round towards the shore. Some people

came down to the water edge and hallow’d to us, as we did to them;

but the wind was so high, and the surff so loud, that we could

not hear so as to understand each other. There were canoes on

the shore, and we made signs, and hallow’d that they should fetch us;

but they either did not understand us, or thought it impracticable,

so they went away, and night coming on, we had no remedy but to wait

till the wind should abate; and, in the meantime, the boatman and I

concluded to sleep, if we could; and so crowded into the scuttle,

with the Dutchman, who was still wet, and the spray beating over

the head of our boat, leak’d thro’ to us, so that we were soon

almost as wet as he. In this manner we lay all night, with very

little rest; but, the wind abating the next day, we made a shift

to reach Amboy before night, having been thirty hours on the water,

without victuals, or any drink but a bottle of filthy rum,

and the water we sail’d on being salt.

In the evening I found myself very feverish, and went in to bed;

but, having read somewhere that cold water drank plentifully was good

for a fever, I follow’d the prescription, sweat plentiful most of

the night, my fever left me, and in the morning, crossing the ferry,

I proceeded on my journey on foot, having fifty miles to Burlington,

where I was told I should find boats that would carry me the rest

of the way to Philadelphia.

It rained very hard all the day; I was thoroughly soak’d, and by noon

a good deal tired; so I stopt at a poor inn, where I staid all night,

beginning now to wish that I had never left home. I cut so miserable

a figure, too, that I found, by the questions ask’d me, I was

suspected to be some runaway servant, and in danger of being taken

up on that suspicion. However, I proceeded the next day, and got

in the evening to an inn, within eight or ten miles of Burlington,

kept by one Dr. Brown. He entered into conversation with me while I

took some refreshment, and, finding I had read a little, became very

sociable and friendly. Our acquaintance continu’d as long as he

liv’d. He had been, I imagine, an itinerant doctor, for there was no

town in England, or country in Europe, of which he could not give

a very particular account. He had some letters, and was ingenious,

but much of an unbeliever, and wickedly undertook, some years after,

to travestie the Bible in doggrel verse, as Cotton had done Virgil.

By this means he set many of the facts in a very ridiculous light,

and might have hurt weak minds if his work had been published;

but it never was.

At his house I lay that night, and the next morning reach’d Burlington,

but had the mortification to find that the regular boats were gone

a little before my coming, and no other expected to go before Tuesday,

this being Saturday; wherefore I returned to an old woman in the town,

of whom I had bought gingerbread to eat on the water, and ask’d

her advice. She invited me to lodge at her house till a passage

by water should offer; and being tired with my foot travelling,

I accepted the invitation. She understanding I was a printer,

would have had me stay at that town and follow my business,

being ignorant of the stock necessary to begin with. She was

very hospitable, gave me a dinner of ox-cheek with great good will,

accepting only a pot of ale in return; and I thought myself

fixed till Tuesday should come. However, walking in the evening

by the side of the river, a boat came by, which I found was going

towards Philadelphia, with several people in her. They took me in,

and, as there was no wind, we row’d all the way; and about midnight,

not having yet seen the city, some of the company were confident

we must have passed it, and would row no farther; the others knew

not where we were; so we put toward the shore, got into a creek,

landed near an old fence, with the rails of which we made a fire,

the night being cold, in October, and there we remained till daylight.

Then one of the company knew the place to be Cooper’s Creek, a little

above Philadelphia, which we saw as soon as we got out of the creek,

and arriv’d there about eight or nine o’clock on the Sunday morning,

and landed at the Market-street wharf.

I have been the more particular in this description of my journey,

and shall be so of my first entry into that city, that you may

in your mind compare such unlikely beginnings with the figure

I have since made there. I was in my working dress, my best

cloaths being to come round by sea. I was dirty from my journey;

my pockets were stuff’d out with shirts and stockings, and I

knew no soul nor where to look for lodging. I was fatigued

with travelling, rowing, and want of rest, I was very hungry;

and my whole stock of cash consisted of a Dutch dollar, and about

a shilling in copper. The latter I gave the people of the boat

for my passage, who at first refus’d it, on account of my rowing;

but I insisted on their taking it. A man being sometimes more

generous when he has but a little money than when he has plenty,

perhaps thro’ fear of being thought to have but little.

Then I walked up the street, gazing about till near the market-house

I met a boy with bread. I had made many a meal on bread, and,

inquiring where he got it, I went immediately to the baker’s

he directed me to, in Secondstreet, and ask’d for bisket,

intending such as we had in Boston; but they, it seems, were not

made in Philadelphia. Then I asked for a three-penny loaf,

and was told they had none such. So not considering or knowing

the difference of money, and the greater cheapness nor the names

of his bread, I made him give me three-penny worth of any sort.

He gave me, accordingly, three great puffy rolls. I was surpriz’d

at the quantity, but took it, and, having no room in my pockets,

walk’d off with a roll under each arm, and eating the other. Thus I

went up Market-street as far as Fourth-street, passing by the door

of Mr. Read, my future wife’s father; when she, standing at the door,

saw me, and thought I made, as I certainly did, a most awkward,

ridiculous appearance. Then I turned and went down Chestnut-street and

part of Walnut-street, eating my roll all the way, and, corning round,

found myself again at Market-street wharf, near the boat I came in,

to which I went for a draught of the river water; and, being filled

with one of my rolls, gave the other two to a woman and her child that

came down the river in the boat with us, and were waiting to go farther.

Thus refreshed, I walked again up the street, which by this time had

many clean-dressed people in it, who were all walking the same way.

I joined them, and thereby was led into the great meeting-house of

the Quakers near the market. I sat down among them, and, after looking

round awhile and hearing nothing said, being very drowsy thro’

labor and want of rest the preceding night, I fell fast asleep,

and continued so till the meeting broke up, when one was kind

enough to rouse me. This was, therefore, the first house I was in,

or slept in, in Philadelphia.

Walking down again toward the river, and, looking in the faces

of people, I met a young Quaker man, whose countenance I lik’d, and,

accosting him, requested he would tell me where a stranger could

get lodging. We were then near the sign of the Three Mariners.

"Here," says he, "is one place that entertains strangers, but it

is not a reputable house; if thee wilt walk with me, I’ll show thee

a better." He brought me to the Crooked Billet in Water-street. Here

I got a dinner; and, while I was eating it, several sly questions were

asked me, as it seemed to be suspected from my youth and appearance,

that I might be some runaway.

