"I have often wondered for what good end the sensation of grief could be intended. All our other passions, within proper bounds, have a useful object. And the perfection of a moral character is not in a stoical apathy so hypocritically vaunted, and so untruly too, because impossible, but in a just equilibrium of all the passions. I wish the pathologists then would tell us what is the use of grief in the economy, and of what good it is the cause, proximate or remote." Vol. II. p. 370.

He seemed never to have dreamed of such a thing as moral discipline; is this Unitarianism?

Considering the term "Unitarian" as descriptive of one of the religious denominations of our country, he had no more right to call himself by this name, than he had to say he was a Trinitarian; and we must say that to our minds there is something exceedingly disengenuous in the attempt thus to enroll Mr. Jefferson with one of the religious societies of the land. If Mr. Jefferson intended by the application to himself of the term, Unitarian, to intimate that he believed there was one God and but one; we know of no Christian who is not in this sense, an Unitarian also; but if he designed to express his belief in monotheism, as contradistinguished from assent to the doctrine of the Trinity, then does his conduct savour somewhat of the littleness of trick; for he did not view Christ in the light in which he is considered by Unitarians generally: he did not deem him as entitled to the character of a divine messenger, any more than Socrates was; nor did he believe in Christianity as a divine revelation; nor in the assemblage of doctrines commonly included in the term Unitarianism; of which let us say, that although not disposed to adopt them, we yet, as an act of justice, will distinguish from the French infidel school to which Mr. Jefferson in truth belonged. In the last years of his life, it may have served his purposes to seek an affiliation among the Unitarians. That denomination had then increased in numbers, and included in its ranks some men of high intellectual attainments; it was no disgrace to Mr. Jefferson to be deemed the associate in thought of such men, and hence he was not reluctant to adopt their distinctive name, though there might not be between them entire coincidence of opinion. We leave it to those with whom he thus classed himself, to estimate at its true worth the compliment paid to their religious system by Mr. Jefferson, in the proof which he afforded, of its close approximation in his mind, to the infidelity of France.

But Mr. Jefferson on this topic has been more communicative than his biographer is disposed to be. Let him speak for himself. In his correspondence, published after his decease, he

And here, as we

leaves no room for doubt as to his opinions. shall find occasion to quote from his own writings, it may be well to notice a remark made by our author on the subject of some of those writings. Professor Tucker informs us in his preface of what was well known before, that the publication of many of the letters in the four volumes of Mr. Jefferson's correspondence was singularly indiscreet; he also tells us, that Mr. Thomas Jefferson Randolph, grandson and executor of Mr. J. is alone responsible for their publication, and intimates that his own book is, in part at least, occasioned by the injuries which it is apprehended Mr. Jefferson's name and memory may have sustained by the indiscretion of his descendant. Now it must be confessed that he is in an unhappy predicament whose own letters render needful the interposition of a friendly biographer to shield his character from censure. Most writers have been glad to enrich their pages with the original letters of those whose lives they were portraying: there is always a freshness and freedom from constraint about them which afford the most satisfactory illustrations of character; but in the view of professor Tucker, the case seems to be otherwise with respect to Mr. Jefferson, and doubtless there is a sufficient reason for it. But as the letters are published, we shall use them when necessary for our purpose, because we are at a loss to perceive any cause for declining to do so. They are before the world, and are now the world's property; and we are simple enough to think that whether writing for the public, or to a private friend, Mr. Jefferson was equally under obligations to write truly. We understand not that system of ethics which justifies misrepresentation, because it is made in a private letter to a single correspondent, unless indeed friendship be an excuse for falsehood. We take it for granted therefore, that Mr. Jefferson meant to be believed in what he wrote; and indeed his biographer himself informs us that he probably wished these very letters "to be carefully preserved as memorials of his thoughts and feelings." Our business at present is with "his thoughts and feelings" for these show his true character, and therefore we are glad to learn from any source what they were.

On the subject of Christianity, he has been explicit enough. In a letter to William Short, he informs him that he is not "with Jesus in all his doctrines. I am a materialist; (says he) he takes the side of Spiritualism: he preaches the efficacy of repentance towards forgiveness of sin; I require a counterpoise of good works to redeem it &c. &c."* And in a subsequent letter to the same individual he thus speaks of Christ :

* Jefferson's correspondence, vol. iv. p. 320.

VOL. I.-NO. I.

3

"That Jesus did not mean to impose himself on mankind as the Son of God, physically speaking, I have been convinced by the writings of men more learned than myself in that lore. But that he might conscientiously believe himself inspired from above, is very possible. The whole religion of the Jews, inculcated on him from his infancy, was founded in the belief of divine inspiration. The fumes of the most disordered imaginations were recorded in their religious code, as special communications of the Deity; and as it could not but happen that, in the course of ages, events would now and then turn up to which some of these vague rhapsodies might be accommodated by the aid of allegories, figures, types, and other tricks upon words, they have not only preserved their credit with the Jews of all subsequent times, but are the foundation of much of the religions of those who have schismatized from them. Elevated by the enthusiasm of a warm and pure heart, conscious of the high strains of an eloquence which had not been taught him, he might readily mistake the corruscations of his own fine genius for inspirations of an higher order. This belief, carried, therefore, no more personal imputation, than the belief of Socrates, that himself was under the care and admonitions of a guardian Dæmon; and how many of our wisest men still believe in the reality of these inspirations, while perfectly sane on all other subjects. Excusing, therefore, on these considerations, those passages in the gospels which seem to bear marks of weakness in Jesus, ascribing to him what alone is consistent with the great and pure character of which the same writings furnish proofs, and to their proper authors their own trivialties and imbecilities, I think myself authorized to conclude the purity and distinction of his character, in opposition to the impostures which those authors would fix upon him."

