Rulers must not be suffered thus to absolve themselves of their solemn responsibility.It does not lie in their mouths to say that a sect is not patriotic.It is their business to make it patriotic.History and reason clearly indicate the means.The English Jews are, as far as we can see, precisely what our Government has made them.They are precisely what any sect, what any class of men, treated as they have been treated, would have been.If all the red-haired people in Europe had, during centuries, been outraged and oppressed, banished from this place, imprisoned in that, deprived of their money, deprived of their teeth, convicted of the most improbable crimes on the feeblest evidence, dragged at horses' tails, hanged, tortured, burned alive, if, when manners became milder, they had still been subject to debasing restrictions and exposed to vulgar insults, locked up in particular streets in some countries, pelted and ducked by the rabble in others, excluded everywhere from magistracies and honours, what would be the patriotism of gentlemen with red hair? And if, under such circumstances, a proposition were made for admitting red-haired men to office, how striking a speech might an eloquent admirer of our old institutions deliver against so revolutionary a measure! "These men," he might say, "scarcely consider themselves as Englishmen.
They think a red-haired Frenchman or a red-haired German more closely connected with them than a man with brown hair born in their own parish.If a foreign sovereign patronises red hair, they love him better than their own native king.They are not Englishmen: they cannot be Englishmen: nature has forbidden it:
experience proves it to be impossible.Right to political power they have none; for no man has a right to political power.Let them enjoy personal security; let their property be under the protection of the law.But if they ask for leave to exercise power over a community of which they are only half members, a community the constitution of which is essentially dark-haired, let us answer them in the words of our wise ancestors, Nolumus leges Angliae mutari."But, it is said, the Scriptures declare that the Jews are to be restored to their own country; and the whole nation looks forward to that restoration.They are, therefore, not so deeply interested as others in the prosperity of England.It is not their home, but merely the place of their sojourn, the house of their bondage.This argument, which first appeared in the Times newspaper, and which has attracted a degree of attention proportioned not so much to its own intrinsic force as to the general talent with which that journal is conducted, belongs to a class of sophisms by which the most hateful persecutions may easily be justified.To charge men with practical consequences which they themselves deny is disingenuous in controversy; it is atrocious in government.The doctrine of predestination, in the opinion of many people, tends to make those who hold it utterly immoral.And certainly it would seem that a man who believes his eternal destiny to be already irrevocably fixed is likely to indulge his passions without restraint and to neglect his religious duties.If he is an heir of wrath, his exertions must be unavailing.If he is preordained to life, they must be superfluous.But would it be wise to punish every man who holds the higher doctrines of Calvinism, as if he had actually committed all those crimes which we know some Antinomians to have committed? Assuredly not.The fact notoriously is that there are many Calvinists as moral in their conduct as any Arminian, and many Arminians as loose as any Calvinist.
It is altogether impossible to reason from the opinions which a man professes to his feelings and his actions; and in fact no person is ever such a fool as to reason thus, except when he wants a pretext for persecuting his neighbours.A Christian is commanded, under the strongest sanctions, to be just in all his dealings.Yet to how many of the twenty-four millions of professing Christians in these islands would any man in his senses lend a thousand pounds without security? A man who should act, for one day, on the supposition that all the people about him were influenced by the religion which they professed, would find himself ruined before night; and no man ever does act on that supposition in any of the ordinary concerns of life, in borrowing, in lending, in buying, or in selling.But when any of our fellow-creatures are to be oppressed, the case is different.
Then we represent those motives which we know to be so feeble for good as omnipotent for evil.Then we lay to the charge of our victims all the vices and follies to which their doctrines, however remotely, seem to tend.We forget that the same weakness, the same laxity, the same disposition to prefer the present to the future, which make men worse than a good religion, make them better than a bad one.
It was in this way that our ancestors reasoned, and that some people in our time still reason, about the Catholics.A Papist believes himself bound to obey the Pope.The Pope has issued a bull deposing Queen Elizabeth.Therefore every Papist will treat her grace as an usurper.Therefore every Papist is a traitor.
Therefore every Papist ought to be hanged, drawn, and quartered.
To this logic we owe some of the most hateful laws that ever disgraced our history.Surely the answer lies on the surface.The Church of Rome may have commanded these men to treat the queen as an usurper.But she has commanded them to do many other things which they have never done.She enjoins her priests to observe strict purity.You are always taunting them with their licentiousness.She commands all her followers to fast often, to be charitable to the poor, to take no interest for money, to fight no duels, to see no plays.Do they obey these injunctions?