After dinner, my sleepiness return’d, and being shown to a bed,

I lay down without undressing, and slept till six in the evening,

was call’d to supper, went to bed again very early, and slept

soundly till next morning. Then I made myself as tidy as I could,

and went to Andrew Bradford the printer’s. I found in the shop

the old man his father, whom I had seen at New York, and who,

travelling on horseback, had got to Philadelphia before me.

He introduc’d me to his son, who receiv’d me civilly, gave me

a breakfast, but told me he did not at present want a hand,

being lately suppli’d with one; but there was another printer

in town, lately set up, one Keimer, who, perhaps, might employ me;

if not, I should be welcome to lodge at his house, and he would

give me a little work to do now and then till fuller business

should offer.

The old gentleman said he would go with me to the new printer;

and when we found him, "Neighbor," says Bradford, "I have brought

to see you a young man of your business; perhaps you may want such

a one." He ask’d me a few questions, put a composing stick in my

hand to see how I work’d, and then said he would employ me soon,

though he had just then nothing for me to do; and, taking old Bradford,

whom he had never seen before, to be one of the town’s people that

had a good will for him, enter’d into a conversation on his present

undertaking and projects; while Bradford, not discovering that he

was the other printer’s father, on Keimer’s saying he expected

soon to get the greatest part of the business into his own hands,

drew him on by artful questions, and starting little doubts,

to explain all his views, what interests he reli’d on, and in what

manner he intended to proceed. I, who stood by and heard all,

saw immediately that one of them was a crafty old sophister,

and the other a mere novice. Bradford left me with Keimer, who was

greatly surpris’d when I told him who the old man was.

Keimer’s printing-house, I found, consisted of an old shatter’d press,

and one small, worn-out font of English which he was then using himself,

composing an Elegy on Aquila Rose, before mentioned, an ingenious

young man, of excellent character, much respected in the town,

clerk of the Assembly, and a pretty poet. Keimer made verses too,

but very indifferently. He could not be said to write them, for his

manner was to compose them in the types directly out of his head.

So there being no copy, but one pair of cases, and the Elegy

likely to require all the letter, no one could help him.

I endeavor’d to put his press (which he had not yet us’d, and of

which he understood nothing) into order fit to be work’d with;

and, promising to come and print off his Elegy as soon as he

should have got it ready, I return’d to Bradford’s, who gave me

a little job to do for the present, and there I lodged and dieted,

A few days after, Keimer sent for me to print off the Elegy.

And now he had got another pair of cases, and a pamphlet to reprint,

on which he set me to work.

These two printers I found poorly qualified for their business.

Bradford had not been bred to it, and was very illiterate;

and Keimer, tho’ something of a scholar, was a mere compositor,

knowing nothing of presswork. He had been one of the French prophets,

and could act their enthusiastic agitations. At this time he did

not profess any particular religion, but something of all on occasion;

was very ignorant of the world, and had, as I afterward found,

a good deal of the knave in his composition. He did not like my

lodging at Bradford’s while I work’d with him. He had a house,

indeed, but without furniture, so he could not lodge me; but he got

me a lodging at Mr. Read’s, before mentioned, who was the owner

of his house; and, my chest and clothes being come by this time,

I made rather a more respectable a

In Future ?…

Salı, 06 Kasım 2007

In Future ?…

Cable tv is now being used only for tv channels. In future cable tv will grow up and be a great communication system about most of the things.

“Firstly we have to develop our system and make technique problems less. We are trying to add 26 more channels and we are trying to solute the electricity problem. Our aim is to spend more money to reach more people with better technology. We are planning to let people to choose what they want to watch. If we deal with tv companies every user will be able to watch what they want any time. Decoder problem has a solution too, if we deal with channels about this problem too, everybody will be able to watch every channel without a decoder. Finally, our greatest project includes all communication systems, we are planning to control telephones, internet, financial problems, shopping, video games, education, thief alarms, fire alarms and also electricity. Yes we do not have a system for doing these things but we have lots of engineers and they are working for this projects”.

However now it is on air in only some cities, cable tv coordinators have great projects for the future to be able in all cities and do more.

- 4 -

Uncollected Prose

Salı, 06 Kasım 2007

UNCOLLECTED PROSE

by Ralph Waldo Emerson

_The Lord’s Supper_

_The Editors to the Reader_

_Thoughts on Modern Literature_

_Two Years before the Mast._ A Personal Narrative of Life at

Sea.

_Social Destiny of Man: or Association and Reorganization of

Industry._

_Michael Angelo, considered as a Philosophic Poet, with

Translations._

_Essays and Poems_. By JONES VERY.

_Walter Savage Landor_

_Transcendentalism_

_The Senses and the Soul_

_Prayers_

_Fourierism and the Socialists_

_Chardon Street and Bible Conventions_

_Agriculture of Massachusetts_

_The Zincali: or an Account of the Gypsies of Spain.

_Ancient Spanish Ballads, Historical and Romantic.

_Tecumseh; a Poem_. By GEORGE H. COLTON.

_Intelligence_

_Harvard University_.

_English Reformers_

_Poems_. By ALFRED TENNYSON.

_A Letter to Rev. Wm. E. Channing, D. D._ By O. A. BROWNSON

_Europe and European Books_

_The Bible in Spain, or the Journeys, Adventures, and

Imprisonments of an Englishman in an attempt to circulate the

Scriptures in the Peninsula_.

_Past and Present_ By Thomas Carlyle.

_Antislavery Poems._ By JOHN PIERPONT. Boston: Oliver Johnson. 1843.

_Sonnets and other Poems._ By WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON.

_America — an Ode; and other Poems._ By N. W. COFFIN.

_Poems by_ WILLIAM ELLERY CHANNING.

_A Letter_

_The Huguenots in France and America_

_The Spanish Student. A Play in Three Acts_. By H. W. Longfellow.

_The Dream of a Day, and other Poems_. By JAMES G. PERCIVAL.

_The Tragic_

——————————————

_The Lord’s Supper_

The Kingdom of God is not meat and drink, but righteousness,

and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. — ROMANS XIV. 17.

