Semi-weekly Louisianian. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1871-1872, 1872-01-21
GENIUS IN Its DEALINGS WITH M
AGE MEN.
BIZ Z. P. wHIpPLR.

40 'o W ''a'e iactS that N,
will excite in Others the emos,'
which the writer or orator doc, :
directly express, and insinuai. =
opinions which he does not Dn,'
nently forward. Thus N. At5.,''
Cequerel, fills, once wrote . -
book on the celebrated case ., -
as, a subject on which vOltairs y
many a French liberal and uba,,
thropist after voltaire, had e,n.,'
ed such a storm of passions, .
dignation. NJ. Coquerel to,..
the true way to exhibit the ~,
injustice of the case, and es~
the cause Of liberation agaasS..
otry, was to state the facts az,
and leave the differences and Il.
dignation to the understands y,
and hears of his readers. H. 81.
ceeded wonderfully well. How
it," said to him Michelet, the H,|
torian, "that you could narns /,
the circumstances of a crime ri
that with such ezasperatiing ud.
ness? My wife and l read # /.
evening in a passion Of race ul
tears; and yet you, the naratr
seemed neither to reason nor to IN.
veigh?"
1t is plain that N. Coquerel show.
ed himself in this a mastery rheto.
ritician. He had drawn his own
conclusions, and expressed his own
moral wrath, he might have made
his individuality too Extensively prO.
minent. He would have thought |
and felt for his readers, instead d
SO presenting the story as to Halter
them into thinking and feeling Tor
themselves. By austerly or adruit /
ly suppressing his personality, b
lost all the advantages which pm
coed from the ostentation Of d.
quence; but he none the less ma
surely gained the object Of eloqua
A fair-minded Roman CATH
could not read his book withS
cursing the stupidity and the rusj
ty Of the magistrates and eccsS1
astics concerned in that special out
rage on the rights Of man.
Indeed it is the egotism whld
taints most expressions of mora|
indignation that deprives it of il
due effect. The egotism may b
noble; it may indicate a passionaii
hatred of injustice and wrong
But still, to the democracy Of read
ers, it exalts the writer into q knd
Of moral aristocrat, priling and
pluming himself on his superiority
to ordinary men in the qulcknes|
intensity, and depth Of bis mora
conception: and they are inclined
to doubt the fairness of the repre-
sentation which is thrust so violent
" and holly on their attention
The writer is so prominent thai
SUSPICION steals into the minds O
The readers that he is SURVEYING
Iacts in relation to each other. Id
of his moral sentlmf''
thus casts ominous conjecture o.
The comprehensivencss aud c0n'0'
,ntiousness of his intellect.
Compare, for example ho'l {;
With Prescott, as historians BON
ire thoroughly honest; both Wouio
the deliberate ml'sialel
nent of a fact, or the CONSCIOUS a'
urbance of a relation, as a STAN w
heir personal honor; both lh''
written history from an exhaustive
.nalysis and patient comparison !, u
'riginal authorities. But Slo'i''
hrows himself into the thick Of 'n'
ght between Romanism and riO,'
stantism, and is as eager 70 Pu''
is opinions as to verify his lacs !,
'rescott demurely hides hlms s1
ehind the facts he explores, aa'
is lucid narrative of social, PollIhls u.
|, and ecclesiastical iniqultles u
rays no special individual intern ai,s
he matter. Motley CLOVIS :, WI. -
loble rage as he writes; Pr ,a' rlc "
vrites as to make his readers s.e ~
nth noble rage, while he hlll ,sJ
GEMS imperturbably unconce nv,
nd calm. The result is 'DS !,
hough both fundamentally asl 'so,s
heir opinions, Prescott carries pd va
uthority with the biSoted h p,s.|
opponents of both. . I r0rs
oft in the last analysis, is not Ii N