Again, in the letter first referred to, the apostles are charged with "stupidity" and "roguery," and we are informed that "of this band of dupes and impostors, Paul was the great Coryphoeus, and first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus."

Now, so far as man is concerned, we mean not to question Mr. Jefferson's right to entertain these opinions. If it pleased him to mistake for the grand discoveries of an enlarged intellect, an incredulity which is quite as vulgar as a too ready belief: be it so. "To his own master" let him stand or fall; he has gone where human censure and human applause are alike indifferent to him; he has ere this discovered his mistakes, if any he made, on the subject of Christianity; but when our admiration of him is invoked, we do claim for ourselves even the same privilege which we have accorded to him—the privilege of having our opinions on the subject of Christianity; and as they are diametrically opposed to his, we shall take the liberty of withholding our admiration. We will not indeed imitate his example, and charge him with "stupidity," as he has charged

* Jefferson's Correspondence, vol. iv. p. 327.

the apostles; but we will say, and especially to our young countrymen, that Christianity may be true, even though Mr. Jefferson disbelieved it; we will say that men whose minds were at least equal to his, and whose lives were better, have believed it, after such a patient investigation as Mr. Jefferson had neither leisure nor learning enough to make. We caution them therefore not to be charmed into infidelity by the fascination of a name. We assure them that as scholars, and statesmen and gentlemen, they may reach all that Mr. Jefferson ever attained, without being obliged to pay for their elevation by the surrender of their faith in Christianity.

If on this subject nothing more remained to be said, no heavier imputation would rest on Mr. Jefferson's memory than that, in the opinion of some, he erred in judgment; but it is due to truth to add, that he was not content in silence to enjoy his own opinions, without an effort to infuse them into others: he was willing to labor in the work of proselyting, and we happen to know that he did so labor. The man who entertains doubts of the truth of Christianity, after honest and patient examination, is much to be pitied; and the best proof of his sincerity, who professes thus to be skeptical, will be found in the fact that he confines his doubts to himself. Unable (as every man must be to demonstrate with absolute certainty that the Christian religion is untrue, he seeks not to make others share in the perplexities which embarrass him; he feels that there is no philanthropy in depriving a fellow creature of something, which, however doubtful, yet imparts comfort to him who believes it. Nor does such a man endeavor to give currency to his opinions by seeking to array, in their support, the imposing influence of high and honored names: he does not betray the spirit of a partizan ready to count his recruits, and mislead the thoughtless by the exhibition of a muster roll of mighty names. And finally, if he be really honest in his doubts; if the hatred of a bad heart be not mistaken for the perplexities of an embarrassed head, he will scorn the baseness of leaving behind him a written record implicating the departed, and not to be used until after his own death; so that, when produced, the calumniated will be past the power of denial, and the calumniator safe from the world's indignant expression of reprobation.

In Mr. Jefferson's " Ana,"* (which, our author informs us in his preface, were arranged by Mr. J., " and intended, no doubt, to be one day published," by his executor,) under the date of February 1st, 1800, appears the following statement :—

"February the 1st. Doctor Rush tells me that he had it from Asa * Jefferson's writings, vol. iv. p. 512.

Green, that when the clergy addressed General Washington on his departure from the government, it was observed in their consultation, that he had never, on any occasion, said a word to the public which showed a belief in the Christian religion, and they thought they should so pen their address, as to force him at length to declare publicly whether he was a Christian or not. They did so. However, he observed, the old fox was too cunning for them. He answered every article of their address particularly except that, which he passed over without notice. Rush observes, he never did say a word on the subject in any of his public papers, except in his valedictory letter to the Governors of the States when he resigned his commission in the army, wherein he speaks of the benign influence of the Christian religion.'

"I know that Governeur Morris, who pretended to be in his secrets, and believed himself to be so, has often told me that General Washington believed no more of that system than he himself did."

If any man supposes this to be a fair representation of General Washington's opinions on the truth of the Christian religion, he may find means to correct his error in the perusal of a work lately given to the public, devoted expressly to the subject of Washington's religious belief, and reviewed in our pages; to that we refer him :* he may there find the injustice which Mr. Jefferson has here done to the "father of his country." Willing to insinuate that he was likeminded with himself, he yet shrinks from the responsibility of an explicit declaration, and screens himself under the convenient cover of " Doctor Rush tells me," and "Rush observes." But further, Thomas Jefferson knew General Washington as well as Mr. Morris did, if not better: his biographer informs us that he had with him "a long and intimate acquaintance, from the year 1769:" and during the four years that he was secretary of state, Mr. Jefferson himself says, "their intercourse was daily, confidential, and cordial." Vol ii. p. 349. Why then, if he must record this rumor, does he not add, as a noble frankness would have prompted, that in his intercourse with his distinguished countryman, he had or had not seen the evidence of his unbelief? He had it in his power to speak from personal knowledge: why cite Mr. Morris at all, when he proves that, to his own mind at least, it was doubtful how far he was a credible witness; for he sneeringly remarks, that he "pretended to be in" the president's "secrets, and believed himself to be so ?" If this sneer be not a gratuitous eruption of malignity toward Morris, then it is obvious that Mr. Jefferson did not himself suppose that Mr. Morris had the confidence of Washington. If so, honor required that he should not have used his testimony; and this conclusion loses none of its force

* Mc Guire's religious opinions of Washington.