1846.]

Means of perpetuating Belief.

261

But there was one expedient more to be tried. The ladies, always noted for their credulity as well as for their generosity and untiring zeal, were at last appealed to; and they were imploringly asked to finish what the men had hardly faith enough to begin. They entered upon the work with alacrity; but even the faith and constancy of woman failed, before the cap-stone was brought on with rejoicing. Here the "work of faith and labor of love" were exhausted, and the work would, in all probability, have been abandoned, had not the spirited and energetic contractor, perhaps to save his own reputation, and secure his pay for what he had already done, conceived the plan of levying a tax upon the pilgrims who should resort to this American Mecca. Consequently he provided a steam-engine, (for everything in these galloping days must go by steam,) and the necessary apparatus, by which the pilgrims were raised to the top of this majestic pillar. By the help of this tax he was enabled to complete the monument about twenty years after it was commenced.

Now in view of all the circumstances connected with the erection of this granite pile, have we not reason to suspect, that the public have entertained great doubts of the authenticity of the portion of history under consideration? rather is not this great delay inconsistent with a well grounded faith on the part of the people, and perfectly consistent with the hypothesis we have assumed? And now that the monument is completed, the same system of levying contributions upon visitors is kept up, that was adopted by the Catholic priests in the dark ages. Those who ascend this monastic column, walking up its dark winding passage, with a dim light in their hands, must pay a tribute, not of respect to the memory of our fathers, but of money to the guardian goddess of Bunker's Hill.

There are at this time many means resorted to, to keep up the impression that the history of this battle is not fabulous. Besides the tax imposed upon those whom credulity or curiosity may lead to the spot, there is also a sort of Dioramic show of this battle, which has been got up with great ingenuity, and which has been exhibited in various parts of the country, by which the owners are enabled to levy a contribution upon hundreds of those who never visited the battle-field. This is a kind of second edition of

the devices of the Romish Church, by which those who never saw one of their saints when alive, are enabled to see and to possess, if they are able to pay the purchase money, some pretended relic of him when dead.

But the boldest expedient is yet to be mentioned. The Masons, it is said, have erected a little monument within the great one, to aid in commemorating the fading glories of this memorable battle. This is drawing upon our credulity in the same manner the Irish monk did upon the traveller, when he showed him two skulls of St. Patrick, the one his skull when he was an adult, the other his skull when he was a boy!

All these influences are brought to bear upon the subject, to keep up the faltering faith in that pretended military exploit. There is also a local interest, a State pride, which fosters this belief. Vermont points to Bennington, New York to White Plains, New Jersey to Princeton, and Virginia to Yorktown, and it is a pity, if Massachusetts cannot divide the glories of the Revolution with her sister States, when she contributed so largely of her blood and treasure to carry on that war. Her efforts in that struggle would justly entitle her to at least one consecrated spot, to which those who have no patriotism themselves can point, and boast of the patriotism of their ancestors. Not that I would call in question the patriotism of our citizens generally; but it is true of Massachusetts men, as well as others, that those who have the most to say of the heroes of the Revolution, and who point to Bunker's Hill the most frequently, have the least of that self-denying spirit, which characterized our ancestors. Such men could hardly sustain themselves, if Bunker's Hill were blotted from their memory. This local feeling, this State pride, this boast of our father's patriotism, uttered so loudly by those who have none themselves, united with pecuniary interest, serves to keep up a pretended or real belief in the event. And besides, all who have contributed to the erection of the monument, are committed to that belief. For such persons to reject this boasted page in our history, would be confessing either that they had been imposed upon themselves, or that they had endeavored to impose upon others. And the number thus committed is very great; for I believe, in some cases the subscription was restricted to the small sum

1846.]

Close of the Argument.

263

of five dollars as the maximum, on the plea that no one might be deprived of the opportunity of having his name enrolled among those who cherished a grateful remembrance of the deeds of departed heroes. But may not this limited subscription be fairly construed into an admission, that five dollars was the measure of the strongest faith on this subject; and may we not infer that this was a device to enlist as many as possible, so that if this pretended battle should ever be called in question, these subscribers should ever hold their peace?

Taking all these circumstances into view, it is not at all surprising that the great mass of the people should believe, or pretend to believe, in this opening scene of the Revolutionary drama. The mass believe in it, because the belief is fashionable. The superstitious believe in it, because they think it nearly allied to impiety to call it in question. The worldly wise and prudent acquiesce in it, through fear that an agitation of the question would produce excitement. And the unprincipled demagogue adopts it, because he finds Bunker's Hill a convenient watch-word to excite the passions of the ignorant.

