Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

than the foregoing for the infinity and eternity of matter. It remains for Mr. Humphrey, or any other priest, to shew the contrary, or a better argument for the absence of space and time, or that they do not relate to matter.

Because I used the phrase, that I have no doubt of the infinity of matter, Mr. Humphrey, from the want of knowing the meaning and expression of words, has inferred that I have doubt upon the subject. To say I have no doubt of a thing, and to say I am certain of it, is one and the same expression. I cannot distinguish between them. Another point on which Mr. Humphrey hangs is, because I have once used the phrase almighty power he has a right to build upon it as an admitted proof; and connects the word supernatural with it; whilst I positively denied, at the time of using the phrase, that it was any thing more than a natural power; by which I meant to say, that matter in its motions produces all the phenomena we behold, and thus is truly a natural almighty power. I used the word all in a relative sense; Mr. Humphrey applies an absolute or infinite sense to the word; and arrogantly says, whilst "The Republican" is extant, I cannot deny the phrase. I deny his inference from, or construction upon, the phrase. In the sense in which Mr. Humphrey takes the word, I deny that there is an almighty power; but in a relative sense, as far as it relates to the all of what we behold and see produced, I admit matter to be that almighty power. I deny that there is a power distinct from matter, that can create or destroy matter, or in any wise change its properties. Whatever assertions Mr. Humphrey denies of mine I will prove it, and I look to him to do the same or admit that he cannot.

Mr. Humphrey lays great stress upon his idea that, "matter is necessitated to exist," and he cannot comprehend how that necessity is the result of the energies of matter, and not an independent or priinary cause. Matter is necessitated to exist because there is no power independent of or prior to matter. Matter is necessitated to exist because it has not the power of self-annihilation. Matter is necessitated to exist because it is the great whole, the one infinite and leaves no room for a power to act upon it. It is nécessitated to motion by its own properties; by a continual motion of gaseous currents from one solid body to another; which philosophers designate under the terms "attraction and repulsion of fluids." Necessity is a word, which, in itself implies a result, and nothing primary. It cannot exist alone or independent. If Mr. Humphrey would make himself acquainted with the chemical properties of matter, he will then rest the ideas he now applies to necessity upon matter, and find the former to be a secondary, the latter to be the primary object of power, force, compulsion. Necessity or motion (and necessity must necessarily be a moved power) is an emanation, a property of matter; and consequently it must be coexistent and coextensive with matter.

Mr. Humphrey in his excursive flights, will not confine himself to matter, but delights to flounder in the ocean of fiction, and wants me to flounder there with him, but I prefer solid ground whereon to move.

In this last letter, he observes: "If matter be infinite, it is supported." A more stupid observation was never put upon paper. That which is infinite swallows up every other thing, and cannot possibly need or leave room for a supporter. He does not know the common orthography of our language, nor the common meaning of words. I do not reproach him with this as a jeer, but it behoved him to have studied these before he travelled into metaphysics and public controversies.

In this last communication, Mr. Humphrey says, that I have falsely accused him with saying, "that what is infinite must constitute the almighty power," and calls upon me to point out in his pamphlet where he has so written. It forms the whole drift of his argument in his pamphlet; and at page 38 he expresses himself thus: "The word almighty, signifies unbounded, or infinite, and almighty power is infinite power," then he goes on to argue that this infinite power must exceed or embrace every other power, if it did not, it could not be infinite. It was here I told him that he had put forth one philosophical truth; and that this was the only one, and when he can once comprehend how matter constitutes this one infinite, his ideas will be somewhat purified to what they now are, and he will then be at liberty to talk about philosophical grounds: at present his mind is a compound of fictions, in giving currency to which, he is a complete RANTER. You, Mr. Hellawell, will perceive in a moment, that Mr. Humphrey has contradicted himself in the two last quotations I have made from him. In the first he says: "though matter be infinite it requires a support:" in the second, or in the argument to which I have alluded, he expressly and truly states, that "a something more than infinite, implies a contradiction in terms, and is an absolute impossibility." These words are to be found on page 39 of his pamphlet. Such a man as Mr. Humphrey will be always sure to answer and refute himself, if he feels himself pressed. What appears in this paragraph would justify me in putting down my pen, and in asking whether this be not enough for him; but as this is the last time I shall notice his pamphlet, I am willing to follow him through his present defence of it.

I stated in my last letter to Mr Humphrey, that in admitting there was no vacuity in space, he had admitted his error upon the grand point. He denies such an admittance in his present communication, but in his letter of April 14, published in No. 17, Vol. 5, of “The Republican," he admits repeatedly, that there can be no vacuity in space, and in one place he says, "it is impossible for a considerate man not to believe, that the atmosphere of one body extends to the other, when light and heat so visibly extends to us from the sun.” He further admits all I have said about the gaseous principle of matter, but I am sure he does not understand nor comprehend it. Here then it is evident, that his "supernatural almighty power" (since I have disposed of his necessity as a primary power) must mean some thing in the form of an animal, floating or moving about in the different atmospheres of the planetary world. This we know is the no

tion that all idolators, whether Christian, Jew, Mahometan or Pagan, have had both of Deity and Devil.