In the history of the Church no subject has been more fruitful

of controversy than the Lord’s Supper. There never has been any

unanimity in the understanding of its nature, nor any uniformity in

the mode of celebrating it. Without considering the frivolous

questions which have been lately debated as to the posture in which

men should partake of it; whether mixed or unmixed wine should be

served; whether leavened or unleavened bread should be broken; the

questions have been settled differently in every church, who should

be admitted to the feast, and how often it should be prepared. In

the Catholic Church, infants were at one time permitted and then

forbidden to partake; and, since the ninth century, the laity receive

the bread only, the cup being reserved to the priesthood. So, as to

the time of the solemnity. In the fourth Lateran Council, it was

decreed that any believer should communicate at least once in a year

– at Easter. Afterwards it was determined that this Sacrament

should be received three times in the year — at Easter, Whitsuntide,

and Christmas. But more important controversies have arisen

respecting its nature. The famous question of the Real Presence was

the main controversy between the Church of England and the Church of

Rome. The doctrine of the Consubstantiation taught by Luther was

denied by Calvin. In the Church of England, Archbishops Laud and

Wake maintained that the elements were an Eucharist or sacrifice of

Thanksgiving to God; Cudworth and Warburton, that this was not a

sacrifice, but a sacrificial feast; and Bishop Hoadley, that it was

neither a sacrifice nor a feast after sacrifice, but a simple

commemoration. And finally, it is now near two hundred years since

the Society of Quakers denied the authority of the rite altogether,

and gave good reasons for disusing it.

I allude to these facts only to show that, so far from the

supper being a tradition in which men are fully agreed, there always

been the widest room for difference of opinion upon this particular.

Having recently given particular attention to this subject, I

was led to the conclusion that Jesus did not intend to establish an

institution for perpetual observance when he ate the Passover with

his disciples; and, further, to the opinion, that it is not expedient

to celebrate it as we do. I shall now endeavor to state distinctly

my reasons for these two opinions.

I. The authority of the rite.

An account of the last supper of Christ with his disciples is

given by the four Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

In St. Matthew’s Gospel (Matt. XXVI. 26-30) are recorded the

words of Jesus in giving bread and wine on that occasion to his

disciples, but no expression occurs intimating that this feast was

hereafter to be commemorated.

In St. Mark (Mark XIV. 23) the same words are recorded, and

still with no intimation that the occasion was to be remembered.

St. Luke (Luke XXII. 15), after relating the breaking of the

bread, has these words: This do in remembrance of me.

In St. John, although other occurrences of the same evening are

related, this whole transaction is passed over without notice.

Now observe the facts. Two of the Evangelists, namely, Matthew

and John, were of the twelve disciples, and were present on that

occasion. Neither of them drops the slightest intimation of any

intention on the part of Jesus to set up anything permanent. John,

especially, the beloved disciple, who has recorded with minuteness

the conversation and the transactions of that memorable evening, has

quite omitted such a notice. Neither does it appear to have come to

the knowledge of Mark who, though not an eye-witness, relates the

other facts. This material fact, that the occasion was to be

remembered, is found in Luke alone, who was not present. There is no

reason, however, that we know, for rejecting the account of Luke. I

doubt not, the expression was used by Jesus. I shall presently

consider its meaning. I have only brought these accounts together,

that you may judge whether it is likely that a solemn institution, to

be continued to the end of time by all mankind, as they should come,

nation after nation, within the influence of the Christian religion,

would have been established in this slight manner — in a manner so

slight, that the intention of commemorating it should not appear,

from their narrative, to have caught the ear or dwelt in the mind of

the only two among the twelve who wrote down what happened.

Still we must suppose that the expression, _"This do in

remembrance of me,"_ had come to the ear of Luke from some disciple

who was present. What did it really signify? It is a prophetic and

an affectionate expression. Jesus is a Jew, sitting with his

countrymen, celebrating their national feast. He thinks of his own

impending death, and wishes the minds of his disciples to be prepared

for it. "When hereafter," he says to them, "you shall keep the

Passover, it will have an altered aspect to your eyes. It is now a

historical covenant of God with the Jewish nation. Hereafter, it

will remind you of a new covenant sealed with my blood. In years to

come, as long as your people shall come up to Jerusalem to keep this

feast, the connection which has subsisted between us will give a new

meaning in your eyes to the national festival, as the anniversary of

my death." I see natural feeling and beauty in the use of such

language from Jesus, a friend to his friends; I can readily imagine

that he was willing and desirous, when his disciples met, his memory

should hallow their intercourse; but I cannot bring myself to believe

that in the use of such an expression he looked beyond the living

generation, beyond the abolition of the festival he was celebrating,

and the scattering of the nation, and meant to impose a memorial

feast upon the whole world.

Without presuming to fix precisely the purpose in the mind of

Jesus, you will see that many opinions may be entertained of his

intention, all consistent with the opinion that he did not design a

perpetual ordinance. He may have foreseen that his disciples would

meet to remember him, and that with good effect. It may have crossed

his mind that this would be easily continued a hundred or a thousand

years — as men more easily transmit a form than a virtue — and yet

have been altogether out of his purpose to fasten it upon men in all

times and all countries.

But though the words, _Do this in remembrance of me_, do occur

in Matthew, Mark, or John, and although it should be granted us that,

taken alone, they do not necessarily import so much as is usually

thought, yet many persons are apt to imagine that the very striking

and personal manner in which this eating and drinking is described,

indicates a striking and formal purpose to found a festival. And I

admit that this impression might probably be left upon the mind of

one who read only the passages under consideration in the New

Testament. But this impression is removed by reading any narrative

of the mode in which the ancient or the modern Jews have kept the

Passover. It is then perceived that the leading circumstances in the

Gospels are only a faithful account of that ceremony. Jesus did not

celebrate the Passover, and afterwards the Supper, but the Supper

_was_ the Passover. He did with his disciples exactly what every

master of a family in Jerusalem was doing at the same hour with his

household. It appears that the Jews ate the lamb and the unleavened

bread, and drank wine after a prescribed manner. It was the custom

for the master of the feast to break the bread and to bless it, using

this formula, which the Talmudists have preserved to us, "Blessed be

Thou, O Lord our God, the King of the world, who hast produced this

food from the earth," — and to give it to every one at the table.

It was the custom of the master of the family to take the cup which

contained the wine, and to bless it, saying, "Blessed be Thou, O

Lord, who givest us the fruit of the vine," — and then to give the

cup to all. Among the modern Jews who in their dispersion retain the

Passover, a hymn is also sung after this ceremony, specifying the

twelve great works done by God for the deliverance of their fathers

out of Egypt.

But still it may be asked, why did Jesus make expressions so

extraordinary and emphatic as these — "This is my body which is

broken for you. Take; eat. This is my blood which is shed for you.