I might pursue this subject further, and show other causes which, in the want of sufficient evidence, serve to keep up this belief; but I deem it unnecessary. I have shown on the great principles of Mr. Hume's theory, that the battle of Bunker's Hill is not entitled to our belief; that experience, that great touchstone of truth, is decidedly against it; that the event itself is improbable; that the witnesses in its favor are interested, and that their testimony is contradictory. We have also seen that the tardiness in the erection of the monument furnishes a strong presumptive argument, that those who erected it had but a wavering faith in the event the structure proposed to perpetuate; and that local feeling, personal interest, and State pride will easily account for the general belief we find in the community, even admitting the history of the event to be fabulous.

I do not intend to be dogmatical, but I would respectfully ask whether we have not made out our case. Have we not shown on the theory laid down by Mr. Hume, that the people have been grossly deceived upon this subject? I think we have. We have followed out the reasoning of

the great logician, and are, as it seems to me, compelled to admit, either that the accounts we have read from our childhood of the battle of Bunker's Hill are all a fabrication, or that Hume's great argument is fallacious and his positions false. Here then is the dilemma. And which horn shall we embrace? If we follow Hume, we shall unsettle the faith of thousands, and destroy all confidence in history; and if we adhere to the common opinion of the events of June 17th, 1775, we assail the great logician, draw upon ourselves the charge of being credulous, and are justly exposed to the sneers of all unbelievers. Nay, more; if we reject Hume's theory, we shall be charged with being led by Campbell, and other priests, who, it is said, are interested in keeping up a great reverence for what is called faith. If we discard the theory of Hume, we shall be accused of being priest-ridden, and so wanting in manly independence. Moreover, we shall, in such case, be required to believe not only in the battle of Bunker's Hill, but in other events recorded in history. We shall also be compelled to believe in the events recorded in the Scriptures, and to receive the precepts of Christ and his Apostles, which have always been found to be troublesome companions for those of us, who, rejecting Puritanism, wish not only to think, but to act and live freely- that is, to enjoy our "home-bred and fire-side rights."

On a full view of the whole subject, I am inclined to adhere to the theory laid down by Hume, who may be regarded as the father of all rational unbelief. His theory makes short work of miracles and the other dogmas of religion. It is too laborious a task, to refute all the arguments which are brought in support of Christianity, even if it were possible. Who can have patience to plod through Lardner's elaborate "Credibility," or even Paley's "Evidences of Christianity?" Butler's "Analogy" requires more study and thought, than most of us wish to bestow upon that subject. West on the "Resurrection of Christ" is a small book, but is exceedingly difficult to answer; and Littleton on the "Conversion of St. Paul" has so perplexed me, that I have resolved never to attempt to read it again. Leland's "View of Deistical Writers" presents the opinions of our friends in such an awkward light, that I have no patience with it; and even Leslie's "Short and Easy

1846.]

Hume's Theory.

265

Method with the Deists," is far too long and hard for me to answer. Now considering the multiplicity of books in support of Divine revelation, and the great difficulty there is in answering their arguments in detail, I have felt the necessity of some "short and easy method" of meeting these arguments at once; and I find nothing so convenient as Hume's theory. I can answer all these writers, meet all their arguments, and overthrow all their statements, by the talismanic reply of Mr. Hume - The experience of the world is against it.

This summary mode of meeting all kinds of troublesome arguments, I have found of great service on innumerable occasions. I therefore cling to it. I regard it as a kind of labor-saving machine, which answers every purpose, and has this additional recommendation, that the superficial can employ it just as well as the profound. I have found it perfectly satisfactory in speculation. I say in speculation, for I must confess, that it will not hold good in the common affairs of life. When I first became acquainted with the writings of Mr. Hume, I was so pleased with his theory, that I resolved to make it the rule of my life in the management of my ordinary affairs. But you can hardly conceive of my mortification, when I found this, my favorite theory utterly to fail me. I learned by that very experience which Mr. Hume commends, that his theory led me to doubt everything, to withdraw confidence from every body, and refrain from all action whatever. I found it would paralyze all effort, destroy all business transactions, and produce a sort of Mesmeric sleep in the whole community. My embarrassment was extreme; but I soon extricated myself from this difficulty by adopting a theory of my own concerning Mr. Hume's theory, viz. that his grand position of human experience was merely theoretical, well adapted to matters of speculation, but never designed to apply to the tangibilities of real life.

This view of Mr. Hume's theory, I find exceedingly convenient. I can use it or disuse it, as the case may require. I employ it in all matters of mere opinion, in all abstract speculations, but discard it, or rather lay it aside, in all cases of a practical character. In this way I enjoy all the benefits of his theory without any of its embarrassments. But utility is not the only recommendation of my theory;