Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1860-08-09
From the Marlboro Gazette.
SELF-CONlUEST.
o
CA man to be a man,
Must rule the empire of himself,
In it must be supreme"

The greatest of all heroes is the man who has
conquered himself The worlds imperial Alex
ders and Caesars are not comparable to him for
a moment. Though their fame has been herald
ed in history and embalmed in song, WHOM did
they conquer? If it be replied that they con-
quered their enemies, Extensively or defensively
considered, the next question to be determined
lis, .aCss the contest an equal one? To this in
most cases, it must be answered, mol They
triumphed over the weak by the power of might
Exceptions to this truth there are, but the teach
ing of all history is that this worlds conquerors
mastered their foes by superior stratagem or su-
perior force. The glory of their triumphs is then
greatly diminished by an inequality of the en-
gagements in which they were achieved.
But whom does the moral hero conquer .
HIMSELF is our emphatic answer. Does he gain
the mastery over "a foeman worthy of his steel ?''
We shall see. Himself is his enemy, and his
moral nature the battlefield. A giant foe is
found in his appetites-an enemy that slew the
man who slew thousands on his way to Crown
and Kingdom, Alexander the Great but the
moral hero conquers his appetites. 'Ikeep my
body under suIjection." was the declaration of
that prince of conquerors, Paul, the Apostle, in
comparison of whom the Incorporate, self-slain
Macedonian monarch reaches the point of moth
ing. Anger and lust have slain hecatombs of
imperial victims. History abounds in numerous
instances of those who took cities and conquered
empires, and yet who were inundated on the
altar of their own evil passions. But the moral
hero masters this cnemy-an enemy which has
snltten to the dust the very flower of talent and
genius in every department of life; therefore, be
Is the greater hero. The declaration Of the wise
man has the sanction and affirmation of all rea-
son: "Ile that is slow to anger is better than
than the mighty; and he that ruleM his spirit,
than he that taketh city"
The annals of all time teach that ambition for
power is no inconsiderable foe; and yet that
which slew the mighty Cinsar-sfor Caesar was
ambitious '-has been slain by many a self-con-
queror. Look at the former with "a Senate at
hlssheels," and then survey the noble proportions
OF that mans character who preferred "affliction
with the people of God to the princey treasures
OF Egypt, and then say, reader who was the
greater hero =?
Public opinion has been in time past, and
sometimes is now, no small enemy to the moral
hero, and yet even this has been dared and con-
cured by him. Compare Plate, judicially salts
lied concerning the innocence of the SAVIOUR, and
yet for fear of man delivering him up to an
ignominious death, with the Hebrew worthless,
who, rather than wrong good conscience, dared
to say to the proud monarch upon his throne
1--WE are not careful to answer thee in this mat
ter, and say on which side lay the true hero
ism! To dare to do right in the face of stern
difficulty requires the loftiest moral courage,
nobler by far than that which has often won
the fame and achieved the sceptres of the worlds
mightiest cheiftans That was the reply of a
heroic spirit, who, when challenged to the field
of mortal contact, said he was not afraid of his
foe, but be was ''afiaid to SIM" 10 be afraid to
do w1ong argues the highest style of courage
In corruptible, in integrity and firm as granite
IN devotion to moral principle. life itself to such
spirit would not be conceived as worth having
on dishonorable terms. Daring alike to smile
on virtue and to frown on vice, where may his
parallel be found among the great names Of
martial history?
In deciding the superior heroism of these two
characters, the next question to be settled in
determining the result is, Vas there just cause
for acor? Here, as before, exceptional cases
may be granted, and yet we may answer, touch
ing the general rule emphatically in the mega
tive. The enlargement of empire and the acqu-
ston of treasure, in connection with an illsatia-
BILE ambition for present distinction and future
enrolment upon the page of history, were in the
min the only causes which led an Alexander,
or Caesar. or Napoleon to the fold of battle
Cen this be denied =? If it can not had they just
calse for war? A thousand times, No! If
they had no just cause for war, what were they
but assassins and plundercrs on tremendous