Drink it." — I reply they are not extraordinary expressions from

him. They were familiar in his mouth. He always taught by parables

and symbols. It was the national way of teaching and was largely

used by him. Remember the readiness which he always showed to

spiritualize every occurrence. He stooped and wrote on the sand. He

admonished his disciples respecting the leaven of the Pharisees. He

instructed the woman of Samaria respecting living water. He

permitted himself to be anointed, declaring that it was for his

interment. He washed the feet of his disciples. These are admitted

to be symbolical actions and expressions. Here, in like manner, he

calls the bread his body, and bids the disciples eat. He had used

the same expression repeatedly before. The reason why St. John does

not repeat his words on this occasion, seems to be that he had

reported a similar discourse of Jesus to the people of Capernaum more

at length already (John VI. 27). He there tells the Jews, "Except

ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, ye have no

life in you." And when the Jews on that occasion complained that they

did not comprehend what he meant, he added for their better

understanding, and as if for our understanding, that we might not

think his body was to be actually eaten, that he only meant, _we

should live by his commandment_. He closed his discourse with these

explanatory expressions: "The flesh profiteth nothing; the _words_

that I speak to you, they are spirit and they are life."

Whilst I am upon this topic, I cannot help remarking that it is

not a little singular that we should have preserved this rite and

insisted upon perpetuating one symbolical act of Christ whilst we

have totally neglected all others — particularly one other which had

at least an equal claim to our observance. Jesus washed the feet of

his disciples and told them that, as he had washed their feet, they

ought to wash one another’s feet; for he had given them an example,

that they should do as he had done to them. I ask any person who

believes the Supper to have been designed by Jesus to be commemorated

forever, to go and read the account of it in the other Gospels, and

then compare with it the account of this transaction in St. John, and

tell me if this be not much more explicitly authorized than the

Supper. It only differs in this, that we have found the Supper used

in New England and the washing of the feet not. But if we had found

it an established rite in our churches, on grounds of mere authority,

it would have been impossible to have argued against it. That rite

is used by the Church of Rome, and by the Sandemanians. It has been

very properly dropped by other Christians. Why? For two reasons:

(1) because it was a local custom, and unsuitable in western

countries; and (2) because it was typical, and all understand that

humility is the thing signified. But the Passover was local too, and

does not concern us, and its bread and wine were typical, and do not

help us to understand the redemption which they signified.

These views of the original account of the Lord’s Supper lead

me to esteem it an occasion full of solemn and prophetic interest,

but never intended by Jesus to be the foundation of a perpetual

institution.

It appears however in Christian history that the disciples had

very early taken advantage of these impressive words of Christ to

hold religious meetings, where they broke bread and drank wine as

symbols.

I look upon this fact as very natural in the circumstances of

the church. The disciples lived together; they threw all their

property into a common stock; they were bound together by the memory

of Christ, and nothing could be more natural than that this eventful

evening should be affectionately remembered by them; that they, Jews

like Jesus, should adopt his expressions and his types, and

furthermore, that what was done with peculiar propriety by them, his

personal friends, with less propriety should come to be extended to

their companions also. In this way religious feasts grew up among

the early Christians. They were readily adopted by the Jewish

converts who were familiar with religious feasts, and also by the

Pagan converts whose idolatrous worship had been made up of sacred

festivals, and who very readily abused these to gross riot, as

appears from the censures of St. Paul. Many persons consider this

fact, the observance of such a memorial feast by the early disciples,

decisive of the question whether it ought to be observed by us. For

my part I see nothing to wonder at in its originating with them; all

that is surprising is that it should exist among us. There was good

reason for his personal friends to remember their friend and repeat

his words. It was only too probable that among the half converted

Pagans and Jews, any rite, any form, would find favor, whilst yet

unable to comprehend the spiritual character of Christianity.

The circumstance, however, that St. Paul adopts these views,

has seemed to many persons conclusive in favor of the institution. I

am of opinion that it is wholly upon the epistle to the Corinthians,

and not upon the Gospels, that the ordinance stands. Upon this

matter of St. Paul’s view of the Supper, a few important

considerations must be stated.

The end which he has in view, in the eleventh chapter of the

first epistle is, not to enjoin upon his friends to observe the

Supper, but to censure their abuse of it. _We_ quote the passage

now-a-days as if it enjoined attendance upon the Supper; but he wrote

it merely to chide them for drunkenness. To make their enormity

plainer he goes back to the origin of this religious feast to show

what sort of feast that was, out of which this riot of theirs came,

and so relates the transactions of the Last Supper. _"I have

received of the Lord,"_ he says, _"that which I delivered to you."_

By this expression it is often thought that a miraculous

communication is implied; but certainly without good reason, if it is

remembered that St. Paul was living in the lifetime of all the

apostles who could give him an account of the transaction; and it is

contrary to all reason to suppose that God should work a miracle to

convey information that could so easily be got by natural means. So

that the import of the expression is that he had received the story

of an eye-witness such as we also possess.

But there is a material circumstance which diminishes our

confidence in the correctness of the Apostle’s view; and that is, the

observation that his mind had not escaped the prevalent error of the

primitive church, the belief, namely, that the second coming of

Christ would shortly occur, until which time, he tells them, this

feast was to be kept. Elsewhere he tells them, that, at that time

the world would be burnt up with fire, and a new government

established, in which the Saints would sit on thrones; so slow were

the disciples during the life, and after the ascension of Christ, to

receive the idea which we receive, that his second coming was a

spiritual kingdom, the dominion of his religion in the hearts of men,

to be extended gradually over the whole world.

In this manner we may see clearly enough how this ancient

ordinance got its footing among the early Christians, and this single

expectation of a speedy reappearance of a temporal Messiah, which

kept its influence even over so spiritual a man as St. Paul, would

naturally tend to preserve the use of the rite when once established.

We arrive then at this conclusion, _first_, that it does not

appear, from a careful examination of the account of the Last Supper

in the Evangelists, that it was designed by Jesus to be perpetual;

_secondly_, that it does not appear that the opinion of St. Paul, all

things considered, ought to alter our opinion derived from the

evangelists.

One general remark before quitting this branch of the subject.

We ought to be cautious in taking even the best ascertained opinions

and practices of the primitive church, for our own. If it could be

satisfactorily shown that they esteemed it authorized and to be

transmitted forever, that does not settle the question for us. We

know how inveterately they were attached to their Jewish prejudices,

and how often even the influence of Christ failed to enlarge their

views. On every other subject succeeding times have learned to form

a judgment more in accordance with the spirit of Christianity than

was the practice of the early ages.

But it is said: "Admit that the rite was not designed to be

perpetual. What harm doth it? Here it stands, generally accepted,

under some form, by the Christian world, the undoubted occasion of

much good; is it not better it should remain?"

II. This is the question of expediency.

I proceed to state a few objections that in my judgment lie

against its use in its present form.

