Part 1

Produced by David Widger

AN ADDRESS TO MEN OF SCIENCE;

CALLING UPON THEM TO STAND FORWARD AND VINDICATE THE TRUTH FROM THE FOUL GRASP AND PERSECUTION OF SUPERSTITION; AND OBTAIN FOR THE ISLAND OF GREAT BRITAIN THE NOBLE APPELLATION OF WHENCE MANKIND SHALL BE ILLUMINATED, AND THE BLACK AND PESTIFEROUS CLOUDS OF PERSECUTION AND SUPERSTITION BE BANISHED FROM THE FACE OF THE EARTH; AS THE ONLY SURE PRELUDE TO UNIVERSAL PEACE AND HARMONY AMONG THE HUMAN RACE. IN WHICH A SKETCH OF A PROPER SYSTEM FOR THE EDUCATION OF YOUTH IS SUBMITTED TO THEIR JUDGMENT.

By Richard Carlile

London:

PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY R. CARLILE, 55, FLEET STREET.

1821. Price One Shilling.

ADDRESS,

Gentlemen,

In addressing a Letter to so distinguished and so important a part of the community, it becomes me to say, that, I am not myself a man of experimental Science, neither, out of the ordinary occupations of my past life, have I ever seen a scientific experiment made in any one department of Chemistry, or Natural Philosophy; all that I know, with the above exception, has been acquired by reading and meditation. My present address is chiefly confined to those Philosophers, who study and practice the sciences of Chemistry and Astronomy. I shall endeavour to point out to them that, they are bound by duty, by common sense, and by common honesty, to make known to mankind, or, more particularly their fellow countrymen, whatever discoveries they may make to prove that the others are following a system of error, or that they are acted upon by a system of imposture. I shall make it appear plain to them, that they have not hitherto done this, and that they have openly countenanced systems of error and imposture, because the institutions of the country were connected with them; or, because they feared to offend those persons who might be deriving an ill-gotten profit from them. This subject will form the first head of my address. In my second head, I shall shew that the present system of educating children is entirely on a wrong basis, and their youthful time is so far wasted, as to leave them, when advanced to the years of maturity, in a state of comparative ignorance. I shall shew that if in their school exercises they were made acquainted with nothing but the elements of Astronomy, of Geography, of Natural History, and of Chemistry, so that they might at an early period of life form correct notions of organized and inert matter, instead of torturing their minds with metaphysical and incomprehensible dogmas about religion, of which they can form no one idea but that of apparent absurdity and contradiction, they would be prepared to make a much greater advancement in the Arts and Sciences, and to improve their condition in society much more than can be now possibly done. These shall not be altogether theoretical ideas, their practicability will reach the mind of every rational being, or he who takes the liberty to think and reason for himself. Many new plans and schemes for education are daily starting up, but the whole, of which I have any knowledge, have the above common error; for the subjects upon which our youth are taught to read and write, and those in which the dead or foreign living languages are taught, are by no means calculated to expand the mind, or to give it a knowledge of Nature and her laws; and thus the most important of all opportunities is lost, and much time actually wasted, in which their minds might be prepared for the reception and knowledge of natural and useful truths. What is the knowledge of the present school-boy, in what is called classical literature, when compared with a useful instruction 'in Chemistry and the laws of Nature? Of what use to society at large is a classical scholar? or one well versed in the ancient mythologies, for this, after all, is the chief part of classical knowledge? It neither gives a polish to manners nor teaches morality. It fills the mind with a useless jargon, and enables the possessor now and then to make a tinsel and pompous declamation in half a dozen different languages; which, if it were to undergo a translation into one language, and that which we call native, would be found to be a mass of unintelligible and unmeaning trash--words of sound, to which it would be difficult to attach an idea, and in which all correct notions are wanting. It makes a man a pedant only. Such men have been most aptly termed spouters of froth. My present object is to lay down a sketch of what seems to me a more instructive and useful system of education. I submit this sketch to the judgment of Men of Science, with an idea that every schoolmaster ought to be a Man of Science, and not a parish priest, as Mr. Brougham would have. This is the outline of my second head, on which in due order I hope to enlarge most satisfactorily.

In my first head I shall address myself first to the Chemists of this Island, and finish by a distinct allusion to the students and practitioners in the science of Astronomy.