He has attempted to raise a jeer where I have told him that some of the arguments of his pamphlet were perfect nonseuse, and such as to bid defiance to all analysis: he seems to think that the greater the nonsense the more easy to analyze it, but this is not the fact. He has raised arguments upon fictions, and how are they to be analyzed? How can I analyze his necessity as a primary power in relation to matter, otherwise than I have done by shewing it must be a result and not a prior power to matter? How am I to analyze his supernatural almighty power; to which I cannot attach au idea, nor he neither, but a fictious one? We cannot analyze a fiction, but we are coinpelled to prove it a fiction, by shewing that it has no analogy to any thing in nature. This I have done with regard to his supernatural almighty power, and with regard to every other fiction that he has raised.

He has raised an apparent, but not a real contradiction in one part of my answer to him, where I have said that the varieties of matter change from one object to another, but matter as a whole changes not. In one of his logical cuts, he asks, if the parts do not make up the whole, and if every part changes, must not the whole change? However clear this may appear as a logical conclusion, it is not applicable to matter. Every part of our bodies is incessantly changing, whilst the outline, the form remains the same, until it gives way to a greater power or a greater body of matter, there is then a change but no destruction, no lessening of the quantity of matter: this will apply as an answer to the case of the inustard seed. The same may be said of a planet, and thus on to the infinity of matter, which, having no superior power, cannot be subject to change. Every part is subject to, and acted upon, by a greater or superior part, whilst the whole is subject to nothing, to no change. If this answer may not suit Mr. Humphrey's logic, it is clear in a physical point of view: it is both Material and Common Sense. If he were to take his logic into his garden with him, he would find many physical causes and effects to which it would not apply. Logic is known to be a very deceitful criterion for many things, and such as it is, Mr. Humphrey talks much and knows but little about it. It will be seen by the letter which I now print for him, that before he talked about logic, he should have made himself acquainted with the simplest rudiments of Grammar, or the orthography and etymology of our language. If he sent his pamphlet to the Printer in the same state as he has sent his letters to me, there were other persons, besides the Farmer and the Joiner, required to correct it.

Now, Mr. Hellawell, in Mr. Ilumphrey's manner, I turn to you, and beg you will excuse my addressing this public letter to you. There was something so extremely offensive in his joint communication to you and me, that I could not but mark it, by refusing to address him direct. I can assure him that his letters form no grati

fication, except it be a little amusement to my readers, and civility, at least, was due from him, when he expected his letter printed in "The Republican." I am not a man of forms and ceremonies, I despise them in most instances; but in controversies of this kind, I think a common civility is necessary. The foul language of Knox, Luther, and Calvin, in controversy, would not be read in the present day.

Accept, Sir, my hearty thanks for the trouble you have taken on my account, and whenever you find an opportunity to forward me the volume of our joint friend, entitled, "Israel Vindicated," I shall be glad to give it a reading, and should it meet my expectations, from what I know of the author, I will print it, if not, I will carefully return it. Mr. Houston, a Scotchman, once the publisher of Mr. Cobbett's Register, is the Author of "Ecce Homo," for which I believe he suffered a long imprisonment; though I never read any account of any trial in the matter. The martyr, Daniel Isaac Eaton, was first prosecuted, but somehow or other, the author became responsible to the Inquisitors. I have never reprinted "Ecce Homo," for, with the exception of the numerous and very valuable quotations in it, I do not like the work. I am of opinion, it would have been time for a Deist to have written the life of Jesus the Jew, when his existence had been proved: the contrary of which is the prevailing opinion at present. It is mine after a careful and candid examination of authorities upon the subject.

I am, Sir, most respectfully yours,

TO MR.

R. CARLILE,

DEAR SIR,

Paris, May 28, 1822. I THANK you kindly for the trouble you have taken in forwarding to Carlile the sum I intended for him. I think him to be a real worthy man, for the courage and perseverance he continues to show, for promoting the good cause. No good government can ever be established for the happiness of the people at large, I am persuaded, without the destruction of Priestcraft. Priests of all religions have ever been ready to unite with Kings, or the powerful, to establish passive obedience and enslave the people, and I believe that all the great things the Athenians accomplished were in great part owing to their never having admitted an established Priesthood, and had America unluckily adopted a domineering Priesthood, they would be very far from what they are at present. Our priests here work bravely for destroying the system, Castlereagh in union with the Bourbons have been

labouring to re-establish in France. They will accelerate the revolution, drive away the Bourbons, and cause their own destruction, and so far we shall be indebted to them by and by your time, most likely, will come after.-Mean while I wish you health and happiness, and am,

Yours, &c.

S.

P. S. I send Three Pounds for those Shopmen of Carlile's, who have been so roughly handled, as a subscription for courage and independence of mind in his service.

Received the 7th of June, 1822, from

at Paris,

per Mr. J. W. One Pound each, as a subscription for courage and independence of mind in Mr. Carlile's service.

H. BOYLE.

J. RHODES.

W. V. HOLMES.

H. BOYLE acknowledges the receipt of five shillings and three-pence from Mr. Whitaker of Union Street.

On Monday, June 17, will be published, the Second
Edition of

CAIN, a Mystery. By Lord BYRON. Price 6d.

Printed and Published by R. CARLILE, 55, Fleet Street. All Communications (post paid) are requested to be sent to Dorchester Gaol, until a further Address to some House or Shop be given.--Orders, with remittances, or references for payment, will be punctually attended to. Country Agents will find the most liberal Terms for prompt Payment.

« AnteriorContinuar »