1. If the view which I have taken of the history of the

institution be correct, then the claim of authority should be dropped

in administering it. You say, every time you celebrate the rite,

that Jesus enjoined it; and the whole language you use conveys that

impression. But if you read the New Testament as I do, you do not

believe he did.

2. It has seemed to me that the use of this ordinance tends to

produce confusion in our views of the relation of the soul to God.

It is the old objection to the doctrine of the Trinity, — that the

true worship was transferred from God to Christ, or that such

confusion was introduced into the soul, that an undivided worship was

given nowhere. Is not that the effect of the Lord’s Supper? I

appeal now to the convictions of communicants — and ask such persons

whether they have not been occasionally conscious of a painful

confusion of thought between the worship due to God and the

commemoration due to Christ. For, the service does not stand upon

the basis of a voluntary act, but is imposed by authority. It is an

expression of gratitude to Christ, enjoined by Christ. There is an

endeavor to keep Jesus in mind, whilst yet the prayers are addressed

to God. I fear it is the effect of this ordinance to clothe Jesus

with an authority which he never claimed and which distracts the mind

of the worshipper. I know our opinions differ much respecting the

nature and offices of Christ, and the degree of veneration to which

he is entitled. I am so much a Unitarian as this: that I believe the

human mind cannot admit but one God, and that every effort to pay

religious homage to more than one being, goes to take away all right

ideas. I appeal, brethren, to your individual experience. In the

moment when you make the least petition to God, though it be but a

silent wish that he may approve you, or add one moment to your life,

– do you not, in the very act, necessarily exclude all other beings

from your thought? In that act, the soul stands alone with God, and

Jesus is no more present to the mind than your brother or your child.

But is not Jesus called in Scripture the Mediator? He is the

mediator in that only sense in which possibly any being can mediate

between God and man — that is an Instructor of man. He teaches us

how to become like God. And a true disciple of Jesus will receive

the light he gives most thankfully; but the thanks he offers, and

which an exalted being will accept, are not _compliments_ –

commemorations, — but the use of that instruction.

3. Passing other objections, I come to this, that the _use of

the elements_, however suitable to the people and the modes of

thought in the East, where it originated, is foreign and unsuited to

affect us. Whatever long usage and strong association may have done

in some individuals to deaden this repulsion, I apprehend that their

use is rather tolerated than loved by any of us. We are not

accustomed to express our thoughts or emotions by symbolical actions.

Most men find the bread and wine no aid to devotion and to some, it

is a painful impediment. To eat bread is one thing; to love the

precepts of Christ and resolve to obey them is quite another.

The statement of this objection leads me to say that I think

this difficulty, wherever it is felt, to be entitled to the greatest

weight. It is alone a sufficient objection to the ordinance. It is

my own objection. This mode of commemorating Christ is not suitable

to me. That is reason enough why I should abandon it. If I believed

that it was enjoined by Jesus on his disciples, and that he even

contemplated making permanent this mode of commemoration, every way

agreeable to an eastern mind, and yet, on trial, it was disagreeable

to my own feelings, I should not adopt it. I should choose other

ways which, as more effectual upon me, he would approve more. For I

choose that my remembrances of him should be pleasing, affecting,

religious. I will love him as a glorified friend, after the free way

of friendship, and not pay him a stiff sign of respect, as men do to

those whom they fear. A passage read from his discourses, a moving

provocation to works like his, any act or meeting which tends to

awaken a pure thought, a flow of love, an original design of virtue,

I call a worthy, a true commemoration.

4. Fourthly, the importance ascribed to this particular

ordinance is not consistent with the spirit of Christianity. The

general object and effect of this ordinance is unexceptionable. It

has been, and is, I doubt not, the occasion of indefinite good; but

an importance is given by Christians to it which never can belong to

any form. My friends, the apostle well assures us that "the kingdom

of God is not meat and drink, but righteousness and peace and joy, in

the Holy Ghost." I am not so foolish as to declaim against forms.

Forms are as essential as bodies; but to exalt particular forms, to

adhere to one form a moment after it is out-grown, is unreasonable,

and it is alien to the spirit of Christ. If I understand the

distinction of Christianity, the reason why it is to be preferred

over all other systems and is divine is this, that it is a moral

system; that it presents men with truths which are their own reason,

and enjoins practices that are their own justification; that if

miracles may be said to have been its evidence to the first

Christians, they are not its evidence to us, but the doctrines

themselves; that every practice is Christian which praises itself,

and every practice unchristian which condemns itself. I am not

engaged to Christianity by decent forms, or saving ordinances; it is

not usage, it is not what I do not understand, that binds me to it –

let these be the sandy foundations of falsehoods. What I revere and

obey in it is its reality, its boundless charity, its deep interior

life, the rest it gives to my mind, the echo it returns to my

thoughts, the perfect accord it makes with my reason through all its

representation of God and His Providence; and the persuasion and

courage that come out thence to lead me upward and onward. Freedom

is the essence of this faith. It has for its object simply to make

men good and wise. Its institutions, then, should be as flexible as

the wants of men. That form out of which the life and suitableness

have departed, should be as worthless in its eyes as the dead leaves

that are falling around us.

And therefore, although for the satisfaction of others, I have

labored to show by the history that this rite was not intended to be

perpetual; although I have gone back to weigh the expressions of

Paul, I feel that here is the true point of view. In the midst of

considerations as to what Paul thought, and why he so thought, I

cannot help feeling that it is time misspent to argue to or from his

convictions, or those of Luke and John, respecting any form. I seem

to lose the substance in seeking the shadow. That for which Paul

lived and died so gloriously; that for which Jesus gave himself to be

crucified; the end that animated the thousand martyrs and heroes who

have followed his steps, was to redeem us from a formal religion, and

teach us to seek our well-being in the formation of the soul. The

whole world was full of idols and ordinances. The Jewish was a

religion of forms. The Pagan was a religion of forms; it was all

body — it had no life — and the Almighty God was pleased to qualify

and send forth a man to teach men that they must serve him with the

heart; that only that life was religious which was thoroughly good;

that sacrifice was smoke, and forms were shadows. This man lived and

died true to this purpose; and now, with his blessed word and life

before us, Christians must contend that it is a matter of vital

importance — really a duty, to commemorate him by a certain form,

whether that form be agreeable to their understandings or not.

Is not this to make vain the gift of God? Is not this to turn

back the hand on the dial? Is not this to make men — to make

ourselves — forget that not forms, but duties; not names, but

righteousness and love are enjoined; and that in the eye of God there

is no other measure of the value of any one form than the measure of

its use?