Of all the advancements made in Science of late years, perhaps the most pre-eminent and the most important to mankind, stands that in the science of Chemistry. Our Chemists have proved themselves the greatest of all revolutionists, for they have silently and scientifically undermined all the dogmas of the priest, upon which the customs and the manners of society seem hitherto to have been entirely founded. Every species of matter has been brought to dissolution, and its elementary properties investigated, by their crucibles and fires, or their galvanic batteries, and we have been practically and scientifically shewn in what manner Nature performs her dissolutions and regenerations. As far as I understand, but one of the phenomena of nature remains unexplored, and that is the properties of the electric fluid, or the real cause of the solar light and heat. I do not despair of this being reached, and I have the stronger hope, as it will lead at once to a knowledge of the cause of our existence, and that of every animal and vegetable substance. It will shew the cause and process by which inert matter becomes organized, and how all the variegated beauties of nature start into life. However, at present, we know quite enough to authorize the rejection of all our priestly cosmogonies, we know quite enough to set at nought the notion that the planetary system of the universe has existed but six thousand years--we know that matter is imperishable and indestructible, for, although, a fire to a common understanding seems to destroy combustible matter, yet such is not the case, for after any combustible substance has passed through the fiercest fire, the whole of its component parts still exist to their former full extent; the fire has only separated them and changed their relative situations; they are dispersed in their gaseous state, and again ready for the operations of nature, to amalgamate with some new living and growing substance, to which their qualities can be assimilated.*

* The latter part of this sentence might appear preposterous when addressed to the Chemist, or to the Man of Science, but it is probable that this Address might be read by some individual who might not comprehend the assertion that matter is imperishable and indestructible; therefore the writer has taken the liberty to introduce this slight explanation. He confesses that but two years since he startled himself at the assertion, and asked the assertor whether fire did not destroy matter.

We know that the planetary system of the universe has existed to all eternity as to the past, and must exist to all eternity as to the future. For, although, that solar system of which our habitation is a part, or other solar systems, might go through great changes, yet its effect is but as the falling of a hair from our heads, and cannot be said to disturb the great whole.

Instead of viewing ourselves as the particular and partial objects of the care of a great Deity, or of receiving those dogmas of the priest which teach us that every thing has been made for the convenience and use of man, and that man has been made in the express image of the Deity, we should consider ourselves but as atoms of organized matter, whose pleasure or whose pain, whose existence in a state of organization, or whose non-existence in that state, is a matter of no importance in the laws and operations of Nature; we should view ourselves with the same feelings, as we view the leaf which rises in the spring, and falls in the autumn, and then serves no further purpose but to fertilize the earth for a fresh production; we should view ourselves but as the blossoms of May, which exhibit but a momentary splendour and beauty, and often within that moment are cut off prematurely by a blast. We are of no more importance in the scale of Nature than those myriads of animalcules whose natural life is but for the space of an hour, or but a moment. We come and pass like a cloud--like a shower--those of us who possess a brilliancy superior to others, are but as the rainbow, the objects of a momentary admiration, and a momentary recollection. Man has been most aptly compared to the seasons of the year, in our own climate, the spring, is his infancy; the summer, the time af his ardent manhood; the autumn, his decline of life; and the winter, his old age and death--he passes, and another series comes. He is produced by, and produces his like, and so passes away one generation after another, from, and to all eternity. How ridiculous then is the idea about divine revelations, about prophesies, and about miracles, to procure proselytes to such notions! To what generation do they apply, or if they apply to all future generations, why were not the same revelations, prophesies, and miracles, necessary to all the past generations? What avail the dogmas of the priest about an end to the world, about a resurrection, about a day of judgment, about a Heaven and Hell, or about rewards and punishments after this life, when we assert that matter is imperishable and indestructible--that it always was what it now is, and that it will always continue the same. Answer this, ye Priests. Come forward, ye Men of Science, and support these plain truths, which are as familiar to your mind, as the simplest demonstration in mathematics is to the experienced and accomplished mathematician.

Future rewards and punishments are cried up as a necessary doctrine wherewith to impress the minds of men, and to restrain them from vice: but how much more impressive and comprehensible would be the plain and simple truth, that, in this life, virtue produces happiness, and vice nothing but certain misery.

Away then with the ridiculous idea, and the priestly dogma of immortality. Away with the contemptible notion that our bones, our muscles, and our flesh shall be gathered together after they are rotted and evaporated for a resurrection to eternal life. Away with the idea that we have a sensible soul which lives distinct from and after the dissolution of the body. It is all a bugbear, all a priestly imposture. The Chemist can analyse the body of man, and send it into its primitive gaseous state in a few minutes. His crucible and fire, or his galvanic battery, will cause it to evaporate so as not to leave a particle of substance or solid matter, and this chemical process is but an anticipation, or a hastening, of the workings of Nature; for the whole universe might be aptly termed a great chemical apparatus, in which a chemical analysis, and a chemical composition is continually and constantly going on. The same might be said of every organized body, however large, or however minute; its motions produce a constant chemical analysis and composition, a continual change; so that the smallest particle of matter is guided by the same laws, and performs the same duties, as the great whole. Here is an harmony indeed! Man alone seems to form an exception by his vicious conduct and demoralizing character. By assuming to himself a character or a consequence to which he is not entitled, and by making a pretension to the possession of supernatural powers, he plays such fantastic tricks as to disturb every thing within his influence, and carries on a perpetual war with Nature and her laws.

After those few observations upon the properties of matter either organized or inert, (to which I know every Chemist in the country, whose science has conquered the bigotry of his education, will give his assent) I would call upon them all and every one to stand forward and teach mankind those important, those plain truths, which are so clear and so familiar to their own minds. It is the Man of Science who is alone capable of making war upon the Priest, so as to silence him effectually. It is the duty of the Man of Science to make war upon all error and imposture, or why does he study? Why does he analyse the habits, the customs, the manners, and the ideas of mankind, but to separate truth from falsehood, but to give force to the former, and to extinguish the latter? Why does he search into Nature and her laws, but to benefit himself and his fellow man by his discoveries, by the explosion of erroneous ideas, and by the establishment of correct principles? Science must be no longer studied altogether as an amusement or a pastime, which has been too much the case hitherto; it must be brought forward to combat the superstitions, the vices, and the too long established depravities among mankind, whence all their present and past miseries have emanated, and unless the former can be destroyed, the latter will still ensue, as a regular cause and effect.

It is evident that Men of Science have hitherto too much crouched to the established tyrannies of Kingcraft and Priestcraft. Speaking generally they have adopted some of the aristocratical distinctions of the day, and have supported the frauds upon mankind, which it was their peculiar duty to expose. This has given room to the advocates of superstitiop, to put forward as an authority-for their dogmas, the names of Bacon, of Newton, of Locke, and many others. They say that it is no disgrace even to err with such men, and thus, for the want of a more decided and determined character in the advocates of Science and Philosophy, the enemy has built a strong hold within our lines, and has taken an important advantage of our irresolution. I will not believe that Bacon, or Newton, or Locke, in the latter part of their life, had any other ideas of the Christian religion, or any other religion, than I have. In their days, the faggots had scarcely been extinguished, nor was the fuel which supplied them exhausted. They might therefore deem it prudent to equivocate as a matter of safety. Besides, the two former were in the employ of a court, and consequently under the trammels of Kingcraft, which ever has, and ever will find its interest in the support of Superstition and Priestcraft.

I would appeal to any man who calls himself a conscientious Christian, and ask him whether he thinks such a man as himself could write the following paragraph:

"Atheism leaves a man to sense, to philosophy, to natural piety, to laws, to reputation: all which may be guides to an outward moral virtue, though religion were not; but superstition dismounts all these, and createth an absolute monarchy in the minds of men: therefore Atheism did never perturb states; for it makes men wary of themselves, as looking no farther, and we see the times inclined to Atheism (as the time of Augustus Caesar) were civil times: but superstition hath been the confusion of many states, and bringeth in a new _primum mobile_, that ravisheth all the spheres of government." This is Lord Bacon's apology for Atheism, and, in my humble opinion, he wrote it feelingly, conscientiously, and upon principle, as an Atheist, which word has no other meaning than a seceder from all mythologies, although the ignorant and interested make so much ridiculous clamour and fuss about it.

To shew that Newton was thoroughly ignorant of the chemical properties of matter, I will quote again a paragraph, which I quoted in page 341, Vol. II. of "The Republican," in the answer to the Rev. Thomas Hartwell Home's pamphlet, entitled "Deism Refuted," &c. It is thus: "All things considered, it appears probable to me, that God in the beginning created matter in solid, hard, impenetrable particles; of such sizes and figures, and with such other properties, as most conduced to the end for which he formed them, and that these primitive particles, being solids, are incomparably harder than any of the sensible porous bodies compounded of them; even so hard as never to wear, or break in pieces: no other power being able to divide what God made in the first creation. While these corpuscles remain entire, they may compose bodies of one and the same nature and texture in all ages; but should they wear away or break in pieces, the nature of things depending on them would be changed: water and earth, composed of old worn particles, or fragments of particles, would not be of the same nature and texture now, with water and earth composed of entire particles at the beginning; and, therefore, that nature may be lasting, the changes of corporeal things are to be placed only in the various separations, and new associations of these permanent corpuscles." The Chemists of the present day must smile at this notion of Sir Isaac Newton, about what God did in the beginning: it is evident, that he knew but little about chemical analysis and composition; or, rather, that his ideas upon the subject were quite erroneous and hypothetical, when he might have obtained a demonstration quite conclusive, if he had studied Chemistry with other parts of his philosophy. Such, in my opinion, is the importance of the science of Chemistry in the pursuit of truth and in the investigation of Nature and her laws, that the first proper step towards philosophical studies must be an acquaintance with its elements and powers.