There remain some practical objections to the ordinance into

which I shall not now enter. There is one on which I had intended to

say a few words; I mean the unfavorable relation in which it places

that numerous class of persons who abstain from it merely from

disinclination to the rite.

Influenced by these considerations, I have proposed to the

brethren of the Church to drop the use of the elements and the claim

of authority in the administration of this ordinance, and have

suggested a mode in which a meeting for the same purpose might be

held free of objection.

My brethren have considered my views with patience and candor,

and have recommended unanimously an adherence to the present form. I

have, therefore, been compelled to consider whether it becomes me to

administer it. I am clearly of opinion I ought not. This discourse

has already been so far extended, that I can only say that the reason

of my determination is shortly this: — It is my desire, in the

office of a Christian minister, to do nothing which I cannot do with

my whole heart. Having said this, I have said all. I have no

hostility to this institution; I am only stating my want of sympathy

with it. Neither should I ever have obtruded this opinion upon other

people, had I not been called by my office to administer it. That is

the end of my opposition, that I am not interested in it. I am

content that it stand to the end of the world, if it please men and

please heaven, and I shall rejoice in all the good it produces.

As it is the prevailing opinion and feeling in our religious

community, that it is an indispensable part of the pastoral office to

administer this ordinance, I am about to resign into your hands that

office which you have confided to me. It has many duties for which I

am feebly qualified. It has some which it will always be my delight

to discharge, according to my ability, wherever I exist. And whilst

the recollection of its claims oppresses me with a sense of my

unworthiness, I am consoled by the hope that no time and no change

can deprive me of the satisfaction of pursuing and exercising its

highest functions.

September 9, 1832.

ESSAYS FROM "THE DIAL"

_The Editors to the Reader_

We invite the attention of our countrymen to a new design.

Probably not quite unexpected or unannounced will our Journal appear,

though small pains have been taken to secure its welcome. Those, who

have immediately acted in editing the present Number, cannot accuse

themselves of any unbecoming forwardness in their undertaking, but

rather of a backwardness, when they remember how often in many

private circles the work was projected, how eagerly desired, and only

postponed because no individual volunteered to combine and

concentrate the free-will offerings of many cooperators. With some

reluctance the present conductors of this work have yielded

themselves to the wishes of their friends, finding something sacred

and not to be withstood in the importunity which urged the production

of a Journal in a new spirit.

As they have not proposed themselves to the work, neither can

they lay any the least claim to an option or determination of the

spirit in which it is conceived, or to what is peculiar in the

design. In that respect, they have obeyed, though with great joy,

the strong current of thought and feeling, which, for a few years

past, has led many sincere persons in New England to make new demands

on literature, and to reprobate that rigor of our conventions of

religion and education which is turning us to stone, which renounces

hope, which looks only backward, which asks only such a future as the

past, which suspects improvement, and holds nothing so much in horror

as new views and the dreams of youth.

With these terrors the conductors of the present Journal have

nothing to do, — not even so much as a word of reproach to waste.

They know that there is a portion of the youth and of the adult

population of this country, who have not shared them; who have in

secret or in public paid their vows to truth and freedom; who love

reality too well to care for names, and who live by a Faith too

earnest and profound to suffer them to doubt the eternity of its

object, or to shake themselves free from its authority. Under the

fictions and customs which occupied others, these have explored the

Necessary, the Plain, the True, the Human, — and so gained a vantage

ground, which commands the history of the past and the present.

No one can converse much with different classes of society in

New England, without remarking the progress of a revolution. Those

who share in it have no external organization, no badge, no creed, no

name. They do not vote, or print, or even meet together. They do

not know each other’s faces or names. They are united only in a

common love of truth, and love of its work. They are of all

conditions and constitutions. Of these acolytes, if some are happily

born and well bred, many are no doubt ill dressed, ill placed, ill

made — with as many scars of hereditary vice as other men. Without

pomp, without trumpet, in lonely and obscure places, in solitude, in

servitude, in compunctions and privations, trudging beside the team

in the dusty road, or drudging a hireling in other men’s cornfields,

schoolmasters, who teach a few children rudiments for a pittance,

ministers of small parishes of the obscurer sects, lone women in

dependent condition, matrons and young maidens, rich and poor,

beautiful and hard-favored, without concert or proclamation of any

kind, they have silently given in their several adherence to a new

hope, and in all companies do signify a greater trust in the nature

and resources of man, than the laws or the popular opinions will well

allow.

This spirit of the time is felt by every individual with some

difference, — to each one casting its light upon the objects nearest

to his temper and habits of thought; — to one, coming in the shape

of special reforms in the state; to another, in modifications of the

various callings of men, and the customs of business; to a third,

opening a new scope for literature and art; to a fourth, in

philosophical insight; to a fifth, in the vast solitudes of prayer.

It is in every form a protest against usage, and a search for

principles. In all its movements, it is peaceable, and in the very

lowest marked with a triumphant success. Of course, it rouses the

opposition of all which it judges and condemns, but it is too

confident in its tone to comprehend an objection, and so builds no

outworks for possible defence against contingent enemies. It has the

step of Fate, and goes on existing like an oak or a river, because it

must.

In literature, this influence appears not yet in new books so

much as in the higher tone of criticism. The antidote to all

narrowness is the comparison of the record with nature, which at once

shames the record and stimulates to new attempts. Whilst we look at

this, we wonder how any book has been thought worthy to be preserved.

There is somewhat in all life untranslatable into language. He who

keeps his eye on that will write better than others, and think less

of his writing, and of all writing. Every thought has a certain

imprisoning as well as uplifting quality, and, in proportion to its

energy on the will, refuses to become an object of intellectual

contemplation. Thus what is great usually slips through our fingers,

and it seems wonderful how a lifelike word ever comes to be written.

If our Journal share the impulses of the time, it cannot now

prescribe its own course. It cannot foretell in orderly propositions

what it shall attempt. All criticism should be poetic;

unpredictable; superseding, as every new thought does, all foregone

thoughts, and making a new light on the whole world. Its brow is not

wrinkled with circumspection, but serene, cheerful, adoring. It has

all things to say, and no less than all the world for its final

audience.

Our plan embraces much more than criticism; were it not so, our

criticism would be naught. Everything noble is directed on life, and

this is. We do not wish to say pretty or curious things, or to

reiterate a few propositions in varied forms, but, if we can, to give

expression to that spirit which lifts men to a higher platform,

restores to them the religious sentiment, brings them worthy aims and

pure pleasures, purges the inward eye, makes life less desultory,

and, through raising man to the level of nature, takes away its

melancholy from the landscape, and reconciles the practical with the

speculative powers.