We need nothing further to convince us of the struggle which existed between science and superstition in the mind of Sir Isaac Newton than the following creed, which I have met with quite _a propos_, or in the midst of writing this address, in a weekly provincial paper, and which, I imagine, has been put forth at this moment as one of those little anxieties to prop the declining superstition of the age. It is thus headed, _Sir Isaac Newton's Creed_: "The Supreme Being governs all things, not as soul of the world, but as Lord of the Universe; and upon account of his dominion, he is stiled the Lord God, Supreme over all. The Supreme God is an eternal, infinite, absolutely perfect being; but a being, how perfect soever, without dominion, is not Lord God. The term God, very frequently signifies Lord; but every Lord is not God. The dominion of a spiritual being constitutes him God; true dominion, true God; supreme dominion, supreme God; imaginary dominion, imaginary God. He is not eternity and infinity, but eternal and infinite. He is not duration and space, but his duration of existence is present, and by existing always and every where, he constitutes duration and space--eternity and infinity. Since every part of space, and every indivisible moment of duration, is every where; certainly the Maker and Lord of all things, cannot be said to be in no time, and no place. He is omnipresent, not by his power only, but in his very substance; for power cannot subsist without substance. God is not at all affected by the motions of bodies, neither do they find any resistance from the omnipresence of God. He necessarily exists, and by the same necessity he exists always and every where. Whence also it follows, that he is all similar, all eye, all ear, all brain, all arm, all sensation, all understanding, all active power; but this, not in a human, or corporeal form, but in a manner wholly unknown to us, therefore not to be worshipped under a corporeal representation." Here is the creed of Sir Isaac Newton! and who can read this, and for a moment believe that he was a Christian when he wrote it? I am not about to approve all this jargon and contradiction; I despise it; I pity the Man of Science that could write such nonsense; and rather than I would be called the author of it, I would relinquish as much fame as Sir Isaac Newton obtained in other respects. The foregoing ideas of Sir Isaac Newton on the properties of matter are equally unintelligible, contradictory, and ridiculous. Lord Bacon's definition of Christianity, or the essentials of the Christian religion, which I have seen printed as a religious tract, but which I have not at hand for reference or quotation, is just of the same stamp, and rather than be called the author of such trash, I would consent to be considered an idiot. Yet Lord Bacon as a natural philosopher, and Sir Isaac Newton as a mathematician and astronomer, were eminent in the highest degree, when the age in which they lived is considered. The conduct of both evinces the mischievous effect of superstition on the human mind, particularly where that mind is brilliantly adapted for making a progress in science and scientific discoveries.

It is impossible to analyze the creed of Sir Isaac Newton relative to Deity, or found any one idea upon it. It is a string of words that have no application, and independent of their contradiction, all that can be said of them is, that they describe nothing. The writer of such a creed must have been an Atheist in disguise, or perhaps unknown even to himself. Its total amount implies that there is no God such as priests teach, and bigots and fools imagine and believe. Mirabaud, in his System of Nature, has brought forward several quotations from Newton's writings, and has commented on them to shew that he was what is vulgarly called an Atheist: that he was what every Man of Science must be, _a seceder from the idolatry of the ignorant_. Such I believe he was in his latter days, and in his private opinion, but he had not the honesty to avow himself such. It is unquestionable that Newton in his youth possessed much superstition, and it is equally unquestionable that the progress he had made in science in his advanced age, had entirely conquered that superstition and banished it from his mind, although, I am sorry to say, that he was not honest enough to make a full and conscientious confession of the change to which his theological opinions had been subjected. Perhaps I cannot make a deeper impression on the mind of the reader as to the real character of Newton, than by quoting an anecdote from William Whiston's Memoirs written by himself.