But perhaps we are telling our little story too gravely. There

are always great arguments at hand for a true action, even for the

writing of a few pages. There is nothing but seems near it and

prompts it, — the sphere in the ecliptic, the sap in the apple tree,

– every fact, every appearance seem to persuade to it.

Our means correspond with the ends we have indicated. As we

wish not to multiply books, but to report life, our resources are

therefore not so much the pens of practised writers, as the discourse

of the living, and the portfolios which friendship has opened to us.

From the beautiful recesses of private thought; from the experience

and hope of spirits which are withdrawing from all old forms, and

seeking in all that is new somewhat to meet their inappeasable

longings; from the secret confession of genius afraid to trust itself

to aught but sympathy; from the conversation of fervid and mystical

pietists; from tear-stained diaries of sorrow and passion; from the

manuscripts of young poets; and from the records of youthful taste

commenting on old works of art; we hope to draw thoughts and

feelings, which being alive can impart life.

And so with diligent hands and good intent we set down our Dial

on the earth. We wish it may resemble that instrument in its

celebrated happiness, that of measuring no hours but those of

sunshine. Let it be one cheerful rational voice amidst the din of

mourners and polemics. Or to abide by our chosen image, let it be

such a Dial, not as the dead face of a clock, hardly even such as the

Gnomon in a garden, but rather such a Dial as is the Garden itself,

in whose leaves and flowers and fruits the suddenly awakened sleeper

is instantly apprised not what part of dead time, but what state of

life and growth is now arrived and arriving.

_Thoughts on Modern Literature_

There is no better illustration of the laws by which the world

is governed than Literature. There is no luck in it. It proceeds by

Fate. Every scripture is given by the inspiration of God. Every

composition proceeds out of a greater or less depth of thought, and

this is the measure of its effect. The highest class of books are

those which express the moral element; the next, works of

imagination; and the next, works of science; — all dealing in

realities, — what ought to be, what is, and what appears. These, in

proportion to the truth and beauty they involve, remain; the rest

perish. They proceed out of the silent living mind to be heard again

by the living mind. Of the best books it is hardest to write the

history. Those books which are for all time are written

indifferently at any time. For high genius is a day without night, a

Caspian Ocean which hath no tides. And yet is literature in some

sort a creature of time. Always the oracular soul is the source of

thought, but always the occasion is administered by the low

mediations of circumstance. Religion, Love, Ambition, War, some

fierce antagonism, or it may be, some petty annoyance must break the

round of perfect circulation, or no spark, no joy, no event can be.

The poet rambling through the fields or the forest, absorbed in

contemplation to that degree, that his walk is but a pretty dream,

would never awake to precise thought, if the scream of an eagle, the

cries of a crow or curlew near his head did not break the sweet

continuity. Nay the finest lyrics of the poet come of this unequal

parentage; the imps of matter beget such child on the soul, fair

daughter of God. Nature mixes facts with thoughts to yield a poem.

But the gift of immortality is of the mother’s side. In the spirit

in which they are written is the date of their duration, and never in

the magnitude of the facts. Everything lasts in proportion to its

beauty. In proportion as it was not polluted by any wilfulness of

the writer, but flowed from his mind after the divine order of cause

and effect, it was not his but nature’s, and shared the sublimity of

the sea and sky. That which is truly told, nature herself takes in

charge against the whims and injustice of men. For ages, Herodotus

was reckoned a credulous gossip in his descriptions of Africa, and

now the sublime silent desert testifies through the mouths of Bruce,

Lyons, Caillaud, Burckhardt, Belzoni, to the truth of the calumniated

historian.

And yet men imagine that books are dice, and have no merit in

their fortune; that the trade and the favor of a few critics can get

one book into circulation, and defeat another; and that in the

production of these things the author has chosen and may choose to do

thus and so. Society also wishes to assign subjects and methods to

its writers. But neither reader nor author may intermeddle. You

cannot reason at will in this and that other vein, but only as you

must. You cannot make quaint combinations, and bring to the crucible

and alembic of truth things far fetched or fantastic or popular, but

your method and your subject are foreordained in all your nature, and

in all nature, or ever the earth was, or it has no worth. All that

gives currency still to any book, advertised in the morning’s

newspaper in London or Boston, is the remains of faith in the breast

of men that not adroit book makers, but the inextinguishable soul of

the universe reports of itself in articulate discourse to-day as of

old. The ancients strongly expressed their sense of the

unmanageableness of these words of the spirit by saying, that the God

made his priest insane, took him hither and thither as leaves are

whirled by the tempest. But we sing as we are bid. Our inspirations

are very manageable and tame. Death and sin have whispered in the

ear of the wild horse of Heaven, and he has become a dray and a hack.

And step by step with the entrance of this era of ease and

convenience, the belief in the proper Inspiration of man has

departed.

Literary accomplishments, skill in grammar and rhetoric,

knowledge of books, can never atone for the want of things which

demand voice. Literature is a poor trick when it busies itself to

make words pass for things. The most original book in the world is

the Bible. This old collection of the ejaculations of love and

dread, of the supreme desires and contritions of men proceeding out

of the region of the grand and eternal, by whatsoever different

mouths spoken, and through a wide extent of times and countries,

seems, especially if you add to our canon the kindred sacred writings

of the Hindoos, Persians, and Greeks, the alphabet of the nations, –

and all posterior literature either the chronicle of facts under very

inferior ideas, or, when it rises to sentiment, the combinations,

analogies, or degradations of this. The elevation of this book may

be measured by observing, how certainly all elevation of thought

clothes itself in the words and forms of speech of that book. For

the human mind is not now sufficiently erect to judge and correct

that scripture. Whatever is majestically thought in a great moral

element, instantly approaches this old Sanscrit. It is in the nature

of things that the highest originality must be moral. The only

person, who can be entirely independent of this fountain of

literature and equal to it, must be a prophet in his own proper

person. Shakspeare, the first literary genius of the world, the

highest in whom the moral is not the predominating element, leans on

the Bible: his poetry supposes it. If we examine this brilliant

influence — Shakspeare — as it lies in our minds, we shall find it

reverent not only of the letter of this book, but of the whole frame

of society which stood in Europe upon it, deeply indebted to the

traditional morality, in short, compared with the tone of the

Prophets, _secondary_. On the other hand, the Prophets do not imply

the existence of Shakspeare or Homer, — advert to no books or arts,

only to dread ideas and emotions. People imagine that the place,

which the Bible holds in the world, it owes to miracles. It owes it

simply to the fact that it came out of a profounder depth of thought

than any other book, and the effect must be precisely proportionate.

Gibbon fancied that it was combinations of circumstances that gave

Christianity its place in history. But in nature it takes an ounce

to balance an ounce.

All just criticism will not only behold in literature the

action of necessary laws, but must also oversee literature itself.

The erect mind disparages all books. What are books? it saith: they

can have no permanent value. How obviously initial they are to their

authors. The books of the nations, the universal books, are long ago

forgotten by those who wrote them, and one day we shall forget this

primer learning. Literature is made up of a few ideas and a few

fables. It is a heap of nouns and verbs enclosing an intuition or

two. We must learn to judge books by absolute standards. When we

are aroused to a life in ourselves, these traditional splendors of

letters grow very pale and cold. Men seem to forget that all

literature is ephemeral, and unwillingly entertain the supposition of

its utter disappearance. They deem not only letters in general, but

the best books in particular, parts of a preestablished harmony,

fatal, unalterable, and do not go behind Virgil and Dante, much less

behind Moses, Ezekiel, and St. John. But no man can be a good critic

of any book, who does not read it in a wisdom which transcends the

instructions of any book, and treats the whole extant product of the

human intellect as only one age revisable and reversible by him.

In our fidelity to the higher truth, we need not disown our

debt in our actual state of culture, in the twilights of experience

to these rude helpers. They keep alive the memory and the hope of a

better day. When we flout all particular books as initial merely, we

truly express the privilege of spiritual nature; but, alas, not the

fact and fortune of this low Massachusetts and Boston, of these

humble Junes and Decembers of mortal life. Our souls are not

self-fed, but do eat and drink of chemical water and wheat. Let us

not forget the genial miraculous force we have known to proceed from

a book. We go musing into the vault of day and night; no

constellation shines, no muse descends, the stars are white points,

the roses brick-colored leaves, and frogs pipe, mice cheep, and

wagons creak along the road. We return to the house and take up

Plutarch or Augustine, and read a few sentences or pages, and lo! the

air swarms with life; the front of heaven is full of fiery shapes;

secrets of magnanimity and grandeur invite us on every hand; life is

made up of them. Such is our debt to a book. Observe, moreover,

that we ought to credit literature with much more than the bare word

it gives us. I have just been reading poems which now in my memory

shine with a certain steady, warm, autumnal light. That is not in

their grammatical construction which they give me. If I analyze the

sentences, it eludes me, but is the genius and suggestion of the

whole. Over every true poem lingers a certain wild beauty,

immeasurable; a happiness lightsome and delicious fills the heart and

brain, — as they say, every man walks environed by his proper

atmosphere, extending to some distance around him. This beautiful

result must be credited to literature also in casting its account.

In looking at the library of the Present Age we are first

struck with the fact of the immense miscellany. It can hardly be

characterized by any species of book, for every opinion old and new,

every hope and fear, every whim and folly has an organ. It prints a

vast carcass of tradition every year, with as much solemnity as a new

revelation. Along with these it vents books that breathe of new

morning, that seem to heave with the life of millions, books for

which men and women peak and pine; books which take the rose out of

the cheek of him that wrote them, and give him to the midnight a sad,

solitary, diseased man; which leave no man where they found him, but

make him better or worse; and which work dubiously on society, and

seem to inoculate it with a venom before any healthy result appears.

In order to any complete view of the literature of the present

age, an inquiry should include what it quotes, what it writes, and

what it wishes to write. In our present attempt to enumerate some

traits of the recent literature, we shall have somewhat to offer on

each of these topics, but we cannot promise to set in very exact

order what we have to say.

In the first place, it has all books. It reprints the wisdom

of the world. How can the age be a bad one, which gives me Plato and

Paul and Plutarch, St. Augustine, Spinoza, Chapman, Beaumont and

Fletcher, Donne and Sir Thomas Browne, beside its own riches? Our

presses groan every year with new editions of all the select pieces

of the first of mankind, — meditations, history, classifications,

opinions, epics, lyrics, which the age adopts by quoting them. If we

should designate favorite studies in which the age delights more than

in the rest of this great mass of the permanent literature of the

human race, one or two instances would be conspicuous. First; the

prodigious growth and influence of the genius of Shakspeare, in the

last one hundred and fifty years, is itself a fact of the first

importance. It almost alone has called out the genius of the German

nation into an activity, which spreading from the poetic into the

scientific, religious, and philosophical domains, has made theirs now

at last the paramount intellectual influence of the world, reacting

with great energy on England and America. And thus, and not by

mechanical diffusion, does an original genius work and spread

himself. Society becomes an immense Shakspeare. Not otherwise could

the poet be admired, nay, not even seen; — not until his living,

conversing, and writing had diffused his spirit into the young and

acquiring class, so that he had multiplied himself into a thousand

sons, a thousand Shakspeares, and so understands himself.

Secondly; the history of freedom it studies with eagerness in

civil, in religious, in philosophic history. It has explored every

monument of Anglo-Saxon history and law, and mainly every scrap of

printed or written paper remaining from the period of the English

Commonwealth. It has, out of England, devoted much thought and pains

to the history of philosophy. It has groped in all nations where was

any literature for the early poetry not only the dramatic, but the

rudest lyric; for songs and ballads, the Nibelungen Lied, the poems

of Hans Sachs and Henry of Alckmaer in Germany, for the Cid in Spain,

for the rough-cast verse of the interior nations of Europe, and in

Britain for the ballads of Scotland and of Robinhood.

In its own books also, our age celebrates its wants,

achievements, and hopes. A wide superficial cultivation, often a

mere clearing and whitewashing, indicate the new taste in the

hitherto neglected savage, whether of the cities or the fields, to

know the arts and share the spiritual efforts of the refined. The

time is marked by the multitude of writers. Soldiers, sailors,

servants, nobles, princes, women, write books. The progress of trade

and the facilities for locomotion have made the world nomadic again.

Of course it is well informed. All facts are exposed. The age is

not to be trifled with: it wishes to know who is who, and what is

what. Let there be no ghost stories more. Send Humboldt and

Bonpland to explore Mexico, Guiana, and the Cordilleras. Let Captain

Parry learn if there be a northwest passage to America, and Mr.

Lander learn the true course of the Niger. Puckler Muskau will go to

Algiers, and Sir Francis Head to the Pampas, to the Brunnens of

Nassau, and to Canada. Then let us have charts true and Gazeteers

correct. We will know where Babylon stood, and settle the topography

of the Roman Forum. We will know whatever is to be known of

Australasia, of Japan, of Persia, of Egypt, of Timbuctoo, of

Palestine.

Thus Christe